Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
It is not so much the actual identity of the voucher recipient. It is the idea that the person living next door does not own their unit and does not have the same interests as me. So you're grandmonther likely would not be objectionable, but there is no guarantee that she would be the only renter for as long as I own my unit.
|
There's no guarantee there would be a renter at all. Or that the owner next door isn't a complete asshole. That's the breaks of property ownership. I'd be sympathetic to the idea of a "no rental" clause in a deed restriction (but I have no idea if that would be enforable) to prevent renter problems, but once you're going to rent, I don't see how one's status as the recipient of a government subsidy tells one anything about a person that isn't better answered some other way. Rental history, credit report, criminal record, length of time in current job, length of time at prior residence, personal references.
Your better answer is that the Feds are too horrible at doing their jobs to require anyone to accept money from them. In many areas, Section 8 paperwork is complicated to fill out for the landlord, there is a substantial delay before the government starts paying, and the government is habitually late with the monthly portion (all these are true for Baltimore; I can't imagine Chicago being much better). These impose a legitimate hardship on a landlord.
On the otherhand, I just caught a summary of a case in New York that ruled that a New York section 8 equivilent tenant can not withhold his portion of the rent in response to an unihabitable apartment, unless the government also agrees to withhold rent. Given that the government bureucracy that is so hard to start up payments is also equally hard to stop them, New York landlords are now free to completely disregard their tenants' health if the tenants receive assistance.
