call me old fashioned, but making it more difficult for rent regulated tenants to monetize what's probably their biggest asset doesn't strike me as pro-tenant.https://therealdeal.com/2019/09/05/sen-julia-salazar-proposes-legislation-to-crack-down-on-buyouts/ …
-
-
1) LL wants to demolish the building to build a bigger one (buyouts tend to be larger in this case) 2) to combine or otherwise substantially reconfigure unit(s) to create a new starting legal rent 3) to avoid a drawn out eviction process
-
As an addendum to 1),it could be for a use change (ex: turning a ground floor apt into retail) but that rarely makes sense or is even possible zoning wise. Separately, I think we’ll see the return of tenants buying each other out, which doesn’t seem to be covered by this bill.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Because they may lose less money from a creating a vacant one than the expenses that come from an occupied one.
-
No that’s not really a thing, despite some emo landlords (or their lawyers) and conspiracy theorists speculating about that in the press.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.