A great debate is playing out today as to what is more valuable to society,
apartment rentals or apartment conversions?
Should this decision as to which is more valuable be made by the collective
wisdom of the City Council and city attorney, or by the free market? Housing is
a scarce resource and not everyone can have all they want.
Who should decide who gets what? Should it be through political favoritism or
the collective wisdom of more than 1 million adult residents in the city of San
Diego, the impartial workings of the free market? Which collective wisdom will
bring about the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people?
Private providers of housing are forced to unconditionally obey the will of
consumers who, by their decisions to buy or abstain from buying, determine what
is to be produced. Consumers determine what type of housing shall be built at
the lowest possible price, and in what quantity and quality, whether it be
detached or attached single-family homes, condominiums, condo-conversions,
mobile homes or apartments.
The city attorney and City Council, unlike developers, act under no such
commands and are not financially accountable to anyone for their decisions.
The most effective way for low-income people to become prosperous is through
property ownership. The founding fathers of this country understood this
critical point, and subsequently Congress extended the opportunities through the
Great Land Rushes in the 1880s.
Equity in property begets capital, which begets investment, which begets greater
productivity, income and wealth, which begets richer people and richer
countries. (The primary reason third world countries are poor is lack of private
property and enforceable property rights.)
So why does the city attorney and City Council want to do everything in their
power to keep people poor? Keep them poor by denying them the opportunity to buy
an affordable home that's been converted from an apartment? Studies show that
people who move into condominium conversions vacate less expensive apartments in
a chain of moves.
At any given time there's a ratio between the number of households and the
number of dwellings in a city. This ratio does not change based on whether a
dwelling unit is called an apartment or a condominium. There's no net change in
the housing inventory due to conversions.
Does anyone believe that politicians have the wisdom to determine who is most
deserving in our society between renters and those renters who want to be
homeowners? Is this the proper role of politicians in a free society?
Politicians represent all the people, and they violate the people's trust when
they favor or disfavor select portions of the public. Most important,
unrestricted condo-conversions, over and above all other considerations,
increase private property ownership, and private property is the hallmark of a
free society. Freedom is a lofty goal and should not arbitrarily be restricted
by government.
Perhaps our politicians should be explaining why people with initiative, who
work hard, improve their education, their work skills and who save a down
payment should have their hopes and dreams dashed in favor of politically
mobilized renters. By what right do politicians determine who is most deserving
in our society?
-- Charles Jolly,
Realtor
-- Matt Giacalone,
Past president San Diego Association of Realtors
-- Chuck Hoffman,
Past president SDAR
-- Sue Ditler,
Past president SDAR
-- George Jonilonis,
Past president SDAR
* Fred Schnaubelt,
* President, Citizens for Private Property Rights
