Short answer is It won’t be large enough of popular to leave a city so that it can impact housing price (to fall) and a particular area to raiseBesides the infrastructure that many talks about, there is the input and output of labor and skilled workers, Currently the market has C amount of jobs that are WFH-able, and let’s say that is 10,000 of Software engineers in this example, the current 10,000 of engineer can decide to move to less expensive area so to speak, but most of them will not, I will explain later, you see in order for the FB or google to continue to hire SE they need to have continuous input of student into the top schools, which are mostly in better areas so to speak, FB and google in this case won’t just hire anyone, so in order for less student to go to bigger cities where better education is offered, that city needs to have a better school, and public school doesn’t fund over night, so you get the idea, then for those who lives in say LA Bay Area, if they decided to move, they will need to move to an area where good education can be offered, and they won’t be there “cheaper in price” area that we are thinking about.LA has always see a shortage in housing and that will continue to get worsen, for those that moves to TX, it’s mainly being dragged by Companies moving to TX therefore the migration, of say FB decided to move to a smaller town out of no where then yes we can see that to follow, but just a WFH policy will not lead enough people to move, lastly is that no local government will incentivize enough to bring people in their cities, like what TX is doing, because simply if they haven’t they didn’t have the resource or not being able t offer incentive for the big companies to come in therefore bringing up RE and commercial Revenue stream, those that wanted to move, has a reason to move long time ago, could be cost of living has been pushing them out, or being closer to family, and now it just gave them one more reason to act on it, but WFH itself will not be a trend to get people moving.

We actually have a SE CT group, and we meet monthly which is currently through Zoom. 

To be accurate leases do not "transfer" per se, I believe in most states as a buyer you need to honor the terms.

My reason for asking is that California is a market, while I live in and own in, I don't think I can afford to invest at this time but want to get my feet wet per se in another market.  

All of these homes cashflowed with 0-5% down when fully rented:1. 201 8th Street UNIT A/B, Sultan2. 11005 Roseberg Avenue S, Seattle, WA 981683. 12209 2nd Avenue SW, Seattle4. 12260 Des Moines Memorial Drive S, Burien5. 15415 SE 179th Avenue, Monroe6. 23109 25th Avenue S, Des MoinesHope this helps - reach out to me over messages if you'd like to talk about it more, $400k isn't an easy price point to work in but with the right search criteria and team behind you, you can make it work!

As a very general rule, you can pick up good cash flowing properties at around $100k/door if you are looking outside of the class c neighborhoods or less expensive in those areas ($80-90k or so on the SE side of town).

The state initiated an investigation (#4), but then essentially put it on hold pending the outcome of #2#2 dragged out for about a year because the tenants were pro se in the court and the judge gave them A LOT of latitude. 

If what one client needs done takes four to five hours and they don't have another project reasonably close by to fill the remainder of the day, they lose out - thus they charge for their availability per se, more so than their actual time.True professionals shouldn't take any offense to a client asking about rates/costs/etc., so don't be shy next go-round - ask ahead of time and make your hiring decision accordingly.

However SE or W2 tax would have to be paid and ultimately there is no more income and possibly less with SE tax or W2.

As someone from SE Michigan just learning about real estate these posts have been very helpful.