Update: Oreo, Dog Thrown Off Building, Was Euthanized
Access-A-Ride Renders Bike Lane Inaccessible
The UWS Gets Its Very Own Apple Store
Emily and Sarah Kunstler, Filmmakers
Video: Close Encounters Above Central Park?
The NY State Division of Housing and Community Renewal finally closed a loophole in rent regulations that would have allowed owners and landlords leaving government-subsidized housing programs to increase rents to market rates by citing "unique and peculiar" circumstances. According to the NY Times, some tenants' rents would have skyrocketed from $981/month to $4,500/month for a two-bedroom on the Upper West Side and from $1,000/month to $5,275/month for a three-bedroom, also on the Upper West Side.
The Division of Housing & Community Renewal explains that the Mitchell-Lama program was created in 1955 "for purpose of building affordable housing for middle-income residents." The owners would get low-interest mortgages and tax exemptions, in exchange for "limitation on profits, income limits on tenants and supervision by DHCR." For buildings completed before 1974, there was a "unique and peculiar" provision loophole intended to allow for rent increase for, say, a unit rented by a building manager, but the owners of 23 Mitchell-Lama buildings in NYC and Westchester and Nassau Counties, per the Times, "sought permission from the state to raise the rents to market levels in 4,400 units."
The buildings will now move into rent stabilization (which generally means landlords will have to wait for the current tenants to leave before jacking up rents - more information here), or they can revise their applications to leave Mitchell-Lama. Building owners are also unhappy that the law was called a "loophole" - earlier in the fall, a lawyer representing the Rent Stabilization Association called the change a "political response to tenant activism."
Graphic from a 2006 study by City Comptroller William Thompson, who found that around 25,000 apartments were in the process of leaving the Mitchell-Lama program
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Gotta love Mitchell-Lama. I know someone on the UWS paying less than $900/month with utilities for a 2 bedroom in a doorman building with a garage and parking space.
"...would have allowed owners and landlords of government leaving subsidized housing programs..."
"The owners would gets low-interest mortgages and tax exemptions..."
No need to see who wrote this masterpiece!
Programs like this need to be gotten rid of. This kind of rent control provides a huge benefit to the small minority of New Yorkers who are lucky enough to have gotten in at the right time, to the detriment of the vast majority of people who aren't.
Sure, let's get rid of this program so that even more middle class people can be displaced for the wealthy. Read the Times story -- the guy's rent was going to go up from $1000 to over $5000. Tell me, are the "vast majority" of people going to be able to afford that rent every month? And do you really think that putting these Mitchell-Lama apartments on the open market would drive the market rate for Manhattan housing down?
These people should have either bought an apartment 30 years ago when they were cheap or acted like adults and moved to the outer bouroughs where they can afford rent instead of acting like middle-aged teenagers who get to live the high life on Uncle Sugar's dime.
So why does the guy deserve to have an apartment for less than 20% of the market rent?