There used to be a time in NYC when the life-formula for a working man was simply this: out of the four weeks a month that you worked, one week was to pay your rent. If you don’t believe me, ask some old-timer on your block. The other three weeks of the month, you worked to pay for utilities; other bills of living-like credit cards and higher purchases; food, clothing and entertainment costs; and then you saved a few dollars for a lil vacation somewhere (like to Atlantic City before the casinos came, or to some lil spot on the Jersey Shore during the hot summer); and finally, you put aside a few more dollars for a rainy day. Since it was always pouring for black people in general, you didn’t see too many of us on the Jersey Shore in summer, but you could have glimpsed some of us on the AC boardwalk from time to time.
Then times changed. Even one singing group said that nothing was going on but the rent. Rent started soaring higher than the endangered bald eagle. It seems like you worked longer hours just to pay the rent in NYC. The landlord/ landlady has a birthday every first of the month, and he/she is always expecting a package. You make more drops than Paulie from the Sopranos; unbeknownst to anyone, all renters became “mobbed-up”.
In NYC (and in most of these dis-united states) rent now takes a bigger chunk of your paycheck than it did before. It’s not just about inflation; it’s also about greed (but that’s another column). The savings rate as a nation is below 5% of wages. And don’t forget (for you economics students) that savings equates with investments, which in turn spur economic growth and higher living standards. Nowadays, bankruptcies break their own records annually; and this has been happening for over a decade now. The middle-class is being squeezed more than a tube of toothpaste in the early morning, while the gap between rich and poor widens.
In 1998 I ran for the NY State Assembly and suggested a annual “renter’s rebate” for those who pay more than 25% of their net income in rent. To me, the justification was simple: everyone else got some type of rebate. Developers always seemed to get tax abatements, write-offs, set-asides, tax-deferments, subsidies and the like; in fact they flew so many free miles of tax-payer programs that both the city and the state gave them their own “pilots”. Then petty landlords cashed in on the scheme with annual abatements and deflated estimates of true property values. A few civil servants even got busted behind some of the fraudulent shenanigans. Other petty landlords did illegal conversions and rented every nook and cranny in their buildings. When winter came, it was the renters feeling the heat–or lack of. Do you think the Trumps and Ratners of the world take much heat for their cold-ass greed? Think again.
A renter’s rebate package can have income ceilings and maximum cut-offs; it should only be for middle-income workers and such. It should be pegged to cost-of-living increases/ inflation rates, and it should be also indexed to median incomes or average wages of city workers. I know that the devil is in the details, but believe me when I say that the specifics can be left to the “experts”. This is “doable”. This is a “middle/ lower income” initiative; well–to-do people get enough breaks as it stands today. As a renter it will surely be nice, to annually look forward to some kind of rebate at tax-time. If that rebate was tied into some type of “home-ownership” program, then that would even be better.
When you think about all this, it seems that it is always the renters who feel the pinch. When maintenance costs increase (real or imagined), guess who picks up the tabs? Go try to rent some commercial space anywhere in this city as a small businessman or woman; if you make a lil money, within three years the landlord will run you out of your spot like if you stole something. But I am not really dealing with commercial space; that’s just an aside. I am talking about hard-working citizens who go out there day in day out, trying to keep the wolves from the door. They need a break; today. And not just a McDonald’s break.
As homelessness increases in NYC, we need to look at imaginative ways of combating that problem. If at tax time renters would get a rebate, then that money can be saved towards the purchase of their own homes. With down payments and closing costs as high as they are nowadays, any help to renters will be appreciated. The rebate could even be set aside in some type of interest-bearing account held by the city or state. When the time is right, the holder of said account can be given matching loans to start building. This in turn will spur housing activity on an economics plain. We don’t have to wait for big developers to shake down (or is it, “stick-up”) the public coffers, for inducements to build affordable (whatever that means) housing; a renter’s rebate program can possibly be tied–in to some type of low-income/ affordable housing program. I am no expert on this, but my gut tells me that this can happen.
In 2004 I advised one mayoral candidate to propose a renter’s rebate plan; he did. Another candidate for said office stole the idea and mouthed off; but no action came about. The idea died after the primary. Today, that idea’s time has come. Last Saturday while sitting in on the Working Families Party’s candidate interviews, the question came up as to high rents and the renter’s dilemma; it was a good question to say the least.
I challenge the WFP (and ACORN) to work with me on making this (renter’s rebate) happen. I have already lined up a city councilmember to introduce this as legislation. Let’s do this. Let’s roll.
Stay tuned-in folks.