NYC Rent Adjustments and Freezes

NY1 interviewed me this morning in Former Rent Guidelines Board Chair Talks Process, Possibility of Freezing Rent: 

Mayor Zohran Mamdani promised to freeze the rent on nearly 1 million stabilized apartments as a signature part of his campaign.

Despite a late push by former Mayor Eric Adams to lock up the rent board for a year, Mamdani was able to appoint a majority of the members who will decide in June whether they agree with his push for a rent freeze.

David Reiss, a former chair of the Rent Guidelines Board, joined “Mornings On 1” to talk about the process and the plausibility of the plan.

Click the link to watch the full interview.

Pat Kiernan and I discussed the column I wrote with Nestor Davidson about the process for determining rent adjustments for NYC rent-stabilized units.

 

Current Issues in Affordable Housing in New York City

New York City Bar

I will be moderating a panel on Rent Freezes, the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (HSTPA), and Nonpayment at this in-person New York City Bar program on May 7th. The registration link is here and the full program description is below:

Description:

This program will provide an inside perspective on the future of affordable housing in New York City.  Seasoned practitioners from the private and public sectors will discuss the role of the city, state and federal governments, in conjunction with for-profit developers and not-for-profit organizations, in building and preserving affordable housing. Participants will learn about the statutory, regulatory and business considerations underlying critical topics in affordable housing.

Three expert panels will present on the following:

    • Rent Freezes, the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (HSTPA), and Nonpayment
    • The Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA)
    • Case Study – Office to Residential Conversions

The detailed agenda for the day follows.

9:00 am – 9:05 am        Introduction & Program Overview

Farhana H. Choudhury, Associate Counsel/Chief of Staff for Legal at NYSHCR

Julia A. Solo, Senior Vice President & Counsel at Federated National Land

9:05 am – 10:05 am       Panel 1: Rent Freezes, the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 (HSTPA), and Nonpayment

This panel will focus on the impacts of the HSTPA that have limited rent increases for things like apartment and major capital improvements, the Mamdani administration’s proposal for an extended rent freeze, and post-pandemic rent collection challenges.

Organizers:

Farhana Hassan Choudhury, Associate Counsel/Chief of Staff for Legal

Andrew M. Darcy, Pro Bono Counsel at Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP

Moderator:

David Reiss, Professor, Cornell Law School

Panelists: 

Doug Apple, CEO, 1811 Consulting

Rafael Cestero, CEO, Community Preservation Corporation (CPC)

Tim Collins, Partner, Collins Dobkin & Miller LLP

Rob Ehrlich, Partner, Lazarus Karp Ehrlich McCourt, LLP

Topics will Include

    • Trends in Court
    • Long-Term Sustainability & Expectations Over the Next 5-10 Years
    • Potential Solutions
    • Public Commission

Question & Answer Session Conclusions

10:05 am – 10:15 am    Break

10:15 am – 11:15 am     Panel 2: The Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA)

This panel will discuss the current status of the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA).  In December 2025, COPA passed the City Council but was vetoed by outgoing Mayor Adams on his last day in office. Mayor Mamdani and new City Council Speaker Menin did not attempt a veto override when the new City Council was seated in January, and the bill which passed City Council in December is effectively dead for the time being, although many advocates and politicians, including Mayor Mamdani, have vowed to continue the fight for COPA. It’s not clear where COPA will stand in May, but this panel will examine the history and advocacy behind COPA, its operation in Washington, DC and San Francisco, and potential constitutional challenges to the law.

Organizers:

Gerrald Ellis, Deputy General Counsel, Paths Development

Alexandra Hohauser, Associate at Nixon Peabody LLP

Moderator:

Gerrald Ellis, Deputy General Counsel, Paths Development

Panelists:

Erica F. Buckley, Partner, Nixon Peabody LLP

Arielle Hersh, Director of Policy and New Projects, UHAB

Topics will Include

    • Overview of COPA, as proposed, in NYC
    • Current status of COPA in NYC
    • Discussion of the main sticking points in even getting COPA passed
    • Discussion of COPA in Washington, DC and San Francisco
    • Potential constitutional challenges

Question & Answer Session  Conclusions

11:15 am – 11:25 am     Break

11:25 am – 12:25 pm     Panel 3: Office to Residential Conversions that include Affordable Housing

This panel will discuss the challenges and benefits to office-to-residential conversions in New York City, including land use considerations, challenges in design, the unique considerations of financing, the 467-m tax incentive and case studies.

Organizers:

Daniel M. Bernstein, Member and Leader of the Tax Incentives and Affordable Housing Department at Rosenberg and Estis, P.C.

Zachary L. Nathanson, Senior Associate Attorney at Adler & Stachenfeld LLP

Moderator:

Daniel M. Bernstein, Member and Leader of the Tax Incentives and Affordable Housing Department at Rosenberg and Estis, P.C.

Panelists: 

John Cetra, FAIA, Co-Founder, CetraRuddy Architecture D.P.C.

Tricia Dietz, Assistant Commissioner for Housing Incentives, NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development

Alexander Tendler, Vice President at Vanbarton Group

Daniel Weisen, Senior Director at Eldridge Capital Management

Topics will Include

    • Land Use Considerations
    • Partial Conversions
    • Design Considerations in the Conversion Process
    • 467-m: Eligibility Considerations
    • 467-m: Applying for Tax Exemption Benefits
    • Lender Considerations
    • Case Studies

Question & Answer Session Conclusions

12:25 pm – 12:30 pm     Closing Remarks

Farhana H. Choudhury, Associate Counsel/Chief of Staff for Legal at NYSHCR

Julia A. Solo, Senior Vice President & Counsel at Federated National Land

Feet to The Fire on Property Taxes

Created by ChatGPT

Newsweek interviewed me for Mamdani’s Property Tax Plans Holding Hochul’s Feet to Fire, Expert Says. It reads, in part,

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s proposal for a 9.5 percent property tax increase in the city is a way of holding Governor Kathy Hochul’s “feet to the fire,” according to David Reiss, professor of law at Cornell Tech and Cornell Law School.

Mamdani said this week that he was proposing the increase in property tax rates in New York City as an option if he could not persuade the governor to approve higher taxes on the wealthy.

“It’s very interesting, because Mamdani endorsed her in her race for governor, which is this year,” Reiss, an expert in real estate, told Newsweek, pointing at the strong relationship that the two have maintained until now.

Not only is the 34-year-old mayor backing Hochul in her reelection bid, but he also told organizers of a Tax the Rich rally in Albany, planned for February 25, that he would likely not attend the event because he does not want to antagonize the governor, as reported by The New York Times.

“So he’s done some things that are very good for her, but then he’s kind of holding her feet to the fire and saying that Albany can make the situation much better in New York, and this is how I want you to do it,” Reiss said.

“‘I want to raise taxes on the wealthy, and the backup—because I want more revenue for the city—would be my property tax hike, but I acknowledge that it’s painful,’” he added. “’I acknowledge that that’s unpleasant, but I want to hold your feet to the fire on the income tax increase.’”

* * *

“I think Mayor Mamdani is trying to set the terms of the debate and kind of trying to allocate blame for the budget deficit that the city’s about to face,” Reiss said. “And so he’s trying to say, ‘I have a path forward, but it requires partners in government to help with that path forward,’” he added.

“And so, he’s kind of trying to set up a dynamic where, when blame is allocated for budget cuts and promises unkept, he could say he did his best to make this happen, but partners in government are not playing ball with him.”

* * *

For Reiss, the unfolding tension between Mamdani and Hochul over a “rich tax” in New York is a reflection of a bigger split within the Democratic Party nationwide.

“I think both in New York and nationally, what we’re seeing is the economically progressive wing of the Democratic Party, as reflected in Mamdani, represents a push to reallocate resources away from the very wealthy towards the low-income and working class constituents,” Reiss said.

Mamdani, he thinks, is doing a good job at setting that debate up. The question is, he said, which wing of the party will win.

“It’s an interesting question in a majority Democratic state like New York, where both the governor and the mayor are Democrats. But it’s also going to be interesting in jurisdictions where you might have a Democratic mayor and a Republican governor, especially as we go to the congressional midterms,” he added.

“Republicans are going to talk about Socialist Democrats and Democrats are going to talk about billionaire-loving Republicans. And voters will have to decide, you know, which vision of America they agree with more.”

* * *

Voters, Reiss said, are sophisticated enough to understand that Mamdani might not keep all of his campaign promises, and might be willing to cut him some slack because he has already delivered some important reforms.

“For Mamdani, a very early win was getting the governor to go along with the child care proposal, which is, I think, fulfilling a major campaign promise,” he said.

“I think he now has the ability, because he’s been able to appoint a majority to the rent guidelines board, to encourage the board to implement a rent freeze, and that was a major campaign promise,” Reiss added.

Mamdani’s Property Tax Hike Proposal

ChatGPT Image

ABC News interviewed me in New York Mayor Mamdani’s Property Tax Hike Proposal Puts Pressure on Taxing Millionaires. It reads, in part,

David Reiss, a clinical professor of law at Cornell Law School, told ABC News that it was inevitable that Mamdani’s progressive policies would be met with initial resistance by moderates in a highly contested election year, but the debate over taxation will be one that resonates across the country as affordability takes center stage at the ballot box.

“I have no doubt this will be a flashpoint for national elections and state and local elections as well,” Reiss said.

    *     *     *

A Political Game of Chicken Not Limited to NYC

Reiss, who used to chair New York City’s Rent Guidelines Board, told ABC News that taxation has always been the big factor in elections, with Republicans previously running on a stance of no new taxes on Americans.

This year’s election season will be different, he noted, given Mamdani’s rise to national prominence, as well as that of progressive candidates who have been championing policies to help Americans make ends meet, such as improved child care and rent relief.

“You will see people say, ‘We want to increase revenues to support progressive issues,'” Reiss said.

Reiss said that Mamdani is “planting the flag” in a manner that is important to him and his supporters by making a property tax hike warning a part of his negotiations with the City Council and Albany.

Reiss further said that dangling a worst-case scenario this early puts the conversation on affordability and government fiscal priorities front and center, instead of it being buried under other issues that will surface as election season kicks off.

“You’re seeing a very popular mayor to use the bully pulpit for some change with a politically middle-of-the-road state government,” he said. “It really is a political game of chicken.”

    *     *     *

Reiss noted that the public push for more cost relief has seen leaders become more open to considering progressive policies.

Since Mamdani won the mayoral election, Hochul has been more open to some of his proposals to help New Yorkers, including expanding state funding for child care options for children aged two and older.

On Monday, the governor, whom Mamdani has endorsed, announced that the state would invest $1.5 billion in the city over the next two years for various services and programs, such as public health and youth services.

“It seems from a political perspective a logical strategy for a popular mayor to take, but it’s not without its risks,” Reiss said.

    *     *     *

Lawmakers across the country are facing growing calls from their constituents to address income inequality and the wealth gap, Reiss said, noting a proposed wealth tax in California on billionaires that has prompted some corporations threaten to leave the state.

“It’s the lightning rod, and it sets the terms of the debate,” Reiss said of Mamdani’s budget negotiation proposal. “But we’ll see if it compels other partners in government to go along or to resist it.”

Mamdani’s First 50 Days: Housing Edition

By Dmitryshein, CC BY-SA 4.0

NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani

I was interviewed for AMNewYork’s story, Mamdani’s First 50 Days. It reads, in part,

For Professor David Reiss, a Cornell University housing expert and former chair of the Rent Guidelines Board, the mayor’s housing orientation so far is unmistakably pro-tenant, but it also underscores deeper challenges.

“He’s clearly pro-tenant,” Reiss said, noting Mamdani’s rhetoric, appointments, and actions such as launching his rental rip-off hearings and the revival of the Mayor’s office to protect tenants. But he cautioned that short-term policies aimed at controlling tenants’ costs must also account for the long-term viability of the housing stock.

“Are you pro-tenants five years, 10 years, 15 years down the line?” Reiss asked, pointing to the risk that buildings with constrained revenue might struggle to cover unavoidable expenses like property tax, insurance, and mortgage payments without meaningful engagement.

Reiss traced much of this pressure to state rent restrictions, which eliminated several mechanisms that previously allowed landlords to raise rents between tenancies. Under current conditions, he said, the annual RGB adjustments are often the only permissible rent increases, which, in recent years, have been modest in the view of landlord groups.

If rents are capped or frozen, his view is that the city will have very few tools to ensure financial stability without subsidies or cost reductions — whether direct (financial support) or indirect (tax relief or reduced operating costs).

“You have very few tools,” he said. “They usually involve somehow reducing costs directly or indirectly, or increasing income by subsidizing,” Reiss said that any meaningful approach will have to consider how the city allocates limited funds, especially in the face of a budget gap that has already pushed the administration to consider rainy day funds and reserve drawdowns elsewhere.

That tension between immediate affordability and long-range health of the housing stock frames much of the current policy conversation. Reiss said the rent freeze itself — assuming it survives legal and procedural hurdles — would represent a significant political success if delivered, given that it was a core campaign pledge. But he stressed that a broader housing strategy must also ensure that rent-regulated buildings can cover ongoing costs without descending into default or neglect.

“Success for the Mamdani administration,” Reiss said, “is to thread the needle between his expressed statement of reducing rent increases or rent freeze on the one hand, but ensuring that the housing stock has enough income to support itself — not just for this year, but for three years, five years, seven years down the line.”

Consumer Law Awardee, alongside Senator Warren

David J. Reiss (right), clinical professor of law and research director of the Blassberg-Rice Center on Entrepreneurship Law at Cornell Tech and Kara Bruce (left), head of the AALS Section on Commercial and Consumer Law and the Graham Kenan Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

Via Cornell Law School:

David J. Reiss, clinical professor of law and research director of the Blassberg-Rice Center on Entrepreneurship Law at Cornell Tech, was among the distinguished law professors honored at an awards ceremony held January 9 during the Association of American Law Schools’ (AALS) Annual Meeting in New Orleans.

Reiss was recognized with the Section on Commercial and Consumer Law Juliet Moringiello Mentorship Award, which was also given to Senator Elizabeth Warren, Harvard Law School (Emeritus). “I am extremely honored to share this award with Senator Elizabeth Warren, who is a hero to many of us who work on consumer protection issues in the financial sector,” said Reiss.

Kara Bruce, head of the AALS Section on Commercial and Consumer Law and the Graham Kenan Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of North Carolina School of Law, presented Reiss with the award.

“In his twenty-three-year career in law teaching, David has founded and directed a variety of law clinics, merging discrete areas of law such as real estate, consumer, and small business law into programs that offer broad support to the communities they serve. Along the way, he has guided and supported many clinicians, adjuncts, and fellows as they found their footing in legal academia,” said Bruce.

Praised for his mentorship-focused activities at Cornell, Reiss spent the past semester co-teaching with Robert MacKenzie, the Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP Clinical Teaching Fellow at New York University School of Law, as he entered the academy. “Watching his excitement as he figures out how he wants to approach teaching, scholarship, and service over the decades to come is a joy in its own right. And to the extent I can offer any advice that he might find useful, I am very happy to do so,” said Reiss.

Reiss remains connected with the practicing bar as a fellow of both the American College of Real Estate Lawyers and the American College of Mortgage Attorneys. He also has a forthcoming book, Paying for the American Dream: How to Reform the Market for Mortgages, that will be published by Oxford University Press.

At the award ceremony, Reiss said, “Receiving this award drove home to me how we are a community of scholars who work with each other and rely on each other to make sense of the immense complexity of commercial law and to understand the implications of its structure for consumers and businesses.”

Why Was Housing So Much Cheaper in the 1950s?

inequaltiMarketplace quoted me in Why Do Cars, Housing and Clothing Cost Much More Than They Did in the 1950s? It reads, in part,

Question: Why did a pair of jeans, a box of rice, cars, houses and other items that still exist today cost one price in the 1950s but now are so much more? They’re still the same products with very little change. In fact, due to automation, many of these things are actually cheaper to produce.

    *     *     *

Aren’t products today higher quality?

There has been an increase in the quality of some products over time, which means looking at costs from the 1950s vs. today can seem like an apples-to-oranges comparison.

One can make the argument that cars are equipped with better features than ones from the ‘50s. “We have all kinds of things like seat belts and anti-lock brakes and computerized systems in your dashboard,” Stapleford said.

But if you’re trying to determine affordability, you have to look at the options that are available to you at the time.

“If someone wanted a 1950 car, they couldn’t get it. You couldn’t go out and buy a car that’s exactly the same as it was in the 1950s. You don’t have that kind of discretion as a consumer. You’re sort of stuck with what’s available on the market. So you’re then forced, in a way, to buy this higher-quality thing, which you may or may not want,” Stapleford said.

If you’re comparing housing prices, you also have to look at changes in the types of homes people are buying.

A typical home in the 1950s could cost around $7,000 a year vs. about $400,000 now, said David Reiss, a law professor at Cornell University who studies housing policy.

But while today’s price is 57 times more the cost of a house in the 1950s, you have to adjust for inflation and look at the size of these homes. The average house is now much bigger, Reiss pointed out. So based on square footage, a home today is actually probably four or five times more expensive than one in the 1950s, Reiss said. They also have more amenities, he pointed out.

“The quality of the housing has gone up dramatically, and that’s probably reflected in the price to some extent,” Reiss said.

But there are still other factors explaining the increase in price, which include construction productivity and supply and demand. There are people who will pay $1 million for an apartment with a leaky roof because of the area it’s in, Reiss said.

In a lot of areas with job opportunities, the regulations that govern new construction are very strict, which contributes to these high prices, Reiss said.

Many Americans feel like homeownership has become increasingly out of reach.

There was less income inequality in the mid-20th century compared to now, Reiss said. In 1950, the household median income was $2,990, with the median home value about 2.5 times that. In 2024, the median sales price was almost five times the median household income.

There is one big caveat: Reiss noted that the housing market was “incredibly discriminatory” against different groups like Black Americans. But for those who didn’t face unjust policies, homeownership was more affordable.

“Now you have extreme wealth at the one end, and some very low incomes at the bottom end,” Reiss said.