California demonstration. Date unknown. cesinaction.org
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
“WHEREAS, a large portion of residents of the Township of Neptune live in apartment complexes and mobile home parks, and are in dire need of protection as tenants, especially in the area of rent increases and affordable, available housing.”
This is the opening paragraph of the new, effective today, rent control ordinance in Neptune Township.
From the August 3 issue of the Coaster: “Committeeman Randy Bishop said, ‘This is in response to the Winding Ridge and other apartment complexes that recently had large rent increases. It made us look at where we are regarding rental housing prices in Neptune’
“Bishop said he hopes the township can keep rental units affordable and give tenants, not only protective rent control, but the ability to come forward to a board pertaining to issues with their units.”
Winding Ridge apartments in Neptune Township.
The NJ Supreme court has said that such ordinances are legal, but only a small number of N.J. municipalities have them (98/565 in 2011). Around here, such laws exist in Red Bank and in Eatontown. But, throughout the country, only a few states actually have such laws.
Ironically, the Wall Street Journal reported in 2011 that such laws are being scaled back or phased out totally throughout the state of New Jersey. They said that rental rate increases result in more tax dollars for communities, and beside, landlords tend to vote while tenants do not.
The Neptune ordinance provides for a Rent Leveling Board which will have five members and two alternates. The ordinance spells out the limits for rent increases which are tied to the Consumer Price Index, which goes up about 1-2% each year lately. Landlords can ask for bigger increases either because of capital improvements or hardship.
The ordinance is aimed at apartment complexes. The Township Attorney, Gene Vincent, is quoted in the August 3 Coaster regarding what kinds of units are affected by the ordinance: “It defines what is subject to rent control, which is mostly multiple dwelling complexes with three or more units and mobile home parks. It doesn’t include commercial rentals; transitory rentals, like motel, hotels; and two-family homes,” he said.
As far as Ocean Grove is concerned, there will be little impact. Hotels, B & B’s, inns and condo’s are not affected. Commercial buildings are also not affected. There is only one apartment complex in town, and private homes that rent out three or more apartments are affected.
Code Enforcement and the Township Housing Authority will police this law and issue violations.
Mayor Eric Houghtaling said this morning, “There will be a few changes to the wording and perhaps the amount of multiple units required before the rent control comes into play. We feel this is the best way to help those who rent and works the best with the property owners. We hope to find a balance.”
This link would be perfect for the story on blogfinger regarding rent control/ code enforcement.
Some commenters want Neptune to jack up the code enforcement of rundown houses. This story would be a good example of how it should be done. LOL
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/texas-swat-team-conducts-_n_3764951.html?utm_hp_ref=email_share
If the number of rentals in Neptune goes down (as every economic study suggests), then it might lower taxes for single family homes as residential properties usually cost the town more in expenses then they bring in property taxes. However if the value of a residential building goes down but continues to operate then, yes, all other property taxes will go up.
Ken, I am stunned to hear another large development is opening. It makes the town council’s vote even more short sided. Residents of these “unconsciousable” rentals could of used the economic pressure of increased housing to lower their rents and improve conditions. However, especially considering new construction is exempt from rent control for 30 years, it is as if the town condemned them to stay in their current apartments — apartments which, if it follows common rent control patterns, will become less maintained and increasingly unsuited for their needs.
Frank S …As the ordinance reads right now 2 family homes are included..It is only 2 family owner occupied that is exempt! The Township Committee can say it’s intention was not to include 2 families, but the ordinance states something else.
Also included in this ordinance are condos. If an investor or person owns 3 or more units in a complex the units are subject to rent control.
Renters are welcome in Ocean Grove by many, but I can’t see how any landlord can recoup his money ..and keep up the property.
Dude, Devo and Frank S….I am confused because these large complexes were built as RENT CONTROLED by developers, which seems to contradict assertions that developers will not build with such restrictions. In fact I understand a new large multi-unit development is to be built in NEPTUNE.
ken
Frank S.
If someone owns a rental building and has constraints due to rent control, then that building’s value in the real estate market declines. Along with that decline comes lower property taxes (which are based on the value of the property)
As for the effect of improvements on taxes, I’m sure you know that if you make improvements in your house, the next time they appraise it, the value will be higher and thus so will your property taxes. If the owner of an apartment building makes no improvements because of rent control, then the town will not enjoy the higher taxes that would have occurred otherwise. So, it’s like a loss of tax revenue.
As for developers coming in, I was referring to those projects out in Neptune Township, not in Ocean Grove where there is no potential for such development, except at the North End.
The Township has the potential to increase tax revenues from further development, for example along Rt. 66. If future housing ratables don’t happen because developers might run away from a town which has rent controls, then all of us might see taxes go up in the future.
If you disagree with this, then I suggest you ask a local realtor. That’s where I got some of these ideas.
The Dude : Although you make declarations you offer no explanations.
” Any building in Neptune that is subject to rent control will find its taxable value reduced.” How come ? Why would their taxes be reduced ?
” owners of properties affected by rent control will be less likely to improve their buildings, thus further reducing tax revenues ” It may or may not be true that they might be less likely to improve their buildings. However how/why would tax revenue be reduced ?
Previous commenters have voiced dislike of large multi families & rental complexes yet you express that it would be a negative if ” developers who would build large rental complexes will go elsewhere instead of Neptune ” Which is it ?
To: n.o p…..For several months large numbers of NEPTUNE residents have attended the bi-monthly Township Committee meetings to complain about sudden large rent increases (30 to 60% ). Usually large numbers of residents (AKA. voters! And there is an election soon) who are persistent enough do get the elected officials attention. .
The background story of why the rents are going up all at once so dramatically has not been explained. I assume that 20 or so years back these complexes were built by developers getting some type of special deal which is now allowing these extraordinary increases. Hopefully some commenter with a good long memory will inform us of the facts.
A few reactions to some recent comments above:
Rental units are bad for a town any way you slice it. Rent control basically guarantees that there will be underinvestment in maintenance and diminished real estate values. However, the silver lining is that future builders/creators of rental units will be discouraged from coming to OG/Neptune and existing units will have pressure to convert to other uses.
The reason that rent control laws are passed despite their well established destructive impact, is because politicians are looking, in essence, to buy the votes of renters. Since 25% of Neptune residents (approximately) are renters, that means the Council members just shored up their reelection chances. Because this crass transaction is unsavory as a rationale, politicians will publically state that they are “protecting the most vulnerable citizens”. In so doing they are damaging the town unnecessarily.
Here’s a thought experiment. What would Neptune Township be like if there were no rental units at all and no public housing units? What if there were only single family homes and condos? What if the marginal individuals who apparently cannot afford market rate rents in Neptune moved on to elsewhere? Would Neptune become a better place to live? Would the schools be better? Would real estate value rise? Would there be less crime? That’s a vision worth fighting for don’t you think? By the way, this same thought experiment applies to Ocean Grove.
N. O. P.—-Go to Blogfinger and scroll down to our August 15 article about rent control. Then go to the commments (at the bottom) and look for the link (By Linker) to the Coaster article from Aug 3 and also read the link (by Blogfinger) to the Asbury Park Sun article.
does anyone know who on the neptune township committee spearheaded this regressive legislation and their reasoning for this action
also…anyone happen to know what the story behind the story is…..i ask this since rent control has been mostly done away with since it created more problems then it solved…so i feel there is more here then the public is aware of
Ocean Grover homeowners: If you think that this rent control law will not affect you because your home has no rental units or just one or two, you are mistaken. Any building in Neptune that is subject to rent control will find its taxable value reduced.
Also, owners of properties affected by rent control will be less likely to improve their buildings, thus further reducing tax revenues.
In addition, developers who would build large rental complexes will go elsewhere instead of Neptune Township.
The overall result will be to reduce income for the Township.
Then everyone’s tax rate will increase, including all homeowners in Ocean Grove.
Grounded in Reality: OG was trending up in 1985 when we bought hoping future grand kids would come to the beach (Yes! Every summer!). In a few years house values went down so much I got a reduction in my Property Taxes but could not refinance the mortgage. Walking or biking around town then there were many houses obviously in need of “fixing-up”. But things changed [for a multitude of reasons] and about a dozen years ago it appeared more than half the houses were finally looking good, now the bad ones really stand out. From my longer perspective I’ve seen meaningful improvements but these houses can deteriorate just as quickly so keeping them up to CODE is vital.
ken
Grounded in Reality : I must be blind and ignorant. I just don’t see these “run-down houses that exist on almost every block.” Perhaps you are more observant and/or critical then I or most folks are.
I do not want the government/town to get involved with “meaningfully enhancing the quality of the housing stock.” That is up to individual owners, citizens, and neighbors.
If you honestly feel that a home is so run down (“on almost every block”) and get nowhere talking with an owner and it disturbs you so much, then you should report it to Neptune code enforcement.
Frank: Your points are well taken. I have owned my home in OG for four years and do not have the same appreciation for the history and community that you have. Having said that, I do not think that keeping one’s house painted, porch floors finished and treated or fixing badly cracked sidewalks is incompatable with a sense of community.
My older brother has a house in Spring Lake, and there is a strong sense of community there. All owners would benefit both economically and astheically from enhanced upkeep of the run-down houses that exist on almost every block.
In the four years I have lived here, I do not sense that the town has meaningfully enhanced the quality of the housing stock. We need to speed things up. “Pristine” would be a great word to have associated with OG.
For anyone to comment on trends in Ocean Grove, one needs a greater perspective than four years. When we first bought in Ocean Grove, it was 1998. At that time there were some blocks that looked really crappy—decrepit and run-down. You could walk on any block and see quite a few houses in bad shape. Many Victorians had been ruined after WWII by shoddy work done to create multiple apartments in single family homes
During the next 15 years we saw tremendous investment in crummy OG houses by dedicated people who rehabilitated many buildings and made them look historic. The transformation has been dramatic. These investments in Ocean Grove homes need to be protected in order to encourage more investment.
Rentals have always been important in OG. Over 100 years ago there were boarding houses and hotels everywhere in town. Old photos show so many people crowding the beach, that it looked like Coney Island.
The residential rental scene now (to be distinguished from the summer tourist rental scene) has been changing for the better, because many of the run-down for-rent apartment houses, which people bought here just for “investment” are now rehabilitated single-family second homes for young families from New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. This demographic is a plus for Ocean Grove for a variety of reasons. The rental properties that remain need to be residences that are safe, attractive and well maintained.
Rental properties promote diversity. Without that demographic, Ocean Grove could become elitist and boring, like some wealthy towns around here. I think we should all work to create an ideal inclusive community where affordable housing is part of the mix.
How can we create such a place? Well, a good start is by encouraging all citizens of OG, including part-time owners and full time renters to take an interest in their town and not just show up. The organizations in town need to work together for common goals. We need a council of OG organizations, similar to the combined group that has met periodically after Sandy.
As for the rent control ordinance, Neptune wants to protect the poor, but landlords also need protection for their investments. The Mayor said that this is his goal. I believe it is in Neptune’s best interest to see Ocean Grove continue to be a beautiful, prosperous, and desirable place to live. Affordable housing is a good goal for any town, including Neptune/Ocean Grove, but all interests need to be considered.
Regressive legislation: There is a reason why rent control has been eliminated in other jurisdictions. Instead of encouraging responsible landlords, we will be bringing in slumlords.
Way to go …Neptune Township Committee…shame on you
Grounded in Reality : While not all of OG’s homes may be as manicured, pristine, and as ” conforming ” as yours might be I, certainly do not think that OG’s ” housing stock is so run down “. Not many would agree with you.
That those who “can’t afford the town move on ” . You no doubt are affluent and are a newcomer. What about those who have lived here a long time and helped make this town ? Pricing them out is your solution ?
I for one also don’t want to see my or my neighbors’ taxes increase. There are issues that “Neptune needs to be thinking about” more important than and less harmfull then raising our taxes.
Frank, that isnt an opinion. Property is determined by the square footage, size of the lot, improvements (pool, porch), recent home sales, age.
How does this rent control affect OG? Since technically everyone leases from the CMA arent we all renters?
The reality is that many (not all — a few are beautiful) of the divided houses in OG are run down. There are also a number of single family homes that are not well maintained — at least 1-2 per block. Many owners have badly cracked sidewalks and curbs that have been pushed down into the ground so that the dirt hits the road. There are houses that do not conform to the Victorian look and feel of the town (e.g., split levels), yet their owners have not re-skinned them to fit in.
Why is the housing stock so run down? The answer is that many people in OG lack the financial means to maintain their properties and/or they lack the will to maintain them. In Neptune, of course, the situation is much, much worse.
The solution is for taxes/home values/rents to rise sufficiently to motivate owners/renters who can’t afford the town to move on. More affluent owners will make the necessary investments. Look at what happened in Spring Lake between 1975 and today as an example of what is possible. Red Bank is another example.
In OG, this transformation has been happening very slowly, as I notice only minimal improvements in the housing stock in the four years I have lived here.
In Neptune, the town council has stated that they are determined to protect (read: keep) the people they have now, even if they have to trample on private property owners rights and free-market principles to do it.
Neptune needs to be thinking about how they can raise the both the rents and taxes to initiate a transformation of their town.
Joe : I disagree. An interesting diverse unique population and character give a town value. Both monetarily and spiritually. In fact in the case of OG this is intrinsic to the nature of OG. People quite often comment & praise how special, unique, and charming OG is. They are not just referring to our pretty homes. These comments are also a reflection on our citizenry – both owners & renters.
Although it did happen in the past (decades ago)one cannot currently take a single family and turn it into a 3 family. Tomas was posing his question in the present/future tense.
Tomas does care about the value of his community, the monetary value. When selling a home, the “interestingness” of a community doesn’t affect the price, the quality of the housing stock does.
I can think of multiple single family homes in Ocean Grove that are now divided
Tomas. Frankly your interest in maximizing the value of your house is selfish (and yes egocentric too) and as dollar driven as the uncaring multi-family owners you decry.
Don’t you care about the value of your community ? A diverse involved interesting and stable community maintains and maximizes your almighty property value. A community comprised simply of affluent single family home owners would be dull and unattractive. If that is what you aspire to I suggest you move to the suburbs. As to your question : A single family can not be divided into 3 units. Illegal.
With all due respect to renters, OG would be best served if it was 100% single unit homes. The group homes (only a few left, fortunately) and apartment buildings (large and small) almost always detract from nearby property values and are the sources of many issues. While I may be egocentric, I want OG to evolve in a way that maximizes the value of my house — which means fewer apartments.
Let me pose this question: If you knew that the house next door to you was going to be divided into three appartments, would you think that was good? I doubt it.
I am a 2 family landlord. As I understand it, what Neptune is doing will only affect 3 family or more properties; not smaller 2 or 1 rental owners who often live in 1 of the units and are locals. On the other hand, 3 family or more properties are usually non owner occupied and investor owned with profit motive.
The latter owner tends not to take as great care of their property, as doing so would eat into their profit. Rent control will not change this.
Reading some of these comments here seems to be an anti-renter attitude. Many renters are affluent, professionals, stable, and great neighbors/citizens. That they choose not to own is their business. To look down upon them and deem them as undesirable is foolish and mean-spirited.
Many new owners to OG are seasonal and part-timers. Many just see OG as their weekend/summer getaway. However tenants usually are full-timers, and many have been here for years. A lot are involved with and intrinsic to the community.
Rising rents over past dozen years or so has led to many fine folks being priced out of and displaced from OG. Rising/unstable rents tend to lead to a transient population. Rent control might help stabiilze a community/OG.
Don’t mess with hemlock. The DEA office in Greece rates it schedule one.
Just read the piece in the Sun. If the market will bear a 35% rent increase, that is fantastic news because it means the town is on the upswing. If you can’t afford it, then it’s time to move on. I can’t afford to live in Spring Lake, but I would not expect the town council there to regulate rents or home values so I can. I don’t think it right that Neptune Township be run as a charity project.
Paul: I don’t have the Socrates quote at hand, and my words were a paraphrase (I’m relying on my memory from a philosophy class I took in college). However, Socrates and his most famous student, Plato, were well known critics of democracy.
I would look in “The Republic” by Plato, which contains recounted dialogues with Socrates discussing democracy and other forms of government.
The Analogy of the Ship is a good place to start. A ship requires a captain, a navigator, and a crew who are highly skilled in order to get to its destination. A ship manned by an untrained and unqualified crew cannot properly operate a ship — likely resulting in calamity. Furthermore, an untrained and unqualified crew also cannot properly choose the destination for the ship, as they will chose to go to the place and by the route that meets their most immediate desired rather than considering the currents, weather, pirates, and other factors that an expert crew would think about. Similarly, a government cannot be run well by untrained citizens who are chosen by other untrained and generally uninformed citizens.
Socrates was blamed (falsely) for inciting the coup against the newly installed Athenian democracy in 404 BC with his teachings. When Athenian democracy was restored in 403 BC, the authorities trumped up charges on Socrates (principally that he was an atheist) because they wanted him and his ideas eradicated. As we all know Socrates, a great and noble man, was sentenced to death and died by drinking poison hemlock. Plato fled from Athens and continued to advance and expand upon Socrates ideas.
Propelled by population shifts and budget pressures, New Jersey voters and local officials are slowly eroding the state’s rent-control laws, in many cases reversing decades-old programs that were long considered among the most tenant-friendly in the nation.
The most recent shift came this week when two cities in Hudson County—an urban enclave where politics are dominated by the Democratic Party—moved to scale back their local rent-control laws.
On Tuesday, Hoboken voters approved a city-backed referendum to limit provisions that, in part, allowed tenants to recoup unlimited retroactive overcharges. Two days later, the Bayonne City Council unanimously voted to decontrol apartments after tenants move or are evicted.
Experts said they see the turning tide as a sign that towns and cities are looking at every constituency—even those long protected by politics and social mores—as they try to boost tax revenue.
If areas that had rent control for decades see that this is no longer working then why is Neptune trying to reinvent the wheel and bringing rent control to us.
would like to know how the Neptune Housing Authority will also be monitoring and getting involved with issuing violations when the Commissioners of the Housing Authority have not discussed any of the rent control ordinances or their participation with it. They do not meet in the summer or have had any meetings since June.
Abbott. Forgive me if I inferred that Democrat voters automatically support rent control. I might have gotten ahead of myself or misconstrued what I was saying.
What I mean is that this town is solidly Democrat, and because of that, our Democrat elected officials operate with impunity because they know they are not going to be challenged. For many (and I have to use the words) “low information” voters who vote by label or sound bite, they get the message that the Democrats will protect them from evil. That wasn’t explicitly said at the Commitee meeting, but it sure came across that way.
Most voters haven’t a clue what rent control is about and except for maybe a small portion, MORE voters didn’t even know it was on the table.
Fair enough?
Here is a link to the Asbury Park Sun‘s article about the Neptune Committee meeting regarding rent control. The reporter describes the fireworks:
http://asburyparksun.com/two-hour-hearing-precedes-rent-control-passage/
It is becoming apparent that this subject is only superficially about controlling rents. Once again, issues that affect our country crystallize on the tiny stage of small town America. This topic is about politics, class, race, local government and its priorities, taxes, power of government, capitalism, and about who we are as a people.
We in Ocean Grove are still struggling with issues of free speech, gay rights, religious freedom, private property, and church vs state in the schools.
But, they say that all politics is local, and certainly all of these issues tie into politics. Abbott quoted Socrates. I’d like to see that reference. It is very cynical. We can have a better democracy if we all participate, and commenting on Blogfinger is a unique way to do so.
Abbott: Thank you for a first-class comment. It is very informative and helpful as we pursue a constructive dialogue on Blogfinger regarding rent-control. It is just this kind of comment by a reader which will allow Blogfinger to fulfill its goal of being “an information sharing website.”
You really should use your real name—-why not take credit for your opinions? Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger
In response to Paul, OG did not have rent control and that’s my point.
The case study with OG is this: 1) 20+ years ago, OG was in a dilapidated state with many rooming houses/SROs, many houses split into multiple units, many unsavory characters in town, more crime, drugs, etc. 2) Because OG had no rent control, rents were allowed to rise with rising property values as the town gradually improved. 3) As rents and real estate values rose, there was a significant turnover of folks who lived in the town, rooming houses/rental apartments were repurposed or replaced, multiple-unit houses were recombined, etc. 4) The town progressively improved leading to further even higher rents and property values, more folks invested in large scale renovations/rebuilds. Hopefully OG will continue to improve, as it still has a ways to go before it is fully restored.
My point is that — in my personal analysis — OG renaissance would have been significantly attenuated (or worse) if rent controls had been in place. An inconvenient truth is that rental units — especially subsidized rental units — damage the economic health and property values of a town. Rent control will lead Neptune to have even further deterioration of its housing stock and decreased property values. Why would they want that?
Maxster: Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents do not inherently support rent control or the types of ill-advised policy being implemented in Neptune. Neptune’s leaders make the choices they do for their own personal expediency – not because they are Democrats per se.
It was Socrates who said that democracy is fatally flawed because it ultimately reduces to being an elaborate vote buying scheme. Neptune is Exhibit A.
I would bet my last dollar that the township will NEVER re-open this ordinance to fix it.
Meanwhile, the town keeps on electing the same old people 1) because of the demographics where more voters are Democrat or Democrat leaning Independents and 2) the opposition (AKA Neptune Republicans) are in a tailspin. God knows when they last won a seat. My bet is that nothing changes again this year.
Interestingly, the Grove used to be a solid “red” Republican vote-getter, but now it is much more Democrat blue. NOT blaming the Grove for giving us rent control, but it is within your power to make changes. But, too many people just vote labels. It will take the tax base falling apart like Detroit to make any changes in this town.
Abbott: Please be precise and tell us how “Ocean Grove is a case study.” The prior comment was referencing derelict houses.
What lessons regarding rent control can you find in Ocean Grove?
Thanks, Paul
This is a really, really bad idea! Do any of those people read about towns with rent control and the problems with it?
This has nothing to do with Code Enforcement and everything to do with pandering to a base! Shame on them!!
This is a continuation of the kind of terrible public policy that has gotten Neptune (and AP) into the mess they’re in today. These towns are doomed to continued failure unless their elected officials do what is right for the long-term interests of the municipality — not just pandering to immediate desires of certain constituencies.
Rising rents (or as some would call them, market-based rents) would be the best thing that could happen to Neptune. In fact rising rents and rising taxes are the key policy levers that Neptune has to affect a positive evolution of their town. Why? The formula is easy to understand: rising rents = more valuable real estate = rising real estate values and property taxes = more responsible/affluent/educated owners or renters = better maintained properties and more civic pride = further rising values = more tax dollars = better schools = conversion of rental properties to full ownership = gradual elimination of rental housing = eventual elimination of public housing projects = even better schools and even higher real estate values.
As stated above in another comment, Ocean Grove is a case study. Rent control is a proven loser.
All of this begs the question: just what is Neptune’s strategy to improve the quality of their town?
Unfortunately the dynamics of the voter base have changed so that the Committee doesn’t have to think about negative feedback from the residents. The spring Democratic primary is where the action is nowadays.
In fact, the demographic aided by this rent control will assure no changes happen on the Committee party-wise. As Ken mentioned, it’s too bad that nobody listened to the level headed, no-dog-in-the-fight, residents at the meeting. Sadly, those are the folks that will bear the brunt of the negative tax impact of deteriorating / abandoned rental units.
If what is reported is true, then renters make up 25% of the town. That will leave the homeowners to pick up the tab of this impending failure. Less rent = less taxes for landlords= more taxes for homeowners.
One article reported that a resident received a $25 increase on her rent of $1425? Hmmm? That is like 1.8% which is less than the CPI in most years and most likely less than the annual property tax increases the town has been receiving.
Seems like the Neptune politicians had knee-jerk reactions that will eventually harm the town. Poor leadership to say the least
This should fail spectacularly. Less incentive and money flowing to the landlords means they lose the ability to maintain and fix up the units. It also results in loss when tenants severely damage and destroy a unit; the landlord does not have the cash flow to demo and repair the unit to livable conditions, so they do what they can and rent it out at a lower price, resulting in lower income tenants who damage the unit….See a cycle here.
Rent control will only result in the deterioration of rental properties, lowering the income level of township residents, and decreasing the value of the units. Rental properties can be effective, like the Seaview Island development, but that requires the community to buy into paying more to gain increased services and features.
Code Enforcement: Does anyone really believe they will have any impact?? Just ask the folks in Ocean Grove that live next to one of the MULTIPLE properties that are tied up in court. Once again another law or ordinance that is mostly unenforceable or will just end of in court for months or years with no resolution.
Here is a link to a Coaster article on this subject dated Aug.3, 2013
http://thecoaster.net/wordpress/neptune-plans-rent-control-measure/
This is a fascinating event for two reasons. The first is that rent control is very widely recognized as a bad move for all involved. Every college economics department teaches that rent control leads to landlords’ underinvesting in maintenance, falling property values, less tax revenue, and, over time, shortages of rental housing (NYC and Santa Monica are two cases in point).
The second reason is that Neptune apparently thinks that rental housing is a positive for their town. Some believe that towns that have high levels of rental housing have lower quality schools, deteriorating tax base, lower civic involvement, more crime, etc. If there is to be rental housing, I would think that Neptune would want to have rising rents, which would lead to higher real estate values, higher property values, and a repurposing of rental properties over time to other, higher value uses (e.g., condos, or demolish and rebuild single family homes).
What are the Mayor and Neptune Committee thinking? How can they be unaware of the disastrous outcomes that rent control will bring Neptune? Don’t they want Neptune to become a more economically prosperous, better town over time? OG is a great example of how a decrease in rental housing can benefit a town.
I completely agree with The Maxster. This ordinance is, as Mr .Bishop said: “…in response to Winding Ridge and other large complexes…raising rents…”.
This over-reaching action will have unintended consequences for small apartment units in Ocean Grove which are owned (and in some cases lived in) by locals.
Last night there were three distinct groups attending the SRO meeting. The affected tenants, landlord representatives (including small unit landlords from Ocean Grove,) and a third group of Neptune and Ocean Grove residents with “no dog in the fight”.
The third group kept raising the inadequacies of the ordinance as currently written such as: the lack of proper maintenance, code enforcement already overwhelmed with the violations in single and 2 family residences, unresponsive out-of-town ownership, and the unfairness to small unit local owners: all to no avail.
There are no assurances that rent increases will not be beyond what many tenants can afford, nor that unsightly living conditions will be addressed. Only continuing pressure (attending Twp agenda meetings) by the interested parties will ensure corrective action.
The situation that was discussed at the Committee meeting had nothing to do with high rents. It had to do with no heat in the winter and leaks in roofs that have created water damage to the homes in Winding Ridge resulting in mold problems….and fines for paying their rent late.
The rent control board will not take care of these situations and, in actuality, it will make them worse. The Housing Authority will have to take landlords to court (at a very high cost to the tax payers of Neptune)..as the Township could do right now without rent control. And when these large corporations abandon the property and they are in total shambles ..who will be left to fix the problem? And when the buildings get condemned who will house these people most of whom are on fixed incomes or assistance of some kind?
Nope they did nothing to address the real problems being complained about to help these people …It was so sad really sad …
I was appalled at the rush to judgement last night about the rent control ordinance. The township committee couldn’t table it for two weeks, in order to make the ordinance right and remove the confusing language, and to protect the small landlords. They asked us to trust them, that they would readdress these issues later. Since when have they ever done that in this town and why should we trust government?
Instead we use a cannon to swat a fly. This ordinance came about simply because of Winding Ridge, an aberration of a problem. Instead, one class was pitted against another and everyone will lose.
One subject was not brought up. Will this ordinance retroactively address the rent grievances at Winding Ridge? I would like to know more about that. Because if it doesn’t then the renters are still getting screwed.
Worse, the Township wants to use a rent control ordinance to solve code violation problems.