&gt; ...rent control seems like part of the problem to me, in the sense that it hides the true extent of market distortions from many people living in the area...<p>musesum mentions:<p>&gt;  Am lucky to have rent control. Right now, if I move away, I wouldn&#x27;t be able to afford moving back.<p><i>Everyone</i> I speak to in my building [0] is <i>very</i> aware of the current ludicrously high rents in the city and how it limits their ability to keep a slumlord in line. I can&#x27;t imagine the situation is substantially different in any other rent-controlled building in the city.<p>Also, be aware that SF&#x27;s rent-control is more correctly termed rent-stabilization. Vacated units can have their rent set to <i>any</i> rate. Stabilization only kicks in once that unit is occupied.<p>&gt; ...while incentivizing weird and unethical behavior to circumvent it by developers who could probably be nudged...<p>I honestly don&#x27;t know what you&#x27;re talking about here. Were you aware that rent control in SF doesn&#x27;t apply to new construction [1]; only to housing built or occupied before June 13, 1979? [2]<p>If you <i>were</i> aware of that, would you be so kind as to tell me what you are referring to? :)<p>[0] Including the old lady who is afflicted with alzheimer&#x27;s.<p>[1] Unless -as happened with Sangiacomo&#x27;s Trinity Place on Market street- a special arrangement is reached to destroy existing rent-controlled units, but have a 1:1 replacement in the new construction.<p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sftu.org&#x2F;rentcontrol&#x2F;#Rent_Control_Coverage" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.sftu.org&#x2F;rentcontrol&#x2F;#Rent_Control_Coverage</a>