It’s time, again, to talk the losing battle for cities that is the renters versus owners battle. It’s a recurring discussion, which means it’s almost as circular as the Pembina River (jokes: the river is not a circle people!), though far less enjoyable. What’s most concerning for cities, though, is that it hurts basic democracy.
An apartment building in Little Havana, Miami. Neighbourhoods that fight density based on owners versus renters restrict where these gentle-density buildings can be built. Flickr: Phillip Pessar
I’ll walk you through this step by step.
Today, Alex Bozikovic, a Globe and Mail writer you should follow, tweeted the following:
A toxic stew of classism, nativism, and entitlement on Vancouver’s west side https://t.co/dn5OR982cU
— Alex Bozikovic (@alexbozikovic) July 29, 2020
The inspiration for this tweet was the tweet below. I encourage you to read the speaker’s thoughts on owners versus renters.
"When you're an owner, you have a far greater impact and care more for the neighbourhood than you would if you're a renter."
— Justin McElroy (@j_mcelroy) July 29, 2020
A transcription of one speaker and 10 minutes from a public hearing tonight for a 4-storey rental apartment in Vancouver's Shaughnessy neighbourhood. pic.twitter.com/EbV8m3fAQO
Okay then. So we’ve got owners speaking as if they know renters, and telling city governments that renters care less about taking care of neighbourhoods than they do in order to prevent increased density (read: apartment buildings) from coming to their neighbourhoods.
It’s anecdata, subjective, and self-serving garbage. And it’s rampant at city councils.
But beyond being simply inaccurate, this renters versus owners falsehood does bigger harm. It breaks democracy in cities. Allow me to explain.
A few years ago, I wrote a story for The Yards that examined what barriers to those living in multi-family housing (many of them renters) means for local elections. Too long, didn’t read? One city councillor, who lives in multi-family housing himself, said he’s talked to people at their doorstep who were certain that, as renters, they were not entitled to vote in municipal elections.
This is where your head should probably explode.
If we assume that a large portion of those who rent have less means than those who rent (this is not at all a rule, of course; many rent for many reasons), what this potentially means is that those who need to be heard about the city services they rely on — think transit, for example — don’t even feel entitled to cast a vote in city elections.
My argument: end the renters versus owners discussion now. It’s bad.