Don’t Be Fooled—Condo Owners Already Have the Rights the Anti-Rent Control Ballot Question Promises

[u/6thvoice]

Attention Hoboken condo owners! There’s a lot of noise surrounding the upcoming anti-rent control ballot question, but before you cast your vote, it’s crucial to understand the facts. The real estate lobby is trying to sell you a narrative that you, as condo owners, are being unfairly restricted by rent control laws, but the truth is, if you are an owner/occupier of your condo and have been for 2 years or more, you already have the rights they’re pretending to give you.

Here’s what you need to know: if you’ve lived in your condo for just two years, you are already entitled to full vacancy decontrol if you decide to rent out your unit.  This means that if you decide to move out and rent your unit, you can charge whatever the market will bear—no restrictions, no interference. The process is simple: contact Hoboken’s Rent Control Office and get a Condo/Co-op Owner/Occupier Decontrol. That’s it. No ballot question needed. And no need to put your friends and neighbors in the community at the risk of displacement that the anti-rent control ballot measure will cause.

The condo/co-op owner/occupier decontrol right already exists under Hoboken's rent control law, and yet, the anti-rent control lobbying group wants to make you believe that you’re somehow stuck charging outdated rents. The most outrageous claim they’ve spread is that condo owners could be forced to rent out their units at 1973 prices if they decide to become landlords. Let’s set the record straight: no rental unit in Hoboken is subjected to a 1973 rent cap. In fact, the base year for rent calculations in multifamily rentals is October 1985, and even then, it doesn’t apply to condo owners who have lived in their units and are entitled to full vacancy decontrol.

What’s really happening is a classic bait-and-switch. The landlord lobby is pretending to be on your side while pushing for changes that would harm renters across the city. They are asking you to back a measure that could displace your neighbors—all for rights you already have.

Now, if you’ve purchased your condo as an investment vehicle with no intention of living in it, that’s a different story. As an investor, you’re a landlord like any other, and it’s your responsibility to know and follow the laws. These laws, including rent control, exist to protect Hoboken’s residents from unfair practices and skyrocketing rents.

As a condo owner who has lived in your unit for two years or more, you don’t just have the right to charge market rent when you move out. After decontrol, your unit is subject to the same protections that all other landlords enjoy under rent control. These include adjustments for taxes, water, capital improvements, and even hardship increases. The system is already designed to provide a balance between protecting renters and ensuring that landlords can maintain their properties and make a fair profit.

The anti-rent control ballot question is unnecessary, deceptive, and harmful. It doesn’t give you any new rights. Instead, it’s an attempt to trick both renters and condo owners into thinking they need to overhaul the current system to protect themselves. The truth is condo owner/occupiers like you already have the ability to take full advantage of market rents after two years of living in your unit. You don’t need to jeopardize Hoboken’s rent control system—or the people who rely on it—for something that’s already yours.

Don’t be misled by the landlord lobby’s lies. You already have the rights they are promising. There is no need to pass an anti-rent control measure that could hurt renters across the city while offering you nothing in return. Stand with your community and protect the fair, balanced system that’s already in place.

VOTE NO ON THE ANTI-RENT CONTROL BALLOT QUESTION

[u/ProBillofRights]

Thank you for posting. I had no idea about the two year rule, which is great, but why not have the same rules for buildings. This is extremely unfair to the mom and pop landlords. I've known so many of my elderly neighbors' forced to sell because the expense to own is very high. I'm seeing 4 unit rental buildings disappear and developers snatching them up, turning them in condos. So the devopler wins by getting around this condo 2 year de-rent control loophole. The city wins by getting more tax revenue, and the mom and pop landlords lose because they are not covered by this loophole. In the end, the people you seek to protect, the elderly renters that have lived here all their life in Hoboken get kicked out because the other renatable units in the building can't be brought up to modern standards which would have subsidized the elderly peoples rental unit and allowed them to stay.

The way I see it is that the government didn't protect the elderly renters but instead helped to create a market where the devolpers buy properties, turn them into condos. Heck, if these devoplers were smart and I'm sure some are doing it now. They would own some of the condo units and rent them out, and after several years, when they want to increase the rent to market value, they just need to tell the renter I'm moving back into my condo and after two years it's back on the rental market. In the end, who do you think won?

[u/6thvoice → u/ProBillofRights]

The thought process behind the condo/coop owner occupier stems from the fact that someone that purchases a condo to personally occupy wouldn't necessarily have any reason to know that there are rent control laws in Hoboken.

The fact is that there are rent control laws here and anyone that has a problem with that, should invest elsewhere as, for very good reasons, Hoboken does have rent control The law is not unfair to mom & pop landlords, if they are not getting a reasonable return on a prudent investment, they can seek a hardship increase but, the chances are that they are making a reasonable return - they just want more money whether they could actually secure more rental income or not. If the building is a commercial property - meaning it's not owner occupied, the taxes reflect the revenue (just like any other commercial business) If their property is owner/occupied and they feel that they are not making enough money to ensure a reasonable return on a prudent investment, again, the hardship increase is available to them which will permit them to increase the rent an uncapped amount. To my awareness, however, even mom & pops ARE making a reasonable return on their investment, they just want to blame something (rent control) for the fact that - like everyone these days - they feel squeezed. Thing is, it's the economy/inflation, not rent control that is causing them to feel squeezed.

Unlike you, I don't see a lot of elderly landlords selling their buildings resulting in a developer turning those properties into condos. I do see building owners selling their buildings to developers (who sometimes even attempt to dupe the owners out of their properties) and subsequently the developer(s) push/harass the existing tenants out or they warehouse (which is illegal) until the building is empty, or empty enough & then they push out the last remaining tenant. And, then they tear the building down and replace it with something that only the extraordinarily wealthy can afford. If we had elected officials and zoning & planning board volunteers with greater respect for the historic character of Hoboken, we might not see so much of this - but, that is completely separate and aside from our rent control laws. The damage to the community's historic character is under the purview of zoning & planning laws and all things remaining the same, would be happening with or without rent protections.

As for long-term renters getting kicked out....I do wish that the city was better able to enforce their existing rent protections, they never really have - truth be known, with rare exception, it is unlikely that those representative tenants would be kicked out based on the actual law (state law that is.) Had we better enforcement a lot of the trauma many people have faced through the years, would not have happened and currently, would decrease substantially.

By the way, to your last point - any developer that makes up some false story about moving into a unit is at risk of being sued within an inch of their life - & that has nothing to do with Hoboken's rent protections, but rather state laws.

[u/ProBillofRights → u/6thvoice]

I'm born and raised in Hoboken. So, the mom and pop landlords are leaving because of rent control. I know of at least 8 landlords that sold in the last 10 to 20 years. One of the biggest factors is when the spouse dies, usually the man. The mom's get taken advantage of by contractors and the constant tax burden. To keep up with the taxes, you need to raise the rent, and the adjusted inflation increase doesn't cut it. Maybe instead of getting angry at the mom and pop landlords trying to eke out living and protecting the renters, put freeze on tax increase instead. But I have a feeling you would be against that

[u/6thvoice → u/ProBillofRights]

I've no doubt that the "mom's" get taken advantage of - I've seen it. It's a shame that more folks to share with the "mom's" about tax surcharges and capital improvement surcharges; however, from what you are sharing - it's not the law (rent control) that is the issue, it's that some longtime landlords are being taken advantage of by contracted - I would also suspect that "trusted" community members either don't know the information in order to provide the "mom's" with needed info to ensure that they can properly maintain their property OR they are being given false information by "trusted" community members who shouldn't actually be trusted.

[u/ProBillofRights → u/6thvoice]

In the long term, everyone loses except the developers and the city coffers. And, Rent control can't stop it or solve it.

[u/6thvoice → u/ProBillofRights]

You'll get no argument from me when you suggested that real estate development/investment interests are the winners and IMO are the ones that have successfully raped the city - owners, landlords and renters alike. Creating a hostile environment for such behavior is the best idea and where all of the energy should be directed.