4 ms·
Tenant rights is a huge one. There were other contributing factors as well: Anti-discrimination laws • 1968 Fair Housing Act made SROs “dwellings” subject t
by CGMthrowaway 1y ago
Tenant rights is a huge one. There were other contributing factors as well:
Anti-discrimination laws
• 1968 Fair Housing Act made SROs “dwellings” subject to full federal anti-bias rules
• 1974 McQueen v. City of Detroit: an SRO that refused welfare recipients was liable
• 1982 Sullivan v. SRO Management: an owner who turned away unmarried couples violated marital status discrimination
• 1988 FHA amendments added “familial status” making “no children after 8 pm" illegal
Also building code and tax incentives
• 1974 UFC required sprinkler retrofits
• 1977 24 CFR 882 required private-bathroom retrofits
• 1986 low-income housing credit gave 130% write-ups for new construction but only 90% for rehab of existing SROs
- BobaFloutist 1y agoI mean SROs that aren't subject to full federal anti-bias rules, are allowed to refuse welfare recipients, that turn away unmarried couples, or reject children after 8 pm probably wouldn't really fix the problems that people want SROs to fix. I'm not sure if > 1977 24 CFR 882 required private-bathroom retrofits means that SROs are required to have private bathrooms, which would absolutely damage the model and doesn't strike me as strictly necessary.
- CGMthrowaway 1y agoMore supply wouldn't fix the problems? Adding supply for one group leaves more supply for the others (e.g. welfare, couples and families)