wat0n wrote:Why would they do anything like that if there were no rent controls? It would seem it was more profitable to them, at the time, not to redevelop and just charge the market price.
But in some cases, governments may let them run amok until they aren't small. For instance, they may prefer to charge low rents and dedicate the resources that would be used for maintenance to other ends, and let a future administration deal with the problem when it arises.
That is, there is a similar problem to the one you mention between private developers and owners, but this is between present and future administrations. You can also see it with the GOP's "starve the beast" strategy, leaving it to the Democrats to clean the mess.
Again, this is not how public building projects work.
Elected officials can choose to defund infrastructure, but all that means is that the government bodies who pay for construction and maintenance have less money. It does not mean that these bodies do lower quality work or use less stringent regulations. They just fire a bunch of people and do less.
No, it's not relevant if the present administration will leave all the consequences arising from a lack of maintenance to the next one.
And now we have a third argument.
I have dealt with this one as well. Please see above.
...Except when the inspectors come from the same city government that is also a landlord. That's why in that case you need the enforcement of maintenance regulations of public buildings to be carried out by a higher level of government (e.g. State/Provinces enforcing regulation on the cities).
No. The inspectors are hired by a different group of people who ask for and maintain buildings.
This entire argument seems to be based entirely on an ignorance of how public building projects are run, the different bodies involved, and who is liable to who.
Another thing you should know, then, is that this all a matter of public record. The city would also have to hire crooked accountants to cook the books. The number of people needed for this to work quickly makes it unfeasible and simply easier to actually do decent work.
This system even works in construction in places where there is a lot of organised crime in construction, like Quebec.