Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/18/2021 1:40:09 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last
To: SeekAndFind

“e. The City imposes this lifetime lease requirement on all property owners seeking to change the form of ownership from a tenancy-incommon interest to a condominium interest. Moreover, the ordinance contains a poison pill: if any owner sues to challenge the constitutionality of this requirement, the City suspends the condo conversion program entirely as to properties with even one tenant.”

“All non-owning tenants, regardless of need or income, are eligible for an offer of a lifetime lease under the ECP and have two years to decide whether to accept it. App. F-8, § 1396.4.5 So long as the tenant remains in the apartment, the City will not accept any waiver of the lifetime lease. App. F-20, § 1396.4(g)(3). Both the offer of a lifetime lease, and the lease itself, are recorded against title to the property, together with a separate binding agreement between the City and the property owners. Id. Moreover, existing tenants may invite family to move into their units, establishing “co-tenant” status and thus becoming eligible for the lifetime lease. App. F-17. The expedited conversion program also contains a program-wide poison pill: any legal challenge from a single property owner suspends the program for all buildings containing even one tenant.”

besides taking by unconstititional ordinance, the below would seem to be the red meat of the story:

“After the Pakdels filed suit on June 26, 2017, the City sent a letter to all owners citywide informing them of the Pakdels’ identity and street address and that, as a result of their legal challenge, there is now a moratorium on all new condominium conversions in San Francisco.”


32 posted on 04/18/2021 5:09:34 PM PDT by blueplum ("...this moment is your moment: it belongs to you... " President Donald J. Trump, Jan 20, 2017) )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

Home owners don’t become home owners by being stupid.
Apparently you can be stupid and be a San Francisco city planner


35 posted on 04/18/2021 6:19:56 PM PDT by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

The city intends to become the owner of these buildings. They’ll hire friends and family to manage them at exorbitant rates, with the occupants and managers all billing the taxpayers. Since San Francisco is in the red, that means taxpayers in other jurisdictions like you and I will pay for this.


36 posted on 04/18/2021 6:39:42 PM PDT by T.B. Yoits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-23 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson