Rent control is a good idea, right? Low income families are able to remain living in their communities, even as the cost of living rises. It keeps families and friends together, and maintains the "mesh" and "fabric" of what makes communities great.
However, you sometimes hear about a retiree who has had a rent controlled apartment for several decades, and get dirt cheap rent compared to the rest of the marketplace. That would be OK if they actually lived there. Sometimes they'll move to warmer climates, and sublet out the apartment, banking the difference.That's sort of sleazy, but not that big of a deal. The retiree would most likely take care of their unit, and maintain ties with the community. Besides being sleazy, its illegal - however I'm not a real estate lawyer, and I'm sure the legalities of such issues vary from location to location.
Surprisingly, that's not the worst of the offenses. One might suppose that its only necessary to occupy and maintain one rent controlled apartment. That's reasonable. I mean how many low-income families need more than one place to live? Yes, there are exceptions - when couples marry, they might end up having two domiciles as one, but married couples aren't required to live together, and they may continue to occupy each rent controlled apartment as individuals. Its unlikely, but reasonable to assume.
What about four rent controlled apartments? Could you ever think of a reason for someone to have four rent controlled apartments? I certainly can't, and I'd be very surprised if you could.
But that's exactly (if there's not more that are not known about) the amount of rent controlled apartments that Representative Charles B. Rangel of Harlem New York is "living" in. Yes, he's living in four apartments in the same building. Oh wait, actually he's using one as an office - his election committee office, according to the New York Times.That's not cool, Mr. Rangel.
However, you sometimes hear about a retiree who has had a rent controlled apartment for several decades, and get dirt cheap rent compared to the rest of the marketplace. That would be OK if they actually lived there. Sometimes they'll move to warmer climates, and sublet out the apartment, banking the difference.That's sort of sleazy, but not that big of a deal. The retiree would most likely take care of their unit, and maintain ties with the community. Besides being sleazy, its illegal - however I'm not a real estate lawyer, and I'm sure the legalities of such issues vary from location to location.
Surprisingly, that's not the worst of the offenses. One might suppose that its only necessary to occupy and maintain one rent controlled apartment. That's reasonable. I mean how many low-income families need more than one place to live? Yes, there are exceptions - when couples marry, they might end up having two domiciles as one, but married couples aren't required to live together, and they may continue to occupy each rent controlled apartment as individuals. Its unlikely, but reasonable to assume.
What about four rent controlled apartments? Could you ever think of a reason for someone to have four rent controlled apartments? I certainly can't, and I'd be very surprised if you could.
But that's exactly (if there's not more that are not known about) the amount of rent controlled apartments that Representative Charles B. Rangel of Harlem New York is "living" in. Yes, he's living in four apartments in the same building. Oh wait, actually he's using one as an office - his election committee office, according to the New York Times.That's not cool, Mr. Rangel.