An Evolving Mission
Since it’s early settlers, the Mission has been changing drastically. Due to landlords controlling the cost of rent, from a fluctuating economy. When this happens it forces it’s early settlers to be driven out because the cost of living becomes too much for them bare. They have no choice, but to leave or find a way to make a greater income to keep living in these areas. San Francisco residents should take action in a number of ways to preserve the culture of the Mission District.
The city of San Francisco would have to build more affordable housing to lower- income residents. More and more people want to move into the city of San Francisco and also call it their home. Katy Steinmetz states in her article about solutions to San Francisco’s housing problems, “ Lee announced the ambitious goal of building or rehabilitating 30,000 new homes by 2020, the equivalent of 5,000 each year- and a massive increase from the rate that the city has been building. In 2011, a mere 260 units were completed in the City by the Bay”(Steinmetz). She also states, “ Lee has said he wants one-third of the new units to be ‘permanently affordable’ to lower-income residents” (Steinmetz). More affordable housing to lower income residents will reduce the amount of displacement that is happening to our city. Building more affordable housing rather than luxury condominiums that cater only to the rich will help San Francisco housing issues. New residents such as tech workers are flowing into the city because they favor the feel of urban living. Tech workers who live in the Mission are able to ride in their own private corporate buses that take them from their homes in San Francisco all the way down to Silicon Valley to work. Their private corporate buses cause traffic in the Mission and San Francisco resident Roberto Hernandez states, “ Children are getting to school late because of these tech buses that roll through the Mission. They’re late, and they don’t eat breakfast. So they’re there with an empty stomach. They start in school late because they’re getting to school late” (Hudson). These new buses are causing inconvenience to original residents of the area trying to get to work or school by MUNI bus. Hernandez also adds, “ If you ride a MUNI bus, it’s slow; it’s late; it stinks. Now you ride one of those tech buses, you get Wi-Fi; you get luxury on that bus; you get everything. But those buses, for us, is just a symbol of what rich folks can get away with” (Hudson). The wealthy are able to have luxury benefits such as the buses that take them straight to work in the Silicon Valley and block MUNI bus stops, while residents still take the MUNI bus, which are sometimes often late during the morning and evening rush hours.
Young urban professionals are interested in the Mission and have the desire of the hip and eccentric vibe of the city life. They are more drawn to this more urban neighborhood because it’s in the heart of the city and their interest in the Mission is also a factor of the rising price in rent and space, which pushes out the poor and middle class out of the city. Hudson states in his article, “ San Francisco welcomes the booming tech industry, whose workers’ average salaries are over $100,00. In April 2011, with a push from Mayor Ed Lee, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a city ordinance that gives Twitter and other tech companies a 1.5 percent city payroll tax cut for the next six years in return for those businesses staying in San Francisco’s mid-Market Street area. The tax breaks must be re-approved every year. In 2012, the tax cuts cost the city $1.9 million and were re-approved for this year. Twitter is expected to get $22 million from the tax break over six years and possibly more since stock options are untaxed, and the company is now publicly traded. Twitter’s IPO is also expected to create more millionaires” (Hudson). These young professionals with high paying salaries are able to afford the high cost or rent and living in the Mission and possibly the whole city. Their tax cuts are also what draws them to living in the Mission district, which is close to the Financial District and Market Street. Members of these companies in San Francisco have to organize community benefit agreements known as CBAs. They are charity contributions to the city, but it only benefits other professionals in the industry, which are cocktail parties and ballet performances to employees only. They have no contribution what so ever to the communities of San Francisco.
We should make landlords pay for evictions happening throughout the city. Steinmetz also states in her article, “City Supervisor David Campos proposed a law on Feb. 4 that would require certain landlords evicting tenants from rent-controlled buildings to essentially subsidize the new, higher rents those people would be forced to pay. Landlords would have to pony up the difference between the controlled rents and whatever the going market rate for that apartment would be for the equivalent of two years” (Steinmetz). Home brokers and land lords drive people out of their homes by buying their property and offering them a large amount of money or evict them from their property. Hudson states, “ The number of evictions in 2013 has surpassed evictions in 2006, the height of the real estate bubble. Total no-fault evictions are up 17 percent compared to 2006. More significantly, there has been a 115 percent increase in total evictions since last year in 2012. From 1997 to 2013, there have been over 11,000 no fault evictions- either through demolition, owner move-in, or the Ellis Act” (Hudson). Hudson explains the Ellis Act by stating, “ The Ellis Act is a California state law that allows landlords to evict tenants to “go out of business” by pulling their property off the market. This allows speculators to swoop in and flip the property. In fact, speculators are driving many Ellis Act evictions. The Anti- Eviction Mapping Project reports that Ellis Act evictions ‘increased by 175 percent’ in 2013” (Hudson). This act therefore brings in a new population of people, which creates a melting pot of a diverse community. It also brings in people who have the money to afford these properties.
The cost of living in San Francisco is increasing at a very fast rate. Low to medium income residents cannot keep up with the rising rent and property of the city. Hudson states, “ Median rent in San Francisco is over $3000 a month, with some neighborhoods in the $4000- $5000 range. Even rooms for $1000 a month are virtually nonexistent. This makes San Francisco perhaps the least affordable city for middle-class families in the country, with New York City following closely behind it” (Hudson). Even with the rise of minimum wage in San Francisco, it’s not enough money to live and pay for the rent. It is unfair for people in the Mission and other neighborhoods who have family owned businesses and homes they have to pay rent for. There are no affordable housing in San Francisco because the city refuses to build more affordable homes. This drives residents to other areas in the Bay.
Most people like myself see gentrification as a deficit to a historical, beautiful city, whereas others view it as a positive aspect. People who own property in the city and rent out their house, apartment, or unit can earn income due to higher rent prices. As tech workers are able to afford the high rent, original homeowners can raise the rent of their home and rent it out to tech workers and other people of wealth. Gentrification of the Mission also made the area more “safe” as more white residents are moving into the area.
The original residents of San Francisco are being pushed out of their homes due to these factors. The city is becoming more gentrified by the minute. The amount of displacement is jaw dropping and we must take action into what is happening to our city that we call home.
Works Cited
Steinmetz, Katy. “ 8 Solutions to San Francisco’s Housing Problems.” Time Magazine. 7 Feb. 2014. Web. 22 May. 2016
Hudson, Adam. “The Bleaching of San Francisco: Extreme Gentrification and Suburbanized Poverty in the Bay Area.” Truthout. 27 April. 2014. Web.
