Spike Lee on gentrification

[freemkt]

Originally Posted by NOLA101

Of course. Ownership trumps renting. If I own for 1 second, and you rent for 1,000 years, my rights are still legally greater than yours.

Let me see if I've got what you're saying...

Are you saying that a property owner who just came to town has a greater right to use zoning to drive out a 25-year renter who does not rent from or have any relationship with the aforesaid newbie property owner?

[freemkt]

Originally Posted by drive carephilly

If you own a house on 5th Street you don't have a greater legal standing than a renter on 5th Street when it comes to a someone building a new house on 8th Street. The property on 8th Street belongs to neither of you. You might get more sympathy in court when it comes to 'protecting your investment' but you don't have special legal protections when it comes to OPP.

When it comes to someone renting a property that you own your legal standing as the owner comes down to the degree of possession. Is it adverse possession? holdover tenancy? lease? If your tenant has a lease and hasn't violated any terms of the lease that would lead to eviction then you as an owner don't have many rights to use of the property and the lease is even transferable to new owners if you decided to sell it.

I've never seen any data or survey on this, but I'd bet money that MOST homeowners in this country disagree with you and me on this issue.

As for getting more sympathy, homeowners use this sympathy in the legislative (state and especially municipal) context, not in the judicial context, where you correctly note it might not prevail.

[mhays25]

I'm a homeowner. The idea that this might give me more influence is repulsive and unamerican.

Everybody has rights, and every citizen beyond a certain age has the same voting rights.