שאינו יודע האט געשריבן:
דו רעדסט פון די וועקענסי אלאוענס?
No, the law voided IAI which was the tool to bring it up to market rent and get it free market This is besides vacancy allowance and more which is also ridicules', but without IAI he closed the last chance to ever make money from a stabilized asset
א נייע פראפאזעל.. אינטרעסאנט אנציווייזן די סיבה פאר זיין פראפאזעל..
Proposed bill would require landlords to pay for tenants’ internet
Landlords in New York City are already on the hook for their tenants’ heat and hot water. A proposed City Council bill wants to add internet service to that list.
The measure, introduced Thursday by Council member Ben Kallos, would require owners of multifamily buildings to provide free broadband internet to their tenants. If the bill is passed, existing buildings with 10 or more apartments would have until Jan. 1, 2026 to comply.
“Every New York City apartment comes with heat, hot water, electricity, and a phone line. It’s time to add Internet, so it is there and just works when a tenant moves in,” Kallos said in a statement. “We can finally end the digital divide and bridge the homework gap by making sure every apartment in New York City comes with Internet.” He pointed to a recent report by the Centers for Disease Control, which found that vaccination rates were “significantly associated with household internet access in New York City.”
Kallos, who represents the Upper East Side, is pitching this idea with just a little more than two months left in office. The proposal will almost certainly face pushback from property owners. The bill language specifies that the cost of the internet service, including any related charges, cannot be passed along to tenants.
Jay Martin, executive director of the Community Housing Improvement Program, a landlord group, called the bill “yet another unfunded mandate on rent-stabilized housing providers.”
“In a city with a homeless crisis the councilman should be focused on building more housing and lowering the operating costs of the housing we currently have which in turn lowers the need for rent increases,” he said in an email. “What’s next? Free gyms? Housing has costs. Costs that are paid by rent. Getting out of the Upper East Side would help.”
New buildings must go electric under City Council deal Shorter buildings face mandate in 2024, taller ones in 2027
The City Council is poised toban the use of gas in new buildings, requiring most to use electricity-powered heat and hot water.
Lawmakers reached a deal late Wednesday on a bill requiring new buildings shorter than seven stories to go electric on Jan. 1, 2024, and taller ones after July 1, 2027. Projects that get their construction documents approved before those dates will be exempt.
A building with fewer than seven stories and at least half of its units subject to an affordable housing regulatory agreement is spared from the requirement if construction documents are approved before Dec. 31, 2025. A new building that is taller and has such an agreement will have two more years beyond that.
Some burning of fossil fuel in new buildings will be allowed, but not for heat and hot water. The measure allows the combustion of 25 kilograms of carbon dioxide per million British thermal units of energy or more if it has nothing to do with the building’s heat or hot water and is only used intermittently.
That threshold rules out natural gas (53 kilograms) and heating oil (70), according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. But the requirements do not apply to the use of fossil fuel when it is necessary for manufacturing or operation of a laboratory, laundromat, hospital, crematorium or commercial kitchen.
According to New York Communities for Change, a group that has advocated for the measure, the City Council will vote on the bill next week. The Council is known to schedule votes only for bills that have enough support to pass.
“The evidence is clear: An immediate shift to requiring gas-free buildings is both feasible and necessary,” a coalition led by NYCC, NYPIRG, WE ACT for Environmental Justice, and Food & Water Watch said in a statement. “We have the technology and the skills to build all-electric buildings, many of which are already built or under construction across the city.”
The amended measure, sponsored by Council member Alicka Ampry-Samuel, delays the gas and oil ban: An earlier version applied to new construction and major renovations within two years of its passage. The latest bill language is closer to the de Blasio administration’s demand that gas hookups be banned by 2030.
It also does not seem to apply to renovations, a mandate that was not clearly defined in the original bill and had been a point of contention, and likely would have further held up negotiations. The mayor and most City Council members are in their final month in office.
The latest version also partially adopts a size-based phase-in favored by the real estate industry. The Real Estate Board of New York supported a ban that would apply in new construction with fewer than three stories and single-family homes in 2025, buildings with fewer than 10 stories in 2027 and taller projects in 2030.
The trade group had pointed to the need to test electric heat pumps in large-scale buildings, and to the fact that New York still relies heavily on electricity generated by burning fossil fuels.
A report by the New York Independent System Operator this month warns that the state’s electric system will be less able to “withstand disturbances” starting in 2025 and its reliability could be endangered if planned transmission projects are delayed.
“The transition away from fossil fuels is only possible if we have reliable electricity so that New Yorkers can confidently turn on their heat in the winter, their air conditioning in the summer, and the lights in the office,” REBNY’s James Whelan said in a statement this week. “This report is a serious wake-up call that policies need to be more carefully coordinated with these very real risks in mind.”
Meanwhile, the state legislature could step in and speed up the process and apply it statewide. A bill has been introduced to require new buildings to be all-electric by 2024.
Another rent board vote, another disappointment for tenants and landlords. To the chagrin of both sides, the Rent Guidelines Board voted 5-4 Tuesday night to raise stabilized rents 3.25 percent on one-year leases and 5 percent on two-year leases.
Separately, the board voted 7-2 to freeze rents on stabilized hotels. Both adjustments take effect Oct. 1, 2022.
The full-year hike for rent-stabilized apartments was the first since Covid hit and signaled an end to the de facto protection the board had afforded tenants over a year and half of freezes.
For landlords, it wasn’t nearly enough.
Just as tenant advocates argued that many renters would be unable to shoulder any added expense, owners were adamant that the moderate increase would not offset their rising costs.
In a rarity, the parties did find one point to agree on: The system for determining rent increases is in need of reform. But no such effort is being considered, and it is unlikely that the two sides would agree on one in any event.
Ahead of Tuesday night’s hearing, renters and tenant advocacy groups, including the Rent Justice Coalition and the Met Council on Housing, rallied outside the site of the final vote in NoHo to demand a rent rollback.
But Rent Justice Coalition member Julius Bennet was the first to admit that a reduction was a near impossibility. The board last month preliminarily approved a 2 to 4 percent increase; final decisions have always fallen within approved ranges.
Read more Landlords buy TV time to sway New Yorkers, rent board Rent Guidelines Board considers moderate hike in narrow vote Rent board staff proposes increase of up to 4.5% Rather, the groups’ real aim was to criticize a reconstituted rent board they claim has prioritized landlords’ profits over tenants’ financial security as inflation soars and a recession looms.
“I do not get the feeling that we’re being heard too well,” said Bennett, referencing the four public hearings held this spring that offered New Yorkers a platform to speak on rent adjustments.
The tenant activist said the forums felt more like “an exercise” than an avenue to influence board members.
Speaking over the cheers of protesters, a newly appointed tenant representative on the board, Adán Soltren, said he felt the neutrality of the panel had been compromised.
Backed by fellow tenant member Sheila Garcia, Soltren characterized the board members, who are mayoral appointees, as tools used by the city to ensure the real estate industry, a major donor to Mayor Eric Adams and previous administrations, is pulling in enough money.
“Shame on this administration and any administration that will put members in place on this board that clearly believe investments deserve more respect than people,” Soltren said.
“This process has been performative at best and for the tenants of the city, I am truly sorry,” he added.
Mayor Eric Adams, in a statement after the vote, recognized that the increase would be hard on some tenants, but that small owners are facing bankruptcy after years of freezes. He blamed “this system.”
“We cannot pit landlords against tenants as winners and losers every year,” the mayor said.
Landlord groups argued that the board didn’t do owners any favors by approving an increase in rent smaller than their expenses rose.
“The data is clear. The adjustment approved by the RGB today will not put a penny of profit in the pockets of small property owners,” said Jay Martin, executive director of the Community Housing Improvement Program. “The RGB has simply taken steps to limit their losses for the next year.”
In the months ahead of the vote, dispatches from the rent board signaled an increase that would take landlords’ rising expenses into account. A March report revealed owner profits in Covid’s first year had plummeted by 8 percent excluding some major expenses; the next month the board staff recommended a 2.7 to 4.5 percent increase.
And ahead of the final vote, all but two proposals put forth for board members to consider included a hike for one-year leases.
But owners who called for a hike as high as 9 percent to offset rising costs, including for property taxes, water rates and energy, viewed the 3.25 percent bump as both a pittance and evidence that the city’s method of determining rental adjustments needs an overhaul.
“The RGB vote proves this is a broken system,” said Joseph Strasburg, president of landlord group the Rent Stabilization Association. “It fails landlords and tenants.”
His implication was that rent increases too small to keep buildings well maintained will leave more than 2 million tenants in increasingly substandard housing.
Landlords argue that the rent board’s adjustments are based on data that doesn’t offer a full or up-to-date picture of owner expenses.
“It’s time for a different approach,” Strasburg said. The group’s president didn’t specify changes to the rent board itself. Rather, Strasburg suggested that state lawmakers reform property taxes, address rising insurance rates and expand the housing voucher system to funnel more money to tenants and thereby landlords.
CHIP floated introducing offsets for stabilized landlords or a different system for implementing rent hikes last week.
Public member Christian Gonzalez-Rivera, who joined both tenant members in voting for a rent freeze, echoed the call for policy change. He floated lower property taxes and a more generous tax abatement to help landlords afford repairs.
Most of those changes would depend on the state legislature, which is in recess until January.
City Comptroller Brad Lander did convene a group of lawmakers and housing advocates last week to call for property tax reform as the 421a tax break expired. And the city and state have both taken recent action on housing vouchers, bumping the caps for the FHEPS program at both levels of government to Section 8 rates this year.
Still, the sentiment from both sides is clear: Something’s got to give.
“If our elected officials truly care about affordable, well-maintained housing as a human right, they will use their powers to make sure that landlords have the money they need to make repairs,” Gonzalez-River said.
אינטרעסאנט די 311 וועבסייט האט א טעות און שרייבט 3.5%..
נקוט האי כללא בידך: די עקסטרעים פון רעכט איז ראסיזעם וואס טויג נישט פאר אידן און די עקסטרעים לינק איז גזירות נגד הדתווי מזעהט ליידער איבער די וועלט לעצטענס
זיי דו דער נגיד וואס שטעלט צו פאר אנדערע. פארוואס עפעס ער?
מסכים.. אוודאי אבער מיינעך נישט אז מזאל פייניגן לענדלארדס וואס די דעמס טוען אבער עס דארף גיין מענטשליך נישט אז עטליכע מאכן בילאנען אנע חשבון מיט 300 פארצענט פראפיט אויפן חשבון פון ארימעליידט מילאנען איז פונקט גענוג...
נקוט האי כללא בידך: די עקסטרעים פון רעכט איז ראסיזעם וואס טויג נישט פאר אידן און די עקסטרעים לינק איז גזירות נגד הדתווי מזעהט ליידער איבער די וועלט לעצטענס
זיי דו דער נגיד וואס שטעלט צו פאר אנדערע. פארוואס עפעס ער?
מסכים.. אוודאי אבער מיינעך נישט אז מזאל פייניגן לענדלארדס וואס די דעמס טוען אבער עס דארף גיין מענטשליך נישט אז עטליכע מאכן בילאנען אנע חשבון מיט 300 פארצענט פראפיט אויפן חשבון פון ארימעליידט מילאנען איז פונקט גענוג...
קוקט אויס האסט נישט דורכגעטוהן די נ.י. סטעיבעלייזט געזעצן, עס איז ערגער ווי קאמיניזעם.. די שטאט צווינגט דיר צו שאדן האבן געלט ווייל די עקספענסעס וואס זיי גייען ארויף איז ווייניגער ווי זיי ערלויבן ארויפצוגיין. דאס איז חוץ אלע אנדערע צידרייטע געזעצן ווי שוין אויסגעשמעוסט דא עטליכע מאל.
דאס זאג איך אויך קלאר אז די דעמס געזעצן זענען רשעות אבער כהאב קאמענטירט אויף די אויסדריק אז ריעל עסטעיט איז בכלל נישט געמאכט צוצושטעלן האוזינג פאר מענטשן דאס איז נישט ריכטיג ווייל הייזער בעצם איז א מאסט פאר די מענטשהייט און די קענסט נישט דאס אוועקנעמען מיטן בעטן 300 פארצענט ריווח ווי מטוט ליידער ביי אונז נאר וואס יא ממעג מאכן געלט אבער ווי מענטשן און אפארדעבל
נקוט האי כללא בידך: די עקסטרעים פון רעכט איז ראסיזעם וואס טויג נישט פאר אידן און די עקסטרעים לינק איז גזירות נגד הדתווי מזעהט ליידער איבער די וועלט לעצטענס