Fuck_You_Downvote t1_iz511pv wrote
Reply to comment by The_Lone_Apple in NYC comptroller says Adams has ‘exacerbated’ widespread city worker vacancies by mowotlarx
City gets money from property tax, sales tax and business tax. No business = no tax.
mowotlarx OP t1_iz53js7 wrote
If the City wanted to fix the issue of losing property tax from businesses in Manhattan they should request landlords lower rents and make it more enticing to stay or to rent space there for smaller businesses. Sometimes private business owners are smart. Why would they waste their $$ on bloated Manhattan rent when staff don't even want to be there? Who does that benefit except the rent collectors? Why is the City (well, the Mayor) the last one to understand this?
socialcommentary2000 t1_iz554e9 wrote
I agree with you in spirit, but there's a bit of a problem : Manhattan has sort of specialized in being the McLargeHuge commercial real estate capital of the country. It's very hard to repurpose that.
There's also the fact that financials and their involvement of commercial real estate means there's incentives (as in, actual contractual incentives for primary stakeholders) to never lower the rates on leases. Senior holders and all that. It's all very arcane, just like just about everything in commercial real estate.
mowotlarx OP t1_iz588nz wrote
I'm not sure we will ever find a future for the McLargeHuge commercial space. They need to make a decision now on whether to lower rents or remodel spaces.
Just an anecdote of course, but the massive quarter block office building I see out my office window has at least 5 gutted floors. It used to be cubicle farms top to bottom for a bank, I believe. It's been emptied out since late 2019 (started pre-COVID) and not a bit of movement there yet. As the Mega Corps leave to save $$ and keep staff happy, who else would ever come and claim that overpriced space? They're going to have to convert it no matter what, whether it's into smaller offices on the same floor or into housing. I don't know why the Mayor is leading them on and wasting time.
TheAJx t1_iz5avco wrote
One of the hardest things to do on this sub is to explain to people that not every problem is caused by evil people doing obviously evil things that could be magically solved with the wave of someone's hands.
The NYC is built the way it is, for better or worse, mostly better considering how prosperous the city is. To expect this behemoth of a city to just magically adapt to the new normal is asking a lot.
mowotlarx OP t1_iz5eskx wrote
It's not going to magically adapt, we all agree. We need a City government that is practical and responsive to change and to plan ahead. We don't have that. It'll come back to bite us in the ass.
Crimsonwolf1445 t1_iz9ax3d wrote
The big issue imo is that pretty much all solutions one can work towards would not see clear results for several years making it useless in the eyes of any elected official.
Why would they do the work of enacting policy the next guy will get all the credit for?
Frankly i have no hope of any politician from any party to not solely act in their own self interest
mowotlarx OP t1_izaac9p wrote
Agreed. City staff see the vision over time between administrations and do a lot of work. Then a new administration begins and they scrap the work and restart something that gets dropped again later. Very rarely do they promote agency staff into commissioner positions. Instead the pick their friends who have little to no experience and are starting from scratch.
It's very hard to have consistency and a cohesive vision for the public when politicians only hop in to promote their own agenda.
JohnQP121 t1_iz6y7jz wrote
Nobody wants the commute. Lower rent wouldn't help with that.
[deleted] t1_iz5bg44 wrote
[deleted]
mowotlarx OP t1_iz5egkp wrote
And what if nobody moves in and pays the rent?
movingtobay2019 t1_iz5j6gg wrote
Valuation is based on listed rent, not actual rent.
Fuck_You_Downvote t1_iz5jt4r wrote
True. And property is valued based on cash flow. Paper cash flow or actual cash flow are the same. So in a spreadsheet somewhere someone said it is worth 100 a foot in rent, and was sold as such. And they guy who bought it says it is 110 a foot and got a loan based on that. If someone moves in under 110 the bank repossesses his building or it just sits vacant for 12 years. Which one will he do?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments