Rent Guidelines Board Increases

[brxgrl]

Does the rent guidelines board have a cap as to the percentage they can raise rents in rent stabalized apartments? Anotherwords, right now it is at 2 or 4% - can they raise it to 10% if they want to???

[NYCkid]

Sure they can raise it 10% if they find a reason to. I believe that they have. It is supposed to reflect a range of variables which raise the LL's operating costs for the buildings like inflation, energy costs, taxes and so on. I think that due to the upcoming property tax hike next years guidelines are supposed to go up. Taking this into consideration, if you are resigning a lease this year you may want to consider signing a two year option.

[MikeW]

Also, if at all possible, renew your lease before June. There's a good chance that rent regulation will expire this year and not get renewed. If it happens, it will happen in June. If you get a lease signed before then, at least you'll get another two years of your regulated rent.

[jot0n0]

No rent regulations in NYC?!?! Not very likey.

[HAJ77]

While I agree that it's not likely, there is a definite possibility that rent regulations will not be renewed. Yet another reason for people to write/call/E-mail their Representative in Albany and to attend the meetings in NYC.

[NYCkid]

That is a scary thought that rent regulations could end. During the recent Governor elections I kept telling everyone who lives in a regulated apartment that even thinking about voting for Pataki may be equal to giving up their home. Unfortunatly, McCall didnt have the money to get this point across to rent regulated voters.

I dont think that regulations will go away entirely, but I expect the protections to become much weaker.

[Phil Cohen]

I agree that it is a good idea to renew a rent-stabilized lease before June. As a matter of fact, it is a good idea to do as much as possible DHCR-related before June (overcharge complaints, etc.) While it is unlike rent regulations will be done away with, it is possible.

[MikeW]

Don't think it's so unlikely that the rent laws will be allowed to end. Pataki, after playing liberal to get reelected, is now starting to play conservative to angle for a post in the Bush White house. Even if this doesn't work, he won't face the voters for three years after the regulations would expire. Also, while he played up to labor in the last election, he quite conspicuously did nothing for renters

And with the budget so out of wack this year, the Democrats will have a hard enough time keeping the Republican two thirds of the the state government from gutting all the social programs, and might not have enough political juice left over to push through a rent law renewal (or not be willing to pay the huge political favors necessary to get the Republicans support for renewal).

[NYCkid]

Is there any possibility that the city take back the rent regulation programs if the state dumps them?

[MikeW]

No.

There's something called the Urstadt Law. It basically says that no locality can have more stringent rent regulations than the state regulations (however localities can have weaker regulations). This law doesn't expire.

[TenantNet]

On the last two posts ... The City can't "take them back" in the way you suggest. Back in the 30's the state pre-empted municipalities on housing issues. Has to do with the flow of powers. Kind of like that states retain all powers not specifically granted to the federal govt. Anyway, the state is required to 'enable' rent regulations and renews them periodically. It's the enabling legislation that expires this year. And from the enabling legislation, municipalities (including NYC) can 'opt in' with their own rent regulation. So the NYC City Council must opt in with its own legislation every few years. MikeW was sort of correct on the Urstadt law, but not exactly. It was a 1971 Session Law modifying the existing enabling legislation. It basically says that any change can't be more stringent than what currently exists. Meaning you can only go in one direction, making it better for landlords. So if City Council makes it better for landlords (but the state law stays the same), Urstadt still prevents City Council from later going back and reversing its course. But that's why people try and fight it out in court cases. Some say a change would violate Urstadt. Sometimes it does; sometimes it doesn't.

On the rent laws themselves, while true that anything could happen, it's extremely unlikely that they will go away. As wwe said in our recent newsletter, Pataki and Bruno aren't the ones to pay attention to. It's Silver as he has the power to make it happen. Six years ago Tenants & Neighbors went along with Silver's disastrous weakening of the rent laws.

[MikeW]

John,

This is true only to the extent that the likelyhood of the rent laws being renewed, is directly proportional to what Silver is willing to trade Pataki and Bruno for them. P&B are steadfastly hostile to the rent laws, and only ascede to their renewal as either trade goods for other legislative agendas, or out of fear of a electoral backlash at an inopportune moment.

Last time around the latter came into play, since Pataki was up for reelection a year after the laws would have expired. That isn't the case this time around (and I've got to think the timing was planned that way). If the law expire, he won't be up for election for three years hence, buy which time the mayhem would be over for at least a year, and likely forgotten. Also, the Republicans have maintained their hold on the state senate, while losing a seat in the city (Goodman's) while gaining one upstate <?>. This makes them even less concerned about the needs of the city.

Remember any one of them alone (Pataki, Bruno, or Silver) and effective end rent regulation.

Originally posted by TenantNet:
On the rent laws themselves, while true that anything could happen, it's extremely unlikely that they will go away. As wwe said in our recent newsletter, Pataki and Bruno aren't the ones to pay attention to. It's Silver as he has the power to make it happen. Six years ago Tenants & Neighbors went along with Silver's disastrous weakening of the rent laws.

[eastsidah]

Let's hope the rent reg's go away in June so some sanity can return to the rental market. This is the only city with a perpetual shortage of rental units,regardless of what the economy is like. Also, how can you defend a practice which put's a limit on the amount a person can charge for their property? We live in a capatilist system not a socialist one (and don't use the regulated utility markets as an example. Those are legalized monopolies. The rental market in NYC has thousands of providers. If there was only one provider of apartments then that analogy might make sense).

I would also like to see the statistics of how many regulated tenants violate the laws. I bet over 80% of the RR tenants who rent rooms in their apartments overcharge.

PS No i'm not a landlord, just someone who would like to be able to rent an apartment in this city without it turning into a Seinfeld episode.

[HAJ77]

Do you have anything constructive to add to this forum or are you going to just rant about rent regulations in all of your posts?

[NYCkid]

He obviously has no clue about rent regulation laws, or apartment hunting in this city. If landlords did things by the book they would be able to make improvements to buildings and charge more for appartments. The problem is that most landlords are more interested in charging more and giving less.

I never understand these obscene arguments against regulation--especially when they claim that deregulation would lower rents. That is such a crock. Get a clue.