gslavik t1_j083gas wrote
Reply to comment by Electrical-Wish-519 in Jim Thorpe councilmember concerned over roommate zoning ordinance which would prevent people from living with unrelated roommates by saintofhate
> The rent goes to the landlords who neglect the tenants and they end up walking around town and stealing from stores, etc.
This makes it sound as if landlords are caretakers of people renting from them ...
Electrical-Wish-519 t1_j0875jq wrote
A lot of times they are. There are foundations that get state funding to pay for living expenses. People involved in the foundation pay rent to themselves in homes they bought and don’t do a great job of looking after the people they’re wards of.
gslavik t1_j087nti wrote
> looking after the people they’re wards of.
Should that say "guardians of"?
Are you referring to minors and adults (who cannot take care of themselves)? I think that it would be a different relation ship from renter/landlord.
Electrical-Wish-519 t1_j08myeq wrote
Yes. Guardians of. And yes I’m talking about this scenario where people can’t take care of themselves. They often get neglected and can be a disturbance to the town, so the towns pass these ordinances like the one above to keep them from happening in their community.
Not weighing in if it’s right or wrong, just that it’s not always evil landlords trying to squeeze renters, though I’m sure that’s certainly a scenario that happens
gslavik t1_j08scph wrote
Your argument makes sense. The "landlords who neglect the tenants" part threw me off what you were trying to get across.
feelsgoodman666 t1_j08nhht wrote
Sounds like an issue with these “foundations” and how they administer their “care” - what does that have to do with zoning individuals out of being able to rent apartments? I don’t see any benefit to this other than classic nimby nonsense
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments