Wells Fargo takes ownership of 1,800 EPA units
Original post made on Mar 4, 2010
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, March 3, 2010, 1:44 PM
on Mar 4, 2010 at 1:39 am
FIRST: Raising rents in EAST Palo Alto would be a good first step into making it non gangland territory anyhow.
Second: "no bids"? Well, that's simple to explain - there were no bids because Wells Fargo wouldn't allow the property to be sold at it's true market value which is the price it would have sold for if that were allowed. Nobody can make a profit buying these properties at the asking price.
Wells Fargo will soon discover that the property is worth a lot less, and all the property will fall into disrepair, because they won't maintain it, and Palo Alto won't challenge the bank on it. By the time this is all over, the properties will just be lots and scrubland.
on Mar 4, 2010 at 3:26 pm
What's with Rent Control in East Palo Alto? The few examples of rent control in the Bay Area do not show intended or positive results for the communities that have them (ie San Francisco). Placing an artificial cap on rents discourages development and improvements.
And if the East Palo Alto City Council thinks dealing with Wells Fargo is going to be easier than the previous owners, they are in for a big surprise. Wells Fargo has the resources to be a tough negotiating party.
Implementing revised rent control measures ahead of dealing with Wells Fargo is either extremely naive or extremely foolish of the City Council. They are apt to received the same treatment from Wells Fargo a man dressed in a suit made of ribeye would get, if he walked into a cave with a sleeping bear.
Having witnessed the debacle of their school district and asinine actions promoting rent control, I'm concluding East Palo Alto's woes have little to do with their geographic location, and much more to do with mismanagement of the city.
on Mar 5, 2010 at 6:13 pm
Stupidity - the voters are stupid, yes the ones who voted for rent controls