Please donate to streets.mn for the “streets to the max” day! Thank you for your support.
It’s often been said that “[animals are] man’s best friend.” Women, too–they are also tight with animals. Many people have and own their own animals in addition to consuming different types of animals, and they are generally very protective of the welfare of the ones they are not consuming.
Animals have generally been shown to have various emotional and social benefits. However, animals, primarily cat and dog, do come with a cost. Damn near every strip of boulevard in Loring Park and other denser neighborhoods look terrible. Check out this patch of grass in Olde St. Anthony:
Cats also can cause limited property damage owing to their curiosity and the apparent attitude re: declawing in today’s charged political environment.
And so I would have to say that it does make sense for a prudent property manager to want some sort of upfront or ongoing mechanism to protect against potential pet damage.
You know what’s ridiculous though is paying all three types of financial penalties associated with pet ownership:
- A pet deposit
- An upfront pet fee
- An ongoing pet rent
In my current lease, I am subject to all three of these things, like a schmuck.
My previous apartment had a deposit and a fee. And to add insult to injury, in both buildings it’s technically not spelled out as a pet fee, but some portion of the deposit is…nonrefundable.
Side note: I don’t know about the Patriot Act per se, but what’s Orwellian as hell is the term “nonrefundable deposit.” You can see that its usage really took off when Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999.
This is absurd. $25/month and $400 pet deposit, $250 of which is refundable… for a cat.
Where are policymakers and advocacy organizations on this issue?
An experience-based fee? Okay. A deposit–makes sense. Ongoing rent which would basically be the 1/12th of the annual fee each month? Fantastic.
But all three?
Balderdash. A scandal. Highway apartment robbery.