Chair Lee on IBO rent-stabilized housing distress report and mayor's housing plan
Lee asks whether the mayor's block-by-block housing plan sufficiently addresses distressed housing. Parker describes IBO's analysis of financial and physical distress indicators, noting rent-stabilized buildings fare equal to or better than non-stabilized rentals, and distressed properties require different policy tools depending on their specific challenges.
And just really quickly, going back to block by block, I know that you recently published a report, Current State of Rent-Stabilized Housing, which provides an overview of the distressed housing stock in New York.
So in your opinion, does the mayor's housing plan sufficiently address the rehabilitation and preservation of distressed housing in the city?
If not, what additional strategies should the city implement?
So we did publish two reports, and we also testified to the Rent Guidelines Board.
And I'm going to ask Sarah to speak to the details.
So specifically, IBO looked at multiple indicators of distress for buildings with rent-stabilized apartments in them.
We looked at both signs of financial distress, looking at participation and eligibility for the lien sale, and also physical distress.
So housing code violations and participation in the HPD alternative enforcement program and emergency repair program.
Distressed properties are not a monolith, and different properties require different policy tools and interventions, whether they're facing financial distress or physical distress.
But one key takeaway from our analysis is that among rent-stabilized apartments, rent-stabilized buildings fare equal to or, in some cases, better than non-stabilized rental buildings across these multiple metrics of distress.
So it's not something specific to rent stabilization.
It is a small subset of housing, more specifically citywide.
Okay.