Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Having created RC and RS then allowing them to go on far too long the City is stuck with the mess of their own making. It would just cause too much upheaval especially for middle aged and seniors ending RS or RC protections. The City cannot even build/create enough housing for the poor and elderly now, imagine what throwing a few million RS or RC tenants into that mix.
That being said aside from whatever RS units the City manages to wring out of affordable housing schemes, below market apartments are dying a slow death. In a decade or perhaps generation the only RS units that are well below market will be those part of various new units part of affordable housing schemes.
This is simply because of demographics; a bulk of the below market RS units are held by middle aged to elderly, and sooner or later they will be vacated by death or perhaps tenant moving out. Once that happens it is all but certain the LL will gut renovate to get the rent close to or near market rate. Once that happens even if the unit is RS that is only comfort in the protections it brings regarding increases, automatic renewals. etc...
Once you get rents at or near $2k per month, using the 40x income to rent ratio large numbers of persons simply will not qualify.
As Milton Friedman said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program." It creates an entire class of people who are dependent on the program and is almost impossible to get rid of later, even when the reason for creating it no longer exists.
NYC rent regulation apparently began on the federal level in 1942 as a wartime measure. The program was later taken over by NY State in 1950 when the federal program ended.
They should phase out this program by returning regulated units to the market when the tenant dies or leaves.
Another historic vote. Second time ever they voted for a rent freeze.
This is going to come back and bite de Boob or successive administrations in their behinds.
Sooner or later oil and other prices will rise; and landlords are going to say what is sauce for the goose is good for the gander and demand increases in proportion. If the board does not give it will be seen as political and invite all sorts of trouble including possible legal action.
Meanwhile RS tenants are probably going to see buildings kept less clean, no frills, no favors, and so forth.
This also has to potential to sour future participation by landlords in any scheme that places their apartments under RS. Only those desperate and or seriously want/need something from the City will do so; others will either shy away from rentals all together or develop only for high end.
I think it would be okay to phase out RS and RC when the tax break for mortgages is also phased out. And maybe all the deductions landlords take, such as depreciation, etc.
good luck finding a decent place to live with no landlord incentives to be landlords . who in their right mind would tolerate tenants , take the risk and own an ill-liquid investment without the incentives to do so . if it wasn't for depreciation our first property would not have been close to breakeven early on and we would have been out of the landlording game . .
with many rent stabilized apartments co-op's with original tenants like ours , as the baby boomers retire , move or die each year going forward now there will be less and less rent stabilized apartments left as they become decontrolled .
in our area of bayside there are only two pure rental buildings left that are not co-op or condo .
out of all those buildings you see . most rentals are in co-op's or condo's so they are either already decontrolled or will be as soon as the original tenant is out ..
Last edited by mathjak107; 06-28-2016 at 02:04 AM..
i listened to our mayor say that landlords should not get rent increases if the cost of the buildings upkeep did not go up .
but by the same token i bet he wants to earn a return on his invested money whether his personal expenses went up or not . i bet everyone here wants a raise regardless of the status of their personal expenses .
everyone forgets this is how landlords earn their livelihood and or income that supports them . they want and deserve a return on the money they invested and put at risk the same as everyone here deserves a raise independent of their own expenses
this is insane.
how do they expect the landlords to keep up with maintenance on the buildings without a rent increase.
2 years in a row and nothing.
this is unfair to all the landlords out there.
I wish they would finally do away with RC and RS.
and i think it basically sucks that it is mandatory for the LL to have to renew the tenants lease forever.
don't worry many landlords work around it . our building increased indoor parking by 40 dollars a month since rent increases were zero .
we also had capital improvement increases . remember those go on forever even after they are recouped
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
