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.
I just saw a clip of Lawanna Mayfield on News14 talking about a low-income housing program that will help repair some buildings but force the owners to lock in their current rates for 15 years.
Anyone else feel like this is an attempt to get a foot in the door for rent control? I know the city council seems all hot about low-income housing lately and I feel like this is the end goal. I dont think it will work out the way they hope if this is the goal.
The concept of rent control, like a minimum wage are tests to see if someone has any understanding of economics. Both, on their front, seem to be helpful but both are harmful to those they claim to benefit as well as to society overall.
This is a great deal for the city, which is why council members on both sides of the aisle voted in support. Instead of spending millions more to build affordable housing units from scratch, the city is also preserving units at a much lower cost. The developer was not forced into this deal (like rent control), but actually came to the city with the idea of restricting a rent increase for 15 years for a 20% subsidy on the renovations. The developer is focused on creating affordable housing and has a profit with social responsibility mission.
I just saw a clip of Lawanna Mayfield on News14 talking about a low-income housing program that will help repair some buildings but force the owners to lock in their current rates for 15 years.
Anyone else feel like this is an attempt to get a foot in the door for rent control? I know the city council seems all hot about low-income housing lately and I feel like this is the end goal. I dont think it will work out the way they hope if this is the goal.
I don't think that it will get to the point of being a mandatory practice, but I don't see why the practice won't become widespread.
As to people who support rent control, there's an easy way around this which respects the free market:
Micro apartments.
I want to see that working class people have the ability to live in Charlotte, but not at the expense of regulating the market. Enter micro apartments, whose compact footprint satisfies all parties: profitability for the landlord, and affordability for the tenant.
How so?
If a regular one bedroom apartment in Charlotte is around 800 square feet, and rents for 1k-1,200, that floorplan could be split into two (a 400 sq ft micro apartment), which could rent for $600 per month.
Except anyone (Democrat or Republican) with even an elementary understanding of economics is against rent control.
First and foremost this isn't rent control, plus with the city subsidy along with whatever tax credits are available for project like this will off set much of the upfront investment this owner makes & they still likely make a decent profit while providing much needed housing inventory
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.
