The Rent Stabilization Association (RSA), which states that it represents 25,000 property owners and agents, filed a lawsuit to overturn the city’s Tenant Protection Act. RSA’s take is that the City Council did not have the authority to amend the housing code to create a violation for harassment.
The RSA says it by no means condones the harassment of tenants. Measures already exist to protect tenants, says the RSA, and the Tenant Protection Act, championed by Speaker Christine Quinn and other Council members, was simply passed and enacted to score political points.
Quinn’s office and housing organizations said they spent 14 months working on the local law so that it would be balanced. But the RSA was never receptive—even after safeguards were included to make sure tenants weren’t repeatedly dragging their landlords to court for false claims.
We wonder what kind of measure would have been satisfactory to the RSA? It sounds like no measure at all.
The Tenant Protection Act helps give some recourse to families at the mercy of landlords who repeatedly threaten them, cut off their hot water, and commit other violations. Before the Act, tenants would have to go to Housing Court for each individual violation instead of having a chance to demonstrate a pattern of harassment.
The RSA is a big, powerful lobby. Tenants facing the pressure of landlords who through harassment or neglect want to push them out so they can charge higher rents deserve and need recourse. The Tenant Protection Act should be fiercely defended and remain on the books.







