Dear Editor:
Your recent article (“Tenant Rights Group Propose Just-Cause Eviction Law,” Banker & Tradesman, Dec. 7) about the just-cause eviction proposal for Boston had a critical error and also did not describe the Small Property Owners Association’s position well. The error is: “Buildings with fewer than five units would be exempt” from just-cause eviction control and mandatory rent review. Correctly stated: Owner-occupied buildings with fewer than five units would be exempt from it.
Tenant advocates say it’s all about “corporate developers.” Not so. Many small owners would fall under its rigid eviction control and mandatory rent review. Those owners who do not occupy their one-, two-, three- or four-family buildings, but often live next door or down the street, would be covered.
Eviction control is the best way to describe half the proposal. Every eviction in controlled buildings must be reviewed, and many, many evictions asked for will be denied. Why else would advocates propose eviction control? Much tenant misbehavior that doesn’t reach a high level to justify eviction in the eyes of the control board will have to be tolerated by owners, co-tenants and neighbors.
All evictions in order to renovate kitchens and baths will be denied to stop owners from upgrading and charging higher rents. This is de facto rent control. Buildings will steadily deteriorate and ruin neighborhoods, shifting a substantial property tax burden to non-controlled owners.
The other half of this proposal is just as bad: rent review. Advocates call their rent review process “mediation;” such a nice, fuzzy-wuzzy word. Do not fall for the trap. It’s mandatory that every rent increase over 5 percent must be reviewed by the city in a hearing, and it’s all stacked against the owner. Tenants will get a free lawyer, not landlords. All tenant advocacy groups will be notified and invited into the hearing. Owners “must mediate” with all of them. Owner groups are not mentioned. One very big pressure will be the owner’s own tenants, who will all be invited. Advocates will paint the owner as a greedy, rich developer and turn those tenants against their owner. What owner wants constant, day-to-day hostility and non-cooperation, or possibly even rent strikes, in exchange for a rent increase?
The vicious review will discourage many owners from ever raising rents more than 5 percent. That will stop most capital improvements and cause steady deterioration. No evictions. No upgrades. No rent increases over 5 percent. How will housing be preserved for the long run? New housing construction will stop because builders do not want to operate under these conditions. Tradesmen will have no new work. Controlled properties will be devalued immediately if this proposal is enacted, and then they will steadily devalue from lack of capital improvements, pushing the property tax burden onto non-controlled owners. This proposal is a coercive form of rent control that is not thinking about the future of Boston.
Skip Schloming
Executive Director
Small Property Owners Association
