a woman's request for help regarding some troubles she'd had finding an
apartment for herself and 2 kids:
I'm searching for a new place to live for myself and my two girls, but
I'm starting to get the distinct impression that landlords are less
than thrilled about my children. (One woman told me over the phone
that I wasn't a good candidate because I was a single mom and she
didn't think I was going to pay the rent. How she decided that without
any knowledge of my income or expenses was beyond me.)
Are there any renters on the list? Has anyone encountered problems
with trying to move the family into a new place? Any suggestions?
I offered the following advice:
As a realtor and landlord I know it is illegal to discriminate on the
basis of familial status. On the other hand, some people (landlords) do
discriminate. I would suggest that a couple of things impress
landlords:
1) most kids are relatively well behaved, meet the landlord at the
property along w/ your kids (when the are well rested and well fed &
happy) and show her/him that they are well behaved and they are not
screaming banshies.
2) getting the appointment to see the apartment does not require you to
say that you have two kids.
3) references from former landlords go a long way, as do credit reports
and employment references. on the other hand, fiends, relatives, the
fact that you go to church, or sob stories, etc. do not.
4) finally, presentation, matters a lot: speaking well, making sure
your kids are not crying in the background when you are on the phone,
nice appearance and clean car etc, mean a lot to a landlord. Think
about it, if you care for your car and yourself, there is a hope that
you will care for the landlords property. If you don't, the landlord
won't rent to you.
I'm not a big fan of the tenants union, they are reactionary and a
negative force in this city. I'd point you to the SF Rent board before I
went to the TU. I would also point you in the direction of the california
apartment association, which has a "renters" section on their website
(caanet.org) or the SF apartment association. I don't know if they have
a list of landlords that have availabilities, but their members are the
most educated about the law and proactive about doing business in a
fair way, so they are the landlords that I would want to rent from.
I'll just offer this last bit of advice: you don't want to rent to
someone who is going to discriminate against you on the basis that you
have kids. Those people are not good landlords anyhow.
best of luck
Another list member replied to my post this way:
As a realtor and a landlord, of course Michael Sundius is "not a big
fan of the tenants union." In a city where housing is so expensive
and homelessness (including for working families) so extensive, for a
landlord to call the tenants union "reactionary" and "a negative
force" is as predictable as it is ludicrous. For anyone who cannot
afford to own their own home in the city and who must therefore rent,
the tenants union is the best source of information and support
available. I say this as a rentor who has lived and rented in San
Francisco for 23 years, with impeccable references from a number of
landlords, and as a Certified Law Student currently working on a
landlord/tenant case.
Michael's suggested response to illegal discrimination is not to
oppose the discrimination but to avoid dealing with those people. If
the civil rights movement had followed that advice Black people would
still be sitting in the back of the bus.
And poof.. we have ourselves the age old disagreement. I'll add the
rest as comments for readability. Please I'd love to hear your thoughts
about this and the opportunity to air mine in as well.
6 comments:
Dr,
We could argue this all day and still come out on different sides, but please do not insult me or assume that I suggesting that she not oppose illegal acts.
The fact are this:
1) 5 out of seven of my tenants have children
2) I reserve 25% of my apartments for section 8 assisted tenants
3) I am well educated in the law and ethics and play fairly.
4) The only government body who can really do anything about a report
of illegal discrimination is the Rent Board which is where I suggested her to go at first. I also suggested other options.
5) The general advice that I offered was sound advice for anyone looking to rent an apartment. Picking a well behaved family over a screaming one is a business decision. I'm not suggesting that someone simply sit in the back of the bus
6) My tenants like me
My general advice to you is not to attack someone you don't know for trying to be helpful. (especially on this list).
As I said, this could go on for ever. So to end this here and now: if you,or anyone would, like to discuss my advice further you can find me at my office on Cortland Ave on most days (please call to make sure I'm there). I'm happy to debate this issue over some coffee. I'll buy.
Than you.
By the way, hnblonkenfeld, I'd be proud to rent one of my apts to you, alas it is in bakersfield, which is only about 4 hours from the library park on cortland :[
The other poster replied again privately to me this way:
I just call it like I see it. I'm not saying you discriminate. I'm just saying you're a landlord and a realtor.
(editorial comment. I'm still not sure what he's getting at by that but it stands as is -msundius)
One of my friends came to my defense. Brandon says:
1) Why do these discrimination arguments seem always to devolve into some variation on
"If Dr. King had taken that approach..."? This is lazy rhetoric. Make the point on its merits. Or, at least invoke some less cliched analogy/comparison. Perhaps we need a corollary to Godwin's Law for this.
2) Does Mike's being a landlord/realtor inherently disqualify his opinions on this topic? I don't know anything about the tenant's union, and don't have an opinion about it one way or the other, but this apparent position would seem to fly in the face of the later argument with the civil rights analogy. To put it in those terms:
If only renters can have valid opinions about the Tenants Union, that would be like saying
only blacks could have valid opinions about civil rights.
Ridiculous, no? There are lots of horrible landlords out there and probably a similar
proportion of nightmare tenants. Everyone needs a voice in this discussion, and ad
hominem smackdowns don't do anything to advance the discourse.
To which my original detractor replied:
Here's an argument on the merits:
If when we encounter someone who discriminates against us we simply avoid them, that leaves them free to discriminate against the next person. Simple enough. The civil rights analogy is entirely appropriate and accurate, for this family discrimination is a civil rights question by definition, and all the civil rights laws we have now (employment and housing, e.g.) were essentially modelled on the Black civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s. Obtaining appropriate legislation would be irrelevant if it weren't enforced. But Michael's suggestion was to forego, ignore enforcement of the law. Hence, my analogy was, again, entirely appropriate. (By the way, notice I didn't mention Dr. M.L. King -- you did. I referred to the civil rights movement, which was much larger than MLK, including, among many many others, The Black Panthers and Malcolm X. So your critique of my analogy" was simply wrong.)
I'm sure Michael is a very nice and reasonable guy. I have no difficulty believing him when he says he doesn't discriminate. I was merely disagreeing with his position on how to stop discrimination, which I think -- contrary to your purported criticism of me -- is the responsibility of everyone.
Furthermore, as a landlord, his opinion of the tenants union is obviously suspect, even if he's a righteous guy. I thought that, for the renters on the listserv, it was appropriate to point out that his negative opinion of the tenants union might not be entirely disinterested. I never said he couldn't have his opinion; I just wanted to offer another opinion from a renter's perspective. Being neighborly does not mean foregoing reasonable critique or pointing out economic interests that might influence one's opinions on certain matters. So much should be obvious.
I'll add the following comments:
but first, thank you Brandon for your insight and support.
1) The intent of my original email was not ever to promote a "position on how to stop discrimination". Rather, it was intended to solve the problem of the original poster's problem of finding a home for her family. (I'm still assuming that was her meaning since her clarification suggested so). Anyhow, I hope she was well served by my response.
2) If you think that it was incumbent upon me to tell her how to fight evil in the world, and you certainly have an argument, I would still submit that my recommendation of talking to the Rent Board is superior to my detractor's suggestion of going to the Tenants Union, since the rent board is where such disputes are adjudicated.
3) As a long time tenant (of 23 years I think he said) in San Francisco, under the auspices of the rent board and tenants union, he has benefited equally as I have as a landlord for the last 10; He also stands to continue to gain given that he seems intent on remaining a tenant. This conflict of interest, equally disqualifies him as an unbiased authority on this subject.
To his credit he did state that he we are all entitled to our opinion; though his tone seemed to suggest that because I am a Realtor and a landlord my opinions are "suspect" and his were pure.
4) If we are talking about who stands to gain from the Tenants Union being as strong as it is and pedaling as much influence as it does, lets just say that I am not a SF Landlord so I really could care less (in that respect). As for my clients: landlords here don't really mind as much as you would think. The dirty little secret is that most landlords still get their return on investment. The ones who are hurt by rent control (there I said it) are the following: 1) 1st time buyers; 2) New tenants who are subsidizing long time tenants 3) small time landlords who don't have the means to wait out the long time tenants (I digress). On the other hand my detractor stands to loose dearly if the Tenants Union were to simply disappear one day; as he no doubt has been paying sub market rents for some time now.
So please do disclose the *not* so obvious, as well.
5)I'll leave you with one more thought which brings this all home to the discrimination against families. And this is an important one to me as a parent. Landlords don't want to rent to families, because families stay in one place for a long time!!! The poor woman who wants to find an apartment for her two kids is doubly, no triply, screwed because 1) people like my detractor have artificially low rents which need to be subsidized by new-comers 2) Families are viewed by landlords as long term tenants and thus less desirable; 3) the Tenants Union and niby-ism has influenced the board of sups to block all avenues for inexpensive home ownership such as condos and new development.
This brings us to yet another reason why San Francisco is a non family friendly city (just one of many). You can say all you want, but rent control is not the answer to housing, just as diet pills are not the answer to obesity. You cannot get a silver bullet by placing the entire burden on a small portion of the population (or simply making your heart pump faster). In fact this subsidy doesn't even do a very good job of targeting those who need the help. This rent control is there for all, no matter what their means are.
Don't get me started about the bribes necessary to end a month to month contract.
Great article on the real estate happenings, I really enjoy reading your posts. Just for your information, Donald Trump is in big trouble right now with his real estate empire. I hope everyone can pull through this slump!!
Elmo
Real Estate Professional
Post a Comment