Gentrification in DC - Wash Post Article Shows The Bad Side

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m black and I agree with posters here. She didn’t manage her money well all these years. When her husband died in 2003, that’s when she should’ve been planning better. 2003 is when the dc area starting gentrifying , so she should have been saving up her money on buying a property, instead of continuing to rent.

Many of the white gentrifyers coming into DC do tend to be a holes and snobby, but this one was on her.

Same.

She was a federal employee and her husband had a good job as well which comes with life insurance if they didn't have a private family plan.

Just a tiny bit of planning or foresight and she and either of her spouses could have been in a home right where they are now. With the money she has, if she's been saving, she could still buy in further out NE which basically has the same levels of living as when she first moved to U Street (there was no Trader Joes there until 10 years ago).

Personally, I see this on these boards all the time. Long-time renters in central D.C. and Arlington and what-have-you who think that a low rate rental is OWED to them.

No. Save for it. Strive for it. Put that stable salary you've had for decades towards it.

Yes. I don't understand why they are unable to find another place to live and are moving in with family, separately to boot. Both are employed. A federal employee of 40 years makes a decent living. Something else must be going on.

Money aside, I do still understand she must be hurting. I have never lived anywhere for that long and it really is a fantastic neighborhood with lots of character and history.

The only thing I felt bad about was the part where she said she was essentially the caretaker of the building. Sweeping it, painting, Christmas tree, etc.

That's basically the building supervisor and if she didn't get paid for all that, she got burned. But if she did get paid in the form of a bigger unit or at least first choice (why else move from the 2nd to the 1st floor), or straight out - a decrease in market rent ($500/mo still doesn't seem like enough for a 2 or 3 bedroom, I think there are places in Baltimore that charge more and you're living in some pretty depressed areas), then it was fair.

Big effing deal. I bought a condo in a 4 unit rowhouse condo building nearly 10 years ago in Mt Pleasant. I was pretty much the caretaker for the time I owned my condo. Our fees were low, so we couldn't afford property management, cleaning, yard work, a super etc. While my neighbors helped some of the time, I cared more than they did, so this means that I pretty much did 99% of the maintenance for our building, which included the work I've mentioned above but also periodic exterior painting, cleaning gutters, etc. I could go on forever. I also handled the finances. I don't think my position was unique, and as much as I would have loved special privileges for doing all that work, I knew that wasn't happening.

Big difference between a homeowner in a tiny HOA taking on that responsibility and a renter paying well below market rate doing so for an absentee landlord who obviously doesn’t care.

fixed that for you.

If I were paying $500/month for a 2 bedroom in DC, I'd happily do a shit ton of maintenance for the building.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I thought DC was renter friendly, how do you force her out legally?

That was the big unanswered question in the article. They glossed over what exactly happened. It sounded like there was some sort of negotiated settlement but it was unclear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’d be different if she owned her house, though. My aunt (were black) bought a rowhouse in the 70s for dirt cheap. She’s since passed but left the house in her kids names who are now pushing 50 themselves and keep getting lowball offers to sell, like maybe only 300k. That and the city is drastically raising property taxes. My cousin says they’re holding on as long as they can, but it is a shame when you own and still can get screwed out because a flipper wants to do a cheap reno and sell it for 1 mil.


But in this article, the woman is renting for 40 years. That’s on her.

There's no reason to get screwed though. Don't sell to a flipper.

OK, this is about the third person who has said "the city is drastically raising property taxes," and to my knowledge that just isn't true. I don't believe DC tax rates have increased materially in the past 20 years. However, the *value* of property has increased, which increases the total tax bill. But that's just math, not an action by the DC government.

And in case you were wondering, having your property go up in value is a good thing.

No one is saying tax rates went up; just the tax bill or the "tax." Whether this is math or not, you should acknowledge that property values in DC have gone up much faster than incomes, so you shouldn't be shocked that some people have a hard time paying their bill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m black and I agree with posters here. She didn’t manage her money well all these years. When her husband died in 2003, that’s when she should’ve been planning better. 2003 is when the dc area starting gentrifying , so she should have been saving up her money on buying a property, instead of continuing to rent.

Many of the white gentrifyers coming into DC do tend to be a holes and snobby, but this one was on her.

Same.

She was a federal employee and her husband had a good job as well which comes with life insurance if they didn't have a private family plan.

Just a tiny bit of planning or foresight and she and either of her spouses could have been in a home right where they are now. With the money she has, if she's been saving, she could still buy in further out NE which basically has the same levels of living as when she first moved to U Street (there was no Trader Joes there until 10 years ago).

Personally, I see this on these boards all the time. Long-time renters in central D.C. and Arlington and what-have-you who think that a low rate rental is OWED to them.

No. Save for it. Strive for it. Put that stable salary you've had for decades towards it.

Yes. I don't understand why they are unable to find another place to live and are moving in with family, separately to boot. Both are employed. A federal employee of 40 years makes a decent living. Something else must be going on.

Money aside, I do still understand she must be hurting. I have never lived anywhere for that long and it really is a fantastic neighborhood with lots of character and history.

The only thing I felt bad about was the part where she said she was essentially the caretaker of the building. Sweeping it, painting, Christmas tree, etc.

That's basically the building supervisor and if she didn't get paid for all that, she got burned. But if she did get paid in the form of a bigger unit or at least first choice (why else move from the 2nd to the 1st floor), or straight out - a decrease in market rent ($500/mo still doesn't seem like enough for a 2 or 3 bedroom, I think there are places in Baltimore that charge more and you're living in some pretty depressed areas), then it was fair.

Big effing deal. I bought a condo in a 4 unit rowhouse condo building nearly 10 years ago in Mt Pleasant. I was pretty much the caretaker for the time I owned my condo. Our fees were low, so we couldn't afford property management, cleaning, yard work, a super etc. While my neighbors helped some of the time, I cared more than they did, so this means that I pretty much did 99% of the maintenance for our building, which included the work I've mentioned above but also periodic exterior painting, cleaning gutters, etc. I could go on forever. I also handled the finances. I don't think my position was unique, and as much as I would have loved special privileges for doing all that work, I knew that wasn't happening.

Big difference between a homeowner in a tiny HOA taking on that responsibility and a renter paying well below market rate doing so for an absentee landlord who obviously doesn’t care.

fixed that for you.

If I were paying $500/month for a 2 bedroom in DC, I'd happily do a shit ton of maintenance for the building.

Guessing landlord similarly could not afford these services while charging his tenants below market rate for decades.

[Anonymous]

The article said she got a settlement but of course didn't go in to what that settlement entailed. She got low low rent for 40 years then a cash payout. Boo hoo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The article said she got a settlement but of course didn't go in to what that settlement entailed. She got low low rent for 40 years then a cash payout. Boo hoo.

Which is how you know that the piece is a propaganda piece. A real journalist would have reported this and presented both sides, not write obviously biased crap.

[Anonymous]

I think of this as a form of reparations. I think as America changes we will have to be creative in how reparations take shape.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think of this as a form of reparations. I think as America changes we will have to be creative in how reparations take shape.

Poor trolling attempt. Try harder next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think of this as a form of reparations. I think as America changes we will have to be creative in how reparations take shape.

Please tell me how I, a brown person who is an immigrant, should pay reparations to people my ancestors have never wronged?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’d be different if she owned her house, though. My aunt (were black) bought a rowhouse in the 70s for dirt cheap. She’s since passed but left the house in her kids names who are now pushing 50 themselves and keep getting lowball offers to sell, like maybe only 300k. That and the city is drastically raising property taxes. My cousin says they’re holding on as long as they can, but it is a shame when you own and still can get screwed out because a flipper wants to do a cheap reno and sell it for 1 mil.


But in this article, the woman is renting for 40 years. That’s on her.

Why don’t they renovate and flip it themselves?

[Anonymous]

“She’d just gotten off work at the Social Security Administration office in Northeast Washington, where she has worked for as long as she has lived in this apartment.

“I am the kind of person who doesn’t like change,” she said. “I spent 40 years in the same job; 40 years in the same apartment.”

Why can’t a person not want a house?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’d be different if she owned her house, though. My aunt (were black) bought a rowhouse in the 70s for dirt cheap. She’s since passed but left the house in her kids names who are now pushing 50 themselves and keep getting lowball offers to sell, like maybe only 300k. That and the city is drastically raising property taxes. My cousin says they’re holding on as long as they can, but it is a shame when you own and still can get screwed out because a flipper wants to do a cheap reno and sell it for 1 mil.


But in this article, the woman is renting for 40 years. That’s on her.

Why don’t they renovate and flip it themselves?

They did. And they’re not selling.

[Anonymous]

They tenants have the right to buy the building but they gave it up. All the tenants received a lots of money but no one disclosed the amont. The previous owner, who is black, made a lot of money from the building. If the original owner didn’t sell the building and let each tenant buy their unit at deep discount, who is going to upkeep the building as well as each unit. Didn’t you read that there is no dishwasher in the apartment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“She’d just gotten off work at the Social Security Administration office in Northeast Washington, where she has worked for as long as she has lived in this apartment.

“I am the kind of person who doesn’t like change,” she said. “I spent 40 years in the same job; 40 years in the same apartment.”

Why can’t a person not want a house?

She can buy a condo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think of this as a form of reparations. I think as America changes we will have to be creative in how reparations take shape.

Please tell me how I, a brown person who is an immigrant, should pay reparations to people my ancestors have never wronged?

Actually who do you think sold the slaves in Africa? You rounded up and captured your neighbors and sold them to slave traders.