Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ChrisFromLongIsland t1_jbef61b wrote

As buildings that are majority rent stabilized all eventually become decrepit and go BK they should be sold as coops to the current owners. Then the owners can build wealth. Create there homes as they want them and be responsible for the upkeep of the buildings. Stop the cycle of rent and make people homeowners.


jakeuznslao t1_jbei53y wrote

Yes but do this for public housing


BronInThe2011Finals t1_jbfi7cg wrote

You wouldn’t PURCHASE a fuckin project apartment lmao

Why suggest that someone living in one should?



Convergecult15 t1_jbfne9j wrote

People think it’s so easy. Someone buys their NYCHA apartment as a co-op and immediately has to spend 15-20k getting it up to code. And then that “co-op” is immediately worth several hundred thousand if not a million and they refi it to the max and wind up in foreclosure the next economic hiccup. I remember the news doing a story on co-op residents in Harlem being foreclosed on while they were upside down on their mortgages, but at the end of the story they highlight that they purchased the apartment for a dollar through HUD in the 90’s and took our two 600k mortgages on it. People don’t become financially literate when they receive a windfall after years of abject poverty. Buying the projects won’t make them not projects anymore, it will just remove their code exemptions and further impoverish the owners causing those neighborhoods to be bought up by middle class millennials and forcing the prior residents out on the streets.


Chewwy987 t1_je0lj7u wrote

That’s the bigger issue a lot of these people in Los income housing rent stabilized or projects were never taught financial literacy and do have no ability to properly manage finances to get thendelfd out of poverty. I have friends that we’re in poverty but learned financial literacy and the importance of an education and’s not they’re a controller at s small hedge fund. Without proper education and financial literacy will determine if they’ll break the cycle of generational poverty living off the government programs


CactusBoyScout t1_jbezehe wrote

You’re saying convert NYCHA to coops or convert rentals to NYCHA?


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbepp73 wrote

Problem is you need to have enough coop members with balls to sue those who can’t/won’t pay assessments as these buildings need substantial repairs. If you buy and can’t fork over $50k, you need neighbors who will sue, put a lien on the property and push until it’s sold to someone who can pay during foreclosure.

That’s the only way that model works, and I don’t think there’s enough people with the common sense to do it.

Condo’s and coops only work when you have a board who is willing to be tough.


ChrisFromLongIsland t1_jbezymd wrote

Yea when you own a building it comes with responsibilities.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbf1v2e wrote

The problem is enforcing, especially with a poorer population. Telling someone who makes < $100k, they owe $50k in the next 90 days or it’s going to get legal is not pretty, but the reality of this proposal.

$50k per unit doesn’t even go that far when you’re talking about a neglected building. Even well maintained buildings need a surprise $10-15k every now and then for random projects. $50k for a neglected building is hardly a crazy high number.

Current owners would just be subsidizing wealthier people/investors who would buy up the foreclosures while losing their savings in the process.

IMHO that’s predatory.


ChrisFromLongIsland t1_jbf4az9 wrote

Most buildings that I am aware of let the tenants finance big construction projects. Also buildings need maintenance. If the owners don't want to pay for the maintenance of their building I don't know what to say.


pixel_of_moral_decay t1_jbfpcxe wrote

Financing requires either the board have assets and good credit or telling individuals to get their own line of credit (which requires the same).

This works with wealthier buildings where you’ve got that. But those buildings generally do that because it’s cheaper to take on a low interest loan the past decade than pay upfront and loose the investment opportunity. Same reason people take mortgages and pay the minimum, your return in the market is higher than the cost of the interest rate, so you can essentially profit off the loan.

If I can take a loan out for $50k at 3% (not hard until recently) I can keep my $50k I have in the market and keep earning 4-5%. 1-2% profit for taking a loan vs paying up front.

None of that really applies with a building of cash strapped people.


Hotsauceinmybag_NY t1_jbg007f wrote

This is what my building did. It was rent to own after being a crack den for years and being condemned. Went through the TIL program, now we’re converting. Definitely a unicorn situation. In order for it to be successful though you need to have shareholders who actually give a damn and smart, democratic board that isn’t entirely full of sh*t. Fortunately my board is a little of all three lol.