The Rent Guidelines Board has given approval for rent increases on approximately one million rent-stabilized apartments in New York City. The approved changes allow landlords to raise rent by 3% for one-year leases, 2.75% for the first year and 3.2% for the second year on two-year leases. These increases will apply to new leases signed on or after October 1, 2023.
After months of discussions and contentious meetings with the public, the Rent Guidelines Board reached a 5-4 final vote in favor of the rent hikes. In May, the board had initially proposed a range of increases from 2% to 5% for one-year leases and 4% to 7% for two-year leases, which faced criticism from tenants and advocates who called for rent rollbacks or freezes. Landlords argued that rent increases were necessary to cover their rising expenses.
Mayor Eric Adams commended the Rent Guidelines Board’s decision, stating that the approved rent increases strike a balance between protecting tenants from unsustainable hikes and providing small property owners with the necessary resources to maintain their buildings and preserve affordable homes for New Yorkers. The vote received support from both tenant and public representatives.
However, The Legal Aid Society, an organization that had advocated for a rent freeze, expressed dissatisfaction with the Rent Guidelines Board’s ruling. They believe that the increase in rents for vulnerable residents will lead to more people being displaced and facing housing insecurity. They highlighted that the majority of tenants in rent-stabilized units are already struggling with high rent burdens and emphasized the affordability crisis in New York City.
The Rent Stabilization Association, which represents owners and managers of over one million rent-stabilized apartments in New York City, criticized the Rent Guidelines Board’s decision. They claimed that the board disregarded their own data and yielded to the pressure of radical politicians and activists. The association argued that the decision deprived affordable housing providers of the necessary revenue to cope with escalating costs. They also emphasized that government programs exist to support tenants in economic distress, while stabilized building owners, as private providers of a public benefit, are subject to arbitrary politics instead of sound policy.