Proposed Rent Guidelines for October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025
Rule status: Adopted
Agency: RGB
Effective date: October 1, 2024
Proposed Rule Full Text
Rent-Guidelines-Board-Proposed-2024-Rent-Guidelines.pdf
Adopted Rule Full Text
RGB-Guidelines-and-Statements-2024-1.pdf
Adopted rule summary:
Pursuant to its statutory mandate, the New York City Rent Guidelines Board is adopting rent guidelines for October 1, 2024 through September 30, 2025.
Comments are now closed.
Online comments: 28
-
DR
Comment added May 14, 2024 1:00amRent is too low. We need increases to cover operation costs like water, insurance and taxes.
-
Jeff
Comment added May 14, 2024 2:00pmMy property tax went up 10% last year. Why can taxes go up more than legal rent?
-
Zav
Comment added May 15, 2024 2:33amAs a small property owner, I write to express the urgent need for rent increases to cover the rapidly escalating costs we face. The current economic landscape has placed immense financial strain on us, making it increasingly difficult to maintain our properties while meeting our financial obligations.
In recent years, we have witnessed a significant rise in operating expenses, including property taxes, insurance premiums, maintenance costs, and utilities. These expenses have surged at a rate far exceeding the permissible rent increases, leaving us in a precarious financial position.
Despite our best efforts to economize and streamline operations, the gap between rental income and operating expenses continues to widen. This unsustainable situation jeopardizes our ability to provide quality housing for tenants and maintain our properties to acceptable standards.
Furthermore, failure to address these cost pressures could have detrimental consequences, leading to deferred maintenance, property deterioration, and ultimately, diminished housing quality for tenants.
Therefore, I urge the Rent Guidelines Board to consider the plight of small property owners and implement a reasonable 20% rent increase that aligns with the escalating costs of property ownership. Such adjustments are essential to ensure the viability of small property owners, preserve the integrity of rental housing, and uphold the well-being of both landlords and tenants alike.
-
Rabbi Gershon Peretz Taub Arbah
Comment added May 17, 2024 8:44pmDear Members of the Rent Guidelines Board,
I hope this letter finds you well. I am writing to you as both a property owner in Williamsburg with rent stabilized housing. I wish advocate for an increase in rent for stabilized buildings such as my own. The financial distress faced by property owners, including myself, is a critical issue that needs to be addressed.
I would like to present my arguments grounded in the principles of fairness and justice as outlined in Talmudic law.
The Talmud states that laws should be fair and equitable to all parties involved. When the laws, such as rent stabilization, become outdated and do not reflect the current economic realities, they fail to uphold this principle of fairness. It is not fair or equitable that I must pay more in taxes and insurance than I am able to collect in rent.
Furthermore, the Talmudic concept of “hefsed merubah” (significant loss) is relevant here. The Talmud teaches that one should not cause significant financial loss to another (Bava Metzia 39b). The current rent stabilization guidelines have not kept pace with the rising costs of property maintenance, taxes, insurance and necessary upgrades, which places an undue burden on property owners. This financial strain can lead to a deterioration in the quality of housing, ultimately harming both landlords and tenants.
The Talmud also speaks to the importance of “chesed” (kindness) and “tzedek” (justice). In Deuteronomy 16:20, it is written, “Justice, justice you shall pursue.” To pursue justice, we must ensure that the systems in place do not unduly favor one party over another. Currently, the static nature of rent stabilization does not account for inflation and the increasing cost of living, which results in an imbalance that is unjust to landlords.
Lastly, the principle of “yishuv ha’olam” (settling the world) suggests that our actions should contribute to a stable and flourishing society. A system that impoverishes property owners and prevents them from maintaining their buildings contradicts this principle. By adjusting rent guidelines to reflect the present economic conditions, we can create a more sustainable housing market that benefits everyone.
In conclusion, I urge the Rent Guidelines Board to consider these Talmudic principles when reviewing rent adjustments. A fair increase in rent will not only alleviate the financial distress faced by property owners but will also contribute to a more balanced and just society. Thank you for your attention to this critical matter.
Good Shabbos,
Rabbi Gedalia Paul Theodore
Rent Stabilized Property Owner
Williamsburg, NY -
UNHP
Comment added May 18, 2024 4:27amAffordable Housing Needs Help with Operating Costs -Rising Water and Insurance Costs Threaten Affordability.
Water Costs: Seeking a Fair Share from NYS of Federal Money for NYC’s Water System from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Property Insurance Costs: NYS Department of Financial Services needs to work with affordable housing groups to make property and liability insurance available and affordable
Water Costs: Seeking a Fair Share from NYS of Federal Money for NYC’s Water System from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law:UNHP has been monitoring water and sewer charges for many years in NYC. The NYC Water Board is required to set rates to cover both the cost of operating the water system and the debt service for the system. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is providing the largest investment in water infrastructure in US history. We had hoped that this infusion of federal funds would reduce the amount that the Water Board would need to borrow, thereby holding down debt service costs, and reducing the impact on rates.
However, it is our understanding that under current New York State guidelines, New York City is receiving a small percentage of the federal funds allocated to the state in comparison to the 44% of NYS’s population living in New York City. Additionally, the NYS Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act requires that 35% of the funds be used in Disadvantaged Communities. NYC DEP says that 59% of NYS’s Disadvantaged Communities are located in NYC. Yet under current state guidelines, New York City will receive a very small percentage of the federal money. While we understand funds need to be spent across the state, we want to see NYC receive a fair share of the federal infrastructure money.
Property Insurance Costs: NYS Department of Financial Services needs to work with affordable housing groups to make property and liability insurance available and affordable
UNHP has been documenting the soaring costs of property insurance over the past several years. Bronx-based non-profit controlled affordable housing groups have seen rate increases of between 15 and 30% for each of the past 5 years. The result has been a redirection of funds away from providing services in buildings. We have also seen an increasing difficulty in obtaining insurance. In recent years, companies have been asking about the source of rent for tenants in the buildings. We need the Department of Financial Services to take a proactive role in protecting affordable housing and determining whether companies are practicing a form of redlining by asking how many tenants may have subsidized rents.
For more information, contact UNHP at [email protected] or [email protected]
Comment attachment
University-Neighborhood-Housing-Program.pdf -
Moira Birss, Brendan Mitchell and Seana O’Shaugnessy
Comment added May 18, 2024 4:36amThe insurance crisis threatens affordable housing development
Insurance costs are becoming such a large part of the budgets of affordable housing developers and managers that it’s forcing them to reconsider building new projects. That means fewer affordable housing units available, even as the affordable housing crisis grows.
And even in existing affordable housing buildings, the rising cost of insurance is making it harder to afford green retrofits–even ones that would save them money, like solar panels.
Comment attachment
Blog_-How-the-insurance-crisis-threatens-affordable-housing-development.pdf -
As told by Jay Martin
Comment added May 18, 2024 5:41pm“An E-Scooter parked in front of one of our members buildings caught fire on the sidewalk yesterday.
The Scooter owner was nowhere to be found.
The fire department came and put out the fire.
So the owner was given a bill for $2500 for hazardous material removal.
This was in front of a building in the Bronx where $2500 is higher than the average 1 month rent in the building.
Not sustainable.”
Comment attachment
jm.pdf -
Insurance Prices Are Why Your Rent is High
Comment added May 19, 2024 11:42amAn April report by the New York Civil Justice Institute finds in most cases, the insurances costs in the state are higher than anywhere else in the country. Scott Hobson, of Big I New York, an industry advocacy group, said while high premiums are always an issue, the report lays out an even bigger concern.
Insurance companies are not being greedy. Much like rent stabilized housing providers for each dollar in revenue they collect, insurance providers are paying out $1.12 in claims. Thats not a recipe for success, so they raise premiums to try to match costs.
Those increases in premiums mean owners HAVE to raise rent as well. We can’t expect them to shoulder the burdens of climate change and inflation on their own.
The Rent Guidelines Board must act. Please raise the rent. We can’t keep operating as if costs have not gone up for everyone.
Comment attachment
Insurance-industry-warns-coverage-crisis-could-be-looming.pdf -
Big Mac Man
Comment added May 20, 2024 1:22amHi, The price of a BigMac was $0.50 in 1974 according to The Economist. Today in NYC that same BigMac costs $6.19. Thats an increase of over 12x. Those prices didn’t go up because McDonalds is an evil greedy corp. They went up because minimum wage went up from $2 in 1974 to $16 in 2024, an 8x increase. The cost of ground beef went from $0.89 per pound in 1974 to over $6 per pound in 2024, a 6 fold increase.
In 1974, the Census Bureau says the AMI was $11,100 in New York. Today in 2024, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) says the AMI is $155,300 for a family of four. Thats a 14x increase.
Rent on the other hand has only gone up about 4x on that same timeline. So adjusted for inflation, wage increases, etc rent is actually DOWN since 1974 where was costs of providing housing have gone up and the wages of tenants have gone up.
Why are housing providers being asked to live on 1974 rents and incomes while dealing with 2024 prices? We can’t pay our supers $2/hr. We can’t pay insurance at 1974 rates. We can’t live by 1974 codes and regulations, but we have to accept 1974 incomes. How does this make sense?
We HAVE to catch up to costs. We need SIGNIFICANT rent increases in 2024 if tenants expect 2024 level of services, repairs and compliance.
Thank you for your help in bringing back from the bring of insolvency.
-
Property is why your rent is high.
Comment added May 22, 2024 10:24pmIf property tax was lower, I wouldn’t need to raise rents. If the rest of us could get away with not paying property taxes like Darlene Mealy and other city council members, rent could be lower for everyone.
Unfortunately us common folks don’t get that privilege, so we need the RGB to let us raise rents.
Comment attachment
mealy.pdf -
Rent is high because of taxes
Comment added May 23, 2024 1:47amIt is quite hard for regular landlords to make ends meet because we have a never ending set of bills for taxes, city fees and fines to pay. These directly contribute to the cost of rent for tenants. Remove or reduce them and tenants would benefit
If we could all get the same deal as Public Advocate Jumaane Williams and not pay our HPD related fees and fines for years at a time, rent would be lower.
Comment attachment
jw1.pdf -
TaxFax
Comment added May 23, 2024 12:20pmWould rents be lower if we could all skip out on property taxes and city fees/fines like our elected officials?
Eric Adams has owed $301.82 in rat mitigation fees to the dept of transportation since Sep 2023 for his property at 936 LAFAYETTE AVE in Brooklyn.
Darlene Mealy has not paid property tax since 2020 on her Apt at 869 Herkimer St in Brooklyn. She currently owes about $19,000 in back taxes and HPD fines.
DARLENE MEALY hasn’t paid her 2024 property taxes on 1447 E. 108th St (3-08273-1213) either. Her commons charges are so behind that the management has placed a lean on the condo. Much easier to rent at “affordable” rates if you dont have to afford tax and commons dues.
City Council Member CHARLES BARRON & Assembly Member INEZ BARRON haven’t paid their 2024 property tax on 744 BRADFORD ST.
City Council Member Crystal Hudson hasn’t filed her annual rent registrations or bed bug reports on 564 Carlton Avenue, Brooklyn, 11238. Much easier to manage “affordable” housing when you dont have to deal with city red tape and paperwork.
Jumaane Williams hasn’t paid his building registrations since 2020 for his rental property at 1392 E 98th St in Brooklyn.
And there are many more of these.
It’s really easy to afford operating in this city when you have the power to prevent enforcement actions against your properties for violations.
Can rent regulated owners take advantage of these same perks?
-
Angela Benfield
Comment added May 29, 2024 2:57pmOnce again, the proposed rent hike for two year leases is quite higher than one year leases. This is bad for the stability of families and elderly tenants who will have no choice but to take a one year lease for the lower rent, regardless of how long they have already lived in an apartment or plan to live there. They will take the one year lease and face lease renewals and possible higher rents the following year. A choice for a one year or two year lease should be based on how long the tenant wants to commit, not on how much rent they will pay. Thank you for your consideration.
-
Where in the world is Genesis Aquino?
Comment added May 31, 2024 5:25pmIs Genesis Aquino being paid for her participation in the Rent Guidelines Board? It looks like she missed the first 1hr and 12 minutes of the RGB hearing in Queens on May 30, 2024. This is not the first hearing she has missed significant portions of.
How can she give us a fair shake in this RGB process if she doesn’t listen to the testimony, review the provided reports / stats, or otherwise engage in productive debate about this issue?
-
Victoria Wurdinger
Comment added June 2, 2024 6:06pmDear Rent Board members:
New York City’s housing shortage is at its worst point in half a century. The number of affordable apartments available to rent — those that are less expensive than the citywide median — is basically zero, according to the most recent city survey.Last year, New York City experienced its largest loss of rent-stabilized apartments in eight years. Landlords try to dispute this but I know of several: They have been well documented by The City.com ( https://projects.thecity.nyc/rent-stabilized-map/ ) and in just one instance I know of, a subsidized unit was removed and declared “fair market” by moving a wall to make it SMALLER, not larger as the “Frankenstein” loophole allegedly allowed. The rent has nearly tripled.
Very few buildings have 100% subsidized apartments, due to the depletion of subsidized units, meaning the landlord is getting “fair market” rates for many apartments. Those rates have skyrocketed and stabilized apartments have disappeared so fast that ALL NYC vacancy is barely 1%.
Historically, the rent board has focused on landlord expenses and shown them great deference. During the 2008 recession when many of us were asked to take pay cuts or lost jobs, the rent board passed a record 8% increase because its focus was landlords and their profits. Pataki got rid of preferential rents, creating huge rental increases in one year. Now, with food inflation at an all-time high, NYC landlords have raised rents to record levels, meaning most housing costs 30 to 50% of tenant’s incomes, –all while subsidized units are disappearing in shocking numbers.
Housing costs are at the top of inflation, due to landlord’s demand for high profits. Corporations and hedge funds are trying to make tenants cover their losses on their commercial buildings and temporary pandemic residential losses, for which the government paid most of them if the tenant filed for rent, which went directly to the landlord. Just one hedge fund bought up 80 buildings in Park Slope alone last year. Naturally, most the tenants are being forced out for a quick renovation—sheet rock walls and systems for the tenants to pay their own heat–that will double the rents.
There are very few landlords not making a significant profit and if they aren’t, they are warehousing apartments or intentionally allowed them to decline. Despite claims of high taxes, etc, ALL buildings with subsidized units are old, and the taxes are very low on older buildings. They are easy to find online: Just one in Brooklyn with 25 mixed units was valued at over $10.5 million with taxes barely over $100,000, which just 5 units could pay in under a year.
With NYC vacancy barely existent and available to none but the well off—and rents at an all-time high, while affordable housing is at an all-time low—once again landlords are arguing for huge rent increases. Tenants have nowhere to go, meaning the city can barely house any teachers, artists, service workers, store employees or even police and fire dept employees. There is no more middle class by national standards.
No one I know got a 3% or 4% salary increase—let alone a 6% raise. To consider a 4-6% rent increase under these circumstances proves just how this board favors landlords. In fact, one member does not even believe subsidized housing should exist, which means that person’s goal is to raise rents so high and fast that this housing disappears forever. That person should not be on this board, given that they do not even believe in the board’s purpose—or its very existence.I urge this board to consider the REAL environment on the ground and keep rent increases at 2-3% or below for both 1- and 2-year leases. A 2-year lease should NEVER increase the second year of the lease—another legal sleight-of-hand designed to eliminate rent-regulated units all together and to destroy NYC as a functioning city for all, including the working- and once-middle class the mayor says the city needs to survive.
Comment attachment
6-2-2024-comment-rent-board-increases.docx -
M. Williams
Comment added June 3, 2024 12:07amRent Control destroys housing production. This is a fact and it is irrefutable.
Look at Hennepin County (Minneapolis) which saw a big increase in housing permits from 2021-2022 as a result of deregulation – while permitting declined steeply in next door Ramsay County (St Paul).
In the end St Paul saw rent prices go up, and Minneapolis saw them come down.
Turns out housing is not immune from the laws of supply and demand.
I’m a small housing provider. My single building is 80% rent stabilized. The remaining units cannot support a legal rent high enough to cover the losses from the rent stabilized units. Turns out theres a ceiling on what the market will support. And even if they could, those units are now covered under shadow stabilization via the new “Good Cause” laws.
The RGB’s own data shows that building’s like mine need double digit rent increases to avoid insolvency. We need your help. We have to get a 10-15% increase or we wont be around next year.
Comment attachment
rent-control-stats.pdf -
M Williams
Comment added June 3, 2024 12:39amDear Rent Board members:
Please find a correction of Victoria Wurdinger’s commentary on your rules. I have fixed it so as to ensure it represents the economic reality of housing in NYC.
New York City’s housing shortage is at its worst point in half a century. The number of affordable apartments available to rent continues to fall lower due to the fact that the city keeps raising property taxes, utility costs every year.
Last year, New York City experienced its largest loss of rent-stabilized apartments in eight years due the state not reauthorizing 421a in time, further driving vacancy lower. Shame on Albany for not acting sooner.
While not all buildings are 100% subsidized, it is not fair to ask free market renters to cover the costs of rent stabilized renters. Rent stabilizing is one of many reasons free market renters are being squeezed for more and more money each year.
Historically, the rent board has focused on tenant expenses and shown them great deference. 2020: 0%, 2021: 2.5%, 2022: 3.25%, 2023: 3.20%. None of these increases were sufficient to address the RGB’s own economic data – which showed double digit increases were need to ensure further investment in our limited rent stabilized housing stock. In short, we’ve driven these buildings into solvency.
During the 2020 pandemic while many of us were struggling with vacancies and skyrocketing inflation driven expenses, the RGB afforded us a 0% increase. In that time salaries have gone up due to labor shortages, but rents have continued to remain flat. Now, with all inflation at an all-time high, NYC landlords have been unable to raise rents to cover expenses, meaning most buildings are barely able to cover property tax and insurance – let alone maintenance and capital improvements.
Housing costs are at the top of inflation, due to the city’s demand for high property taxes. Tenants are trying trying to make landlords and neighboring free market units subside their cost of living as if they have a right to someone else’s salary. And since COVID benefits required the tenant to file for assistance, in many cases we were left holding the bag with arrears from that era as tenants were uncooperative and unwilling the filing for assistance.
This isn’t about hedge funds and cooperations. Small landlords with pre-1974 buildings are feeling the economic pinch here and need massive increases to avoid going under.
There are very few rent stabilized landlords making any profit. They rent every unit they can at least break even on, and only warehouse apartments if they find that renting them would drive further losses.
Despite claims of others here, taxes are not low. Taxes in many cases exceed the rent owners are allowed to charge. And unfortunately, the RGB data mixes pre-1974 units which receive no tax subsidy with modern buildings under 421a and soon 485x skewing the economic outlook represented in RGB reporting. The reality is the situation is WORSE than what RGB data shows not better.
With NYC vacancy barely existent we need to make sure the limited buildings we do have can generate sufficient revenue to cover maintenance costs. Otherwise we will lose this precious housing stock and further drive vacancy lower. But are again tenants are crying and begging for rent roll backs. Where would the money for taxes and insurance come from? We already cannot afford our expenses with the paltry rents we collect now. For
Everyone of our tenants got double digit salary increases during the pandemic years and even recently in 2023. AMIs have gone up significantly, as have costs. Bureau of Labor stats confirm this. It’s been a job hunters market for many years. Those increased salaries and labor costs are also a part of why rents must go up. The costs of staff for maintaining property, conducting compliance inspections, etc have all gone up to match those salary increases. The only thing that has not gone up is the rent.
Two of the board members, are so disinterested in a genuine economic conversation that they have frequently shown up late or skipped hearings entirely. They do not belong on the board. They walked into the room knowing that no matter what the data said they would only vote for a roll back, not an increase. They do not care about their duty to preserve our rent stabilized housing stock by ensuring it is economically viable. They only care about bleeding housing providers dry to avoid their own rent being increased. Hopefully the Mayor will remove them after their antics at the last two hearings.I urge this board to consider the REAL environment on the ground and offer 10-15% increases for both 1- and 2-year leases. Again your own data shows how important this is to avoid the loss of the limited rent stabilized housing stock we have.
Do the right thing. Help make housing viable in NYC again. Raise the rent!
Sincerely,
M Williams.
Housing Provider -
M Williams
Comment added June 3, 2024 12:51amNYC needs to learn from other cities around the world about how to address our housing crisis. Rent stabilization is not the answer
In the very center of Tokyo, one can live for just $800/month. In NY the cost is 3-4x or more, unless you are lucky enough to have won the lottery such that you live in a rent stabilized or rent controlled unit whose costs are unfairly subsidized by your neighbors or your housing provider.
Why is Tokyo rent so low? Turns out if supply matches or exceeds demand, pricing comes down. This isn’t an economic fairy tail it is reality.
In the past 50 years, Tokyo has built more new homes than the *total* number of homes in New York City. New York City’s expensive housing costs are entirely a policy choice. Rent stabilization, permitting red tape, high property taxes and ever increasing insurance costs are all part of why less housing is built here than in other major cities.
Want NYC to be more affordable? Stop regulating, start building. The prices on free market units will tumble as they did during the COVID-19 pandemic years. This is in the control of our elected officials.
But until they do their job, you at the RGB have to act based on today’s reality. Rents on stabilized and controlled units MUST go up significantly. This is the only way to ensure those buildings remain solvent. I understand it is not palatable to tenants or press friendly, and I’m not excited about it either but until Albany and City Hall act to bring the cost of providing housing down, rents have to go up.
M Williams
Comment attachment
Housing Provider
tokyo.pdf -
I R
Comment added June 4, 2024 3:25amDear Rent Guidelines Board Members,
I watched today’s Bronx hearing remotely, and wanted to respond to some of the testimony we heard.
Mr. Agramonte testified about the plight of the disabled and senior citizens during tonights RGB hearing. He said he didn’t understand how the disabled would be able to cover their rent if it went up, because their disability benefits do not increase. The answer is DRIE
As a reminder, tenants who disabled are able to have their rent frozen as part of the “Disability Rent Increase Exemption (DRIE)” program. No matter how much the RGB decides to increase rents, the disabled can have their rent frozen in place and owners will receive the difference in the form of a property tax subsidy.
The same is true for retirees such as Mrs. Petersen and Irving Bennet who of their retirement income being fixed, while rents increased. SCRIE is available for just this purpose.
Beyond SCRIE and DRIE, voucher programs and other subsidy programs exist for distressed tenants. During the pandemic ERAP helped tenants with their rent arrears. City Council members and other elected officials hold regular office hours to assist tenants apply for these.
On the other hand, NO programs exist for landlords of existing rent stabilized buildings as their costs go up by double digit percentages – but their rents remain flat. J-51 expired. DHCR’s hardship program is backed up for years.
City Council Members offer no workshops or open house events for housing providers. HPD, DHCR, etc have no staff for helping building owners navigate the system.
If you want to reduce the cost of housing, you have to reduce the cost of providing that housing.
Thank you.
-
Hayley Craig
Comment added June 4, 2024 2:24pmHello, my name is Hayley Craig and I am a tenant in a rent stabilized apartment in Brooklyn. The proposal to increase rent stabilized rents by 2-4% for 1 year renewals and 4-6.5% for 2 year renewals is too high for the majority of New Yorkers to afford. These numbers need to be significantly decreased, as many of us are already struggling to get by as is. The cost of living continues to go up while wages are not increasing at the same rate. Affordable housing should be a crucial priority for our city so that working class New Yorkers do not continue to be displaced as property values rise as the city continues to gentrify.
-
RBG Victim
Comment added June 4, 2024 5:59pmCHIP has called for an investigation into Con Edison’s delivery charges, which are significantly higher than National Grid’s. Slattery Energy analyzed energy data and determined that in 2024, National Grid is charging an average delivery charge of $0.60 per Therm, compared to a $1.45 per Therm delivery charge from ConEd. The difference in delivery charge is estimated to cost an additional $17,213 for rent-stabilized buildings of 30 units, based on the average per apartment usage of 675 Therms. This is just one more example of ways the state inflates costs for rent-stabilized housing, even as it fails to ensure rents cover inflation or operating costs.
Comment attachment
coned.pdf -
Kristin Guest
Comment added June 4, 2024 6:53pmThe RGB should recommend the minimum possible rent increases for rent stabilized units. There is a severe housing shortage! Landlords are increasing rent just because they can! If they can’t afford to run buildings somehow while passively collecting thousands of dollars a month per unit, they can sell it!
-
Nicolas Seunarine
Comment added June 4, 2024 7:20pmI am asking that this does not pass because renters already pay lot due to inflation and I am union member who pays rent. Expenses pile up and no increases.
-
Sophia
Comment added June 6, 2024 2:02amTo those asking for rent not to go up, you’re anger is misdirected. Call your city council members and ask them why they raise property tax on rent regulated housing each year?
If they cared about you and your rental, they wouldn’t be raising the costs that drive up your rent.
RBG Members, The increases you are recommending here are not sufficient. RBG studies said we need 2x-3x the current recommendations. Follow the data. Fund housing in NYC
-
RGB Victim
Comment added June 9, 2024 1:54amYou can’t complain about housing costs in the same breath as you raise the costs of providing that housing. Why is the city raising water rates and other utility costs while asking us not to raise rents?
Is this 8.5% increase even part of the PIOC data?
Comment attachment
[email protected]×1456.pdf -
Cat B
Comment added June 10, 2024 7:13pmI oppose the proposed bill allowing yearly rent increases in rent-stabilized buildings based solely on merit. Instead, I urge for mandatory annual inspections of building conditions and evaluations of residents’ income before permitting rent hikes. If residents’ incomes and building conditions do not improve, only homelessness and housing insecurity will rise. This trend threatens to make NYC a renter’s city, undermining ownership opportunities and disproportionately impacting Black and Brown communities. It also fosters classism, favoring temporary transplants over long-term residents. We must enforce rental rights to prevent NYC from becoming a city that backs slumlords.
-
Laura
Comment added June 10, 2024 10:53pmI am a market rate tenant living here in NYC, but most of my neighbors are rent stablized. Each time you fail to increase rent stabilized units by a reasonable level, my landlord has to raise my rent to cover the gaps. Why am I covering the costs of other tenants? Why aren’t rent stabilized tenants covering their own fair share of the costs? The market dynamics here are broken.
-
CNYC
Comment added June 11, 2024 10:45amVote “NO” on these exorbitant rent increases. Landlord greed is breaking the backs of New Yorkers! This city is steadily losing its vibrancy, because people cannot afford the cost of living here. A lot of alleged property owners in these comments would have you believe that tenants are to blame for their failure to properly maintain their properties. Meanwhile, they are constantly ( often illegally) pulling properties from the Rent-Stabilized market, even further reducing livable options for NYC residents. As tenants, we continue to pay higher rents, whilst being subjected to diminished services! Vote to preserve quality of life in New York City! Vote NO to rent increases! The proposed range is simply untenable. Don’t succumb to the greed of veritable slumlords.