Your points are well taken, but don't undermine my proposal.  The money would not be enough to cover all buildings, but would provide an incentive for buildings to come up with cost effective remediation and seek the money (before others exhausted it).  The city could award funds to the most cost effective solutions first, thereby getting the most bang for the buck (remediate the most units for the available money.)  That sales in non-sprinkler buildings remain unaffected suggest that there is a tax differential that the city can cordon off and use to fund the project.