rentals

Since these are not normal times, this law seems punitive to homeowners who can't sell. Right now only a very narrow part of the housing market is viable, while many houses go begging on the market. Would WStP be better off if homes were gobbled up at low prices by people with minimal financial means? All this would do is create a population of owners that will lag on upkeep.

According to the article, homeowners that cannot sell their homes can apply for a waiver that would allow the property to be rented for a limited time (2 years, I believe it was). What the ordinance prevents is someone turning the property into a permanent rental property. As a homeowner, I support policies like this. If 50 percent of my neighborhood turned into rentals, my homes value would sink the rest of the way out of sight.

"A better way to maintain property values is to ensure quality rentals by setting and enforcing strong housing codes" - I've never had a rental neighbor that came close to a homeowner when it came to taking care of their property.

Just another reason that foreclosure is the way to go if you are too far underwater and need to move "up" in life. If you bought a responsible home and are now screwed because the government, banks, investors, etc. all made tons of money leaving you holding the bag.....foreclose. 7 years to get your credit back??....this is just false information thrown about by the banks to worry you into paying back a bogus mortgage. I know people who had both car loans...and home loans within one year of a foreclosure....at the current market rate. If you have a steady job......banks will borrow to you. They have to, it's how they make money.

mcjoe1 - I think you mean you've never had a landlord that kept up their rental property as well as a homeowner. For the most part, it is not the responsibility of the renter to maintain the property.

Where is the evidence that rental properties decrease property values? I am pretty sure the Loring Park (with 82% rentals) and Uptown (with 76% rentals) are two of the most desirable neighborhoods in the metro area. Maybe the real problem with West St. Paul and Winona is that tenants with financial means choose to live anyplace but there?

Just another example of the government disrupting free enterprise and creating more problems that it will ever solve....

A great example is Obama... Creating more problems that he can ever solve.....

This is going to lead to a bunch of vacant houses which in my opinion is worst than rentals. I know if I couldn't rent out my house right now I would just give the bank the keys and tell them to eat the loss. Like someone said earlier this is just forcing people that are trying to do the right thing, paying their mortgage, to simply go into foreclosure.

A neighborhood that has vacant, deteriorating houses is less desirable than those with properly maintained rental properties. If the issue is the condition of rental properties, license and inspect them and require them to meet appropriate standards. I assume this is already being done. It seems more reasonable than forcing more homes into foreclosure.

This has been going on in Duluth for years, yet I never see any mention of it. When UMD's new Chancellor moved to town, he was unable to rent the house he wanted because of the restrictions.