I also live in a rent-controlled apartment in SF. I'm not sure what the particular policy in Boston is, but here they can increase the rent by 3%/year (I think) while I live there. After I leave, they can reset it to whatever they like.
So, in principle, if market rents increase a lot, the landlord has an incentive for me to leave. I think there's another side to this though: I've been a great tenant for a while and always pay on time -- if I leave, he runs the risk of getting a scammer who just won't pay and will take a year to evict.
Also, since I've locked in a nice rate, I have an incentive to stay and even make minor improvements (like clearing all the dead growth from the patio, etc.)
I think rent control probably is not a great idea in many places, but in SF it seems to work. My pet theory is that the boom-bust cycle here is much more severe and without rent control the city would have no stable population.
The question for both of you is how did you get the rent controlled apartment? I bet it wasn't through craigslist. Everybody I know in the city who lives under rent control (which, admittedly, is not very many) found their places through friends.
Not that it's a bad thing, but it supports the idea that you have to be "connected" to get a place. Maybe not a lawyer or a judge, but having been around the city helps.
It was through Craigslist... the deal is that every building in San Francisco built before a certain year (I don't remember which year) is rent controlled, so you don't really need a connection. The year cutoff is, I assume, to encourage developers to build new rental properties.
There was a proposition to ban rent control in California, which failed to pass.
I lived in a rent-controlled apt in SF that I found through craiglist. It wasn't cheap, nor squalid - Similar to what the other people say. My experiences over 20 years of renting also say - landlords treat good tenants like gold - if you don't make noise, don't sell drugs, and pay on time, they generally are happy to not raise your rent.
So, in principle, if market rents increase a lot, the landlord has an incentive for me to leave. I think there's another side to this though: I've been a great tenant for a while and always pay on time -- if I leave, he runs the risk of getting a scammer who just won't pay and will take a year to evict.
Also, since I've locked in a nice rate, I have an incentive to stay and even make minor improvements (like clearing all the dead growth from the patio, etc.)
I think rent control probably is not a great idea in many places, but in SF it seems to work. My pet theory is that the boom-bust cycle here is much more severe and without rent control the city would have no stable population.