Cynthia Chaffee’s Manhattan apartment would likely go for more than $5,000 a month if the landlord charged market price. But Chaffee pays thousands less thanks to the city’s long-standing rent stabilization rules — regulations that will expire this year if lawmakers don’t act.
The 63-year-old paid $300 a month when she moved into the one-bedroom space in 1978. To Chaffee, the rules governing how much she and more than 2 million other New York City residents pay in rent protect the city’s diversity and character.
“The city is changing enough as it is, and these laws are so important to so many people,” said Chaffee, who won’t specify how much she pays now. “If you want to have neighborhoods, if you want to have families and artists and elderly living in New York City, we need these laws. Can you imagine what New York City would be like without them?”
The laws governing the rent paid by Chaffee and more than 2 million other New York City residents are due to expire June 15, and state lawmakers are preparing for what could be a bruising debate over whether to renew, strengthen or weaken them.
he complicated set of rules determines the size of rent increases for nearly 1 million apartments built before 1973. Supporters say they are critical to ensuring that New York City — a city of 2.2 million apartments — remains affordable to working-class and middle-class residents. Landlords, however, chafe under rules that they say keep rent artificially low and force them to charge more for unregulated apartments and forgo improvements.
Brooklyn landlord Chris Athineos manages some rent-stabilized apartments that go for as little as $500 to $700 a month — units that would go for $1,500 or $2,000 if unregulated. He said the rules are unfair to landlords and tenants who are forced to subsidize the lower rents of regulated units.
“We all pay the same price for a loaf of bread or a gallon of milk at a particular market,” said Athineos, whose family business manages 140 apartments in nine properties. “Just because you’ve been going to that market longer doesn’t mean you get to pay less for the bread.”
16 comments:
Crappy you have it backwards.. Most of the landlords today would not have been able to buy the building if it was unregulated.
Higher rents equals a higher sale price, so they paid far less then market value because of RS which is really nothing more then a easement on rent. And it goes with the building.
Landlords just need to wait it out..most people will die and the kids/grand-kids are so stupid they dont realize a RS apartment is the best 401K they could ever have...and wont move in for 2 years and be able to take over the lease.
"Landlords, however, chafe under rules that they say keep rent artificially low and force them to charge more for unregulated apartments and forgo improvements."
- - - - - - - -
This is not true. Under the Major Capital Improvement rule (MCI), Landlords can make improvements to rent-stabilized buildings, and to individual units when they become vacant, and charge the cost to tenants over 40 months as monthly rent increases. This stay as permanent rent increase, even after all costs are recovered.
NYC is a real estate town. Sooner or later the the lords of the manor will turn everyone into serfs. The term landlord goes back to the. Middle Ages anyway. And rent is something he squeezed from his tenant farmers. Has civilization progressed? Not by very much it appears.
It still remains to be answered:
Why does NYC have to be made affordable to people who can't afford to live there?
If we had a slightly better minimum wage in NY State and NYC, then this could be fixed across the board for productive people who work legally. As for the old without enough savings and the infirm aren't exactly going to curl up and die defenseless if they move to a new city with with cleaner air and a slower pace of life.
first of all if you are a rent control/rent stabilization tenant and you live in the apartment with your parents/grandparents, etc. and can prove that you have lived there for two (2) years or more it is called succession rights -- law is the law --
when it comes to MCI landlords have only a certain percentage that they can charge and they have to show their books for this -- hell many landlords have 2 3 and 4 sets of books for that matter -- check out the rent stabilization site and code information on this --
The problem with rent stabilization is the life long passing on of this perk. These people who would have had to make better financial decisions if their rent was going up even at cost of living put it off and never consider moving. That leaves these dinosaurs paying significantly less than the market value.
Case in point: there was a story a few weeks ago on Queens Crap about a woman renting out room in her 4 bedroom Central Park view apartment on Airbnb. A single woman in a 4 bedroom apartment. If her rent was going up she would have made a smart choice and moved years ago.
Keeping rents down for 'diversity' is nonsense. You want 'diversity'? Go visit the projects.
Let the developers build in prime space and charge market value.
Stop the passing on of rent stabilized apartments. If the recognized tenant dies, the rent stabilization for that apartment dies with them.
Clean up the projects and start placing low income families in them.
Stop raising the taxes of the working/earning class to pay for the 'artist'/leisure class.
Rent regulations are set to expire every two years. This article is sort of extremist. They are also renewed every two years. And the laws aren't necessary to "protect the diversity" of the city. How stupid a statement.
There really should be a time limit on rent stabilization. I have a friend whose mom got into one of those apartments in the 1970s. She raised 4 kids there while working as a nurse in the neighboring area. With the additional money she saved, she purchased a home in FL and a home overseas. My friend is now living in the apartment, and has no plans to give it up.
At some point, we have to stop these rental dynasties. I think it's good to help people, but maybe it shouldn't be a lifelong entitlement. Don't
pass the apartments from generation to generation. Maybe you only get 10 years to live in the place. If you couldn't increase your income enough to afford your own apartment, then you have to move out and try to make it someplace else. If you're elderly, then you'll still get a subsidy, but the City gets to choose where you can live. Maybe that would encourage people to get their affairs in order a little sooner.
A great deal for people whose bloodline extends to the occupant of a New York City apartment on October 1, 1943.
A bad deal for anyone else.
Watch privileged, mostly white, drunk morons act stupid and get arrested
The only difference between Rent Stabilization tenants and the impromptu dance party people in the Lower East Side, is that the Rent Stabilization tenants aren't getting arrested.
Good.
Im tired of my property taxes being used to help other people get discount housing.
If we deported more, we would have more room and more places to move around. Less people would equal more room which would probably bring our rents down.
Let's call it what it is..."ethnic cleansing and social engineering". Dispersing ethnics, people of color, minorities from nabes to boost rents and bring in higher paying hipsters....is an imposed diaspora. The real estate industry, composed of owners, brokers, manipulators and developers, does not care about the character of neighborhoods besides their own where they live and the sum of their wealth.
Deport the greedy landlords. That's the only way you will see rents go down. Until then we are, more or less, sharecroppers on the lord on the estate's manor farm. "
In the words of Tennessee Ernie Ford: "16 tones...and wadda ya get....another day older and deeper in debt. St. Peter Don'tcha call me 'cause I can't go...I owe my soul to the company store"!
Stop exporting jobs to foreign locations, so I can earn a decent wage and afford paying a higher rent. Nobody ever passed a law about a real decent minimum wage yet, have they? What about laws about keeping jobs in the USA?
Post a Comment