The Indypendent
DONATE NOW - URGENT FALL 2009 FUNDRAISING CAMPAIGN
Search All Articles

Get The Indy by Email




Facebook Twitter

Donate

Subscribe

The IndyShop

RSS Available

Why we love The Indy






Sarah Stuteville
Journalism Workshops

Indykids

Posters!

A Threat to Peace
Artwork by The Indypendent Staff

A Threat to Peace - Artwork by The Indypendent

Buy Now! »


Army of None
Artwork by David Hollenbach

Army of None - Artwork by David Hollenbach

Buy Now! »


Community Resources

Landlords Look for Big Rent Increases

By Bennett Baumer
June 19, 2008 | Posted in IndyBlog , Uncategorized | Email this article

The Rent Guidelines Board (RGB) will vote to raise the rents in over one million rent stabilized apartments later today. That the RGB will raise rents in our very expensive city is a foregone conclusion – they raise the rents every year – the question is by how much.

The RGB, comprised of two landlord representatives, two tenant representatives and five so-called public members, are seriously considering double-digit rent increases, a minimum $60 charge on every apartment, a fuel surcharge on top of the guideline increases and an undetermined “longevity tax” on tenants with a tenure of eight years or more.

“We are facing the possibility of the highest rent hikes since the late 1970s and early 1980s, when we had 11 percent for one-year and 14 percent for two-year rent adjustments,” Michael McKee, treasure of the Tenants Political Action Committee said.

“Unfortunately, the five public members appointed by Mayor Bloomberg are sympathetic to landlords. They give lip service to the problems of tenants, but when crunch time comes, they show that their true sympathies are with the landlords.”

McKee computes that for every one percent rent increase on rent stabilized leases, $42 million flows from the pockets of already strapped rent stabilized tenants into landlord coffers. The average median income for rent stabilized households is $32,000 according to the 2005 New York City Housing and Vacancy Study by the RGB. One half of New Yorkers pay more than 30 percent of their income towards the rent and 28 percent give the landlord half of their paycheck in rent. Generally, housing is considered affordable when a tenant or homeowner pays no more than 30 percent of their income towards housing costs.

Now a decade into the building boom, New York City has seen the priciest real estate transaction in American history with the $5.4 billion sale of Stuy-Town/Peter Cooper Village (http://www.indypendent.org/2006/09/21/met-life-to-stuy-tenants-middle-class-my-ass/) and the astronomical profits to be made have even attracted big Wall Street private equity firms. But some how every June when the RGB final vote occurs, every New York City landlord all of the sudden is flat broke and just can’t turn a profit in the real estate market.

Though the tenant movement is proposing innovative and comprehensive rent reforms (http://www.indypendent.org/2008/04/11/the-de-stabilization-of-new-york-city/), the landlords are singing the same song.

“Our point on this issue is that somebody’s got to realize that you can’t keep raising rents because incomes are not going up at same rate as expenses,” Jack Freund, the vice president of the Rent Stabilization Association (RSA) told the Gotham Gazette. The RSA is a landlord trade association. “Unless there is some curtailment of taxes and water and sewer rates, unless the city does that, it’s basically going to drive out affordable housing.”

At the Brooklyn RGB public hearing on June 11, the landlord lobby paraded a throng of small landlords who hammered away that the cost of number-two oil (the most common fuel) is projected to increase 31.2 percent. But the public face of the RSA belies the concentrated wealth and ownership of the housing stock by large New York City landlords.

The final vote will take place today at the Great Hall in Cooper Union (7 E. 7th Street) in Manhattan at 5:30pm. Tenant groups will be holding a press conference before the hearing in front of Cooper Union.

Share and Enjoy:
  • TwitThis
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Sphinn
  • Mixx
For nine years, The Indypendent has printed truth in the face of power. With political and economic systems faltering, there is an opportunity for real change from the bottom up. But this means having a vibrant independent media. Consider supporting The Indypendent as a monthly sustainer, donating as little as $5 a month. Please visit indypendent.org/donate.

Subscribe to the Indypendent!

4 Responses to “Landlords Look for Big Rent Increases”

Anonymous Says:

Groups like Met Council and Tenants and Neighbors are going to be getting their people out and it could be noisy like a couple years ago. Click here for more information: http://metcouncil.net/

matt Says:

good story. any more detailed info on the RGB members? Who are these people who have such a stranglehold on our livelihoods?

Dave Powell Says:

Great article Bennett. However I think the quote from Freund is misleading.

It’s much more important what the RSA (landlord trade group) does than what they say. what I remember them saying in years past was “You can’t expect LLs to subsidize private housing, our costs have gone up so shut up and eat this rent increase”. I mentioned it only because for those who don’t know the players and the theatrics of the RGB, the quote from Freund can actually be interpreted as progressive. I agree with him (yikes!) that rents shouldn’t be raised when wages are not keeping pace. I also think that for live-in or non profit LLs (who represent a very slim percentage of rent stabilized LLs) who are ACTUALLY in danger of loosing their buildings that tax relief is a better remedy than increasing rents.

Of course the RSA and all the rest of them don’t truly want the city to address the plight of a handful of small LLs through tax relief or anything else. If they did then the RSA couldn’t trot them out year after year and the GREED of the real estate industry would be laid even more bare than it already is.

-DP

——————————————————————————–

From: Bennett Baumer
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 3:04 PM
To: Dave Powell
Subject: RE: Indypendent blog entry

DP,

Perhaps you are right, but everyone voices “concern” over rents. Everyone gives it lip service because it is PC. No one really cares though.

-BB

PS Post a comment if you want.

——————————————————————————–

From: Dave Powell
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2008 3:02 PM
To: Bennett Baumer
Subject: RE: Indypendent blog entry

Thanks Bennet! Two questions though. Regarding the Stuy Town sale you said the price was 5.4 millions dollars. Is that right? For the whole complex? Sounds like it’s missing some zeros. Also Jack Freund quote actually sounds unlike the same old song from the RSA: voicing a “concern” about rising rents, stagnant incomes and demanding tax relief instead…am I reading it wrong?

steve w. Says:

The price for Stuy-Town was $5.4 BILLION.
The Freund quote seems a little garbled, but I think he’s making two arguments.
One is that with taxes and water charges rising and tenants’ incomes stagnating, ther will be some areas where even charging what the market won’t guarantee a profit–that’s what happened in the early 1970s, when landlords got vacant apartments deregulated, but fuel costs shot up and poor people couldn’t afford rent increases.
The second is that yes, landlords do often talk about increasing the amount of subsidized housing–it would guarantee them a secure government-paid income. On the other hand, they usually don’t support political candidates who’d like to say, build more public housing.

Leave a Reply