As someone who has spent her entire life living in a rent stabilized apartment in Stuyvesant Town, I find it incredibly difficult to understand why rent protection is such a highly contested issue in New York City.  Like many other families in New York City, both of my parents worked while I was growing up.  While both of my parents have college degrees and were able to retain, for the most part, full-time positions throughout my childhood, it has always been quite difficult and at times, impossible, for us to afford to pay our rent.  Despite rent stabilization, our rent has risen considerably over the years due to many loopholes that our landlord has discovered, notably the Major Capital Improvement (MCI) rent increases we saw all too frequently during Tishman Speyer’s ownership.

My family is not alone in the extreme burden that rising rents put on New York families.  According to a 2012 report from the New York Comptroller’s Office, 49 percent of New Yorkers spend over 30 percent of their income on rent and 20 percent of New Yorkers spend greater than 75 perecent of their income on rent. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development states that anyone paying over 30 percent of their rent is “considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care.”

I cannot even begin to imagine how middle class New Yorkers are able to survive without rent stabilization.  The fact that you can find a decent apartment to live in for a feasible amount of rent, and then have your rent doubled, tripled, and sometimes even quadrupled the following year is ludicrous.  I believe everyone, particularly young New Yorkers, deserves to feel a sense of housing security in knowing that so long as they continue to work hard, they will be able to have an apartment to call home that is set at a financially feasible monthly rent.  My opinions are unfortunately not shared with everyone; as I read the original New York Times article that announced the Blackstone/Stuyvesant Town deal, I came across multiple negative comments at the bottom of the web page.

Many commentators expressed anger over the preservation of affordable housing for the middle class. In New York City, the income limit is roughly $128,205 for a family of three to qualify for the affordable units.  These commentators suggested that legislative attention and government subsidies should be focused to those who most desperately need it: low income, not middle income, families. This is a traditional urban housing rhetoric, and the reason why NYCHA was created and over 300 housing developments were built to house low-income tenants in New York City.  While public housing for low-income tenants is an important part of the solution to the affordable housing crisis in New York City, it cannot be the sole focus.

While some may snub a family of three making $128,205 as well off enough to find market-rate housing, I firmly disagree. This sort of perspective argues that only the poor should be guaranteed housing protections, and anyone else who does not fit into that classification should compete with each other in the free market.  A family of three with an annual income of $128,205 will doubtfully have a difficult time finding a market rate apartment in New York City at a livable price.  This is due to the fact that New York City has the second highest average rental price in out of all cities in the United States, with the average rent for a one bedroom being $3,100 a month.  That being said, it is no surprise that housing costs eat up a significant portion of New Yorker’s income, with one in five households of renters in the city paying more than half of their income in rent.  But this fact proved irrelevant for many commentators, who suggested that those who cannot afford New York City, particularly Manhattan rent, do not have a right to live in such places; as one commentator states bluntly, “living in Manhattan is a luxury good.  You do not have the right to live in Manhattan.”

Another commenter sums up the complexity around the arguments of who has the right to affordable housing in New York City: “[I] read through most of the comments and now I get it: if you are poor you have no right to live in New York City; if you are wealthy, you have a right to go to a poor neighborhood and kick the people out and resettle it yourselves.”

As someone who lived in Stuyvesant Town since the early 90’s, before the renovated playgrounds, carpeted elevators and lush landscaping, I believe my family has a right to continue to pay an affordable rent for an apartment in a community, and in a city, that we have helped shape into the city it is today.  I was educated in the New York City public school system through college, and am committed to public service and paying back the incredible city I was fortunate enough to live in.  I should have the right to work hard, earn a decent living, and pay an affordable rent in the community that I was raised in, have contributed to, and continue to contribute to. As rents continue to increase throughout the city — including the boroughs, which are often equally expensive as Manhattan — city government must devise housing policies that help not just low-income individuals, but also the middle class to ensure that living here will remain sustainable for New Yorkers of all income brackets.