The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It • Hacker News Board

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#101

Post by iolothebard » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:46 PM UTC

lovich wrote: post #54

jjav wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are only adjusted upon sale of the property While often repeated, that is incorrect. In reality property tax goes up 2% every year under prop 13.

I see sources backing up percentage increases that are much larger than 2% http://www.zillow.com/san-francisco-ca/home-values/ https://www.boe.ca.gov/ma/news/AV_Bay-Area_PC.htm

Sales reset the property taxes on properties. It was one of a few reasons I didn't buy a home in the Bay Area a few years back. Probably should have, my buddy that bought his house for 500k in the city is sitting on probably 1.2-1.4m now. Not bad for 3-4 years appreciation.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#102

Post by iolothebard » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:47 PM UTC

socrates2016 wrote: post #100

Rich people with money vs rich people with property. The poor people have mostly been driven out already. There is plenty of housing for tech workers. The problem is it's not hip enough: bay view, outer mission, outer sunset, outer richmond, portola valley, etc...

Dude, he doesn't even see the Asian people in SF. Poor guy, he's missing out on some amazing yoga pants based on my experience :-)

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#103

Post by mng2 » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:47 PM UTC

nickhalfasleep wrote: post #5

richmarr wrote: post #4

I'd be interested to see projections of earthquake casualties before and after this increase in housing density.

Morbidly, I think a big earthquake will be the turning point for housing in the Bay Area. After a 6.5+, just about all the brick buildings will be degraded to the point of no return. We might see plenty of new steel / wood construction with the rebuilt (or 3d-printed) facades of old buildings, with new heights and efficiencies inside (better lighting, accessability, modularity).

We already had Loma Prieta in 1989. You don't see very many bricks in the Bay Area, compared to back east.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#104

Post by nkurz » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:48 PM UTC

rsync wrote: post #98

muzz wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The magnitude of Prop 13's distortions contribute much more to the problem than policies that a city could implement itself. Housing is often viewed as a San Francisco problem, but really it's an area-wide problem acutely and a state-wide problem more broadly. I.e., areas outside the policy of San Francisco, such as peninsula, south bay, etc, are not significantly cheaper. And entire other metros, like Los Angeles an…

I am sympathetic to the notion that prop 13 is a massive distortion that is driving all of these problems ... But I have a hard time reconciling that with the relative pricing in other equally desirable coastal areas that do not have prop 13 (or anything like it). I am simplifying greatly, but in a broad sense, SF housing is as expensive as Boston housing is as expensive as NYC housing ... and certain hot-or-not insp…

I am simplifying greatly, but in a broad sense, SF housing is as expensive as Boston housing

I don't think that's true even in the "broad sense". San Francisco rents may be roughly comparable to to NYC, but are significantly more than Boston: https://www.zumper.com/blog/2016/04/zumper-national-rent-rep...

It may not be true, but I think the argument would be that in the absence of Prop 13, SF rents would indeed be comparable to Boston rather than 50% higher.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#105

Post by JonFish85 » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:48 PM UTC

mahyarm wrote: post #81

coroutines wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prop 13 is really great and really bad. My grandparents own a home in Livermore they've had from 1925. Livermore is now a very costly place to live in, and modern property taxes would make it impossible for them to live in a city they saw grow up around them. I do think Prop 13's protection should be eliminated for businesses - most definitely. If you're a landlord, perhaps it would make sense to allow up to 2 x Prop…

Then make prop 13 a 65+ only law that can only apply to your main residence.

Why only 65+? What about not forcing families to uproot and move because they can't afford the taxes?

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#106

Post by iolothebard » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:50 PM UTC

davmre wrote: post #21

ModernMech wrote: post #10

The folly with arguments blaming San Francisco for the problem is the fact that the entire Bay area is priced at an insane level. Take another look at this [1] BART map with corresponding home prices for each stop. Yeah, it's cheaper to live outside of the city, but it's still crazy expensive. The median sale price for a house in Pittsburg is $430,000, with a 62 min commute into SF. If you live 62 minutes outside of…

You're right that the same arguments apply throughout the Bay Area. That fact that SF needs to build more and denser housing doesn't excuse Palo Alto, Mountain View, Berkeley, Oakland, etc. from doing the same. But even the housing policy you describe, in which SF acts unilaterally, would still be a great good. Tens of thousands of people previously priced out of SF would now be able to live in the city. And those wh…

70 story high rise in Atherton and Belmont! That will be the day :-)

I quite liked the Peninsula. SF wasn't really my cup of tea. God forbid people like me that lived on the Cliffs of Despair (Pacifica) and were relatively happy.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#107

Post by epa » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:52 PM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #89

aetherson wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name some of these cases.

Some employees at UCSF do this -- They can get on a 7-on/7-off schedule, fly in from somewhere more reasonable (often Denver or somewhere in the Midwest), stay on a couch for a week, earn a SF salary then fly back to a $1,500/month mortgage somewhere else.

'Stay on a couch for a week' - pretty large pre-requisite here..

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#108

Post by magnetix » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:53 PM UTC

Agustus wrote: post #67

mdb333 wrote: post #28

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_%281... Good thoughts. You failed to mention Prop 13 which was put into place a long time ago and simply doesn't make sense anymore. It's at least part of the reason it is so affordable (in relative terms) for rich people to keep second homes here when they bought them years ago. We live in a building of 60 units where probably at least a third of those are abse…

In your example, the building you describe is a condominium? If so, then what does it matter what your tax bill is and if they are absentee owners; if the owner maintains the property, pays their bills and taxes, then you should be happy to have them. Tax reassessments during the boom of 2001 to 2007 were on track to price a lot of people out of their houses based on their current economic status. Proposition 13 and…

>If you have a job that pays $100,000 and the taxes on your $250,000 house is $7,500 (3% property tax) and the tax quadruples to $30,000 in five years; why would you want the market fluctuations to be able to force an individual to leave their house?

A simple solution (for the elderly at least) would be to roll up all the debt until death, payable by the estate.

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#109

Post by rsync » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 8:55 PM UTC

nkurz wrote: post #104

rsync wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am sympathetic to the notion that prop 13 is a massive distortion that is driving all of these problems ... But I have a hard time reconciling that with the relative pricing in other equally desirable coastal areas that do not have prop 13 (or anything like it). I am simplifying greatly, but in a broad sense, SF housing is as expensive as Boston housing is as expensive as NYC housing ... and certain hot-or-not insp…

I am simplifying greatly, but in a broad sense, SF housing is as expensive as Boston housing I don't think that's true even in the "broad sense". San Francisco rents may be roughly comparable to to NYC, but are significantly more than Boston: https://www.zumper.com/blog/2016/04/zumper-national-rent-rep... It may not be true, but I think the argument would be that in the absence of Prop 13, SF rents would indeed be co…

I don't know ...

I do know I have seen a lot of commentary and postings right here on HN about the prohibitive cost of housing in Boston - perhaps it is just certain desirable areas in the center, or Cambridge ...

Re: The Housing Market in San Francisco and Ideas to Fix It

#110

Post by rsync » Thu, Apr 07, 2016, 9:00 PM UTC

seattle_spring wrote: post #43

jjav wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> are only adjusted upon sale of the property While often repeated, that is incorrect. In reality property tax goes up 2% every year under prop 13.

Which is insignificant compared to yearly property appreciation in the same area.

Let's please test your intellectual honesty, shall we ?

You are indeed correct that in our very modern era, the 2% ratchet under prop13 is less than what we see California real estate appreciating at.

So would you indeed support rebates and/or clawbacks and/or negative property tax increases if California was to ever see sustained drops in valuation ?

I own property in California as well as in other states and I can tell you that the property taxes sure go upwards very easily ... not so much the other way around ...