Should Landlord Subsidize Tenants' Good Life?
A familiar story with the same violins playing in the background: A group of pioneering artists with under-market rents fighting the evil landlord who wants to maximize the profitability of his property. In this case, it’s a particularly colorful gang of circus performers and nonprofit publishers, many of whom will have to leave New York…
A familiar story with the same violins playing in the background: A group of pioneering artists with under-market rents fighting the evil landlord who wants to maximize the profitability of his property. In this case, it’s a particularly colorful gang of circus performers and nonprofit publishers, many of whom will have to leave New York if they lose the court battle over whether they are protected by rent stabilization laws. As big a bummer as it is for them (and arguably for the fabric of the neighborhood), we can’t see why the landlord should have to subsidize these folks any longer. No one forced them to move here twenty years ago–they did so because it was the best deal they could find at the time. It’ll be interesting to see what the judge says.
The Good Life on South 11th Street [NY Times] GMAP P*Shark
Photo by justiNYC
The New Loft Law Now! site has a reprinted story about the last effort to revise the Loft Law…. from the Indypendent… It was a few years ago already… Look here: http://www.newloftlawnow.org/blog/
The New York Times got personal, and missed the main story: there are literally hundreds, arguably thousands, of residential loft tenants throughout the outer boroughs who are not covered by the city’s Loft Law, last revised a full quarter-century ago. The Brooklyn courts, until recently, had been extending protections to many live/work tenants, but in the last year or two reversing precedents are placing all of these newer people in precarious circumstances, and most of them don’t even know it yet! All the NYC lawyers who have been defending such llive/work tenants are shaking in their boots about this. Whole neighborhoods — Greenpoint and Williamsburg, for starters — are being sold off for an invasion of yuppies of a magnitude rarely seen in history. As usual, the pioneers are their own executioners… how many artists are left in Soho?
We need a New Loft Law Now!
Well said, 5:55.
fact is- there is a Loft Law that NYC passed to try to protect all people in such situations — where renters improve a space over many years and the LL illegally rents it and keeps it not up to code. In such situations, the LL is penalized when it is time to sell, and the tenants may have rights to rent stabilization, or perhaps a settlement to get them to leave. There are valid policy reasons for such laws. The idea is to not let LL circumvent their obligations to keep blgs to code for years, and then cash out later– putting renters (however low the rent) on the street. This is good policy for the city as a whole. It creates the right incentives for LL and tenants. People should not let the idea of the tenants being freeloaders cloud their vision– there is a larger goal here in protecting long-term loft tenants rights in such situations.
“I would bet that we spend less as a nation on arts than any other “western” nation.”
We spend more as a nation than every “western” nation on everything.
I don’t who is stupider? The former landlord for illegally renting to so-called “artists” who could exploit the loft laws to their advantage? Or the archivist/circus act tenants who continued to remain tenants for twenty years as the entire city gentrified and their neighborhood was crowned the epicenter of hipsterhood?
The stupider party in this case is the party that loses, most likely the tenants. Good riddance.
The stereotyping of artists in a lot of these posts is unrealistic. Many of the members of the Williamsburg Artist Community work as well as make art. They have families, work as teachers, cabinet makers etc. Jobs with modest incomes. Maybe some of these posters just believe the media inflated hype about Williamsburg hipsters. It’s not the real picture. And by the way, I am an artist with a responsible job who is and was always a participant in neighborhood matters. I even bought my own house and spent 20 years rebuilding and renovating it. In Williamsburg, community members including a large proportion of artists worked hard for years to create a plan for the future of a mixed income Williamsburg. This was ignored in a cheap political deal for what is “illusionary housing” and condo’s for the rich. What matter that we’ve built a community when members of that community are being kicked out. What good is it even if you own your own house when crappy construction practices at adjacent sites are undermining the foundations of those hard won houses. Homeowners (moderate income not yuppies) are left with legal costs, no home. Loss of housing, loss of community. And a few more members of a community get kicked out. NYC deserves to lose its creative class. Trouble is, the story will repeat itself in Philadelphia etc. and even if you can afford to buy a condo, you can’t paint in one.
I don’t understand the point of this story. Any tenant has a legal right to stay only until their lease is up. That goes for anyone, trapeze or no trapeze. I have nurses, teachers, and students as tenants. When their lease is up, they lose their right to occupy the apartment. Why should a teacher have less rights than a circus performer? Is there some kind of legal loophole for circus performers I missed somewhere?
I’ve done some research into loft conversions, and the city does have a law to protect anyone — whether or not they’re artists — who have spent time and energy rehabilitating lofts that landlords didn’t want to fix up themselves. Depending on the zoning for the building and the length of time the loft residents have lived there, a loft resident can go to court and basically win rent stabilization for himself and force the landlord to bring the building up to code. This may be the city law that the people in this article are relying upon. I don’t know about the rent strike, though. Witholding rent is a response to uninhabitable conditions and, because rent that a court finds was rightfully withheld is forfeited by a landlord, even after he makes a repairs, it’s a useful way to get essential services into/put back into an apt. Not paying your rent strike solely because you DON’T want to get evicted seems silly.