Last Tuesday, the Mayor’s Office of Housing (MOH) held its first listening session to discuss Mayor Wu’s rent stabilization initiative — a policy it plans to present to state lawmakers next week. next year.

In March, Wu set up a 23-member advisory committee to study local housing conditions and the feasibility of rent stabilization measures. As part of this effort, the group sought public input on the state of housing affordability and potential solutions to make the city more accessible.

The mayor ran her campaign largely on a promise to help tackle rising rental costs and displacement, including using rent control, which was banned by Massachusetts voters nearly a year ago. 30 years.

In its first rent stabilization “listening session” with the public, nearly 300 people joined Zoom to share their thoughts, mostly on whether they are for or against any form of rent control. rents, or rent stabilization, terms that have been used interchangeably since the mayor first campaigned on the issue. A mix of landlords and affordable housing advocates gave testimony that ultimately took on a contradictory tone – with landlords describing rent control as a disastrous policy, while tenants struggling to find affordable housing described it as a vital lifeline.

One tenant, Robin Williams, said she struggled to make ends meet for herself and her children, even working multiple jobs.

“Some days I had to think, should I pay my rent or buy food, put clothes on my children’s backs and on my back?” said Williams. “I’m fighting, and this rent is ridiculous.”

Among those who testified vehemently against rent control were a representative of the Mass Landlords organization, representatives of leasing company 617 Living and online rental database Boston Pads and a handful of owners claiming to be small owners.

Referring to her current model as a “mom and pop” operation, Alexandra Bartsch, whose family has owned 30 units in Allston since the 1960s, said rising inflation has already reduced owners’ incomes and the rent controls prevented price adjustments. depending on market conditions.

“There is no stabilization for our mortgage. There is no stabilization for taxes, which are constantly increasing. There is inflation,” she said. “There is no stabilization for plumbers or contractors who have to fix these places.”

Bartsch went on to say that his family was almost “forced into bankruptcy” by rent control decades ago.

“Rent control always fails and decimates the housing stock and doesn’t work in favor of the people who need it most,” Bartsch said.

Other issues raised on the anti-rent control side include reluctance to raise prices for loyal older tenants. Several landlords presented the scenario in which rent control would come into effect and prices would remain permanently in a lowered state.

Stuart Schrier, a landlord himself but also an advocate for statewide landlords lobbying against rent control, said Tuesday the policy will “force him to raise rents.”

“I could triple his rent and still be below market,” Schrier said of his longtime tenant upstairs. “But I don’t want to do that.”

Moreover, a common thread in the testimony of the anti-rent control party was the idea that regulating a free market, with such a limited commodity, was beyond the jurisdiction of the city.

“The thing is, it’s a supply and demand issue,” Cris Bratsis said. “The idea that the government wants to govern and take away my private property and what I do with my property and who I rent it to is, to me, an absurd notion.”

And while some housing experts have pointed to the scarcity of rental housing available in the Greater Boston area as a problem, affordable housing advocates say it actually works in favor of landlords and the need to keep up with rates in the market is just a campaign of fear. revenue loss tactic.

“Most of the properties whose rents would be stabilized are not individual landlords or individual landlords,” said attorney and tenant Conrad Ciszek. “Most of them are multi-million or billion dollar corporations that inflate tenant prices, displacing them, all in an effort to manipulate the market to line their pockets and maximize their profits.”

Mike Leyba, co-executive director of tenant advocacy group City Life/Vida Urbana, echoed Ciszek’s argument that depending on how the mandate is written, a rent control policy doesn’t necessarily have to include tenants. owner-occupied housing or “small landowners”. ”

“It doesn’t target small homeowners – literally no one is advocating that. And it doesn’t cause the sky to fall or the market to collapse,” Leyba said.

He pointed to the success of rent control policies in Oregon, New York and California.

Leyba added that 65% of Boston residents, many of whom are low-income people and people of color, would be helped by rent stabilization.

After nearly 90 minutes of testimony, city staff invited those whose arguments could not be made to share their testimony by email to [email protected]

Listening session organizers said more sessions are expected to be announced in the coming weeks before city councilors draft legislation to submit to the state. Moreover, according to state leadership in January, state-level openness to such a policy is likely to vary.