Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Vapid_Ingenue t1_iz9wu0b wrote

Reply to comment by Diet_Coke in Casino tops Richmond wish list [to VA General Assembly], but affordable housing lies at the heart by CrassostreaVirginica

It should be illegal for corporations to own single family homes

15

Diet_Coke t1_iz9x9hb wrote

I agree, if I was king of Richmond for a day I'd change our zoning rules to make it against regulations for an LLC to own a 1 - 4 family dwelling. Homes should be for shelter, not investing.

8

Mr_Boneman t1_iza4le3 wrote

Councilman Mike Jones LLC owns the house he “lives in” in his district. Of course he owns multiple properties outside the city and his son was a star QB at Henrico HS while he was serving on city council. Managed to put a stop sign in front of the house on a commuter road as well that makes no sense being there other than to make his life more convenient. Really need someone to run against him in the new HOD district carved out for him as he preps to be our next mayor.

9

SwanOverSunshine t1_izafqcm wrote

Oh no, is he going to run for mayor? He’s so terrible, def not smart and ethical enough for that. He’s such a divider in the community, very us vs them. Was hoping he’d go into the general assembly where he would do less damage since he’d be one of many.

7

Mr_Boneman t1_izbd2bp wrote

I fear he’s setting up his HOD run to raise funds/gain attention for his mayoral run. Grade A affinity scammer, Dwight Jones with CTE and makes Stoney sound like a Rhodes scholar. He wouldn’t win if someone competent runs against him (Please John Balisles) but if it turns into a 3-5 person race that’s where I worry. Not enough people pay enough attention to him or know how shitty his record is, or that he couldn’t even properly file paperwork to run for office. Addison is too milquetoast to win against him and has other un redeeming qualities that would make it hard to beat him.

2

SwanOverSunshine t1_izbupvd wrote

I really hope Jon Baliles runs - he would be an amazing, unifying mayor. Really understands the city on a logistical level. Do you read his 5x5 newsletter?

2

Mr_Boneman t1_izby27x wrote

I’m not aware of it? My guess is when he left the Stoney Admin he knew what was coming with regards to their competence and agenda. I’m sure he’ll do something’s I won’t agree with, but him and Agelasto are sorely missed on CC.

2

DCFishingGuy t1_izai0vh wrote

>richmond.com/news/s...

So then all these go up for sale, the people living their get evicted, the same people don't have the money to buy them, the housing market crashes which affects the larger economy and the people who couldn't afford to live before are the most affected. Congrats you just destroyed our city.

−1

Diet_Coke t1_izanhps wrote

No, they could still be owned by individual investors just without the protection of an LLC. One impact of that is that it makes slumlords personally liable for their properties, they can't play a shell game with LLCs and avoid liability for giving their tenants lead poisoning or failing to remediate black mold. From an insurance perspective, it would also limit one individual to owning ~4 - 5, maybe up to 15, 1 - 4 family dwellings because you can't get insurance for more than that as an individual.

I'm sure there would be some people who sold their properties. This change likely would put downward pressure on housing prices, which would be a good thing. It would not crash the market.

6

LostDefectivePearl t1_izb4fun wrote

I’m looking into an LLC for when I buy a house because I don’t want my name to be that easily searchable in public records. My partner has gotten death threats at work due to the nature of her job. It wouldn’t be hard to see who holds the LLC but just that small obstacle would probably stop some unhinged people from finding our address.

1

Charlesinrichmond t1_izciya6 wrote

Okay putting my lawyer hat on this makes so little sense I cannot even parse it

This would require the complete conversion of the US to a communist society to work I'm not actually kidding. You have to destroy most American laws it makes the Trump take on things look minor

You might not realize how trumpian this is

0

Diet_Coke t1_izcktqn wrote

That old Trump the communist

1

Charlesinrichmond t1_izfewfe wrote

nope. The Trump who wants to destroy the constitution and our democracy and rule of law.

He wants to destroy some aspects. You want to destroy other aspects. I actually give you the benefit of the doubt and I don't think you realize what you are proposing.

Corporations are just people. Groups of people. Your proposal boils down to overturning property rights, which is a big change in our society, and would quite literally require pitching a big chunk of the constitution

0

GMUcovidta t1_iza3yg4 wrote

There's times they have to- like if they're building a new development, warehouse etc. they may have to buy and demolish several single family homes. They may also buy a single family home and transition it into something else. You see this a lot with large older properties being converted into hotels, event venues etc.

It should definitely be regulated but a flat out ban doesn't make sense.

6

Vapid_Ingenue t1_iza4ylq wrote

Fair enough. I'll concede that. But corporations owning hundreds or thousands of single family homes all throughout a city... it just ain't right

3

[deleted] t1_izafwlq wrote

[deleted]

2

Charlesinrichmond t1_izcnz32 wrote

So what you are saying is renters should pay more? Because basically all tenants are in investment units and if investment units are charged more than tenants will have to pay more

1

Charlesinrichmond t1_izcikjp wrote

I think all of my law professors and half of my college professors would start crying if they read this point. It's really remarkably uneducated

0

Vapid_Ingenue t1_izer7fl wrote

Well let me help educate you: I don't give a fuck about you or any of your professors

0