A state report backs up what we've been saying: The voucher process needs to be fixed. We break it down. The city council is out with their new housing plan, and it includes something we're happy about. An expansion of vouchers. Plus, NYCHA is getting lead out of apartments, which is great, but we explain why rent stabilized buildings can't follow their model. Let's start Housing New York. 

[THEME]

“We need 800,000 units to meet the demand today… What we have right now in the United States and what we have right now in New York City is almost a crisis of absurdity… We have to figure out a way to get these vacant units back online in a reasonable way that sets a rent that's affordable for most people… We will end America's housing shortage by building 3 million new homes and rentals…” 

[INTRO]

Welcome to Housing New York, our weekly podcast where we break down the news that's impacting rental housing in our great city. I'm your host Kenny Burgos. We are taping this on Monday, November 4th. By the time you listen to this podcast, the election will either be happening or over. So we're going to avoid any talk of the campaigns in this podcast and stick to housing. Let's get to the news. 

[THE NEWS]

[Comptroller finds Social Services ineffective at processing housing vouchers] We're going to start this week's podcast discussing vouchers, and more specifically how the lack of efficiency is preventing families with vouchers. This was the conclusion of a report by the State Comptroller last week, which found that the New York City Department of Social Services was ineffective in processing voucher applications, which was leading to long delays in moving families out of shelters. The report also highlighted the biggest hurdle for voucher recipients, the lack of affordable housing in New York City. This report was validation of things we've been saying for a while. 

The biggest frustration for many building owners is when they tell a voucher holder they can move into the apartment next week, but it takes two or three months for the government to process the application and set up inspections. This lag is lost rent for the owner, and many times they have to rent the apartment to someone else because of the delay. The government has some programs, and there are some nonprofits that will pay property owners to hold apartments, but this is a band-aid for the larger problem, which is that the process needs to be more efficient.

Eventually, we need to get to a place where vouchers work more like cash. Tenants are able to use a government subsidy to help find housing that meets their needs quickly, without a convoluted process. But more importantly, we need more apartments for voucher holders. If supply does not dramatically increase, then you will continue to have the scenario we have now, where many times five or more voucher holders apply for the same apartment.

One thing we can promise is that NYAA will be leading the conversation on how we can address these issues for years to come.  

[City of Yes vs. City For All]

Continuing our theme of discussing housing supply, the city council has launched a new plan that they call City For All. It is billed as a companion to the Mayor's City of Yes proposal that would slightly upzone all neighborhoods in the five boroughs. City For All focuses on targeted affordable housing subsidies but also includes investment in preservation, the expansion of tenant rights and legal services for tenants, and a healthy investment in expanding voucher access for low income New Yorkers. 

Our take is that all of this sounds great, especially expanding vouchers. We have been vocal supporters of City of Yes and believe it should be passed as is. The best way for that to happen is for the City Council to take a Yes/And approach, which is what they appear to be doing. 

Not to be the Debbie Downer here, but we also have to put this into perspective. City of Yes is a first step to increasing supply. City For All is a good step towards strengthening the social safety net for New York's most vulnerable residents. But combined, this still only tackles roughly a quarter of the city's housing shortage problems. We need bigger and bolder ideas if we truly want to make New York City affordable, and to make sure there is enough room for the city to grow and prosper in the future. 

[Broker Fees Update]

Since we're already talking about the City Council, let's touch quickly on some updates with the Broker Bill. We now know for sure that the City Council will be voting on the FAIR Act, which is the bill sponsored by Chi Ossé, that would change how broker fees are paid in the city. 

The simplest way to describe it is that the person hiring the broker would pay the fee. The more nuanced take is to say that the bill attempts to force the owners to pay the broker fee because, as currently written, if an owner advertises the apartment, they will be required to pay the fee. 

In response to this moving quickly, REBNY has reportedly proposed an alternative bill that would require brokers to give renters a quote-tenants bill of rights, clearly explaining the current laws and proactively tell tenants what the broker fee would be. 

Our take on this hasn't really changed. We think this is shaking a snow globe and ultimately it is going to create confusion and force people to change how they operate, but fundamentally it is not going to help renters. The only thing that will create a better environment for renters is an increase in supply.

NYAA does have some specific concerns about how this will impact older and stabilized buildings. These buildings cannot absorb this cost of hiring brokers, so they will have to figure out a different way to market the apartments. A bigger concern, though, is vouchers. Currently, a lot of voucher programs pay the broker fees, and if this bill disrupts that current process, it could make it even harder for voucher holders to find apartments.

Looking ahead, we think everyone should understand that there will be unintended consequences to this bill passing, and there will be massive changes in how apartments are rented out. Anyone who expects this to just be a cost shift from renters to building owners is going to be in for a surprise.  

[Back to California: Judge blocks San Francisco’s Vacancy Tax Law] 

Okay, we are flying back across the country to California now.

This seems like it's becoming a regular segment on the podcast, but we have some news to tell you about the San Francisco Vacancy Tax Law. For those unfamiliar, voters in the city of San Francisco voted to approve a vacancy tax last year. It was set to be implemented early next year. The basic idea of the tax is that it would be punitive if you didn't live in your condo for the majority of the year, or if you had a rental property that you failed to rent out. 

This week, a judge blocked the implementation of the law, agreeing with property owners that any vacancy tax that is punitive is unconstitutional. 

We highlight this decision because we want to make it clear that it follows the logic of New York court precedent. It's simply unconstitutional to force a property owner to rent out an apartment unless just compensation is paid. In fact, the state's legal defense of New York's rent stabilization law is predicated on the idea that the government is not forcing building owners to rent out units, which is what a vacancy tax would do. 

I know many rent stabilized building owners have been worried about a vacancy tax on apartments they cannot afford to renovate under the current laws. We are confident that will never happen, so you don't have to worry about it. But we do need to work with elected officials to get many empty rent-stabilized apartments back online and NYAA is focused on making that happen. 

[Summer 2025 deadline looms for lead paint testing in rent stabilized buildings]  

We want to end the podcast this week talking about lead paint. There was a story in City Limits about the efforts of NYCHA to remove lead based paint from more than 10,000 apartments since they were ordered to undergo this work back in 2019.

Lead paint removal is a huge issue in New York City. The vast majority of apartment buildings are older than 1960. Which is the date where lead paint was banned and no longer allowed in buildings. This means that roughly half of all apartments in the city have to have lead paint removed from them.

Local Law 1 of 2004 kickstarted the requirement that lead was removed from apartments and older buildings on turnover. Next summer is the deadline for all apartments to be tested for lead based paint. Many owners have been proactive in doing this, but gaining access to occupied apartments can be difficult. 

What you need to know is NYCHA relocates their tenants to do the abatement work, and they [the tenants] really don't have a right to refuse. Private property owners that are required to test for lead paint and do remediation work cannot force a tenant out of their apartment unless there is a court order.  

Owners want to comply with this law, but we fear that tens of thousands of lawsuits are going to have to be filed against tenants in order to gain access to these apartments. This is going to be a massive cost to owners and a terrible inconvenience for renters. We are hopeful that the Mayor and City Council will work with us to prevent this from happening.

We're confident we can find a middle ground that still gets let out of apartments without disrupting renters' lives.  

[OUTRO]

And that's it for this week's episode. Be sure to follow us on all our social media handles @HousingNY – That's for Instagram, TikTok, X, even YouTube Shorts. 

If you like what we are doing, you should give us a good rating on whatever app you're using to listen to this podcast. The positive feedback is helpful to get our message out to a larger audience. 

Tune in next week where hopefully we'll have results from this year's presidential election and we'll discuss what that means for housing in New York. 

The Housing New York podcast is a proud product of the New York Apartment Association. We appreciate your feedback and you can leave us a comment on Substack or wherever you listen to this podcast. You've been listening to Housing New York with Kenny Burgos, and remember, good housing policy starts with good conversation.