Consultation Means Nothing

St. Paul recently amended its draconian rent control law to exempt new construction for twenty years. One of the largest developers of multi-family housing in the city, Ryan Cos., said that a twenty-year exemption wasn’t enough to incentivize construction of new housing. City officials responded that the exemption was made “in consultation with developers—including Ryan.” However, as the city demonstrated, consultation means nothing.

City officials gave Ryan a voice in discussions about the amendment. And then they promptly allowed the howls o the mob to drown out Ryan. The city allowed tenants and their advocates to render Ryan’s consultation meaningless.

City officials seem to believe that Ryan had an opportunity to express its views, the company has no right to complain. This is akin to a robber justifying his actions by saying that he acted in “consultation” with his victim. A discussion may occur, but ultimately, the victim’s desires are irrelevant, and the robber imposes his views through force. A discussion between Ryan and city officials occurred, but ultimately, Ryan’s desires are irrelevant, and the city imposes it views through force.

The city has decided that Ryan should not be free to produce and trade rental housing as it deems best. The company told the city what it needed—a thirty-year exemption—to move forward with a housing project. The city essentially told Ryan to stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.

Ryan deserves credit for expressing its disagreement with the amendment. However, the company deserves criticism for suggesting that a thirty-year exemption would be an acceptable compromise. The company compromised on a fundamental principle—the moral right to use one’s property as one thinks best. Whether the city will control Ryan’s properties in twenty-years or thirty-years is simply a detail. Ultimately, the city will control Ryan’s properties.

Ryan, and other landlords in cities with rent control, are being penalized, not because they have violated anyone’s rights, but because they have the audacity to own rental property. This type of injustice is made possible by altruism—the notion that individuals must sacrifice for others. Both Ryan and the city accept altruism as the moral ideal. They only disagree about when that sacrifice should begin.