Since the utility has no control over who the landlord puts in the unit, why should they have to eat the loss? 

My concern with the more expensive property is that it would eat up most of my savings, preventing me from purchasing another property unless I find an alternative financing source.

Things were perfectly fine until I started getting complaints from other guests.The complaints were: Loud talking during quiet hours, moldy food or cluttered food in common space refrigerator, frequent use of laundry room and late hours use, cooking food at late hours, eating all the ice in the refrigerator, leaving clothes and items in the common space. 

Otherwise yeah you'll have to eat the sunk cost on the place.

To sleep well and eat well. 

Lets say someone has a dark commercial building that eats $40k a year while its dark.

I mean really, in this case of this post, even if the tenant had sold the OP's snowblower, she would end up financially far, far better off to eat that $100 loss and get rid of the tenant in the least confrontational way possible (which she managed to do without the loss), than to confront him and have him stop paying rent with a national eviction moratorium. 

@Tim Sipowicz you have 50k which is a very nice nest egg.

I like the idea of bitcoin but Its more of a currency than a investment and I wouldn't put all of your eggs in 1 basket  

The issue with turnkey properties is that they eat up a lot of your profits.