Village of New Paltz residents and others had a fair amount to say about housing at the November 29 meeting of New Paltz’s trustees. There were three distinct topics on the agenda — a law about unreasonable rent increases, a vacancy study that could be the precursor to rent control and modifying the existing affordable housing law — but the comments were not quite that tidy and distinct. The rigor of public meetings relies to some extent on keeping items separate, but humans don’t always individually draw the same bright lines that might make bureaucratic sense. The process appeared chaotic at times, and some feathers did get ruffled, but the trustees appeared to take in all the feedback and input that was provided on these various, interconnected topics.
Will rent be controlled?
The option of conducting a vacancy study has been under consideration since the expansion of the state’s Emergency Tenant Protection Act in 2019. It’s the first step in a process laid out in that law, which could lead to units in eligible buildings being subject to rent limits set by a county-level board. However, units are only subject to the law when they are in buildings constructed before 1974; there must also be at least six units in the same building to count. That means that 528 units are eligible, out of an estimated 2,364 units total according to information in the draft vacancy report released in time for the November 29 board meeting. Village leaders didn’t appear motivated to pursue this course of action until it became possible to get points towards the county’s housing-smart initiative, as well. Modeled on the state-level climate-smart communities program, the county housing program provides yet-to-be-specified incentives when a sufficient number of points are accumulated by completing action tasks, such as this one. The precise number of points for this and other action tasks has also not yet been articulated.
Most of the feedback regarding this study and its implications was supportive, although some of those commenting may have reviewed an earlier draft of the report, or gotten information through hearsay, because the vacancy rate that was referenced by those speaking was much higher than the 2.7% which was included in that draft report. For or against, speakers were largely under the impression that the rate was about 5%, which is the threshold below which a housing emergency may be declared, starting the process toward regulating rents for those specific units.
Regardless of the accuracy of their data, those who commented in support of declaring a housing emergency painted a grim picture about finding someplace to live in the village. There are not many open apartments, and those offerings were described as being subpar for the cost. Trustees were warned that the practice of attending the college and then settling in New Paltz permanently was becoming unattainable for many students; it’s difficult even for a student who works full time to afford rent here. Likewise, a professor on campus who testified doesn’t live in New Paltz because it’s too expensive.
According to Andrew Hiller of the Democratic Socialists of America, renting a one-bedroom apartment in the village requires a full-time job for at least $21 an hour.
Those not in favor of moving toward rental regulation included Rich Lanzarone, who serves as executive director of the Hudson Valley Property Owners’ Association. Lanzarone was among the majority who appear to have reviewed an earlier draft of the study, and noted that several of the properties that were included in the study were ineligible. All of those properties were excluded in the report that was available as of the meeting. Based on Lanzarone’s understanding, the vacancy rate in eligible units would be 5.6%, which is too high for declaring a housing emergency.
Former Hyde Park supervisor Aileen Rohr also spoke in opposition; those comments ended up causing some confusion, however, as Rohr specifically held them to share during the public hearing on the unreasonable rent increase law. Rohr’s references to building construction dates and other clues led trustees eventually to recognize that Rohr was referring to the vacancy study process and not the village law proposal. The gist of Rohr’s concerns were that the selective enforcement on older buildings could have outsized impacts on landlords. Rohr also shared both that maintenance costs are higher in older buildings and the assertion that rent is cheaper.
One question that was until recently unclear was what to do about buildings when the owners decline to respond to the survey. The answer is to assume that they are fully occupied. With those data for eligible buildings compiled, the vacancy rate is 2.7%, well below the threshold for declaring a housing emergency; a hearing on that question has been scheduled for December 6.
Significantly absent from this study is housing on campus, which is excepted for being otherwise regulated. Those regulations do not appear to include any limits on the rent itself, however. Resident Leonard Loza pointed out during the meeting that students living on campus pay $10,000, and later during the comment period Bob Gabrielli phrased it as costing those renters $1,350-1,450 for double occupancy. According to a recent report in the campus paper called the Oracle, all unmarried, first-year full-time matriculated students must live on campus. There is room for 3,250 to live on campus, according to that article.
Additionally, the Oracle reporter noted how the presence of campus housing has distorted the local market, citing a source to show that a one-bedroom apartment in New Paltz costs an average of $1,629 a month, but that the average in all of Ulster County is just $1,155 per month.
Is the rent too damned high?
The public hearing on an unreasonable rent increase law continued. If passed, tenants in the village would have the right to challenge rent increases beyond a certain threshold, and the landlord would have to bring a court case to get that higher rent imposed.
Citing some of the high costs of maintaining a rental building, Loza speculated that this move would not be legal, and made clear that a lawsuit would follow to test whether it is or not. Loza is not the first to promise legal action should this measure become law. Lanzarone, is of the belief that court rulings that found “good cause eviction” laws unconstitutional would easily be applied to this new approach.
Local real estate broker Matt Eyler noted that high interest rates make creating housing with affordable rents extremely difficult. The cost of borrowing is often cited by landlords and developers, highlighting the fact that some distortions in the rental market might be tied to the idea that borrowed money is the best money for this business.
Gabrielli, pined for the fact that private contracts were once protected from public interference such as this—until the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory in 1911 prompted an update to the state constitution.
If there is to be a lawsuit, it won’t be anytime soon. Trustees decided to keep the hearing open, as is their practice when an idea is expected to generate a large amount of input.
Long wait for affordable housing
There’s been a law on the village books since 2015 that requires a certain number of newly-built rental units to be kept at affordable rates, as calculated using a percentage of the household median income in the county. The number of affordable units built under that law surged when Zero Place opened — to seven. Terry Dolan, chair of the village’s affordable housing board, spoke to trustees about tweaking the law to increase that number.
What’s required right now is that when a new complex or development with at least ten units is approved, that 10% of those units will have rents set to be affordable for those earning 60% of that median household income. The change would see complexes of 20 or more units including 15% affordable in the mix. The developer in these cases gets a density bonus, allowing more units on the same footprint to help offset potential losses.
The project that such a change would most immediately impact might be New Paltz Apartments, proposed for land just south of campus that developers will be seeking to have annexed into the village. Over 600 bedrooms are being considered in that planning board review.
Also being considered is a tiered system of affordability, using either 80% or 40% of household median income rather than 60%.
Trustees set a hearing on this proposal for December 20.
Join the family! 
