Council delays rent control discussion

Full story: The Ukiah Daily Journal

The Ukiah City Council voted unanimously Wednesday night to postpone discussions and further action on a proposed rent-stabilization ordinance for mobilehome parks.
Comments
1 - 4 of 4 Comments Last updated Jun 4, 2010
Blackbeard

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jun 4, 2010
 
If the politicians want to give money away then they should just give the people that can not pay there rent a subsidy with the 35,000. At least with a subsidy it will be the politicians bearing the cost of their deciscion and not the private individuals who have invested in their businesses. There was proposed houseing with the DDR development that0 was so heavily opposed. Do not allow expansion of the rental market and then seek to control rent because the lack of units drives up the costs. The fact that the prices are out of hand should scream the need for more units. Give someone else the opportunity to offer houseing and the situation might just subside without controlling the profit margin of others. The city should give opportunity instead of taking it away. If I lived in the parks I would support rent control even if it was not needed. Wouldn't you? Otherwise you create more beuracracy that will never go away and continually seek to expand authority. Mr. Baldwin says "people want protection from unfair profit takers" well if you think you are being taken advantage of you have the right to move yourself to a more desirable and affordable location. No one is forced to stay. To impose rent controls on private property because the tenents do not want to pay the rent is just wrong.
The Truth

San Jose, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jun 4, 2010
 
Blackbeard wrote:
If the politicians want to give money away then they should just give the people that can not pay there rent a subsidy with the 35,000. At least with a subsidy it will be the politicians bearing the cost of their deciscion and not the private individuals who have invested in their businesses. There was proposed houseing with the DDR development that0 was so heavily opposed. Do not allow expansion of the rental market and then seek to control rent because the lack of units drives up the costs. The fact that the prices are out of hand should scream the need for more units. Give someone else the opportunity to offer houseing and the situation might just subside without controlling the profit margin of others. The city should give opportunity instead of taking it away. If I lived in the parks I would support rent control even if it was not needed. Wouldn't you? Otherwise you create more beuracracy that will never go away and continually seek to expand authority. Mr. Baldwin says "people want protection from unfair profit takers" well if you think you are being taken advantage of you have the right to move yourself to a more desirable and affordable location. No one is forced to stay. To impose rent controls on private property because the tenents do not want to pay the rent is just wrong.
Agreed. Just a continuance of governments redistribution of wealth, rather than letting the market take care of itself.
JustSaying

San Francisco, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 4, 2010
 
The 5 year lease option and not be part of the rent control is a good thing for consumers of nicer mobile home parks actually. It can cost quite a bit of money to maintain the higher-end parks or add features like pools or club houses. Landlords will not opt to maintain, upgrade or add these kinds of features since the government red tape involved is usually very onerous and not worth it. It is easier to maintain the park at the lower level. The 5 year option gives tenants the choice of what type of park they want to belong to and any increases would be set in a contract for 5 years. I grew up on a mobile home park and when the park went rent control it was the worst thing that ever happened since it had been a nicer park. I am sure some people on other parks benefited but I think the majority of people were very disappointed with the result. The key is to give people a choice and let them make their own decisions on what type of park they want.
Tangent to what

Covelo, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 4, 2010
 
"People want protection from unfair profit takers, and I'm not sure we get that if we just go with the Merced ordinance," Baldwin said. "This is the weakest conceivable option, and one that I understand was suggested by a park owner."
OOOO Argggg unfair profits!! Mr. Baldwin, it's none of your business what people charge for rent. Zero, zip, nada, now go away.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Merced Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
CA Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 11 hr Pea solved 200,564
CA CA Proposition 23 - Global Warming (Oct '10) 18 hr Donny B 7,922
Broker held in realty scam (Nov '08) Tue KeS 4
CA California Proposition 19: the Marijuana Legali... (Oct '10) Tue matches lighters 15,961
CA California seeks to ban free, single-use carryo... (Jun '10) Aug 24 Mono 4,996
Lund chusna mujhe bahut achha lagta hai (Sep '12) Aug 23 shivam 27
CA Jury reaches verdict in Oakland BART shooting t... (Jul '10) Aug 6 starbucks 2,262
•••
•••
Merced Dating

more search filters

less search filters

•••

Merced Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Merced People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Merced News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Merced
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••