Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This discussion has started to digress, I want to know if there are any municipaliteis that have true rent control that is continually adjusted for average annual incomes and not some some kind of wierd patch work legislation.
Why dont voters take control of their own communities and say we are not going to tolerate land lords taking advantage of people in the name of "market price".
In the course of this discussion it seems the biggest question is why dont govts start buying land at deflated prices via eminent domain in order to build basic housing from which people can pay a reasonable rent to build up a savings and buy their own place? Why as a state or muni do we want to tolerate rent slavery?
In alot of areas govt spending (either federal or state) is driving the "market price" so why not get some really advanced acounting to calculate the actual land value accounting for the effects of govt spending in the area and take the land for substanilly less money since in alot of locals the land lord is relying on the govt itself to derive the "market value", such as is the case with a military base or any other significant govt activity or contracting.
Have you ever invested your life savings in a business venture... which can include income property?
It is one thing to have ideas and everybody does... quite another when you have skin in the game.
My cosst continue to rise and I am in an area with many rent controlled jurisdictions... over the summer my city imposed a flat out ban on rent increases across the board... funny thing is I have not raised rents on existing residents in years but I do go to market when I have a vacancy... so it was punishing "Good" owners because it hit them harder as they lag on rent increases.
I know the projects... Public Housing has been tried and almost a universal failure and given a choice people will wait years for a Housing Voucher then a few months for housing in a project because people don't want to live in projects.
The alternative, Section 8 Housing, which is privately owned and has proven vastly more successful and greatly limited the cost of shelter since the property owner is on the hook for all costs and no longer government as it is with projects.
What many fail to realize is Real Estate is cyclical... just look at how desirable Detroit was at one time and compared it today with a much smaller population.
In my own city I walked past abandoned homes on the way to and from school... no one wanted them and the city finally came up with a plan to get them back on the tax roll by selling homes for $1 in Oakland CA...
Rent Control has my pitfalls... owners don't invest as happened in large areas of New York...
Just look how Native Americans fared under government housing for generations... is this really a solution?
One way to provide more housing is to remove barriers... many projects here never leave the drawing board... one close to me had so much opposition the land is now open space and no housing will ever be built there... saved from developers and off the tax roll.
A friend took 5 years from conception to completion for 1 single family home in Oakland... the red tape would boggle the mind of most not to mention the fortune it costs to hook up to services and the fees for fire suppression, design review and endless community input.
I must be doing something right having tenants going back to the 1980's and almost all my vacancies are filled by referrals... when I have one.
The government closed large military bases around the Bay on land that was often seized under eminent domain for WWII and opted to sell in most cases... some that bought went into receivership because the risk proved to great... land that was not sold is being flooded and turned back into wetlands... rather that than have homes is what I hear the most.
I get it... it is only natural to want what you don't have or covet what others have.
Last edited by Ultrarunner; 12-13-2016 at 01:10 AM..
The landlords are very active politically in most areas. I mean EXTREMELY politically active. Also a certain party is almost 100% against rent control so it will be a huge struggle. In many states this certain party controls the government at the state level and have actually passed laws making it illegal for a city to have rent control.
So part of the answer is to vote and be informed.
IMO some reasonable rent control is necessary. I'm not saying to limit rent increases to 5% per year but I think a cap of something like 20% might be more fair. Also I am a fan of doing something like requiring the landlord to give one months notice for non-renewal for every year the tenant has been at the property. I think the notice requirements in some states are way too low.
Also keep in mind as you read these replies and ask this question, that nothing brings out a landlord's anger more than the two words "rent control". You've seen it here and the exact same thing happens in real life. As soon as it is mentioned the local landlords pack the city meetings and get together to lobby against it as if their lives depended on it.
I get it... it is only natural to want what you don't have or covet what others have.
With all due respect, I don't think it is that. I think it is more that some people simply want a secure place to live. That your landlord can (in some areas) suddenly raise the price of your unit 300% with as little as 15 days notice puts a huge damper on any idea of housing security.
Why not compromise and set reasonable limits? Do landlords really need the legal right to triple the rent with two weeks notice?
What if your power company had the same right to do that? Would you also speak of it in the way you have if they tripled your bill in two weeks and then told you to sell your home and move somewhere else if you didn't like it (because they are the only power company in town)? Let me guess: "That's different". No it isn't, really. It's only a difference of power and expectations.
32 its doubtful you own these properties free and clear which means rent control would bankrupt you. There will be pain on the front end leading up to hyper inflation, thats just the way it goes. BTW 32 years old squeeking by enough to put a down on your first place hardly qualifies the ego you have.
Just because you don't understand what is possible with hard work and determination doesn't mean it isn't possible. Lazy and uninspired people will always try to take what the harder working individuals have earned; by the way, I would expect an engineer to know a lot is two words.
Rent control wouldn't bankrupt me since the majority of what I own I own outright because I paid cash at the bottom of the market for a lot of it and I put in a lot of time and money fixing them back up. What it will do is cause me to either pull them off the market and leave them vacant or sell because I can live off the interest of what I have invested pretty easily.
No government program will take housing and claim eminent domain as you describe it. What is more reasonable and likely is they take unencumbered land with no improvements and build new public housing and even that would be difficult to convince real thinking adults to do. Projects have failed and cost WAY more tax dollars than it was worth. What you describe is public housing not rent controls and public housing is a gigantic failure in every form. Rent control drives prices up not down like i explained many replies ago. NY, CA, London are all the most expensive places to live and they all have rent control. History has shown us that any time people are given things they will abuse and destroy it.
With all due respect, I don't think it is that. I think it is more that some people simply want a secure place to live. That your landlord can (in some areas) suddenly raise the price of your unit 300% with as little as 15 days notice puts a huge damper on any idea of housing security.
Why not compromise and set reasonable limits? Do landlords really need the legal right to triple the rent with two weeks notice?
What if your power company had the same right to do that? Would you also speak of it in the way you have if they tripled your bill in two weeks and then told you to sell your home and move somewhere else if you didn't like it (because they are the only power company in town)? Let me guess: "That's different". No it isn't, really. It's only a difference of power and expectations.
What is a reasonable limit? How much of a cap are you going to put on a businesses earning potential?
It is different because the power company holds a monopoly whereas in non-rural areas you could easily move within two square mile or less; go pull up any major city on Zillow and look how close together those purple dots are. I'd be interested if you could find one example of a LL raising the rent with only half a terms' notice and a court holding a tenant to it. If a LL raises rent 300% it is a clear indication that he either has the unit way under priced and wants to bring it up to market in which case congrats you got one hell of a deal for at least a little while so you should have some savings to cover moving expenses. Otherwise, he doesn't want you there and doesn't know of a polite way to ask you to leave. No one is going to pay 300% over market, and any reasonable adult knows that, so he isn't going to get what he is asking for anyway.
With all due respect, I don't think it is that. I think it is more that some people simply want a secure place to live. That your landlord can (in some areas) suddenly raise the price of your unit 300% with as little as 15 days notice puts a huge damper on any idea of housing security.
Why not compromise and set reasonable limits? Do landlords really need the legal right to triple the rent with two weeks notice?
What if your power company had the same right to do that? Would you also speak of it in the way you have if they tripled your bill in two weeks and then told you to sell your home and move somewhere else if you didn't like it (because they are the only power company in town)? Let me guess: "That's different". No it isn't, really. It's only a difference of power and expectations.
I've operated under rent control my entire career... it started out as a reasonable way to provide some stability to existing tenants and it worked reasonably well...
This was more than 30 years ago and due to the extremely strong politically active tenant groups the rules and regs continue with no end in sight...
The real problem is those for it are never satisfied...
It comes down to property rights... either you own something with all the rights and responsibilities that come with owning or you don't
Rent Control diminishes owner rights and increases responsibility...
A lot of my friends live off grid or are net metered...
I as a utility customer have tremendous leeway as to home much I use and this explains how two identical homes next to each other have vastly different utility costs.
I manage rentals and one family will have a $60 monthly utility bill and the adjacent unit a $300 utility bill...
Nothing I say will change anyone's mind... Landlords are sitting Ducks as you can't pick up your building and move it...
On the other hand... tenants choose to move and relocate all the time... residential tenants have free legal representation in my city and a myriad of protections from all levels of government.
I've operated under rent control my entire career... it started out as a reasonable way to provide some stability to existing tenants and it worked reasonably well...
This was more than 30 years ago and due to the extremely strong politically active tenant groups the rules and regs continue with no end in sight...
The real problem is those for it are never satisfied...
It comes down to property rights... either you own something with all the rights and responsibilities that come with owning or you don't
Rent Control diminishes owner rights and increases responsibility...
A lot of my friends live off grid or are net metered...
I as a utility customer have tremendous leeway as to home much I use and this explains how two identical homes next to each other have vastly different utility costs.
I manage rentals and one family will have a $60 monthly utility bill and the adjacent unit a $300 utility bill...
Nothing I say will change anyone's mind... Landlords are sitting Ducks as you can't pick up your building and move it...
On the other hand... tenants choose to move and relocate all the time... residential tenants have free legal representation in my city and a myriad of protections from all levels of government.
The real problem with rent control in most areas are the loopholes landlords exploit to make it ineffective. Worse the landlords use the loopholes to make life a living hell for the tenants who do get the rent control.
Can you share which market you are in?
There needs to be a middle ground here. A landlord should be able to increase the rent 10-15% a year, sure. But they don't need to be able to triple the rent with two weeks notice either. No excuses.
I have been looking VERY deeply into doing rentals and I am finding that there are numerous factors that cause this issue.
When I got a quote for a full building it was one price (not including labor), when I actually pieced out the individual parts of the building (to include shipping) from the individual manufacturers I got a VERY different number. Also when I compared local labor price quotes from a general (or even a sub) I got one price when I looked out of state for subs (even with plane tickets and incidentals factored in) I got another VERY different number.
The other issue is cost of land, at least in my area the constriction of land is VERY artificial which ... artificially raises the cost of the raw lots (lots of lobby to stop bridge projects or federal lands which push many people out of the market).
There is A lot of fleecing going on and perhaps this just boils down to human incompetence, when farmer john falls asleep at his post and the foxes get in the chicken coop this is what you get. I don't know if govt is just to lazy to really grind down these contractors or what the deal is but there seems to be a lot of price inflation concentrated with a hand full of general contractors who have formed little oligarcys all over the nation. Then the munis and cities/states form licencing and bonding requirements in order to keep people from doing their own thing and forces people to do business with certain other people, since you cant get bonding unless you have a "track record" of projects and your not going to have a track record if this is your one and only project.
So when you look at the price of a building there is a lot of fleecing in there of people getting fat checks who did not really do a whole lot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner
Have you ever invested your life savings in a business venture... which can include income property?
It is one thing to have ideas and everybody does... quite another when you have skin in the game.
My cosst continue to rise and I am in an area with many rent controlled jurisdictions... over the summer my city imposed a flat out ban on rent increases across the board... funny thing is I have not raised rents on existing residents in years but I do go to market when I have a vacancy... so it was punishing "Good" owners because it hit them harder as they lag on rent increases.
I know the projects... Public Housing has been tried and almost a universal failure and given a choice people will wait years for a Housing Voucher then a few months for housing in a project because people don't want to live in projects.
The alternative, Section 8 Housing, which is privately owned and has proven vastly more successful and greatly limited the cost of shelter since the property owner is on the hook for all costs and no longer government as it is with projects.
What many fail to realize is Real Estate is cyclical... just look at how desirable Detroit was at one time and compared it today with a much smaller population.
In my own city I walked past abandoned homes on the way to and from school... no one wanted them and the city finally came up with a plan to get them back on the tax roll by selling homes for $1 in Oakland CA...
Rent Control has my pitfalls... owners don't invest as happened in large areas of New York...
Just look how Native Americans fared under government housing for generations... is this really a solution?
One way to provide more housing is to remove barriers... many projects here never leave the drawing board... one close to me had so much opposition the land is now open space and no housing will ever be built there... saved from developers and off the tax roll.
A friend took 5 years from conception to completion for 1 single family home in Oakland... the red tape would boggle the mind of most not to mention the fortune it costs to hook up to services and the fees for fire suppression, design review and endless community input.
I must be doing something right having tenants going back to the 1980's and almost all my vacancies are filled by referrals... when I have one.
The government closed large military bases around the Bay on land that was often seized under eminent domain for WWII and opted to sell in most cases... some that bought went into receivership because the risk proved to great... land that was not sold is being flooded and turned back into wetlands... rather that than have homes is what I hear the most.
I get it... it is only natural to want what you don't have or covet what others have.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
