For those that "haven't been affected by eviction moratorium"

Laura Guy · 2021-09-09T18:19:23-07:00

For those of you who say the eviction moratorium doesn’t/hasn’t affected you. I’m here to tell you it does. If you own rental property, but “haven’t had any issues”, 12% of mom and pop housing providers- your colleagues- have been forced out of the business due to the moratorium. Laws around the country are preventing housing providers from running background checks, criminal history, credit history, eviction history. You haven’t had any issues YET. If you own your home, or wish to in the future- the government has set the precedent that it can tell you what you can and cannot do with your property. The Biden administration has also stated they wish to eliminate single family zoning altogether. You may lose that right, or opportunity. This affects you. If you have gone into a contract with someone- where you agree to do something in exchange for something else- the government has now said they will not honor that contract. This affects you. As a housing provider and real estate professional, I have personally had very minimal issues or losses myself. But I will fight this- because it’s tyranny and blatant government overreach. The beauty and success of this great United States of America has relied upon having rights- The right to own property, the right to make decisions about our bodies and beings. This country provides opportunity to any individual- from any race, gender, or background. In particular, the housing industry has created an incredibly diverse group of entrepreneurs and success stories, that can be shared with future generations. These fundamental rights are slowly being chipped away and I challenge those of you who say “you are not affected” to stand up and fight with us. Make a donation. Share with a friend. Volunteer your time. DO something. Your livelihood is next.

Bruce WoodruffPro Member

Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes

5y

Good post and great points! You are absolutely correct that the 'powers that be' are trying to establish a new normal where rules and laws don't matter. If not enough people pay attention to what's going down we are in trouble.

5 Reply

Laura Guy

OP

Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes

5y

Thank you!! My organization is filing suit against both our state (Indiana) and federal governments to ensure no further moratoriums are allowed by ANY governing body. The state of New York has already extended the moratorium into 2022 ….

15 Reply

Bruce WoodruffPro Member

Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Laura Guy:

Thank you!! My organization is filing suit against both our state (Indiana) and federal governments to ensure no further moratoriums are allowed by ANY governing body. The state of New York has already extended the moratorium into 2022 ….

Did you ever think about running for office? I'm serious....

4 Reply

John Kunick

Investor · Broken Arrow, OK · Member since 2016 · 210 posts · 314 votes

5y

@Laura Guy, bravo! You nailed it! This is about freedom and liberty and true capitalism being unhindered by tyrants and dictators. I was one of those when the EM started that said it was unconstitutional as it infringes on property rights and contract law. Honestly, I was surprised/disappointed by those landlords that saw it as "understandable and necessary" given the pandemic. To me, it set a precedent that the government can declare any emergency it wants and therefore what else can be deemed "understandable and necessary"? This whole thing hopefully has taught a lot of people valuable lessons about the slippery slope of government overreach.

11 Reply

Alan Lacey

Lender · Grand Rapids, MI · Member since 2019 · 175 posts · 82 votes

5y

@Laura Guy Doesn’t that 12 percent number include those who sold to take advantage of the hot market to sell their homes? I haven’t heard that the Biden administration want to overturn single family zoning laws nationally, but presuming that was a goal it would be the single biggest role back of government intervention in property rights in recent memory. If highest and best use isn’t single family then those zoning regs interfere with the free market economy.

3 Reply

Bill B.

Investor · Las Vegas, NV · Member since 2013 · 8k+ posts · 10k+ votes

5y

Single family zoning is definitely not a right. And getting rid of it would definitely be an opportunity. As you say. What right does the government have to tell me what I can do with my property. I should be able to build whatever I want on it, or at least any kind of residential housing if you don’t want my machine shop next to your house. I can’t name one thing Biden has done right, but if he wants to get rid of sfh zoning, go team Biden.

2 Reply

Nathan GesnerBusiness Member

Moderator

Real Estate Broker · Cody, WY · Member since 2010 · 28k+ posts · 41k+ votes

5y

My market is a good example of this. I manage nearly 400 rentals and didn't have a single non-paying tenant due to COVID. But the government, media, and politicians keep pushing more and more "benefits" to renters that stop paying. The rhetoric really ramped up in the spring as the eviction moratorium was nearing an end and federal dollars were pushed to help tenants catch up on rent. As soon as the ERAP money came available, I suddenly had tenants paying late or not paying at all and then applying for ERAP money. It's just a cash grab. Here's the real funny part: every business in town is begging for workers and my 14-year-old was able to grab two jobs and earn over $2,000 a month this summer which would have been enough or every single one of my tenants claiming they need assistance. Our government created a problem then teaches people how to game the system to grab free money while leaving the Landlord (mostly females and minorities) twisting in the wind.

The DIY Landlord Book4.7248 Reviews

Website View Page

26 Reply

Laura Guy

OP

Flipper/Rehabber · Indianapolis, IN · Member since 2014 · 54 posts · 144 votes

5y

@Bruce Woodruff haha thank you!! :). Yes I have considered it....

5 Reply

Jay HinrichsBusiness Member

Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Bill B.:

Single family zoning is definitely not a right. And getting rid of it would definitely be an opportunity. As you say. What right does the government have to tell me what I can do with my property. I should be able to build whatever I want on it, or at least any kind of residential housing if you don’t want my machine shop next to your house. I can’t name one thing Biden has done right, but if he wants to get rid of sfh zoning, go team Biden.

Oregon tried that with prop 37 that passed.. anyone who owned a property prior to 71 i think it was was allowed to go back into time and do whatever they wanted under the zoning at the time.. well much of Oregon had NO zoning at that time.. so you had one company Stimpson lumber make 37 claims on literally 20 or 30 thousand acres of Timber land After the state realized this was no good they reversed the law .. LOL were right now very few timberlands are buildable.. Just like most of the prime ag land here you need a minimum of 160 acre to get a building permit.. and there are not a lot of 160 acre parcels. so it affectively zoned out building in the ag and timber areas. which with the forest fires we see today in cA.. that did allow urbanization into land that was forest in history we are seeing the drastic results.. and even in Oregon a few towns burnt down although not really because of urbanization into the forest like the Sierra Nevada has.

we are looking at a specific county in WA and that county still has NO Zoning everything just gets approved by project.. this is good and bad.. there is a time and place to separate manufacoring from SFR and commercial from SFR. in the day i guess Texas had a lot of that no zoing and a mish mash of uses.

AS for the Eviction moratorium this is nothing new.. many markets have had these kind of rules and laws for decades now.. think NYC SF Berkley .. state of Oregon now has rent control over the entire state etc etc.. this is a state issue not a national issue.. and investors don't like it don't buy there or simply don't buy rentals no one is forcing them to buy rentals. there are many subdivision for instance in Madison county MS were rentals are prohibited at all you can only owner occupy and the zoning in that county precludes ANY MF. And based on that its by far the wealthiest county in the state.

Podcast Guest on Show #222

JLH Capital Partners51 Review

Website View Page

6 Reply

Jay HinrichsBusiness Member

Real Estate Consultant · Summerlin, NV · Member since 2014 · 45k+ posts · 66k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Account Closed:

The sad reality is this has hurt more poor people far more than it has helped . Whenever big brother gets involved you can bet the folks at the bottom will by default suffer the most . When my taxes and bills go up to pay for these socialist programs ..the tenants just pay more each month to offset the fees .

Just like we need affordable housing what an Oxymoron.. fighting with the fire department on one of my subdivision they decided I need to put in an 8 inch water line to no where plus 3 hydrants that do not serve my 90 homes.. cost of about 100k.. building permits are 30 to 50k per house .. as we know #$%# flows downhill so the product we should be able to get to the public for about 350 to 375k as starter first time buyer homes are now 550 to 625k ..

Podcast Guest on Show #222

JLH Capital Partners51 Review

Website View Page

5 Reply

Ron Brady

Rental Property Investor · Burlington County, NJ · Member since 2019 · 540 posts · 771 votes

5y

@Laura Guy I appreciate the challenges of operating in our legal environment. At the same time, as people who are late-to-life real estate investors, we believe that the BENEFITS our government has granted to real estate investors are more abundant than the limits. To wit:

- 30 year fixed mortgages. We've retired to Mexico and to purchase a home here requires cash!

- Depreciation. What, we can deduct $ from my taxes each year for an appreciating asset?

- Expenses. Wait, we can travel from our home in Mexico to our properties in Mexico, and the government lest us deduct the travel expenses from our taxes?

- 1031 Exchanges. You mean we can exchange our asset gains into better gaining assets and yet pay no taxes on it?

And more and more and more. We've secured a more secure and bigger nest egg in real estate with the system the government has set up in three years than we did in 20 years in W2 jobs.

I know that many want to believe that the system is rigged against us. We are NOT among that group.

We believe that there are benefits and challenges in any field. In real estate in the US, we believe the benefits far outweigh the challenges.

Of course, just our two cents.

15 Reply

Account Closed

Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2018 · 420 posts · 388 votes

5y

@Laura Guy let’s not rewrite history here. The moratorium began under Trump and was ended under Biden. Yes, the decision came down from the (conservative majority) Supreme Court and yes, Republicans claim to have been against it all along. That does not negate the ABSOLUTE FACT that the moratorium originated and STOOD for MONTHS under the admin of Donald J Trump.

12 Reply

Victor S.

WorldWide · Member since 2016 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Account Closed:

@Laura Guy let’s not rewrite history here. The moratorium began under Trump and was ended under Biden. Yes, the decision came down from the (conservative majority) Supreme Court and yes, Republicans claim to have been against it all along. That does not negate the ABSOLUTE FACT that the moratorium originated and STOOD for MONTHS under the admin of Donald J Trump.

And? Trump is gone and Joe used the powers he never had (and he knew it very well as well) to extend it until SC had to come back and slap him down. It was not ended "under Biden," but in spite of what he tried to weasel in.

@Ron Brady, one of Joe's tax items was/is to eliminate the 1031 exchanges.

3 Reply

Account Closed

Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2018 · 420 posts · 388 votes

5y

@Victor S.her original statement was that the government has set precedent that they can tell you what to do with your own property. I felt it necessary to remind her who set that precedent in this case. It matters. In fact, our entire legal system is based on precedent and it is our legal system that protects us as property owners. Biden’s favorable position on the moratorium is almost negligible by comparison. The gauntlet was already in place for longer than most mom and pop investors could withstand, by her own admission.

4 Reply

Bruce WoodruffPro Member

Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Account Closed:

@Laura Guy let’s not rewrite history here. The moratorium began under Trump and was ended under Biden. Yes, the decision came down from the (conservative majority) Supreme Court and yes, Republicans claim to have been against it all along. That does not negate the ABSOLUTE FACT that the moratorium originated and STOOD for MONTHS under the admin of Donald J Trump.

It's true that Trump should not have gone down this road despite the pressure from Pelosi et al...however his 4 month scheme was extended by Joe and would still be in place if not for the SCOTUS ruling. Go ahead and bash Trump if you must, I will even jump on that bus with you, but don't make it sound like Biden ended it because of his alternative beliefs....that ain't true...

@Laura Guy Her point was the overreach of federal government power, period.

9 Reply

Account Closed

Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2018 · 420 posts · 388 votes

5y

@Bruce Woodruff March 2021 to Jan 2022 is 10 months. 10 months (at 0% occupancy effectively) is crippling to most investors, whether they’ve appropriate funded their reserve accounts or not.

Trump’s administration is SOLELY responsible for setting the precedent and for those 10 months. To me, that is not up for debate.

2 Reply

Victor S.

WorldWide · Member since 2016 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Account Closed:

@Victor S.her original statement was that the government has set precedent that they can tell you what to do with your own property. I felt it necessary to remind her who set that precedent in this case. It matters. In fact, our entire legal system is based on precedent and it is our legal system that protects us as property owners. Biden’s favorable position on the moratorium is almost negligible by comparison. The gauntlet was already in place for longer than most mom and pop investors could withstand, by her own admission.

Trump, whatever you may say or think about him, never overstepped his executive privilege in such a manner before, and I highly doubt he, being a RE guy himself, would go on with the CDC's continued moratorium. I'm surprised you're ok with the SC's punt over to Congress to be able to mandate (they love this word lately) who gets to stay in whose property and for how long.

3 Reply

Bruce WoodruffPro Member

Contractor/Investor/Consultant · San Diego / Phoenix · Member since 2021 · 12k+ posts · 15k+ votes

5y

@Account Closed The CARES Act and the Eviction Moratorium are two different (yet related) things. CARES was initiated by Congress. Yet you'll say Trump signed it and you're right. I'm guessing you would have screamed bloody murder if he hadn't. Question: Are you trying to clarify this situation or do you just hate Trump?

Anyway, let's keep this topic going because it is important and it would be a shame if it were shut down....

5 Reply

Account Closed

Investor · Phoenix, AZ · Member since 2018 · 420 posts · 388 votes

5y

@Bruce Woodruff I don’t hate Trump. I don’t hate anyone. The CARES Act was effectively the bail out for landlords in my opinion. You’re damn right I would have been enraged if he’d declined to sign it. With the option of forbearance, you could sustain your position as a landlord to some degree. Without it, I imagine 50% or better of mom and pop landlords would be out of business and their lives in ruins.

However, I don’t believe that the CDC had the authority to implement the moratorium. A sentiment ultimately shared by the Supreme Court. This should have been vehemently opposed and expeditiously legislated. Instead Trump stepped aside, and then effectively passed the buck. Frankly, I think I’m just sick of absolutely nothing sticking to Trump. He is inaction was effectively gasoline on the fire of government overreach as it relates to personal property rights.

1 Reply

Steve Vaughan

Rental Property Investor · East Wenatchee, WA · Member since 2014 · 10k+ posts · 16k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Laura Guy:

If you own rental property, but “haven’t had any issues”, 12% of mom and pop housing providers- your colleagues- have been forced out of the business due to the moratorium.

More like 'really, it's worth what? ` Cha-ching. Never liked landlording anyway, laughing all the way to the bank.

Other than over-dramatize and cry tyranny, what specifically can we do?

2 Reply

Max T.

Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes

5y

@Laura Guy

You are right but this is nothing new. There was a lot of this during/after ww2. This article explores this, especially how local government continues to take even after the federal backs off.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/09/supreme-court-ended-eviction-ban-not-fight-against-evictions/

The cycle generally goes like this:

1. National emergency

2. Government action

3. Time passes, emergency ends, overreaching policies (mostly) struck down

4. Normalcy, people forget, then get surprised when it happens again.

2 Reply

Max T.

Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes

5y

@Bill Brandt

Yes I see that as an opportunity.

People who think they have a right to live in a whole community of single family zoning are Karens, I’m sorry 😂

3 Reply

Max T.

Investor · Philadelphia, PA · Member since 2015 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes

5y

@Whit B.

Trump solely? Nah. It happened during ww2 first.

0 Reply

Gary L Wallman

Rental Property Investor · Beavercreek OH · Member since 2018 · 422 posts · 970 votes

5y

That's why millennials hate capitalism. They think what this country has is capitalism and it's failing. It's not.

In truth is we have corporate capitalism and crony capitalism. Way to many barriers to entry for true capitalist's. Permits that cost 50k, licenses for everything from hair cutters to plumbers. Ridiculous zoning restrictions. Taxi medallions that cost 200k. Liquor licenses that cost 300k. Here in Ohio 50 million dollar license fee to start a casino. Why? To keep the competition out.

The complete opposite of true capitalisms. Add in the fact that our country no longer upholds the rule of law or private contracts and passes eviction moratoriums by, of all people, the CDC and you can see we screwed the pooch as a country.

As a patriot, I sure hope we can turn this country around.

10 Reply

Dan H.Pro Member

Investor · Poway, CA · Member since 2015 · 7k+ posts · 8k+ votes

5y

Originally posted by @Max T.:

@Bill Brandt

Yes I see that as an opportunity.

People who think they have a right to live in a whole community of single family zoning are Karens, I’m sorry 😂

You purchase a property knowing the zoning (whether dense on sparse). The area is chosen because it matches what you desire (including in terms of the zoned density). Then someone decides to change that density. How is this different than you purchase in a residential area and the person next door decides to open a machine shop? recycle place? Dump? Airport? 6 story hotel?

Zoning exists to provide some assurance to what is permitted. It allows purchasers to make purchase decisions based on their preferences.

In my view it is the people that believe they should be able to change zoning that are the Karens. Why do they think they are entitled to change the zoning that was in place when they purchased? They purchased with a known zoning as did all their neighbors, but screw the neighbors. They think they are entitled to do what they want with the property even though it was zoned a particular way when they purchased it.

Why do people believe that they should be able to live where they want instead of where they can afford? The US does not have a housing problem. There is plenty of room for housing. It is not where the masses want to live. They want to live in So Cal, NYC, San Francisco, Boston, Austin, Seattle, etc. A lot less want to live in the small town in the Midwest (nothing against the small town in the Midwest - I recognize it is the perfect place for some people just a reality is that it is not desired by as many people which is why it is right for some people).

I like that there are high density options and low density options. I do not want to see there not be any low density options. Basically I like choice. I like the ability to live in the hustle bustle of NYC or the ability to live in the small low density town where everyone knows your name (for example that nice little Midwest town). My own choice is to live near the hustle and bustle, but in the outskirts where I can have less traffic, lower density, know my neighbors (I know every neighbor in my residential area).

I suspect I cannot convince you, but I suspect there are many that share my view on the benefits of zoning.

8 Reply

For those that "haven't been affected by eviction moratorium"

For those that "haven't been affected by eviction moratorium"

Most Popular Reply

77 Replies