MontClairVoyant: The Issue of Rent Makes a Dent

1. Dave,

   Your class/income analysis of all issues verge on Leninist; those for rent control are revolutionaries. Those opposed are kulaks. Did you read that St Paul developers cancelled housing projects after St. Paul passed rent control? That’s a textbook prediction: price ceilings reduce supply. If you really want more affordable housing, lobby for more, higher rise, development (of course that’s anathema to you because you despise those developers too). The truth is, More supply leads to lower prices, but not vice versa. It’s been shown over and over. Why not forgo wordplay for 30 minutes and educate yourself on the well documented perverse effects of rent control: less housing, neglected maintenance, misallocation, landlord renter conflicts, and inequity (where connected but undeserving renters get the unit).

   And lest you’re worried, You can thoughtfully oppose such a tried-and-failed policy without losing your progressive bona fides. Montclair has plenty of smart liberals that understand that you can’t make something cheap by just capping the price. A more sophisticated analysis by you might raise your stock without branding you a kulak.

   Sincerely

2. Thank you for the comment, lacamina.

   I’m a social democrat, not a (near) Leninist. I do like The Marx Brothers. 🙂

   Montclair’s currently stymied rent control measure is modest. Landlords can still raise rents each year, and there are exceptions for owners of just a few rental units and for owners of newer buildings. Quite reasonable.

   What’s not very reasonable are things like $3,000-plus and $4,000-plus rents (in some cases) that contribute to the decreasing of Montclair’s economic diversity.

   Sure, there can be “perverse effects of rent control” when some landlords just can’t accept making a modestly smaller profit. There are also “perverse effects” of NO rent control: people who want to stay in or move to Montclair but can’t afford to. People most of us want in town: teachers, artists, blue-collar workers, etc.

   Speaking of artists, it’s a bad joke that the new “Arts District” is unaffordable for virtually everyone in the arts.

3. Dave,

   You know what is going to really suck about a referendum vote? All those renters (the majority) that the Councils and TOOM excluded from the rent control protections. The Council and TOOM flipped them off. You want to guess what TOOM will say to this disenfranchised group? Nothing. Do you want to guess the positions our Councilors will take? Hopefully, they will have the Census 2020 numbers before then.

4. You’re killing me

5. Thank you for the comment, Frank.

   The rent-control measure does have large loopholes. 🙁 You’re right that that could have some impact on the referendum vote, if there is a referendum. Unfortunately, often a “compromise” is all one can get with legislation. I don’t blame the Tenants Organization of Montclair; they got as much they could get. I wish the Township Council had approved a stronger measure. Of course, there’s no measure at the moment “thanks” to the Montclair Property Owners Association. 🙁

6. lacamina, you win “Shortest Comment of the Day.” 👏

7. Dave,

   I noted your ongoing criticism of some impactful past decisions by our land use bodies. This coming week you will have the opportunity to see, in real time, the limits of our land use bodies to do right by the township. It is the appeal to the Zoning Board of Adjustment by the owners of 109 Union St over being denied a demo approval by the HPC. You remember, the “toxic waste zone”. For the record, I think very, very highly of our ZBA. But, they have to be accountable. The justification for their oversight of private property, e.g zoning, is derived from protecting the public interests.

   You will be immediately told there is no public comment because this is an appeal of the facts, findings, exhibits, etc that were part of the HPC hearing. Since the public comments are already part of the transcript record, no further input is appropriate. The ZBA & the applicant will offer additional testimony to affirm or refute whether it was a proper hearing and outcome. But, neither can overreach and create a 3rd bite at the apple hearing to make a case.

   The ZBA will have a report from their engineering expert. I have read this report half a dozen times and I remain alarmed at its scope, its content, and its authority. And that’s me being nice.

   What I understand well is that there has yet to be lab documentation introduced quantifying the extent of the asbestos contamination. Furthermore, the testing lab’s single report presented to the HPC is not part of the ZBA’s appeal exhibits. Too much information, maybe?

   It’s bad. It’s unrepairable. Its cost-prohibitive. I’ll take their word for it. Oh, then maybe the ZBA can insert some stipulations that the new structure can’t have a basement. Logical stuff. Land use stuff. Not technical, scientific stuff. Oh, and the fire hose connection thing…maybe FYI the MFD.

   My issues are two-fold and I have been emphatic in stating them. Don’t blame the HPC for shortcomings elsewhere and take all measures to protect the public from the health threat.

8. I make the following correction before my above post is published:

   “Furthermore, the testing lab’s single report presented to the HPC is not part of the ZBA’s appeal exhibits. Too much information, maybe?”

   ‘not’ should be ‘the only’.

9. Thank you for the comments, Frank.

   I’m almost always against a beautiful old home being razed in Montclair, but this might be one of the exceptions. I haven’t studied this situation super-closely, though. Read a couple of articles a while ago…

10. Few will read the board report, but I do love the authors’ opening sentence, maybe inspired by Beckett’s “The sun shone, having no alternative, on the nothing new.”

    What you might appreciate is the Deputy Mayor that presided over the Demolition Ordinance unanimous passage is the attorney for the demo application.

    The house will be demolished. The bigger issue is the total demolition ordinance won’t survive either. I’m ok with this, too. I always thought it was an unwieldy ordinance that would work to undercut preservation policy. Which it has done with the very first major demo application.

    The ordinance’s survival was predicated on an untested, ‘Maginot Line’-style authority. This report, if relied on in this case, will provide the local precedent for a perfectly legal Blitzkrieg around the ordinance’s purpose.

11. I’m sure Samuel Beckett’s line was more eloquent. 🙂

12. “This very long, very twisty-turny journey will go on a little longer,” adds Toni Martin of TOOM.

    Yes, like Waiting for Godot.

13. Thank you, silverleaf! Clever punchline. 🙂

    Meanwhile, “Waiting for Godot” characters Vladimir and Estragon probably can’t afford to rent in Montclair… 🙁

14. But I’d betcha those two would just love the steak au poivre at Faubourg!

15. Ha, silverleaf! 🙂 I’m sure they would — after “Waiting for the Dough” to pay for said steak. 🙂

16. In that case, Green Eggs and Ham at Ray’s Luncheonette on Walnut.

17. LOL, silverleaf! 🙂 Easier on the budget. And then Vladimir, Estragon, and Sam-I-Am can quickly catch a train to whatever stage they’re performing on. 🙂

Comments are closed.