Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Ilanaspax t1_je0fgzi wrote

This is what solving the housing crisis looks like right? Letting national equity firms suck up all the housing supply and then pretending they are doing the city they priced everyone out of a favor. 🤩

34

xTheShrike t1_je0jo88 wrote

Didn't most property taxes go up 25% recently?

21

xTheShrike t1_je0k464 wrote

Ultimately this is what is going to happen. The large firms can operate at a loss, push out the smaller landlords, and buy up their properties. This is what happens every single time.

2

jersey-city-park t1_je0mj38 wrote

Property taxes: ~30% increase YOY

Inflation: 8% increase YOY

Interest rates: 0.25% March 2022 to 5% March 2023

WhY Is ReNt GoInG Up

22

Ilanaspax t1_je0q93w wrote

Did you read the article? Because it details how these giant corporate landlords have essentially monopolized the rental market using an app and it has little to do with property taxes. Their goal is profit not providing housing which is why letting them build rentals so freely all over JC was a slap in the face to its existing residents.

45

HappyArtichoke7729 t1_je0rph0 wrote

Building more rentals relieves pressure on rent.

Getting rid of the Realpage monopoly would also relieve a lot more pressure on rent.

Increasing law enforcement would also relieve pressure on rent, by arresting landlords who are breaking the rent control laws.

Disallowing more housing to be built is dumb, and part of the reason we're in this mess. (Not the entire reason)

But we will leave things exactly as they are now, because these large corporations are the ones funding our politicians' careers.

1

Ilanaspax t1_je0se5z wrote

It’s SO weird how out of all those solutions for affordable housing the only one that ever gets executed involves developers getting more money 🤔

oh well I guess we’ll trust the process and just let them keep polluting the city with luxury rentals and pricing out the existing population until we finally figure this out

3

objectimpermanence t1_je0sgmu wrote

Well gee, I wonder why housing is significantly more affordable relative to local incomes in places like Houston and other Sunbelt cities, where large corporate landlords are basically allowed to build whatever they want with relatively minimal interference.

It’s almost as if there is some other economic factor at play here. Certainly Texas landlords aren’t less greedy than landlords are here.

−1

njkid30 t1_je0skku wrote

Remember to tip your landlord folks

67

Ilanaspax t1_je0zgn7 wrote

ah so we agree that the tax abatements being handed out like candy by the city at the time were completely unnecessary?

If only Fulop had known ahead of time that trying to make JC enticing to transplants was going to create an alleged housing shortage that could only be solved by building more luxury rentals with insane rent increases every year.

I’m sure he had no idea 🥹…but I’m sure he’s pleased with his multiple home renovations by Dixon.

2

jersey-city-park t1_je10q72 wrote

> Because it details how these giant corporate landlords have essentially monopolized the rental market using an app

Allegedly. Anyone that ignores the economic factors just has their head up their own ass

10

LoneStarTallBoi t1_je13w9i wrote

Lmao Houston rents have been skyrocketing for more than a decade.

My college apartment that I paid $200 a month for in 2006 is listed now for l 2k a month and it still looks like the windows don't close all the way. You can find cheap rent in Katy or Clear Lake but that's like saying you can find cheap rent in Allentown.

0

CryptographerPale595 t1_je13zkr wrote

90 Columbus had a bunch of dif renewal options and the smallest increase was 9%. I thought that was bad but 20-30 is ridiculous

14

el_tigrox t1_je14ydt wrote

Some claim it, others have it. A lot of the newer buildings don’t have tax abatements partly because Fulop and others worked to stop the practice in some parts of the city.

All I know is Equity Residential has been caught lying about Portside Towers and they continue to be antagonistic to anyone that questions them in their buildings.

7

Inevitable-Exam-3208 t1_je15za0 wrote

Didn't Solomon say high rests were caused by Airbnb?? Now that there's barely any left should rents be going down.... according to him?

2

DPedia t1_je16fp3 wrote

Plus the additional $25-per-unit monthly "solid waste" fee on our water bills that definitely was not a tax increase, no sir.

Nobody needs to be shedding any tears for landlords, but the cost of everything is rising.

7

ezmolaw t1_je1714c wrote

Don’t many of the lux high rises have 10+ year abatements? I imagine the mom & pop landlord feels the rise in property taxes, inflation etc way more. Too bad much of the housing now is new corporate owned/rented units. Once those abatements go in those high rises I imagine rents to skyrocket even more.

20

AccountantOfFraud t1_je1753q wrote

Mortgage interest is deductible and also how would they get fucked by interest in the first place? We've had rates at near zero for years now. The interest of which is also included in the rent payment.

Most landlords are living off their tenants with the sole reason that they were lucky to have capital.

5

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1ad7q wrote

You realize the share of investors in housing peaked in 2012-13?

And that Zillow famously wound down its home buying after taking significant losses on it, something big enough to make national news last summer?

And that small to midsized landlords make just as much profit per unit as large landlords?

There is only one solution and it's getting New York City to build enough housing so their residents stop moving here. If that happened, Jersey City's high building rate would lead to stable prices just as it did in Minneapolis. Problem is Minneapolis is the largest city in their region and Jersey City is not even close. As for Hoboken they don't build enough either and it's no surprise there are no neighborhoods like Greenville or Bergen Lafayette or McGinley Square still standing there.

14

BillyCrocker72 t1_je1advg wrote

But even if large buildings have exemptions, landlords who do not would still affect the market by passing their property taxes increases to rent. Collectively owing a property in Jersey City became more expensive regardless if some had or had not exemptions.

I live in my property in JC (32% tax increase btw), but if I was renting it out, I would surely pass these costs to my tenant. The aggregate effect of people doing the same would without a question put pressure on rent, even of tax abated properties

19

PostPostMinimalist t1_je1aphe wrote

Challenge: Find a single thread containing the word “rent” that also doesn’t contain either “soar” or “skyrocket”

4

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1axcq wrote

Because any time you say "supply and demand" on this subreddit certain people's heads explode. Yet they have no problem understanding it when it comes to food or car production. No one in their right mind would argue to stop the production of new cars to bring down car prices.

Collusion is bad, and also supply and demand is real.

12

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1c0u4 wrote

Here's a tip: your "mom and pop landlord" is also raising rents and already was well before the recent property tax increase. Look at old small buildings on StreetEasy. Look at the rent history. Bonus points for looking at NYC units where no such tax hike occurred yet the rent went up all the same.

20

el_tigrox t1_je1cgdx wrote

Human checking in! You can actually look at tax abatement data and information here - it's a couple years old, but will give you a good look at what's out there: https://civicparent.org/2021/07/26/jersey-city-2021-budget-160-abatements-on-citys-books-visualizations-on-abatement-type-value-pilots-and-taxes-if-billed-in-full/

​

So if your building claims that they are raising because taxes went up - double check here to make sure that's true!

4

objectimpermanence t1_je1dwpj wrote

Your $200/month (wtf?) apartment was definitely more of an exception than a rule. Marketwide, rents there haven’t gone up anywhere close to 10x since 2006.

Prices have been going up in Houston, but not nearly as much as they have been in the NYC metro area.

A solidly middle class family earning <$100k in Houston can still afford to own or rent a decent home in a decent neighborhood. Good luck doing that in most other coastal cities where NIMBYs rule the roost.

1

K04free t1_je1elqi wrote

If rent is too high in Jersey city or Hoboken, try moving to Manhattan.

4

mad_dog_94 OP t1_je1erwn wrote

airbnb didnt help, but not for the reasons we think. if it was actually a bunch of people that just rented out their space i wouldnt care, but it was megacorps buying up massive amounts of properties. also theyre always gonna move the goalpoasts so there isnt gonna be a win ever

4

mad_dog_94 OP t1_je1fbhu wrote

restricting supply doesnt work, but neither does entrusting basically all new construction to giant companies who definitely are for sure 100% legitimate and above board. it also doesnt help that the budget for the city is completely mismanaged

1

Blecher_onthe_Hudson t1_je1fhah wrote

The equity vultures are feeding at a housing shortage massacre caused by decades of rent control and exclusionary zoning, enacted and preserved by people trying to freeze the status quo.

New York State just defeated a measure that was trying to increase density in transit suburbs. This is what has caused high housing costs.

7

Blecher_onthe_Hudson t1_je1fy9q wrote

>There is only one solution and it's getting New York City to build enough housing so their residents stop moving here.

100%, only it needs to be the suburbs as well as the city. The town I grew up in on Long Island is 35 minutes from Penn station, has two rail stops, and zero multifamily development.

17

The_Nomadic_Nerd t1_je1hjmx wrote

Yeah that video made me furious. I looked at some of their other videos though and to their credit, they're not wrong 100% of the time. They even have a video about how landlords should tip their good tenants in order to keep them, in the form of lowering rent, unit upgrades, etc.

7

oatmealparty t1_je1hn8f wrote

Are there any precedent for what is an unconscionable rent increase?

3

pixel_of_moral_decay t1_je1huw9 wrote

Those buildings are only viable if rents continue to go upwards. If banks had any reason to doubt future trajectory they wouldn’t be financing it.

Nobody invests in something they plan to lose money in, and those buildings are expensive to build and even more expensive in the long run to maintain.

4

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1i4pl wrote

  1. Northern NJ and NYC are in the same housing market. People living in NYC move here all the time (not to mention other states). It's because NYC doesn't build nearly enough for their population.

  2. You disagreed with the statement that "housing is significantly more affordable relative to local incomes in places like Houston" and implied you have to go to Katy to find rent below 2k, which is just completely false and easily disproven with a quick trip to Zillow. Literally yesterday I considered moving to Houston for much cheaper housing prices.

6

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1ilri wrote

Of course we shouldn't entrust all new construction to giant companies.

That's just another form of restricted supply.

Missing middle housing should be legalized (and now is legalized across good portions of the city, and a number of small projects have been approved).

Why aren't those affordable, you ask? Because even small local developers play by supply and demand. Joe from down the street does not have any special interest in giving you a sweet deal. Plus they have to pay high land costs even if their construction winds up cheaper and they don't have amenities.

It's also the same principle behind new cars not being affordable while used cars are, you need to make enough new stuff that people start moving out of the old ones, thus lowering the price.

4

objectimpermanence t1_je1o8nc wrote

Paterson is not affordable relative to local incomes. Median household income in Paterson is only $48k, which is less than it is in Houston.

Open up Zillow and you will find very few habitable homes on the market in Paterson for under $300k.

2

objectimpermanence t1_je1qqdc wrote

That would be pointless. The vast majority of housing is owned by individuals. And 70% of rental properties are owned by people who own just one or two properties. Source.

The underlying problem is that there is simply not enough housing in the places where people want to live. When demand outpaces supply, prices go up. It’s really simple stuff.

7

paul-e-walnts t1_je1r171 wrote

What’s insane to me is that people expect the city on the other side of the Hudson from Manhattan to somehow not attract people to live here.

What is the alternative to accommodating demand for housing, Keep JC as shitty as possible to make it unappealing for everyone?

3

Informal_Bat_722 t1_je1w7ra wrote

You continue to show how uneducated you are, as you post a wikipedia article about Japan's interest-rate policy with a note about what the Fed's position was after The Great Recession. Moreover, you're comparing the fed's rate vs mortgage interest that a consumer exposed to which are not mutually exclusive.

Why don't you speak to any of your successful friends, or anyone who has worked in finance/accounting, if they think a 2% difference in mortgage interest is significant or not :]

Not only a pussy, but also showing signs of a brittle ego. Keep it up!

−1

exgaint t1_je1xia8 wrote

This will be my 3rd year living near grove st. rent went from 3127 -> 3850 -> 4800

12

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1xo8z wrote

Rentals are still needed, people who just moved and young students need a place to stay, people getting out of domestic abuse and such need a place to stay, also there should still be an option available for those who don't want to deal with maintenance if we're talking about an ideal society. The real problem is rent growth. If there was enough supply to stop rent growth then not only does renting becomes more appealing, there is also no reason to "invest in housing" at that point driving the investors out naturally.

8

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1yjox wrote

There is no theory by which less of them results in lower rents for you and me.

People move here from NYC because of lower income taxes and more space; people also move here from outside the NYC metro because of better job opportunities. Location is the #1 determinant of whether someone moves, not whether there is new housing there. This is why gobs of millionaires live in crumbling old buildings in Manhattan and parts of Brooklyn.

If you don't build the yuppie fishtanks, the yuppies will simply outbid for your housing. Don't be mistaken and think they'll simply stay away - that's what they thought in San Francisco (and Manhattan and Brooklyn), and then the rich moved into the old housing, because they care about location and proximity to jobs, not whether the housing is new. They can always move in and gut renovate the inside, after all, or the landlord does it to take advantage of the higher rent they can pay.

3

Informal_Bat_722 t1_je1yp3z wrote

> Mortgage interest is deductible and also how would they get fucked by interest in the first place? We've had rates at near zero for years now.

English is hard for you, huh?

In a conversation where everyone is speaking about mortgage interest rates, and following the very sentence when you call out mortgage interest rates. Colloquially, and properly in the English language, there is a correlation between sentences in one paragraph.

If that wasn't your intention, then you should work on your grammar.

Does all this thinking hurt your whittle brain?

0

djn24 t1_je1yq5z wrote

I lived in the same apartment in grad school for 3 years and my landlord never raised rent in that time. When I moved out they thanked me for being such a great tenant and gave me my deposit back on the spot. They told me they only raised rent between tenants to match the market but don't want to mess up a good relationship with a tenant they don't have to worry about.

It's ridiculous that this is now completely abnormal behavior.

9

djn24 t1_je1z4ic wrote

We also need incentives/funding out there to just start mass developing single family homes in less urban areas. New York is pushing through orders that will force communities on the outskirts of urban sprawl to start developing more housing, which should hopefully help to offset this crunch in a few years.

2

JeromePowellAdmirer t1_je1zpp3 wrote

That is an actual "solution" people always bring up. "Fire your gun, that'll sure keep them away!"

These people have clearly never heard the countless stories of people making 100k+ in Brooklyn who are all like "yeah when I moved out here I heard gunshots all the time." If they can't afford the housing closer to their job they'll come here whether we like it or not, can either build new housing for them or let them take over existing housing.

3

MrHarryPits t1_je27cei wrote

where can we check which buildings are rent controlled?

1

Ilanaspax t1_je2dpr1 wrote

It is insane they needed to make an ad campaign when NYC is right there. Kind of makes you wonder why they did it doesn’t it?

So crazy how our only solution to the housing crisis is making it so only rich transplants can afford to live here and existing residents relocate and enjoy none of the “improvements”.

1

m3ssinaround t1_je2h878 wrote

My rental property increased in value so the taxes went up, because the value went up it now costs more to insure the property. Also because the value of the property increased the HOA increased. I did some math and passed the difference onto my tenant. I showed him the numbers and told him it is what it is, I'm not making anymore money. The problem is some landlords will add a few numbers so they can make more.

4

Miringanes t1_je2lkkd wrote

Not sure, they aren’t necessarily fixed, and sometimes they are even more than what the tax rate is but a developer might lock into them because it’s a known rather than a variable like a tax would be.

So in theory, yes, they could’ve went up, but also they could’ve been at a higher tax rate than what the average person was paying all along and now there is rate parity.

2

objectimpermanence t1_je2uvhi wrote

> Mortgage interest is deductible and also how would they get fucked by interest in the first place?

Just because mortgage interest is deductible doesn’t mean it it’s a cost that doesn’t matter. There are plenty of limitations on the deduction and it’s not a dollar for dollar reduction in tax liability.

Also, multi-family properties aren’t always financed with fixed rate debt. Those with floating rate debt are already feeling the pinch. And some fixed rate debt has a term as short as 5 or 10 years, which means that a decent percentage of borrowers will be forced to refinance every year at dramatically higher rates than their previous financing.

Some will be forced to default. Projects that penciled out with near zero interest rates could easily be underwater in a higher rate environment.

2

PizzaPoopFuck t1_je36r96 wrote

When I was a kid in Hoboken they would just burn the building down at 3:00 am with your family inside. Good times.

7

wolfiex0 t1_je38a0i wrote

Went from $2800 to being offered $3600 for lease renewal after being in the same place for 3 years. Laughable. We’re leaving!

2

akowz t1_je478wt wrote

I dont think this is true. Your reference was posted in 2015, so thats why you wouldn't have any of the newer buildings. But jersey city has been granting abatements since then and many run for decades from now. Examples below:

https://patch.com/new-jersey/jersey-city/jersey-city-ends-tax-abatement-after-urban-renewal-project-stalls

(A 2022 construction project loses its previously-granted 20 year abatement after inactivity)

https://jerseydigs.com/life-on-a-grand-scale-plus-a-private-balcony-awaits-in-crystal-point-two-bedroom-condo-dtjc/

(Tax abatement until 2040 for Crystal Point)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/924901/000156276222000205/R35.htm

(The new Haus25 has an abatement until 2047)

4

K04free t1_je4tftu wrote

I moved from a 2 bed, 2 bath 1100 square foot apartment in Dumbo. Rent was going to be $5400 if I renewed and the building had 0 amenities.

I got a similar apartment in JC for $1000 less per month plus tax savings. My girlfriend and I were both able to cancel our equinox memberships ($180 a month) as well. Worked out to approximately $2000 month saving between the two of us. We signed for 2 years

0

mitsulang t1_je4v3ck wrote

I lived in the same house for nearly 10 years, and the landlord never raised the rent. He gave the same reasons. Why mess up a good relationship with a steadily paying tenant who doesn't mess up the property?

1

mitsulang t1_je4vfkf wrote

I'm guilty of the "if you don't like it, go somewhere else" mentality, when it comes to many things. I have to check myself often, because you're right, it's not always easy to just uproot and go elsewhere (job, home, etc). It can be a real financial, mental, and physical problem.

2

Informal_Bat_722 t1_je4ze1f wrote

Yes but it's disingenuous at best to relate the interest rates the fed sets to what a consumer's mortgage interest rate actively is.

Your comment was that [mortgage] rates have been near zero for years now, which is objectively wrong. Show me any consumers who have a near zero mortgage interest rate.

Honestly, you kind of come off as someone with a mental disorder or some level of autism so I'm not continue to make fun of you.

How brittle you are makes it too easy.

0

DeepFriedAsses t1_je53p4t wrote

I checked rents the other day as well as like 3 months ago and there was at least a $500 average increase

2

planet-doom t1_je6ppe2 wrote

i mean, it’s dumbo. One of the most expensive neighborhoods in Nyc. Looking at mid market apartments between Jersey and UES or UWS or further away in Brooklyn all shows comparable number now. This wasn’t the case 4 years ago

3

K04free t1_je6tsf9 wrote

Point I’m getting at for modern apartment layouts (2 bed, 2 bath, open kitchen, washer + dryer, amenity building), JC is still far cheaper.

If the layout and features don’t matter as much, you could probably find something cheaper but not comparable in NYC. Thing is lots of the far away points in Brooklyn and upper Manhattan are further away from downtown JC

1

VengefulMigit t1_je6yfwt wrote

In Hoboken, if the building is older than 30 yrs old, its subject to rent control. The increase is indexed to the CPI rate/inflation from 3 months prior to the end of a lease. Assuming there wasn't some type of exemption filed & approved by town hall.

2

Ilanaspax t1_jef4p61 wrote

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/business/media/a-new-effort-from-a-new-jersey-city-urges-make-it-yours.html

The sole reason? No. Do I believe they deliberately courted high income folks to price out working class residents?Absolutely and it was extremely transparent at the time.

City spent 1.2 million on the ad campaign in 2014 after giving out tax abatements for luxury high rises. It’s SO weird how 10 years later there isn’t enough affordable housing and the only solution is more luxury rentals 🤔

2