Reply to Shooting at Brandywine & Connecticut Ave NW This Afternoon

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Shooting at Brandywine & Connecticut Ave NW This Afternoon"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]https://www.foresthillsconnection.com/news/neighborhood-in-the-news-another-ambassador-moving-in-rent-on-the-rise-the-real-birthplace-of-the-u-s-atomic-age/

[quote]Rent on the rise: The median advertised rent for a two-bedroom Van Ness apartment during the May-July study period was $3,333, a 7.5% increase from year-ago levels. (RentHop via UrbanTurf)[/quote]

Vouchers have really exerted an upward pressure on rents. Prior to the program being rolled out in Van Ness/Forest Hills, many buildings were offering several months free as move in specials.

The middle class is being priced out, area also used to have a lot of new grad grads and government workers in addition to families and the elderly, all drawn by the safety and quiet of neighborhood. [/quote]

I don't get the logic of hoping the voucher program drives away long-time rent controlled tenants. If those tenants leave, do landlords really think anyone who can pay full price will want to live in the buildings if there are so many disruptions? Or are they merely wanting to increase their stock to get more public $$ for the voucher programs? In that scenario, we are back to the private public housing scenario with tax $ enriching select landlords. [/quote]

DC pays as much as $1,000/month/unit OVER market rate. Many long term tenants of the rent stabilized older buildings are paying well under market rate. Chaos and violence is one way to move them along.

In the Sedgewick Garden articles in the WP it was pretty clear that very disruptive tenants were allowed to create havoc to try to rid the building of tenants who had organized to try to exercise TOPA rights. Something similar could be happening, with a longer range plan, and cash grab with presumed kickbacks in the interim.

Even individual landlords who rent out their condo or buy a second one are profiting.

Commercial landlords who decline vouchers have been sued by the city in the past. The Council limited how much time could be considered when evaluating the criminal past of a prospective tenant. That is a big problem too. [/quote]

In this scenario, the only outcome will be buildings entirely filled with voucher recipients. Paying renters will move to buildings more stability.  It also encourages people to become homeless -- and wait it out -- to get better housing than they could otherwise afford.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics