Chicago’s arcane residential real-estate market maneuverings

Thanks to op-ed writer Cam Lippert-Roof for his June 8 piece (“I’m house-hunting in Chicago. Why does the process feel so stuck in the past?”). It laments Chicago’s arcane residential real estate market maneuverings that attempt to control access to for-sale properties in ways that appear to violate the provisions of the open housing market arrangement set up decades ago to combat secret access to available properties. These restrictive covenants were meant to exclude “the wrong people” from buying into certain neighborhoods.

Eventually, enforcement of covenants was declared illegal because it violated constitutionally protected equal access provisions, arising from racial or religious discrimination.

His op-ed’s headline asks why today’s process “feels so stuck in the past.” Answer: Because too many sellers and brokers still try to circumvent fair housing rules in a vain effort to establish islands of exclusivity, though there’s no evidence that open housing undermines values.

The penalty for violation is severe, and transactions cannot be kept secret. Is the risk that trifling? A big gamble over time, unless the fix is in. Whatever; it flunks the sniff test.

Whoever is asleep at the switch needs to be replaced for the law to stand a chance of being effective and for the buying process to flow smoothly, without unfair maneuverings.

— Ted Z. Manuel, Chicago  

‘Secret’ real estate listings

I found Cam Lippert-Roof’s op-ed about “secret” real estate listings to be eye-opening. But on further reflection, I don’t think it’s that surprising.

After all, we’ve made real estate commissions negotiable, effectively allowing consumers to pay less and Realtors to earn less. Realtors have found a new tool, “exclusive listings,” to help them negotiate their commissions upward.

I do not work in the real estate industry, and I’m not looking for a new home (thank goodness!), so I think it’s pretty clever. It’s the way our economic system works.

— Jeff Landsman, Lincolnwood

Proposed ordinance a bad idea

Regarding the editorial “Johnson administration floats an unfair and ill-conceived crackdown on Chicago landlords” (June 5): I share the Tribune Editorial Board’s opinion that housing providers will soon be facing an “unfair and ill-conceived crackdown on Chicago landlords.” Chicago’s affordability crisis is real, but the soon-to-be-unveiled Protecting Renters Ordinance (PRO) would move us further in the wrong direction. Instead of improving affordability, PRO would expand regulation and add new layers of bureaucracy. The results would be very predictable, including less investment, fewer housing options, higher rents and ultimately more pressure on the very renters the ordinance claims to help.

Chicago already has some of the strongest tenant protections in the country. PRO is not a balanced reform but is a sweeping expansion of regulations that risks shrinking the city’s housing supply….