Hey, there! Log in / Register
City Council approves rent-stabilization bid; now goes to the state legislature
By adamg on Wed, 03/08/2023 - 2:50pm
Christopher Gavin reports the City Council voted 11-2 today to support Mayor Wu's proposal to cap rent increases at no more than 10% for tenants in older buildings with more than six apartments. The measure now goes to the state legislature for consideration.
Councilors Frank Baker (Dorchester) and Erin Murphy (at large) voted against.
Massachusetts landlords are already waging a scorched-earth campaign against the proposal, including suing the city to get a year's worth of e-mail between City Hall and members of an advisory committee Wu set up to study the idea.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
classic screw the newcomers move
Of course the existing elected officials would support this. It's a major benefit to existing residents who voted them in, at the expense of new residents who might theoretically vote for someone else.
This will make it even harder to find an apartment, since existing residents will have an incentive to hang onto places they might not need. Like a single person keeping a 3-bedroom for decades after their kids move out, which happens all the time in NYC. And with vacancy decontrol, a new resident will have to pay market rate, which will be even higher than today due to the hoarding.
I am in support of this
I am in support of this legislation but the city being unwilling to turn over the emails and playing this cat and mouse game does not give me confidence it will pass muster. The emails are public record and this is not a matter of national security or HR. There is no reason to not collect the emails and send them over. I just hope there isn't something stupid in there that will torpedo this whole thing.
Much ado about nothing?
I haven’t taken a deep dive into this new bill but I don’t quite get what is there to celebrate -or lament if you are a landlord. Except for a relatively small number of properties that may be well below market rate, rents are already at an all-time high relatively to income. In that context, a 10% increase/year (or doubling every 7 year) is a big allowance. Even the greediest landlords won't be able to apply a 10% raise year after year and keep his apartments rented. There are big loopholes too (6 units or under, new construction etc.)
This thing doesn’t have a lot of teeth and looks mostly like posturing from both sides.
Wages and salaries aren't rising 10%
Even 10% will be a huge hardship for many families.
The camel's nose under the tent
Basically.
If the state goes along with this version of rent control, what's the next iteration going to be? A cap of 5% per year? All apartments except owner-occupied buildings with under 4 units?
yes
please
keep going
City Life Vida Urbana and others were calling for 3%. That seems better. Exempt no units, because the people shouldn't be exploited by small landlords either. If small landlords need to extort their tenants what is actually so good about them?
It’s a start, but not enough
As a small landlord, I see no reason why I should be exempt. If you’re a landlord and can’t make things work by increasing 10% or less per year, you are doing something wrong.
Agreed. I have a three bed condo I rent in the city
And have only raised rent $50/month in the last five years. But I also make sure everything is in good working order and I’m very responsive to my tenants needs. It’s a symbiotic relationship - I make sure they’re happy and they pay rent on the first of the month every month and don’t trash the unit making me happy.
I had the same experience when I owned …
…. rental property. We kept the rents low, raised them rarely and modestly and only when necessary. We took our responsibility to maintain the property in good and safe conditions very seriously. I was and am still a member of CityLife/Vida Urbana, so it was very important to me that I not succumb to the temptation become a rent gauging slumlord that some landlords can’t resist. It’s so easy to do that without rent control and with laws that favor property owners.
In return we had good long term tenants who kept up their sides of the bargain as well. The low turnover kept costs down. We were always in the black. If inexperienced people new to the business like we were could do all that, I figure just about anyone can.
One of the things I learned from that experience is that when landlords claim they have no choice but to jack up the rents because the “market demands it” that’s just pure unadulterated bullshit.
Wait till everyone
Who’s lease is up in the next few months gets their adjustment. Landlord are going to get ahead of the stupid proposal.
Well said
Summed up the issue well. I worry that legally encoding that high of a maximum will only encourage certain landlords to meet it every year. That would be completely unsustainable from the perspective of the tenant.
They can do that now
If they aren't already increasing by 10%, then it's because the demand market won't satisfy that increase. So I'm not sure what your concern is in this regard.
Thought the proposal was 5% cap
This is almost useless and it excludes most triple-deckers that are increasingly investment company owned. Some "family" run companies have 100's of tenants in small buildings and can set the price for entire neighborhoods.
Rent control
A rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.
Stabilization could happen without government control, for example if demand meets supply.
Control can create stabilization of prices. But we will see the bad effects of rent control that necessitated its removal in the first place.
Would be true if
the market rules of supply and demand were the only forces at play. But, while the lack of supply in cities like Boston is a big issue that needs to be taken seriously, large Rental companies have increasingly been turning to price setting software that touts its ability to "meet or beat" the market in how much it raises rents. Here's a really great ProPublica article on it: https://www.propublica.org/article/yieldstar-rent-increase-realpage-rent.
This sort of thing requires government intervention in some form to counteract. I am not saying that this particular legislation is the right solution--I would argue that such software should be outlawed, but that would be impossible to do at the scale of Boston.
10% is still high!
A 10% yearly increase is no joke! For example, 2000 a month turns into 3220 after 5 years. How do they expect people to be able to afford that?
This bill is a waste of everyones time
Does absolutely nothing that’s not already happening aside from incentivizing landlords to jack the rent up as much as possible every year just in case.
It's vague
with a few contradictory provisions
Like, rent increases are tied to CPI +6%, max 10%, but also a "fair return standard" is set, which is obviously vague and subjective.
Owner-occupied and Section 8 housing are exempt from the rent stabilization measures, which will create an incentive to rent to Section 8 over people whose employment income exceeds eligibility for rent subsidies, eg teachers and other government employees and those in the private sector.
"Just cause" eviction applies to all housing, including owner-occupied houses. Terms are vague - "substantial," "reasonable," etc and could exclude the kind of low-grade harassment or irritation from a tenant which could make an owner-occupant landlord's life hell.
Some foreseeable reasons for eviction are omitted or could be subject to "relocation fees" - for example you are retiring and want to sell a house and move to Florida, and buyers want the house vacant so they can move in.
Rental registration and notification procedures are an obvious avenue for the new Rent Stabilization Board to grab power. The role of the Board to enforce the law in Boston is yet to be seen. Undoubtedly they will try to become a gatekeeper on evictions before filing in Housing or District Court, as the old Rent Control Board was. This would delay even the most urgent and justifiable eviction for weeks or months.
This was the only place I could find a text of the proposed law, with an obviously partisan but reasonable analysis:
https://masslandlords.net/business-updates/2023-02-17-boston-rent-contro...
The Legislature could amend it, I guess.
I don’t think people realize
I don’t think people realize the bill is more than just a rent increase cap. The other provisions are loaded with unintended consequences. The city doesn’t even enforce the rental laws they have now.