The reason that there is so much Section 8 in this city is the current law.  Check out page 7.  Section 8s requirements are not as stringent or unclear as the Citys code.  Infact the Section 8 or HUD code is clear and documented.  The section 8 inspectors also do not have an agenda and are not out to make money.  In addition, HUD pays rent based upon fair market rents set by the government so they will pay more in certain arreas than a non section 8 landlord could get.  A landlord could get upwards of over $600 for a 1 bedroom on Hulett Street if they met the Section 8 requirments.  So that is one of the main reasons that landlords are going to go the section 8 route.  

McCarthy and Porterfield and even Jordan worked for Municipal Housing.....do you think they are going to change the law to make it make sense........

These city "legislators" are clueless again.

http://schenectadylandlords.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/llregistry20090701.pdf


Page 7

§ 210-8 Application; standards; issuance; temporary certificate.
A. Rental certificate.
(1) This chapter shall apply to all buildings in the City of Schenectady which contain two or more rental units, except rental units inspected and leased under contract with the Schenectady Municipal Housing Authority and the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.(2) Whenever a vacancy shall exist in a rental unit and a leasing is about to occur, or whenever there is a change in occupancy, the owner shall submit a written application for a rental certificate. This application shall indicate the name and address of the owner, the location of the property and the identity of the rental unit by number or other suitable means.
(3) Within five working days of receipt of an application, the Building Inspector shall inspect the rental unit to determine if the rental unit is in compliance with the following
standards

there is so much section 8 because the playboys need workers at a 'good price'....

healthcare is especially rife with this mentality and redlining....

most don't really care if they lose their jobs because their bills are paid for and they just get nickeled and dimed in the profession
that is mainly done by single mothers(for numerous reasons)....but they are told they have 'spots in heaven' blah blah blah.....

Quoted from senders

most don't really care if they lose their jobs because their bills are paid for and they just get nickeled and dimed in the profession that is mainly done by single mothers(for numerous reasons)....but they are told they have 'spots in heaven' blah blah blah.....

High unemployment is also good for business.  It drives down labor costs and shackles the employed to their employer with nowhere to go.  

With high unemployment reducing the cost of labor along with a weakening dollar, America can now be competitive with emerging markets like India and China.  

Quoted from CICERO

High unemployment is also good for business.  It drives down labor costs and shackles the employed to their employer with nowhere to go.  

With high unemployment reducing the cost of labor along with a weakening dollar, America can now be competitive with emerging markets like India and China.  

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quoted from CICERO

High unemployment is also good for business.  It drives down labor costs and shackles the employed to their employer with nowhere to go.  

With high unemployment reducing the cost of labor along with a weakening dollar, America can now be competitive with emerging markets like India and China.  

deleveraging and leaving our posterity less wealthy in ALL aspects of society

what's priceless is the new parking lot on union next door to Marottas after that house 'burned down' and was cleaned up on a
Sunday by the city.....

it's now paved.....like a hidden archaeological site

Yes, a main corner of a main street in a renaissance downtown becomes a parking lot. This crime was perpetrated right in front of everyone. What caused the fire? Why did that building that didn't burn have to be taken down, other than that it was in the way of a future parking lot? Absolutely sickening.

Quoted Text

SCHENECTADY
Rental inspection changes pulled for revision
Officials responding to concerns from landlords
BY KATHLEEN MOORE Gazette Reporter
Reach Gazette reporter Kathleen Moore at 395-3120 or moore@dailygazette.com.

    Just days before Monday’s public hearing, city officials have pulled their controversial legislation regarding rental inspections.
    They now plan to rewrite portions of it and then hold a new public hearing at some point.
    Assistant Corporation Counsel Carl Falotico said he decided to change the legislation after meeting with a landlords group, Schenectady Landlords Infl uencing Change.
    The legislation was controversial because it sharply increased the cost of mandatory rental inspections. But landlords had welcomed a provision in the legislation that would allow them to do minor plumbing and electrical repairs at their properties without a professional license, just as homeowners are allowed to.
    And some landlords liked a provision that would guarantee just one inspection a year, rather than an inspection every time a tenant moved out.
    But others complained that the new proposal unfairly punished them for their excellent facilities. They said their buildings were in such good shape that tenants stayed for years. They rarely had to have an inspection under the current rules, which call for inspections only when tenants move out.
    Falotico said he wanted to reconsider the legislation in the wake of their complaints.
    “They raised concerns we want to make sure we take into account,” he said. But, he added, “I’m not saying we’ll do everything.”
    The changes have not yet been drafted, but he plans to present the new legislation at the Feb. 19 council committee meeting. That meeting was moved from Feb. 18 because that is President’s Day.
    Councilwoman Leesa Perazzo said she was pleased that Falotico was willing to tweak his legislation.
    “Although some things are nonnegotiable, because of the safety of the tenants, we want to get as close as possible [to what the landlords want] so our property owners — which essentially are business owners in our city — are not unduly burdened,” she said.
    Landlords have argued that their properties should not be subject to inspections at all, but city offi cials won’t budge on that.
    “The issue at heart was we’ve got some properties that aren’t maintained well enough,” Councilman Carl Erikson said.
    He added that landlords with poorly maintained buildings probably hate inspections because of the repairs they must make after each visit from code enforcers. But he doesn’t want to help that landlord stay in business by offering less burdensome rules.
    “That guy is going to get irritated, but we don’t need that guy,” Erikson said.
    Erikson wants to offer payment options for landlords so that they can pick the cheapest inspection method. Those who have little turnover could pay per inspection, while those with a lot of turnover might find it cheaper to pay per year, he said. .............................>>>>......................>>>>.....................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....r01001&AppName=1

Why should a property owner pay for a yearly inspection if a tenant is renting her place long term? How is that something the city needs to become involved in? And who are these landlords with frequent turnovers within a year? Do good landlords have revolving door tenants, and if they do, doesn't it make sense to re-inspect those places more frequently?
This program has never worked as it was intended and it looks like this revision is just a money grab from people who aren't causing any problems. If I were a long-term renter, I wouldn't want the city poking around in my home once a year "just in case". What a violation of privacy and possibly discrimination against renters.
You know what would help protect Schenectady's housing stock? LOWER the taxes to attract the young buyers we are now losing to places like Burnt Hills. Our two-family houses used to be a gateway to homeowning for first time buyers who didn't have a lot of cash yet.
City government is just trying to keep the cash rolling in to support their grabfest until the carcass is picked clean. Most of the grabbers have left already, the last few are beefing up their fat retirements as long as they can before they skedaddle too. Notice the lack of interest in taking care of the city's business, such as properly managing snow removal. This illustrates that these people aren't really here for the reasons they pretend to be.

Who is it that will doing the inspections? Are they screened, no felons or convicted folks.

The only places that probably need real inspections are those of the largest slumlord here in Schenectady.

And the biggest scumlords are the ones who won't get their places inspected nor will their tenants contact city hall to inquire if the place has been inspected (and that's because they either lack the intelligence to do that or because they can't find a place for the price they will pay).

Related, but unrelated, question/comment. I'm guessing that for Section 8, the agency that pays a portion of the rent sends the check direct to the landlord, yes?   If that's the case, there needs to be a change, all checks go to city hall if the property is tax delinquent.

I called the city myself on behalf of a young acquaintance who unknowingly rented from that big slumlord. The place had code violations, and no, there was no inspection certificate. The guy I spoke with told me that the slumlord was notorious for not getting inspections done. Why should he? No one is going to do anything about it.
Did he reimburse the city for that demolition they did at taxpayer expense, or are they still having trouble finding him? It is always hard to find someone if you don't bother to look.
You know what we need here in Schenectady, with so many housing related problems? Housing Court, like they have down in NYC. That is another area we are getting shortchanged in. A police officer I spoke with on a related topic agreed with me that it is necessary, but none of our elected officials even seem aware that there is a problem.

The City is nickle and diming all property owners. Look at the condition of roofs and sidewalks even in Upper Union St and the GE Plot. No one has money for repairs after exploding taxes and idiotic McCheese fees. The answer is less government, lees taxes
and less code enforcers. Saw a Code Enforcer at Stewarts with hair down to his rear end entering his City vehicle. Real professional look for City servants. More revenue generation just drives the good landlords.
The last thing we need is more housing on the market.

Quoted from benny salami

The City is nickle and diming all property owners. Look at the condition of roofs and sidewalks even in Upper Union St and the GE Plot. No one has money for repairs after exploding taxes and idiotic McCheese fees. The answer is less government, lees taxes
and less code enforcers. Saw a Code Enforcer at Stewarts with hair down to his rear end entering his City vehicle. Real professional look for City servants. More revenue generation just drives the good landlords.
The last thing we need is more housing on the market.

and that is why Metroplex is funding more apartments, because we need more housing stock!

Quoted from TakingItBack

and that is why Metroplex is funding more apartments, because we need more housing stock!

Without Section 8 ...the City would see the exodus of more than 1/2 its population and Galesi would have to find another City to bilk $16 million for a deteriorating DSS building.

Too many people are getting fat off the government handouts...

The City cannot improve when it keeps swimming in its own filth.