Comments On: The Rent Hike by Marti Jonjak

Re: The Rent Hike

Kzeers — Wed, 20 Feb 2013 19:16:44 -0800

Our rent in Eastlake went from $850 to $1350--for an 80 year old building with no overhead lighting and silverfish to boot. Most of the tenants have been living here for years, half of us have moved out with more to follow. Seattle has lost it's soul (brought to you by Amazon.com)
Posted by Kzeers

Re: The Rent Hike

X.G. — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 16:30:26 -0800

@157 "Constant taxes" are just that CONSTANT. There's been no huge uptick in taxation in Seattle. This has NOTHING to do with the taxes and everything to do with unbridled greed and our local government's unwillingness to reign any of it in to protect the citizens they're sworn to help. Don't be a crazy anti-tax ignoramus, please. We ALL pay the regressive sales tax in WA.
Posted by X.G.

Re: The Rent Hike

Bong — Thu, 07 Feb 2013 00:29:53 -0800

Think it has anything to do with the constant taxes on properties? Nah couldn't be...
Posted by Bong

Re: The Rent Hike

Effman — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 10:34:37 -0800

I want to live on Capitol Hill, and top of Queen Anne. But geez, I can't afford to, so I'll settle for a cute little bungalow off Rainier.
Wow, this is so horribly tragic. Please regulate this.
Posted by Effman

Re: The Rent Hike

Janet Maison — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:45:52 -0800

Ah, my beloved Broadmore. A beautiful 1910 brick building at the corner of Terry & Jefferson, lovingly cared for by the owner and managers until 2011. The owners of Cafe Presse and Le Pichet lived below me; the owner of Dinette was above me. Interesting, artsy tenants. I lived there for 20 years, but that wasn't the longest. The owner was simplifying his life, sold the building to Biff and Chance - two 12-year-olds who must have hit up dad's friends for the cash, bought the building, then raised everyone's rent by %64. Yes, the neighborhood was changing and more money could be had. I will forever cherish my time there.
Posted by Janet Maison

Re: The Rent Hike

FREEdomfrog — Wed, 06 Feb 2013 05:34:35 -0800

I lived on Cap Hill in 1991, and paid $400/month for a studio apartment. It was a cool, hip and interesting time. Then I grew up and moved away. I long for those times, but nostalgia's a bitch. This story could have been written 20 years ago.
Posted by FREEdomfrog

Re: The Rent Hike

The I.B.A. — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:12:35 -0800

I am sure glad my mom won't do this to me. Sucks to be you.
Posted by The I.B.A.

Re: The Rent Hike

JF — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 10:30:06 -0800

@91 I'm 99% sure Keck, while brushing his teeth in the morning lets out a comical snort, turns to his partner and says "Sorry, I was just thinking about something at work."
Posted by JF

Re: The Rent Hike

bohemian bourgeoisie — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 14:34:35 -0800

"When us creative, artsy and active folks you seem to resent so much move into un"hip" areas, it's only time before jerks like you want to follow us."
Posted by bohemian bourgeoisie

Re: The Rent Hike

Casual_Observer — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:27:45 -0800

@147: OK, so greed is bad. I agree with that. Contrary to what you believe I'm saying, I appreciate artists. Where we differ: you call accepting the way it is "brainwashed", I call it "unfortunate fact of life". I don't know how many fairy tales you currently have on your nightstand, but demanding something (especially something as free-market determined and owner-set as rent prices) isn't changing anything. It's the giant dance that all renters (artists or not) have to go through if they don't have sympathetic landlords, unfortunately.

I've been on both sides of it, having a landlord who kept their prices locked way below what the market could've asked, and I've also lived in a building where new management came in and offered me the same product for much more than what I had been paying for it. I moved, and I'm better off for having done it. I found a better place with more space for just a bit more money, and my paycheck didn't end up going to an asshole company who would pull that type of move.

Posted by Casual_Observer

Re: The Rent Hike

squeeze002 — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 08:58:54 -0800

This is happening in my building right now. The new owners took ownership in August. In September 2012, they put in a couple of patches in the parking lot, painted a few lines, told everyone in the building while this was going on, "maybe you should get the city zone parking because this will take a few days". Right after it was done, "The maintenance of the building costs are high, so we will be charging you $75 a month for parking". Although for 23 years, my parking spot has been a part of my rent since day one. They had rented a 2 bedroom next door to me after doing some work, but they did the parking thing to those people the same month they moved in, and they moved out. The apartment sat empty for 4 months because they wanted "market rate" and finally had to drop the price. The new tenants moved in the first day, and that evening, while they were settling in someone complained about noise. The management called both of the college students that just moved in, "you're both 10 years old", "I'm not sure you can afford to pay rent here.", and "You're kind is not welcome here." JJ Properties is the new owner.
Posted by squeeze002

Re: The Rent Hike

X.G. — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 01:28:00 -0800

And, @146, "Casual Observer" you're the one "drinking kool-aid" if you think for one minute that simply moving from one neighborhood to the other is the solution 'cause you know what? When us creative, artsy and active folks you seem to resent so much move into un"hip" areas, it's only time before jerks like you want to follow us. Then, developers come to build your overpriced pretentious version of what had been there all along. Don't agree? How do you explain Ballard? It's not about artists or anyone group. It's about not forcing out the non-affluent you so seem to disdain. If you know ANYTHING about history, you know that demanding change is the only way change comes, btw. And, tell me this, smarty, why do rents need to go up hundreds of dollars to keep developers profitable when these same developers were ALREADY making good money before the rents started soaring. You can build new units without jacking up rents. Seriously, you sound sooooo brainwashed by the corporate econo-doctrine churned out by Wall St and their minions. It's greed, pure and simple. Apparently, you're perfectly cool with unbridled greed. Not me. Greed is BULLSHIT fodder for assholes.
Posted by X.G.

Re: The Rent Hike

X.G. — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 01:17:04 -0800

Actually, "casual observer", it's all connected. If you paid attention you'd know that the morally bankrupt system that oppresses poor folks in Central America and Africa and leaves many malnourished and sick is the SAME SYSTEM that keeps people down in wealthier places, just on a different scale. Kool-aid? Any time you'd like to discuss, I'd be happy to have a fact-based conversation. My words are based in real world realities that are undisputable. Unique little flower? To that I soooo want to tell you to F off. I work very hard. I earn other folks good money via my work. I get paid what should be a decent wage. However, me and so many others ALL OVER this city and in many cities across the USA find it harder to keep up with growing costs as dictated by powerful "elites" who gain their power through money. Plan? You bet. Limit rent increases to an annual maximum 5-10%. Rent controls. Ban developer contributions to politicians. I'm glad you're concerned about the worlds injustices but you really don't have to be a dick and piss on us when your neighbors want to fix some part of the bigger problem right here in Seattle. I'll happily accept your apology.
Posted by X.G.

Re: The Rent Hike

Casual_Observer — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:20:32 -0800

@143: What rationale does the city have for limiting rent increases, aside from making people who think they can "demand" things happy? It's ridiculous. Unless you plan on making the next mayorship hinge on the pricing-out of the arts community in Seattle, then good luck getting any of those empty demands to stick to anyone.

Look at what the vacancy rate in this city currently is (around 4.5%, depending on what poll you look at). Demand is increasing. Rent is increasing all over the board, not just in Capitol Hill. While this story is a bit of a shocking increase in rents, it's not like people can't take their business somewhere else, ie other neighborhoods that aren't the hippest, most expensive part of the city. Let 'em have Capitol Hill.
Posted by Casual_Observer

Re: The Rent Hike

Casual_Observer — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 22:11:21 -0800

@132: I'd love to have some of your Kool-Aid when you're done drinking it.

Do you have some real plan for change, or do you just feel like because you're a unique little flower (just like everyone in this city) who has an interest in the art scene that you "deserve" a break? There are quite a few injustices happening over this globe that are slightly more inconvenient and life-affecting than making someone move away from their favorite bars and coffee shops.
Posted by Casual_Observer

Re: The Rent Hike

Bert Chadick — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 19:57:37 -0800

I've seen co-op housing work in another city. The trick is to keep assholes off the board, and having a little pride of ownership.
Posted by Bert Chadick

Re: The Rent Hike

X.G. — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 17:25:18 -0800

@141- Why? Don't you get it???!!!! ANYWHERE we pick up and go to, as soon as we make it fun/attractive/interesting and safe, the developers will follow. And they'll do the same exact thing. Wake up. It's an endless game- if you choose to play. I don't. Let's fight McGinn, Lacata, Conlin, Rasmussen, Clark and all of the indifferent council and mayoral candidates, the corporate developers, etc and DEMAND change. Demand a limit to what landlords/developers can increase rents each year. Demand much higher percentages of housing that fits the income levels of "ordinary" Seattle folks. Demand better solutions that closet/pod living. @141, Your rally cry to pick up and move sounds like Portlandia hipster drivel based in a massive amount of naivete. Sorry. Why is this so hard for so many to see. It won't stop until we demand it does. Good grief.
Posted by X.G.

Re: The Rent Hike

E Powell — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 10:52:31 -0800

Read the last section of RCW 59 18 085 - "interruptions in tenancies designed to avoid the applicability of this section are unenforceable."

Tenant relocation does not depend on the tenant being low income. Again, see RCW 59 18 085. Not one mention of low-income tenants.
Posted by E Powell

Re: The Rent Hike

buttmonkey — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 10:36:34 -0800

Capitol/First hill is over. Time to give it up and move south.
Posted by buttmonkey

Re: The Rent Hike

auntie grizelda — Sun, 03 Feb 2013 01:10:11 -0800

@139: I'm with you!
Posted by auntie grizelda

Re: The Rent Hike

X.G. — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 23:12:01 -0800

We can all theoreticize 'til we're all forced out of Capitol Hill and the rest of Seattle. The FACT is, a small group of developers has taken it upon themselves to monopolize as much rental property (and condo-building, too) and consolidate as much of the market in their hands so as to squeeze the rest of us for all the profit they can get. Where does that leave us in the end> Screwed -unless we do something. This is a global phenomenon whereby anywhere desirable to live is only available to the privileged /monied. Philosophers and theoreticists, that's cool by you? Really? You REALLY think it's just us Cap Hill "snobs" and hipsters? Gimme a break. Ballard used to be a cheap place to live. Wake up, or, like Manhattan, Seattle will become a land of the wealthy and boring, with budding artists, creatives and "ordinary" folk nowhere to be found. Sounds like Bellevue to me. Let's fight back people. COME ON!!!
Posted by X.G.

Re: The Rent Hike

BrendanMcK — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:40:35 -0800

<< basically nothing like our current dramatic increase in urbanism and urban population density has ever happened before >>

Nonsense; Seattle (and many other American cities) have been there before, this is a minor growth cycle compared to some of Seattle's previous booms - eg. post-fire and post-goldrush. Who do you think built all those 1900's apartment buildings - like the one in this story - in the first place and for what reason? Developers; because there was demand; so they could profit from it.
Posted by BrendanMcK

Re: The Rent Hike

billwald — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 18:20:30 -0800

What other consumer product is sold at half the market price to low income people?

The primary function of subsidized housing is to transfer employee costs from the employers to the high end working class people. If not for subsidized housing, the international corporations would have to pay a living wage to their blue collar/white collar employees.

The secondary function . . . minimum wage workers never vote Republican. Communities east of Seattle are happy to vote welfare money to Seattle and cede Seattle to the Democrats if it keeps poor people out of east side neighborhoods.
Posted by billwald

Re: The Rent Hike

Thisbe — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 11:49:53 -0800

This is such an interesting thing to think about - basically nothing like our current dramatic increase in urbanism and urban population density has ever happened before, so it's silly to think that anyone automatically knows how we (as a species? as a society?) should handle it.

http://i.imgur.com/225Ii5z.png

I mean, yes - market forces are real, and if there is someone who will pay more for something than you will, that person will probably get it. Not sure that's a great thing, but it is a thing, and not one for which there's a good solution.

It's kind of astounding on some level that we haven't had a big huge national or international conversation about Where To Put People So Things Still Work. Or actually maybe we did and I just missed it, totally possible. Right now it seems like we're trying to put the population density of the future into the housing spaces of the past, and everyone is shocked - SHOCKED! - when it doesn't work out easy as pie.
Posted by Thisbe

Re: The Rent Hike

Mike McGinn — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:01:53 -0800

@X.G.: To the barricades! Ha ha ha ha ha! Poor hipster fool! You know there's a better way, right? Each time you suck my dick, I'll pay you $2 a minute on the following conditions:

1. No teeth

2. Nice 'n tight 'til I squirt

3. You swallow, then smile and say, ''Thank you sir, could I please have some more?''

This is Seattle, kid. Now get down there. Time to pay the rent.
Posted by Mike McGinn