Sacramento Landlord thing getting worse.... - Posted by Marcos

Posted by Bryan in Cali on February 15, 2002 at 18:21:28:

Not only that, he doesn’t seem to have realistic expectations for what price he can get for the houses. They were cheaply built and have mold, structural, and other problems. He paid $60 million for the land on which the houses were built in 1988. Let’s not factor in the cost of building the houses for the moment. In today’s Bee classifieds there is a once abandoned fixer upper house in Citrus Heights, 3bd2ba, for $120,000. The Bee also stated in an article today that Kawamoto plans to sell the houses individually. Let’s say that he gets $100,000 per house (probably optimistic). He has about 400 houses in the Sacramento suburbs to sell. If he gets $100,000 per house, he will have about $40 million-two thirds the cost of the developments in literal dollars, but if you factor in inflation it’s probably more like half. So in what I think would be an ideal situation, he’d end up with a 50% LOSS. Which makes me think he’s in desperate need of cash-any cash-for some unknown to us reason, and that he thinks that delivering the houses empty will make them more sellable (which is not true).

Sacramento Landlord thing getting worse… - Posted by Marcos

Posted by Marcos on February 15, 2002 at 13:00:18:

"The organization’s discussion of seizing Kawamoto’s property through eminent domain “would be a real stretch,” according to prominent redevelopment lawyer Brent Hawkins of Sacramento. But Hawkins said that “theoretically, it might be possible for a housing authority” such as the SHRA to condemn and seize the houses, although the proposal could cost tens of millions of dollars.

“Courts have interpreted the power of a legislative body like a city to use eminent domain as pretty broad, as long as you enunciate a public purpose,” Hawkins said. “I suppose one of the purposes might include preserving affordable housing.”

Sometimes I just have to shake my head. I mean give me a break, they’re talking about seizing his property because he served notice. This is getting ridiculous. I sometimes think California is a whole different country. And to think I used to live there.


It could work out for the landlord… - Posted by David Krulac

Posted by David Krulac on February 18, 2002 at 19:29:57:

because under emminet domain the state must compensate the owner for fair market value. every body is happy, the owner gets cash, the tenants get to stay where they are and the government creates another housing project overnight. (I am kidding on that last one!)

David Krulac

Sounds like the Soviet state of Maryland (nt) - Posted by jim

Posted by jim on February 15, 2002 at 18:58:59:


Re: Sacramento Landlord thing getting worse… - Posted by CLARE Z

Posted by CLARE Z on February 15, 2002 at 16:45:35:

It is one thing to evict someone. It is another to cause a huge community crisis - which this is. It is not reasonable to evict that many people in that short a time into a community that cannot support the housing. Naturally, the authorities will overeact and make things worse…but this was a bit much.

It was a thoughtless and ethically questionable thing for him to do, and I am sure he could care less.


Re: Sacramento Landlord thing getting worse… - Posted by David H

Posted by David H on February 15, 2002 at 16:32:46:

It seems that this might be aggravated somewhat by the continued rise in rents as per

February 8th 2002


Sacramento has the most vibrant residential rental market in the west. Our December survey found that in the fourth quarter of 2001, average rents rose by 1.5% over the previous quarter. This increase brings the average rent for all unit type to $843, and is a 9.6% increase for the year 2001. That has been the average rate of increase for the past four years.

Ten years ago, the notion that Sacramento would one day be the bright spot in the multifamily market seemed laughably deluded. Even five years ago, average rent gains of more than $10 or $15 a year seemed ambitious. But the tide began to turn about four years ago, with steady gains every year. It is especially remarkable that the increase has continued, since conventional wisdom suggested the initial strength in the market was due to the huge increase in Bay Area rents, which drove renters ever farther afield until they finally went all the way to Sacramento. But now rents in the Bay Area have fallen by anything from 12% to 22% — and the Sacramento MSA is still going strong.

One explanation is that Sacramento County planning restraints halted new construction for a number of years. With supply thus limited, any increase in demand had to be met with higher prices, according to the law of supply and demand. Even now that building has been resumed, supply still lags far behind demand, so prices are still going up.

The Sacramento economy has also been strong, with the unemployment rate rising only .4% from January to December 2001, one third of the national rate. This factor has helped to maintain the growth of demand and suggests that the conventional wisdom may not have been wise enough to realize that the more varied employment base in the area, including the large government work force, has helped Sacramento avoid the rent and occupancy regression which more one-industry reliant markets, such as the Silicon Valley, experienced in 2001.

Just as important as rent levels in judging the health of a housing market is the change in the occupancy level. Nearly every other market in the western region has sunk down to the lower 90 percent range, but Sacramento still holds at 95.6%, extremely high for this recessionary quarter.

With estimates of employment growth this year ranging from 12,000 to 15,000 the prospects in this area look rosy for the future.

Caroline S. Latham

Re: Sacramento Landlord thing getting worse… - Posted by JRHall

Posted by JRHall on February 16, 2002 at 10:04:19:

I would disagree with this being a community crisis. It will work itself out. The government stepping in will only make matters worse. What’s being proposed is to protect people from themselves, Socialism at it’s best. The Constitution is supposed to protect all of us from the government stealing our property. Sorry about the soap box but this is one of my hot buttons. I lived in Sacramento and am glad to have come back home. At least here we have an initiative process to put the state government back in it’s place when they overstep their bounds. The initative process is used frequently here in Oregon.