Posted by MJ on June 13, 2000 at 10:27:31:
In Reply to: Re: Help decoding 'high rent' deregulation, also RRRA97 posted by Anna on June 12, 2000 at 22:04:38:
Thanks again, and thanks also for posting the link to the text of RRRA 1997 and the summary. I am puzzled, as there appears to be no difference between the clause of RRRA 1993 and the clause of RRRA 1997, except for the dates. But, as you pointed out, in the comments section of the proposed amendments to the RSC, it is stated that "as part of the Rent Regulation Reform Act of 1997, the New York State Legislature again expanded the category of deregulated apartments by providing that any apartment that became vacant after June 19, 1997 could be considered deregulated if the legal rent would be $2,000.00 or more per month, whether or not such rent could have been collected from the last tenant prior to vacancy"
Here's the clause, with the 1993 law in lowercase and the 1997 law in caps:
"(n) any housing accommodation with a maximum rent of two thousand dollars or more per month at any time between the effective date of this paragraph and October first, nineteen hundred ninety-three which is or becomes vacant on or after the effective date of this paragraph, OR ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION WITH A MAXIMUM RENT OF TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS OR MORE PER MONTH AT ANY TIME ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE RENT REGULATION REFORM ACT OF 1997 WHICH IS OR BECOMES VACANT ON OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE RENT REGULATION REFORM ACT OF 1997."
Aren't the 1993 and 1997 clauses identical with respect to the point that an apartment has to have rented for $2000 or more a month and then be vacated in order for the landlord to apply for deregulation, or am I missing something here?
A related question: has there been a push by tenants' associations to increase the amount of rent that would have to be paid before an apartment could be deregulated? It seems like the legislature is not taking into account the skyrocketing of rents in NYC, since it keeps upping the date at which a rent of $2000 or more per month counts as "luxury"; in 1993 $2000 a month for rent was likely equivalent to $4000 or more per month in 2000.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup