Rent Board Chief on Shifting Onus from Landlords
The Observer ran an interesting interview yesterday with the head of the Rent Guidelines Board, Marvin Markus, that lays out some of the common-sense problems with rent control and stabilization. If we as a society deem it worthwhile to subsidize certain people (and clearly there are lots of reasons to do so), then the cost…
The Observer ran an interesting interview yesterday with the head of the Rent Guidelines Board, Marvin Markus, that lays out some of the common-sense problems with rent control and stabilization. If we as a society deem it worthwhile to subsidize certain people (and clearly there are lots of reasons to do so), then the cost should be borne by society as a whole not individual landlords, argues Markus. “There are poor tenants, they should be protected, but the individual owner is not the one that should protect them. The population at large clearly should be the ones footing the bill,” he says. And how would be do that? “One suggestion is a rent tax/surcharge of some limited amount, on all rents in the city … and all co-op and condo charges in the city. … It’s very important for the city of New York that there be a mixed income base—from an economic standpoint; from a social standpoint—and we want to make sure, I want to make sure, that that continues.” While landlords make easy political targets, it’s hard to make any rational arguments in favor of the current system: Lifetime entitlements makes no sense at all; nor does a system that dis-incentivizes landlords from maintaining the housing stock.
Rent Board Chief Markus Pleads for ‘Rationality’ [NY Observer]
Photo from the Tenement Museum
“There really is only one way: take this beast behind the barn and shoot it.”
Agreed.
And repeating an earlier post, the biggest damage of rs/rc, isn’t to landlords, who by and large are doing fine.
RS/RC increases rents for all market rate renters (by far the majority of people)in exchange for giving the lucky few a lifelong often nearly free rent ride.
Not to mention that the rent laws make NYC completely unafordable for so many hardworking young people who would love to move here, but can’t afford the artificially high market rents that rs/rc fuel.
FSRQ;
I get that you are arguing for RC/RS to be a mechanism to protect against excessive inflation in rents, rather than another type of affordability subsidy, but how would that work? I don’t know how old you are, but the last time we tried that was Nixon’s disasterous wage and price controls. Regardless of the intent, it still comes down to price controls and all that it brings: black markets, shortages, inefficiencies, etc. Also, it would still give renters an incentive to hunker down in an apartment, rather than brave the open market. I just don;t see how it could work effectively, ESPECIALLY since renters are a majority in NYC. You think politicians won’t meddle with it to buy votes?
There really is only one way: take this beast behind the barn and shoot it. Let affordability be handled by Section 8, affordable housing subsidies, etc.
First of all, as I understand it, Rangel and Patterson have rent controlled apartments, not rent stabilized. Secondly, when I said “everyone else,” I mean folks who pay market rate rent. Who is there to protect THOSE folks from “20,30,80+% increases that can happen yr to yr in some NYC neighborhoods”?
Bottom line, I’m saying that the only reason anyone should have a rent controlled or -stabilized apartment is on the basis of need. So yes, in that sense I believe there should be a “means test.” I understand that this is not the case presently.
FSRQ,
Of course the current rent laws won’t be overturned any time soon. And of course the bigger risk is the BS going on right now with the City Council trying to take over the Rent Guidelines Board from Albany.
And I never said you can’t make money buying rent stabilized/controlled housing. Thousands of investors including myself have done it and will continue to do it every day.
The real problem the rent laws pose for landlords profitability are in the marginal neighborhoods where small landlords don’t have the money to take bad tenants to court, pay large tenant buyouts, or even, most importantly, have the ability to collect a decent rent even on the free market.
It’s the small, often minority landlords in primarily minority neighborhoods who are most hurt by NYC’s rent laws — a major reason why housing in these areas continues to be crappy and in disrepair.
It’s funny actually. Often at the public Rent Board meetings, the landlords represent true racial diversity, while most of the screaming tenants are middle aged fat white folks.
umm ENY – having a RS apartment hardly makes them “different from everyone else” – “Everyone else” who is in a RS apartment – which is about 1 MILLION people – do not have to move when rents jump much faster than inflation; because their rents only go up by the approved amount…..there is no means test for a RS apartment, anyone who can find one is entitled to one, so why shouldnt a politician be able to get one – if they can find one????
If you want to means test for RS – fine but as it stands right now a guy making 20M in a 1500 a mo apartment can have a RS apartment – the question is why should Rangel and Patterson be discriminated against different from anyone else?
“they are public servants whose income certainly wont keep up with the 20,30,80+% increases that can happen yr to yr in some NYC neighborhoods – should they have to move everytime rents jump much faster then general inflation???”
Yes, they should. Why on earth should they be different from anyone else? That’s the dumbest question I’ve heard today.
In addition, as particularly noteworthy public figures, both of their incomes (particularly Rangel’s) far exceeds their salaries as public servants (when you factor in speaking fees and other promotional opportunities).
ENY – why is it wrong for Patterson and Rangel to have RS apartments – they are public servants whose income certainly wont keep up with the 20,30,80+% increases that can happen yr to yr in some NYC neighborhoods – should they have to move everytime rents jump much faster then general inflation???
That being said – why should they or ANYONE be allowed to rent a new apartment for a rent BELOW the marketrate, when others in the same situation cant and either have to pay much more or not move at all.
RS is not, was not and should never be a tool for general affordability – it is, was and should be simply a tool to allow people to have some stability regarding rent increases to avoid wholesale dislocation of people from their homes…..vacancy decontrol NOW!
I have yet to see rents go down after any form of rent control is eliminated.