Letter to the Editor: Apartment Vacancy Rates Paint an Incomplete Picture 86%

By David Malcolm0%

7/16/2026, 9:36:55 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 32 faulty reasoning types, including Framing Effect, Appeal to Emotion, and Indoctrination, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 29.7% saturation with 157 hits. Analysis detected 1,737 faulty-reasoning hits from 528 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 79.7% and a BS Rank of 86% (2,382 of 17,003 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 86.00% of the article peer group.

David Malcolm is the president of Cal West Apartments, Inc. 
In last Saturday’s  Politics Report ,” Will Huntsberry tackled the thorny issue of apartment vacancy rates (apparently the highest in this century) and the impact on affordability. 
He also correctly wrote that the city of San Diego needs “strategies beyond build, build, build.” 
What’s Really Happening 
My company owns and operates apartment rental complexes in San Diego County (San Marcos, Encinitas, La Jolla, El Cajon and South Bay) and in Temecula (Riverside County). 
Here is what we are seeing. 
Base rents are stable  but offers of two months’ free rent are common. 
That is a de facto 16.7 percent reduction on annualized rents. 
Reducing base rents is not possible in the face of rent control measures and, even more importantly, bank loan covenants. 
Thus, concessions like two months’ free rent are not hard to find. 
In Temecula, projects next to ours offer two or even three months’ free rent. 
In the city of San Diego, you see these offers in precisely the locations where apartment buildings have proliferated  Downtown, Mission Valley, Hillcrest, Bankers Hill and North Park for example. 
This means that the impetus to build more apartment units has increased affordability and real rents are down. 
Mission Accomplished? 
I say the city should declare a victory for having increased supply  and take a step back from “build, baby, build!” 
By taking a step back, I mean being less knee-jerk and more about striking the right balance before San Diego becomes Los Angeles, sacrificing community character in the process. 
The rush to build, build, build has already resulted in unintended consequences. 
Take parking as one example. 
Reducing requirements from one or two spaces per unit to no parking whatsoever means that streets will forever be lined with parked cars  and people with special needs are not-so-subtly told, “Don’t apply here.” 
What has San Diego become when we aren’t willing to make room for those with special needs? 
For many projects not a single Handicapped parking space is required. 
Let’s Get Back to Striking the Right Balance 
How does San Diego get back to accommodating demand without throwing community character out the window, so to speak? 
By encouraging developers to build the right product in the right places. 
Transit-oriented development is just one example of that. 
By getting back to considering architectural qualities, height considerations, impacts on wetlands and other environmental assets, and by making sure the appropriate infrastructure is in place or planned. 
That means everything from roads to water and sewer to parks to schools to grocery stores. 
And here’s a thought. 
One good way to do that is by listening to the community planning groups who are the boots on the ground of the communities themselves. 
San Diego has not been doing that and it is to our detriment. 
But it can and must be turned around. 
Let’s shift the conversation from build everything, everywhere, all at once (apologies to the Academy Award-winning Best Picture) to thoughtful, comprehensive “communities planning” before jeopardizing San Diego’s greatest asset; our quality of life. 
Confirmation Bias
13.1%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
14.6%
Representativeness Heuristic
8.5%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
2.1%
Framing Effect
24.4%
Loss Aversion
6.3%
Status Quo Bias
10.6%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
10.6%
Pessimism Bias
18.8%
Negativity Bias
17.6%
Self-Serving Bias
5.1%
Fundamental Attribution Error
3.8%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
4.7%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
9.7%
False Dilemma
13.3%
Slippery Slope
12.1%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
7.4%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0.4%
Appeal to Emotion
24.4%
Begging the Question
2.3%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
13.8%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
7.2%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
3%
Anecdotal
15.7%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
4.2%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
7.2%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
5.3%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
2.3%
Quote-first Misdirection
5.3%
Biased Writer Voice
29.7%
Indoctrination
20.5%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
5.1%

528 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.