A tenant in one of the city's newer condos — built within the last decade, owned by an out-of-town individual landlord — just got slapped with a 40% rent increase on their renewal notice. After two years of tenancy. The first year's bump was a modest 4%, which in hindsight now looks like a warm-up act.

And here's the kicker: it's perfectly legal. Because the unit is in a newer building, San Francisco's rent control ordinance doesn't apply. Condos built after 1979 — and especially individually owned units in newer construction — sit outside the rent stabilization framework entirely. The landlord just has to give adequate notice, and they can name whatever number they want.

As one SF resident put it bluntly: "A 40% increase just means he wants you out. This is what I call a passive eviction."

Another local was even more direct: "Homie def trying to send you a message."

They're not wrong. A 40% hike isn't a market adjustment — it's a goodbye letter with a price tag. And the tenant is now doing exactly what thousands of others have done before: packing up and heading to the Peninsula.

This is the quiet exodus that doesn't make headlines. No dramatic eviction proceedings, no protest signs, no Board of Supervisors hearings. Just a number on a piece of paper that says you can't afford to live here anymore.

Meanwhile, the city continues to wonder why it struggles with population retention and workforce housing. City Hall loves to talk about building more units — and to be fair, more supply is part of the answer — but the regulatory patchwork that protects some renters while leaving others completely exposed creates a two-tiered system that's almost designed to push working people out.

The broader picture is even messier. We're hearing from workers who commute two hours each way and are trying to cobble together half-month housing arrangements through Airbnbs, hotel stays, and room rentals just to maintain a job in the city. When "how do I afford to exist in San Francisco for 15 days a month" is a legitimate logistics problem, something has gone structurally sideways.

More housing, fewer barriers to building, and a regulatory environment that doesn't pick winners and losers based on the age of their apartment — that's the path forward. But until then, expect more quiet goodbyes and more U-Hauls headed south on 101.