Tenant group sees opportunity in multifamily foreclosures

David Goldsmith

All Powerful Moderator
Staff member
One potential solution is a poison pill strategy. Most of the time when rental buildings are foreclosed on there is a receiver appointed to collect rents, pay expenses, etc. If these receivers were required to both reduce rents and issue Statutory Leases (like a Rent Control/Rent Stabilized lease) it would make buying these properties totally unattractive to anyone else but non-profit/tenant controlled entities.
Tenant group sees opportunity in multifamily foreclosures: report
Distressed buildings should become social housing, Community Service Society argues

A new report argues that distress and declining values in rental properties is an opportunity for decommodification of multifamily buildings. (iStock; Chart via Furman Center)
Distressed debt fund managers aren’t the only ones smelling opportunity from a coming foreclosure crisis.
A nonprofit seeking to help the poor says rental properties’ struggles present a chance to decommodify multifamily buildings.

The Community Service Society, which looks for systemic solutions to problems that create a “permanent poverty class” in New York City, expects non-payment of rent to trigger a wave of apartment building foreclosures.
When that wave hits, the group argues in a report, the city and state should make sure rental housing does not fall into the hands of new profit-seeking investors — as it did after the financial crisis of 2008.
chart-705x530.jpg

The report suggests policy makers study solutions developed in the last recession, including a “First Look” program developed with New York Community Bank and administered by the nonprofit Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development.

In 2012, that program resulted in the sale of four distressed mortgages to a nonprofit developer, but a foreclosure auction was held anyway and the nonprofit was outbid by a private investor. The buildings remain in disrepair.
To avoid that scenario, the report recommends the city expand programs such as land banks to finance preservation purchases, and suggests tenants be given the first opportunity to purchase a building, should it come up for sale.
The report also recommends eliminating the 421a and 485a new-development tax breaks and instead adopting tax policy that favors social housing models such as community land trusts.
The authors acknowledge that the biggest obstacle to the goals in the report: cost.
That sentiment echoed by Jay Martin, executive director of the Community Housing Improvement Program, which represents rent-stabilized landlords. Martin disagreed with the report’s recommendations, which he said stem from the idea that profit from housing is wrong.
The report does not answer fundamental questions about how to transition to social housing, Martin said, such as: “How do we pay for it? How do we bring housing costs down, and how do you replace all the tax revenue?”

Martin noted that the city depends disproportionately on tax revenue from rental buildings — a feature of overreliance on real estate to pay for social services, after urban disinvestment in the 1970s, the report argues — and that the city is already facing a huge budget shortfall.
Despite the heavy toll the virus has taken on New York City — and early predictions that tenants would skip rent and landlords would miss property tax payments — the rental market has fared much better than other sectors. It is unclear how much multifamily distress there will actually be.
Landlords say they have gotten no help during the pandemic, but their finances are being steadily depleted.
“It’s almost worse than a complete crash,” said Martin. “We’re in a slow bleed period, with buildings operating on a tenuous margin.”
Jerry Waxenberg, who owns a significant number of rental buildings in the Bronx, said rent collection has been steadier than he expected.
“We operate properties in some of the poorest sections in the city and our rent collections percentage is among the highest,” said Waxenberg.

The lack of severe distress helps explain why legislative efforts to cancel rent, or expand a means-tested federal voucher program, as landlords prefer, have gained little traction.
Despite U.S. Census findings that 15 percent of tenants were not current on their rent in October, industry reports have found that collection has been fairly strong. Although landlords have said that rent strikes have had an impact, it is unclear how much of a rent shortfall is attributable to them.
Meanwhile, landlords are paying their mortgages. Community banks in New York City — the go-to lenders for the rent-regulated multifamily market — have not reported widespread delinquencies.
Nevertheless, unemployment figures in New York City remain much higher than the national average, and while tenants may make tradeoffs to keep paying rent, a prolonged crisis could lead to foreclosures across all asset classes — including multifamily.
The Community Service Society report takes issue with the city relying on increasing property values for tax revenue. It also criticizes the investment strategy of raising rents and neglecting properties to raise net operating income.

“This report seems to insinuate that every landlord has done that,” said Martin. “But there’s no measurement out there, that I know of, that people making more money leads to investing less in the property.”
 

David Goldsmith

All Powerful Moderator
Staff member
With NY poised to lose billions, socialists fight real estate
Activists cry “seize the land” as Republicans seize the Senate

What does a 14-story building proposed in Brooklyn have to do with New York’s quest for billions of dollars in federal aid?
More than you might think.

The mixed-income, mixed-use project at 737 Fourth Avenue has drawn the ire of Protect Sunset Park, a group that helped kill Industry City’s rezoning three months ago. This much smaller proposal is in Greenwood Heights, but the activists see market-rate development marching Sunset Park’s way from Park Slope and intend to stop it.
view

How? By seizing the land.
To “protect” Sunset Park, activists don’t merely want the site to remain a Dunkin’ Donuts. They want it taken from its owners and reserved exclusively for low-income people, rather than about 30 percent of units in the proposed 108,000-square-foot building being set aside for households earning 30 percent to 60 percent of area median income. That’s even more affordable than the city’s affordable housing policy requires, earning the project approval from Community Board 7.

Yet Jorge Muniz-Reyes, a member of Protect Sunset Park, said in a press release, “It’s time to start seizing the space the working class needs to address our housing crisis.”

Any evidence-based analysis would conclude that 30 percent affordable housing is a benefit, not a threat. The actual threat to New York right now is Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, blocking tens of billions of dollars in federal aid to the city, state and Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Unless Republicans lose both Senate run-offs in Georgia, McConnell could keep denying New York for years.

McConnell couldn’t find Sunset Park on a map, but he knows how to win Senate races: by tarring Democratic candidates as socialists.

That might seem absurd. After all, socialism is government ownership of the means of production, and no Democrats running for U.S. Senate favor that. Certainly the two in Georgia don’t. There is no chance that Washington will nationalize industries the way Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea and the Soviet Union did, crippling their economies in the process.

But all it takes is a crumb of truth for a political campaign to feast. When an incoming member of the New York state Assembly says in an op-ed, “We need to socialize land and housing,” and Muniz-Reyes fantasizes about seizing property, the GOP and its media allies can carry that message to Georgia, Florida, the heartland and pretty much anywhere in a matter of hours.

Protect Sunset Park’s release added that the group marched past an “inessential” hotel that “New York’s leaders could seize tomorrow to address the housing crisis in Sunset Park.” Americans care about income inequality, but the idea of the government snatching private property it deems “inessential” would frighten the vast majority of them, for good reason.

The socialism tag hurts Democrats in key races, despite claims to the contrary by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. The Trump campaign used it to great effect in Florida, but immigrants who fled socialist countries are not the only Americans moved by this messaging. On an October visit to central Pennsylvania, I stayed with a college buddy who was disgusted by Donald Trump but said he planned to vote for him to ensure what happened in Venezuela does not happen here.

This is a college professor and Ivy League graduate who builds houses as a side business. From his view, the Democratic Party has become extreme. (He was surprised when I told him that Democrats have for years said the same thing of Republicans.)
The reality is, few socialists have won any elections. Ocasio-Cortez and her squad are four of the House’s 435 members, and not full-blown socialists. Five socialists have won seats in the 213-member New York state legislature — Jabari Brisport, Phara Souffrant Forrest, Marcela Mitaynes, Zohran Mamdani and Julia Salazar — and a few in Chicago. Expressing socialists’ share of elected offices nationwide requires a decimal point and a whole bunch of zeroes.

It also takes a bunch of zeroes to express how much money Washington could send New York if Democrats control the Senate. The House bill passed last month would send $436,000,000,000 to state and local governments. “If I were majority leader and Biden were president … I think we’d get this bill done quickly,” Sen. Charles Schumer said this month during a Crain’s virtual event.

Schumer also complained that Republicans in Georgia are twisting his words about wanting to “change America.”
“They’re [turning] that into things I have never said, things the Democratic Party isn’t for,” he said. “They came up with these straw men.”
But that’s politics, as Schumer well knows. You do what it takes to win. It just so happens that what wins for socialists in deep-blue New York districts loses for Democrats in swing districts and states across the country.

And if the Democrats come up short in Georgia and New York gets bubkes in the next federal aid package, there won’t be money to seize land, subsidize housing, keep the trains running or do much of anything else.
 

David Goldsmith

All Powerful Moderator
Staff member
City Council mulls bill giving nonprofits first crack at buying resi buildings

Affordable housing developers say measure unfairly blocks private partnerships​


The City Council is considering two bills that seek to ensure more affordable housing is created and controlled by nonprofits.
One measure, dubbed the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act, would require city-approved nonprofit organizations or community land trusts be given the first chance to buy residential buildings with three or more apartments when they are put up for sale. The other would create a land bank that would warehouse properties and then prioritize selling them to community land trusts and nonprofits.
view

The aim of both bills, according to its sponsors, is to ensure such properties are taken over by organizations that will maintain or create affordable housing, rather than try to turn a quick profit.
During a Tuesday hearing, Manhattan Council member Carlina Rivera, the prime sponsor of COPA, said the measure could help prevent private equity firms from buying up distressed properties — such as hotels driven out of business by the pandemic — and turning them into market-rate housing. The bill requires that nonprofits are given a 120-day head start to make an offer on a residential property, a timeframe Rivera said would give those organizations a better chance to compete. During that time, the seller can’t accept another offer.

“This is simply about giving affordable housing producers a fair shot,” she said. Under the measure, the nonprofit’s offer needs to be at least equal to the property’s listing and the organization can match competing offers.
Affordable housing developers object to the bill’s preference given to nonprofits. Christopher Widelo, of New York State Association for Affordable Housing, said “the scope of this bill is too vast to benefit too few.” He added that only a small group of nonprofits have the necessary experience and resources to take over residential properties on their own. In written testimony, the Real Estate Board of New York said that while it supports the use of community land trusts, they shouldn’t serve as a “substitute for all public-private partnerships.”

“[The bill] just assumes a nonprofit is a better landlord,” the group wrote. “The exclusion of any private entity and any private-public entity from the qualified entities list is both pernicious and based on false valuation of good versus bad for business practices.”
The group also said the bill raises legal issues, including “the arbitrary and capriciousness of exclusion of all private entities.”

A community land trust is a type of nonprofit that acquires properties, often through long-term ground leases, for community benefit, such as by preserving affordable housing. There are two active community land trusts in the city, including Cooper Square CLT and East Harlem El Barrio CLT. In November, El Barrio purchased four apartment buildings from the city.

HPD has reservations
Kim Darga, an associate commissioner of the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, testified that while the city is excited by the prospect of expanding the use of community land trusts, ensuring nonprofits have the necessary experience and capacity to run these properties could prove a challenge. She also said the land bank bill could “distort the market” and would potentially result in a rise in costs if the bank struggles to find qualified buyers.

Brooklyn Council member Brad Lander, the prime sponsor of the land bank bill, acknowledged that the measure could result in additional costs but said Darga failed to make a case that it would disrupt the market. He said the bill would help prevent speculative developers from buying and then flipping properties, and would instead prioritize permanent affordable housing.
Robert Cornegy, who leads the Council’s Committee on Housing and Buildings, noted he has heard from a number of developers who fear the bills unfairly close off opportunities to minority-led companies. Similar concerns have been raised in relation to another bill introduced by Lander earlier this month that would limit the transfer of city-owned land intended for affordable housing to nonprofit developers.

user-matching
user-matching


user-matching
user-matching
user-matching
user-matching
 
Top