Rent Control: A Misguided Progressive Economic Policy Strikes Yet Again

Kinda hard to have sympathy for people looking to repeat the same problems of the past and having learned nothing from the past lessons.

Ignorance of economics is not supposed to be an excuse.

The Detroit News: As housing prices surge, rent control is back on the ballot

Because limiting the income landlords receive on their rentals to -- under many of the proposals and laws already passed and described in the article -- below even the rate of inflation, is really going to encourage landlords to provide new, more, and better housing stock.

Yes there are  ore tenant voters than landlord voters which is how this stuff gets through, but having landlords lose money on every tenant  is hardly going to encourage them to keep renting properties out - they will not makee up the loss in volume.

It's the same stupid progressive magical thinking, using other people's money (in this case landlords) to pay for their fever-dreams.

While one might sympathize with tenants facing higher rents in very desirable areas to live as depicted in the article, with many of those areas limiting housing development and supply by local ordinance,  what exactly did they expect?

Combine:

a) high inflation with and the cost of everything from utilities to repair materials and labor costs going up; 

b) very high demand for rental space by people with Biden bucks in their pockets bidding up the rent and investment companies (often Biden and Dem contributors and promoters of ESG theories) looking for high return;  and

c) then throw in the reality of landlords getting hosed for two years with the CDC allowing tenants to live in rental units without having to pay rent for two years with landlords being unable to evict them and getting stuck eating the costs.

 Put all that together and you get the current big increase in rental costs, courtesy of misguided progressive economic policy.  

Adding yet another progressive misguided economic policy of rent control to try to fix the prior progressive misguided economic policy brought to you by the same people is not going to make it any better.

Gov Half-Whit To Michigan Property Owners And Businesses: "F You, Pay Me."

MiBiz: Whitmer vetoes property tax deferment bills

Gov. Gretchen Whitmer vetoed two bills that would have effectively deferred summer property tax payments to relieve struggling businesses and property owners during the pandemic.

This is the same governor that has ordered that tenants have not had to pay the rent for the past four months with no fear of being evicted.

Now landlords, not having received any rent for those months by her order, are still expected to come up with the property taxes for those properties on time or risk them going into tax foreclosure.

Commercial ventures, closed for months by her orders, and some like gyms which are still closed, will still have to come up with their property taxes on time without relief or sympathy from the governor for their loss caused by that same governor-ordered inability to operate and have revenue to pay those taxes.

Also, she provides no relief for homeowners affected by the economic disruption - they have to pay their property taxes as well.

If you're a tenant, you're golden in her eyes, after all, she cares about them and they're her core voting block.

If you own property or run a business, she doesn't give a damn about you except for your tax payments which better be in on time.

Well That's Frustrating - Courts, Law, and Hidden Forms

Since Court Clerk Counters are closed to the public dealing with the courts on matters is becoming increasingly difficult.

I had a commercial landlord-tenant eviciton case that I filed via a court's drop box outside the court on June 23rd.

It took them until today to process it and they decided to dismiss it.

Why did they dismiss? Because I hadn't said it was a commercial landlord-tenant eviction as the commercial tenant has not been paying the rent for the past three months.

Actually I had, rather specifically, prominently in the cover letter.

But they threw out the cover letter while processing the filing so they stated I had not informed them that it was a commercial landlord-tenant eviction.

Personally, I think the case caption of Landlord Company Name, LLC vs Tenant Corporation Name, Inc would have been a fricken clue even without the cover letter. Not to mention the property is listed by suites and both Landlord and Tenant are actually in the same office building.

Did they call, did they inquire? No, they just dismissed it so I have to file a motion to reopen it and I emailed them the cover letter to let them know I had in fact sent it.

I also had to add and send over a new form the state came out with that states the eviction is not from a CARES Act covered property, which it isn't, as again, its obviously commercial.

Said form is buried in the State Admin Office website on the second page of Landlord Tenant files and there's no announcement on the District Court or State Site site that its needed, it's basically a nice double-secret form.

Nice of them to require a new form without providing notice of it at all on the District Court site that states their requirements step-by-step (every district court in this state has their own idiosyncratic requirements for landlord tenant actions, and its rather stupid as the governors executive order banning residential evictions actually goes beyond the CARES Act restrictions but at least there's no additional form (that I know of) that you need to file that you're not violating the never-ending executive order banning residential evictions.

Ah, for the good ol' days when you could actually walk in, talk to the clerk, they would look at your filing, and get it all done and let you know about their idiosyncratic procedures instead of these days of delay and when they just dismiss instead of contacting you about adding a form you have no idea was needed.

Sheesh.