Quote:
Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll
A key claim of the tenants has been that their trailers have degraded to the point where they are unmovable. So the trailers would have to be moved in order to repair buried utilities, then they would be demanding money to pay for the damage caused by moving them for the repairs.
|
Some of the tenants have made that claim, but not all of them in any case there is no point debating the impact this would have since we don't know exactly how many units could not be moved and what the costs associated with that are.
Quote:
|
The tenants wanted to purchase the land for its assessed value of $10 million, the city said that in order for it to be sold, the utilities would need to be fixed and that would cost in the neighborhood of $7 million, so would need $17 million to sell the land. Regardless, the park is not public land, so it is an entirely different situation than the city repairing utilities on public land. If the city fixed the utilities, the tenants would see their rent increase in order to fund those repairs. If the repairs were completed on the taxpayer dime, they would be creating a precedent and then have to fight every single homeowner that has a sewer or water line need to be replaced on their property.
|
There would be no precedent set, the single homeowner would still be responsible for utility repairs on their property, the difference in this case is that the city owns the property and fortunately for them taxpayers sign their paycheques.