CREJ

Page 38 — Multifamily Properties Quarterly — May 2021 www.crej.com only protected some renters, evictions remain low. Eviction levels are a frac- tion of historical levels, not because of the moratoriums, but rather because landlords understand the situation. They are actively working with tenants on payment plans, identifying resourc- es for rental assistance or allowing ten- ants out of their leases completely. The reality is that evictions are ter- rible for owners. They are expensive, time-consuming and result in an empty unit that must be cleaned, repaired and re-leased. To paint a pic- ture of heartless landlords eagerly pur- suing evictions is complete and utter nonsense. Evictions also are misunderstood. Usually, a landlord starts an eviction process when a tenant does not pay rent on time since the owner does not know if the resident is ever planning to pay. In most cases, the resident pays the past-due rent, and the process is stopped. Only in rare cases does a local sheriff get involved to physically remove the tenant. The data reveals that nearly 54% of the time an eviction was filed, the resident was able to pay and stay. In approximately 23% of the cases, the resident voluntarily left, and only about 11% of the time did a filing result in physical eviction. Only about 12% of the tenants relied on the CDC declara- tion to avoid eviction. Evictions are not always for non- payment of rent. If a tenant is a drug dealer, violent, has a dangerous animal or just disturbs the peace on a regular basis without regard for neighbors, the property owner has a responsibility to other residents to evict the problem tenant. With so many resources available, it is difficult to understand the reasons for such dire predictions of massive evictions. The federal government has provided all sorts of aid, countless charities are providing help, owners are working with residents and, hopefully, people also can turn to friends and family. In summary, the moratorium on evictions is completely unnecessary: Evictions are at all-time lows. Morato- riums prevent owners from evicting bad actors who threaten the safety of responsible residents. Significant sources of aid are readily available so that individuals can get current on their rents. The moratorium does not prevent individuals from accumulating massive debts that will haunt them well past the pandemic. And the mora- torium removes the incentive for indi- viduals to find affordable, alternative living arrangements. s anewell@monarchinvestment.com Newell Continued from Page 10 themes that are a consistent motiva- tor that we would like to shed some light on. The first and most obvious reason is that the Denver metropoli- tan area is a fantastic place to live. It boasts a population of some of America’s smartest and most-quali- fied workforces along with a boom- ing city whose climate and natural splendor are hard to beat. Addition- ally, Denver still is a relatively afford- able option in terms of the cost of living, especially compared with coastal markets. Secondly, the Denver metro area is by and large still a great place to be a landlord. Owners of apartment complexes, for the most part, have the autonomy to run their buildings how they want. There are few gov- ernment mandates that instill rent control, overbearing tenant rights and big brother oversight on how to be an apartment operator. Places like much of California, New York City and Chicago face the opposite fate. We think this is one of the main reasons investors are coming from states like these. Denver owners, apartment associations and other organizations are extremely proac- tive and on the offensive for keeping this sort of legislation out of Colora- do. This stable political environment also allows investors to feel comfort- able and confident in their yearly budgets and long-term projections. Here investors can run their build- ings in the manner they see fit and they have the option to be rewarded for value-add programs that they chose to institute. Sadly, the global pandemic has seen tenants who are, in their right, electing to not pay rent and not move out of buildings despite late payments and eviction notices. Simply put, landlords have lost their ability to run their build- ings like they are accustomed to and are in some ways forced into difficult practices they otherwise wouldn’t do in order to make their returns. Denver offers investors from cit- ies like New York City, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles and Oakland, California, the opportunity to make good returns and run buildings at their discretion. Lastly, the economic fundamen- tals in Denver still are very strong. Over the last 10 years or so there has been robust job growth and a con- tinual influx of in-migration leading to healthy rent growth and a hefty pipeline of new construction. Accord- ing to CoStar, “A flourishing economy with a rapidly expanding tech scene spurred an apartment construction boom in Denver in the past decade. In four out of the past five years, more than 9,000 units have delivered annually in the metro.” This puts Denver in the top 15 in the country and shows it is a place that is seeing sustained demand for apartments. Denver is proving that it is on the map as one of the best markets in the country to invest in apartment buildings. With buyers ranging from institutional capital to private capital investors, it is a very competitive and lucrative place to build an apartment portfolio. The political climate, booming city and beautiful quality of life will hopefully sustain this surge going forward. s nmaccarter@capstone-companies.com bkaufman@capstone-companies.com MacCarter Continued from Page 16 lation of 880,000, followed by St. Louis, ranking 16th (population 208,000) and Minneapolis, ranking 11th (population 420,000). In Colorado,Westminster is the trendiest city, with a share increase of 35% in apartment applications from the Gen Z renter segment. It went from just 17% in 2019 to 23% in 2020, becom- ing the new up-and-coming “Zoomer” favorite. Colorado Springs also made the top, with a 29% change in just one year, followed by Loveland with 29%, Lakewood with 28% and Boulder with 27%. According to Jill Ann Harrison, pro- fessor at University of Oregon, what all of these cities have in common is a lower cost of living and a vibrant local scene. “It is easier in these places for people to take risks to becoming small- business owners and contributing to the local economy and culture,” she said. “These smaller markets offer an opportunity for younger adults to not just live in a place, but to help to create or contribute to it in meaningful ways. In turn, many of these smaller cities have a truer sense of authenticity that is certainly serving as a pull.” n Boulder has the highest share of Gen Z renters. We also looked at the cities that boast the highest shares of Gen Z renters. According to the data, Boulder takes first place. A considerable share, 65%, of Gen Zers applied for Boulder apartments in 2020, while the shares of other generations were considerably lower, with millennials scoring a 22% share, Gen X 8% and baby boomers and older reporting just 5%. As a college city, Boulder can offer recent graduates the possibility of con- tinuing to live in the area that they’re most familiar with, having the option of remote work available. Nicholas P. Dempsey, associate professor of sociol- ogy at Eckard College, is of the same opinion. “Young people launching careers head to where jobs are in the different industries that interest them, and those still tend to locate in the biggest cities,” he said. “If firms allow many of their employees to work from home after the pandemic, college grads might just choose to skip the move to the big city and stay in the college town that they’ve grown to love. But that’s a big if.” Davis, California, another college city, took the second spot in the top, with a Gen Z share of 61%, followed by Conway, Arkansas, nicknamed “the city of colleges,” with 52%. Other cities in the top, like Bloomington, Indiana, or Ankeny, Iowa, also are home to or in the vicinity of universities, which explains the higher shares of Gen Zers. As for Colorado, following Boulder’s 65% share of Gen Z is Colorado Springs, with the second-largest share of “Zoomers” in the state, 31%. Greeley is third with 29%, followed by Fort Collins with 28% and Loveland with 27%. s florentina.sarac@yardi.com Sarac Continued from Page 22 Monarch Investment and Management Group An analysis of eviction outcomes demonstrates that a small percentage of eviction cases result in physical removal from a home.