RE: Gilbert, AZ apts. (section 8, apartment complexes, renter)

[Low Roller]

Hi,

Would someone know if Gilbert has a law that says a resident has to make four times as much money per month as the rent they pay for a Gilbert apartment?

I know it sounds screwy, but a friend is planning on moving down to the Phx area, and that's what she was told about Gilbert.

We would appreciate knowing if it's T or F.

Also, if anyone knows a good apt complex in Gilbert in the $600-$700 range, we would appreciate hearing about it.

Thanks.

[observer53]

I'm quite confident that there is NO such ordinance, although the Town of Gilbert offices could answer your question, and they might get a kick about this latest rumor. I don't know where these ideas come from.

[CodyW]

If anything, it's a requirement that a certain management company placed on certain properties. All of them have different requirements.. I know if your complex is managed by MEB, you usually need to make 2x the rent. I'm sure different companies require more.

[Howard Roark]

I wish mine required six times monthly rent on income. Instead it takes in section 8. I lived among section 8 neighbors for decades and in my experience, they are not considerate of others.

[ReadyFreddy]

That might be an interesting way to keep apartments out of your city entirely, I suppose... Make laws that take the rental decision out of the hands of the property managers. It would be interesting to see a city enforce that. Police: "You must present your pay stub and your lease, ma'am. It's an annual thing. It's not you, it's everyone."

[Low Roller]

I was mistaken, in that my friend was told one had to make three times the rent per month to get an apartment - and it was told to her by three separate apartment complexes she contacted.

Perhaps it is just a requirement of a certain management company.

Anyway, we'll probably just concentrate on the north Phx area.

Thanks a lot for all your input.

[ReadyFreddy]

It's not a bad rule of thumb.

[observer53]

Originally Posted by ReadyFreddy

It's not a bad rule of thumb.

It's not at all, but I doubt very much it's a city ordinance. As others have suggested, some management companies may be requiring proof of income at that level.

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by Howard Roark

I wish mine required six times monthly rent on income. Instead it takes in section 8. I lived among section 8 neighbors for decades and in my experience, they are not considerate of others.

Howard, it seems the best way to cure that is to move into a more expensive apartment that requires a higher income/rent ratio, and won't accept Section 8 occupants.

[nightnurse613]

I think, as a general guideline, the amount you pay for housing should be about one-third of your total income. Obviously that's a guideline but management companies are allowed to use pretty much whatever criteria they feel comfortable with as long as it does not violate EEO Housing regulations. Unfortunately, if your personal debt compromises 75% of your income, you are going to be hard pressed to pay your rent (or your debtors). Conversely, if you are debt free why should it matter? You may find governmental housing authorities placing restrictions for subsidized housing in order to qualify for their programs (i.e. you can only make between $750 and $1500 in order to live in their complex) but usually those are income limitations. As the OP says; I have also run into situations where a complex required a renter to make a certain minimum dollar amount (say $50,000/yr) in order to qualify for a $1700 a month apartment - or get a co-signer!! However, so far no municipal regulation!!