All Forum Posts by: Kelvin Lee

$90k reno for a triplex is a lot of money.  Before you go that far, I would ask myself these questions. 

1_Does the rental income after reno sustain the mortgage and expenses yet generates decent cash flow, say >8% COC?

2_Is the triplex located in a good neighborhood say B class which generates decent cap gain ( although I would never recommend speculation)

I asked the same question to FaXXers and they said there is no retro fitting pre-requisite under their policy. That said the premium is not going to go down regardless it has been done or you are going to do it. 

Two simple reasons I ended up getting one for my property. One, the earthquake insurance would cover damages caused by earthquake that the regular insurance won't. Two, the premium expense doesn't impact much on the overall investment performance. Just like other expenses, the premium is tax deductible. 

Management companies, either small or big, I used in the past all begin with stellar performance but then turned south after few years. They either forget renewal contract with new rate, hiring vendors that used mud tape for copper pipe leak,  on site manager renting the unit to her own daughter with 20% discount of the market rate, not aggressively looking out for new tenants etc.

Any one got good recommendation that serves in Portland metro with stellar track record over 5 years currently serving your apartment?

I am sure staying my next purchase away from Multniomah County with the rent control looming on the horizon. 

Who believe Chloe Eudaly and Ted Wheeler know nothing about the "Unintended Consequences" would be naive. There is no coincidence fooling the low income group with their own emotion to mow down small owners with all sorts of ordinances, working with big players to generate more revenue by approving land use for building luxury apartment only yet screaming for Housing Crisis for lack of resource on affording housing?? And now luring the individual home owner to install a "FREE" micro ADU in the back yard for the homeless to give the City an excuse to raise the property taxes 5 years after. At the end of the day, both middle and low income classes suffer. The biggest winners in this game have always been the City and the 1% richest.

Well said. So the way the Ted Wheeler and his team wiping out small landlords is for bigger profit from the real estate developers? If so, do you think they get kick back from the developers behind? 

Can anyone explains why the City keep approving luxury apartment new construction one after another instead of building an affordable apartment for the low income group on the same piece of land?

I agree with Steve totally. All these new ordinances if passed would only mow down all small rental property owners, which are the majority of rental housing supplier, and open the gate for the big developers taking over the rental market. The vulnerable low income tenants can only see forever increasing rent with this out of balance ecosystem. Big player won't be affected much by rent control as they have sufficient cash flow from over thousands of units. After all, Chloe Eudaly who uses low income people emotion to wipe out small owners, becomes a winning child to the City and State who successfully generates more revenue from and for the big players.

I spent 6 hrs watching the Moving Fee drama unfolded in the City Hall. The Moving Fee as a form of income to low income family is a toxic pill because 

1_the moving fee is taxable by the City and State 

2_Additional income could get their Earn Income Credit and Housing Assistance reduced and disqualified  

3_Additional income could make the low income family disqualified for Medical benefit which force them paying out of pocket for Obama care or penalized by IRS for being uninsured.

In that meeting, only small owners showed up giving testimonials and protest. No big player even bother to show up as none of these new ordinances can put them out of business. Chloe Eudaly simply took advantage of people emotion passing a moving fee ordinance knowing that it would only back fire the low income family as an "Unintended" consequences. 

At the end of the day, Chloe Eudaly is a politician. 

It's not about the easiness of throwing the deposit into interest-bearing account. Beware that this is just the beginning of Chloe Eudaly's game to drive the small owner up against the wall. No cause eviction, rent control, limited security deposit, moving fees...what else? And how does any of this new ordinances solve the affordable housing? I can't held thinking if Chloe Eudaly works with the big developers behind the scene wiping out small owners to help the big players monopolize the rental housing market. Just look around Portland these day with the new development of luxury apartment grows like a weed. Remember big developers pay big money every year to the City including development fee, property taxes and all sort of benefits behind. The small owner does not.