Ten days after the suit was filed, the management declined to extend McCall’s lease. They wanted her out by the end of June, but she negotiated a mid-July departure date.Recall a few years ago this was the same landlord who evicted residents of the "affordable" units it was no longer required by law to provide. That inspired a fair amount of public outrage but ultimately didn't save anyone's home. Tenants have no power at all.
McCall said being booted from a complex she once loved will be worth it if her suit helps return conditions there to what they once were.
“I knew I was risking it, (but) I have a lot of friends still there, and a lot of people are fearful of coming forward and saying anything,” McCall said during an interview. “If my coming forward improves (things) for them, I feel like that’s how it should work.”
Recall also the path that got us here began when the state and city offered public money to a developer as "incentives" to bring the building "back into commerce" so that developer could make a ton of money so long as he also provided a small affordable set aside which would expire in 15 years. These are terrible deals for the long term stability of the city's residents and neighborhoods. But they are fantastic for the developers and politicians who benefit from them as they happen. Is it any wonder that's the model they return to over and over?
No comments:
Post a Comment