LogFAQs > #975521680

Questionmarktarius posted...

https://archive.is/0JOoS

Thanks.

"New Yorks rent-stabilization scheme is at heart a public-welfare program. It may be a worthy one. But it uses private property for a public purpose. The Constitution therefore requires its cost to be borne by the general public, whether through a tax benefit or some equivalent compensation applicable to all affected buildings."

That appears to sum up the argument of the landlords. In 2019 New York passed a law that took away some of the ways that apartments could stop being rent controlled including by doing renovations after a long term renter leaves the complex and restrictions on turning the apartments into condos so that they can be sold.

The landlords are arguing that this makes it so that they can't be provided with fair compensation for the value of their property.

I think New York specifically may have gone too far, particularly with restrictions on turning the apartments into condos.