
This article was originally published on March 27, by THE CITY. Sign up here to get the latest stories from THE CITY delivered to you each morning.
By Rachel Holliday Smith, The CITY
A million of the city’s apartments are rent-regulated. But who regulates those rents, and how?
The answer is the Rent Guidelines Board (RGB), a group of nine people — all appointed by the mayor — who annually evaluate where rent increases should land.
They take a final vote on how much rent will go up for rent-regulated apartments in late spring or early summer every year, typically in June. That’s when you may see headlines about a rent hike — or a rent freeze, in the case of three of the eight years under Mayor Bill de Blasio, not only during the pandemic.
The board will take a preliminary vote this spring, then hear testimony from the public before its final decision. As the city’s affordability crisis worsens, the always-fraught process is set to be as tense as ever in 2024.
The board’s final vote is the culmination of months of work and debate by the board and its professional staff to consider data about the city’s housing market — and take in hours of raucous public testimony where the board hears from landlords, tenants, elected officials and advocates.
In the past four decades, the board has set maximum monthly rent increases of 0% to 9.5% between both one- and two-year leases, according to RGB records. If you’re curious how that number gets made, here’s a guide to the Rent Guidelines Board:
Jump to:
- Who serves on the board?
- How does the RGB determine the rent?
- When do they make up their mind?
- Is the RGB really independent?
- Should I sign a one- or two-year lease?
- My landlord is adding a 2.2% surcharge on top of the allowed rent stabilized increase. What gives?
- I’ve got something to say about rent! How can I testify to the RGB?
- Does the RGB affect my rent if I’m in a market-rate apartment?
- How can I check if my apartment is regulated?
Who serves on the board?
In the late 1960s, then-Mayor John Lindsay created the first version of the board, which was updated in the 1970s to reflect multiple perspectives on the interests of tenants and owners. The mayor now appoints specific members to represent tenants, landlords and the public.
Two members represent the interests of tenants. Two members represent the interest of landlords. For each of those pairs, the terms are staggered; one member serves a two-year term and the other serves a three-year term.
The remaining five members, including the chair of the board, represent the public and do not directly represent either the tenant or landlord side. Those are typically the swing voters when it comes to rent debates, said Leah Goodridge, who served as an RGB member representing tenants between 2018 and 2021 and is now a member of the City Planning Commission.
“If you’re a landlord representative or a tenant representative, basically every interaction is part of trying to sway the public members to vote your way,” Goodridge said. “They had the most power.”
One of those public members serves for two years and another for three years, while two public members serve for four-year terms. The chair serves for as long as the current mayor wants them there.
How does the RGB determine the rent?
The board is mandated by law to establish permissible maximum rent increases for all housing units that are subject to rent stabilization.
That includes 996,600 rent-stabilized apartments — as of 2023, according to the latest Housing and Vacancy Survey, conducted every three years with the U.S. Census — and a hard-to-quantify number of other rent-regulated dwellings including hotels, single room occupancy buildings and loft apartments.
The board also weighs in on rent-controlled apartments, which are a separate category from rent-regulated units, but make up a sliver of the total universe of apartments.
!function(){“use strict”;window.addEventListener(“message”,(function(a){if(void 0!==a.data[“datawrapper-height”]){var e=document.querySelectorAll(“iframe”);for(var t in a.data[“datawrapper-height”])for(var r=0;r<e.length;r++)if(e[r].contentWindow===a.source){var i=a.data[“datawrapper-height”][t]+”px”;e[r].style.height=i}}}))}();
The board is obligated to hold only one public hearing before it votes, according to the state Rent Stabilization Law and the City Charter. But it usually holds between “six to eight meetings per year,” the RGB website says, all of which are public and webcast.
What factors the board takes into account as it regulates rent — and how, or if, it should prioritize owners over tenants, or vice versa — is a perennial debate, and the subject of fierce argument every year.
According to the bylaws of the board, it has to consider a number of data points before it votes, including things landlords track closely: real estate tax burdens, sewer and water rates, the cost of financing for property owners and operating costs such as fuel and labor. On the other side of the landlord-tenant divide, the board must also consider the city’s supply of housing and vacancy rate — which is now the lowest it’s been in decades — and the cost of living.
To learn about those things, the RGB’s research staff prepares four big reports, released each spring ahead of the board’s deliberations. First is the Income and Expense Study, then the Income and Affordability Study, followed by the Mortgage Survey Report and the Price Index of Operating Costs. (If you want to paw through those documents, all the RGB reports can be found here.)
The first of those big reports, the Income and Expense Study, comes out in late March — and it’s super important, experts say.
No one has chaired the board longer than Marvin Markus, a banker first appointed by Mayor Ed Koch and derided as “Marvin Markup” by tenant advocates when he returned to chair the board during the Bloomberg years. In an interview with THE CITY, Markus said every data point was important and the members considered each of the RGB’s research reports.
“At the end of the day,” Markus said, board members are “the stewards of the housing stock.”
His opinion is that “their job is to make sure there’s enough income in the housing stock consistent with generic ability to pay,” he added.
According to Goodridge, one factor mattered more than all others in determining rent increases, in her experience: the almighty “net operating income” for property owners, or NOI.
NOI is a metric calculated by subtracting all landlord expenses from all revenue to find a measure of profits — leaving out mortgage payments, debt service on loans or costs of major repairs.
“For my nearly four years on the board, the most important reports that were often discussed and weighed were the reports that showed how much profits landlords made,” Goodridge said. “And the most important was whether the net operating income of landlords decreased or increased. That was literally the make or break for the votes of most board members.”
When do they make up their mind?
By law, the board has to decide on rent levels no later than July 1.
But a few things have to happen before then. After the board’s staff publishes its reports and the RGB meets to discuss them, the board takes a preliminary vote on a proposed rent hike — or range of possible rent hikes — about a month before the final vote.
That preliminary vote is important to pay attention to because it almost always predicts what the final vote will be. Over the last three decades, the board has voted for a rent hike lower than the preliminary vote level only three times.

Apartments in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, Feb. 13, 2024.
In between the preliminary vote and the final vote, the RGB holds public hearings to take testimony from New Yorkers. (More on that below.)
When the board makes its decision, the rent guidelines from the final vote will apply to one- and two-year leases signed between Oct. 1 of the year of the vote and Sept. 30 of the following year. For 2024, it will affect leases signed between Oct. 1, 2024 and Sept. 30, 2025.
Is the RGB really independent?
It depends on whom you ask. The board dates back to Mayor John Lindsay’s administration when it was created to independently evaluate rent regulation, separate from traditional political bodies. But, ultimately, the group is wholly appointed by the chief executive in City Hall, and members serve the pleasure of the mayor.
To Goodridge, the role wasn’t far removed from politics.
“In my experience, I did not feel like it was an independent board. It wasn’t. It was a very political board,” she said.
Markus said he often spoke with mayoral staff when he served as board chair, but never had interference from either the Koch or Bloomberg administrations.
“A good chairman would always talk to City Hall…you know, have a conversation on where they were thinking,” he said. “The chair’s very important. The chair needs to, for lack of a better term, whip the votes and lead. So the chair should be talking [to people about] what the thinking is.
“I had absolutely no pushback in both times I did it, because I think those two mayors thought what was going to happen was rational,” he added.
Should I sign a one- or two-year lease?
That totally depends on what your financial needs are, how flexible you want to be with where you live and what the final rent hike from the board ends up being.
But if stability is a top concern, and you want to lock in a known rent for as long as possible, a two-year lease is probably the best option. Plus, keep in mind that rent-stabilized tenants have stronger rights and protections than a New Yorker with a non-regulated lease, for example: the right to renew a lease, and the right to certain types of repairs.
Whatever you decide, remember that you need to let your landlord know your choice within 60 days of receiving the lease renewal form.
My landlord is adding a 2.2% surcharge on top of the allowed rent stabilized increase. What gives?
If you see a 2.2% surcharge on your new rent-stabilized lease, in addition to the RGB’s allowed rent hike, it may be because your building’s tax breaks are expiring.
If your building was built with the 421-a tax break, those tax benefits eventually run out. As they approach expiration, your landlord is allowed to begin adding an annual 2.2% surcharge during a tax break phase-out period. You can find more information about that here.
I’ve got something to say about rent! How can I testify to the RGB?
- Check the RGB page here to find out when meetings and hearings will take place.
- Submit written testimony by mail or through this online form.
- Show up to say your piece directly to the board, which you have a legal right to do. In the past, the board has typically given two minutes to each speaker, “alternating between owner and tenant representatives,” says the RGB website.
- Pre-registering to speak will move you toward the front of the line of speakers, the RGB says. How can you pre-register? Those details will be listed in the “Public Notice” section of the RGB website and published in the weeks before it happens.
Does testimony make a difference? Markus couldn’t say, but he emphasized that heartfelt stories did make an emotional impact on him.
“I was very much emotionally swayed by some of the tenants’ stories and swayed by some of the smaller landlords and their plight.… But at the end of the day, those tenants need to be dealt with in the system,” through rent vouchers, or the Senior Citizen Rent Increase Exemption, or other assistance, he said. “That, unfortunately, is not the job of the Rent Guidelines Board.”
“It’s hard to make a decision on a million apartments based on, you know, five stories on either side that may resonate,” he added.
Goodridge found the debate flawed.
“The structure and the framing of the board unfortunately, often equalized tenants’ survival — being able to afford their home — with landlord profits. And it’s never the same struggle,” she said. “For me, having a business and maintaining it is not the same as someone facing homelessness.”
Does the RGB affect my rent if I’m in a market-rate apartment?
If you have a lease that’s not controlled or rent-regulated — the RGB has no say over how high your landlord should or can set your rent. But read on …
How can I check if my apartment is regulated?
You should be aware that many apartments or buildings legally should have rent-regulated status that tenants may not be aware of — including newer buildings with certain tax breaks, or older buildings with newer tenants. Watchdogs and journalists have blown the whistle on those instances many times, including in this 2015 ProPublica series and in THE CITY’s reporting.
About one-third of all the apartments in New York City are regulated in some form, according to the RGB’s analysis.
The best way to get more information about whether you may be entitled to a rent-regulated apartment is to check your rent history. Read THE CITY’s guide about how to do that here.
This story has been updated and adapted from our first version published in 2023.
THE CITY is a nonprofit newsroom that serves the people of New York. Sign up for our SCOOP newsletter and get exclusive stories, helpful tips, a guide to low-cost events, and everything you need to know to be a well-informed New Yorker.
When a bunch of bureaucrats with a political agenda determine what rents should be the inevitable results are obvious.
NYC has perennial housing shortages, bloated rents (for those unfortunate enough to pay market rate) and rundown and decrepit buildings. We also have entitled people like Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal paying $1.5K per month for a five room apartment she inherited from her parents.
We need to get rid of the RGB and all these archaic rent regulation laws and let the free market decide what a fair rent should be.
In keeping with his populist socialist liberal democrat agenda B de B forced RGB to approve two back to back zero rent increases. Balance of his term in office saw nearly nil increases. This all when RGB’s numbers clearly showed LLs were entitled to increases.
Pity of that effort was when inflation came roaring back and the Fed began raising interest rates RGB had shot their wad. At at time when they might have been forgiven for approving zero rate hikes they had already used that ammunition. Best they could come up with is hybrid solutions where rent increases are bifurcated or otherwise staggered. That isn’t going to last long and don’t see it happening again this year.
RS tenants in NY are mollycoddled (surprise, surprise). In most other parts of USA with rent regulation increases are a simple straight forward process.
In CA for instance it’s about 2.5% to 3% plus portion of CPI up to ten percent.
https://www.steadily.com/blog/how-much-can-a-landlord-raise-rent-in-california
In parts of NJ it’s a straight five percent.
Proposal to bring back RC in Boston goes with increases between 6% to 10%, again by a straight and simple formula. No drama, no politics.
https://www.matthews.com/will-boston-get-rent-control/#:~:text=Boston%20Rent%20Control&text=In%20March%202023%2C%20the%20Boston,was%20lower%20that%20particular%20year.
RGBs in NYC and across state routinely and consistently disregard information and research their own numbers come up with in regards to how much rents should increase. RGB in NYC consistently votes low to nil increases even when numbers clearly show LLs are due far more.
The only people the free market rents benefit are the very wealthy.
Plenty of rent stabilized apartments contain older people on fixed incomes and poor and middle-class families, and most of them are not giant, five bedroom homes.
One reason a lot of rent stabilized apartments fall apart isn’t because the landlords can’t afford to fix them, it’s because the landlords purposely neglect them when the problems are minor and easy to fix, and then claim the repairs are too expensive when they develop into a bigger problem.
A classic example is refusing to fix small leaks that eventually become serious and compromise the integrity of ceilings and floors.
Actually, you’re wrong on all accounts.
Rent-regulated buildings inevitably fall into disrepair because either the landlord does not have generate enough cash to properly maintain the building or they have no economic incentive to properly maintain (because no matter how much they upgrade the building tenants will still pay the same rent).
Buildings falling into disrepair almost never happen in market rate apartments. Sometimes in life you get what you pay for.
And I know plenty of very wealthy people living in rent regulated apartments.
Murry, I’m not wrong. First, the fact that you know “plenty of very wealthy people living in rent regulated apartments” just means you run in wealthy circles. I know plenty of poor and middle-class people living in them and they would not be able to afford current market rate rents.
Second, the landlords took on responsibility for maintenance of the buildings when they bought them, and they knew what they were getting into when they bought buildings with rent controlled or stabilized apartments. To claim now that they can’t meet their responsibilities is disingenuous. Further, you didn’t address my point about sensible maintenance. If repairs are done in a timely fashion, they usually don’t cost too much. It’s when repairs are delayed or done poorly that the expenses build up.
Furthermore RE lobby was told at the time RS like RC before it would be a temporary measure and would gradually phase out. That didn’t and hasn’t happened.
Worse RS has been twisted and morphed into by liberals and democrats in NYS into something in was never designed to be; “affordable” or “low income” housing.
Only way RS gets there is if individual RGBs hold down rents far below what LLs are entitled to; which of course is what NYC and some others have done.
“econd, the landlords took on responsibility for maintenance of the buildings when they bought them, and they knew what they were getting into when they bought buildings with rent controlled or stabilized apartments. ”
People keep making that statement totally ignoring fact RS laws came into law back in early 1970’s. Many LL’s or their heirs had no choice in matter.
From RGB’s own website:
” Tenants who took occupancy after June 30, 1971, in buildings of six or more units built before January 1, 1974, are generally Rent Stabilized. In New York City, apartments are under rent stabilization if they are in buildings of six or more units built between February 1, 1947, and December 31, 1973.”
https://rentguidelinesboard.cityofnewyork.us/resources/faqs/rent-control/#:~:text=Tenants%20who%20took%20occupancy%20after,%2C%20and%20December%2031%2C%201973.
That was 50 years ago, B.B.
If the owners (or their heirs) didn’t like the change, they could have sold the building for a small fortune. No one was forcing them to keep it with the new restrictions. And many people bought buildings after the regulations were in place.
The real, fundamental difference of opinion here is whether or not people who aren’t rich deserve apartments they can afford. In San Francisco, teachers were priced out of local housing and the city ended up with a teacher shortage. We could easily end up with similar difficulties here.
Quite a few NYC apartments are being rented by wealthy people who just want a pied-à-terre for occasional stays. One of my neighbors keeps an apartment just for summer parties – it’s vacant the rest of the year. I could just as easily argue that the solution to the housing shortage is to prevent people from renting apartments they aren’t living in full time, leaving those homes available for those who really need them and work in NYC.
The free market, which handles price efficiency for trillions of dollars of assets over hundreds of years, apparently can’t be trusted to handle 1 million apartments – but 9 people in cheap suits can.
For decades economists on both sides of political fence reach same conclusion. Government interference in markets is wrong and causes distortions. They’ve said same thing repeatedly about rent control laws.
Wherever rent control laws exist developers will not build rental housing in great numbers. What is built only comes with tax breaks or other incentives to overcome natural reluctance (and sizable costs) of getting involved with rent control.
Great factual summary of a complex (and often fractious!) topic.
Given the fact than wealth is in a continuous flux of transfer to a limited amount of the population, a natural occurrence as we think back to our childhood game of Monopoly, only a relative few will survive while the rest will die off in the wilderness. Read history.
Remember that our constitution first protect property rights, and individual right second.
Read history. We came from the English, and their landowning Lords of the land who first protected their own rights. Consider the term “Landlord.”
Remember, you can be arrested, or even shot, for, even harmless, trespassing.
Apparently squatters are not concerned…
https://www.newsweek.com/new-york-citys-squatter-rights-1884219
In my opinion, if rent regulations truly benefitted working-class people they would have been done away with generations ago. Wealthy people have used their influence to make sure they still exist. I would be very supportive if there were some means testing…teachers, police, firefighters, nurses…they should have these apartments. Anyway, this system is not going away in my lifetime. And it is nice to know that there are thoughtful people doing their best to try to make it work…very interesting article, thank you WSR.
Rent regulations keep all the other apartments in the city artificially high to make up for the difference. Let the market determine rates.
New York City is a terrible place to invest in rental housing. No wonder there’s a shortage. If you want less housing and lower quality housing, get rent control. Sure glad I’m a landlord in Florida!