[quote=The-Shoveler] . . . Most the natives I know who have stayed have long since paid off their homes before retirement and you can’t get them to move. maybe I run with a small crowd however.
That is actually a big complaint in San Jose, Retiree’s don’t want to sell and move!!! LOL
The Natives I am talking about are boomer’s who originally bought their homes in the 80’s and 90’s and did not take all the equity out to buy new BMW’s (yes there are many believe it or not).[/quote]
All true, shoveler, except many boomers are still living in a home which they bought in the late ’60’s or early ’70’s for well under $50K. It’s not just SJ … ALL established areas of CA (except those which are grossly overbuilt) will continue to experience less sales listings into the future due to Props 13, 58 and 193 on the books. A CA homeowner, no matter WHAT their age, who is paying just a few hundred in property tax per year would be a fool to sell that “protected” property unless they were forced to move into a board and care facility and absolutely had no heirs who wanted the property for themselves.
It doesn’t matter WHERE the “protected” property is located. If the owner doesn’t want to live there themselves, they can rent it out and retain their ultra-low assessment for their lifetimes and continue to pass the property on to children and grandchildren.
The continuing shortage of listings in CA’s most established (read: generally most-coveted) areas will only result in higher prices in those areas … or at the very least, firmed-up prices in the event of a recession.
The vast majority of CA property owners who don’t have mortgages and also enjoy a very low tax bill have no incentive whatsoever to ever sell. They can’t safely invest the sales proceeds and earn much in this economic climate. It is more profitable for them to rent the property out and use that income to help with their living expenses, if needed, even if they have to hire a PM company to handle everything. It’s nearly all gravy to them 🙂
