Good morning. I am Assemblymember Linda B. Rosenthal and I represent the Upper West Side and parts of the Clinton/Hell’s Kitchen neighborhoods in Manhattan. As the representative of a large number of rent-controlled tenants, a long-time affordable housing advocate and the prime sponsor of bill A.398, which would change the way in which rent increases for rent-controlled tenants is calculated, I am pleased to have the opportunity to express my outrage at the 9.6% maximum base rent (MBR) increase proposed by New York State Homes and Community Renewal (HCR).

The MBR system was originally created in 1970 as a reform measure. It was intended to protect tenants against unexpected rent spikes while ensuring that landlords maintained their buildings in good repair and turned a reasonable profit. Over the years, it appears that these dual aims have been all but forgotten, and rent-controlled tenants have faced year after year of sky-high rent increases that are not reflective of the economic realities for them or their landlords.

This year, the New York City Rent Guidelines Board, for the first time in its history, saw fit to vote in favor of a rent freeze for rent-stabilized tenants because landlord expenses actually decreased, and therefore a rent increase would have been unjustified. It is inconceivable that circumstances have changed so dramatically since June of this year to warrant a proposed 9.6% increase for rent-controlled tenants.

Some landlords will attempt to argue that rent-controlled tenants pay absurdly low rents to justify the increase. While it is true that a small minority of rent-controlled tenants pay rents you and I could only dream of, the 2014 Housing and Vacancy Survey found that the median rent for a rent-controlled unit was $1,020 per month on an average salary of $29,000 per year. (By comparison, rent-stabilized tenants pay a median rent of just $1,300 per month with average annual salaries of nearly $41,000.)

The vast majority of rent-controlled tenants are seniors, many nonagenarians, living on low, fixed monthly incomes. To be sure, cost of living increases for the Social Security and other social benefits programs upon which these seniors rely for their very survival, have never increased by as much as HCR has proposed to increase rent by today.

Each and every day, my staff and I sit with seniors – 70, 80, 90 year olds – who cannot afford to pay their rent. They can hardly walk, yet the terror of falling behind on their rent or receiving another eviction notice forces them into my office. These seniors are already living on the edge of financial ruin, just one additional monthly prescription the difference between making the rent and falling behind.

Approving this increase, or anything close to it, would spell certain disaster for rent-controlled tenants. It would force so many out of their homes and into the streets.

In the last three years, we have lost more than 10,000 rent-controlled units. That loss is a result, in part, of previously high and unwarranted MBR increases. There are now fewer than 30,000 rent-controlled units remaining, the inhabitants of which have lived in their homes for decades. This proposed rent increase will spell the end of rent-control as we know it, but perhaps that’s exactly what the landlords are asking for.

At this point, the MBR system is well beyond the point of repair. It is antiquated and clearly is not reflective of the economic realities faced by tenants and landlords alike. In order to save rent control, and in the process, the lives of just about 30,000 seniors who have built their communities and this city, we must end the MBR and instead pass into law my bill, A.398. Any increase is an unwarranted one.