No city solution for every problem
There are more ideas on how to spend public money than there is public money to spend.
In mid-May, residents of Gateway Studios, the former Holiday Inn at 1505 N. Neil St., C, were forced out of their homes after the hotel's electricity and gas were cut off for unpaid bills.
It was a sad situation. The owners of the property were facing tough economic circumstances. Then there were the residents forced on short notice to find inexpensive housing for themselves and their families.
But should there be a duty for the public to subsidize the individuals who face the problem of dislocation?
Former Urbana Alderwoman Danielle Chynoweth answers that question in the affirmative, and she's lobbying for the Urbana City Council to pass an ordinance to that effect. Chynoweth is urging the council to approve legislation that would provide tenants with at least $2,000 if they are forced to move from a property because of condemnation or code violations.
In a case like that of the Gateway, legislation like that proposed by Chynoweth would have cost Urbana taxpayers more than $100,000.
Urbana Mayor Laurel Prussing takes exception to the idea, which was discussed at Monday's council meeting. As a practical matter, she said, the city can't afford it. In addition, Prussing said it's not the city's job, particularly when there are social programs available under which those who need emergency assistance can get it.
Let's start with the practicalities.
Government at all levels is under financial strain because of the economic slowdown. But even in the best of times, municipal budgets are stretched. Cities like Champaign-Urbana have their hands full providing the basic services, like police and fire protection and public works. The cities also have extended their reach beyond the basics into issues like neighborhood preservation and redevelopment and partnering with other governmental bodies for social services that address quality-of-life issues.
Frankly, there's not enough to satisfy all the existing constituencies. Opening up a new obligation would simply create more financial pressure that could lessen the support for programs the cities are now supporting.
As much as city officials would love to be all things to all people, it's not possible. To the extent they try to do all things, they undermine existing programs. That's the primary lesson the Illinois General Assembly has taught with its profligate spending without the money to pay for it for the past six years.
Programs already are in place for people who need help. Urbana doesn't need to add to them.
There's another aspect to Chynoweth's proposal that is equally dangerous. She has urged that the landlords in question be required to provide $2,000 in subsidies to each tenant or three months rent, whichever is more.
In cases like that of the Gateway, the landlord wasn't able to cover the utility bills. That's why it closed. How likely is it that the landlord could pay the mandated subsidies? If the landlord couldn't, taxpayers would be required to pick up the bill.
Does Urbana really need this headache, even in the name of assisting those in need? Hardly.
Prussing correctly swatted this idea down. People aren't helpless. They generally can manage their own affairs, even on short notice. Urbana has better things to do with its money.
You are more helpless in direct relation to how much money you have.
But in any event even times were prosperous this is a dangerous idea.
A. It does not realy help people in need, you can't get blood from a turnip. If the bankrupted folks don't have it, years in court for a penalty fee serves no one.
B. It gives tennants and unknown investors incentive to destroy a property for cheap acquistion, producing slums.
C. Why are people living an an ex- Holiday Inn? We need guidelines on how these types of hotel turned monthly operate in the first place. These types of places should attract more honorable business men or non profits and less flybynight companies and an after the fact fine is not the answer.
D. If all new growth in the hotel sector has a low utility reqirement it would make it easier for all concerned down the road.
E. If the cities helped developers build or redevelope these types of temorary low income places, they could provide a return via low rent for a number of years and eventually upgrade.
And another thing, I don't know how many people have told me that they chose to live in one of many of these hotels, while apartments at Crystal Lake Terrace were vacant because they wanted instead a section 8 voucher and the list was not open yet.
The Federal Housing Authority has played a role in the motels turning into long term stay places.
Comments
News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. we reserve the right to remove any comment at its discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.