1520 Sedgwick Case Summary

The legal process of gentrification is potentially one of the more easily argued cases, especially in a country that prides itself on its free market. Using 1520 Sedgwick as an example as well I will compare how the ideals of a free market economy would effect it with the realities of the situation. First of all, if the US was a true free market economy 1520 Sedgwick would never have been enrolled in the Mitchell-Lama program because such a system wouldn’t exist unless the government owned the property, which also would be contrary to a free market system. Following the fact that these programs do exist and the government does play a role in the economy, including real estate, we have to conclude that the government has to assume at least some sense of responsibility for the citizens enrolled in the Mitchell-Lama program. However, this does not just include the residents of 1520 Sedgwick, but the owners as well, for the government entered into an agreement with them as well. Plainly put, the government would provide tax incentives for the building owners to maintain low cost units. These incentives were meant to offset potential losses the owners would have to take by not marketing to higher paying tenants. When the owners elected to leave the program it would follow that it was because the tax incentives had begun to produce a shortfall in profit margins instead of compensating for them. The government failed on its end, therefore the owners of 1520 Sedgwick were entitled to …show more content…
His arguments, as well as his cited source’s arguments, offer enough information and contrary claims to grant me the certainty that this topic is appropriate for discourse, and I look forward to pursuing these arguments in an attempt to gain a better understanding of gentrification and the reasoning behind