##VIDEO ID:fco5cS501Fw## [Music] all right let's get started call this meeting to order uh this meeting is called to order in accordance with the open public meetings act notice of this meeting was provided to the home News Tribune The Star Ledger and the Highland Park planet on December 12th 2023 and was posted on the burough website at www.hp and on the bulletin board at Burl Hall 221 South F Street Highland Park New Jersey and has remained continuously posted as required by law Pledge of Allegiance are we doing that supposed to apparently di I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America stands and justice for all all right so uh roll call we're going to start doing that too what lost the list uh HP I'm here lucenda Holt Jared uh billin paulen devonish here ban Ray here uh Stephanie W bat filling in for Stephanie Terry over here okay so uh first order of business is certification of the annual rent increase for 2025 we have um the these data that uh Terry sent us uh the Consumer Price Index data um there is one adjustment to the letter where' it go even if we're going to round up I think we should still have it be accurate so it says 3.8 there that should be 3.7 apologies for the New York uh New Jersey consumer price next um everybody's looked over these of time I don't think same data but with wage increase average wage increase too all right discussion so last time we voted there wasn't much to discuss and I don't think there is because we we're sort of bound by doing but we do have to certify it uh can somebody make chair will entertain a motion to uh to certify I think we have to do a public comment no public comment first all right cool Hello strange people um public comment on this is the this is on the how we calculate the uh the maximum allowable rent increase um each year as uh as the ordinance is now um we take an average CPI consumer price index for New York and uh and Philadelphia we have 3.7 for New York metro area and um 3.4 for Philadelphia which comes to 3.55 round it up to 3.6 um yeah and so we don't have much to discuss but if the public would like to comment sure go on you need to come up to the microphone your name your name my namey i s have a question so if I read correctly the calculation is half the average CPI for New York and Philadelphia plus one um can I ask for a clarification what the sort of logic behind the plus one is so it's 3.4 plus 3.7 which is 3.55 and we rounded it to six because we did last year I don't know that we have to do that though we could actually just publish it at 3.55 I like that better be precise especially because it's at five and not submit that if the sort of reasoning behind the uh formula is or less arbitrary that we might also kind of arbitrarily choose to use a lower figure so how was the decision made can I yield to you Matt on this one you can but I'm Terry I think you one one suggestion I might have is we've started doing this at Council meetings and we should have mentioned it to you is maybe we get all the questions from the audience and then and cycle through and then we'll we'll double back on your question are we G to remember the questions I write notes so why three why why this why this formula okay um you state your name sure I'm Jamie um this is spectacularly offered um so in uh 20121 uh approximately 10% of p park households were at or below federal poverty standards that means horrifyingly approximately one in 10 of our uh households uh are considered to be in poverty um this is problematic of course but it actually doesn't tell a whole story anybody who has lived a jent to that poverty line anybody who's done any sort of work in housing or um uh employment or uh food or any other such Justice uh programs would understand that this isn't the whole picture um there is another standard that perhaps this committee is familiar with but if not um it's it's abbreviated as the um Alice uh program Alice stands for um wow I had this I had this when I was sitting in my seat lied asset asset limited um income constraints employed and what the Alice program which by the way is utilized by rers University's uh Department of Health and Community Services um what this seeks to do is create a more holistic uh look at what need is in a community um and what kind of struggle is in a community if we are to apply uh these standards which includes things like looking at high of living things that are localized things like um uh uh and so on if we apply this to Highland Park in 2021 over 32% of our households were considered to be unable to meet basic needs so onethird of households in Highland Park are unable to meet basic needs heard these um for this program um words are hard sometimes uh so I just want to note that in any deliberation or consideration any any ethical consideration any Justice minded or or equity-minded consideration it needs to take into account that for at least onethird of the households in Highland Park any increase is too much thank you any other um I'll just mention there is someone at home if you'd like to speak please raise your hand all right don't see hand up so we can chairwoman at this time we ask for a motion to close the public motion and after the public motion's closed we should we answer their questions first let me let me just finish for the decorum okay so once you ask for the motion to close the public portion and once it's closed public cannot engage in the dialogue with the members okay of course so once that's done then you can open up for each of the members if they wanted to speak okay as far as the Commissioners and then at that point then you can ask for phone all right well first we have to move it uh so uh the chair will entertain a motion to other no other no other comments oh you do is this the last's comment at the end yeah um the other one will it will be after we've discussed everything though so now it's probably the better time to speak if you want to speak before we sure deliberate make decisions okay thank you thank you uh my go to really Avenue um um so I'm a graduate student at R University thank you for having me here to speak today um I'm speaking on behalf of the hundreds of graduate students posts ad junks um parttime lecturers fellows um and and other workers at brers were simply uh not making a high enough wage um as in addition to as was eloquently put in the last comment um really a large uh portion of Highland Park residents do not make a high enough wage um and it's it's well established that um that wages have stagnated um in relation to Consumer Price Index or other measures um uh cost of living um for example in and and this is a not only uh across the United States but specifically within um middle sex County um for the past 20 years um pretty much unanimous every single year wage growth has underpay uh CPI um so I would like to submit that we consider wage growth as um ra rather than simply CPI as a measure of uh maximum rent increases um really this is not enough again this is if we want to return to the um consumer power that we had 20 40 years ago we we have to reverse the outpacing of um uh of of consumer price index you we we have to correct over correct this you all right now the chair will entertain a motion to uh uh to certify the um annual allowable rent increase public uh I can't make a motion because I'm shairing so somebody else has to make the motion no you go anounce I'm now asking for for a motion all right now asking for a motion to close public comment motion little we need a second all right all anyone opposed to this motion carries now public comment is closed now the chair will entertain a motion for the fourth time third time uh to certify the annual allowable uh uh rent increase for 2025 any discussion from the board I have a question are we certifying this number or are we just certifying that we're going to certify a number I think we're certifying this number and that it's calculated correctly well the only thing I would say is the ordinance does specify how that number is calcul so it's not like we can say yeah we don't really have so we don't just a check to make sure yeah somebody check the math yeah but I think we can you know people did raise issues such as you know should we be including things like um you know factoring in wage growth that's that's whole other question which would have more to do with the amendments to the ordinance right so that's something we can discuss when we get to that portion of the meeting but we can't address that now but I think that can be part of the conversation we talk about the actual amendments to the ordinance later okay that's right so I moved it we because that's that's what specifi the ordinance so that Mo can we specify which number we're going to use places or not for one uh just for the record uh the 3.8 that's printed on the letter needs to be changed to 3.7 for the New York metro area so after that correction um averaging 3.7 uh for New York and 3.4 for Philadelphia the average increase is 3.55 now we have to decide whether or not to round I would prefer not to because it's right in the middle um I don't does matter over time it compounds over time but it's does yeah um chair any objection yes if I may recommend um you can make a motion to to ask you know each each person what you know because right now we don't know which Commissioners feel that they should be around it up or not so you can do a first motion to see if anybody would vote for not rounding it and then a second motion to see if you know if one of them passes that's the one that you're GNA end up we could do it with motions or we can also since the floor is open just have people share their 3.55 I yep Jared um I prefer the to keep it consistent Diane I'm okay with the 3 5 uh I would be okay but all three things to me are not lining up when you go to 3.55 and I feel like that's why they because we have 3.8 3.7 no 3.7 yeah 3.7 3.4 and 3.6 oh that's the there should be a line think of it there is a line there the average is 3.6 is that so then I can go for 3.5 D question but did you you're you said why was it 38 here which is mistake uh I I think it might have been I I apologize for that because it's at the very top here and then it's also in the data Download August 37 and it's on table and that's what you go August to August is it yeah I really apologize for that confusion I don't know what happened I mean they released the the September up you know update so that but it might shift it slightly but I don't what we using these numbers what did last year did you do August to August we used we did use September but that was because our meeting was late so the September data wasn't available when I did the calul what does the ordinance have when you're supposed to it has when we have to certify by it doesn't say what which month what month we had to use I think I don't care what month we use we should probably keep it consistent year over year over year we will have this is third quarter to third quarter I think is the is that yeah I mean this is so it's like it's a fairly standard uh cut off point okay well then then August the end of August is the end of court right consistencies all right so 3.55 so uh I'll obstain um 3.55 we now you got to vote now we gotta vote all right so uh this is procedure but uh now taking uh we're we're now voting uh closing the discussion and voting on um uh certification of the annual allowable rent increase increase uh for 2025 as 3.55% all in favor I I do a roll call for this we have to do roll call each each person just get their vs yes right but like not all motions need have to be roll calls but this one's important so we may want a roll call to know how people voted yes to record it y all right I have that back sure I know your names but I want to make sure being thorough all right so motion all right I would I would not like to vote first uh lenda Hol hi Jared B it's pronounced Bannon Bon thanks sorry uh I paulen devish Ian R yes and I'll vote Yes motion carries unanimous all right um next next on the agenda approve the meeting minutes did everybody have an opportunity to review them before the meeting they were just sent out but we it seems that at least three of us or four of us had an opportunity to J were you able to review them I have [Music] here I got [Music] I'm half deaf so I can't hear a word you're saying right now sorry sorry it's okay I'm trying to read your lips oh I'm sorry I I'll speak a louder so um for each of the minutes once they've been reviewed we need a vote for each of the individuals mentioning call whether you want to get person so on this one you're gonna have to ask ask for the adoption of minutes yes because that's not standard it's chairwoman that's that's how we're going to accept the minutes and the second okay oh that's fine all right let's go okay let me let me finish okay and second thing is is that the individuals that were not here for the EV level meetings they cannot vote they have to abstain because they were not present at meetings I know that not all the members were here all we don't have any one missing we have a vacancy oh you a couple folks missed the actual meetings that is not make the last meeting I wasn't on I wasn't at the first one so I won't go on that one um I don't even know they I did not I did check the attendance do have the attendance that was July 25th yes the minutes from May 23rd second from this May 23rd May 23 okay all right let's see the are minutes what May [Music] 23rd all right I will obain lucenda H approve yes I approved them I was Bandon I approve PA devish approve Dian Ray yes of the minutes carries and now we have we need a second motion for July 2 July 25th and I was here was anybody missing for this I was missing all right I will vot I'll vote uh I will I will vote to approve lucenda Holt yes uh Jared banon um yes paain and Dian R yes all right motion carries we've adopted the minutes for May and July thank you that feels good put all the work in um all right so what's left on our agenda tonight then is are both discussion items they are carried over from our previous meeting two months ago two months ago um uh the first uh order of businesses to review the possible ordinance amendments we have uh received those via email earlier in the week um with notes from our attorney um and then then following that discussion we will uh talk about Outreach and then we take Public public comment again after that so you know all right so uh we have no motion on the floor these are just discussions so we can we can actually start to deliberate now if I will keep stack if do we want to go through these one by one again or do we just want to I think we can go one by one one by one all right so it looks like uh article one has a few different amendments but let's not do it by article because some of these are substantive and some of them are less so um all right so uh first change we have um in uh the definition of capital Improvement so it's uh adding the word permanent before Improvement so that the Improvement does have to be permanent um I think the one that's probably the most like substantive change here is it used to say Capital Improvement was defined as any permanent Improvement um addition or alteration of housing space or equipment that provides a new benefit to a tenant or uh and or adds value and this is the part that's being added so the original definition just had to provide a new benefit to a tenant this uh adding this language would suggest that even if it did not provide a new or provide any additional benefit to the tenant that if it added value to the home um they they could still apply for um for Capital Improvement Capital adjustments thoughts oh there's a second part to this too this is the same Clause so let's just do this um uh so adding on as well as any improvements mandated by law and that must uh not be upkeep not be maintenance repairs Rehabilitation or items or Services um and then there is a proposed here to add a to append a final sentence this would be new a landlord requesting for an increase in rent due to a capital Improvement must fill out and submit a capital Improvement application we didn't have that one in the last one and um it did come up so this is uh this is more of a a correcting and for consistency py but the do we do will people do do we have a definition for what that means like or examples of what that is like people just know oh I know what that is a c or what yeah will they will we all agree on what that is like why are we adding permanent here is the question I guess who um who proposes well what if you put it out say again we put a some a flower pot out front you know what I mean that that's like or I'm I'm I'm being yeah exaggerating but I think permanent is is is a good good definition for a cap for an improvement rather than they put a temporary handicap ramp out front and then and then they get a capital they get the benefit from it and then it goes away you're here keeping sack now so if anybody wants to am I up yes uh no um I think somebody asked you know how would we know if I think there's in the comments under the Capital impr Improvements section there's some examples that SAA put in which we haven't worked the language out which would help flesh out that I think we were trying to anticipate what if one came in how would we know how to evaluated and our existing ordinance didn't have a lot of detail so the language isn't proposed yet but in the comments under 32135 there's some examples of things such as so to your point yes later on in the ordinance we do try to specify to help us if that should come before us and especially for for an application long as we have some way of determining other thoughts I have a question then um it when the original ordinance was written um and you were there for this right uh was there any discussion of this like why uh I'm I'm concerned specifically about the part where uh us to be defined as anything that added benefit like it was a requisite right for this it had to add benefit to the tenant and then now it's the Andor which means it could be it could be either both but or either or adds value um and the value I think we can assume here is implying for the homeowner right because um that's that seems to be the most obvious implication of uh of what value means so this is this is changing kind of a substantive change um allowing cap you know requiring that it that it benefits the tenant versus just adds value to the home is this something that was like left out on purpose or is this something that maybe just like I think this is a clean up I don't think this was left out on purpose right ter I and I'll be honest S I think you suggested that language I don't know if you want to explain your thought on that yeah I think it's fine though this is um a standard Capital Improvement definition that is that has been used and and is accepted and so and under the statute and case law so that has been what I'm you know and and it is a cleanup because you know in order to have a fair shaking of both of these applications that may come forward you have to make sure that we Define it properly to assist everybody in that process and for the rent leveling board to assess what need um point of inquiry then do this mean that so in ter when we Define this once we actually get these applications for the the capital adjustment say we have one of those um and they have to meet that standard that it's a capital Improvement and we Define that um this uh this would mean that they could potentially be raising the rent of a of of tenants um for an improvement that did not benefit the tenant because it's the the or part here suggests that if it adds value to the house but maybe doesn't provide any benefit to the tenant um if we are defining it as a capital Improvement does this then mean that they would be eligible for Capital adjustment I'm a venture an answer to that but someone else can pipe in there may be Capital Improvements that are required for the house to be functioning well maybe Jared that you know I guess I would argue probably a would benefit attendant if the roof got redone you know something like that um so I think that's the spirit of that that you know that and it is it's raising the rent but it's a limited it's a sear charge for a limited period of time that's correct that's correct uh it's not it's not going to come down the same way the tenant may not have a leak in his or her apartment that at the time so when you put a new roof on there's no we still don't have a leak so there's no direct impact to the resident at the time but you're still improving the living situation of the building and I guess you're adding value because you're putting a new roof on I you're definitely adding value the question is whether or not if it's something that doesn't benefit the tenant um that they should be done yeah I guess I tend to agree with Jared that an improvement to the building is going to benefit the tenant um I mean I'm trying to think of what Improvement would not benefit the tenant um chair if I may once we get to the capital Improvement application there is a process and there's some examples in there that may benefit the Commissioners once we get to that board all right um any other discussion on this Clause very good okay so the next um the next proposed change is for the definition of hardship increase the original set a Sit uh defined hardship as a situation where in a landlord's net operating income shall have decreased below a just and fair return um a just and fair return formula is set forth in article 8 uh of this chapter um a a landlord requesting for an increase in rent due to a hardship must fill out and submit a hardship increase application so this is just adding process that wasn't there but already in place yeah uh chair and but what was concerning to me is that when I was reviewing it we were constantly referring to just fair return we didn't Define yeah so um the the more substantive change that's being proposed here is to add to this section A definition of just and fair return um which is uh if the percentage of return on Equity of real property investment the amount of return shall be measured by the net income before depreciation a fair return on the uh Equity investment in Real Property shall be considered to be 2.5% above the maximum passbook demand deposit savings account interest rate available in the municipality that was a so it uh previously was not was not defined and this did come up um but I think that this wasn't I think at some point a lot there was um people that expressed that we can't we can't ensure it's not government's role to ensure that people turn a profit for on their Investments right and that if they were made I think in even one of our decisions if they had made zero they were still building Equity so do we want to this was this did uh this was about like an hour of discussion at least at the not having that definition are you I'm go ahead are you asking if we think the 2.5% above is a there we it's it's rather not yeah no I I don't know one way or the other but if we're are we going to Define it as as it's undefined at this point like we just decided what was fair without to Define it I think more definitions better yeah don't leave it up I think definitely having the clarity there Works mess with the numbers later anything to add all right uh one more in article one two more so uh this is adding a new term to article one defining service um and I think this is because it's added later in later on in um in the ordinance um or proposed to be added in the ordinance Service uh includes but is not limited to uh light heat hot water maintenance painting elevator service air conditioning storm windows screens superintendent service and any other benefit connected with the use of the dwelling discussion anyway all right uh and then the next would uh add a sentence to substantial um compliance uh compliance is to be determined with the aid of appropriate Buu and state regulatory agencies based upon the current code inspection reports which shall not be less six months old at the time of the initial hearing on a rent increase application for hardship or Capital Improvement if I may chairwoman um the reason I added that additional language to is that to make sure that there were not applications that were coming in and people were not compliant because unfortunately it happens where individuals are asking for it and then they you know happened yeah okay and you know the issue is is that um what I think should anger anybody who's involved in this space is that if you can't even get that the basic yeah how can you come forward with an application but it's got to be six months because I don't want to hear three months or four months and then you're asking for some funds go ahead J just from a practical and I I agree with you I think the timing just I'm thinking practically especially when you say state inspection Dian can speak to local inspections on a building seos but on a state inspection um when um they come in they do a cyclical inspection um and it said shall not be less than six months old um the state inspections are sometimes through or five years yes that's correct especially with DCA that's what that's exct right so how maybe I'm reading this wrong and I'm confusing it okay because I promise you that every property that I have unless even if it was inspected I don't get a report for N9 months and it's understandable I know I understand that but the thing what ends up happening is that and I and this may be unfortunate fortunate there is a little bit more um there's a little bit more expectation from unfortunately Property Owners right when it comes down to DCA because they have the knowledge of it they can they can organize themselves in a way that okay I know that DCA is going to come let me kind of be on them to get it in some towns as you know the DCA inspectors St inspector that works for Town sometimes they do both yeah okay so so knowing that inside information that the the I I'm looking at the benefit of Doubt to say okay the tenant's not going to know that but the landlord should and it's pretty standard that six months is the time period knowing the fact that this is the way the state and the local fed regulations so again I maybe I'm just not understanding so if I hypothetically I came and I had a hardship and I wanted to correct comply and then I came and I had building here that I wanted to apply and then I came with all my up toate my Municipal inspections and and we done and they're up to date but then I have this D my DCA uh Green Card inspection which which I is a three no I think it's now a three year or six year or seven year most five years seven actually now and um but it was inspected four and a half years ago am I out of date no here's here's the thing right Highland Park is right like everyone's very nice here right so they're GNA have a conversation but also then you have to make a decision if that's the situation oh okay I I'm at four and a half years you know I I got DCA coming up can I just wait six months and then file the application you know if you want to file an application I will tell you that I would recommend to the chairwoman and to the administrator that they adjourn that application then until I get that from you but that's that's a very rare case no I I bet half of my buildings um 18 months before I get after lately it's been a lot better like hands down but I still have some that I'm waiting nine months to a year to get through the process so I I don't it's a guideline and at the end of the day if the Commissioners feel that it's the wrong policy or not I'm just here to propose modifications to the ordinance but I I will tell you though I will tell you that I just recently had a few buildings where DCA did come back in five days I will tell you that so maybe they're getting better and I you know I want you to have some hope I I I can tell you that this this is not like like from a practical standpoint I would say the majority when you're dealing with the DCA um and they're they've gotten significantly better from the start of when you get your notice that they're going to come and do the inspection um I would say 75% of my buildings get through without having a having a problem every now and then there's there's smoke detector whatever it is um even if you get the two months later they come um and they do the inspection um it's usually another three to four months on average before you get orre in I know that Terry want to say something I don't I don't to comment I have a question because I don't think I understand this one now that I'm hearing your conversation I thought I knew what it meant okay does this if I'm if I was reading this as a lay person trying to implement this ordinance which I may find myself in that position um is this mean I'm going to put it in my words that Jared's coming in for an appeal follow his thing he has a hardship appeal or whatever he's well within his fiveyear DCA period does that count as he's compliant or are you saying he has to a new DCA no no if he's okay with DCA he's in his DCA window he's good see this reads like it can't be more than six I'm not understanding well so chances are my inspection came up I had a fiveyear or threeyear cyclical okay it was due let's say in August typically I'll get a notice from from the state in July practically that says your your your C inspection is come is due in August we we will be notifying you we don't notify them they notify us that's the yes they do okay it nine times out of 10 it never and and it never it's it's never okay there there's always a gap where I'm I'm waiting for the inspection and I'm two months out of out of my green cards expired yes but I guess if you I'm sorry problem I guess maybe if we can think about if we're thinking about the language Maybe you know if you can present the fact that you've you're in the middle you're you're waiting for say right it's a conversation and that and that's fine and that and if that's kind of the intent and the spirit of this you're on top of your stuff yeah but I mean you know here's a situation a lot of people are coming in here and you guys you guys have mentioned that there was an example here where you had a landlord who was out of time or old permits or something was happening and they came forward to the board to ask it was ignorance on their part but you they were new home owners they Hado for a changing tendency you know if this helps landlords before they're putting it in then maybe even that's a good thing because it's it's not fair also to the tenants that are living there if there's other issues that are outstanding no I understand the spirit of it I just as I think as long as I guess maybe the feedback to you sop because we're gonna probably need your help with the language is as long as in the implementation we can take into consider it doesn't have to be cut and dry like of you know um and because I think you know if just like with that other instance we realized they were just new home owners and didn't realize it was the first time the unit had changed and it was only six months after they had a CO so they didn't know so we didn't hold that against them we just asked them to rectify it here go ahead you draft you obviously a lot more efficient tonight if you took out um the the six months and just left it state regulatory agencies local and state regulator based on a current inspection State yeah yeah does that then take the six months out of here so then that almost the spirit of it are are you current well I'm current as I can be because I've talked to the state they're coming out in the state and then it also forces we know with cosos in the town and that that that they can be done within 30 days right yeah I mean I Su to not you can get a c in less than 30 days or an inspection from Highland Park if you need to get go through the process even if you fail an inspection you can they're very they work with you so would it and I don't see ever see myself ever asking for a hardship but I I can see where this this would from my perspective that that I that I'm operating a business I I could see where this is you know you're setting people up to fail because of how the DCA works so would it would it would it be would it be less would it be delive if you took out the six months and just said you have to provide upon current code inspection repos I take everyone's I can take down everybody's recommendations thoughts others go ahead D and can I just add that the uh the COO could be years old you only get it once when the tenant moves in you can almost require them to do it again hey you got a problem then let's let's let's issue why we you you want you're calling to this hardship all right well why don't you require them to come in for an upto-date new Co if it's been years because a tenant's been living in there there's stuff broken that wouldn't meet code maybe we do put in there that if they're going to apply for a hardship that they have to have an upto-date Co even before they apply for the hardship well if if I may and I and I don't know if I'm speaking on a ter because I don't have ordinance in front of Highland Park ordinance there are some towns that require a new Co every time the place is rented out we do that to but tenant's been there five years then it's never going happen so maybe the hardship and I like that and that'll the hardship triggers a a new certificate of inspection for that a local uh an island heart and we can turn those around quickly so we're not be holding someone up effici that's an interesting anybody like does anybody have any problem makes sense change at all I don't know I like I I'll take all suggestions down and what I can do is I can research it and I can it' be stupid not to and I'm not saying it be silly not to okay you want you want you're coming in you want to raise these rents above above uh the guidelines well then you have to prove that your unit is at least have B for the tenant even before we consider it right I think it's fair to yeah sorry good points um all right uh any other comments on that before we move on okay so in uh not a new section oh yep well it's a new subsection 3.2 or 321 uh -2 there's not a anything being proposed concrete at the moment but there is a side note uh that we could add language and the and newly constructed units um subject to a Redevelopment agreement in where was it is this going um it would go in section c but I see that just very quickly um there was also a comment made for section A oh it was a delion but it wasn't meant to be like we must delete this but that was something we discussed so it was the single and two families oh yeah that's actually uh I surprised youum it well yeah know I have it I have it highlighted in my other one I don't know why I'm not using my notes um that would make more sense but yeah uh okay so this is something that um we had sort of discussed before um so this is in 3 point or 32 one-2 um applicability and exemptions um currently nobody's exempt right um or no landlord regardless of how many dwellings they have or how many how many um how many units are in the dwelling uh this chapter say the current language as this chapter applies all rental dwellings in the buau including single two three and four family dwelling units and the proposed change is to remove single and two so they would be exempt from the rent Control Ordinance thoughts do we know what percentage of of the rental stock our inventory in town is single and two families you know I think I was supposed to look up I I don't know for sure all rentals but I can look up based on Census Data the breakdown between the the the housing types and it's reasonable think if it's a two family at least one of the units is um so I could we could look that up to get a better sense of that breakdown and then my only other question is why why which way why are we are why if I only have two family in town and I'm running to to a third party why do I get special treatment because I'm I'm I'm a landlord versus anybody else that in in spirit especially considering I'm putting a huge that I've heard time and time again that it's mostly the the issues we had which created this board for the smaller landlords that didn't really abide that FLW under the radar screen that were causing so why are we now why are we now exempting those landlords that may have caused disproportion sh go ahead Dian so with all due respect having heard is not the same as having data I I don't know that we have data that says there is a blood of two family houses that are flying undergr the I I don't I think they should be exempt however I would amend that to say owner occupied two family houses should be exempt because we don't know who has the basement apartment that they're renting out in a single family home and it's really not very different if you're living in the house and you have someone living in your basement apartment from having someone living on the first floor and you've on the second floor so these also don't come under the state guidelines they come under the local ordinance um and we don't we don't really have the data which is something um honestly I have been kind of looking for um um the ordinance came about not because of that but because of the larger uh apartment complexes that were having um 50% rent increases that's it wasn't about that wasn't it wasn't people coming in saying um and and I know you said last time you heard this but well Doug cyos had aund times that like your biggest problems and and and maybe you may not uh this is you don't Rec call this or that the the inspection department has Inspection Department they're a disproportionate of the issues were with the basement apartments or the two Family Apartments where it was they weren't regulated the same and and and and he spent a disproportionate amount of his time trying to figure that out and get his arms around it I I would like to see that data but I would like to know why why two family okay single family rentals I don't know their house it is what it is why are we exempting uh landlord rental properties like in like this like I I don't somebody give articulate a re a good rational reason why if we're going to do a Broadband rent enforced rent control and everything here that I'm I'm spending my time here doing why are we why are we using our own agendas to determine what who gets regulated and who doesn't it it it should be a Broadband if you rent in rankel if you rent an apartment in Highland Park uh you're subject to the same regulations as if you rent a two family apartment in a in a house or a four family or a 10 family it it why why is somebody give me a a good reason why people should receive special treatment go ahead D well I don't think we're using this Bo for our own agend a uh I I don't think we should include two families however as I said I would amend that to say owner occupy should be exempt as single families if you live in your single family home you're exempt if you have a basement apartment which many people do those basement apartments are not those apartments in your home are not subject if there were if there was this problem then we would see it in zoning board applications we would see it in court documents there would be a way to say oh yeah there was a terrible problem and here's the facts to back it up but we don't have that we have what somebody told you I'm one person and I'm going to vote my that that nobody should be exempt but and I don't know if my vote will sway this change that exempts single and two family family dwellings however disregard my statement that the two families cause disproportionate share of the problems let's let's push that argument to the side okay why should two family units and anybody that is a landlord in town why should they be exempt from if they're operating a business in a similar fashion to anyone else in town why should they get they exempt from from rank control is is it a unless you're telling me there's an e there's there's a there's an there's they they rent to like a lower income family and and and there's other reasons or I don't even know so do me a favor tell me and sway my vote the other way why two family and single family rental units should be exempt right and forget my argument that they causeing disproportion share just I I'm saying owner occupi two families should be accept not two, Terry the one thing I just wanted to remind and I know you guys know this so if it helps you not take this too you know it has to go through Matt or Stephanie to the committee any so whatever consensus-based recommendations this board may have or even things that there isn't consensus around I just want to remind you all you were talking about voting on things I just want to make it clear this body doesn't amend this ordinance it's the governing body that does that um I say that in a way to make it lighten up a little bit because it's more about your contributing your good ideas and thoughts and if there isn't consensus that's an important thing for the governing body to know that there's a difference of opinion on a certain point and they can think about that and see which way they land and get some advice from the attorney so just remember that I'd say that as much for the audience as you guys but um you know this is you know but I appreciate this is a really interesting debate I'm not weighing in on that right now I'm just offering that as a reminder that you know hopefully there'll be some consensus items that can go to the council but even if there's some disputed items that can also be considered as well yeah that's what it sounds like here but I think we're capturing the the discussion with so then that can be included you know this goes on to the next so ideally what ends up happening at every rent level board meeting is that there's a set of resolutions that I will produce for example there was a resolution today earlier that you guys had had a vote on not only on the minutes but on the on the increase of the index so what ends up happening is that there would be a third resolution on what items you recommend or you don't recommend the change but um and I understand that you know people want to be deliberative and they want to have a discussion but as Terry mentioned there has to be a conclusion to it and you know um for me to draft a resolution and make a decision as to what you voted on like for example you know there can be almost a informal vote to say hey i' like to recommend this this uh this change to you know people not having frogs in these rent leveling boards just an example um you know I'm I'm going to put this in the resolution and that would be the recommendation to get followed up by the leasons with that helps guide on the conversations comments on this I had one which is I think the absence of data actually supports the the the applying it equally to everyone in the absence of of of knowing that they're different than how easy is to reconcile the percent of of of residents that that in town that met in one and two family three or one and two families and then how easy is to reconcile does and you might know this does the town the housing board um have a record of violations and that you can easily go and say okay there were 15 viations last month four were um only three were single family or two family and 20 or and 15 or whatever were larger properties is there a is there is that in a database that I haven't worked there in eight years I have no idea what's what's going on just that that could be it's a it's kind of brain damag but but that's the data that you need right sounds like a lot of work because we don't have perfect data you know I mean and even that's that's just it even if you had the the You' have the ones that were filed which is a different Subs that's not like that's probably not um a very good sample of the population because there are people who are less likely to file violations I would say that people that are like International Scholars we have a lot of international Scholars here we have a lot of inter International grad students people are way less likely to assert their rights when they're in a a country that is foreign and so given that we have this uh this this community you know um this uh these members of our community that I think they would be less um less likely than than the average person other you know more yeah um what I'm asking for and so those data would only show the who who who filed a complaint not who was um well no these aren't complaints this is the co inspections and and the call and and the complaints from so there when an inspector goes inspects unit there's problems with it the inspect unit and maybe there was a record of it doesn't it doesn't matter I I I I do know that bigger buildings and and it's not I have agenda like I my properties here are under rank control regardless but I I look at it like okay I do know that I owned a bunch of one and two family houses in on gildon street in New Bruns for the most part I don't own them any I can do whatever I want because half of that stuff flies under the radar of the town because the the town has to focus on the big the The Big Tomato or whatever you want to call and and a lot of the stuff goes under the radar and I can maybe it doesn't happen here but you're you're less likely to be regulated or under guidelines when you're and and do something wrong when no one's watching than than if you you know that's just human nature and that's so I don't and that's on top of the fact that I don't know why we wouldn't be um holding the same standard to all rental properties in town that's it good points any last last words on this all right um the next one there's a little licens in there go ahead Diane all right you got it what about someone has a basement that they can rent out an apartment in their basement should they be and they live in the house is this a legal apartment or it's family right no they they have like down there and they rent out a couple room they're renting out rooms in their house should they be included no if you're renting a if you're renting a spare bedroom to to of your kid to someone to your kid who I wish do to start paying rent um then no Diane but that and that's not what we're talking but we're not talking about the someone lives with you and gives you hundred bucks a month to live there do you know what I mean so I have a question um what is our Point here I'm noticing that we are talking about okay I have a son who lives in my house he he has his bedroom but he contributes to the family living because he lives there he eats there he does everything there so in my estimation he is not a tenant he's not he's my child and he lives there so what I want to clarify is are we talking about under the radar um landlord's not saying I went in so I'm register so why aren't we saying um um dwelling units and or uh just saying single two and adding it to the rest I'm not sure why we're leaving out single and two family that's that's my question that's the same conclusion not trying to be him I'm just trying to figure out because there's one thing for the example I just gave and there's another thing in if you're renting a property so I think I'm not sure like I'm a little T you're absolutely right if it's not a registered dwelling with the town right you're not going to be filing for you're doing whatever you want anyway and that's kind of what I was saying that if it's not registered they're doing whatever they want anyway and and but if you're renting a basement and it's then do whatever you want because that you're it's actually and your but if it's registered with the town and it's a unit then AIT should be under the same guidelines that's what I'm thinking I don't know I think the rest of us agree with that too sorry CH and I I just want to not to try to sway anybody but I did just want to wait if we are considered you know I mean owner occupied is a home ownership model um and if that's something that this board or whomever wants to encourage which which I should be encouraged then we I think we can figure out other ways to do that but you know just looking at Statewide rent control you know ordinances there aren't that many that completely exempt ones and TW particularly in comparable areas I mean you see you actually see exemptions starting in some higher higher you know um larger Family Properties um but uh I think this ordinance is also kind of you know it should be viewed is kind of setting guard rails and if it's something that I think the board is interested in monitoring over time the number of hardships that come in or external factors that are causing a particular subset of landlord to have more hardship or costs um then that's something that you know we can we should try doting um but in the meantime I think it's intentional intentional okay okay any last words are you sure all right got a few more go yeah well not all of it's there's only like maybe one more uh controversial thing I think um so uh the next uh this is is section B1 of um at St heart is uh adding licensed before motels so we're only which if to Jared's point that kind of seems redundant because if you don't regulate non-licensed motels right and we don't have motels and we don't have also um that be but do we care yeah like we can't go regulate the motels that uh that fly under the radar the black market motels all right um there's another change in here okay wait this is so now we're back down to the part where I tried to start which is uh in section c um s do you want to do you want to um explain what what this what we're considering here yeah so on our initial one of our initial meetings I remember you had asked a question regarding um in one of the initial meetings that we had um one of the Commissioners you had posed a question to Terry regarding a complex and that was subject to Redevelopment agreement so I'm just you know I just want to just include all the commissioner comments if that was a concern if you if you feel that doesn't need to be there we can eliminate it as well but I was just referring to our meeting first meeting oh sorry T um the only I'm not a big fan of this one only kind of sound like some of the other the other items is that it just it feels unnecessary in that if they tend they're Exempted under the later clause about being new construction why do we need to have a new Clause to identify them when they're going to be Exempted under whatever that state statute is anyway um constructed which section is it it's the one in njsa D you know for 30 years following completion of construction it's the next Clause so theoretically there would be new construction and they would be Exempted anyway so it just seemed like do we need to specify a difference between Redevelopment new construction versus just somebody who decided to find own a property and just put some new houses up on it or whatever that was but I thought the issue was that during the the process of talking to developers if they could come to some sort of agreement they was they would somehow be oh I didn't know I didn't I don't remember but yeah this not is redundant because I think if they want it I guess maybe right if it was in a development context we could negotiate that point right well having an in does it create ambiguity or is it like if you leave it in and we already everyone knows that these Redevelopment Agreements are going to be subject to to different guidelines anyway does it does does need in no you adding it it's not in now you know it's adding it so here's the thing I you know what it's a lot of the ordinances sometimes there's a lot of definitions and on some ordinances are not right and as I mentioned the commissioner had brought that up so I felt that maybe other people did too so I just I just includ it because you know this is a collaborative process so if you feel that collectively that a lot of people will know what it is I I guess weer refer to you in like your Le site like reading these does it create ambiguity having it in does it is there more confusion with it in than leaving it out it depends on the read B Cherry will all Redevelopment be new construction I mean will there be Redevelopment projects that take an existing building and um make it part of a Redevelopment project I guess I was thinking of it we have an example of a a potential Redevelopment where it's going to be a repurposing of an existing building and but I was talking about where we're using the Redevelopment statute as part of like we have a plan in place like I don't mean it in the lower case are you know just a a new thing I meant I was using it maybe that maybe that's where some of the Mis misunderstanding on my part was where it's part of a designated Redevelopment area or under under governed under a Redevelopment plan that was where my head was at not like lowercase like refurbishment for lack of a better word um I don't feel strongly about it I I don't at all I thought it was redundant but maybe I wasn't fully appreciating the point to be honest so we can just scoo move on uh any any last words on that um okay uh it looks like down in section is this be oh this is proposing to add a section e um that says low rent public housing developments would be exempt because they are governed by other rules right go ahead I just wanted to say that maybe rent subsidize rather than low R yeah I like that is there a nicer term and I had the similar reaction to the language and I didn't have a good suggestion thank you guys any other comments on that one oh we have one so on oh yeah we're at annual rent increases yeah all right here we go um so we're on section 321.com but we do want to I mean I think we should talk about it today because they're they're considering other amendments meaning not for the certification yeah not for CER not for yeah not for 2025 the amendments to the ordinance and because someone brought up during the per factoring in other because we've talked about this like are there other things that we should be factoring in we calculate numbers and yeah wage growth is something that today so and I can so I'll add I think I think wage I think wages should be should be considered when we're considering rents and if you look at table eight these data are from the same place that we get our um that that we use for our uh our CPI data to certify um I also included so included this is wage growth for Middle sex County you'll see 2023 0.4% on average I mean and that's I know that we are using um uh Metropolitan uh data for one of them but that's just because we don't have more local data to do that with and by the way I can calculate I have uh tables already calculated in the graphs generated to show what this happens to this over time I can share that with everyone in any combination that you like um but the problem is is when you have rent outpacing wages it that small percentage it it actually adds up over time and if we were to hold these numbers 3.55 the which will be our maximum allowable increase for uh 2025 and let's say and I hope it doesn't say at 0.4 but let's say hypothetically that it did it would only take about 20 years before uh renters would be paying about 75% of their uh on average 75% of their uh their home income on rent um and I can show I can show the math on that it's not obviously this is this this differential is um is much more extreme than what we see but you can see uh you can see that it never it never um wage growth never outpaces in the last 20 years um and sometimes that different differential grows and sometimes um it shrinks but it never it never overcomes them and so if the rents are increasing even you know a small amount over over wages it's only a matter of time before this becomes like untenable so I think I think I don't know what exactly how we would calculate it in and we can talk about that I think that's question but I I think that we need to we can't just consider like how much you know we can't just consider the price index which is from the landlord side of like uh their their costs and what they and what um you know relative to the market but also the community that lives here and their their ability to pay and so um by the way I did also pull up data for for Middle sex County um for average average rent and average um average annual income and So based on the last census or one of the surveys that was done in 2022 it was about like 94 something which came out to about let's say take-home rough estimate 5,000 a month and 2,000 a month was uh I think that might have been Statewide for the average rent um that's already 40% and so it's a pretty that's already pretty big like that's a pretty big proportion of take-home pay be spending on rent and those small increases again will compound over time and if if we just use the average over these years it'll only take about 10 years to go up like eight% and that's getting us a lot closer to 50% which sounds very scary there other things that we can either factor in or other ways to calculate this number I think that's what we I mean we could yeah I think they're this is this is what I got but um just for the future I could put together a Leal m on um factors that could be and then it might be a little bit more um helpful yeah I think if there are other factors that um that could be considered here um we should be should be considering them because the rate that it's going right now it's um and since we have the other suggestions as well so it looks like we're going to have followup me yeah so shall we any last comments on that oh I just I just want to I mean it would be good good to kind of dive more into these numbers um one thing that concerns me is uh the the fast increase of of household income in part which was also one of the things that kind of precipitated rent control is that our household our average household income has increased significantly last few um so that's also something that could you know um uh put upward pressure on the rental market uh for for more for for higher rent so um that is uh so while while average wages here are have have been you know I'll use the words relatively stagnant um we have seen a considerable increase in household income in Highland Park so I'm not sure how that you know should factor in um but certainly it is something that's going to put pressure on the rental market um can we get data for the local data I was able to get County data but not um I think that's probably important to consider and also like where that where those increases are coming from if it's influx of you know a small population that's making a whole lot of money versus is it like the people who live here on average well I mean we're going to see you know I mean if you just look at you know across the border you know um new new Innovative uh uh uh Transit Development coming you know with with with major industry you know to new brunck that's going to impact H Park and that's going to drive our household comes up yeah so does this mean at the next meeting we'll then have this discussion about like maybe some okay try to get the data out ahead of time for everybody so they can look at it and then we can talk about um what we want our recommendation to be for um for how we might adjust that equation and this is something we've been talking about the whole time that we've been here remember day one we came in and had questions about how it was calculated we had the same questions as it suffices but it's like what can we do to make this a little more tailored to the community that we're we're implementing it in yeah that's good um all right uh where are we three do we have more in this section no that was already there so it looks like the next one's uh vacancy d control is that right yes all right so this is 3216 section c um adding the word wait no us just highlighted that so it's not an addition so it looks like uh uh we would add an individual subject to any harassment oh this is uh this is the thing that um Terry was concerned about like put her like in charge of in the middle of harassment complain so this is this is correcting for that an individual subject to any harassment May file a and it's taking out the buau administrator so don't go to Terry if you're getting harassed um file a complaint in the Municipal Court of the Bureau for any violation of this chapter yeah and there's also some examples suggested earlier as to what the sof like what might look like which I think is helpful withh holding heat or water inadequate security intermittent intermittent failures uh frivolous eviction threats or legal proceedings and action which would cause a reasonable person of like age and physical condition of a tenant to fear for his or her or there can we add there there we're GNA po you um uh limb property or home and you know as as I mentioned in our um our initial meeting we talked about this um obviously this is not an inclusive list um if anybody feels that they're being harassed in any way you can go to the municipal court and file it but I thought perhaps a little more guidance in the ordinance um that can give some sort of Direction because a lot of times when PE individuals are reading the ordinance correct is that me you know is that my situation they might see themselves in there in some way exactly very [Music] good any comments about this I think that help also an internal conflict in the ORD two different ways well I mean did you want me to go into it a while it was a conflict also no I think we covered it pretty straightforward having just done the minutes of the meeting I remember we covered it okay okay okay all right the next if and if I'm skipping any please let me know um in article six this is the rent control board protection of tenants it looks like we're adding the word applications after two so hearing of a hardship and fair rate of return increases applications what hard andir rate of return increase it should be increase application increase applications all right so not increases applications um and then there's one more in number six review of capital Improvement applications to replace the language and approval um of cost for which a capital Improvement search charge is sought is that a substantial change you're just rewarding it to make it just a little easier to understand yeah I think so any comments on that all right uh got a note again this okay wait it says this is correct this contradict Terry that's the Terry that's the one you have to that's the one that stays that's one that was right and the previous one okay so back um oh think the fact that it was conflictual was the biggest problem with that which is like people it's not your job to to take uh harassment complaints um all right this is the fees so we're up to article uh article 8 uh section 321 d29 fees so basic fee for all applications $50 additional fee for each unit $25 and the suggestion has been um that we increase both there was also something about the wasn't there um uh Jared I remember you had another point the escrow yeah the escrow like increasing right and I haven't found anything just yet but need a little bit more I justess gotta look because I haven't seen that I would I my having kind of tried to figure it out for the one and only application we had it was confusing try how to handle this and frankly not having to set up es yeah is easier I'd rather just kind of go with a fee um approach but I don't want to also make it so cost prohibitive that somebody can't access relief if they need to so if you could maybe I would love to know what other places do yeah so by this next meeting I can I can just make a decision as to what you can do because like I said I haven't like I said the only escros I've seen obiously by Statute and this is a statutory board and that's what concerns me I don't want to go too far you know but I I should have either way next time so there's one thing we need to fix here it says the escrow shall be no more than $500 for a landlord of more than a 100 rental units and 250 for landlords of less than 50 but we don't have it we have a gap between 50 and 100 there like I guess they no escrow need to fix it well I was thinking that um Terry and we offline no that what once we determine if we can do an escrow or we do the fees and then we'll do a fee schedule yeah much more clean that sounds better so we're basically if we're keeping it we'll come up with a new yeah exactly that's exactly and you know worst case scenario you can always do even if you had a fee schedule sliding scale that some towns also have right but first let's just figure out appropriate and then I'd be curious if you're looking at other places what the fees are like in other places yes so that we're not too nice or too mean you know yeah that' be nice all right um last one wait section still still on article eight it looks like eligibility um the following Factor should be considered in determining the fairness and reasonableness of the landlord's rate of return so now we can talk about this um so let's see s put uh proof of ownership mortgages it um it is a fair and just return the expenses must be reasonable necessary uh usual operating expenses if there's an expense that is not a yearly expense um PR rated over reasonable time that's also pretty standard um Capital Improvement and or Capital expenses shall not be considered as part of the hardship application should be part okay this is for that's for the taxes part yeah and then uh for number four the number and frequency of Prior hardship and capital Improvement increases for the building so this is taking into to account people that are uh coming back over and over again um to to have uh to to seek um what do you call it the sear charge search charge uh and then five the reasonableness of expenses incurred by the landlord expended for Capital Improvements um and this is just we're just relocating it so that's not a chairman if I comment and I don't know if this was I don't know if this is intentional now but I guess the drafter of the initial there's a lot of capital Improvement information that's in the financial hardship and I thought that was very strange and I don't know why it was there because it's not wasn't intentional on our part you know I mean had a reason I'm not aware it does make it confusing though I like your suggestion to pull it over you got you got to clean it yeah just you know separate it out you know so people know also what what their root like any comments on that section really all right H article nine um application for search charge this is modified above what was oh it from it was move this is where where it's moving to yeah so so what end up happening is like right this was me just sort of piecing off and trying to you know if I had a I don't know what those that children's game is you know the tiles where you just move stuff over like that's what I was trying to do but so my apologies it seems kind of confusing you did like a debit and a credit though right like that's exactly I was trying to trying to do thank you for that um hold on I gotta findest cetch up we're on article [Music] nine all right heree grant is SE charge only if it finds that the major Capital benefits the tenant do we and maybe I'm reading this wrong do we want to have the same definition that we had up front the very beginning with the definition just consistency and you know and and I understand the intent of that but I don't know if that's legal and that's something that has to go which part is not legal that you know if if only you can grant a sear charge only if you got if it's believ that benefits tenant right so I have to check into that and that's that's the my other I guess question with some of the things especially in light of the fact that the cital Improvement language combined some of the financial hardships so I think it might be better to just kind of start new with capital Improvement and just start from like a basic um like these are the basic rules on it you know instead of some of the ideas that may have been and it might be a process and that's up to board if they want to recommend that or not but that's just my suggestion um just so that also when the applicant comes in they get a fair shaking that's it can you report back to us on the Le legality of that because it it does seem a little weird too that you're you're kind of putting tenants in a bad position to like it's like I don't want this improve it and now and and I can't afford it but you're deciding to do it and it's not um and now you're going to charge me well and 10% now right but potentially up my rent with without my consent but also it I guess it get way too much subjective subjectiveness to it right if you're saying something benefits you're gonna take testimony from the tenant yeah you know I mean you know and I don't even like the color EXA exactly so I was thinking that maybe if we just kind of start from more an objective standard also might help the Commissioners any so let's move down to the calculation of CH sech charge this is the um so we need to put a time period in um there's not one in there what will the time period be uh there are a couple of things so there foot wait search charge per square foot there's a footnote here suggestion to add major Capital Improvement shall consist of a substantial change in the housing accommodations uh such as would my my printer kind of ran out there such as would uh materially increase the rent rental value in a normal market and which uh consist of Capital Improvements to building wide operating systems including but not limited to items such as complete Plumbing or electrical replacement for the entire building or a complete new roof major Capital Improvement should also include complete kitchen and bathroom replacements for an individual apartment unit okay thoughts you guys still reading or yeah know this makes sense me I'm more concerned about understanding C but we're not there yet that's what I'm waiting for to well I think most of these things are not something like replacing the electrical system isn't something you would do unless you had to do it um so or replacing the plumbing uh most people you know that's just you're sort of made to do that um you have to have those things yeah those systems have to be replaced like sometimes I think it makes sense um this is all predicated on on on Capital Improvements taking place while while there's a tendency correct I mean is it is it easier to to I mean since we have decol which you know is you know destabilizing generally uh um it does it make sense to to to apply the same kind of hardship application on tenant turnover so they're so what you the point where they're wait till they leave what happens though if your boiler go or your your electricity goes out there is going to make the apartment more more more rentable more more attractive on the market uh you know anything right I mean you know efficiency new appliances better Windows uh you name it so what do you recommending well I'm wondering if if if if if this if this if this should if we if if the board should consider should consider ten and turnover as as as as a trigger for for um what happens if somebody stays in their their rental for 30 years that's but I guess the spirit of it and is that regardless of the tenant there or not if you're doing a roof you're doing a new $75,000 boiler um regardless of there's if the attendant it's it's occupied you may have a another tenant that and you may be struggling and I'm just guessing what I'm gonna apply to for a hardship irrespective of if I have a vacancy to control right with or if I have a vac a vacant apartment I'm gonna platter the hardship sure that option's available so so I think this this makes sense here because more times than not you're going to be doing very little to that apartment maybe new counter tops new cabinets that is really an insignificant amount of of of money versus the major Capital perms that are really going to sink the landlord which is new roof for new boil you know new electrical panel which are tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars so I think practically this does make sense here because I I see how God I hope that never happens but I see how it could Happ happen and yeah it should I don't I'm not crazy about the the words that it always benefit in theory if there's a major Capital Improvement to a building it does benefit the tenant and in the sense that you're guaranteeing there's going to be no leaks in the apartment put a new boiler in you're guaranteeing stability of of heat and so you're not going to get fluctuations so there is I guess they're intangible benefits or not they're not realiz benefits but they're there so I don't know if you have to worry about stuff that happens under d control does that make sense no I appreciate it I'm I'm I'm really just putting that out forood for thought to the point about the timing though like the things that you're saying like those aren't some of those improvements are discretionary or you're deciding to do them right others are you you have to do and so how do you control the timing of that to align with when you're when you have a vacancy it's not like oh boilers going out tomorrow and you don't want to replace a boiler before you have to why would anyone do that right um so yeah I think it makes sense there's no significant Capital Improvement that you're going to do to a particular unit while there's a tenant in there you may I mean the the biggest thing that we been to do is paint it paint it and spackle it and we put all the furniture in the middle and put plastic on it and we'll paint it and make it pretty we'll put new refrigerator appliances and every now and then we to figure out how to get a wall toall carpet and your furniture that we put it underneath but besides that there's not a lot of improvements that actually can get made to an apartment while it's occupied unless you're going to move the resident somewhere else and move all the furniture and then go go which is is I I don't I don't think it's and maybe it happens but it's not doesn't happen it's very rare apprciate thought colen Terry Linda nothing add all right let's go down to C then so um Capital Improvement search charge so this is after the Capital Improvements been made you have a a search charge you're paying for 36 months Capital Improvement search charge applicable to each tenant shall not exceed 10% of uh his base rent unless such Improvement is mandated by local ordinance or state law and shall be payable um uh in up to 36 monthly installments and the suggestion is to increase 15% of the legal rent for the first year of such an increase any further amount of increase would uh would have resulted based on the landlord's application uh shall be a portioned equally over the remaining period of the capital Improvement so this is up this is putting a like not actually change the but like putting more of it up front like no this is actually very generous and I will tell you the 36 months I thought was very kind especially since 15% especially since the spirit was to benefit the tenant right originally right if that this subjectiveness so if you had a capital Improvement that the tenant would be appreciating you don't know if that tenant's going to be there for 36 months but you're still stretching at the 36 and I will tell you I from all the towns that I was looking at even from my own experience being Jersey City rent leveling board attorney I've never seen 36 months so I thought that was very kind that's already that's already the ordinance and that was a that was a specific decision yeah I don't remember I'll be honest I didn't pay as much attention to the because so so what's happening is now is that in this is in the in the let's put ourselves for a moment in the feet of the landlord who's now invested may have even taken a um an equity line against the home let's say the smaller right the first the one and two so they've taken the money out they're paying interest on the capital Improvement but that's why if you're only getting 10% and you already elongated for 36 months it's only fair for 15% and not more than that you can obviously always do more then so it would be fair for both of the parties because the tenant is still getting the benefit and the the homeless um was improved everybody wins and it's there so how long are they paying the 15 I mean the 15% increase goes into effect how long you subtract top pro trade yeah you Pro it you PR rate it from there so it's only a limited whatever 15% of it and then it go over yeah but 36 months is still very generous like I said that tenant may not even be there for 36 months but then they get deol but I mean that's a big increase for renters like that's I couldn't handle that for Capital Improvement right it doesn't matter what it's for if I don't have the money I don't have the money my wage didn't go up yeah but here's but here's the issue right you can't get into a situation where you have no rentals or you have like slum properties right unfortunately which happens and I've seen it and so there has to be also an incentive from both sides and the fact of the matter is that the more units that are taken taken out of the market for renting that only hurts people who are looking for space that that are in livable conditions and that is the intent and the public policy want it but what if the renters can't afford it that's the problem like that that level of an increase is not something that a lot of people are planning for these days because if you have issues like this with capital Improvement this is get shut down Anyway by state and local officials so that this is this is a per an indiv indidual can't even live in a home that that may have these levels of issues then then what then why are we even I mean why do we because we want people to come back and say I'm GNA go take that equity loan because it's expensive let's say the interest rates are really high and you have to go take an equity loan to fix it especially when you have like I said the one and the two unit individuals but even even with the individuals that have the very large buildings they're taking out very large Lo construction loans like it's it's it's a lot of money that has to get invested into it I get all that I'm worried about the renter's ability to pay a 15% increase without planning for that ahead of time our contracts are set annually wages are sticky and so it's not that easy to just to just come up with another but it's over 36 monthly installments which I said is extremely extremely generous um and you know and to have it also pro rated this is not forever it's only for a certain specific time how much does a new roof cost here on a average house in Highland Park I mean I know I have to put in a new fun you're going to find out soon is that you're 515 which is it's a building um I think the going to be better I would like to do some calculations of these average cost did you ask me yeah okay sorry well it really depends on on how much of that cost is going to be passed on to the to the tenant to to the tenant too I mean the landlord can choose to absorb the cost or put it in a different part of their portfolio what we're suggesting is to increase the amount that r ever applying this do you do you i' I've seen the applications in fact um Capital Improvements are many many applications the bulk of them um and and you want to see them you want you want people to invest in their properties like I said it is it is good for the tenant and you want tenants to be um in safe um safe areas where they're living and so um you know affordable too so I think that's the challenge but the challenge is again like like said right if if if is is it better to have something that's livable or or not no SP at all these These are you know these These are yeah I remember last year in um planfield people were that's correct told they couldn't they they had to leave where did they go nobody even knew where they were going they were reassessed because the building was in such disrepair correct so now these people on the street or they're living with relatives orre that's worse it's called the cycl why do we let people I mean people are buying buildings knowing or at least having some sense of what those are going to cost over time um's to the 10% over 36 months but there's a practicality to incentivizing Capital improve oh I totally I totally agree I totally agree and so there's I can I can speak from experience that when and and I I've talked to people about rent control with this um mostly though with rent with rents in town and I told you this the the market kind of rent control was not going to really impact me that much because my my my apartments in town the the the tency can't afford 5% increases I don't I look before when when this ordinance came into effect um when this ordinance came into effect I think our average increases were 2 and a half to 3% a year so really didn't bot this we came in we're like okay you're actually probably and in terms of in terms of that's what I mean you can there are in higher increases but um and where I'm going with this is there has to be some way to to incentivize a landlord to do that and and when I have to do a roof I have to do a roof and it's going to cost about $100,000 in on 515 here it's going to happen the next six months um we've been budgeting it because when rents stay like this like you can we can talk all you want about how wage growth is here and how it was 3.8% New York City CPI but I have never seen my costs they've been eight to 10 to% my Construction cost and I'm I'm being I'm not exaggerating they've doubled in four years for me to put in a bathroom they've doubled and and so you what it's taking me longer and longer to do is I'm reserving and and you're spreading out the cost of the new roof I was supposed to put on the roof two years ago but I didn't have the money to do it and I reserved more money and now I'm doing it I've been patching roofs the roof and the ceilings till I had the money to do it so it it it's a it's she's she's abs absolutely right and from a practical standpoint there you want to incentivize people to improve their properties because it's a give and take well and but not at the expense of of of displacing like entire you know segments of the community I I have a question though and this is important are when this happens do the tenants if they have an ongoing lease do they get an option to break it at that point to leave without um like if I can't simply can the increase that's that's a private matter right between the ten oh so they're not required that's I'm asking if they're required contractual agreement they have right that would be up to the landlord and the Tenant to negotiate it's possible they would have to then have to pay the increase well I I mean I don't want to get into ten tenants and legal law but what I'm saying is that they already have a lease that has legal terms in it and if there is something there if there's not that's up to both of the parties that are involved in the negotiation of that but that's beyond the parameters of this rent level other thoughts I I'll just I'll just reiterate that you know again you know I'm sorry to speak broadly but but rent control really is a last stop of a series of systemic inequities that exist in the housing market right so when we think about you know either or I mean yes absolutely we should be encouraging capital investment in our rental properties to increase the quality of our rental stock I mean I enough time on site and many of us are renters you know on you know in in rental properties that are subpar and um uh you know that's unacceptable at the same time I think we so when we have that conversation I would I'd really rather not not be an either or but a reminder of what is really going to bend the market is the proliferation of more housing in h of Park in the area that's really what we need we need more affordable housing we need to build more housing and that's going to be what's going to drive down those costs in the meantime we have these caps um that are important to protect tenants from just being immediately priced out decontrol be I think it's important to have it here because as a homeowner you don't replace a roof every five years you don't replace it every 10 years it's like over 25 is over time so I'm thinking the prospect of a tenant coming on this is not as much as we are going to think it is is but I think the language needs to be here um yeah I agree it's it's really just the increase from 10% to 15% that I'm concerned with I I think these should be in here and it's already 10% but we're talking about increasing it again when we're when we know that wages are the math behind the exceed 10% the capital search charge applicable to each tenant shall not exceed 10% of of his or her base rent of the of the base rent um so and then 10% monthly uh or annually or is it or is it 10% and like how how is how does the math work on that so let's say simpl simplistic so, a month well actually I think be better not to use a hypothetic right now because this is what end up happening right that Terry had mentioned how it's on a certain rated there's a certain percentage that's already in your ordinance you have for look at me I barely understand Itor but the I guess I think to if I if I may I guess the big point that we're discussing is should the 10 be 15 proposed change it's already 10 we don't you don't have to defend it and uh I don't again I'm not weighing it I just I just want to make sure I was captur that that's that's actually more than our Wages that's actually puts in a like that's more than wages went up in this uh in in in last year because 0.4% was May 5% increase is like how many times that go ahead I would suggest maybe looking at a few Capital scenarios uh where where where you know we could have a few scenarios where this rent where these expenses could be passed on to the tenant and what that those increases look like that helpful agree oh sorry I'm just I like that idea I think that would help understand it yeah put some ACT context to it uh there was one more in there yep so on D Capital Improvement search charge should become effective no sooner than the renewal date of the next lease okay so that that actually does give them then oh no yeah so that gives the the tenants then that out that was my question is do they have it out before they before kick okay but in in the agreement there could be other Clauses that allow for a tenant or a landlord to terminate any sort of contract in anywhere in the world right so and that's I was asking about this specific situation though and it's right here it looks like it's already in here it says the capital Improvement SE shall shall become effective no sooner than the renewal date of the next lease so they have they have a turnover before they get accomodation it's already in there so um and no time during a pending or current and it says ease but is that supposed to be lease yep um and the comment here is suggestion to add provision if the landlord has to conduct emergency work corrected condition causing immediate and or emminent danger to the health safety of occupants of the subject but doesn't say how it would be amended I'm assuming that it would be that it that that it's an exception and they can um they can uh apply the search charge prior to the lease expiring or having an option to I think my concern was that you know this ordinance is for everybody who has you know has everything orderly things happen in life and you have so to clar I want to clarify like what what I mean not the argument for it but the actual clarify so this is this is in that sense what it's doing is it's allowing them to apply the search charge before they've had before their lease has turned over so it has nothing to do with the lease it's basically it was supposed to be a section e for emergency repairs well okay so in the case of emergency repair then do they still have to wait as as it says here I I I haven't given any thought to that because remember I said to you in the lease between the tenant and the landlord there may be other Clauses that may affect it but what I'm saying that for our purposes this is just for emergency work and for Capital Improvements made for the landlord the answer can be yes that's fine but I don't know because why are we adding it I mean just section if I may clarify I think um there is a section because one of the things that I was hung up on when I was trying to understand this previously and I don't know where it is it says something about you know you have to apply for this Capital sear charge in advance of the expenditure so you can't do all this stuff and then come to the board and say please can I have this extra money so that would give us a chance to decide how essential and all these other questions and I think if I'm not speaking for you improperly what you're suggesting is there may be a case where somebody had an emergency and they couldn't apply to the board in advance of corre of their so we're not I don't think she was speak even well you confuse everybody you highlighted that least word for your comment and so it's not related to D her point it's not related I think it's really related saying was separate put an applicant who had an emergency work in that so that's not meant to apply for one I just figur that yeah yeah Terry why it was just where she had to grab I mean it really is sort of suggested it does but I think it was just that was the last word to select they don't have to apply in advance if they have an emercy emery there's a way to accommodate a consideration right right because what ends up happening is that when you're doing the track changes it doesn't let you correct put in you have to link it to something to put the com she put she needed to put the comment attach it to a word right so the thing is that's why I was saying that it was supposed to be a subsection e that's why I kept saying so it's not so it's not it's e it's e because I was wondering what if someone was in a jam and they didn't have the core knowledge to come to the board request this third charge yeah this e would help us know what to do in that situation fix it and then yeah and just for yourself and this is totally TMI but I'll tell you when I would put e in the whole thing would like get erased like the whole do I don't know why why I use microsof I had a whole lot of problems say trying to open your document because you sent it in do file Microsoft Office all this you know extra just realized I was like that's what she needs yeah sorry time is it 7:30 any other final comments on that we have one more uh item that will'll hopefully not take very long um any other or in public comment um any other General comment ments about this everybody feels okay we're going to talk about the the controversial one like next time try to get some I think we need to you all to help us with like a flush that out in a memo and you're gonna do a little I can send you all the I can make graphs for you out of you and then and then after that I think that once you decide on a resolution like the resolutions I'm going to do for today are for the the information that you already voted on right but the thing is is that for this because we don't have any decisions on recommendations to the council I'm not going to do a resolution on it until you receive those memos to discuss um but eventually then I Terry if I would recommend our frequently asked questions can also be changed and once everything we'll align it with whatever the fin yeah um go ahead oh a question it's really for sof if you don't mind I know you wantan to kind of do a reso at the next meeting but my reality is I need to have that rate done by the 15th of October and our meeting is afterwards so I would like to can I proceed with because we like to communicate with the landlords you know we have a whole process so we don't I don't have to wait up for the formal yeah yeah I would go ahead but I was thinking that was the whole reason I jammed it on there no no and I understand but I was thinking that if we can just get into a situation where we're having that because as a statutory board you have to have a record abely yeah so you going to have a record and that's why we wanted to I just that was a self-interested question totally fine and then eventually once everything is done then I can do the capital application for the board also once we finalize correct and all the you know determinations that way when an individual gets the capital application it will guide them themselves plus they may just rule themselves out once they read the exactly right that's exactly right that's exactly right I don't qualify right I have a question about the timeline so what's the timeline for the council for things like if they um I realize you could take as much time as you need but generally how long does it take once um so from the time you start talking about considering like changes to you know to I mean the process would be for the board to make a formal recommendation and then it would come into the finance committee that's the which we operate and then the finance committee would endorse or or not or have questions and said get something on the I for first reading yeah so there's basically you know there's this is a two council meeting type thing a public hearing at that second usually uh reading and then vote so it would take it would have to go to a committee which in this case it happens to fall under our finance committee with Stephanie Matt and I forget who the third is um Jason I think um so they would discuss it and then potentially want to talk about it with the council at a work session because this is substantive enough they may you know depending on what the final set of changes are if we do end up modifying things you know so it can take a while and given where we are in the calendar you know it's getting tight for a 2024 well I don't think we can do that anyways but like what's our time what by by when would we need let's say we do change the the um the formula by when would that need to happen for it to kick for it to go into effect for having it all buttoned up done and done by June so that we're well in advance of that August meeting to give us time to calculate that if we're using especially a new formula you know towards the if you're talking about the rate increase uh calculation um I would as a good way to think about it is like get it done by the end of June get so backing out of that you're looking at you know all of your work done at the early part of the next year into this year and then I mean that's why because the council has to change it before we but but I would suggest to the main thing we're worried about which I think you're right if you do want to make changes to the calculation for that to go into effect for the next next year um you'd want it in place by June okay and we can I can help do a CL calendar thank you um there was no motion uh on the floor for us to deliberate so we'll just move directly to the next section um so the next uh the not last thing on our agenda but second to last thing on our agenda before public comment um we have a discussion about Outreach and education that said come up um Lucinda and I uh talked about it in the last uh meeting and we um carried over to this uh to this meeting the bottom I have one thing I just wanted to add to the mix one of the opportunities we have is coming up quickly I mentioned now that we have our certified increase one of the things that's going out it's more education on the landlord side but for any of our registered properties they will get a letter notifying them of this along with the relevant you know ordinance citations and things like that so that's kind of the first kind of burst of reminder that's out there of course it is only good for the ones we have uh what percentage do you like estimated percent not looked at that question I could find out what the M it's hard to tell too because you know we may have one landlord that has 100 units versus you know so that's one letter versus you know right a bunch so I could find out if uh Scott can break that out for me um by by number of Ls in the property in some way you get a sense of that um so that's just an opportunity um it's you know that's out there and we can look with fresh eyes at what we usually send and we usually send the one page here is the max allowable um but that's and and the notice that they are supposed to post yeah it would be nice to like I mean both landlords and tenants let them know like there's it's a lot more there's a lot more to it than just the hearing I'm just saying like that's that's the lwh hanging that's all I'm saying you know like there but the I mean that we even exist I think some some residents may not know and that uh that they they do have like a an you know a place for the redress of grievances if they if they need to for tenants or um or to uh understanding what you're you're saying I understand what you're saying but I'm not sure how you intend to well people the fact that people you have to know we're here before they can know to get an application and just letting them know the rent increase doesn't tell them what to do about it when if if something goes wrong but also for landlords I think renters also need to know that there's a possibility they could have a 15 a 15% sech charge you know and that's that's allowable here I think that these sorts these sorts of things matter for both both tenants and landlords alike and it's a little bit more than just the rate increase right well I think the issue is you're a small B you don't have the capacity a lot of education so that's going to have to be to get the and partnering with Community groups things like that that have they have aligned interest with um I happen to be leaz on to boards and commissions that that are interested in kind of getting the word out so let's maybe we can talk about that yeah there's no way it's not yeah I I don't know if you're feeling this go there we're not suggesting that you do any of this my point and maybe I just jumped in with it too soon was more just we have a piece that is going out in the mail very soon to announce this and to me while yes I agree it's all the other things in this ordinance the protections on those size are important but the thing that gets everybody's attention is that number and so that's like the headline and I I was just saying I'm going to look at the package and I think your suggestions a good one we can have for more information on the landlords for what your role and responsibilities are you have the FAQ on our website we have ordinance on our website you know we can direct them there and I meant that was only a part of place it was just happens to be L hanging because we do that anyway right it's G to happen and it's important because the good landlords will follow the rules so they know the so we have to get the word out to that I J that we like they it sounds like the the city does have a pre presence sometimes at the at the farmers market that might be a place to at least um have a presence a visible PR presence where people know that that's where they find out that there's a rent control board and that there's a place that they can go um I heard someone talking in the post office to someone else yeah do I like sing at the post office um all right uh any other discussion on that any other ideas all right let's move to public comment uh thank you members of the public that have stayed here throughout this entire meeting this has been one of our longer ones although not our longest uh not even by an hour yet um Let's uh do we a motion to open for public comment I move I move I can't move I entertain I will entertain a motion comment there we go uh any post motion carries the uh the floor is open for anybody who wants to speak about whatever you just heard for the one person at home right now if You' like to speak raise your hand how can you tell their y sorry I'm Kate Stevens I live on L Street I've got a little list of things I just want to note um see uh perhaps if there are points of contention based on vocabulary which came up a little bit tonight uh you know just like how in some of the New Jersey statutes uh there is a plain language glossery at the beginning that might help and also make it more accessible for um uh people who have not designed this language uh and people who are international or just not uh familiar with it it might make it a little bit more accessible and help a lot with Outreach for people who look up these ordinances uh let's see uh small rentals uh and sort of more personal landlord relationships are generally more right for abuse uh and I do just want to note that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence as an ancient historian I would like to make that very clear that it is a bad argument to start from what kind of historian sorry uh ancient his yes where there is a lot of abent um it was noted that average wages have increased in the area uh but has the floor of wages increased in this area uh because that is frankly more important about will people be priced out and become unhoused uh a couple of as noted a couple of people or even the bulk of people having more doesn't mean that the floor has raised uh and those people leaving can also raise the average of wages increasing right if they're no longer in our community and therefore not counted um I tell that to my students all the time about their zero distribution is what you want to say all right uh and then uh let's see does that Capital Improvement increase of 10 to 15% have basis in any anything other than it's a nice round number uh because that's a 15 uh sorry 50% increase over previous and if it's just 15's nice then that I think is a stupid reason and perhaps some actual data and math may help with that thank you thank you nice um any other public comment anybody all right your name yeah I'll just uh add to the course of people mentioning that the exemption for small landlords is of concern um especially because I don't have obviously the evidence to back it up but anecdotally I observe a lot of multif family homes around town and I feel like uh creating uh an uneven application of ritten control um to many of these older units which are among the very few which are covered by this law right there's a bunch of new housing being built but that housing as I understand is exempt from this law so if we're considering the older housing stock being that uh which is available for rent control and therefore will remain affordable for those who most need it then we should consider the totality of that rental stock uh to be applied um to this law thank you thank you anybody else CH entertain a motion to close public comment I'll jump it once we got a second all right uh any objections chair will entertain a motion to adjourn Ive to that's second uh any objections see none motion carries a meeting is adjourned have a good night everyone