By Robert Tannenhauser
Increases in rents effective for rent-stabilized apartment leases commencing October 1, 2022 were preliminarily approved at the Rent Guidelines Board meeting Thursday night, May 5th. The vote was 5-4 vote in favor of an increase between 2% – 4% for one-year leases and between 4% – 6% for two-year leases.
This came after the tenants-group proposal for a decrease of 1% to an increase of 1% for one-year leases, and a range of 0% – 1.5% for 2-year leases, was voted down by a 6-3 margin.
A landlord’s proposal for increases between 4.5% to 6.5% for one-year leases, and 6.5% to 8.5% for two-year leases was also voted down by a 7 to 2 margin. The proposal for no increases on Hotel stabilization units was passed by a 7-2 vote. There will be two more hearings before a final vote is taken on June 15th.
Inflation is extremely high. Costs are rapidly going up. Real estate taxes have been going up very quickly for years. Landlords are entitled to capture some of those costs. Perhaps have more exceptions for those over 75.
Or how about exceptions for young people who haven’t had the opportunity to build savings like those over 75 have?
Exactly. If you’re over 75 and living in a rent stabilized apartment chances are you’ve been living there for decades and saved a nice nest egg because your cost of living has been so low.
People over 75 can best afford an increase in rent.
Obviously, you’re not over 75. Unless you bought your apartment when prices were very low.
And those who have rent stabilized apartment moved to the UWS when it was very dangerous and landlords where giving away apartments.
In an ideal world you are 100% correct. Unfortunately, many people are not fiscally responsible and do not factor in rent increases, inflation, and longer life expectancies when saving for retirement, so they don’t save enough. Rather than saving the benefits of their low rent, many of these old people used the money to travel the world, go to theater, or whatever else, rather than doing a little less of that and being fiscally responsible.
People are living a lot longer these days, so the fantasy of retiring in your early 60s should be scrubbed from people’s minds.
You can achieve a balance for the people you’re describing with tax credits and other benefits targeted at low income residents.
Oh God. Young people will never learn responsibility if we keep giving them breaks like that
New York is an expensive city. Those who cannot afford it may need to leave
Tell that to your 86 year old grand-mother on social security….
What makes you think young people make up a higher proportion of tenants in rent stabilized units? Median age of tenants in stabilized units is 34, vs 31 in private units. With a much higher proportion being lower income and minorities.
Would you say what you said to older New Yorkers who have lived here their whole lives and haven’t seen income increases to match cost of living increases? Or is your attitude just reserved for those who you believe haven’t earned their right to stay in their homes?
Let them eat cake.
Renters got tons of breaks, landlords didn’t.
Business is business and people are foder! Right Jared Kushner?!!
In my opinion, landlords who are making a fortune do not need ANY increase in rent from their tenants. Is this unfair, in a capitalist society, to put a limit on someone’s return on investment?
I don’t think so. Real estate is not like other investments- it involves people’s welfare- which is why it is monitored by the government and there are rent regulations– at least in civilized cities like New York.
Struggling landlords should get either a very modest increase in rent from tenants and/or tax credits or subsidies from the city. If the city says it supports housing for the homeless (shelters, hotels, etc.)because no one should be living on the street, why not help out landlords who need it to continue to provide adequate housing for those who already have it?
Landlords have gone almost 2+ years with no meaningful rent increases to rent stabilized units. Yet in that same time Property Taxes (thanks to DeBlasio) have gone through the roof as well as the cost of actual water. Forget all of the other costs involved in maintaining a building.
I understand this is a very liberal city. I don’t understand where people feel they have the right to dictate how others should be able to collect or spend their hard earned money. That proposition is to hurt landlords no matter their size.
Yes, it is a business. And some businesses in real estate succeed and some don’t. Whether the landlord is swimming in cash is irrelevant.
If people feel as though they are entitled to certain things and costs they should take that up directly with the City Council.
Imagine the government can pass on oppressive increases in taxes, water bills. The utility company can raise rates 60-80%. The union doormen and porters can strike for more money and benefits. The second the idea of a rent increase is brought up, every landlord is villianized as some sort of heartless greedy tyrant. How do people expect these xpenses to be paid? …..2-4% increase is comical…..As someone mentioned above, NYC is expensive, if you cant afford it, leave….there are plenty of places I would like to live, I don’t blame others that I can’t afford it…..
A rent stabilized apartment with a below market rent facilities a wealth transfer from renters of free market priced apartments to the rent stabilized renter because the building owner will price free market apartments to make up for her lost income from below market stabilized rents. And rent stabilized apartments reduce the overall housing supply because rent stabilized apartment tenants have an incentive to never move.
People have a right to live in safe, well maintained, and affordable housing. They don’t have the right to live in the neighborhood of their choice if they can’t afford it.
Who are you kidding? A building owner will price a free market apartment at the highest price he is able to. If all the stabilized tenants disaappeared, he would price those units the same as all the other free market units. That is reality. Dont expect landlords to lower any rents unless the market forces them to.
With all due respect, the first law of economics is supply and demand. So if you were to remove all rent stabilized apartments and make them free market, supply would go up. Unless demand went up by the same amount, prices will have to come down. Sure a landlord can list an apartment wherever they want, but adding supply would most certainly result in lower rents for everyone paying fair market rent. Rent stable apartments only benefit the lucky few who have them. These are an impediment for the majority of us who need to pay fair market rent to live here.
The best way to control inflation is by capping price increases. This is ECON 101. No price increases, no inflation. Lower inflation means lower interest rates, better economy.
That’s funny. That’s how USSR worked. Prices for goods were low, but alas, one could never buy them, since they were not in stock.