Corporations shouldn’t be allowed to sit on property. There’s an old fast food restaurant near my neighborhood, boarded up, trash everyone, it’s a eyesore to the community. The owner wants an unreasonable amount for it. It’s been sitting empty for 10 years.
The government needs to step in, tell the landlord to rent the place out, sell it or we’re going to take it and turn it into affordable housing or a park.
50% vacancy tax. Any property that is vacant for more than 50% of the year would require the owner to pay 50% of the assessed value, unless they can prove there is zero demand for the property at any price.
Would solve the problem very quickly. It’s a fair, equitable, market driven solution to the problem of real estate vacancies. But governments are much more concerned with maintaining the illusion of value, than effective land use.
I work in commercial loans for a living. I can’t speak to other properties that aren’t securitized, but they can’t exactly just take your property without approval. there are exceptions to the rule but it would still require a lengthy and pricey legal process.
Eminent domain requires the government to compensate the land owner with the “fair market value” for taking their land. As the “fair market value” is so overinflated that no one can afford to rent the space, taking vacant properties through eminent domain is not a solution.
There’s an old fast food restaurant near my neighborhood, boarded up, trash everyone, it’s a eyesore to the community.
Do you not have local ordinances requiring property owners to maintain them? Here’s language in a local cities code:
All buildings, both existing and new, andall parts thereof, shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. All devices or safeguards which are required by this Building Code in a building when erected, altered or repaired, shall be maintained in good working order. The owner or the owner's designated agent shall be responsible for the maintenance of the owner's building.
Not maintaining it would result in fines, which the property owner could pay, but the city could either keep increasing the fines to the point where its cheaper for the property owner to sell it.
Corporations shouldn’t be allowed to sit on property. There’s an old fast food restaurant near my neighborhood, boarded up, trash everyone, it’s a eyesore to the community. The owner wants an unreasonable amount for it. It’s been sitting empty for 10 years.
The government needs to step in, tell the landlord to rent the place out, sell it or we’re going to take it and turn it into affordable housing or a park.
50% vacancy tax. Any property that is vacant for more than 50% of the year would require the owner to pay 50% of the assessed value, unless they can prove there is zero demand for the property at any price.
Would solve the problem very quickly. It’s a fair, equitable, market driven solution to the problem of real estate vacancies. But governments are much more concerned with maintaining the illusion of value, than effective land use.
We have something better called eminent domain.
That would set a dangerous precedent though.
Yeah I’m just kidding that would be a chaotic nightmare.
I work in commercial loans for a living. I can’t speak to other properties that aren’t securitized, but they can’t exactly just take your property without approval. there are exceptions to the rule but it would still require a lengthy and pricey legal process.
I’m glad to hear it tbh
👆
Eminent domain requires the government to compensate the land owner with the “fair market value” for taking their land. As the “fair market value” is so overinflated that no one can afford to rent the space, taking vacant properties through eminent domain is not a solution.
Do you not have local ordinances requiring property owners to maintain them? Here’s language in a local cities code:
All buildings, both existing and new, and all parts thereof, shall be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition. All devices or safeguards which are required by this Building Code in a building when erected, altered or repaired, shall be maintained in good working order. The owner or the owner's designated agent shall be responsible for the maintenance of the owner's building.Not maintaining it would result in fines, which the property owner could pay, but the city could either keep increasing the fines to the point where its cheaper for the property owner to sell it.
Land value tax would fix this