The Trojan Horse Ambrose/Williams Substitute Rent "Reform Bill"

and Suggested Opposition Letter to Council

Beware landlords bearing gifts, especially of the so-called “rent reform” kind, proposed by Councilmember Ambrose and Mayor Williams. While tenants currently under rent control receive cost-of-living increases (CPI), under the Ambrose-Williams bill, 10 per cent yearly rent increases could easily become the norm, hence, because of compounding, doubling your rent in less than a decade. To receive the low-income exemption of only CPI increases, you must have VERY low income -- under $21,000 for singles, and under $30,000 for a family of four, a revival of the mayor’s noxious “means testing” idea.

Enactment of Ambrose/Williams would accelerate the flight of the poor and middle class out of the District, making DC an unaffordable city for most. This is not only bad policy, it is a demographic catastrophe, ensuring that the District like other cities across the country are reduced to bi-polar enclaves, consisting of the very rich and the very poor. Examples elsewhere prove it. Boston did away with rent control and it has proven a disaster, forcing thousands of families out of the city! Boston's mayor and many now lament the change, but it is too late. The Apartment and Office Buildings Association (AOBA) hails a purported new rent program in Boston called "Rent Plus". Plus what? The family jewels?

District rent control was designed along with home rule to help and empower low and middle income renters and minorities to keep affordable housing and stabilize neighborhoods. It was also intended to retain people who have a key stake and make a signal contribution to the city, i.e., teachers, firefighters, police and other public service workers -- local or federal.

The Ambrose bill, which is really the mayor's bill in disguise, would defeat the purposes for which rent control was granted: affordable housing. Currently, landlords can raise the rent on any unit that becomes vacant to the highest rent charged a comparable unit. In this market, rents for any vacant units have already reached astronomical levels - $1100 and $1200 efficiencies have become common; $1800 one-bedrooms are the norm. Annual rent increases can amount to hundreds of dollars. None of this is rent control. Whole classes of people have been priced out of the market, including the poor, low income, fixed income, the elderly and students. Landlords cry "market rate" for entry-level rents in apartment buildings, but the market has become a casino and the landlords are breaking the bank at Monte Carlo. "Market rate" for housing is a landlord fixation, but housing, especially rental housing, is not a commodity. We are not talking about oil futures, pork bellies, or Reebok sneakers; we are talking about the roof over people's heads, the sina qua non for physical, economic and social survival in America's big city.

The Ambrose/Williams bill has means testing as a requirement for rent control. "Means testing" is a celebrated misnomer, it should be called "demeans test". Nobody in this city should have to plead poverty for the benefits of rent control. We know of no other jurisdiction in the country has this requirement for rent control. Do we want landlords writing the rules and implementing them as they did during the scandalous 95/5 denial of tenants' "right to buy" fiasco, allowed by a dysfunctional Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA)?

Renters need to stand up and be heard. There are an estimated 100,000 households presently under rent control. Let your council members hear from you! Remind them that this is an election year. TENAC serves notice that we will oppose, and campaign vigorously against any candidates voting to weaken or destroy rent control. If the council hears from us loud and clear, tenants cannot fail.

Please write or e-mail your council member and urge them to support the Graham alternative endorsed by TENAC and vote no on Ambrose/Williams. Below is suggested language.

Your Name

Address

City, Zip

Date

Council Member ___________________

The District Building

1350 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20004

Dear Council Member

As a tenant, I am gravely concerned about the survival of rent control in the city and the current rent control bill (the "Ambrose-Mayor Williams substitute bill") before the District City Council. I urge you to back the Graham alternative proposal endorsed by TENAC and vote “no” on Ambrose/Williams, which instead of correcting the current abuses rampant under the present rent control law, would make them worse. Ambrose/Williams would allow current rents to double in 7 or 8 years. Low and middle income renters can’t afford this. This is unconscionable, since it would inevitably force out of the District low and middle income renters.

Ambrose/Williams would make the District a city of only the very rich and very poor, precisely what rent control was designed to prevent. I remind you that District rent control was developed, along with home rule, to help and empower low and middle income wage earners and minorities to maintain affordable housing. Ambrose-Williams allows continuing skyrocketing rents, and destroys the purpose of rent control: affordable housing for all, especially firefighters, teachers, bus drivers, librarians and other public service employees. Ambrose-Williams would also revive "means testing", an outrageous practice for a paltry number of so-called "set-aside" apartments for the poor. No other rent control jurisdiction imposes means testing. Tenants should not have to plead poverty to get the benefits of rent control.

Ambrose/Williams would also take away the many renter protections renters have presently. Recovering past illegal rent increases would be severely restricted by making 2006 the “base year” for rent control, the year on which all future increases are based.

I am a gravely concerned District tenant. I urge you to support the Graham bill and disavow the Ambrose/Williams substitute bill. As a voter, I will vigorously oppose any council or mayoral candidates hostile to real rent control reform.

Graham bill Yes! Ambrose/Williams No!

Sincerely,