Can ‘Mitchell-Lama 2.0’ help New York’s housing crisis?

Good morning. It is Wednesday. Today we’ll learn about plans to address the housing crisis, not just in New York City, but statewide.

I asked Grace Ashford, who monitors Albany, to look into the housing proposals.

How many times have you heard the phrase “back to the future” in connection with “Mitchell-Lama 2.0?” Because that’s not what it’s about?

There is a lot of nostalgia associated with the Mitchell-Lama program. People see it as a solid way for the government to produce good housing, allowing middle-class New Yorkers to rent and buy affordable homes. That gives it a special place in the political psyche.

That said, this new proposal will be different in some important ways.

How come?

The Senate proposal aims to encourage development of state land, meaning the state could reduce or eliminate property taxes. Senate leaders hope this will give developers an incentive to build affordably.

The original Mitchell-Lama program did not include construction on state land. It not only provided tax benefits, but also lower mortgage terms for developers.

The plan for Mitchell-Lama 2.0 is to include rentals and co-ops, just like the original Mitchell-Lama program.

But this isn’t a done deal, right?

No. The Assembly would also have to embrace Mitchell-Lama 2.0 to get it done, as would the governor.

How many apartments would actually be added?

We don’t know, and the legislators don’t know either. It depends on what kind of deal the Senate could make with the General Assembly and the governor.

It also depends on how developers respond to the prompts provided. If developers decide the incentives aren’t good enough, they may not build as many units as Senate leaders hope.

It’s worth noting that Mitchell-Lama 2.0 is just one of many different ideas the Senate has included in their “One House” budget proposal. They also offer to create a replacement for the 421a tax credit for developers who build a certain percentage of “affordable” units and to make changes to rent stabilization laws that would allow landlords to increase rent based on the improvements they make .

But Senate leaders say they are unwilling to make any deal without one key provision, renter protections that are known to be a good goal. The legislation in its current form would make it more difficult for landlords to evict tenants.

Landlords, who would also have to justify the rent increases, are generally opposed. They feel it is an overreach that could affect their ability to care for their property.

Senate leaders obviously hope that by incorporating ideas valued by tenant groups and unions — like Mitchell-Lama — along with ideas that would appeal to major developers, they can work out a compromise and resolve the housing impasse. breaking through. Why was it so difficult to bring all those groups together?

Progressives are very enthusiastic about the charity proposal. Whether it can gain widespread support remains to be seen. We have seen that there will be opposition in the General Assembly, and the governor has opposed it in the past. Senate leaders say they want to advance the “core principles” of a good cause, which likely means they will accept some kind of deal.

The Assembly has its own ideas, including $500 million to support existing Mitchell-Lama housing and $125 million for people struggling with incarceration and homelessness. They also say they are in favor of tenant protection, but unlike their colleagues in the Senate, they have not formulated a good target proposal.

Can everyone involved – the Senate, Assembly and the governor – craft a budget package in just three weeks?

That’s the big question. An important agenda item is that Easter this year falls on March 31, the day before the deadline, which could indicate that the budget may be a bit late.

Weather

Expect a partly sunny day with temperatures reaching the low 60s. At night, temperatures will drop to the high 40s with partly cloudy skies.

ALTERNATE PARKING

In effect until March 24 (Purim).

The latest New York news

A story by my colleague Andy Newman is poignant because he tried to answer questions that have been on the minds of many New Yorkers: Why do kids sell candy on the subway? Isn’t that child labor? Isn’t it illegal? Shouldn’t someone do something to help?

Families are desperate. Selling food is one of their main sources of income when the adults cannot work legally.

Allowing children to do this during school hours violates several laws and regulations. But a series of city and state agencies said it wasn’t their job to stop it.

• The Ministry of Education has “on-call teachers” who ensure that families send their children to school, but they do not go out on patrol. A spokeswoman referred Andy to the police station.

• The state Labor Department said it was “difficult to determine” whether the practice of children selling candy on the subway violated labor law, which generally “regulates employment relations (i.e., between employers and employees).”

• The city’s child welfare agency, the Administration for Children’s Services, said anyone who sees a child in an apparently unsafe situation can call the state’s child abuse hotline.

• But the state Office of Children and Family Services, which runs the hotline, said a child selling merchandise — or cheating — would not itself be considered neglect or abuse. There should be specific concerns about potential harm, such as “children selling candy at a dangerous intersection,” a spokesperson said.

• The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs the subways, cited a rule against unauthorized commercial activity, which carries a $50 fine, and referred further investigations back to police and City Hall.

METROPOLITAN diary

On the way to Kanaalstraat

Dear Diary:

It was a spring day and I was walking to the train station on my way to run errands during my lunch break when I saw an older woman with a cane waving and smiling at me.

She asked me where the Q train was.

“Right behind you,” I said. “Where are you going?”

“Canal Street,” she replied.

She told me she got lost and couldn’t remember how she ended up in my Brooklyn neighborhood.

I watched her carefully descend the stairs to the station. She did it backwards. She said it was easier on her hips.

I was worried about her, so I offered to drive with her to Canal Street. She agreed.

During our ride, she told me her life story: how she grew up in Beijing in the 1940s, how her son died of leukemia, and how she moved to New York alone to study music.

When we arrived at Canal Street, I insisted on giving her my number.

I haven’t seen her in my neighborhood since, but we occasionally have breakfast at a Chinese bakery near Canal Street. It’s her favorite spot.

– Cathy Zhang

Illustrated by Agnes Lee. Send your entries here And read more Metropolitan Diary here.

Glad we could get together here. See you tomorrow. – JB

PS Here is today’s Mini crossword And Game competition. You can find all our puzzles here.