Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ryanov t1_ix54l7m wrote

Not even government cars, giant government, SUVs.

Agreed, I really find it weird the amount of personal investment people seem to have in this project. I’m not sure what’s driving it. I can think of lots of things that I would go to a public hearing over, and actually have, like razing historic construction to replace it with parking, but this one has me scratching my head.

Not exactly the same thing, but the exemption from rent control for new residential construction for 35 years is part of the law here.

3

Rainbowrobb t1_ix5u3p7 wrote

There may be tax reasons for buying those vehicles overly 5k lbs. Not defending them, as I firmly believe they shouldn't have them.

>Not exactly the same thing, but the exemption from rent control for new residential construction for 35 years is part of the law here.

Right. In 2014, 2015 and 2017 I went to a bunch of city meetings with Newark tenants united and my local tenants organization to fight for protections. I was part of the group pushing (successfully) for building owners to have to refund illegally increased rents. I was a thorn in Maria Hernandez's side for quite some time. She was rubber stamping rent increases for many years, my only failure was not pushing hard enough for an ethics investigation.

But the affordable housing requirement for new construction is different, as you suggested. My gripe is when they are handed both a waiver for the affordable units % and those 20+ year abatements.

I know some younger redditors are irritated by my sometimes overly-curt responses. To be fair, I should really use more kind words when addressing them. I'm sure I just sound condescending.

3

ryanov t1_ixp6vqd wrote

I suppose one can always be nicer, and possibly have better outcomes when having an argument, but for what it’s worth, I think you’re right on the money. There’s a lot of stupid bullshit in here, and I don’t have much patience for it either.

1