Housing crisis is worsening, New Democrat warns
The Yukon government must address unreasonable rent increases and the conversions of affordable rental units into condominiums, NDP housing critic Kate White said today.
The Yukon government must address unreasonable rent increases and the conversions of affordable rental units into condominiums, NDP housing critic Kate White said today.
She wants those issues studied as the government conducts a public review of the Landlord and Tenant Act.
The public review is based on the 2010 report of the Select Committee on the Landlord and Tenant Act, but the housing crisis has gone from bad to worse in the last two years, White said.
The government's lack of response to a drastically low vacancy rate and skyrocketing rents does not reflect the situations that many Yukoners now find themselves in, she added.
"Yukoners expect bold leadership from the government, and this review just does not address the emerging dynamics of the housing crisis,” said White.
"The vacancy rate has dropped to one per cent, there is no new affordable housing in sight, existing rental housing is being converted and sold as condominiums, and now, rents have begun to skyrocket, with some tenants receiving increases between 25 to 67 per cent.”
Meanwhile, residents of the Sternwheeler Apartments in Riverdale have been told their rental units will be converted into condos, White said. The owners of the complex were unavailable for comment today.
The implications could be that dozens of families will be forced to find new rental accommodations that don't exist possibly before next winter.
The public review does not address mechanisms for reviewing rent increases, White noted.
Responsible landlords increase rents to cover legitimate costs and those should be respected, she said, but tenants do not have any protection against gouging and high rent increases due to an inflated market.
"We need a system of rent review in the Yukon,” White said.
"Yukoners need protection from unjustified and exorbitant rent increases.
"Large rent increases result in people losing their housing and the government's inaction on this is completely unacceptable and aggravates the housing crisis.”
Though putting the outdated, 40-year-old, Landlord and Tenant Act out for public review is welcome, not addressing unreasonable rent increases or the issue of "condo-ization” is irresponsible, White said.
Jurisdictions such as B.C. and Alberta have a rent review system, but the Yukon does not.
Comments (24)
Up 0 Down 0
Lloyd on Jun 21, 2012 at 3:37 pm
@ Krysta
Part 2
Revamping the Landlord tenant act isn't simply about rent control. It should be obvious to you as you listen to the rain on your tent whilst reading this. Both sides need rights. The landlords should be able to make a fair buck but also have responsibilities to have upkept buildings. As a card carrying conservative I'm sure you don't cash those (commie) monthly Universal Child Care Benefit cheques so you'll tough it out as long as you can down there and hope your party can do something before the snow flies, god knows you can't get into housing on one income with a couple kids, right? The Yukon economy today is pushing people like you into the margins. You don't fit in with the 3000 sq foot house crowd, the RV crowd, the Snow machiners. The people pouring more cash into the economy than they have. Ft Mac north indeed.
Fear not though, the cracks are widening in the economy. Mining is slowing The pipeline project is dead. Mineral pricing are returning to natural levels. The boom is over. 3 years from now you'll find a nice 3 bedroom split in Copper Ridge for $225,000 (half the cost of today) only then you may not be able to find any work.
Up 0 Down 0
Lloyd on Jun 21, 2012 at 3:13 pm
@ Krysta
Part 1
The housing issue is complicated. Imagine if you had the land and capital to build an apartment complex or a condo complex, what would you do? You'd build a condo complex because you get an immediate return on your investment buy selling those units. Additionally there is a revenue stream from condo fees. Further, home owners actually have a stake in how a building looks or is maintained. They care.
An apartment complex has, from a business perspective a much less desirable clientele ( ie SA recipients, those with mental health issues, addictions etc) also you have to deal with screening tenants, rent and damage deposits and wreckless destruction.
Up 0 Down 0
bobby bitman on Jun 21, 2012 at 8:54 am
I think the problem with lot 262 was that it was offered as one big ball of wax to one purchaser rather than opening it to offers so that smaller investors could try their hand at individual projects. There could have been some great, smaller ideas that could have been tried out.
Up 0 Down 0
Krysta Meekins on Jun 20, 2012 at 2:59 pm
A few of the above posters have made good points. The very last thing a government should do, in a market such as this, is put more restraints and disincentives on landlords - especially rent controls.
If developing rental housing was more lucrative than condo development, we'd see it happening. DG expressed this well. I suspect the inherent risk and longer-term realization of profit on rental housing are significant disincentives.
The YT govt had the right idea, with the Lot 262 offering, to encourage the private sector to enter the affordable housing market with an inexpensive lot. Apparently the down-side was still too daunting for developers in that case.
So, I really don't have the answer either. I almost wonder if it might be a matter of waiting for the housing market to correct itself. The Yukon economy is booming and we led the nation in % population growth in the last census. A housing shortfall is an unfortunate but expected result of positive growth.
I'm private sector employed with children too and admittedly not adequately housed at the moment. But I'm not complaining or blaming anyone else for market conditions. We all need to take some responsibility for ourselves, too.
Up 0 Down 0
You are right on Jun 20, 2012 at 6:39 am
Jennifer, you are right in many respects, but that is exactly why so many of us are protesting being taxed to death so that those who do nothing for themselves can have an easier life. The taxes I pay to support government programs represent money I could use to feed my own family.
Up 0 Down 0
KC on Jun 20, 2012 at 5:05 am
It doesn't seem right to me that we put the burden of social housing on individual landlords rather than society at large.
Not every landlord is some rich land baron who has oodles of money. For many landlord their rental property is their sole or primary investment and possibly even their retirement fund. Meanwhile those with YTG pensions or RRSPS get to pass on their social obligations to others.
If we're going to provide social housing (and we should) the burden of paying for it should be spread around to all taxpayers somehow rather than by distorting the market with rent controls and other policies that require that landlords bear the burden alone.
Up 0 Down 0
Jennifer Smith on Jun 20, 2012 at 2:39 am
It's hard to believe there are so many people out there with no compassion. I have a family, own my house, luckily, and don't have to worry if the landlord raises the rent. But the cost of living, not just here, everywhere, is going up, and wages are not. It is a fact that wages have not increased for the middle class in over 30 years. We are watching the decimation of the middle class for sure. I make good money, but if I lost my job, for whatever reason, I am one paycheck away from needing the food bank, affordable housing, etc. It's hard to try to save for disaster when you have to put food on the table. Try to be more empathetic, people. You never know what battles people are fighting. Peace and love to all!
Up 0 Down 0
Here's the BUT... on Jun 19, 2012 at 7:25 am
Barracks-style shelter is not a bad idea, except for the fact that it would be destroyed in no time flat and the fact that the hard-to-house advocates do not want these folks "institutionalized".
Plus - I would be interested to know Bobby - who do you have in mind to provide 2-3 meals per day? As soon as it lands on the government's doorstep, all kinds of things come into play... food quality issues, government wages for kitchen staff... not only is it not affordable, is it really the government's job?
Up 0 Down 0
bobby bitman on Jun 19, 2012 at 3:42 am
North 60 hit the nail on the head with much of our 'rental problem'. Why in the world has the government not built barracks and bunks to provide a safe, warm place for many of our hard to house? A place where they can go at night, get a warm meal two or three times a day, do their laundry, and be out in the mornings. This would save social services from paying for hotel rooms for each of them, and would lessen the pressure on police and ambulances, and would probably result in better health for the indigent. We do not need middle class lifestyle housing for these people. It cannot be afforded, and it will not be looked after.
Up 0 Down 0
JayManc on Jun 18, 2012 at 11:09 pm
@ anonymous - the year is 2012, $100,000 won't even buy you an apartment anywhere. but you could buy a house down in saskatchewan for about that. perhaps your looking in the wrong place. if everything cost what it cost to build and materials, there wouldn't be any houses or building to move into or buy. because nobody will do it for nothing. unless you do it yourself.
LOL
Up 0 Down 0
DG on Jun 18, 2012 at 5:07 pm
The bottom line is this why should the people that have (landlords) give to the have nots (renters) when a certain percentage does not respect the property that does not belong to them.
Why should any one landlord and in some cases developers charge low rent, and build cheaper rental housing.
Unfortunately our society is not based on happiness for all but the wealth of the individual. And the simplest way to get wealthier in construction/realestate is to sell large nicely built (I didn't say well built...) houses/condo's. It is not a sound business solution to sell below cost or rent below cost or rather to sell/rent below what you can get.
"Hey buddy I have a property that could potentially net me 250 Grand fairly quickly with only minor fixes and outlay, or I could spend a wad of cash, fix the place up and rent for real cheap and make my money back sometime in 2050..."
Get the idea?
Up 0 Down 0
Randy Collins on Jun 16, 2012 at 3:24 pm
Prices for everything is going up I agree, but there is always a need for affordable RENTAL accommodation. If Whitehorse is to grow into a booming economy (which I believe it can be) we need rental accommodation for the people moving here from other places. Laborers, and skilled trades, sometimes, cannot afford to purchase in the beginning of moving to a new city and affordable rentals are needed.
Yes, there are cases of abuse, but that will happen anywhere. We need leadership from our Politicians, not go with the flow, which seems to be the case here.
If something isn't done soon, the people affected may start to revolt and maybe even violence, because you can only bang your head against the wall so long.
Up 0 Down 0
Billy Polson on Jun 15, 2012 at 1:47 pm
Anonymous...I admire your dedication to family and your initiative....but you make no sense.
Up 0 Down 0
Anonymous on Jun 14, 2012 at 10:15 am
I agree that pricing on everything here is hard but it's not so high that you can't afford anything if you try to save instead of blowing all your money on stupid things. I work a job in the private sector, have two dependents and yet I managed to save up enough to buy a nice vehicle and one of those high priced brand new condos (would've gone for a house but you need to set realistic price standards when entering the housing market). I may be severely under travelled but I'm only 23 so it is possible.
I have no sympathy for all the rest of you crying for a freaking hand out when there are people in this town seriously more in need than you. If you are able to work get of your arse and do it.
Yeah turning the sternwheeler into condos was a total dick move but it's within the owner's right to do so. Hopefully quality control will be a contributing factor to the costs of those condos and they'll maybe be on the market for $100,000 (which realistically is probably all they are really worth).
Up 0 Down 0
give me a break - again on Jun 14, 2012 at 7:44 am
Some of you are speaking as if landlords are just another agency to provide government social services. It is unbelievable to me that you think the government should be able to tell someone that they can't charge what they want for rent - especially when costs are going up and damage caused by tenants has to be fixed.
Guess what? THEY OWN THE BUILDING!!! Unless the government and the city want to reduce or waive taxes and utilities and provide grants for repairs, they need to butt out.
Up 0 Down 0
JayManC on Jun 13, 2012 at 11:03 pm
HAHAHA, this is bogus! there are many houses and condos for sale right now. why don't they move there. As for affordable housing, it no longer exists because the price of everything went up, gas, food, etc. so if your waiting for the prices to go down they are not, and you can't get the government to tell them to make it cheaper that's not how life works. god some people just don't want to see the big picture and that's their problem. get out there and quit living off the government perhaps. i understand there are people who need it and plenty who are abusing the system.
Up 0 Down 0
mike on Jun 13, 2012 at 3:09 pm
As a single parent, it is a known fact with my peers, there must be a limit on how much a landlord can charge for his or her apartment. It CANNOT keep going up and up, especially with no renovations in your apartment.
I hope this new act puts some strict conditions on landlords
and while we are at it, enough with the damn condos, we need low income housing more in the Yukon. Not everyone works for ytg.
Up 0 Down 0
Nile on Jun 13, 2012 at 1:51 pm
We have the more social housing per capita then anywhere else in Canada. What we need is a change in legislation so that everyone getting off the bus in Whitehorse can't go strait to the social assistance office and start getting SA. But the NDP would hate that because that's where most of their votes come from. Turning the sternwheeler into condos is a dick move in this economy but well within his rights as an owner. This is why people pass on vacations and new vehicles so they can save every penny for a down payment. It's all about priorities. You can't have it all people.
Up 0 Down 0
June Jackson on Jun 13, 2012 at 11:50 am
I was at the public meeting at the Westmark on the Landlord Tenant Act, 2 years ago. A landlord actually got up and threatened the committee..He said, if you cap my rent increases, I'll tear them all down and build condos. So the government did nothing, and guess what? They still tore down and built condos. In that two years my rent went up 400.00. a month.. and I am here to tell you that my pensions did not.
When is the end? when is enough enough? Why can a landlord lose his butt gambling in LasVegas and come back and raise all his rents $100 a month? When can a trailer park not do one single thing to improve roads, or put in a garbage pick up or anything else and hold everyone hostage to a 400 $ a month pad rent? When is enough if you have 350-400 trailers at 400. a month? Its a revolving circle..one landlord raises his rent and everyone else says..i better raise mine too.. Of course landlords don't want rent caps.. but they did nothing to monitor themselves. When is enough?
Up 0 Down 0
bobby bitman on Jun 13, 2012 at 11:15 am
One good thing about exobitant rents is that people are jumping on the bandwagon to hurry up and create a basement suite, build a cabin, or rent out a room hoping to cash in. This is all motivated by self-interest, but in the end will result in higher vacancy rates and therefore lower rents to compete for renters. And, if people decide to pull their suites off the market if they cannot 'make a killing', that kind of does show what it is worth to people to share their homes, and what kind of returns people expect on investments. I do personally object to $1500 basement apartments unless they are REALLY nice, but that's my judgement call and hey, at least they are offering something. Though I favour the free market, I do think there is a point in saying that 50% rent increases are as good as an eviction notice and are really not 'fair' to a tenant who has been a good tenant. On the other hand, would the tenant pay more to be 'fair' to a good landlord if (more like 'when'), vacancies jump and rents plummet? I kinda doubt it. It is a tough one.
Up 0 Down 0
north_of_60 on Jun 13, 2012 at 9:45 am
If housing is truly a problem then use tax dollars to build bunkhouses with washrooms, laundry, soup kitchen...
Simple, basic, barracks accommodation can be free. If people want a 'better' living space then that's incentive to get a job.
Government shouldn't try to compete with what the profit-driven private sector can/will provide.
Up 0 Down 0
anonymous on Jun 13, 2012 at 9:25 am
I know people who brag about using social housing and how they only have to pay 25%. They laugh about how they don't have to work because of it...and one person told me that she has a boyfriend but will not let him move in or marry him because she will lose housing. Instead, they are together, with two incomes, and are able to buy things no one else can. Ridiculous.
Up 0 Down 0
Lindsay on Jun 13, 2012 at 8:37 am
I want to know what the NDP would do to fix the problem? It is great that they talk about what is wrong... we know what is wrong...but do you have a better solution then the current Government. How is the NDP going to force contractors to build apartments and stop building condo's? Are they going to abandon the agreement signed with the City over how land is developed? I am tired of all the negativeness... start giving us some solutions or are you not willing to do that since you are not in power? Just curious?
Up 0 Down 0
give me a break on Jun 13, 2012 at 7:59 am
So now the NDP wants the government to control the private rental market? Smart landlords should be shaking in their boots about the costs they will have to incur if they are required to bring apartments up to "code" and not charge rental rates that reflect those costs.
Government should make it hard to get into social housing, should make the rates at LEAST 30% (instead of 25%) of gross income, and should charge for heat. If people in social housing were having to pay amounts more reflective of the market, then private developers might want to get involved.
The answer is NOT to just provide housing for everyone and pull the rug out from under landlords.