Post by High Priestess on Oct 4, 2015 4:49:02 GMT
Peter shared in June 2015
New York City Council Bill Takes Aim at Illegal Airbnb Rentals
"Landlords who illegally rent out their apartments as hotel rooms through services such as Airbnb would face tougher fines under a new [New York] City Council proposal.
The fine for a first-time offense would skyrocket from $1,000 to
$10,000 and the maximum penalty would be $50,000, said City Councilwoman
Helen Rosenthal, D-Manhattan, who is co-sponsoring the legislation.
Violators could also be fined an additional $2,000 per day for each day
the original fine is not paid, WCBS 880’s Rich Lamb reported.
Rosenthal said the current $1,000 first-time fine does little to deter property owners."
Click here cbsloc.al/1Gwan4G for CBS NY article.
My two cents: There has been much recent discussion here about enforcement against the worse SF offenders. I agree that they give us all a bad name. The current ordinance allows for penalties that include up to $1000 a day in fines and up to 6 months in jail. These maximum penalties are probably reserved for the worst offenders.
Instead of pouring money into the Planning Dept to set up a STR Police Force, it may be sufficient to examine whether the current level of penalties are adequate (I think so) and/or undertake a more intensive public education campaign about those penalties. The STR Ordinance and its penalty provisions have only been in effect for 4 months. In time, and with news headlines of heavy penalties against bad actors, I am confident that others will be deterred from violating.
Tom:
Wouldn’t it be much easier if Airbnb removed listings that did not meet legal requirements? All of the offenders on the list still have their listings on Airbnb.
I would like to know how many people have paid these fines. Is this why the offenders have set up corporations? One real estate broker on the list has mulitple properties on Airbnb but has something like 8 companies. I wonder is this a way to avoid the penalties?
Is it legal to buy an apartment building in San Francisco, Ellis everyone out, then rent on Airbnb as short term rentals? If not, then why and how are so many people doing it? I would think as a sign of being a good neighbor and showing civic pride for San Francisco that Airbnb would not allow any host that Ellis acted tenants to advertise on their platform.
It seems the answer is simple. Stop assocations with the bad actors. This way, we deflect criticisms that homesharing is responsible for tenant evictions.
Peter, the majority of San Franciscans are renters and they will vote for any law that stregthens their rights.
Peter:
Tom, I don't know if the majority of San Franciscans or SF voters are renters, but let's say they are. It's not clear to me that all renters are anti-home sharing. There are many renters who are or who want to be Hosts, as well as many renters who enjoy staying with Hosts when they travel, and therefore would not like to see their home City passing draconian and restrictive home sharing laws.
Joseph:
Tom, sometimes a multi unit building( not newly built) can be sold unoccupied , to make it more attractive to buyers/investors and without Ellis acts . At that point , they can convert over to Hotel style rentals. They do have to change some business designations , but its all mostly paper work . They can do LTR but for stays of 1-3 months etc . You can check with the planning Dept on this .
Tom:
Yes, these are quite rare. I am objecting to the multi-properties that are tenant occupied and bought by speculators with deep pockets and lawyers that evict the tenants. Many advertise daily rates. In any case, do we want to encourage taking occupied rental buildings away by wealthy speculators to go into the hotel business? The recent news about the Kenyan woman doing this is very disturbing.
Tom:
According to the US Government Census records up to 2013 San Francisco has 36.6% home ownership.
What needs to be done are focus groups and surveys. Poll owners and renters.
Joseph:
Tim there needs to be a balance .
having better protections for renters is great . There will always be real estate market investors and speculators . Tenants rights education is very important .
Many renters don't know their rights or fail to educate themselves . Then they get a note of rent changes or evictions and they don't know what to do or how to fight back .
If you buy a 4 unit unoccupied apartment building , and decide you want to either have a TIC or Condo , have you reduced housing stock ? Yes and No
A rental Property is removed from the rental market , but its opened up the Housing market for people that wish to purchase . There are Conversion Caps
and I think we are now in a Freeze for 10 years on being able to Convert from TIC's to Condo's . Does this help the Market place ? Its much easier to finance a Condo then it is to do a TIC . Ultimately who is responsible for providing available housing stock and rental stock . The City ? Developers ? Supply and Demand ?
Tom:
Absolutely agree with you Joseph. We have a city with 65% of the population that rents. Long-term renters and now even techies are complaining about the high rents. It angers most people of San Francisco to read about flippers and speculators that run out the sick, disabled, and people living on the margins out of their homes for a profit. They advertise on Airbnb for daily rates which are against the law. It’s not rocket science to predict how people are going to vote after reading about absentee homeowners violating the law and advertsing on Airbnb. We do nothing so don’t be surprised if the voters do something draconian election time. I just don’t understand the logic and reasoning for allowing these people to sully the reputation of Airbnb. As I said before, I have a 0% tolerance rate for speculators that evict sick, elderly, and low-income tenants for short term rentals. Airbnb cannot have it both ways - helping working and middle class families and individuals and enabling absentee owners to Ellis Act tenants to advertise on Airbnb. We will get restrictions if these people are not removed from the Airbnb Community.
Joseph:
Tom
I don't think Airbnb wants the bad players either . Its not good for the Companies Image ! So it comes down to how to fairly regulate those that have the right to use Airbnb and other platforms and eliminating the bad players .
Tom:
I agree with you 100%. A good start would be to remove the bad players that the opposition are listing and advertsing all over San Francisco!
Joseph:
Thats why there are already places that should go after them . the City has offices
for the Rent Board Etc, they are the ones with the planning dept that should work with removing the illegal operators . Unfortunately , they have been understaffed and underfunded for years . Look at what happened on Market st
below Van Ness . Some office buildings converted to " Work - Live " or some nebulous type of Living arrangements that divided up old office space and let
residential tenants in . These were very small and often illegal rentals , but the city did not enforce code because it was providing housing for many low income SRO people .
New York City Council Bill Takes Aim at Illegal Airbnb Rentals
"Landlords who illegally rent out their apartments as hotel rooms through services such as Airbnb would face tougher fines under a new [New York] City Council proposal.
The fine for a first-time offense would skyrocket from $1,000 to
$10,000 and the maximum penalty would be $50,000, said City Councilwoman
Helen Rosenthal, D-Manhattan, who is co-sponsoring the legislation.
Violators could also be fined an additional $2,000 per day for each day
the original fine is not paid, WCBS 880’s Rich Lamb reported.
Rosenthal said the current $1,000 first-time fine does little to deter property owners."
Click here cbsloc.al/1Gwan4G for CBS NY article.
My two cents: There has been much recent discussion here about enforcement against the worse SF offenders. I agree that they give us all a bad name. The current ordinance allows for penalties that include up to $1000 a day in fines and up to 6 months in jail. These maximum penalties are probably reserved for the worst offenders.
Instead of pouring money into the Planning Dept to set up a STR Police Force, it may be sufficient to examine whether the current level of penalties are adequate (I think so) and/or undertake a more intensive public education campaign about those penalties. The STR Ordinance and its penalty provisions have only been in effect for 4 months. In time, and with news headlines of heavy penalties against bad actors, I am confident that others will be deterred from violating.
Tom:
Wouldn’t it be much easier if Airbnb removed listings that did not meet legal requirements? All of the offenders on the list still have their listings on Airbnb.
I would like to know how many people have paid these fines. Is this why the offenders have set up corporations? One real estate broker on the list has mulitple properties on Airbnb but has something like 8 companies. I wonder is this a way to avoid the penalties?
Is it legal to buy an apartment building in San Francisco, Ellis everyone out, then rent on Airbnb as short term rentals? If not, then why and how are so many people doing it? I would think as a sign of being a good neighbor and showing civic pride for San Francisco that Airbnb would not allow any host that Ellis acted tenants to advertise on their platform.
It seems the answer is simple. Stop assocations with the bad actors. This way, we deflect criticisms that homesharing is responsible for tenant evictions.
Peter, the majority of San Franciscans are renters and they will vote for any law that stregthens their rights.
Peter:
Tom, I don't know if the majority of San Franciscans or SF voters are renters, but let's say they are. It's not clear to me that all renters are anti-home sharing. There are many renters who are or who want to be Hosts, as well as many renters who enjoy staying with Hosts when they travel, and therefore would not like to see their home City passing draconian and restrictive home sharing laws.
Joseph:
Tom, sometimes a multi unit building( not newly built) can be sold unoccupied , to make it more attractive to buyers/investors and without Ellis acts . At that point , they can convert over to Hotel style rentals. They do have to change some business designations , but its all mostly paper work . They can do LTR but for stays of 1-3 months etc . You can check with the planning Dept on this .
Tom:
Yes, these are quite rare. I am objecting to the multi-properties that are tenant occupied and bought by speculators with deep pockets and lawyers that evict the tenants. Many advertise daily rates. In any case, do we want to encourage taking occupied rental buildings away by wealthy speculators to go into the hotel business? The recent news about the Kenyan woman doing this is very disturbing.
Tom:
According to the US Government Census records up to 2013 San Francisco has 36.6% home ownership.
What needs to be done are focus groups and surveys. Poll owners and renters.
Joseph:
Tim there needs to be a balance .
having better protections for renters is great . There will always be real estate market investors and speculators . Tenants rights education is very important .
Many renters don't know their rights or fail to educate themselves . Then they get a note of rent changes or evictions and they don't know what to do or how to fight back .
If you buy a 4 unit unoccupied apartment building , and decide you want to either have a TIC or Condo , have you reduced housing stock ? Yes and No
A rental Property is removed from the rental market , but its opened up the Housing market for people that wish to purchase . There are Conversion Caps
and I think we are now in a Freeze for 10 years on being able to Convert from TIC's to Condo's . Does this help the Market place ? Its much easier to finance a Condo then it is to do a TIC . Ultimately who is responsible for providing available housing stock and rental stock . The City ? Developers ? Supply and Demand ?
Tom:
Absolutely agree with you Joseph. We have a city with 65% of the population that rents. Long-term renters and now even techies are complaining about the high rents. It angers most people of San Francisco to read about flippers and speculators that run out the sick, disabled, and people living on the margins out of their homes for a profit. They advertise on Airbnb for daily rates which are against the law. It’s not rocket science to predict how people are going to vote after reading about absentee homeowners violating the law and advertsing on Airbnb. We do nothing so don’t be surprised if the voters do something draconian election time. I just don’t understand the logic and reasoning for allowing these people to sully the reputation of Airbnb. As I said before, I have a 0% tolerance rate for speculators that evict sick, elderly, and low-income tenants for short term rentals. Airbnb cannot have it both ways - helping working and middle class families and individuals and enabling absentee owners to Ellis Act tenants to advertise on Airbnb. We will get restrictions if these people are not removed from the Airbnb Community.
Joseph:
Tom
I don't think Airbnb wants the bad players either . Its not good for the Companies Image ! So it comes down to how to fairly regulate those that have the right to use Airbnb and other platforms and eliminating the bad players .
Tom:
I agree with you 100%. A good start would be to remove the bad players that the opposition are listing and advertsing all over San Francisco!
Joseph:
Thats why there are already places that should go after them . the City has offices
for the Rent Board Etc, they are the ones with the planning dept that should work with removing the illegal operators . Unfortunately , they have been understaffed and underfunded for years . Look at what happened on Market st
below Van Ness . Some office buildings converted to " Work - Live " or some nebulous type of Living arrangements that divided up old office space and let
residential tenants in . These were very small and often illegal rentals , but the city did not enforce code because it was providing housing for many low income SRO people .