Here We Go - Housing Voucher Holders Sue Landlords Over "40x" Requirements. (Pierrepont: section 8, for sale)
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.
Actually, the housing advocates are right for a change. The city is giving people vouchers to cover the rent so the income of the tenant is irrelevant. The idea that 10k+ people are in shelters while already having these vouchers is ridiculous. I consider myself plenty conservative, but if we're going to spend the money people deserve the opportunity to at least better their lives.
That said, I understand back during the Bloomberg era, there was a fear that if world got out that showing up at a NYC homeless shelter was a ticket towards a free housing voucher (and in effect, a free NYC apartment), everyone from Texas to Thailand would be coming here. So I don't know what the best solution is.
I don't want to live with people on programs, period. They should create housing for them. That is precisely why so many people that pay market rate rents are saving up to purchase. I don't want my quality of life destroyed paying top dollar.
I have a local realtor now and am looking at co-ops which have more tighter restrictions in place than condos do about who will be approved. Would also likely serve on the board as well...
I don't want to live with people on programs, period. They should create housing for them. That is precisely why so many people that pay market rate rents are saving up to purchase. I don't want my quality of life destroyed paying top dollar.
I have a local realtor now and am looking at co-ops which have more tighter restrictions in place than condos do about who will be approved. Would also likely serve on the board as well...
This is precisely the problem. Forget about the artificial ability to "pay" market rent only due of the largess of our liberal politicians. That ship has sailed. The issue is that holding one of these vouchers does not change the person into someone who deserves to live amongst those who have achieved in life and make socially acceptable decisions.
All too often I deal with the results of voucher/program types who manage to weasel themselves into a neighborhood they have not modeled their life after. The people who suffer due to this arrangement are the owners/renters who have achieved and act within respectful social norms, and of course are paying the full-boat of what it takes to live in such a neighborhood, making the situation for them all that much worse.
God forbid my neighbor who rents her house out decided to accept a voucher family next to me. Mine would be on the market the next day. I have not worked hard all of my life so that my family can be subjected to trash.
Actually, the housing advocates are right for a change. The city is giving people vouchers to cover the rent so the income of the tenant is irrelevant. The idea that 10k+ people are in shelters while already having these vouchers is ridiculous. I consider myself plenty conservative, but if we're going to spend the money people deserve the opportunity to at least better their lives.
Why do you think landlords are refusing to rent to these voucher holders even though their rent payments are *guaranteed*?
The problem with these vouchers is that the city only covers rent for the first year, after that the tenant is supposed to pay. Most tenants do not have the ability to pay after that first year and most know this in advance that they will not be paying rent, knowing that it will take the landlord another year and a long legal battle to evict them (if landlord is lucky!, since these tenants most of the time are some kind of disadvantaged family). Then they will go into the system again to get another voucher. That's why landlords ain't touching these *guaranteed money* vouchers with a 10 foot pole, you can't evict these people once they stop paying.
In a normal system where you were able to actually evict people from your property for non-payment, landlords would be falling over themselves to get tenants whose rent payments are guaranteed. Most landlords who accepted these tenants in the past lost a lot of money.
Thank goodness I stopped renting out my Parkchester unit before thigs went totally down the toilet. I see they filed a complaint against Parkchester (which indeed does have a written policy, which predates this "law", to not rent to Section 8 or other public assistance recipients). I wonder what Parkchester will do - possibilities include (a) arguing (appropriately) that this "law" is unconstitutional (which would be helpful to all NYC property owners in general), (b) raising rents way above the realm of Section 8 and similar programs, or (c) putting all their rental units up for sale to individual owners (the article incorrectly implies they have 12,000 units in Parkchester, because that is the total of all units in Parkchester, but I believe Parkchester Preservation owns at least 5,000). All three solutions would be okay with me, although the first one would obviously be the best.
We as a society don't let people who are not residency-trained in neurosurgery operate on brains. That is not due to classism, elitism or discrimination, but because brain operators who do not know how to operate on brains would destroy patients' lives.
Likewise, not letting people who do not know how to live in normal human society into Parkchester is not classism, elitism or discrimination - it is protection of lives of normal tenants.
And incidentally, if they insist upon enacting this law, there should be a path for summary eviction back into the shelter (or street) for ANY violation of condo rules by a voucher-holder. If a landlord has to accept an obligation to rent to these people, then these people have to accept their obligations too.
People with vouchers (who still manage to rent from some individual unit owners in Parkchester, who are not under the Parkchester Preservation rule not to rent to subsidized tenants) are intensely unpopular with majority of Parkchester residents. This cannot be due to racial or income discrimination because practically ALL current residents of Parkchester are non-white lower middle class. But practically all of them are decent, non-criminal, working people - and this decent community has fully replaced the previous ghetto in Parkchester in the past 20 years precisely due to careful screening of rental applicants, including the Parkchester rule of accepting only self-supporting tenants.
This is precisely the problem. Forget about the artificial ability to "pay" market rent only due of the largess of our liberal politicians. That ship has sailed. The issue is that holding one of these vouchers does not change the person into someone who deserves to live amongst those who have achieved in life and make socially acceptable decisions.
All too often I deal with the results of voucher/program types who manage to weasel themselves into a neighborhood they have not modeled their life after. The people who suffer due to this arrangement are the owners/renters who have achieved and act within respectful social norms, and of course are paying the full-boat of what it takes to live in such a neighborhood, making the situation for them all that much worse.
God forbid my neighbor who rents her house out decided to accept a voucher family next to me. Mine would be on the market the next day. I have not worked hard all of my life so that my family can be subjected to trash.
The scary thing about these vouchers is that the City keeps increasing the dollar amount that they will pay so the floor for market rate rents keeps going up, so single people are paying top dollar in rent, yet having to deal with these people on programs that don't work or give a damn about the building or community that they move into a cause havoc. I don't see any other solution BUT to OWN. You saw that thread posted here about that mixed rental building in Brooklyn where people were paying something like 3k a month and having to deal with junkies smoking up all over the place.
"The issue is that holding one of these vouchers does not change the person into someone who deserves to live amongst those who have achieved in life and make socially acceptable decisions. "
I've rarely seen someone asking so hard for God to strike him down.
Actually, the housing advocates are right for a change. The city is giving people vouchers to cover the rent so the income of the tenant is irrelevant. The idea that 10k+ people are in shelters while already having these vouchers is ridiculous. I consider myself plenty conservative, but if we're going to spend the money people deserve the opportunity to at least better their lives.
That said, I understand back during the Bloomberg era, there was a fear that if world got out that showing up at a NYC homeless shelter was a ticket towards a free housing voucher (and in effect, a free NYC apartment), everyone from Texas to Thailand would be coming here. So I don't know what the best solution is.
IIRC there are currently lawsuits in the works in other cities which force landlords to accept Section-8 vouchers. The Section-8 program is voluntary so how can a city force a property owner to take part in a voluntary program? Section-8 tenants are the worst of the worst. No sane landlord would rent to them.
To add to my own post, actually, there is the fourth and simplest solution for Parkchester: they can simply remove from the condo rules the wording about not renting to government assistance recipients, and then rent to anyone they want. There is no law to prevent Parkchester Preservation from continuing to require the minimum annual income of $38k, the minimum credit score of 650, and a verifiable employment for the most recent 2 years.
FYI, the amount of Section 8 voucher for a 1-bedroom apartment in NYC in 2019 is $1,711. In this rare case of my agreement with Pierrepont, I believe this $1,711 amount pretty much sets the minimum rental price for the city.
Last edited by elnrgby; 08-09-2019 at 01:45 PM..
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.
