Red herring

It is time for proponents of strict rent control in Teaneck to give up the charade. What harm would there be in admitting that they hold their position on purely sentimental grounds, out of desire to benefit the less privileged at the expense of those who appear better off? At least the community could debate whether such a policy is just or unjust. When the Deputy Mayor and other opponents of vacancy de-control purport to have rational reasons for heavy governmental interference in the rental market they make a farce of the process and waste everybody's time.

Consider this ridiculous argument against vacancy decontrol, quoted in this week's Suburbanite. The cover article contains the following snippet from the September 5th Council debate on renewing the rent control ordinance:

[Deputy Mayor Lizette] Parker countered that senior citizens and others on fixed incomes, who seek to remain in the town after selling their homes, might not be able to do so if full de-control were enacted.

"We have a responsibility as a council to protect them," Parker said.

Hang on a second here. The Council should take a legislative action that distorts the market and impacts every renter and apartment owner in Teaneck because there might be some longtime Teaneck residents who want to remain in town, but also want to sell their homes and move into an inexpensive rental?! Just how many of these folks are out there? Are they the ones snapping up newly available apartments at artifically low rents? I doubt it.

But suppose we grant that retirees and others on fixed incomes are truly the intended beneficiaries of government imposed limits on rent increases for newly vacated rental units, as improbable as that may seem. And let us also grant that the interests of this narrow group deserve to be advanced, no matter what the expense to others. Wouldn't we do this demographic a greater service by seeing to it that older residents would not be forced to sell their homes in the first place? With mortgages long since paid off on homes that have appreciated very significantly, the main reason members of this group would be looking for cheap rentals is the heavy property tax burden. As that burden could be greatly alleviated if the proper incentives were in place for owners to improve the housing stock, it seems clear that rent controls are part of the problem, and not part of the solution. It is also clear that the appeal to such a patently absurd argument against full vacancy decontrol is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. The Deputy Mayor and others in her camp must know full well that the emperor has no clothes. Those who are opposed to inefficient rent controls certainly do.

So who, exactly, are they fooling?