Rent Control (ETPA) is Not The Solution For Ossining

OSSINING, NY -- A group of Ossining residents have joined with New York State politically-funded activist group, Community Voices Heard of New York City to call upon Village of Ossining elected officials to find solutions to the Village’s affordable housing crisis. Holding up signs that read, “Stable Homes Now” at a recent village board meeting, the group is working to quickly push through a Rent Control (ETPA) proposal in the Village, which most experts warn will inevitably increase rents and reduce the growth of subsidized affordable housing.

Ossining Mayor Victoria Gearity said at the May 2, 2018 village meeting: “The Village’s Housing Needs Assessment evaluated ETPA as one of a number of considerations in the big picture of housing for our community and noted it as number 8 of 8. The eight recommendations are intended to be done sequentially.”

She continued, “The first recommendation is a clear economic development strategy, the second is a heightened focus on effective code enforcement and it goes on from there. I am in support of us following the housing needs assessment that the village undertook using a tremendous amount of empirical data, as well as community outreach with some very clear strategies that are related to each other. So, I do not think it is wise to move forward with ETPA at this time.”

In 2017, the Village of Ossining Board had engaged top land use and economic consultant Kevin Dwarka Consulting to undertake a housing needs assessment, which included an in-depth analysis of data and feedback solicited from community members through a number of methods. Dwarka presented a series of possible options to the village. Rent stabilization was listed as an option that would follow about eight others to attempt first. As reported in the Westchester Business Journal, during his presentation at the June 14, 2017 village board work session, Dwarka noted that Rent Control-ETPA has a variety of weaknesses and recommended that the village go through the options outlined that precede ETPA. “Regardless of what decision this community goes down with in respect to rent stabilization, a spectrum of different policy options have to be considered as part of the village’s pathway forward,” Dwarka had said.

Dwarka also said that a weakness of the ETPA policy is “There really isn’t a provision in that regulation that rent-stabilized units must go to households who are most in need.”

This would mean that many higher earning individuals can obtain a rent controlled unit, while their low-income neighbors get stuck paying higher rents.

In addition, through Rent Control-ETPA, tenants are able to pass their apartment to an immediate family member. “This creates a tricky situation,” says Dwarka. “It also creates a situation where the tenants of a rent-stabilized unit are inclined to stay put for a very long time, even if the unit no longer meets their needs, which in turn, critics will argue, has an adverse effect on the supply.”

Dwarka presented other adverse impacts of rent stabilization including “a potentially negative effect on the tax revenues the village collects from certain buildings, administrative costs to put the program in place and questions as to how the village would qualify to enact the Emergency Tenant Protection Act.”

According to Building Realty Institute of Westchester and the Mid-Hudson Region (BRI) executive director Albert Annunziata: “ETPA doesn't result in ANY additional affordable housing. It restricts. It stagnates and constrains the Housing Market. It twists the rental housing supply to the advantage of a few and to the despair of the many. Its historically low rent increases cause buildings to slowly deteriorate, actually resulting in a loss of affordable housing over time.”

To this point, top economists throughout the U.S. all agree that rent control hurts those that it purports to help. In its article explaining rent control, The Economist reports, “Economists reckon a restrictive price ceiling reduces the supply of property to the market. When prices are capped, people have less incentive to fix up and rent out their basement flat, or to build rental property. Slower supply growth exacerbates the price crunch. And those landlords who do rent out their properties might not bother to maintain them, because when supply and turnover in the market are limited by rent caps, landlords have little incentive to compete to attract tenants. Rent controls also mean that landlords may also become choosier, and tenants may stay in properties longer than makes sense.”

They continue to explain that people who live in rent-controlled apartments “tend to have higher median incomes than those who rent market-rate apartments. That may be because wealthier households may be in a better position to track down and secure rent-stabilized properties.”