With Albany Lawmakers Set to Pass an Emergency Eviction Law TOMORROW in a

Special Session, NYC’s Largest Landlord Organization Warns That the Proposed Bill Will
Encourage Tenants Not to Pay Rent – Even if They’re Employed
 
From… Rent Stabilization Association
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE SUNDAY, DECEMBER 27, 2020
 
With state lawmakers poised to pass the COVID-19 Emergency Eviction and Foreclosure
Prevention Act at a special session tomorrow, the city’s largest organization of landlords today
warned that a blanket eviction moratorium without the requirement of proving economic
hardship would effectively encourage thousands of employed tenants – many ironically using
their apartments as their workplace – not to pay rent, and will push the city off the cliff of
bankruptcy and take down the affordable rental housing infrastructure like a house of cards.
 
“Owners recognize and support the need to help tenants without sufficient financial resources to
pay rent due to job loss or health circumstances. However, this proposed bill (S.9114 –
Kavanagh / A.11181 – Dinowitz) extends the eviction moratorium for residential tenants based
on the submission of a simple declaration of financial hardship without proving such hardship
caused by COVID-related job loss or income reduction,” said Joseph Strasburg, president of the
Rent Stabilization Association, which represents 25,000 owners of the 1 million rent-stabilized
apartments in the five boroughs.
 
“With no requirement of proof that the COVID-19 pandemic negatively affected their income,
and no income limitation to qualify for eviction protection, a tenant whose household income
went from a half-million dollars to $250,000 would qualify for eviction protection by declaring
that their income has been ‘significantly reduced,’” Strasburg said.  
 
“This bill must have the same scrutiny and eligibility review as Section 8, senior citizen rent
increase exemption, and other government-sponsored assistance.  Anything less, what impetus
would there be for any tenant to pay rent, even if they are still employed – including thousands
working from the apartments they will be withholding rent payments?” Strasburg added.
 
Strasburg said the Kavanagh-Dinowitz bill is in stark contrast to California’s legislative approach
in their eviction law (AB3088), which requires tenants earning $100,000 on 30% of AMI to
provide documentation supporting their hardship claims.
 
“A cap on the amount of the rent level would ensure that the benefits of this proposed bill reach
those that need it.  This bill doesn’t make a serious effort to require tenants to take advantage of
available rent relief – such as the DHCR rent relief program, the federal rental assistance
program, or the city’s HRA one-shot program.  Lawmakers should be directing their constituents
to these programs, whose funds are critical to landlords in maintaining and keeping their
buildings safe and to paying their real property taxes – the latter vital to keeping the city and
essential services afloat,” Strasburg said.
 
“The tsunami of evictions is not occurring; in fact, a minimal number of evictions have been
executed since March 7 – and those cases pre-dated March 7.  Tenants have been protected by
the Governor’s eviction moratorium executive orders and the Safe Harbor Act,” Strasburg said.