Skip to main content

Full text of "Rent control plan and proposed rent and eviction regulations"

See other formats


» » » »■* » » » » » 

Please 

handle this volume 

with care. 

The University of Connecticut 
Libraries, Storrs 

*-»»» <^»«" » » <> 



J 



hbl, stx KFN5837.5.R3A2 1951 

Rent control plan and proposed ren 



3 1153 QDMfiSlOb 1 



a 

25 

Ln 
00 
u> 
-J 









Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2012 with funding from 

LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation 



http://archive.org/details/rentcontOOnewy 



STATE OF NEW YORK 



TEMPORARY STATE HOUSING RENT COMMISSION 



RENT CONTROL PLAN 

and 

PROPOSED RENT AND EVICTION 

REGULATIONS 



s 



JOSEPH D. McGOLDRICK 

Commissioner and 
State Rent Administrator 




Submitted to the Legislature of the 

State of New York Pursuant to the Emergency Housing 

Rent Control Law, Chap. 250, Laws of 1950 

January 15, 1951 



TEMPORARY STATE HOUSING RENT COMMISSION 

Joseph D. McGoldrick 
State Rent Administrator 

Nathan Heller 
First Deputy State Rent Administrator 

Nathaniel L. Goldstein 
A ttorney-General 

Abe Wagman 

Deputy Attorney-General (in charge) 



Administrative Division 

John J. Fogarty 
Executive Officer 

George Zekowski 
Administrative Officer 

Joseph Lilly 
Director of Public Information 

Abraham Blume 
Special Assistant Counsel 

Protest and Interpretation Division 

Jack Sobell 

Principal Attorney 

Ralph W. Morhard 
David R. Cohen 
Associate Attorneys 

Statistical Division 

Rolfe Brett 
Statistician 

Downstate 

Gerald E. Rowley 
Deputy State Rent Administrator 



Operational Accounting Division 

Robert T. Dormer 
Chief Accountant 

Earl D. Pierce 
Assistant Chief Accountant 

Survey Division 

Maurice J. Freeman 
Survey Officer 

Basil M. Ellwood 
Deputy Survey Officer 

Bruce O. Townsend 
Associate Attorney 

Abe Gottlieb 

Economist 

Edward M. Applebaum 
Senior Research Analyst 

DOMINICK P. FELITTI 

Senior Statistician 

Upstate 

Arlen T. St. Louis 
Deputy State Rent Administrator 



Local Rent Administrators 

Joseph Goldberg Lower Manhattan 

Donald Crichton Upper Manhattan 

Edward J. Mitchell Bronx 

Martin D. Levy 

Brooklyn, Staten Island 
Harold F. Garrahan 

Queens, Nassau, Suffolk 

Joseph E. Kelly Westchester 

Charles C. Hoag Poughkeepsie 



Local Rent Administrators 

Francis X. Riley Albany 

Joseph P. Donnelly Buffalo 

Robert L. Andrew 

Binghamton, Elmira 

William J. Frank Rochester 

Charles R. Mooney Syracuse 

Robert Speirs Utica 

Allan G. Patch Watertown 



Foreword 

This is the presentation to the Legislature of the "rent control 
plan" required by Chapter 250, Laws of New York, 1950, Section 4, 
subdivision two (c), which says : 

"Within a reasonable period of time after this act becomes effec- 
tive but in any case no later than the fifteenth day of January, nine- 
teen hundred fifty-one, the commission shall submit to the legislature 
a rent control plan, together with proposed regulations to effectuate 
its objectives, designed to maintain a system of rent controls at levels 
which, in the judgment of the commission, are generally fair and 
equitable and which will provide for an orderly transition from and 
termination of emergency controls without undue dislocations, infla- 
tionary price rises, or disruption. * * * 

"The proposed regulations shall state the date on which they shall 
become operative, but in no case shall they take effect prior to March 
first, nineteen hundred fifty-one; provided however, that such regu- 
lations shall not become operative if, prior to February fifteenth, nine- 
teen hundred fifty-one, the assembly and senate adopt a joint resolu- 
tion disapproving such regulations." 

The commission's general reasoning behind the rent control plan, 
and a simple description of the plan, is given in Part 1 of this docu- 
ment. The new plan itself is embodied in the proposed regulations 
which are set forth in Part 2 with explanatory footnotes indicating 
all proposed changes from the regulations now in effect. 

Rent Control Plan 

The most important thing in the document, of course, is the rent 
control plan itself. Everything else, apart from the proposed regu- 
lations which would carry most of the plan into effect, that is pre- 
sented here is in support of the plan. It should be said that when 
the survey had been completed and the last public hearing had been 
held, the conclusions that were then being drawn from that material 
had to be amended by the force of the tremendous circumstances 
that are re-shaping our lives, and, perhaps, the world. 

To the extent that that is so, the factors that gave the rent control 
plan its final shape are not given in this document. But they are 
available to everyone. They are being given every day in the battle 
reports from Korea — in the records of the activities of the L T nited 
States Government in Washington — in the minutes of chancellories 
of all the world — and, not least of all, in the public exhortations of 
the Governor of this State to its people to prepare for the greatest 
ordeal they ever have known. 

Survey Required 

The law also required the commission (Sec. 4, subd. one (b)) to 
"undertake a complete study and investigation of all factors affecting 



residential rents and rental conditions within the state of New York 
and particularly those areas of the state subject to rent control on 
March first, nineteen hundred fifty" * * * to "include a survey of 
the availability of vacant housing accommodations, the ratio of vacant 
housing accommodations to total housing accommodations, the extent 
to which rent levels and the yields therefrom have increased or 
decreased, and the relationship between them and living costs, and 
all other factors deemed relevant by it in the determination of fair 
and equitable rents." 

The same Section (subd. two • (b)) likewise required : "Within 
a reasonable period of time after the completion and publication of 
the study and investigation * * * but in any case not later than the 
first day of December, nineteen hundred fifty, the commission shall 
provide regulations for the making of individual adjustments in those 
cases where substantial and unavoidable increases in property taxes 
or other operating expenses exclusive of allowances for depreciation, 
obsolescence and reserves shall result in operating costs exceeding 
rental income, and in those cases where" * * * (in advance of the 
new plan) * * * "severe hardship will result because the maximum 
rent for any housing accommodation is substantially higher or lower 
than the rents otherwise generally prevailing in the same area for 
substantially similar housing accommodations, or because of gross 
inequities." 

This Section also "provided however, that * * * no landlord shall 
be entitled to any upward adjustment in maximum rent unless he 
certifies that he is maintaining all services furnished as of the date 
determining the maximum rent and that he will continue to maintain 
such services so long as the adjustment in such maximum rent which 
may be granted continues in effect." 



Survey of Rents 

All of these mandates were fulfilled by the commission. The survey 
was begun on May 29 and its results were published in Survey of 
Rents on November 1. The public hearings were held and are 
described in Appendix "C" of this document. The interim regula- 
tions were filed with the Secretary of State and became operative on 
December 1. 

Copies of Survey of Rents were distributed to each member of 
the legislature and to all officers of the state, county, municipal, town 
and village governments, to the judiciary, and to the public gen- 
erally. Survey of Rents, while a separate publication, is an integral 
part of this document, since conclusions drawn from it were the 
basis of the new rent plan insofar as conditions that prevailed up to 
the time of its completion supply that basis. 

Survey of Rents is the most exhaustive study of factors affecting 
rents and rental conditions ever made by any state, or, for that 
matter, by the United States. Survey of Rents was a wholly objec- 
tive presentation without conclusions ; the conclusions were reserved 
until the evidence to be submitted at the public hearings was in hand 
and cotild be considered in conjunction with the survey material. 



These conclusions are given in Part 4 of this document, pre- 
ceded by a clarification and abridgement of the survey material. 
Since most of the facts upon which these conclusions were drawn 
are set forth in tables in Survey of Rents, reference to these tables 
is made in footnotes alluding to that volume, as well as to additional 
tabular material in this document. 

Part 3 of this document contains a detailed report of the opera- 
tions of the Commission from the enactment of the law until Novem- 
ber 30, 1950. This is supported by 29 tables showing the operation 
of the law as it was administered in each controlled section of the 
State. 

Other Material 

In Part 5 the Commission reports its own survey of the vacancy 
situation in the Borough of Manhattan, City of New York, and, by 
courtesy of the Real Estate Board of New York, Inc., publishes the 
results of the Board's very extensive survey of Manhattan which 
was made last October. 

A study of the relationship of the assessed valuation of land to 
buildings is given in Part 6. 

Appendix 

There are four parts to the appendix, as follows : 

Appendix "A" summarizes the public hearings referred to above. 

Appendix "B" is a compilation of such detailed real estate tax 
data as is important in the study of the earnings of real property in 
the state. It contains an explanation of tax equalization methods, 
together with tax calendars of the relevant taxing authorities. 

Appendix "C" contains an explanation by the United States 
Bureau of Labor Statistics of the "accumulated bias" which affected 
figures taken from its indexes and published in Survey of Rents. 

Appendix "D" gives the report of a special survey of Delaware 
County, and while it speaks for itself, its inclusion here is intended 
to indicate the complexity of the factors that are examined when the 
rental situation in a decontrolled area must be studied. 



CONTENTS 



Page 

Letter of Transmittal 3 

The Commission's Organization 4 

Foreword 5 

Contents 9 

Part 1. RENT CONTROL PLAN 

I. Report of the Commission's Findings and Conclusions 17 

Basis of Commission's Proposals 17 

General Conclusions 17 

II. Mandate of the 1950 Legislature 20 

Two Purposes 20 

Some Relief Required 21 

III. Impact of the International Crisis 22 

Mobilization the Order of the Day 22 

Decontrol Impossible Now 23 

IV. Geographical Scope of Rent Control 24 

Forty-two Counties Affected 24 

Uncontrolled Accomodations in Controlled Areas 25 

Construction Costs Doubled 25 

V. Adjustment Provisions of the Proposed Rent Control Plan 26 

Seven Grounds 26 

Voluntary Lease Agreements 27 

Adjustment to Provide Net Returns 28 

VI. Eviction Provisions of the Rent Control Plan 29 

Two Classes Continued 29 

Evictions for Alterations 30 

Under-occupancy a Problem 30 

Subdivision of Apartments 31 

Demolition of Buildings 31 

VII. Recommended Legislation Regarding Owner Occupancy 31 

Small Properties 31 

Cooperative Buildings 32 



Part 2. PROPOSED RENT AND EVICTION 
REGULATIONS 

The Proposed Regulations will be found on pages 33 to 79, with 
their ozvn Table of Contents on page 34. 



Part 3. OPERATIONS OF THE COMMISSION 

Page 

I . Readiness of the State 80 

The "Stand-By" Law 80 

I I. The State in Action 81 

The Beginning 81 

Volume of Work 81 

Public Information 83 

What it Cost 83 

Statement of Expenditures 84 

Chart 1. Total Cases, Docketed, Disposed of and Pending. ... 85 

Chart 2. Disposition of Cases, by Types 86 

Chart 3. Disposition of Applications for Increases 87 

Chart 4. Disposition of Tenant Applications for Restoration 

of Services 88 

III. Surveys 89 

General 89 

Saratoga County 89 

Town of Coeymans, Albany County 89 

Geneva-Seneca County 89 

Delaware County 90 

Chenango County 90 

Wayne County 90 

Conclusion 90 

IV. Protests 91 

Evidence of Thorough Consideration 91 

Benefit to Courts 91 

V. Litigation 92 

Four Classes 92 

Teeval Case 92 

Other Litigation 93 

VI. Detailed Organization 94 

10 



Operations Tables (May 1 to November 30, 1950) 
Table Pace 

Al — Summary of Operations by Items 95 

A2 — Miscellaneous Workload % 

A3 — Summary of Operations by Offices 98 

A4— Total Cases Docketed, by Types 99 

A5 — Total Cases Docketed, Disposed of and Pending by Types 99 

A6 — Total Application for Increases 100 

A7 — Applications by Landlords and Tenants for Increase- 101 

A8 — Applications by Landlords for Increases 102 

A9 — Applications by Landlords for Decreases 103 

A10 — Total Applications by Tenants 104 

All — Applications by Tenants — Painting 105 

A 12 — Applications by Tenants — Other Services 106 

A13 — Total Applications for Certificates of Eviction 107 

AlA — Applications for Certificates of Eviction — Personal Occupancy .... 108 

A15 — Applications for Certificates of Eviction — Occupancy by 

Landlord's Immediate Family 108 

x\16 — Applications for Certificates of Eviction — Subdivision 109 

A17 — Applications for Certificates of Eviction — Demolition for 

Additional Housing 110 

A18— Applications for Certificates of Eviction . — Demolition for 

Other Than Housing Accommodations Ill 

A19 — Applications for Certificates of Eviction — All Other 112 

A20 — Total Compliance Actions 113 

A21 — Compliance Actions — Overcharges 114 

A22 — Compliance Actions — Evasive Practices 115 

A23 — Compliance Actions — Illegal Evictions 115 

A2A — Compliance Actions — All Other 116 

A25 — Applications for Decontrol 117 

A26— Other Actions 118 

A27 — Applications for Reconsideration 119 

A28— Protests 120 

A29 — Applications Based on Interim Regulations 121 

11 



Part 4. CONCLUSIONS FROM SURVEY 

Page 

I. The State's People 122 

Population 122 

Marriages, Births and Family Formation 123 

Conclusions 124 

II. The People at Work 126 

Business Indicators 126 

Labor Force 126 

Employment and Wages 126 

Manufacturing 127 

Retail, Wholesale and Service Trades 127 

The Consumers' Price Index 127 

Conclusions 128 

III. The Cost of Housing the People 129 

Trends in Controlled Areas 129 

Trends in Uncontrolled Rents in Controlled Areas 129 

Rental Trends in Decontrolled and Uncontrolled Areas 130 

Conclusions 131 

IV. The People's Housing 132 

New Construction 132 

Housing Demand in the State 133 

Vacancies 133 

Shift from Tenant to Owner Occupancy 134 

Rental and Purchase Prices in Greatest Demand 135 

Costs of Materials and Wages 135 

Property Taxes 136 

Conclusions 137 

V. Financial Results of Operating Controlled Housing 138 

Income and Expense 138 

Comparative Income Statements 138 

Rent Ranges 139 

Rental Income 139 

Expenses 140 

Net Income 140 

Return on Assessed Valuation 141 

Mortgages 141 

Conclusions 142 

12 



Additional Survey Tables 

Table Page 

Bl — Vital Statistics — Marriages — January to September, 1950 144 

B2— Vital Statistics— Births— January to September, 1950 145 

B3 — Monthly Business Activity Indexes — January to August, 1950 146 

B4 — Number of Wage and Salary Workers — January to September, 1950 146 

B5 — Monthly General Business Indicators — January to August, 1950 147 

B6 — Average Weekly Earnings of Manufacturing Production Workers — 

1940, 1946 and September, 1950 147 

B7 — Average Weekly Earnings of Manufacturing Production Workers — 

January to September, 1950 148 

B8 — Purchasing Power of Consumer's Dollar in the United States, 

1939 to October 15, 1950 149 

B9 — Consumers' Price Index — Large Cities — January to September, 1950 149 

B10 — Consumers' Price Index for Selected Dates — United States, 

New York City and Buffalo 150 

Bll — Latest Rent Index, Various Cities 151 

B12 — Dwelling Units Contracted for in New York State — 

January to October, 1950 152 

B13 — Indexes of Construction Costs — January to September, 1950 152 

B14 — Indexes of Wholesale Prices for Building Materials — 

January to September, 1950 153 

B15 — New Apartment Rentals Listed in New York Herald Tribune Guide 153 

B16 — Dwelling Units Contracted for in Selected Upstate Counties — 

1949, and January to October, 1950 154 

B17 — Dwelling Units Contracted for in New York City and Nassau, 
Suffolk and Westchester Counties — 1949, and January to 
October, 1950 154 

B18 — New York City Apartments Advertised For Rent in New York 

primes Apartment Directory 155 

B19 — New York City Surburban Apartments Advertised for Rent in 

New York Times Apartment Directory 155 

B20— Average Tax Rates in Selected Cities— 1942 and 1949 156 

B21 — Percent Distribution of Earned Rental Income 157 

B22 — Ratio of Total Expenses to Earned Income 158 

B23 — Ratio of Net Income to Earned Rental Income 159 

B2A — Analysis of Percent Increase or Decrease in Earned Income 160 

B25 — Analysis of Percent Increase or Decrease in Total Expenses 161 

B26 — Analysis of Percent Increase or Decrease in Net Income 162 

B27 — Distribution of Percent Increases and Decreases in Net Income.... 163 

13 



Part 5. NEW YORK CITY SURVEYS 

Page 

I. Special New York City Survey 164 

"Luxury" Apartments 164 

II. Real Estate Board Survey of Vacancies 166 

Part 6. RATIO OF LAND TO BUILDING VALUE 

Relationship in 1949 173 

Assessed Valuations, Selected Counties and New York City, 1949 — 

Ratio of Land to Total 173 

Assessed Valuations, New York City, 1949— Ratio of Land to Total 174 

APPENDIXES 

"A". Analysis of Minutes of Public Hearings 175 

Upstate 175 

New York City 176 

"B". Taxes 180 

Equalization 180 

Assessment Jurisdictions 180 

Town Assessors' Calendar 181 

Village Assessors' Calendar 181 

Tax Calendar for Selected Cities 182 

County Assessment Calendar 182 

Equalization by Board of Supervisors 182 

Levy of Tax 183 

Tax Roll and Collector's Warrant 183 

Fiscal Year of Counties 184 

Fiscal Year of Cities 184 

School Districts 184 

Fire Protection Districts 184 

Water Charges 185 

Sewer Charges 185 

"C". Changes in the Consumers' Price Index 186 

A Correction of the Rent Index 187 

Additional Adjustments Early in 1951 187 

Note on the Correction of Rent Indexes for October, 1950 .... 188 

"D". Survey of Delaware County 189 

Introduction 189 

General Economic Data 189 

Population 189 

Marriages and Births 190 

General Business Activity 190 

Employment 191 

Rent Levels 192 

Housing Supply and Demand 192 

Construction 192 

Housing Characteristics 193 

Temporary Housing 193 

Other Evidence Bearing on Demand 193 

Effect of Reservoir Construction on Housing Demand 194 

Building Costs and Real Property Taxes 195 

Conclusions 195 

14 



Tables Pertaining to Delaware County Survey 

Table Page 

Dl— Population 196 

D2 — Population, Urban, Rural-Non-Farm, Rural-Farm 196 

D3— Marriages 197 

DA— Births 197 

D5 — Business Indicators 198 

D6— Rent Changes after Decontrol 199 

D7 — Median and Average Rent Changes 200 

D8 — Building Construction Permits 201 

D9 — Characteristics of Dwelling Units 201 

D10 — Rental Ranges, Percent Increases 202 



Footnotes 

The footnotes giving the references for the basic material follow 
each chapter. Where the footnote refers to an unlettered table, i.e., 
Table 41, that table will be found in Survey of Rents. Where 
the table number is preceded by a letter, i.e., Table A8, that table 
will be found in this volume beginning on Page 95 ; table numbers 
preceded by the letter B, which begin on Page 144; and table num- 
bers preceded by the letter D begin on Page 196. 



IS 



PART 1 



1951 Rent Control Plan 

/. Report of the Commission 's Findings 
and Conclusions 

Basis of Commission's Proposals 

The rent control plan herewith presented, as the Legislature di- 
rected that it be, has been developed with due regard to the facts and 
conclusions contained in the Survey of Rents and Rental Conditions 
summarized in the latter portions of this document; the information, 
arguments and suggestions made at the public hearings; the experi- 
ence of the Commission in dealing with actual control problems since 
May 1, 1950; and, most importantly, the conditions of emergency as 
they exist at this time. 

From its Survey (the significant findings and conclusions of which 
are discussed in detail in Part 4 of this document), from its pub- 
lic hearings (which are summarized in Appendix "A") and its eight 
months of experience in operation under the present Act, the Com- 
mission reaches the following conclusions : 

General Conclusions 

(1) The shortage of housing accommodations is still acute in all 
of the areas of the State now subject to rent control. 

(2) This is true despite the very sizeable residential construction 
(public and private) which has taken place in the past four years. 

(3) The Commission's Survey clearly reveals that we have not 
yet recovered from the impact of World War II and yet measures 
have already been taken and more are in the making which will cur- 
tail, perhaps entirely suspend, housing construction. 

(4) Forces are in the making which will make it virtually impos- 
sible to foresee the day when the supply of housing will sufficiently 
approximate the demand to permit rent control to give way to the 
normal bargaining relations between landlord and tenant. 

17 



(5) The mobilization on which the nation has already embarked 
has begun even now to curtail residential construction and we may 
anticipate a serious interruption, or even a virtual cessation of such 
construction, as mobilization gathers momentum. 

(6) While a return to normal relations between landlord and ten- 
ant still remains the policy of the State and of this Commission, the 
Commission cannot recommend any measure of decontrol at this 
time. 

Objectives of Rent Control 

(7) The objective of rent control has been the protection of the 
public from inflation and tenants from gouging that would inevitably 
result from the acute housing shortage that has existed in the urban 
areas of this country and this State since 1942. This, and nothing 
else, has been its proper, legitimate and necessary purpose. To this 
has now been added the general purpose of controlling inflation in 
the existing emergency. 

(8) To achieve these objectives, it is necessary to control both the 
rent which the tenant pays and his occupancy. 

(9) Since rent control must be continued, it is important to make 
it fair and equitable to all concerned. 

(10) The Commission believes that it never was the intention of 
rent control to compel landlords as a group, or any portion of them, 
to subsidize tenants. 

(11) The Commission's survey shows that a substantial number of 
property owners, particularly of small properties, are earning little or 
nothing on their properties but that a larger number are earning at 
least as much as the average in 1942/3 and that many are doing even 
better. 

(12) The Commission, therefore, cannot recommend an across- 
the-board increase. 

(13)* While many have urged an 8 percent return, such as the 
Commercial and Business rent law provides, the Commission believes 
that a return of 4 percent on the equalized assessed valuation of the 
property should be allowed in this emergency, including as an 
operating expense an allowance of 2 percent for depreciation of 
the value of the buildings where that value has not been fully de- 
preciated, but excluding as an operating expense mortgage interest 
and amortization. 

(14) The Commission has determined that owners of small struc- 
tures, containing four units or less — the so-called "non-professional" 
landlords — have not been able generally to qualify for increases in 
rents under the previous "hardship" and other financial adjustment 
provisions of the Federal Act. This has often been because custom- 

* The proposed adjustment provisions arc discussed at pp. 26-30. See also 
Proposed Regulations, Section 33, pp. 45-51. 

18 



arily they do not keep records adequate to support their claims of 
operating expenses. The Commission believes that a relatively sim- 
ple procedure should be adopted whereby these owners of small 
properties may receive increases in rental income sufficient to offset 
unavoidable increases in operating costs, such as property taxes, fuel 
and the like, for which they have not been fully compensated. 

(15) The Commission is aware that many tenants, under the Fed- 
eral Act, entered into voluntary leases with their landlords whereby 
their rents were increased up to 15 percent. In making adjustments 
to provide a return on the valuation of a property, or to compensate 
certain classes of landlords for unavoidable increases in operating 
costs, the Commission believes that the total increase to be ordered 
should be apportioned equitably among all the controlled housing 
accommodations in the property, and that due consideration should 
be given to all previous adjustments or increases in maximum rents 
by lease or otherwise. 

(16) In view of the possible inflationary aspects of any excessive 
rent increases, the Commission believes that any increase granted 
to provide a 4 percent return on the valuation of a property (except 
where the property is actually being operated at an actual loss) 
should be limited to 15 percent in any one year. 

(17) The Commission believes that application for increases in 
rental income to provide a return on the valuation of a property, or 
to compensate certain classes of landlords for unavoidable increases 
in operating costs, should be limited to one application per year. 
However, where the property has been affected by some new signifi- 
cant increase in operating costs which applies to a substantial seg- 
ment of housing accommodations in the community, the Commission 
believes it should have power to waive this limitation. 

(18)* The Commission believes that rigid control of evictions is 
an essential component of any plan of rent control. 

(19) The Commission believes that the breaking up of large units 
into smaller ones should be limited to instances of definite under- 
occupancy but should be facilitated as to these. 

The foregoing are embodied in the proposed Rent and 
Eviction Regulations submitted as Part 2 of this docu- 
ment. 

(20)** The Commission, in addition, submits the following recom- 
mendations to the Legislature: 

(a) The Commission recommends that the obstacles to owner 
occupancy of one- and two-family homes be relaxed. 

(b) The Commission recommends that owners of cooperative 
apartments who have had such ownership for more than two years 
be given the same rights of owner occupancy as other home owners. 



* The proposed eviction provisions are discussed at pp. 29-30. See also 
Proposed Regulations, Part V, pp. 56-65. 

_ ** These recommendations are discussed at p. 31. See also Proposed Regula- 
tions, Section 55, paragraphs 1 and 3, pp. 60-61. 

19 



//. Mandate of the 1950 Legislature 

This Commission is under mandate from the Legislature {Emer- 
gency Housing Rent Control Law, paragraph (c) of subdivision 2 of 
Section 4) no later than January 15, 1951, "to submit to the Legisla- 
ture a rent control plan, together with proposed regulations to ef- 
fectuate its objectives, designed to maintain a system of rent con- 
trols which, in the judgment of the Commission, are generally fair 
and equitable and which will provide for an orderly transition from 
and termination of emergency controls without undue dislocations, 
inflationary price rises, or disruption . . .". 

Two Purposes 

It is apparent that at the time the Legislature enacted the statute it 
had in contemplation two broad objectives: (1) the continuation of 
controls so long as required, and (2) their gradual elimination as 
soon as an easing of the housing situation would permit. It is ap- 
parent also that the Legislature established State control because qi 
the uncertainty of continued control by the Federal Government and 
the hardships imposed by conflicts in law and in administration in 
New York City between the Federal Office of the Housing Expediter 
and the New York City Temporary Housing Rent Commission. 

To give the Commission the necessary time within which to pre- 
pare the comprehensive new plan by January 15, 1951, the Legisla- 
ture froze rents generally at the level paid on March 1, 1950. At 
the same time, the Legislature directed that before preparing the 
plan the Commission survey the problem generally and that it pro- 
vide by December 1, relief through interim Regulations for landlords 
suffering severe hardship. It was clear that the Legislature intended 
that the rent control plan to be submitted in 1951 should provide 
both necessary protection to tenants and some return on property 
value — a return which has been denied for a variety of reasons to 
many owners over many years. 

Voluntary Increases in 1950 

The 1950 Act permitted increases in maximum rents only where 
tenants and landlords agreed to increased dwelling space, services, 
furniture, furnishings or equipment. It also controlled evictions. 
It authorized this Commission where necessary to recontrol areas 
which had been decontrolled by the Federal authorities. The Com- 
mission's operations as to these matters are discussed in detail in 
Part 3 of this report, which presents a complete report on the 
Commission's operations. 

Many of the complexities and difficulties in a system of rent con- 
trol are readily apparent, but many others are not. Rent control was 
established by the Federal Government during World War II as 
part of the general program of economic controls over prices and 

20 



wages. This program was largely abolished by Congress in 1946 ex- 
cept for rent control. Many inequities were frozen into the Federal 
law in the beginning, and despite many legislative and regulatory 
changes, some of these inequities have not yet been eliminated. 

Many landlords of residential real estate in New York State failed 
to get the benefits intended for them — intended for that whole sec- 
tion of our economy — by Congress and the Office of the Housing 
Expediter through the so-called "fair net income operating" formula, 
issued on May 3, 1949, effective April 1 of that year. 

Thousands of applications filed throughout the State under this 
regulation had not been acted upon by the Area Offices of the Office 
of the Housing Expediter when the State froze rents. In New 
York City the situation for the landlords was even more complex. 
Thousands of increases had been authorized by the Office of the 
Housing Expediter, but the landlords were unable to collect the in- 
crease because they were barred by the so-called Sharkey Laws which 
attempted to require municipal sanction for these increases. 

While the Sharkey Laws were invalidated by the decision of the 
Court of Appeals in the Teeval case on July 11, 1950, the resultant 
permission to collect the OHE increases that this gave the land- 
lords did not extend beyond May 1, 1950, the date that the State 
law took effect. Accordingly, the landlords affected by this decision 
were able to collect OHE increases only for the brief period prior to 
May 1, 1950, at which date the rents reverted to the lower level. 



Some Relief Required 

Thus, unless some relief is afforded now to landlords in this 
State, they would continue to be penalized while landlords elsewhere 
throughout the country have been accorded substantial help. Such a 
discriminatory situation cannot be defended. A recent report of 
U. S. Housing Expediter Tighe E. Woods reveals that his office 
had granted upwards of one million increases in the first eleven 
months of 1950 and that these averaged 18.2 percent above previous 
rent ceilings. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' rent indexes for 34 
cities for which it gathers data indicate that the New York City 
index (109.1) is far below the national average (125.4) which in- 
cludes New York and that Chicago has a rent index of 143.6 and Los 
Angeles (prior to its recent decontrol) had an index of 134.5.* 

All in all, the result has been that, despite the general prosperity, 
the increase in employment and industrial expansion and rise -in 
costs, many landlords in this State have had just grounds for com- 
plaining that insufficient consideration has been given to their in- 
ability to obtain some return on their properties. Landlords of com- 
mercial property have had a substantial measure of relief. Virtually 
all other businesses, as well as farmers and employees of industry, 
have not been limited in adding to their lawful incomes. 

* Sec Table Bll, Page 151. 

21 



While many landlords frankly have been deprived of some return, 
it is also true that tenants in all the controlled areas of the State 
have required and still require protection because of the almost total 
absence of vacant housing, particularly in neighborhoods convenient 
to their work and at rentals which they can afford to pay. New 
housing construction has been so costly that even persons of medium 
incomes have suffered where this has been the only shelter available 
to them. In many areas newly constructed accommodations are often 
available only by purchase. 

Accordingly, the conflicting pressures by landlords for rent in- 
creases and decontrol, and by tenants for the continuance of rigid 
control, are in some measure irreconcilable. Indeed, the problems of 
control often cannot be solved to individual satisfaction, and any 
approach to solution at this time must be based upon general ob- 
jective — to curb inflation and otherwise to protect the general wel- 
fare and health of the people of the State. 



///. Impact of the International Crisis 

Mobilization the Order of the Day 

Only three months after the enactment of the 1950 Act events 
occurred beyond the contemplation and control of any person deal- 
ing with this problem. The Communist move forcibly to seize con- 
trol of all Korea has precipitated a series of developments that 
demonstrates the Legislature's foresight in providing for "an orderly 
transition from and termination of emergency" only if this could 
be accomplished "without undue dislocations, inflationary price rises, 
or disruption." 

The full impact of this international crisis upon the American 
economy, in which New York State is such an important component, 
is only beginning to be felt. It cannot be measured until the full 
extent of the current mobilization, both military and economic, has 
been developed and publicly disclosed. 

That an entirely new situation confronts us is clearly apparent 
from the Proclamation of National Emergency by the President of 
the United States on December 16, 1950, and from Governor 
Thomas E. Dewey's message to the Legislature on January 3. In 
the light of these new circumstances it is no longer possible to con- 
template any general decontrol of rental housing at this time, nor the 
authorization of excessive increases over present rent levels, nor even 
of projecting a detailed plan for gradual decontrol such as was con- 
templated when the present Act was passed. 

The possibility of beginning in this year to relax controls, as the 
Legislature envisioned last year, evaporated in June with the deter- 
mination by the United States Government, in which the United 
Nations joined, to resist Communist aggression in Korea. While 
everyone was well aware last January that the "cold war" was far 

22 



from ended, no one could have foreseen the condition which now 
confronts us. Indeed, the situation has sharply changed since this 
time last year when building construction was rising to record heights 
of activity. 

Perhaps the most important function of residential rent control in 
1951, and for the duration of the present emergency, will not be 
merely the provision of housing at prices which renters can pay, but 
the holding down of the inflationary pressure that a general and sub- 
stantial increase in rents of large amount would entail. Not only 
must real estate generally contribute patriotically to the effort to 
diminish this pressure, but so must all other portions of the economy. 
To exempt real estate from control at a time when all other segments 
of the economy are about to be placed under controls, perhaps 
stricter controls than any hitherto known in this country, would be 
contrary to the national interest. The impetus that a general rent 
increase would give to demands for higher wages and resultant 
higher prices of most goods would entail economic effects which 
would undermine the mobilization effort at this time. 

In his message to Congress on the State of the Union, January 8, 
the President asked Congress to consider "revision and extension of 
the authority to expand production and to stabilize prices, wages and 
rents." At this writing there has been no amplification of the Presi- 
dent's intention or indication of what Congress is likely to do. 

Decontrol Impossible Now 

Nevertheless, without generating inflationary pressures some relief 
must be afforded to those real estate owners who have suffered loss 
of income for a protracted period. Had our national economy con- 
tinued in the direction of peace and domestic progress, this Com- 
mission was prepared to recommend a number of steps in the direc- 
tion of decontrol, but nothing would be gained by enumerating at 
this time even the ideas that were in contemplation. By the time it 
is again possible to consider decontrol so many basic factors may 
have changed that these studies and projected plans would be worth- 
less. All of them must for the time being be postponed, since no 
one can foresee the end of the present emergency, nor through what 
trials we shall go before it is ended. 

However, the Commission in fulfilling its mandate, reports its be- 
lief that where a 5 percent vacancy ratio would appear in a housing 
area, or in a classification of housing, there would be a sufficiently 
free market to permit the resumption of normal bargaining between 
landlords and tenants. If the present Act is to be amended it would 
recommend that a 5 percent ratio be substituted for the 10 percent 
ratio provided by the 1950 Act. 

Our 1950 survey indicated nothing approaching a 5 percent ratio 
in any of the controlled areas of the State. Events since the com- 
pletion of the survey indicate plainly that the defense program upon 
which the nation already has embarked will postpone indefinitely the 
prospects of attaining it. Furthermore, the Commission urges that 

23 



the 5 percent provision be accompanied by ample power in the Com- 
mission to reimpose controls whenever and wherever the absence of 
controls threatens to produce undue dislocation, inflationary price 
rises or disruption.* 



IV. Geographical Scope of Rent Control 

Forty-two Counties Affected 

At the present time rent control in New York State includes 
twenty-three entire counties and parts of nineteen others. In these 
controlled areas live 91.9 percent of the State's population. Twelve 
counties were never included in the rent control program. The Com- 
mission has made no particular inquiry concerning rents and rental 
conditions in these counties. Until 1950 Census data becomes avail- 
able very little will be known. Even in a period of national emer- 
gency there may not be any warrant for imposing rent control in 
these counties. 

During the period from 1947 to March 1, 1950 the Office of the 
Housing Expediter decontrolled eleven counties and parts of eigh- 
teen others. This Commission recontrolled Saratoga County on July 
1, 1950; the Town of Coeymans in Albany County on August 1, 1950 ; 
and Seneca County and the City and Town of Geneva in Ontario 
County on December 1, 1950. The latter action was prompted by 



*At the public hearings various suggestions were made regarding a vacancy ratio which 
would justify decontrol. Mr. James Quinn, who appeared on behalf of the Central Trades 
and Labor Council of the American Federation of Labor and spoke jointly with Mr. Morris 
Iushewitz of New York City C. I. O. Council, urged this Commission "to urge the Legis- 
lature to defer decontrol until the end of the emergency and to recommend a decontrol plan 
which would provide for automatic decontrol when vacancies in various categories of housing 
needs reach a five percent level, together with a provision for automatic recontrol where the 
vacancies fall to 4J4% percent." (New York City Hearing, p. 29) 

The representative of the Jewish War Veterans, which has 285 posts in the State, urged 
that the Commission "recommend to the Legislature a continuance of a survey by rent 
range and rent area when the vacancy ratio reaches 6 percent, and when the vacancy ratio 
in a particular rent range and rent area falls below 5 percent that there should be recontrol." 
(New York City Hearing, p. 69) 

The Joint Rent Action Committee, speaking through Mr. Morton B. Lawrence, said: 
"We very strongly oppose any across-the-board increase for landlords as being unwarranted, 
and not based on actual needs. . . . 

"We do not favor controls of any sort just for the sake of controls and we are glad to 
recommend complete decontrol in any area where new building causes a vacancy ratio of 
at least 5 percent, on the theory that such a vacancy ratio is a minimum requirement before 
a free market in available space will create a normal relationship between landlord and 
tenant. 

"At the present time the Commission's own survey shows there is a vacancy ratio in 
New York City of only .8 of 1 percent, and only half of these vacancies are available 
for rent. 

"We therefore urge the continuation of the present law without any expiration date — the 
realty interests can set their own termination date (boos) by meeting the challenge and 
building sufficient new dwelling units to create a 5 percent vacancy ratio (boos)." New 
York City Hearing, p. 102) 

In somewhat similar vein, Mr. Richard T. Levy, speaking for Americans for Democratic 
Action, which emphatically urged continued rent controls, said: "The statute could fairly 
and without danger, state that if any distinct areas or locality shows a 6%-8% vacancy 
ratio, in any given rent category, controls can be relaxed, subject to continuous survey and 
recontrol by the state upon the vacancy ratio dropping to 4 }/i to 5% in any given rent 
category. This is the most that safety will permit." (New York City Hearing, p. 130) 

24 



the reopening of the former Naval Station at Sampson as an Air 
Force Base. In this instance, rents were put under control at their 
October 1, 1950 level. A re-registration of rental units in this area 
is to be completed by January 15, 1951. 

The Commission has made a number of sampling surveys in vari- 
ous decontrolled counties. These indicate quite a number of with- 
drawals from the rental market for owner occupancy and rent in- 
creases in some scattered instances as high as 75 percent, 100 percent 
and 125 percent. Barring unusual defense activity in particular local 
areas, the Commission has found no condition that would warrant 
general recontrol of these areas. On the other hand, the Commission 
believes, and so recommends to the Legislature, that the Commission 
should continue to have power to recontrol in areas where an acute 
housing shortage threatens. In the present national emergency, it 
would seem exceedingly unwise not to continue these powers. 

Uncontrolled Accommodations in Controlled Areas 

The principal exemption from control in areas generally subject 
to control is new construction completed on or after February 1, 
1947. This exemption was first introduced in the Federal Housing 
and Rent Act of 1947 effective July 1, 1947. It has been repeated in 
all renewals of the Federal act. It was also the declared policy of the 
State Legislature in the "stand-by" rent control law of 1947 and its 
successive re-enactments. This policy is reaffirmed in the State's 
Emergency Housing Rent Control Law of 1950. 

The obvious intent of this exemption was to stimulate new con- 
struction. It is hardly possible to determine the number of dwelling 
units built for rental during this period. A very large proportion of 
the one family houses built in this period have been offered only for 
sale. It would appear that not less than 134,000 units in multiple 
dwellings have been constructed. The largest concentration of these 
has been in the City of New York. And of these the largest con- 
centration has been in the midtown area of Manhattan, particularly 
in the area between 34th Street and 96th Street east of Fifth Avenue. 
Virtually all of this construction constitutes luxury accommodations. 
Very little of this has been offered at less than $100 per room per 
month and most of it has commanded $200 per room per month. 
A second large concentration of new apartment construction is found 
in the Borough of Queens. Most of this has been rented at $45 to 
$50 per room per month. 

Construction Costs Doubled 

In general, it appears that new apartments have rented for ap- 
proximately double the rate per room per month of controlled ac- 
commodations in the same general neighborhood. On the other hand, 
it is fair to point out that these new buildings have, by and large, 
cost at least twice as much as comparable structures in the years 
immediately prior to World War II. 

25 



There has been some indication that the demand for new construc- 
tion at these high rentals has been approaching saturation, at least 
in the two areas just mentioned, and that a degree of price resistance 
is now being encountered. It has certainly not developed to the point 
where any substantial number remain vacant. A recent check of 522 
elevator apartment houses on the East Side of mid-Manhattan with 
31,236 dwelling units disclosed 72 units vacant.* 

* See Part 5, New York City Survey, pages 168-170. 

It may not be possible to demonstrate that the exemption of new 
construction has actually stimulated construction in the period since 
July 1, 1947, but the Commission feels reasonably certain that with- 
out it very much less would have been achieved. To attempt now 
to impose controls on this hitherto uncontrolled construction would 
in the judgment of the Commission contribute nothing to the solu- 
ution of the housing and rental problems at this time. 

The Rent Regulations submitted herewith attempt to establish 
maximum rents at levels which are generally "fair and equitable" 
with due regard to the necessity that the adjustments be granted and 
put into effect "without general uncertainty, dislocation and hardship 
inconsistent with the purposes of this Act". (See Part III, Adjust- 
ments.) The Regulations also provide in Part V for the continued 
control of evictions, obviously essential in view of the present hous- 
ing emergency. Control of rents and evictions are the twin pillars 
upon which rent control must rest. A brief analysis of the Adjust- 
ment and Eviction Sections may be of value in indicating how the 
Regulations attempt to accomplish substantial justice to both land- 
lords and tenants within the framework of the Act. 



V. Adjustment Provisions of the 
Proposed Rent Control Plan 

Seven Grounds 

The grounds for increasing rents, Section 33, are limited to seven 
and, briefly, are as follows: 

1. (Section 33, paragraph 1): The first is based upon an increase 
in the rental value of the housing accommodations by reason of an 
improvement or added service or facility furnished to the housing 
accommodation since March 1, 1950, for which the landlord has not 
received any previous increase in the maximum rent. The equitable 
necessity for such a section is obvious. Generally the consent of the 
tenant is required except, of course, when the change occurred while 
the property was vacant. However, provision is made that the Ad- 
ministrator may waive the requirement of consent by the tenant 
where the proposed improvement or additional service is reasonably 
required for the operation of a structure, or is necessary for the 
preservation or maintenance of the housing accommodations, or 
where 75 percent of the tenants in large structures consent to such 

26 



improvements. These provisions will make it possible for landlords 
to proceed with the improvement of properties. 



Voluntary Lease Agreements 

2. (Section 33, paragraph 2): The second adjustment ground is 
one which permits landlords and tenants to enter into voluntary lease 

agreements whereby the maximum rent may be increased up to a 
limit of 15 percent provided the tenant is given the protection of a 
two-year lease. The tenant is thereby secured against having to pay 
more than the amount agreed upon in the lease no matter what the 
landlord's financial position may be in the operation of a property. 
The Commission is of the opinion that this permission to enter into 
voluntary lease agreements will result in a substantial number of 
landlords and tenants adjusting their problems without application 
to the Commission. Tenants will be in a position to request increases 
in services or equipment as a condition to their signing this agree- 
ment. Landlords may be able to improve their operating position 
without having to file applications for rent adjustments under the 
financial provisions of the Regulations on the ground that their maxi- 
mum rents are not "fair and equitable". As a condition for the in- 
crease in maximum rent, the landlord must also certify that he is 
maintaining and will maintain all present services. Maximum rents 
will be increased automatically by the execution of these voluntary 
lease agreements, and there will therefore be no delay in the process- 
ing thereof. A landlord will be required to file reports with the 
Local Rent Offices which will give the Commission necessary infor- 
mation for its records. 

3. (Section 33, paragraph 3): The third adjustment ground per- 
mits an increase in maximum rent where there has been since March 
1, 1950, an increase in the number of subtenants, or an increase in 
the number of occupants which has resulted in the housing accom- 
modation being over-occupied. This adjustment provision is de- 
signed to permit a landlord an adjustment of maximum rent because 
his tenant is either deriving rental income from a subtenant, or is 
using the housing accommodations in such a manner as to cause the 
landlord greater expense. 

4. (Section 33, paragraph 4): The fourth ground permits an ad- 
justment where, because of unique or peculiar circumstances, the 
maximum rent is substantially lower than the maximum rents for 
comparable housing accommodations. This adjustment section does 
not permit an increase based merely on the claim of the landlord 
that the housing accommodations are rented for less than his neigh- 
bors are receiving. It is designed to give relief only in those unique 
or peculiar cases where abnormal factors caused rents substantially 
different from those generally prevailing for similar accommoda- 
tions. A typical case would be that of a rent frozen at an abnor- 
mally low amount because of previous occupancy by a son who was 
not charged the normal rental. 

27 



Adjustment to Provide Net Return 

5. (Section 33, paragraph 5): The fifth and most important ground 
is designed to permit a landlord relief when he can establish that 
his net annual return is clearly inadequate. This is consistent with 
the general legislative rent control program as embodied in the other 
rent control statutes, namely the Commercial and Business Space 
Laws. A landlord whose property is earning a net annual return of 
less than 4 percent on the equalized assessed valuation of the entire 
property may obtain relief upon proper proof. 

In computing net return, the Commission believes that there should 
be an allowance of 2 percent of the value of the buildings as an oper- 
ating expense where that value has not been fully depreciated, but 
that mortgage interest and amortization should not be included as 
an operating expense. 

However, no increase in maximum rent under this section may ex- 
ceed 15 percent of the maximum rent paid by the tenant on the date 
of issuance of the order of adjustment. The net return allowed to 
landlords under the section is of course less than the 8 percent which, 
is presumed to be a reasonable return under the Commercial and 
Business Space Laws. The Commission is of the opinion that his- 
torically there has been a lower return on housing properties as com- 
pared to commercial properties. In any event, the Commission firmly 
believes that the present housing emergency makes it essential to limit 
net return to 4 percent, with the additional limitation that no tenant 
shall have to pay more than a 15 percent increase in the course of any 
one year. (There may be a rare case in which a tenant may have to 
pay more than 15 percent if it is essential in order to bring his land- 
lord to the "break-even" point in the operation of the property.) 

6. (Section 33, paragraph 6): The sixth adjustment ground is 
designed to give relief to owners of small properties who for lack of 
proper records may not be in a position to establish their rights under 
the net return section. The survey conducted by the Commission 
has shown conclusively what has been common knowledge, namely 
that there have been substantial increases in property taxes, fuel, 
utilities, insurance and repairs and maintenance. Those small land- 
lords who have not received increases in maximum rent to offset 
these increases are entitled to receive relief with a minimum of dif- 
ficulty. Here also, to avoid undue hardship to the tenant, the in- 
dividual adjustment may not exceed in one year 15 percent of the 
amount paid by the tenant. 

7. (Section 33, paragraph 7): The seventh adustment ground is 
patterned after the sixth section and applies only to the operators of 
rooming houses, controlled rooms in hotels in New York City and 
Buffalo, and owners of cooperative apartments. This method of 
granting adjustments is used in addition to the net return procedure 
because of the difficulty in establishing valuation in many of these 
cases. 

However the Regulations contain a general provision that the total 
adjustments under 5, 6 and 7 may not exceed 15 percent in any 
twelve-month period. Provision is also made that no general adjust- 

28 



ment in rent shall be given to a landlord unless he certifies that he is 
in fact maintaining all the services and facilities to which the tenant 
is entitled. 

The Regulations also contain provisions (Section 23 ; Section 34, 
paragraph 2 ; and Section 35) designed to compel a landlord to main- 
tain the essential services to which a tenant is entitled and which 
are given for the maximum rent which he is paying. Provision 
is made for a continuance of such services unless and until the Ad- 
ministrator permits their withdrawal, in which event a commensurate 
decrease in the maximum rent will be ordered. 

These sections follow the general mandate of the Act with re- 
spect to maintenance of services and the authority of the Adminis- 
trator to decrease the maximum rents where such services are not 
maintained. 



VI. Eviction Provisions of the Rent 
Control Plan 

Two Classes Continued 

The eviction sections of the new Regulations (Part V) follow 
basically the pattern set forth by the Legislature in the 1950 Act. 
The grounds for eviction are separated into tw r o classes. The first 
class (Section 52) is where the landlord claims that the conduct of 
the tenant is such as to deprive him of the protection of the Regula- 
tions or where the occupancy of the tenant is illegal because of the 
requirements of local or State law. The landlord is permitted to 
bring a proceeding in the local court in this type of case without first 
securing a certificate from the Administrator, after serving appro- 
priate notices upon the tenant and upon the Administrator as pro- 
vided in Section 53. 

All other types of eviction are barred unless the landlord shall first 
secure a certificate from the Administrator permitting him to pursue 
his remedies to evict the tenant. (Sections 54, 55, 56, 57, 58 and 
59.) The distinction is necessary, since this latter type of case is 
caused solely by the emergency and the tight housing situation pres- 
ently existing. It is therefore imperative that before any such evic- 
tion or removal of the tenant occurs, a careful inquiry must be made 
to determine not only the good faith of the landlord but that the 
proposed eviction or removal would not be inconsistent with the pur- 
poses of the Act. 

The type of cases covered by the requirement of a prior certificate 
is self-occupancy by a landlord or the immediate members of his 
family. (Section 55, paragraph 1.) It is necessary that the landlord 
establish an immediate compelling necessity before a certificate can 
be granted. 

29 



Eviction for Alterations 

The 1950 Act permits the eviction of a tenant where " . . the land- 
lord seeks in good faith to recover possession of such housing ac- 
commodations for the immediate purpose of substantially altering, 
remodeling or demolishing them. . ." (Section 12, subdivision 1, 
paragraph h.) 

The Commission's present Regulations (Section 57) limit action 
under this to cases where the Administration finds : 

"1. That such alteration or remodeling is reasonably necessary to 
maintain the safety of such building or structure ; or 

"2. That such alteration or improvement is for the purpose of 
subdividing an apartment into a greater number of self-con- 
tained family units which meet the requirements of Sec- 
tion 11." 

This was further limited by the requirement that the existing 
tenants have the right to first occupancy at a controlled rental of 
any apartment resulting from the alteration. 

Under-occupancy a Problem 

The obvious intent of the 1950 Act was to permit subdivision 
where it would result in the creation of housing for more people. 
This purpose would not be served merely by cutting up moderate- 
sized units into smaller ones. There is a genuine shortage of accom- 
modations for larger families. On the other hand, under-occupancy 
is a real problem. Numerous instances have come to the Commis- 
sion's attention of one or two persons occupying as many as ten or 
more rooms. A survey of the occupancy characteristics of higher 
rental apartments in Manhattan by Harrison, Ballard & Allen re- 
ported 96 apartments of 10 or more rooms occupied by single indi- 
viduals. It may be questioned whether such tenants are entitled to 
the protection of the rent control program. 

It has been argued that the decontrol of such apartments would 
permit them to be cut up into smaller housing units and thus con- 
tribute to the relief of the housing shortage (Robert A. Wagner, 
Fifth East Agency Inc., New York City Hearing, pp. 59 to 66 and 
memorandum submitted). But decontrol would be no guarantee of 
such a result. Many of these tenants are people of large means 
who would readily enough pay higher rents to continue where they 
are now residing. The answer would seem to be to permit a tenant 
who occupies an apartment consisting of six or more rooms and 
whose occupancy is less than one person for each room, exclusive of 
bathroom and kitchen, to be evicted provided the owner proposes in 
good faith to alter the structure to provide a greater number of self- 
contained family units. Only tenants whose maximum monthly rent 
is less than $200 should have the right to first occupancy at a con- 
trolled rental. Otherwise all units resulting from such conversion 
should be decontrolled. 

30 



Subdivision of Apartments 

Provision has been made for the subdividing of apartments con- 
sisting of six or more rooms which are presently under-occupied. 
(Section 57, paragraph 2) It is obvious that nothing is gained by 
permitting the subdivision of an apartment now occupied by a large 
family. However, it is to the public interest to encourage the crea- 
tion of additional housing units by the breaking up of large apart- 
ments, which now house few occupants. In order to avoid undue 
hardship upon these occupants, they are given the right to remain 
in one of the new apartments at a prescribed rent, or to be relocated 
by the landlord in other suitable housing accommodations. However, 
where the maximum rent of the housing accommodations is $200 
per month or more, the landlord has no obligation to arrange for the 
tenants' housing requirements. It is believed that, in the present 
housing market, these tenants can relocate themselves and need no 
protection. 

Demolition of Buildings 

The Regulations further provide for the issuance of certificates 
where a landlord wishes to evict tenants in order to demolish the 
building. (Section 58) In those cases where the landlord desires 
to demolish in order to construct a new structure, which will have a 
greater number of housing accommodations, the landlord is under no 
obligation to relocate the tenant in possession. (Section 58, para- 
graph a) However, where the landlord proposes to demolish exist- 
ing housing accommodations in order to construct a commercial 
building, it is deemed advisable to impose the obligation upon the 
landlord to relocate the tenants in suitable housing accommodations. 
(Section 58, paragraph b) There is no obligation to relocate, how- 
ever, where the tenant is paying a monthly rental of $75 or more 
for one room, $150 for one to three rooms, or $200 or more for 
three or more rooms. 

Further protection is afforded to tenants in those cases where the 
landlord claims he wishes to withdraw the housing accommodations 
from the rental market. In the present critical housing shortage, 
the Commission is of the opinion that this right to remove housing 
accommodations from the rental market must be severely limited in 
the public interest. (Section 59) 

VII. Recommended Legislation 

Regarding Owner Occupancy 

Small Properties 

The Commission has given a great deal of effort to the study of 
the pr blems of the owners of small properties and has made a sin- 
cere effort to provide solutions. 

31 



One- and two-family houses are rarely bought as primarily income- 
yielding investments. There is a sound and desirable tradition of 
home ownership in this State. In many communities a majority of 
the homes are owner-occupied. This is a thing that public policy in 
this State and in the nation has always sought to encourage. In the 
period immediately following the war there was doubtless a certain 
amount of panic buying but this has largely subsided. 

The right of an owner to live in a house which he owns is some- 
thing which ought not lightly be denied him. The denial of this right 
is also an impediment to home buying. 

The Commission believes that immediate and compelling necessity 
should not be a prerequisite to the issuance of a certificate of evic- 
tion to the purchaser of a one- or two- family house, who in good 
faith seeks possession for his personal occupancy. The purchase of 
one- and two-family houses is primarily for home ownership, and it 
is, therefore, reasonable to require only that the landlord prove that 
he, in good faith, desires immediate possession for self-occupancy. He 
should not be required to establish an immediate compelling necessity. 
However, in view of the limitation imposed upon the Commission by 
paragraph (f) of subdivision 1 of Section 12 of the Act, the Com- 
mission recommends the amendment of that provision of the Act to 
give authority to the Commission to adopt such a regulation and 
return to the simpler and perfectly fair test of "good faith". 

Cooperative Buildings 

A comparable situation exists as to a very small number of per- 
sons who acquired apartments in cooperative buildings. Since March 
of 1949 they have been completely denied possession unless the build- 
ing was occupied to the extent of 80 percent by cooperative owners. 
It is safe to say that no one bought into such building except to 
secure occupancy. Panic buying of these has likewise subsided. Cer- 
tainly anyone who has owned such accommodations for two years is 
now entitled to the same rights as any other home owner. To permit 
this, Subdivision 9 of Section 1410 of the Civil Practice Act should 
be repealed since the whole subject of cooperatives is adequately dealt 
with in the proposed Regulations. (Regulations, Section 55, para- 
graph 3.) 

In proposing this change in the Regulations, the Commission does 
not intend to abandon its position that the right of the recent pur- 
chaser of stock allocated to a cooperative apartment to evict the 
tenant in possession must be limited to avoid improper pressures 
upon such tenants to purchase stock in dormant or new cooperatives. 

Tt should be pointed out that neither of these changes would lead 
to immediate eviction of present tenants. Such owners would still 
be required to obtain certificates from the Commission which gener- 
ally provide for a three-month waiting period, and be subject there- 
after to the stay which the courts are empowered to grant so that 
tenants in New York City could obtain a maximum of six months 
more, and tenants elsewhere could obtain a maximum of four 
months more, to acquire other accommodations. 

32 



PART 2 



PROPOSED 
RENT AND EVICTION REGULATIONS 

of the 
Temporary State Housing Rent Commission 



Promulgated by the Commission pursuant to 
Chapter 250, Laws of New York, 1950. 



Effective, subject to the provisions of Section 

4(2) (c) of Chapter 250, Laws of New York, 

1950, on March 15, 1951. 



33 



PART 


I 


PART 


II 


PART 


III 


PART 


IV 


PART V 


PART VI 


PART 


VII 


PART 


VIII 


PART IX 


PART 


X 


PART 


XI 


PART XII 



PART XIII 



RENT AND EVICTION REGULATIONS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Vagc 

SCOPE 35 

MAXIMUM RENTS 42 

ADJUSTMENTS 45 

REGISTRATION and RECORDS 55 

EVICTIONS 56 

PROHIBITIONS 65 

ENFORCEMENT 67 

PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LOCAL RENT 

ADMINISTRATOR 68 

PROTESTS 70 

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL 

MATTERS 74 

SARATOGA COUNTY 76 

TOWN OF COEYMANS IN ALBANY 

COUNTY 77 

CITY and TOWN OF GENEVA IN ON- 
TARIO COUNTY and SENECA COUNTY 78 



34 



RENT AND EVICTION REGULATIONS 
PART I. SCOPE 

Section 1. These Regulations are adopted and promulgated pur- 
suant to the powers granted to the Temporary State Housing Rent 
Commission by the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, Chap- 
ter 250 of the Laws of New York for the year 1950. As used in 
these Regulations the term "Act" or "State Act" shall mean the 
Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, as amended by Chapter 
250 of the Laws of 1950. These Regulations shall supersede all 
regulations previously promulgated and in effect prior to March 
15, 1951. 1 

Section 2. Statutory definitions. When used in these Regula- 
tions, unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context, 
the following terms shall mean and include: 

1. "Commission." The Temporary State Housing Rent Commis- 
sion created by the Act. 

2. "Housing accommodation." Any building or structure, per- 
manent or temporary, or any part thereof, occupied or intended to 
be occupied by one or more individuals as a residence, home, sleep- 
ing place, boarding house, lodging house or hotel, together with the 
land and buildings appurtenant thereto, and all services, privileges, 
furnishings, furniture and facilities supplied in connection with 
the occupation thereof. 

3. "Rent." Consideration, including any bonus, benefit or gra- 
tuity demanded or received for or in connection with the use or 
occupancy of housing accommodations or the transfer of a lease of 
such housing accommodations. 

4. "Maximum rent." The maximum lawful rent for the use of 
housing accommodations. Maximum rents may be formulated in 
terms of rents and other charges and allowances. 

5. "Person." An individual, corporation, partnership, associa- 
tion, or any other organized group of individuals or the legal 
successor or representative of any of the foregoing. 

6. "Landlord." An owner, lessor, sublessor, assignee, or other 
person receiving or entitled to receive rent for the use or occupancy 
of any housing accommodation or an agent of any of the foregoing. 

7. "Tenant." A tenant, sub-tenant, lessee, sub-lessee, or other 
person entitled to the possession or to the use or occupancy of any 
housing accommodation. 

8. "Documents," Records, books, accounts, correspondence, mem- 
oranda and other documents, and drafts and copies of any of the 
foregoing. 

1 The last sentence is added to the original section. 

35 



'9. "Municipality." A city, town or village. 
10. "Local governing body." 

a. In the case of a city, the council, common council or board of 
aldermen and the board of estimate, board of estimate and appor- 
tionment or board of estimate and contract, if there be one. 

b. In the case of a town, the town board. 

c. In the case of a village, the board of trustees. 

Section 3. Additional definitions. 

1. "Administrator." The State Rent Administrator or such other 
person or persons as the Administrator may designate to carry out 
the powers and duties delegated to him by the Act. 

2. "Local Rent Administrator." The person designated by the 
Administrator to administer rent control in the local rent areas set 
forth in Section 8, or such person or persons as may be designated 
to carry out any of the duties delegated to the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator by the Administrator. 

3. "Local Rent Office." The office of the State Rent Adminis- 
trator for a particular local rent area as set forth in Section 8. 

4. "Essential Services." Those services including, but not lim- 
ited to, repairs, decorating and maintenance, the furnishing of 
light, heat, hot and cold water, telephone, elevator service, kitchen, 
bath and laundry facilities and privileges, maid service, linen serv- 
ice, janitor service, and removal of refuse. 

5. 2 "Federal Act," The Emergency Price Control Act of 
1942, and as thereafter amended and as superseded by the Housing 
and Rent Act of 1947, and as the latter was thereafter amended 
prior to May 1, 1950, and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. 

6. 3 "Local Laws." The local laws specified in Chapter 1 of 
the Laws of New York, for the year 1950, namely: Local laws 
Nos. 21, 23, 24, 25 and 73 of the Local Laws of The City of New 
York for the year 1949; and Local Law No. 3 of the City of Buffalo 
for the year 1947. 

7. "Apartment," A room or rooms providing facilities com- 
monly regarded in the community as necessary for a self-contained 
family unit but not including housing accommodations located in a 
rooming house or hotel. 

8. "Rooming House." In addition to its customary usage, a 
building or portion of a building in which housing accommodations 
are rented on a short term basis of daily, weekly or monthly occu- 
pancy to more than two paying tenants, not members of the land- 
lord's immediate family. The term shall include boarding houses, 
dormitories, trailers not a part of a motor court, residence clubs, 
tourist homes and all other establishments of a similar nature, 
except a hotel or a motor court. 



2 The following is added to the original definition: "and regulations adopted 
pursuant thereto." 

8 The term originally read "Local Laws of the City of New York." 

36 



9. 4 "Hotel." Any establishment which on March 1, 1950 was 
commonly known as a hotel 5 and in which at least an appreciable 
number of its occupants were provided with customary hotel ser- 
vices such as maid service, furnishing and laundering of linen, 
telephone and secretarial or desk service, use and upkeep of fur- 
niture and fixtures, and bellboy service, or which services were 
available with or without extra cost. 

10. 6 "Hotel Tenant." A tenant, sub-tenant, lessee, sub-lessee or 
other person entitled to the possession or to the use or occupancy 
of any housing accommodation within a hotel in the cities of New 
York and Buffalo who has resided in such hotel continuously for 
ninety days or more prior to March 1, 1950. 

Section 4. 7 Effective date. These Regulations shall become 
effective March 15, 1951. 

Section 5. Amendment or revocation. Any provision of these 
Regulations may be amended or revoked by the State Rent Admin- 
istrator at any time. 

Section 6. Filing of Amendments. Such amendment or revoca- 
tion shall be filed with the Secretary of State and shall take effect 
upon the date of filing unless otherwise specified therein. 

Section 7. Separability. If any provision of these Regulations 
or the application of such provisions to any persons or circum- 
stances shall be held invalid, the validity of the remainder of these 
Regulations and the applicability of such provisions to other per- 
sons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. 

Section 8. Local rent areas subject to rent control. Except as 
hereinafter provided in Sections 9 and 10 of these Regulations 
(which describe housing accommodations not subject to rent control 
and housing accommodations exempted by these Regulations), these 
Regulations shall apply to all housing accommodations located in 
the counties, cities, towns, and villages listed below, and as the 
same mav be hereafter amended. 



4 Originally designated Section 3(10). Former Section 3(9) is revoked. 
It originally read: "9. 'Term of Occupancy'. Occupancy on a daily, weekly, 
or monthly basis." 

5 Present Section 3(9) deletes the language added by Amendment No. 6, filed 
with the Secretary of State on July 24, 1950, and made effective May 1, 1950. 
This language read: "in the cities of New York and Buffalo", and appeared 
immediately after the phrase, "commonly known as a hotel", in the second line. 

6 Originally designated Section 3(11) which reads as follows: "11. 'Hotel 
Tenant.' A tenant, sub-tenant, lessee, sub-lessee or other person entitled to 
the possession or to the use or occupancy of any housing accommodation within 
a hotel in the City of New York who has occupied such housing accommoda- 
tion continuously for ninety days prior to March 1, 1950." It was changed 
to read as provided above effective May 1, 1950 by Amendment No. 6, filed 
with the Secretary of State on July 24, 1950. Former Section 3(10) is now 
designated Section 3(9). See footnote 4, supra. 

7 This section is amended by substituting "March 15, 1951" for "May 1, 
1950". 

37 



Local Rent Areas 



Local Eent 
Office 

Albany 



Binghamton 



Buffalo 



Poughkeepsie 
Rochester 

Syracuse 



Utica 



Watertown 
Brooklyn 
Staten Island 



Counties or Portions thereof under the Eent Regulations 

In Albany County, the Cities of Albany, Cohoes and 
Watervliet and the following Towns: Bethlehem, 
Colonie, Green Island, Guilderland, New Scotland, and 
Coeymans 8 

In Rensselaer County, the City of Troy, the City of Rens- 
selaer and the following Towns : Brunswick, East 
Greenbush, Hoosick, and North Greenbush 

In Fulton County, the Cities of Gloversville and Johns- 
town and the following Towns: Ephratah, Johns- 
town, Mayfield, Northampton, and Broadalbin 

Columbia County 

In Clinton County, the City and Town of Plattsburgh 

Schenectady County 

In Montgomery County, the City and Town of Am- 
sterdam 

Saratoga County* 

Broome County except the following Towns: Lisle, 

Triangle, Nanticoke and Barker 
Tioga County except the following Towns: Spencer, 

Candor, Newark, Berkshire and Richford 
In Chenango County, the Town of Bainbridge 
In Otsego County, the City and Town of Oneonta and 

the Town of Unandilla 
In Delaware County, the Town of Sidney 
Chemung County except the Towns of Baldwin, Catlin, 

Veteran, Erin, Van Etten and Chemung 
In Steuben County, the City of Corning and the Towns 

of Corning and Erwin 

Erie County and Niagara County 

In Cattaraugus County, the City of Olean and the Town 

of Olean and the Villages of Allegany and Frank- 

linville 
In Chautauqua County, the Cities of Jamestown and 

Dunkirk and the Towns of Busti, Carroll, Dunkirk, 

Ellicott, Kiantone, Poland and Pomfret 

Dutchess County, Orange County, Ulster County, and 
Rockland County 

In Monroe County, the City of Rochester and the Towns 
of Brighton, Gates, Grece, Irondequoit, Penfield, 
Perinton, Pittsford and Webster 

Onondaga County 

Seneca County 10 

TompMns County 

In Cayuga County, the City of Auburn and the Town 

of Owasco 
In Oswego County, the Cities of Fulton and Oswego 
In Ontario County, the City and Town of Geneva 11 

Oneida County 

In Herkimer County, the Town of Danube, Frankfort, 
German Flatts, Herkimer, Little Falls, Manheim, New- 
port, Schuyler and Winneld, the City of Little Falls 
and Village of Middleville 

Jefferson County and St. Lawrence County 

Kings County 

Eichmond County 



38 



Bronx Bronx County 

Lower Manhattan New York County 
(South Side of 110th 

St. and below)" 
Upper Manhattan New York County 
(North Side of 110th 

St. and above) 18 
Queens Queens County 

Mineola Nassau County and Suffolk County 

White Plains Westchester County 

Section 9. Housing accommodations not subject to rent con- 
trol. These Regulations shall not apply to the following: 

1. 14 Housing accommodations owned by the United States, the 
State of New York, or any political subdivision thereof; or by any 
municipality or public housing authority; or housing accommoda- 
tions in buildings constructed pursuant to the Public Housing Law 
and in which rentals are fixed by the Commissioner of Housing pur- 
suant to such law. 

2. A hospital, convent, monastery, asylum, public institution, or 
college or school dormitory or any institution operated exclusively 
for charitable or educational purposes on a non-profit basis. 

3. 15 Housing accommodations which were completed on or after 
February 1, 1947, provided, however, that maximum rents estab- 
lished under the Veterans' Emergency Housing Act for priority 
constructed housing accommodations completed on or after Feb- 
ruary 1, 1947, shall continue in full force and effect, if such accom- 
modations are being rented to veterans of World War II or their 
immediate families who, on June 30, 1947, either occupied such 
housing accommodations, or had a right to occupy such housing 



8 The Town of Coeymans was recontrolled effective August 1, 1950 by 
Amendment No. 7 filed with the Secretary of State on July 31, 1950. For the 
text of this amendment, see Part XII of these Eegulations. 

Saratoga County was recontrolled effective July 1, 1950 by Amendments 
No. 4 and No. 5 filed with the Secretary of State on June 30 and July 7, 1950, 
respectively. For the text of these amendments, see Part XI of these 
Regulations. 

"Seneca County and the City and Town of Geneva in Ontario County 
were recontrolled effective December 1, 1950 by Amendment No. 11 filed with 
the Secretary of State on November 24, 1950. For the text of this amendment, 
see Part XII of these Eegulations. 

"See footnote 10, supra. 

"This description originally read: "(Below 110th St)". 

"This description originally read: "(Above 110th St.)". 

"This paragraph is amended to conform with the Act, by adding: "or 
housing accommodations in buildings constructed pursuant to the Public Hous- 
ing Law and in which rentals are fixed by the Commissioner of Housing pur- 
suant to such law." 

"The original paragraph read as follows: "3. Housing accommodations 
which were completed on or after February 1, 1947, provided, however, that 
maximum rents established under the Veterans' Emergency Housing Act for 
priority constructed housing accommodations completed on or after February 
1, 1947, shall continue in full force and effect, if such accommodations are 
still being rented to veterans of World War II or their immediate families, 
Avho were in possession on June 30, 1947." 

39 



accommodations at any time on or after July 1, 1947, under any 
agreement whether written or oral. 

4. Housing accommodations created by a change from a non- 
housing to a housing use on or after February 1, 1947, except that 
within the City of New York, the date shall be May 1, 1950. 

5. 16 Additional housing accommodations created by conversion, 
consisting of a structural change in housing accommodations involv- 
ing substantial alterations and remodeling, on or after February 1, 
1947, and prior to May 1, 1950, outside the City of New York, ex- 
cepting however that portion of the original housing accommoda- 
tions occupied by a tenant in possession at the time of the conver- 
sion, or by a successor tenant in possession on March 15, 1951, but 
only so long as such tenant continues in occupancy. 

6. 17 Rooms or other housing accommodations in hotels except 
that a room or housing accommodation occupied by a hotel tenant 
as herein defined in the cities of New York and Buffalo, is subject 
to these Regulations so long as such tenant occupies the same. 

7. Any motor court, or any part thereof, any trailer, trailer 
space, or any part thereof, or any tourist home, or any part thereof, 
serving transient guests exclusively. 18 

The term "motor court" shall mean an establishment renting 
rooms, cottages or cabins, supplying parking or storage facilities 
for motor vehicles in connection with such renting and other services 
and facilities customarily supplied by such establishments, and 
commonly known as a motor, auto or tourist court in the community. 

The term "tourist home" shall mean a rooming house which caters 
primarily to transient guests and is known as a tourist home in the 
community. 

8. Non-honsekeeping, furnished housing accommodations, located 
within a single dwelling unit not used as a rooming or boarding 
house, but only if : 

a. No more than two paying tenants, not members of the land- 
lord's immediate family, live in such dwelling unit, and 

b. The remaining portion of such dwelling unit is occupied by 
the landlord or his immediate family. 

9. Housing accommodations in buildings operated exclusively for 
charitable purposes on a non-profit basis. 

Section 10. Housing accommodations subject to rent control, 
but exempted from control by these Regulations. 

These Regulations shall not apply to the following housing ac- 

16 The original paragraph read as follows: "Additional housing accommoda- 
tions created by conversion on or after February 1, 1947, and prior to May 
1, 1950, outside the City of New York." 

17 This paragraph originally read: "6. Booms or other housing accommoda- 
tions in hotels outside the City of New York." It was amended effective May 
1, 1950 by Amendment No. 6, filed with the Secretary of State on July 24, 
1950, to read: "6. Rooms or other housing accommodations in hotels outside 
the cities of New York and Buffalo." It is further amended to read as pro- 
vided above. 

18 This paragraph originally read as follows: "7. Any motor court, or any 
part therof; any trailer, or trailer space used exclusively for transient occu- 
pancy or any part thereof; or any tourist home serving transient guests ex- 
clusively, or any part thereof." 

40 



commodations only so long as they meet the specific requirements 
hereinafter set forth : 

1. Farming tenants. Housing accommodations situated on a farm 
and occupied by a tenant who is engaged for a substantial portion 
of his time in farming operations thereon. 

2. Service employees. Dwelling space occupied by domestic ser- 
vants, superintendents, caretakers, managers, or other employees 
to whom the space is provided as part or all of their compensation 
without payment of rent and who are employed for the purpose of 
rendering services in connection with the premises of which the 
dwelling space is a part. 

3. Summer resort housing. Housing accommodations located in 
a resort community and customarily rented or occupied on a sea- 
sonal basis prior to October 1, 1945, which were not rented during 
any portion of the period beginning on November 1, 1943 and end- 
ing on February 29, 1944. This exemption shall be effective only 
from June 1 to September 30, inclusive. 

4. 19 Structures subject to underlying leases. Leases for entire 
structures or premises as distinguished from the individual housing 
accommodations therein contained, wherein more than 25 rooms are 
rented or offered for rent by any lessee, sublessee or other tenant of 
such entire structure or premises ; or structures in which all of the 
housing accommodations are exempt or not subject to control under 
these Regulations. 

5. Non-profit clubs. Rooms in a bona fide club certified by the 
Administrator as exempt. The Administrator may so certify if on 
written request of the landlord the club establishes that it is a non- 
profit organization and is recognized as such by written statement 
of the Bureau of Internal Revenue; that it rents rooms only to 
members, bona fide guests of members, and members of bona fide 
clubs with which the club has reciprocal arrangements for the ex- 
change of privileges; and that it is otherwise operated as a bona 
fide club. 

6. College fraternity or sorority houses. Rooms in a bona fide 
college fraternity or sorority house certified by the Administrator 
as exempt. The Administrator may so certify if, the landlord 
establishes that the fraternity or sorority is a bona fide organiza- 
tion operated for the benefit of students and not for profit as a 
commercial or business enterprise. This exemption shall not apply 
when the rooms are rented to persons who are not members of the 
fraternity or sorority. 

Section 11. Conversions after May 1, 1950. 

1. 20 Any housing accommodations resulting from conversion of 
housing accommodations created on or after May 1, 1950 shall 



19 The original paragraph read as follows: "10(4). Structures subject to 
underlying leases. Entire structures or premises wherein more than 25 rooms 
are rented or offered for rent by any lessee, sublessee or other tenant of such 
entire structure or premises; or structures in which all of the housing accom- 
modations are exempt or not subject to control under these Kegulations." 

20 This paragraph is amended by inserting the words "housing accommoda- 
tions consisting of" after the words "and such change has resulted in addi- 
tional", and by adding the proviso. 

41 



continue to be subject to rent control unless the Administrator 
issues an order decontrolling them which he shall do if there has 
been a structural change in a residential unit or units involving- 
substantial alterations or remodeling; and such change has resulted 
in additional housing accommodations consisting of self-contained 
family units, provided, however, that such order of decontrol shall 
not apply to that portion of the original housing accommodations 
occupied by a tenant in possession at the time of the conversion, 
only so long as such tenant continues in occupancy. 

The term "self-contained family unit" shall mean a housing ac- 
commodation with private access, containing one or more rooms in 
addition to a kitchen (including kitchenette or pullman kitchen) 
and a private bathroom. 

2. No order of decontrol shall be issued by the Administrator 
where there is a conversion of occupied housing accommodations 
unless and until the landlord obtains a certificate of eviction in 
accordance with 21 the provisions of Section 57 (2). 

Section 12. 22 Withdrawal from rental market. Nothing in 
these Regulations shall be construed to require any person to offer 
any housing accommodations for rent, but housing accommoda- 
tions already on the rental market may be withdrawn only after 
an order is issued by the Administrator under Section 59. if such 
withdrawal requires that a tenant be evicted from such accommo- 
dations. 

Section 13. Effect of these Regulations on leases and other 
rental agreements. The provisions of any lease or other rental 
agreement shall remain in force pursuant to the terms thereof, 
except insofar as those provisions are inconsistent with the Act or 
these Regulations. 

Section 14. Receipt for rent paid. No payment of rent need 
be made unless the landlord tenders a receipt for the amount to 
be paid when so requested by a tenant. 

Section 15. Waiver of benefit void. An agreement by the 
tenant to waive the benefit of any provision of the Act or these 
Regulations is void. 

Section 16. [Revoked.] 23 

PART II. MAXIMUM RENTS 

Section 21. Maximum rents for housing accommodations, ex- 
cept in hotels. 

I. 24 Except as otherwise provided in this section, the maximum 
rent for housing accommodations outside the City of New York 

21 The words "in accordance with" are substituted for "pursuant to" in the 
original paragi aph. 

22 The language of this section is changed by substituting the words "an 
order is Issued by" for "prior written approval of" in the original paragraph. 
.•.nil by adding after the word "Administrator", the words "under Section 59." 

23 Section 16 is revoked. The section rend as follows: "16. Filing of docu- 

AJ] registration statements, reports and notices provided for by these 
Regulations shall be filed in accordance with Parts VIII, IX and X of these 
Regulal ions." 

42 



shall be the maximum rent which was established on March 1, 1950 
pursuant to the Federal Act, and shall not include adjustments 
granted by orders issued under the Federal Act after that date, 
regardless of whether they were made effective as of, or retroactive 
to, that date or a date prior thereto. 

2. 24 Except as otherwise provided in this section, the maximum 
rent for housing accommodations within the City of New York 
shall be the maximum rent which was established on March 1, 1950 
pursuant to the Federal Act, and shall not include either, (a) 
adjustments granted by orders issued under the Federal Act after 
that date, regardless of whether they were made effective as of, or 
retroactive to, that date or a date prior thereto, or (b) adjustments 
granted by orders increasing the maximum rent, issued after 
March 1, 1949 under the Federal Act, regardless of whether the 
order of increase was made effective as of, or retroactive to, March 
1, 1949 or a date prior thereto, but shall include adjustments for 
new or additional services or facilities provided by the landlord 
while the housing accommodations were not rented, or where ten- 
ant-occupied, to which the tenant then in possession had agreed, 
either expressedly or impliedly. 

3. For housing accommodations which on March 1, 1950 had 
no maximum rent established pursuant to the Federal Act, but 
which were subject to a maximum rent established pursuant to the 
local laws of the City of New York, the maximum rent shall be the 
rent established on March 1, 1950 pursuant to such local laws. 

4. 25 For housing accommodations first rented after March 1, 1950, 
or where there has been a change thereafter in rooming houses in 
the number of occupants or terms of occupancy, the maximum 
rent shall be the first rent for such accommodations, provided the 
landlord shall register the accommodations by May 15, 1950, or 
within 15 days from the time of first renting, whichever is later, 
as provided in Section 43. The Administrator may order a decrease 
in the maximum rent, as provided in Section 34(1) where said 



24 Paragraphs 1 and 2, as provided above, incorporate the substance of the 
original paragraph 1 and, as amended, are intended to clarify the 
method of establishing maximum rents under the Act and these Eegulations. 

The original paragraph 1 read as follows: "1. Except as otherwise pro- 
vided in this section, the maximum rent for housing accommodations subject 
to these Eegulations shall be the maximum rent which was prescribed on March 
1, 1950 pursuant to the Federal Act, provided, however: (a) that where a 
lower maximum rent was prescribed pursuant to the local laws of the City 
of New York, the maximum rent as prescribed under such local laws shall 
be the maximum rent instead of the maximum rent prescribed under the 
Federal Act; and provided: (b) that where the maximum rent prescribed in 
(a) of this paragraph does not reflect any adjustment which was actually 
granted subsequent to March 1, 1949, pursuant to the provisions of the Fed- 
eral Act, because of the provision by the landlord of new or additional services 
or facilities to which the tenant then in possession had agreed, either ex- 
pressedly or impliedly, the maximum rent for such housing accommodations is 
increased by the amount of the adjustment previously granted for such ser- 
vices or facilities. Where the accommodations were not rented at the time the 
services or facilities were added, the maximum rent shall include the amount 
of the adjustment granted by the Office of the Housing Expediter." 

25 Formerly designated paragraph 2. 

43 



maximum rent is substantially higher than the maximum rents for 
comparable housing accommodations, giving due consideration to 
any factors bearing on the equities involved. 

If the landlord fails to file a proper registration statement 
within the time specified, the Administrator may establish the 
maximum rent as provided in Section 36 of these Regulations. 

5 26 p or housing accommodations in rooming houses, where the 
number of occupants or the term of occupancy for housing accom- 
modations rented prior to March 1, 1950 was thereafter changed 
and no registration statement has been filed for such number of 
occupants or term of occupancy under the Federal Act, the maxi- 
mum rent shall be the rent charged for such changed term of 
occupancy or for the changed number of occupants but not more 
than the maximum rent for similar housing accommodations for 
the same term or number of occupants in the same establishment 
provided the landlord shall file a proper and timely registration 
statement by May 15, 1950, or within 15 days from the date of such 
renting, whichever is later, as required by Section 43. The Admin- 
istrator may order a decrease in the maximum rent so established 
in accordance with the provisions of Section 34(1). If the land- 
lord fails to file such proper and timely registration statement, the 
Administrator may establish the maximum rent as provided in 
Section 36. 

6. 27 Any tenant in a rooming house on a daily term of occupancy 
who has resided in such rooming house on such daily basis continu- 
ously for a period of more than 7 days shall, upon written request 
to the landlord, be permitted by the landlord to change to a weekly 
term of occupancy. Such written request shall be sent to the land- 
lord by registered mail, return receipt requested. 

7. 28 For housing accommodations in Columbia County, the maxi- 
mum rent on May 1, 1950 shall be the rent prescribed on March 17, 
1950 pursuant to the Federal Act. 

Section 22. 29 Maximum rents for housing accommodations in 
hotels. 

1. In the City of New York, the maximum rent payable by 
any hotel tenant is the rent established on March 1, 1950 by Local 
Law No. 21 of the City of New York for the year 1949. This shall 
include any adjustment granted by the New York Temporary 
City Housing Rent Commission pursuant to the provisions of the 
said local law; except that where there was no maximum rent 
established by such local law on March 1, 1950, the maximum rent 

26 Formerly designated paragraph 4. 

37 Formerly designated paragraph 5, and originally read as follows : "5. Any 
tenant in a rooming house, on a daily or weekly term of occupancy shall, on 
written request, be permitted by the landlord to change to a weekly or monthly 
term where the landlord is not then renting for such term as many housing 
accommodations as were rented for such terms of occupancy during June 
1943." This paragraph was amended to read as provided above, effective 
November 20, 1950, by Amendment No. 10, filed with the Secretary of State 
on that date. 

28 Formerly designated paragraph 6, this paragraph was added by Amend- 
ment No. 2, effective May 3, 1950, and filed with the Secretary of State on 
May 12, 1950. 

44 



payable by any hotel tenant is the rent established under the 
Federal Act on that date. 

2. In the City of Buffalo, the maximum rent payable by any 
hotel tenant is the rent established on March 1, 1950 by Local Law 
No. 3 of the City of Buffalo for the year 1947. This shall include 
any adjustment granted by the Temporary City Housing Rent 
Commission of the City of Buffalo pursuant to the provisions of 
the said local law; except that where there was no maximum rent 
established by such local law on March 1, 1950, the maximum rent 
payable by any hotel tenant shall be the amount of rent payable 
on that date. 

Section 23. 30 Services included in the maximum rent. Every 
landlord shall provide with housing accommodations, the same 
dwelling space and the same essential services, furniture, furnish- 
ings and equipment as were provided, or were required to be pro- 
vided, on March 1, 1950 or any subsequent date determining the 
maximum rent. 

PART III. ADJUSTMENTS 

Section 31. Maximum rents. Maximum rents may be increased 
or decreased only by order of the Administrator except as herein- 
after specified. 

Section 32. 31 No retroactive adjustments. No order of adjust- 
ment in a maximum rent previously established pursuant to these 
Regulations shall be effective prior to the date on which the order 
therefor is issued. 

Section 33. 32 Grounds for increase of maximum rent. This sec- 
tion sets forth specific standards for the increase of maximum 

29 This section originally consisted of one paragraph relating to the method 
of establishing maximum rents for housing accommodations in hotels in New 
York City. It was amended, effective May 1, 1950, to add provisions for estab- 
lishing maximum rents for housing accommodations in hotels in the City of 
Buffalo by Amendment No. 6, filed with the Secretary of State on July 24, 
1950. 

This section is further amended by substituting the word "established" for 
"prescribed" wherever it appears in this section. 

The original section read as follows: "Section 22. Maximum rents for 
housing accommodations in hotels in the City of New York. The maximum 
rent payable by any hotel tenant is the rent prescribed on March 1, 1950 by 
Local Law No. 21 of the City of New York for the year 1949. This shall 
include any adjustment granted by the New York Temporary City Housing 
Rent Commission pursuant to the provisions of the said local law; except 
that where there was no maximum rent prescribed by such local law on 
March 1, 1950, the maximum rent payable by any hotel tenant is the rent 
prescribed under the Federal Act on that date." 

80 This paragraph is amended by inserting before the phrase "date determin- 
ing the maximum rent" the words "March 1, 1950 or any subsequent". 

31 The words "no order of adjustment in a maximum rent previously estab- 
lished pursuant to these Regulations" are substituted for "increase or decrease 
in maximum rent" in the original section. 

32 This section is amended by adding four unnumbered paragraphs relating 
to all the adjustment provisions contained in the numbered paragraphs. The 
original unnumbered paragraph read as follows: "Section 33. Grounds for 
increase of maximum rent. Any landlord may file an application for adjust- 
ment to increase the maximum rent otherwise allowable only on the grounds 
that:" 

45 



rents. In applying these standards and entering orders adjusting 
maximum rents, the Administrator shall take into consideration all 
factors bearing on the equities involved, subject to the general 
limitation that the adjustment can be put into effect without dis- 
location and hardship inconsistent with the purposes of the Act. 
No adjustment shall be granted where a previous adjustment had 
been granted upon the same or similar grounds. 

The Administrator shall have the power, at any time where the 
necessity for an adjustment granted hereunder no longer exists, in 
whole or in part, to modify or revoke the same. 

No landlord shall be entitled to any increase in the maximum 
rent under this section unless he certifies that he is maintaining 
all essential services provided or required to be provided with the 
housing accommodations involved as of March 1, 1950 or any sub- 
sequent date determining the maximum rent and that he will con- 
tinue to maintain such services so long as the increase in such 
maximum rent continues in effect. 

The total of all adjustments for any individual housing accom- 
modation granted under paragraphs (5), (6), and (7) shall not 
exceed 15 percent for any twelve-month period, except as provided 
in paragraph 5 (d) of this section. 

Any landlord may file an application to increase the maximum 
rent otherwise allowable, on forms prescribed by the Adminis- 
trator, only on one or more of the following grounds : 

l. 33 Increased services or facilities since March 1, 1950. There has 
been, since March 1, 1950, a substantial change in the housing 
accommodations by a major capital improvement as distinguished 
from ordinary repair, replacement and maintenance, which has 
resulted in an increase in the rental value of the housing accommo- 
dations; or a substantial increase in dwelling space, essential serv- 
ices, furniture, furnishings or equipment provided in the housing 
accommodations. 

No adjustment under this paragraph shall be ordered on the 
basis of any such change unless it occurred with the consent of the 
tenant or while the housing accommodations were vacant; provided 
however, that the tenant's consent shall not be required if the 
Administrator finds that such change 

(a) is reasonably required for the operation of a structure of 
which the housing accommodations are a part, or 

(b) is necessary for the preservation or maintenance of the 
housing accommodations, or 



33 This paragraph, as amended, includes in its provisions the substance of 
original paragraph 1 and Section 39, which is revoked. See footnote 44, infra. 

This paragraph originally read as follows: "1. There has been since Marcli 
1, 1950 and prior to May 1, 1950, an increase in the dwelling space, or in the 
essential services, furniture, furnishings, or equipment provided in the housing 
accommodations, to which the tenant then in possession had agreed. Any such 
agreement by the tenant may have been either express or implied. Consent 
shall be unnecessary where the accommodations were not rented at the time such 
services or facilities were added. The amount of the adjustment shall be the 
rental value of the dwelling space, services, furnishings, or extra equipment 
as determined by the Administrator, or the amount which the tenant agreed 
to pay, whichever shall be less." 

46 



(c) is consented to in writing by the tenants in occupancy of at 
least 75 percent of the housing accommodations in structures con- 
taining more than four housing accommodations. 

The Administrator may grant an appropriate adjustment in an 
amount which will reflect the difference in the rental value of the 
housing accommodations by reason of such change, but in no event 
greater than the amount requested; provided, however, that where 
the Administrator has applied the exceptions contained in (a) or 
(b) of this paragraph no adjustment for any individual housing 
accommodation shall exceed 15 percent of the maximum rent pre- 
scribed on the date the order is issued under this paragraph. 

2. 34 Voluntary written agreements. The landlord and tenant 
have voluntarily entered into a valid written lease in good faith 
with respect to any housing accommodation, which lease provides 
for an increase in the maximum rent then in effect under these 
Regulations. 

The maximum rent shall be automatically increased by the exe- 
cution of said lease, provided such lease : 

(a) Takes effect on or after March 15, 1951 for a term of not 
less than two years from the effective date thereof; 

(b) Provides for a rent increase not in excess of 15 percent 
over the maximum rent which would otherwise apply under these 
Regulations ; 

(c) Contains a certification by the landlord that he is maintain- 
ing all essential services furnished, or required to be furnished, as 
of the date determining the maximum rent and will continue to 
maintain such services so long as the increase in the maximum rent 
continues in effect; 

(d) Gives the landlord no right of cancellation of said lease in- 
consistent with the provisions of the Rent and Eviction Regula- 
tions; and 

(e) Does not provide for the payment by the tenant of any rent 
in excess of the amount therein provided. 

Within fifteen days after the effective date of such lease the 
landlord shall file a report of such lease upon forms prescribed by 
the Administrator, which shall include a statement of any addi- 
tional services or equipment furnished to the tenant as a consid- 
eration for the execution of the lease. 

3. 35 Increased subtenants or occupants. There has been since 
March 1, 1950 an increase in the number of subtenants; or an 

34 This is a new provision. The original paragraph 2. read as follows : "On 
and after May 1, 1950, the landlord and the tenant in actual occupancy have 
entered into a voluntary written agreement upon forms prescribed by the 
Administrator to increase the dwelling space, or the services, facilities, furni- 
ture, furnishings or equipment provided with the housing accommodations. 
Such agreement must set forth specifically what the landlord will supply or is 
supplying to the tenant, and the agreed amount of the requested increase. 
The Administrator may grant an adjustment in the amount requested, provided 
such amount is not in excess of the rental value as determined by the Adminis- 
trator." 

35 This is a new adjustment provision. The original paragraph 3 of Section 
33 related to "certification of services", now provided in the third unnumbered 
paragraph of Section 33. 

47 



increase in the number of occupants which has resulted in a num- 
ber of occupants in excess of normal occupancy. Normal occupancy 
shall be considered to be one person per room, not including kit- 
chen and bathroom. Children born to occupants of housing accom- 
modations while they reside therein shall not be considered in 
computing excess occupancy. 

The Administrator may grant an appropriate adjustment in an 
amount which will reflect the difference in the rental value of the 
housing accommodations by reason of such change, but in no event 
greater than the amount requested. 

4. 36 Unique or peculiar circumstances. Because of unique or 
peculiar circumstances which materially affected the maximum 
rent thereof, the maximum rent is substantially lower than the 
rents generally prevailing in the same area for substantially simi- 
lar housing accommodations. 

The Administrator may grant an appropriate adjustment of 
the maximum rent in the amount requested provided that the 
adjustment shall not result in a maximum rent higher than the rents 
generally prevailing in the same area for substantially similar 
housing accommodations. 

5. 37 Net annual return. 

a. The maximum rents for housing accommodations in a prop- 
erty yield a net annual return of less than four percent of the valua- 
tion of the property, as hereinafter denned. Such valuation shall 
be the current assessed valuation establshed by a city or town, 
which was in effect and upon which taxes are payable on March 
15, 1951, properly adjusted by applying thereto the ratio Which 
such assessed valuation bears to the full valuation as determined 
by the State Board of Equalization and Assessment. 

The Administrator may make a determination that the valuation 
of the property for the purposes of this paragraph is an amount dif- 
ferent from such assessed valuation where the valuation of the land 
without the buildings thereon does not bear a reasonable relation- 
ship to the valuation of the buildings themselves; or where there 
is a request for a reduction in such assessed valuation currently 
pending; or where there has been a reduction in the assessed valua- 
tion for the year next preceding March 15, 1951 ; or where there 
has been a sale of the property within the year next preceding 
March 15, 1951 for an amount different from the assessed valua- 
tion. 

b. For the purposes of this paragraph the following terms shall 
mean and include: 

"Property." Any structure or group of structures including the 
land containing housing accommodations having common facilities 
and operated as a single enterprise. 

"Net Annual Return." The amount by which the earned income 
exceeds the operating expenses of the property. 



86 This is a new paragraph and incorporates the substance of Section 38 
which is revoked. See footnote 43, infra. 

87 This is a new paragraph. 

48 



"Earned Income." The present annual scheduled rental income 
from all controlled housing accommodations, decontrolled and un- 
controlled housing accommodations, if any, commercial and busi- 
ness space and other rented or rentable space not used for housing 
accommodations, if any, plus any other income earned from the 
operation of the property during the test year, provided that 
where a housing accommodation or commercial or business or other 
rentable space in a property is vacant or is occupied in whole or in 
part rent free, its full rental value shall be deemed the rent for the 
purposes of the application. 

"Operating Expenses." All operating expenses necessary in the 
operation and maintenance of the property and properly allocable 
to the test year, excluding mortgage interest and amortization, but 
including an allowance for depreciation of two percent of the 
valuation of the buildings exclusive of the land, as defined in para- 
graph 5(a), or the amount shown for depreciation of the buildings 
in the latest required Federal income tax return, whichever is lower ; 
provided, however, that no allowance for depreciation of the build- 
ings shall be included where the buildings have been fully depre- 
ciated for Federal income tax purposes or on the books of the 
owner. Increases or decreases in real estate taxes, water or sewage 
charges and wages currently in effect may be projected in comput- 
ing operating expenses. 

"Test Year." The most recent full calendar year or fiscal year, 
or any twelve consecutive months ending not more than ninety days 
prior to the filing of the application. 

c. If, as determined by the Administrator, a property is earning 
a net annual return of less than four percent of the valuation 
of the property, the Administrator shall grant an adjustment 
in the maximum rents in the manner and subject to the provisions 
of subdivision d. of this paragraph. 

d. That portion of the amount necessary to establish a net an- 
nual return of four percent of the valuation of the property 
attributable to the controlled housing accommodations shall be 
apportioned equitably among all the controlled housing accommo- 
dations in the property. In making such apportionment and in 
fixing the increases in maximum rents the Administrator shall 
give due consideration to all previous adjustments for increases in 
maximum rents by lease or otherwise, provided, however, that no 
adjustment for any individual housing accommodation shall exceed 
15 percent of the maximum rent prescribed on the date the 
order is issued under this paragraph; provided, however, that 
the Administrator may waive this limitation where a greater in- 
crease is necessary to make the earned income of the property 
equal to its operating expenses. 

e. No further application may be filed under this paragraph until 
one year from the date an increase is granted hereunder. The test 
year used in any such subsequent application shall begin after the 
end of the test year used in the last previous application. The 
Administrator may waive these limitations where the property has 

49 



been affected by a significant increase in operating costs which 
applied to a substantial segment of housing accommodations in 
the community. 

6. 38 Unavoidable increases in operating costs in small structures. 

a. The landlord owns no more than four rental units within the 
State and has incurred unavoidable increases in property taxes, 
fuel, utilities, insurance and repairs and maintenance which have 
occurred since the Federal date determining the maximum rent or 
the date the property was purchased by the present owner, which- 
ever is later. 

b. If, as determined b;f the Administrator, the landlord has not 
been fully compensated by increases in rental income sufficient 
to offset such increases in operating costs the Administrator shall 
grant an adjustment in the maximum rents in the manner and sub- 
ject to the provisions of subdivision c. of this paragraph. 

c. That portion of the increased operating costs attributable to 
the controlled housing accommodations shall be apportioned equi- 
tabl3 T among all the controlled housing accommodations in the prop- 
erty. In making such apportionment and in fixing the increases in 
maximum rents the Administrator shall give due consideration to 
all previous adjustments or increases in maximum rents by lease or 
otherwise, provided, however, that no adjustment for any indi- 
vidual housing accommodation shall exceed 15 percent of the maxi- 
mum rent prescribed on the date the order is issued under this 
paragraph. 

d. No further application may be filed under this paragraph 
until one year from the date an increase is granted hereunder. The 
test year used in any such subsequent application shall begin after 
the end of the test year used in the last previous application. The 
Administrator may waive these limitations where the property has 
been affected by a significant increase in operating costs which 
applied to a substantial segment of housing accommodations in the 
community. 

7. 39 Unavoidable increases in operating costs in other specified 
structures. 

a. The landlord operates a hotel or rooming house or owns a 
cooperative apartment and has incurred unavoidable increases in 
property taxes and other costs, including costs of operation of such 
hotel or rooming house, but excluding mortgage interest and amor- 
tization, and excluding allowances for depreciation, obsolescence 
and reserves, which have occurred since the Federal date deter- 
mining the maximum rent or the date the present landlord com- 
menced the operation of the property, whichever is later. 

b. If, as determined by the Administrator, the landlord has not 
been fully compensated by increases in rental income sufficient to 
offset such increases in operating costs, the Administrator shall 
grant an adjustment in the maximum rents in the manner and sub- 
ject to the provisions of subdivision c. of this paragraph. 



38 This is a new paragraph. 

39 This is a new paragraph. 



50 



c. That portion of the increased operating costs applicable to 
the controlled housing accommodations shall be apportioned equit- 
ably among all the controlled housing accommodations in the prop- 
erty. In making such apportionment and in fixing the increases 
in maximum rent the Administrator shall give due consideration 
to all previous adjustments or increases in maximum rents by 
lease or otherwise, provided, however, that no adjustment for any 
individual housing accommodation shall exceed 15 percent of the 
maximum rent prescribed on the date the order is issued under this 
paragraph. 

d. No further application may be filed under this paragraph 
until one year from the date an increase is granted hereunder. 
The test year used in any subsequent application shall begin after 
the end of the test year used in the last previous application. The 
Administrator may waive these limitations where the property has 
been affected by a significant increase in operating costs which 
applied to a substantial segment of housing accommodations in the 
community. 

Section 34. Grounds for decrease of maximum rent. The 
Administrator at any time, on his own initiative, or on application 
of the tenant, may order a decrease of the maximum rent otherwise 
allowable, only on the grounds that: 

1, Where a maximum rent has been established pursuant to 
paragraphs 4 or 5 of Section 21, and the landlord has filed a proper 
and timely registration statement, the Administrator may order a 
decrease in the maximum rent where such maximum rent is sub- 
stantially higher than the maximum rents for comparable housing 
accommodations, giving due consideration to any factors bearing 
on the equities involved. Where the landlord has failed to file a 
proper and timely registration statement, the Administrator may 
establish the maximum rent pursuant to Section 36. 

2. There has been a substantial deterioration of the housing 
accommodations because of the failure of the landlord to properly 
maintain the same, or there has been a decrease in the dwelling- 
space, essential services, furniture, furnishings or equipment re- 
quired under Section 23. 

3. 40 Under paragraph 2 of this section, the maximum rent 
of the housing accommodations shall be decreased by that amount 
which the Administrator finds to be the reduction in the rental 
value of the housing accommodations because of the substantial 



40 This was originally paragraph 4 and is redesignated paragraph 3. The 
portion of this paragraph originally reading "Under paragraphs 2 and 3", 
is changed to read "under paragraph 2." 

The original paragraph 3, revoked, read as follows: "3. On and after May 
1, 1950, the landlord and the tenant then in actual occupancy have entered 
into a voluntary written agreement to decrease the dwelling space, or the 
facilities, services, furniture, furnishings or equipment provided with the hous- 
ing accommodations. Where the landlord and the tenant have agreed as to the 
amount by which the maximum rent should be decreased, the Administrator 
may give consideration to that fact." 

51 



deterioration or decrease in dwelling space, essential services, fur- 
niture, furnishings, or equipment. The Administrator may, how- 
ever, take into consideration all factors bearing on the equities 
involved. 
Section 35. Decrease of services; application, order or report. 

1. Until the accommodations become vacant the landlord shall 
maintain the same dwelling space, essential services, furniture, 
furnishings, and equipment as required under Section 23 unless 
and until he has filed an application to decrease the dwelling space, 
essential services, furniture, furnishings, or equipment and an 
order permitting a decrease has been entered thereon by the Ad- 
ministrator. 

2. When the accommodations become vacant the landlord may 
prior to renting to a new tenant decrease the dwelling space, essen- 
tial services, furniture, furnishings, or equipment. Within ten days 
after so renting, the landlord shall file a written report with the 
Local Kent Administrator showing such decrease. 

3. The order on any application under paragraph 1 of this sec- 
tion may require an appropriate decrease in the maximum rent. 
Any maximum rent for which a report is required by paragraph 2 
of this section may be decreased in accordance with the provisions 
of Section 34. 

4. If the landlord shall have failed to file the application or a 
proper and timely report, as required by paragraphs 1 or 2 of this 
section, the Administrator may enter an order establishing the 
maximum rent pursuant to Section 36. 

Section 36. 41 Orders where facts are in dispute, in doubt, or not 
known. If the maximum rent, or any fact necessary to the deter- 
mination of the maximum rent, or the dwelling space, essential 
services, furniture, furnishings, or equipment required to be pro- 
vided with the accommodations, is in dispute between the landlord 
and the tenant, or is in doubt, or is not known, or where the land- 
lord has failed to file a proper and timely registration statement 



41 The original section read as follows: "Section 36. Orders where facts 
are in dispute, in doubt, or not known. If the maximum rent, or any fact 
necessary to the determination of the maximum rent, or the dwelling space, 
essential services, furniture, furnishings, or equipment required to be provided 
with the accommodations, is in dispute between the landlord and the tenant, 
or is in doubt, or is not known, or where the landlord has failed to rile a 
proper and timely registration statement pursuant to the provisions of the 
Federal Act, or these Regulations, or where the landlord has failed to file 
an application or report required by Section 35, the Administrator at any 
time upon written request of either party, or on his own initiative, may issue 
an order establishing the maximum rent on the basis of the maximum rents 
for comparable housing accommodations, after taking into consideration all 
other factors bearing on the equities involved; or may issue an order deter- 
mining the dwelling space, essential services, furniture, furnishings and equip- 
ment, required to be provided with the accommodations. Any such order shall 
establish the maximum rent or determine such facts as of May 1, 1950 or as 
of the date of first renting after May 1, 1950, or as of the date of decrease 
of such dwelling space, essential services, furniture, furnishings or equipment 
after May 1, 1950, whichever is applicable." 

52 



pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Act, or these Regulations, 
or where the landlord has failed to file an application or report 
required by Section 35, the Administrator at any time upon written 
request of either party, or on his own initiative, may issue an order 
determining the facts including the amount of the maximum rent, 
the dwelling space, essential services, furniture, furnishings and 
equipment, required to be provided with the accommodations, or 
establishing the maximum rent on the basis of the maximum rents 
for comparable housing accommodations, after taking into consider- 
ation all other factors bearing on the equities involved. Any such 
order shall determine such facts or establish the maximum rent 
as of May 1, 1950 or as of the date of first renting after May 1, 
1950, or as of the date of decrease of such dwelling space, essential 
services, furniture, furnishings or equipment after May 1, 1950. 
whichever is^ applicable. 
Section 37. [Revoked.] 42 

42 This section is revoked. It was added to these Regulations effective 
December 1, 1950 by Amendment No. 12, filed with the Secretary of State on 
November 30, 1950. 

The section read as follows: 

"Section 37. Adjustment in maximum rent where operating costs exceed 
rental income. 

"1. Any landlord may file an application upon forms prescribed by the 
Administrator to increase the maximum rent for housing accommodations in 
a property on the ground that substantial and unavoidable increases in prop- 
erty taxes or other operating expenses for the current year will result in 
operating costs exceeding rental income. 

"2. For the purposes of this section, the following terms shall mean and 
include : 

(a) 'Property'. Any structure or group of structures containing housing 
accommodations, having common facilities and operated as a single enterprise. 

(b) 'Operating Costs'. All operating expenses necessary in the operation 
and maintenance of the property and properly allocable to the current year, 
plus mortgage interest but excluding allowances for depreciation, obsolescence 
and reserves. Increases or decreases in real estate taxes, water or sewage 
charges and wages currently in effect may be projected in computing operating 
expenses. 

(c) 'Mortgage Interest'. The amount of interest regularly payable upon 
a mortgage lien or mortgage liens upon the property recorded on or before 
November 30, 1950 and held by a person having no equitable interest, either 
directly or indirectly, in the property other than as such mortgagee; provided, 
however that the principal amount of the mortgage lien or liens shall not be 
allowable in an amount exceeding two-thirds of the current assessed valuation 
of the property adjusted by applying thereto the ratio which such assessed 
valuation bears to the full valuation as determined by the State Board of 
Equalization and Assessment, and that the amount of interest thereon shall 
not be allowable in an amount exceeding six percent per annum. 

(d) 'Current Year'. The most recent full calendar year or fiscal year, or 
any twelve consecutive months ending not more than ninety days prior to the 
filing of the application. 

(e) 'Eental Income'. The present annual scheduled rental income from all 
controlled housing accommodations, decontrolled and uncontrolled housing 
accommodations, if any, commercial and business space and other rented or 
rentable space not used for housing accommodations, if any, plus any other 
income earned from the operation of the property during the current year, 
provided that where a housing accommodation or commercial or business or 
other rentable space in a property is vacant or is occupied in whole or in part 
rent free, its full rental value shall be deemed the rent for the purposes of 
the application. 

53 



Section 38. [Revoked.] 43 
Section 39. [Revoked.] 44 



"3. If, as determined by the Administrator, operating costs exceed rental 
income, the Administrator shall grant an adjustment in the maximum rents 
in the manner and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4 of this section. 

"4. That portion of the excess of operating costs over rental income at- 
tributable to the controlled housing accommodations shall be apportioned 
equitably among all the controlled housing accommodations in the property. 
In making such apportionment and in fixing the increases in maximum rents, 
the Administrator shall give due consideration to all previous adjustments or 
increases in maximum rents by lease or otherwise. 

"5. No landlord shall be entitled to any upward adjustment in maximum 
rent unless he certifies that he is maintaining all services furnished as of the 
date determining the maximum rent and that he will continue to maintain 
such services so long as the adjustment in such maximum rent which may be 
granted continues in effect. 

"6. The Administrator shall have the power, at any time, where the necessity 
for an adjustment as granted hereunder no longer exists in whole or in part, 
to modify or revoke the same." 

43 This section is revoked. It was added to these Eegulations effective 
December 1, 1950 by Amendment No. 12, filed with the Secretary of State 
on November 30, 1950. Its substance is incorporated into Section 33(4). 
See footnote 36, supra. 

Section 38 read as follows: 

"Section 38. Adjustment in maximum rent where severe hardship results 
from a maximum rent substantially lower or higher than comparable rents. 

"1. Any landlord may file an application upon forms prescribed by the 
Administrator to adjust the maximum rent of housing accommodations on 
the ground that severe hardship will result because the maximum rent of 
such housing accommodations is substantially lower or higher than the rents 
generally prevailing in the same area for substantially similar housing accom- 
modations. Such application shall set forth facts showing that such severe 
hardship results from unique or peculiar circumstances relating to such housing 
accommodations which materially affected the maximum rent thereof. 

"2. Where the Administrator determines that due to such unique or peculiar 
circumstances severe hardship will result because the maximum rent of housing- 
accommodations is substantially lower or higher than comparable rents for 
controlled housing accommodations, he shall grant an appropriate adjustment 
of such maximum rent, provided that the adjustment shall not result in a 
maximum rent higher than the rents otherwise generally prevailing in the 
same area for substantially similar housing accommodations. 

"3. No landlord shall be entitled to any upward adjustment in maximum 
rent unless he certifies that he is maintaining all services furnished to the 
housing accommodation involved as of the date determining the maximum 
rent and that he will continue to maintain such services so long as the adjust- 
ment in such maximum rent which may be granted continues in effect. 

"4. The Administrator shall have the power, at any time, where the necessity 
for an adjustment as granted hereunder no longer exists, in whole or in part, 
to modify or revoke the same." 

44 This section is revoked. It was added to these Eegulations effective 
December 1, 1950 by Amendment No. 12, filed with the Secretary of State 
on November 30, 1950. Its substance is incorporated into Section 33(1). 
See footnote 33, supra. 

Section 39 read as follows: 

"Section 39. Adjustment in maximum rent because of severe hardship aris- 
ing from gross inequities. 

"1. Any landlord may file an application upon forms prescribed by the 
Administrator to increase the maximum rent of housing accommodations on 
the ground that severe hardship will result because of gross inequities. Such 
application shall set forth facts showing that the landlord has made or furn- 
ished the improvements, services, equipment or facilities referred to in sub- 

54 



PART IV. REGISTRATION AND RECORDS 

Section 41. Registration of housing - accommodations. Except 
as otherwise specifically provided by these Regulations, 45 every land- 
lord of housing accommodations rented or offered for rent shall 
file a written statement on the form provided therefor, containing 
such information as the Administrator may require, to be known 
as a registration statement, unless a registration statement was 
heretofore filed in accordance with the rent regulations promul- 
gated pursuant to the Federal Act. 

Section 42. Additional housing accommodations. For addi- 
tional housing accommodations created by conversion, including 
housing accommodations changed from non-housing to a housing 
use on or after February 1, 1947 within the City of New York and 
which were decontrolled under the Federal Act, but which were 
subject to rent control under the local laws of the City of New 
York, the landlord shall file a new registration statement on or 
before May 31, 1950, notwithstanding any previous registration 
statement filed by him. 

Section 43. First rents. For housing accommodations first- 
rented after March 1, 1950, or where there has been a change 
thereafter in a rooming house in the number of occupants or terms 
of occupancy, such registration statement shall be filed by May 15, 
1950, or within fifteen days after first renting, whichever is later. 

Section 44. Change of ownership. Where, since the filing of 
the registration statement for any housing accommodations, there 
has been a change in the identity of the landlord, by transfer of 

divisions (a), (b), (c), or (d) of this paragraph, which have resulted in an 
increase in the rental value of the housing accommodations and for which no 
adjustment of maximum rent has previously been granted: 

(a) A major capital improvement, other than for normal repair, replace- 
ment or maintenance, commenced prior to May 1, 1950 and completed there- 
after; or 

(b) A major capital improvement, other than for normal repair, replace- 
ment or maintenance, first required by law on or after March 1, 1950; or 

(c) An additional service or facilitv first required by law on or after 
March 1, 1950; or 

(d) A restoration of dwelling space, essential service, furniture, furnishings 
or equipment for the elimination of which a decrease in maximum rent had 
previously been ordered by the Administrator subsequent to May 1, 1950. 

•'2. Where the landlord has established that severe hardship will result be- 
cause of one or more of the conditions specified in paragraph 1 of this section, 
the Administrator shall grant an appropriate adjustment in the maximum rent 
of the housing accommodations involved, after taking into consideration all 
factors bearing on the equities. No adjustment under subdivision (d) of para- 
graph 1 shall exceed the amount of the previous decrease in the maximum rent. 

"3. No landlord shall be entitled to any upward adjustment in maximum 
rent unless he certifies that he is maintaining all services furnished to the 
housing accommodation involved as of the date determining the maximum 
lent and that he will continue to maintain such services so long as the adjust- 
ment in such maximum rent which may be granted continues in effect. 

"4. The Administrator shall have the power, at any time, where the neces- 
sity for an adjustment as granted hereunder no longer exists, in whole or in 
part, to modify or revoke the same." 

45 The words "Except as otherwise specifically provided by these Regula- 
tions" are added to the original section. 

55 



title or otherwise, and no notice of such change has been filed, the 
successor landlord shall file a notice on a form provided for that 
purpose on or before May 15, 1950 or within fifteen days after the 
change, whichever is later. 

Section 45. Service of papers. Any notice, order or other 
process or paper directed to the person named in the registration 
statement as the landlord at the address given therein, or where a 
notice of change in identity has been filed, to the person named as 
landlord and at the address given in the most recent such notice, 
shall constitute notice to the person who is then the landlord. 

Section 46. Failure to file. Where the landlord has failed to 
file a proper and timely registration statement as required by this 
Part IV, the Administrator may establish the maximum rent pur- 
suant to Section 36. 

Section 47. Records and record-keeping. 

I. 46 Every landlord of a rooming house or hotel subject to these 
Regulations, rented or offered for rent, shall keep, preserve, and 
make available for examination by the Administrator, records 
showing the rents received for each housing accommodation, the 
particular term and number of occupants for which such rents were 
charged, and the name and address of each occupant. 

2. Every other landlord shall keep, preserve, and make available 
for examination by the Administrator, records of the same kind 
as he has customarily kept relating to the rents received for hous- 
ing accommodations. 

PART V. EVICTIONS 

Section 51. Restrictions on removal of tenant, including hotel 
tenants. 47 

1. So long as the tenant continues to pay the rent to which the 
landlord is entitled, no tenant shall be removed from any housing 
accommodations by action to evict or to recover possession, by 
exclusion from possession, or otherwise, nor shall any person 
attempt such removal or exclusion from possession, notwithstanding 
that such tenant has no lease or that his lease, or other rental 
agreement has expired or otherwise terminated, notwithstanding 
any contract, lease agreement or obligation heretofore or hereafter 
entered into which provides for surrender of possession, or which 
otherwise provides contrary hereto, except on one or more of the 
grounds specified in Section 52, or unless the landlord has obtained 
a certificate of eviction as hereinafter provided. 

2. It shall be unlawful for any person to remove or attempt to 
remove any tenant or occupant from any housing accommodations 
or to refuse to renew the lease or agreement for the use of such 
accommodations, because such tenant or occupant has taken, or 

46 This paragraph is amended by deleting from the original paragraph the 
words "containing more than twenty rooms" which appeared immediately after 
"Every landlord of a rooming house or hotel." 

47 The original title was : "Kestrictions on removal of tenant." 

56 



proposes to take, action authorized or required by the Act or any 
regulation, order or requirement thereunder. 

3. No tenant of any housing accommodation shall be removed or 
evicted unless and until such removal or eviction has been author- 
ized by a court of competent jurisdiction. 

This paragraph shall not apply where the removal or eviction is 
for non-payment of rent and involves a tenant of a hotel or room- 
ing house who occupies his accommodations on a daily or weekly 
basis, provided the landlord shall give written notice thereof to the 
tenant at least three days prior to the date specified therein for the 
surrender of possession and prior to any action for removal or 
eviction. Every such notice shall include therein a statement of 
the rent due and the rental period or periods for which said rent 
is due. An exact copy of every such notice together with an affi- 
davit of service shall be filed with the Local Eent Office within 
twenty-four hours after such notice is given to the tenant. 48 Should 
the tenant tender the rent due within the three day period, the 
landlord may not remove or evict the tenant. 49 

4. No tenant shall be removed or evicted in any action or pro- 
ceeding pending on May 1, 1950, except after compliance with the 
requirements of these Regulations. A proceeding or action to evict 
is deemed to be pending if a warrant of eviction was not executed 
therein on or before May 1, 1950. 

5. 50 Notwithstanding any other provision of these Regulations, no 
tenant of any housing accommodation within the City of New York 
shall be removed or evicted for failure to pay the accrued increases 
authorized by any order of the Office of the Housing Expediter 
issued after March 1, 1949, 51 the collection of which was barred by 
Local Law No. 73 of the City of New York for the year 1949. 

This prohibition shall be applicable to any such proceeding for 
removal or eviction pending on August 14, 1950. Such a proceed- 
ing to evict is deemed to be pending if a warrant of eviction was 
not executed therein on or before August 14, 1950. 

This prohibition shall not be applicable where such an increase 
is or has been: (a) Authorized pursuant to the provisions of Sec- 
tion 21 (2) 52 of these Regulations, or (b) Compensable pursuant to 
an express provision of a written rental agreement in effect at the 
time such increase was granted or prior to May 1, 1950. 

Section 52. Proceedings for eviction without certificate. An 

action or proceeding to recover possession of any housing accom- 
modation shall be maintainable after service and filing of the notice 



48 This unnumbered paragraph was added by Amendment No. 9, filed with 
the Secretary of State on August 30, 1950, and made effective August 29, 1950. 

49 This sentence is new and is added to clarify the intent of the unnumbered 
paragraph. 

50 This paragraph was added, effective August 14, 1950, by Amendment No. 8, 
filed with the Secretary of State on August 17, 1950. 

61 Originally read "issued between March 1, 1949 and May 1, 1950". 
"Changed from "21(1)" to "21(2)" to conform with change in Section 21. 
See footnote 24, supra. 

57 



required by Section 53 only upon one or more of the following 
grounds : 

1. The tenant is violating a substantial obligation of his tenancy 
other than the obligation to surrender possession of such housing 
accommodation and has failed to cure such violation after written 
demand 53 by the landlord that the violation cease within ten days 54 ; 
or within the three month period immediately prior to the com- 
mencement of the proceeding the tenant has wilfully violated such 
an obligation inflicting serious and substantial injury to the 
landlord. 

2. 55 The tenant is committing or permitting a nuisance in such 
housing accommodations; or is maliciously or by reason of gross 
negligence substantially damaging the housing accommodations ; or 
his conduct is such as to interfere substantially with the comfort 
or safety of the landlord or of other tenants or occupants of the 
same or other adjacent building or structure. 

3. 56 Occupanc}^ of the housing accommodations by the tenant is 
illegal because of the requirements of law, and the landlord is 
subject to civil or criminal penalties therefor, or both. 

4. 57 The tenant is using or permitting such housing accommoda- 
tion to be used for an immoral or illegal purpose. 

5. 58 The tenant who had a written lease or other written rental 
agreement, which terminates on or after May 1, 1950, has refused 
upon demand of the landlord to execute a written extension or re- 
newal thereof for a further term of like duration not in excess of 
one year but otherwise on the same terms and conditions as the 
previous lease except insofar as such terms and conditions are in- 
consistent with the Act. 

6. 59 The tenant has unreasonably refused the landlord access to 



53 The word "demand'' is substituted for "notice" appearing in the original 
paragraph. 

54 The words "within ten days" are added to the original paragraph. 

55 The original paragraph read as follows: "2. The tenant is committing or 
[permitting a nuisance in such housing accommodation and such nuisance con- 
tinues after written notice to the tenant that the same shall cease. 

"No tenant shall be evicted solely on the ground that the conduct of such 
tenant in the use and occupancy of such housing accommodation constitutes 
a nuisance, unless such conduct interferes substantially with the comfort or 
safety of other tenants or occupants of the same or other adjacent building 
or structure, or unless such tenant has been found guilty by a criminal court 
of competent jurisdiction of committing or permitting a nuisance in such 
building or structure." 

ca This is a new provision. The original paragraph 3 is redesignated para- 
graph 4. 

67 This was originally designated paragraph 3. It is amended to remove as 
;i prerequisite a conviction by a criminal court. The original paragraph read 
as follows: "3. The tenant is using or permitting such housing accommodation 
to be used for an immoral or illegal purpose, and has been found guilty by 
a criminal court of competent jurisdiction of using the housing accommoda- 
tion for such immoral or illegal purpose." 

M Originally designated paragraph 4. 

09 Originally designated paragraph 5. 

58 



the housing accommodations for the purpose of inspection or of 
showing the accommodations to a prospective purchaser, mortgagee 
or prospective mortgagee, or other person having a legitimate in- 
terest therein; provided, however, that such refusal shall not be 
ground for removal or eviction if such inspection or showing of 
the accommodations is contrary to the provisions of the tenant's 
lease or other rental agreement. 

Section 53. Notices required in proceedings under Section 52. 

1. Except where the ground for removal or eviction of a tenant 
is non-payment of rent, no tenant shall be removed or evicted from 
housing accommodations by court process and no action or proceed- 
ing shall be commenced for such purpose upon any of the grounds 
permitted in Section 52 unless and until the landlord shall have 
given written notice to the tenant and the Local Kent Office as 
hereinafter provided. 

2. Every notice to a tenant to vacate or surrender possession of 
housing accommodations shall state the ground under Section 52 
upon which the landlord relies for removal or eviction of the tenant, 
the facts necessary to establish the existence of such ground, and 
the date when the tenant is required to surrender possession. 

3. Within 24 hours after the notice is served upon the tenant, 
an exact copy thereof together with an affidavit of service shall be 
filed with the Local Rent Office. 

4. Every such notice shall be served upon the tenant within 
the period of time hereinafter set forth prior to the date specified 
therein for the surrender of possession and prior to the commence- 
ment of any proceeding for removal or eviction: 

a. 60 Where the notice specifies one or more of the grounds stated 
in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Section 52 for such removal or eviction, 
not less than ten days. 

b. 61 Where the notice specifies one or more of the grounds stated 
in paragraphs 1, 5 and 6 of Section 52 for such removal or eviction, 
not less than one month. 

c. 62 Where the tenant is a weekly tenant, the notice required in 
paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Section 52 shall be not less than seven days. 

5. 63 This section shall not apply where a summary proceeding 
for the removal of a tenant in the City of New York was instituted 
and a final order made prior to May 1, 1950. 

60 This subdivision is amended to conform with changes made in Section 52. 
It originally read as follows: "(a) Where the notice specifies one or both of 
the grounds stated in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Section 52 for such removal or 
eviction, not less than ten days." 

a This subdivision is amended to conform with changes made in Section 52. 
It originally read as follows: ''(b) Where the notice specifies one or more 
of the grounds stated in paragraphs 1, 4 and 5 of Section 52 for such re- 
moval or eviction, not less than one month." 

•* This subdivision is amended to conform with changes made in Section 52. 
It originally read as follows: "(c) Where the tenant is a weekly tenant, the 
notice required in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Section 52 shall be not less than 
seven days." 

65 This paragraph was added by Amendment Xo. 1, filed with the Secretary 
of State on May 5. 1950 and made effective the same date. 

59 



Section 54. Proceedings for eviction with certificate. 

1. No tenant shall be removed or evicted on grounds other than 
those stated in Section 52 unless on application of the landlord the 
Administrator shall issue a certificate permitting the landlord to 
pursue his remedies at law at the expiration of the waiting period 
hereinafter specified in paragraph 2 of this section. The Adminis- 
trator may issue an order granting a certificate 64 if the removal or 
eviction meets the requirements of Sections 55, 56, 57, 58, or 59. 
The Administrator may also issue orders granting certificates 65 in 
other cases if the requested removal or eviction is not inconsistent 
with the purposes of the Act or these Regulations and would not be 
likely to result in the circumvention or evasion thereof. 

2. Certificates issued pursuant to this section or Sections 55, 56, 
57, 58 or 59 shall authorize the landlord to commence proceedings to 
remove or evict the tenant at the expiration of three months from 
the date of issuance of the certificate by the Administrator. Where 
the Administrator finds (a) that equivalent accommodations are 
available for rent into which the tenant can move without sub- 
stantial hardship or loss, or (b) that undue hardship would result 
to the landlord, a certificate may be issued 66 and may authorize the 
landlord to pursue his remedies for removal or eviction of the 
tenant at the expiration of a period shorter than such maximum 
waiting period. 

3. No certificate shall be used in connection with any action or 
proceeding to remove or evict a tenant unless such removal or evic- 
tion is sought for the purpose specified in the certificate. 

4. In the event that the landlord's intentions or circumstances so 
change that the premises, possession of which is sought, will not 
be used for the purpose specified in the certificate, the certificate 
shall thereupon be null and void. The landlord shall immediately 
notify the Local Rent Administrator in writing and surrender the 
certificate for cancellation. 

5. The provisions of this section shall apply to all certificates 
issued pursuant to these Regulations. 

Section 55. Occupancy by landlord or immediate family. 

1. A certificate shall be issued where the landlord seeks in good 
faith to recover possession of housing accommodations because 
of immediate and compelling necessity for his own personal use 
and occupancy or for the use and occupancy of his immediate 
family. As used in this paragraph, the term "immediate family'' 
includes only a son, daughter, father or mother. Provided, how- 
ever, that where the housing accommodations are located in a one 
or two-family house, and the landlord seeks to recover possession 

01 Originally read "The Administrator may so certify." 
65 Originally read "The Administrator may also certify." 
6fl The phrase "although less than 20 percent of the purchase price has been 
paid" was added to the original paragraph, after the word "issued", effective 
May 25, 1950, by Amendment No. 3, filed with the Secretary of State on 
May 26, 1950. The phrase is deleted from the paragraph and now appears 
in Section 55(4). See footnote 72, infra. 

60 



for his own personal use, an immediate and compelling necessity 
need not be established. 67 

2. Where the housing accommodations are located in a structure 
or premises which contain more than two housing accommodations 
and the housing accommodations or structure or premises are 
owned by two or more persons not constituting a cooperative corpo- 
ration or association (husband and wife as owners being considered 
one owner for this purpose), no certificate shall be issued under 
this section for occupancy of more than one housing accommoda- 
tion and then only if none of the co-owners is already in occupancy 
of any housing accommodation in such structure or premises. 

3. 68 In the case of housing accommodations in a structure or 
premises owned by a cooperative corporation or association, a 
certificate shall be issued by the Administrator to a purchaser of 
stock or other evidence of interest to possession of such housing 
accommodations by virtue of a proprietary lease or otherwise 
where (a) the tenant originally obtained possession of the housing 
accommodations by virtue of a rental agreement with the pur- 
chaser; or (b) the purchased stock was acquired by the landlord 
more than two years prior to the date of the filing of the applica- 
tion; or (c) the purchased stock was acquired less than two years 
prior to the date of filing of the application and on that date 
stock in the co-operative has been purchased by persons who are 
then tenants of at least 80 percent of the dwelling units in the 
structure or premises and are entitled by reason of stock owner- 
ship to proprietary leases of dwelling units in the structure or 
premises. 

For the purposes of this paragraph the term "housing accommo- 
dation'' shall not include servants' rooms which are non-housekeep- 
ing and located in the service portion of the building, and the 
term "tenant" shall not include the persons occupying such ser- 
vants' rooms. Any application under this paragraph must also 
comply with the requirements of paragraphs 1 and 4 of this section. 

4. Where the landlord 6 ' 3 purchased and thereby acquired title to 

67 The proviso is new and is adopted subject to the amendment of paragraph 
(f) of Subdivision 1 of §12 of the Act as recommended by the Commission. 

68 This paragraph is changed and is adopted as provided above subject to the 
amendment of Section 1410, Subdivision 9 of the Civil Practice Act as recom- 
mended by the Commission. 

The original paragraph read as follows: "3. In the case of housing ac- 
commodations in a structure or premises owned by a cooperative corporation 
or association, no certificate shall be issued by the Administrator to a pur- 
chaser of stock or other evidence of interest in such cooperative, who is 
entitled by reason of such ownership of stock or other evidence of interest to 
possession of such housing accommodations by virtue of a proprietary lease 
or otherwise, unless stock or other evidence of interest in the cooperative has 
been purchased by persons who are tenants in occupancy of at least 80 percent 
of the housing accommodations in the structure or premises and are entitled 
by reason of such ownership to proprietary leases of housing accommodations 
in the structure or premises. For the purposes of this paragraph the term 
'housing accommodation' shall not include servants' rooms which are non- 
housekeeping and located in the service portion of the building, and the term 
'tenant' shall not include the persons occupying such servants' rooms." 

69 The word "landlord" is substituted for "owner or owners" in the original 
paragraph. 

61 



the premises on or after May 1, 1950, except that in the City of 
New York the date shall be September 17, 1947, no certificate shall 
be issued under paragraphs 1, 2, or 3 of this section unless the 70 
landlord on or before the date of the filing of the application 71 
has made a payment or pajmients totaling at least 20 percent of 
the purchase price or the assessed valuation of the premises, which- 
ever is the greater; provided, however, that where the Administra- 
tor finds (a) that equivalent accommodations are available for rent 
into which the tenant can move without substantial hardship or 
loss, or (b) that undue hardship would result to the landlord, a 
certificate may be issued although less than 20 percent has been 
paid. 72 This requirement shall not apply where the landlord is a 
veteran of World War II, who, by virtue thereof, obtained a loan 
for use in purchasing housing accommodations, guaranteed in whole 
or in part by the Administrator of Veterans Affairs. 

5. A certificate shall be issued where the landlord establishes 
that it is an organization exempt from taxation under Section 
101(6) of the Internal Revenue Code, and that it seeks in good 
faith to recover possession of the housing accommodations for the 
immediate and personal use and occupancy as housing accommoda- 
tions by members of its staff. 

Section 56. Tenant not using premises for own dwelling. 

I. 73 A certificate shall be issued for the eviction of the tenant and 
sub-tenants where the landlord seeks in good faith to recover posses- 
sion of housing accommodations for which the tenant's lease or 
other rental agreement has expired or otherwise terminated, and 
at the time of termination the occupants of the housing accommo- 
dations are sub-tenants or other persons who occupied under a 
rental agreement with the tenant, and no part of the accommoda- 
tions is used by the tenant as his dwelling. 

2. No tenant shall be evicted under this section where the prem- 
ises are operated as a rooming house and the eviction of the 
tenant will result in the removal of the furniture and furnishings 
used by the occupants, unless the landlord establishes that substan- 
tially similar furniture and furnishing will be provided at the time 
of the removal and that arrangements will be made for the occu- 
pants to remain in occupancy under substantially the same terms 
and conditions as those existing on the date of the issuance of the 
certificate. 

3. No occupant of housing accommodations, other than the ten- 
ant, shall be evicted under this section, where the rental agree- 
ment between the landlord and tenant contemplated the sub-letting 
by the tenant of the entire accommodations or a substantial portion 
thereof. 

Section 57. Alteration or remodeling. A certificate shall be 



70 The word "the" is substituted for "such" in the original paragraph. 

71 The phrase "on or before the date of filing of the application" is new. 

72 This is new. It incorporates the phrase "although less than 20 percent 
has been paid" which originally appeared in Section 54(2). See footnote 66, 
supra. 

"The phrase "for the eviction of the tenant and sub-tenants," is new. 

62 



issued where the landlord seeks in good faith to recover possession 
of housing accommodations for the immediate purpose of substan- 
tially altering or remodeling them, provided that the landlord shall 
have secured such approval therefor as is required by law. No 
certificate involving alteration or remodeling shall be granted 
under this section unless the Administrator shall find: 

1. That such alteration or remodeling is reasonably necessary 
to maintain the safety of such building or structure; or 

2. 74 That such alteration or remodeling is for the purpose of sub- 
dividing an under-occupied housing accommodation containing six 
or more rooms into a greater number of housing accommodations 
consisting of self-contained family units which meet the require- 
ments of Section 11. An apartment shall be deemed under-occupied 
when there is less than one occupant for each room, exclusive of 
bathroom and kitchen. Roomers or boarders who are not members 
of the tenant's family shall not be counted as occupants. 

Upon approval of plans by the local authorities having jurisdic- 
tion thereof, where such approval is required, and before proceed- 
ing with such alteration or remodeling, application shall be made 
to the Administrator for an order directing the tenant occupying 
such housing accommodation to remain in possession of an adequate 
portion thereof, as determined by the Administrator, and to sur- 
render possession of the remainder of said housing accommodation, 
within a time to be fixed by the Administrator. Where it is not 
practicable for the tenant to remain in possession of a portion of the 
housing accommodation, the Administrator may require the land- 
lord to furnish suitable temporary housing accommodations to the 
tenant during the alteration. The order so granted shall be condi- 
tioned on the right of such tenant to first occupancy of any hous- 

74 The original paragraph 2, substantially amended as provided above, read 
;is follows: 

"2. That such alteration or improvement is for the purpose of subdividing 
an apartment into a greater number of self-contained family units which meet 
the requirements of Section 11. 

"Upon approval of plans by the local authorities having jurisdiction thereof, 
and before proceeding with such alteration or remodeling, application shall 
be made to the Administrator for an order directing the tenant occupying 
such apartment to remain in possession of a suitable portion thereof, as 
determined by the Administrator, and to surrender possession of the remainder 
of said apartment, within a time to be fixed by the Administrator, and to 
remain out of possession while such alteration or remodeling is being made. 
The order so granted shall be conditioned on the right of such tenant to first 
occupancy of any apartment resulting from such alteration or remodeling of 
such subdivided apartment. 

"The Administrator shall establish the terms and conditions under which 
such alteration or remodeling may be made and shall establish the maximum 
rent to be paid by the tenant occupying such suitable portion of such apart- 
ment and shall establish the maximum rent to be paid by such tenant for the 
first occupancy of any apartment selected by him in such subdivided apart- 
ment after it has been altered or remodeled. The Administrator shall estab- 
lish the maximum rent on the basis of the maximum rents for comparable 
housing accommodations after taking into consideration all other factors 
bearing on the equities involved. Should the tenant fail to abide by the order 
of the Administrator, a certificate of eviction may be issued* as heroin 
provided." 

63 



ing accommodation resulting from such alteration or remodeling 
of such subdivided housing accommodation. 

AY here the tenant cannot be adequately housed in any portion of 
the subdivided housing accommodation, the landlord may secure a 
certificate where he shows that he is willing and able to relocate the 
tenant in other suitable housing accommodations within the same 
city, village or town not unreasonably distant from the premises 
being altered, and available at a rent not greater than the rent 
now being paid by such tenant. 

The Administrator shall establish the terms and conditions under 
which such alteration or remodeling may be made and shall estab- 
lish the maximum rent to be paid by the tenant occupying such 
suitable portion of such housing accommodation during the altera- 
tion, and shall establish the maximum rent to be paid by such 
tenant for the first occupancy of any housing accommodation 
selected by him in such subdivided housing accommodation after 
it has been altered or remodeled. The Administrator shall estab- 
lish the maximum rent on the basis of the maximum rents for 
comparable housing accommodations after taking into consideration 
all other factors bearing on the equities involved. The landlord 
shall file an application under Section 11 for an order of decontrol, 
provided, however, that such order of decontrol shall not apply to 
that portion of the original housing accommodations occupied by a 
tenant in possession at the time of the conversion but only so long 
as such tenant continues in occupancy. 

Where the housing accommodation to be subdivided has a maxi- 
mum monthly rent of $200 or more, there shall be no requirement 
that the tenant be relocated or given occupancy of any of the hous- 
ing accommodations created by the alteration or subdivision. 

The order in all such cases shall grant the landlord permission to 
recover possession of the housing accommodations without further 
application should the tenant fail to abide by the order of subdivi- 
sion issued by the Administrator. 

Section 58. Demolition. 

A certificate shall be issued where the landlord seeks in good 
faith to recover possession of housing accommodations for the im- 
mediate purpose of demolishing them, provided that the landlord 
shall have secured such approval therefor as is required by law. 75 
No certificate involving demolition shall be granted under this sec- 
tion unless the Administrator shall find: 76 

a. 77 That such demolition is to be made for the purpose of con- 

75 This was originally numbered paragraph 1. 

76 This was originally numbered paragraph 2 and is combined with original 
paragraph 1 to make one unnumbered paragraph. 

77 Originally designated subdivision b. of paragraph 2. 

Eedesignated and amended in the following respects: the phrase "a new 
building or structure" is changed to read "new buildings or structures"; and 
the words "consisting of self-contained units" are inserted after "housing 
accommodations". 

The substance of original subdivision a. of former paragraph 2 is incor- 
porated in paragraph 3 of Section 52. The original subdivision a. which read 
as follows is revoked: "a. That such demolition has been ordered for reasons 
of public safety by the appropriate local authority; or". 

64 



structing new buildings or structures containing a greater number 
of housing accommodations consisting of self-contained units than 
were contained in the structure to be demolished; or 

b. 78 That such demolition is to be made for the purpose of con- 
structing other than housing accommodations. Tn such case a cer- 
tificate shall be granted only upon such terms and conditions as will 
provide for the relocation of the tenants in other suitable hous- 
ing accommodations within the same city, village or town, not un- 
reasonably distant from the premises being demolished, at rents not 
greater than the rents then being paid by such tenants; provided, 
however, that there shall be no requirement that the landlord re- 
locate a tenant whose maximum monthly rent is $75 for one room. 
$150 for one to three rooms, and $200 or more, for three or more 
rooms. 

Section 59. 79 Withdrawal of occupied housing accommodations 
from rental market. A certificate shall be issued where the land- 
lord establishes that he seeks in good faith to permanently with- 
draw occupied housing accommodations from both the housing and 
non-housing rental markets without an}' intent to rent or sell the 
housing accommodations. No certificate shall be issued under this 
section unless the landlord establishes that he seeks to recover pos- 
session of the housing accommodations because of an immediate and 
compelling necessity and exceptional circumstances and the con- 
tinued operation of the housing accommodations by the landlord 
will impose undue hardship on him, or where the granting of the 
certificate is inconsistent with the purposes of the Act. 

PART VI. PROHIBITIONS 

Section 61. General prohibitions. It shall be unlawful, regard- 
less of any contract, lease or other obligation heretofore or here- 
after entered into, for any person to demand or receive, any rent 
for any housing accommodations in excess of the maximum rent, 
or otherwise to do or omit to do any act, in violation of any regu- 
lation, order or requirement under the Act or these Regulations, or 
to offer, solicit, attempt or agree to do any of the foregoing. 

Section 62. Evasion. The maximum rents and other require- 
ments provided in these Regulations shall not be evaded, either 
directly or indirectly, in connection with the renting or leasing or 
the transfer of a lease of housing accommodations by requiring the 
tenant to pay, or obligate himself for membership or other fees, 
or by modification of the practices relating to payment of commis- 

78 Originally designated subdivision c. of paragraph 2. 

79 This section originally read : "A certificate shall be issued where the land- 
lord establishes that he seeks in good faith to recover possession of the housing 
accommodations because of an immediate and compelling necessity and excep- 
tional circumstances, and the continued operation of the housing accommoda- 
tions by the landlord will impose undue hardship on him. The landlord must 
further establish that he intends to permanently withdraw them from both 
the housing and non-housing rental markets without any intent to sell the 
housing accommodations." 

65 



sions or other charges, or by modification of the services furnished 
or required to be furnished with the housing accommodations, or 
otherwise. 

Section 63. Purchase of property as condition of renting. 

1. No person shall require a tenant or prospective tenant to pur- 
chase or agree to purchase furniture or any other property as a 
condition of renting housing accommodations. 

2. The term "person" as used in this section shall include an 
agent or any other employee of a landlord acting with or without 
the authority of his empkn-er. 

3. The term "person" as used in this section shall also include 
a tenant in occupancy of housing accommodations who attempts to 
sell furniture or any other property to an incoming tenant. 

Section 64. Term of occupancy. No tenant shall be required 
to change his term of occupancy; for example, a tenant on a 
monthly basis shall not be required to change to a weekly basis, and 
a tenant on a weekly basis shall not be required to change to a 
daily basis. 

Section 65. Security deposits. Regardless of any contract, 
agreement, lease or other obligation heretofore or hereafter entered 
into, no person shall demand, receive or retain a security deposit for 
or in connection with the use or occupancy of housing accommoda- 
tions, except if said deposit does not exceed the rent for one month 
in addition to the otherwise authorized collection of rent in ad- 
vance, and only if the demand, collection, or retention of such a 
security deposit was permitted under the rent regulations promul- 
gated pursuant to the Federal Act, or the local laws of the City 
of New York. 

Section 66. Lease with option to buy. 

1. Where a lease of housing accommodations was entered into 
prior to May 1, 1950, and the tenant, as a part of such lease or in 
connection therewith, was granted an option to buy the housing 
accommodations which were the subject of the lease, with the 
further provision that some or all of the payments made under 
the lease should be credited toward the purchase price in the event 
such option is exercised, the landlord, notwithstanding any other 
provision of these Regulations, may be authorized to receive pay- 
ment made by the tenant in accordance with the provisions of 
such lease and in excess of the maximum rent for such housing 
accommodations. 

(a) Such authority may be secured only by a written request 
of the tenant to the Local Rent Office and may be granted by order 
of the Administrator if he finds that such payments in excess of 
the maximum rent will not be inconsistent with the purposes of the 
Act or these Regulations and would not be likely to result in the 
circumvention or evasion thereof. 

(b) After entry of such order the landlord shall be authorized 
to demand, receive and retain, and, the tenant shall be authorized 

66 



to offer payments provided by the lease in excess of the maximum 
rent for periods commencing on or alter May 1, 1950. After entry 
of such order, the provisions of the lease may be enforced in accord- 
ance with law, notwithstanding any other provision of these Regu- 
lations. 

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize the 
landlord to demand or receive or the tenant to offer payments in 
excess of the maximum rent in the absence of an order of the 
Administrator as herein provided. 

2. Where a lease of housing accommodations has been entered 
into on or after May 1, 1950 and the tenant as a part of such lease 
or in connection therewith has been granted an option to buy the 
housing accommodations which are the subject of the lease, the 
landlord prior to the exercise by the tenant of the option to buy, 
shall not demand or receive nor shall the tenant offer payments in 
excess of the maximum rent, whether or not such lease allocates 
some portion or portions of the periodic payments therein provided 
as payment on or for the option to buy. 

Section 67. Disclosure by employees. It shall be unlawful for 
any officer or employee of the Commission, or for any official adviser 
or consultant to the Commission, to disclose, otherwise than in the 
course of official duty, any information obtained under the Act, or 
to use any such information for personal benefit. 



PART VII. ENFORCEMENT 

Section 71. Criminal penalties and civil actions. 

1. Any person who wilfully violates any provision of §9 
of the Act, and any person who makes any statement or entry false 
in any material respect in any document or report required to be 
kept or filed under §4 or §5 of the Act, and any person who 
wilfully omits or neglects to make any material statement or 
entry required to be made in any such document or report, shall, 
upon conviction thereof, be subject to a fine of not more than 
five thousand dollars, or to imprisonment for not more than two 
years in the case of a violation of subdivision three of §9 of 
the Act or Part VI of these Regulations and for not more than 
one year in all other cases, or to both such fine and imprisonment. 
(See §10, Subdivision 2 of the Act.) 

2. If any landlord who receives rent from a tenant violates a 
regulation or order prescribing a maximum rent with respect to 
the housing accommodations for which such rent is received from 
such tenant, the tenant paying such rent may, within one year from 
the date of the occurrence of the violation, bring an action against 
the landlord on account of the overcharge pursuant, to §10, Sub- 
division 5 of the Act. Under circumstances specified in that sec- 
tion of the Act, the Administrator may bring an action against 
the landlord for such overcharge. 

67 



Section 72. Inspection and records. 

1. Any person who rents or offers for rent, or acts as a broker 
or agent for the rental of any housing accommodations shall, as 
the Administrator may from time to time require, furnish informa- 
tion under oath or affirmation or otherwise, permit inspection and 
copying of records and other documents and permit inspection of 
any such housing accommodations. 

2. Any person who rents or offers for rent, or acts as a broker 
or agent for the rental of any housing accommodations shall, as 
the Administrator may from time to time require, make and keep 
records and other documents and make reports. 

PART VIII. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE LOCAL RENT 
ADMINISTRATOR 

Section 81. Proceedings instituted by landlord or tenant in 
the Local Rent Office. A proceeding is instituted in a Local Rent 
Office by a landlord or a tenant with the filing of an application for 
adjustment of rent, for a certificate of eviction, or for other relief 
provided by the Act or these Regulations. Such application shall 
be verified by the applicant and filed with the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator for the area within which the housing accommodation is 
located upon the appropriate form issued by the Administrator 
in accordance with the instructions contained in such forms. 

Section 82. Proceedings instituted by the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator on his own initiative. The Local Rent Administrator may 
institute a proceeding on his own initiative whenever he deems it 
necessary or appropriate pursuant to the Act or these Regulations. 

Section 83. Notice to the parties affected. 

1. Where the application is made by a landlord or tenant the 
Local Rent Administrator shall forward, as promptly as possible, 
a copy of such application by mail to the person or persons affected 
thereby. 

2. Where the proceeding is instituted by the Local Rent Admin- 
istrator on his own initiative, he shall forward to all parties affected 
thereby a notice setting forth the proposed action. 

Section 84. Answer. A person who has been served with a copy 
of an application or a notice of a proceeding shall have seven days 
from the date of mailing within which to answer. Every answer 
must be verified, and an original and one copy shall be filed with 
the Local Rent Administrator. 

Section 85. Action by Local Rent Administrator. At any stage 
of a proceeding the Local Rent Administrator may: 

1. Reject the application if it is insufficient or defective. 

2. Make such investigation of the facts, hold such conferences, 
and require the filing of such reports, evidence, affidavits, or other 
material relevant to the proceeding. 

68 



3. Forward to or make available for inspection by either party 
any relevant evidence and afford an opportunity to file rebuttal 
thereto. 

4. For good cause shown accept for filing any papers, even 
though not filed within the time required by these Regulations. 

5. Require any person to appear or produce documents or both 
pursuant to a subpoena issued by the Administrator. 

6. Consolidate two or more applications or proceedings which 
have at least one ground in common. 

7. Forward to either party a notice of action proposed to be 
taken by the Local Rent Administrator. 

8. Grant or order a hearing. 

Section 86. Final determination by the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator. The Local Rent Administrator, on such terms and condi- 
tions as he may determine, may: 

1. Dismiss the application if it fails substantially to comply with 
the provisions of the Act or these Regulations. 

2. Grant or deny the application, in whole or in part. 

3. Issue an appropriate order in a proceeding instituted on his 
own initiative. 

A copy of any order issued shall be forwarded to all parties to 
the proceeding. 

Section 87. Su Pending- Proceedings. 

1. If an application for adjustment under former Section 37 
was filed prior to March 15, 1951, and no order on such application 
had been entered by the Local Rent Administrator prior to March 
15, 1951, no adjustment may be granted under such section, pro- 
vided, however, that if the application contains all the facts re- 
quired for purposes of an adjustment under Section 33, or if the 
landlord files such additional data as may be required, an adjust- 
ment may be granted pursuant to Section 33. 

2. If an application for adjustment under former Sections 
33(1) or 39 was filed prior to March 15, 1951, and no order on such 
application had been entered by the Local Rent Administrator 
prior to March 15, 1951, no adjustment may be granted under such 
former sections, provided, however, that if the application contains 

80 This is new. The original Section 87, revoked, read as follows : 

"Section 87. Action by Local Rent Administrator upon consent applications. 
Where the application is based upon a voluntary written agreement entered 
into on or after May 1, 1950, between the landlord and a tenant in actual 
occupancy to increase or decrease the dwelling space, or the services, facilities, 
furniture, furnishings or equipment provided with the housing accommoda- 
tions, the Local Rent Administrator: 

"1. If he approves the amount of the adjustment as agreed to, shall issue 
an order adjusting the maximum rent accordingly without further notice to 
either party. 

"2. If he disapproves the amount of the proposed adjustment, shall notify 
the parties in writing of the amount, if any, he is prepared to approve; if 
the parties thereto do not agree to the amount suggested by the Administrator, 
the application shall thereupon be dismissed." 

69 



all the facts required for purposes of an adjustment under Sec- 
tion 33(1), or if the landlord files such additional data as may be 
required, an adjustment may be granted pursuant to Section 33(1). 

3. If an application for adjustment under former Section 33(2), 
or Section 34 or Section 35 was filed, or if the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator had instituted a proceeding under these sections or under 
Section 36, and no order in such pending proceedings had been 
entered by the Local Rent Administrator prior to March 15, 1951, 
the Local Rent Administrator may continue to process these appli- 
cations pursuant to the appropriate sections of these Regulations. 

4. Applications for certificates of eviction filed prior to March 
15, 1951, on which no order had been entered by the Local Rent 
Administrator prior to that date, may continue to be processed 
under the similarly numbered certificate grounds of these Regula- 
tions, provided, however, that the determination of such applica- 
tion shall be based upon the requirements of the present section, 
rather than upon the former requirements. 

Section 88. Modification or revocation of orders. 

1. The Local Rent Administrator, on application of either party 
or on his own initiative, may modify, supersede or revoke any 
order issued by him under these or previous regulations, 81 unless 
a protest has theretofore been filed. 

2. The Local Rent Administrator shall give notice to the persons 
affected of his intention to modify, supersede or revoke an order, 
in which event the provisions of Section 82 through 86, inclusive, 
shall apply. 

PART IX. PROTESTS 

Section 91. Persons who may file protests. 

1. Any person aggrieved by these Regulations or by an order 
issued by a Local Rent Administrator may file a protest to the 
Administrator in the manner provided in these Regulations. 

2. A joint protest, verified by each person joining therein, may 
be filed by two or more landlords or tenants, where at least one 
ground is common to all persons so filing. The Administrator, in 
his discretion, may treat such protest as joint or several. 

3. The Administrator may, in his discretion, consolidate two or 
more protests which have at least one ground in common. 

Section 92. Time for filing protests. 

1. A protest against any provision of these Regulations may be 
filed at any time after the effective date thereof. 

2. A protest against an order of a Local Rent Administrator 
must be filed within thirty days after the effective date of such 



The phrase "under these or previous regulations" is new. 

70 



order. The Administrator may, in his discretion, and for good 
cause shown, extend the time for filing. 

Section 93. Time of filing answer to protests. Where a protest 
against an order issued by a Local Rent Administrator has been 
filed by a landlord or tenant, the other party or parties shall be 
afforded a period of fifteen days from the date of service of such 
protest within which to serve and file an answer to the protest. 

Section 94. Form and content of protest against these Regu- 
lations or portion thereof. No printed form of protest is provided 
or prescribed. Each protest against these Regulations or portion 
thereof must be clearly designated "Protest to the State Rent Ad- 
ministrator re Section .... (or Sections ) of the Rent 

and Eviction Regulations", and shall set forth the following: 

(1) The name and post-office address of the party filing the 
protest, and whether he is a landlord or tenant, or representative. 

(2) A complete identification of the provision or provisions pro- 
tested, citing the section or sections of these Regulations to which 
the objection is made. 

(3) A simple concise statement of the objections to these Regu- 
lations or portion thereof protested. 

(4) A specific statement of the relief requested. 

(5) Each protest shall be verified by the party filing the protest. 

Section 95. Form and content of protest against an order of 
the Local Rent Administrator. No printed form of protest is pro- 
vided or prescribed. Each protest must be clearly designated 
"Protest to the State Rent Administrator re Order bearing docket 
number " and shall set forth the following : 

(1) The name and post-office address of the party filing the 
protest, and whether he is the landlord or tenant of the accom- 
modations involved or a representative. 

(2) A complete identification of the order to which objection is 
made, the date of issuance#thereof, the docket number, and the 
name of the Local Rent Office. 

(3) The location by post-office address of all housing accommo- 
dations involved in the protest. 

(4) The names and post-office addresses of all other parties af- 
fected by the protest. 

(5) A simple, concise statement of the objections to the order 
protested. 

(6) A specific statement of the relief requested. 

(7) 82 A statement informing the person served with the protest 
that he may within fifteen days from the date of such service, file 
a verified answer thereto, by filing the same with the State Rent 
Administrator, 280 Broadway, New York 7, New York, together 



82 This is a new provision. Former Section 95(7) is now designated Section 
95(8). 

71 



with proof of service of a copy of the answer upon the party filing 
the protest. 

(8) 83 Each protest shall be verified by the party filing the 
protest. 

(9) 84 Each such protest shall contain proof of service of (a) a 
copy of the protest and (b) copies of all accompanying papers 
upon the Local Rent Administrator and upon all parties affected 
by the protest. 

Section 96. Service and filing of protests. 

(1) Each protest shall be filed in an original and one copy at 
the Principal Office of the Administrator, 280 Broadway, New York 
7, New York. 

(2) Where the protest is against an order issued by the Local 
Rent Administrator, a copy of the protest shall also be served 
on the Local Rent Administrator issuing the order being protested, 
and upon each party affected by the protest. 

(3) A protest under Section 95 will not be accepted for filing 
unless accompanied by an affidavit or other proof of such service. 

Section 97. Time of filing answer to protest. Any person 
served with a protest as provided in Section 95(2), may, within 
fifteen days from the date of service, file a verified answer thereto, 
by filing the same with the Administrator, together with proof of 
service of a copy thereof upon the party filing the protest. The 
Administrator may, in his discretion, and for good cause shown, 
extend the time within which to answer. 

Section 98. Action by Administrator. Within a reasonable 
time after the filing of the protest and the answers, if any, the 
Administrator may: 

(1) Reject the protest if it is insufficient or defective. 

(2) Make such investigation of the facts, hold such conferences, 
and require the filing of such reports, evidence, affidavits, or other 
material relevant to the proceeding. 

(3) Forward to or make available for inspection by either party 
any relevant evidence and afford an opportunity to file rebuttal 
thereto. 

(4) For good cause shown accept for filing, any papers, even 
though not filed within the time required by these Regulations. 

(5) Require any person to appear or produce documents or 
both pursuant to a subpoena issued by the Administrator. 

(6) Grant or order a hearing. 

Section 99. Final determination by the Administrator. The 



83 Originally designated Section 95(7). Former Section 95(8) is now desig- 
nated Section 95(9). 

** Originally designated Section 95(8). 

72 



Administrator, on such terms and conditions as he may determine, 
may: 

(1) Dismiss the protest it' it fails substantially to comply with 
the provisions of the Act or these Regulations. 

(2) Grant or deny the protest, in whole or in part, or remand 
the proceeding to the Local Rent Administrator for further action. 

(3) In the event that the Administrator denies any such protest 
in whole or in part, the Administrator shall inform the party or 
parties filing the protest of the grounds upon which such decision 
is based, and of any economic data and other facts of which the 
Administrator has taken official notice. 

Section 100. 85 Pending protests. If a protest was filed against 
any provision of the regulations in effect prior to March 15, 1951 or 
against an order of a Local Rent Administrator issued prior to 
March 15, 1951 and no final order on such protest had been entered 
by the Administrator prior to that date, the Administrator may 
continue to process such protest, provided, however, that the deter- 
mination of such protest shall be in accordance with and based 
upon the requirements of these Regulations, rather than upon the 
former requirements. The provisions of Section 87 shall also apply 
to action taken by the Administrator on protests. 

Section 101. SG Time within which the Administrator shall take 
final action. If the Administrator does not act finally within a 
period of ninety days after the protest is filed, or within such 
extended period as may be fixed by the Administrator with the 
consent of all parties appearing in the proceeding, the protest 
shall be deemed to be denied. 

Section 102. ST Stay of eviction certificates upon filing of pro- 
test. The filing of a protest by a tenant against an order granting 
a certificate of eviction within thirty days after the date of such 
order, or within the time for filing as extended by the Adminis- 
trator, shall stay such order until the final determination of the 
protest by the Administrator regardless of whether the waiting- 
period provided in the order has already expired. 

85 This is new. Original Section 100 has been redesignated Section 101. 

86 Originally designated Section 100. 

87 Originally designated Section 101. This section was amended effective 
November 20, 1950 by Amendment No. 10 filed with the Secretary of State 
on that date. It is further amended by inserting the phrase "or within the 
time for tiling as extended by the Administrator". 

This section originally read as follows: 

"Section 101. Stay of eviction certificates upon filing of protest. 

"1. The filing of a protest by a tenant against an order granting a cer- 
tificate of eviction shall stay such order until thirty days after the determina- 
tion of the protest by the Administrator. 

"2. The waiting period, if any, provided by such order shall not be extended 
by the stay and the termination or expiration of the stay shall not operate 
to curtail such waiting period. 

"3. At any time after the filing of the protest the Administrator nun- 
terminate the stay of such order if he determines that the tenant's protest or 
objections are dilatory, frivolous or not made in good faith." 

73 



Section 103. 88 Judicial review. The filing and determination 
of a protest is a prerequisite to obtaining judicial review of any 
provision of these Regulations or any order issued thereunder, 
except as provided by §8 of the Act. A proceeding for review may 
be instituted under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Act provided 
the petition is filed within 30 days after the final determination of 
the protest. 

Section 104. 89 Modification or revocation of orders on protest. 

The Administrator, on application of either party or on his own 
initiative, may modify, supersede or revoke any order issued by 
him under these or previous regulations, notwithstanding that a 
petition for judicial review has been filed with the Supreme Court 
pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Act. 



PART X. MISCELLANEOUS PROCEDURAL MATTERS 

Section 110. When a notice or paper shall be deemed served. 

1. Notices, orders, protests, answers and other papers may be 
served personally or by mail. When service is made personally 
or by mail an affidavit by the person making the service or mailing 
shall constitute sufficient proof of service. When service is by 
registered mail the return post office receipt shall constitute suf- 
ficient proof of service. 

2. In any proceedings under these Regulations any notice, order 
or other process or paper directed to the person named as land- 
lord on the registration statement on file in the Local Rent Office, 
at the mailing address given' thereon, or where a notice of change 



88 Originally designated Section 102. The original Section 103 was revoked, 
and this section was amended, effective November 20, 1950 by Amendment 
No. 10 filed with the Secretary of State on that date. 

The original Section 102 read as follows: "Section 102. Judicial review. 
The filing and determination of a protest is a prerequisite to obtaining 
judicial review of any provision of these Regulations or any order issued 
thereunder, except that a defendant in a criminal prosecution or civil action 
or proceeding may obtain judicial review upon a showing of reasonable and 
substantial excuse for his failure to have protested as provided herein. A 
proceeding for review may be instituted under Article 78 of the Civil Practice 
Act provided the petition is filed within thirty days after final determination 
of the protest." 

The original Section 103 read as follows: "Section 103. Stay of eviction 
proceedings upon judicial review. If, in protest proceedings concerning the 
issuance of an order granting a certificate of eviction, the Administrator 
denies the tenant's protest in whole or in part, or if the final order of the 
Administrator grants the landlord's protest in whole or in part, such order 
shall be stayed for a further period of thirty days from the date of the 
Administrator's determination. If the tenant files a petition under Article 78 
of the Civil Practice Act, such order shall be further stayed until entry of the 
final judgment of the Supreme Court and for a period of thirty days there- 
after. If within that period, the tenant files an appeal with the Appellate 
Division of the Supreme Court, any further stay shall be governed by the 
provisions of the Civil Practice Act for appeals from a final order in a special 
proceeding." 

89 This is a new section. <- 

74 



of identity has been filed in the Local Rent Office, to the person 
named therein as landlord and at the address given in such notice 
of change of identity most recently filed, shall constitute notice 
to such landlord. 

3. Where a notice of appearance has been filed by an attorney, 
service on the attorney shall be deemed proper service as if made 
on the party or parties represented. 

Section 111. Power of subpoena. The Administrator or any 
officer or agent designated by the Administrator, may administer 
oaths and affirmations and may, whenever necessary, by subpoena 
require any person to appear and testify or to appear and produce 
documents, or both, at any designated place. 

Section 112. Production of documents. The production of a 
person's documents at any place other than his place of business 
shall not be required in any case in which, prior to the return date 
specified in the subpoena issued with respect thereto, such person 
either has furnished the Administrator with a copy of such docu- 
ments certified by such person under oath to be a true and correct 
copy, or has entered into a stipulation with the Administrator as 
to the information contained in such documents. 

Section 113. Action by Commission on failure to obey sub- 
poena. In case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpoena served 
upon any person, the Supreme Court in, or for any judicial dis- 
trict in which such person is found or resides or transacts business, 
upon application by the Administrator, shall have jurisdiction to 
issue an order requiring such person to appear and give testimony 
or to appear and produce documents, or both; and any failure 
to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court as 
a contempt thereof. 

Section 114. Privilege against self-incrimination. No person 
shall be excused from attending and testifying or from producing 
documents or other evidence in obedience to the subpoena of the 
Administrator or of any duly authorized officer or agent thereof, 
on the ground that the testimony or evidence required of him 
may tend to incriminate him or subject him to a penalty or for- 
feiture, but no person shall be prosecuted or subjected to any 
penalty or forfeiture for or on account of any transaction, matter 
or thing concerning which he is compelled, after having claimed 
his privilege against self-incrimination, to testify or produce evi- 
dence, except that such person so testifying shall not be exempt 
from prosecution and punishment for perjury committed in so 
testifying. The immunity herein provided shall extend only to 
natural persons so compelled to testify. 

Section 115. Disclosure of information by the Administrator. 

The Administrator shall not publish or disclose any information 
obtained under the Act or these Regulations that the Administrator 
deems confidential or with reference to which a request for con- 
fidential treatment is made by the person furnishing such informa- 

75 



tion. unless the Administrator determines that the withholding 
thereof is contrary to the public interest. 

Section 116. Delegation of authority. The Administrator may 
delegate in writing to the Local Rent Administrator, or any other 
person or persons, the authority to carry out any of the duties and 
powers granted to him by the Act or these Regulations. 

Section 117. Opinions and official interpretations. 

1. Official interpretations of general applicability with respect 
to the provisions of the Act or these Regulations shall be issued 
only by the Administrator. No interpretation shall be given in 
response to any hypothetical question. 

2. Any person desiring an opinion as to the applicability of the 
Act or these Regulations to a specific factual situation, shall make 
a request in writing for such opinion to the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator for the locality within which the housing accommodations 
involved are situated. Such request shall set forth in full the facts 
out of which the question arises and shall state the name and post- 
office address of the person or persons making the request and 
the location of the housing accommodations involved. If there is 
a pending or closed proceeding in the particular office, or if the 
inquirer has previously requested an opinion on the same or sub- 
stantially the same facts, his request shall so indicate. No opinion 
shall be given in response to any hypothetical question. 

3. Any opinion or official interpretation shall remain in full 
force and effect unless and until revoked or modified in writing by 
the official issuing it or bv the Administrator. 



PART XI. ° HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN 
SARATOGA COUNTY 

Section 118(a). Maximum rents for housing accommodations 
in Saratoga County. The maximum rent for housing accommoda- 
tions in Saratoga County which are subject to these Regulations 
shall be the maximum rent which was established 91 on January 2, 
1950, pursuant to the Federal Act, wherever there was a maximum 
rent in effect on that date. 

Section 118(b). Substitution of applicable dates. Parts I to X, 
inclusive, of these Regulations are applicable to all housing accom- 
modations in Saratoga County; however, wherever March 1, 1950 
appears therein, January 2, 1950 shall be substituted; wherever 
May 1, 1950 appears therein, June 30, 1950 shall be substituted; 
and wherever May 15, 1950 appears therein, July 15, 1950 shall be 
substituted. 

Section 119. Adjustments for substantial improvements made 
in the period from January 3, 1950 to June 30, 1950. Any landlord 

90 Added by Amendments No. 4 and No. 5. See footnote 9, supra. 
M Previously read "prescribed". 

76 



of housing accommodations in Saratoga County may file an ap- 
plication for adjustment to increase the maximum rent otherwise 
allowable on the grounds that in the period from January :',. 1950 
to June 30, 1950, the landlord had made substantial improvements 
to the housing accommodations or had increased the dwelling space 
the essential services, furniture, furnishings or equipment pro- 
vided in the housing accommodations. The amount of the adjust- 
ment shall be the rental value of such substantial improvements. 
additional dwelling space, services, furnishings, or extra equipment 
as determined by the Administrator taking into consideration all 
the equities involved. 

Section 120. Designation of jurisdiction and effective date. 
The administration of rent and eviction control in Saratoga 
County shall be under the jurisdiction of the Local Rent Ad- 
ministrator of the Albanv Local Rent Office. 92 This Part shall be 
effective July L 1950. 



PART XII. 93 HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN THE TOWN 
OF COEYMANS IN ALBANY COUNTY 

Section 121. Maximum rent for housing accommodations in 
the Town of Coeymans in Albany County. The maximum rent 
for housing accommodations in the Town of Coeymans in Albany 
County which are subject to these Regulations shall be the maxi- 
mum rent which was established 94 on January 5, 1950, pursuant to 
the Federal Act wherever there was a maximum rent in effect on 
that date. 

Section 122. Substitution of applicable dates. Parts I to X, 
inclusive, of these Regulations are applicable to all housing accom- 
modations in the Town of Coeymans in Albany County; however, 
wherever March 1, 1950 appears therein, January 5, 1950 shall be 
substituted ; wherever May 1, 1950 appears therein, August 1, 1950 
shall be substituted; and wherever May 15, 1950 appears therein, 
August 15, 1950 shall be substituted. 

Section 123. Adjustments for substantial improvements made 
in the period from January 6, 1950 to July 31, 1950. Any land- 
lord of housing accommodations in the Town of Coeymans in Al- 
bany County, may file an application for adjustment to increase 
the maximum rent otherwise allowable on the grounds that in the 
period from January 6, 1950 to July 31, 1950, the landlord had 
made substantial improvements to the housing accommodations or 
had increased the dwelling space, the essential services, furniture, 
furnishings or equipment provided in the housing accommodations. 

92 This first sentence is added to include within the Regulations the designa- 
tion of jurisdiction of rent and eviction control in Saratoga County. The 
words "Designation of jurisdiction and" are added to the original title of this 
section. 

88 Added by Amendment No. 7. See footnote 8, supra. 

"Originally read "prescribed". 

n 



The amount of the adjustment shall be the rental value of such 
substantial improvements, additional dwelling space, services, fur- 
nishings, or extra equipment as determined by the Administrator, 
taking into consideration all the equities involved. 

Section 124. Designation of jurisdiction. The administration 
of rent and eviction control in the Town of Coeymans in Albany 
County shall be under the jurisdiction of the Local Rent Adminis- 
trator of the Albany Local Rent Office. 

Section 125. Effective date. This Part shall be effective August 
1, 1950. 



PART XIII. 95 HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN THE CITY 

AND TOWN OF GENEVA IN ONTARIO COUNTY, AND IN 

SENECA COUNTY 

Section 131. Maximum rent for housing accommodations in 
the City and Town of Geneva in Ontario County, and in Seneca 
County. The maximum rent for housing accommodations in the 
City and Town of Geneva in Ontario County, and in Seneca 
County, which are subject to these Regulations shall be the rent 
which was in effect on October 1, 1950. 

Section 132. Registration requirements. On or before Janu- 
ary 15, 1951, every landlord of housing accommodations subject to 
these Regulations, rented or offered for rent on October 1, 1950, 
shall file with the Local Rent Administrator a form prescribed by 
the Administrator, known as a Registration Statement. This form 
shall identify each housing accommodation and shall specify there- 
in the maximum rent provided by these Regulations for such hous- 
ing accommodations and shall contain such other information as 
the Administrator shall require. This Registration Statement shall 
be filed pursuant to instructions appearing on the form. 

Section 133. Substitution of applicable dates. Parts I to X, 
inclusive, of these Regulations are applicable to housing accommo- 
dations in the City and Town of Geneva in Ontario County, and in 
Seneca County; however, wherever March 1, 1950 appears therein, 
October 1, 1950 shall be substituted; wherever May 1, 1950 appears 
therein, December 1, 1950 shall be substituted; and wherever May 
15, 1950 appears therein, January 15, 1951 shall be substituted. 

Section 134. Adjustments for substantial improvements made 
in the period from October 1, 1950 to November 30, 1950. Any 

landlord of housing accommodations in the City and Town of 
Geneva in Ontario County, and in Seneca County, may file an 
application for adjustment to increase the maximum rent otherwise 
allowable on the grounds that in the period from October 1, 1950 to 
November 30, 1950 the landlord had made substantial improve- 
ments to the housing accommodations or had increased the dwelling 

w Added by Amendment No. 11. See footnotes 10 and 11, supra. 

78 



space, the essential services, furniture, furnishings or equipment 
provided in the housing accommodations. The amount of the ad- 
justment shall be the rental value of such substantial improve- 
ments, additional dwelling space, services, furnishings, or extra 
equipment as determined by the Administrator, taking into con- 
sideration all the equities involved. 

Section 135. Designation of jurisdiction. The administration 

of rent and eviction control in the City and Town of Geneva in 
Ontario County, and in Seneca County, shall be under the juris- 
diction of the Local Rent Administrator of the Syracuse Local 
Rent Office. 

Section 136. Effective date. This Part shall be effective De- 
cember 1, 1950. 



79 



PART 3 

Operations 

/. Readiness of the State 

The "Stand-By" Law 

Since the creation of the Temporary State Housing Rent Commis- 
sion by the Legislature in 1946, Joseph D. McGoldrick has been its 
sole member by appointment of Governor Thomas E. Dewey. The 
Commission was created at that time by the so-called "stand-by" 
law, which was enacted so that in the event Congress failed to con- 
tinue rent controls as long as the emergency in New York required, 
the State automatically would take over. 

The soundness of the "standby" law was proven in 1946 when 
there was an hiatus of twenty-five days between the expiration of the 
Federal rent control law and enactment of a new Federal law. In the 
interregnum New York was the only state in the country to have rent 
control. The State Temporary Housing Rent Commission admin- 
istrated the "standby" statute while it was in force. 

At its 1950 session the Legislature decided that the State should 
take over controls from the Federal Government and New York City 
and on March 29 Governor Dewey signed the admendment to the 
original act by which that was accomplished. Two days later the 
Governor appointed Mr. McGoldrick to the post of State Rent Ad- 
ministrator. Thereafter Mr. McGoldrick operated under two titles, 
Commissioner of the Temporary State Housing Rent Commission 
and State Rent Administrator. 

Also having been a member of the Temporary State Commission 
to Study Rents and Rental Conditions since 1948 by appointment of 
Governor Dewey, and, besides that, having been Chairman of the 
New York City Rent Advisory Board by Federal appointment upon 
the recommendation of Governor Dewey, Mr. McGoldrick was able 
to assemble quickly the machinery for the enforcement of state con- 
trols upon their taking effect as of May 1, 1950. He had the Regula- 
tions prepared, printed, and distributed in time to go into operation on 
May 1, the date the act became effective. These Regulations included 
a provision for the making of individual adjustments in cases where 
landlord and tenant mutually agreed in writing to a substantial in- 
crease or decrease in dwelling space, or a change in the services or 
facilities provided in the housing accommodation. Although the Act 
provided that such a provision was to be effectuated no later than 
July 1, the Commission included that provision in the May 1 Regu- 
lations. Since the original filing the Regulations have been amended 
from time to time as experience warranted; on December 1, 1950 the 
number of amendments in effect was twelve. 

80 



//. The State in Action 

The Beginning 

The personnel required at the start — 450 men and women — was 
almost entirely enlisted from the Office of the Housing Expediter 
to give the State the advantage of their skill and experience. 

The Federal Government co-operated in transferring the office 
quarters which had been occupied by the Housing Expediter, along 
with the official files, which were indispensable to proper administra- 
tion; the Federal Government also loaned office furniture and sup- 
plies to the State. From the City of New York, where the municipal 
government also had maintained controls under its own laws, there 
was similar co-operation. 

Because of the immense complexity that is inherent in any set of 
economic controls, and that is especially prevalent in the relations 
of landlord and tenant, the Commission has since found that inex- 
perienced personnel tend to slow up greatly the administrative 
processes. 

One of the objects of the Commission was to simplify the pro- 
cedure. Accordingly, a great deal of advance work was done in 
preparing forms and reducing them to the plainest terms. The num- 
ber of forms was reduced almost in half. While the task of re- 
writing, printing and distributing these throughout the State was 
immense for the brief period available for preparation, the transition 
from Federal and local to State control proceeded swiftly, and so far 
as those subject to the provisions of the law are concerned there was 
virtually no interruption. 

The Principal Office was located in new quarters at 280 Broadway, 
New York City, because the vast bulk of the Commission's work 
concerned that city. Local Rent Offices were established in the 
same cities as those in which the Office of the Housing Expediter had 
Area Rent Offices and generally in the same quarters the Federal 
Government had used. A Local Rent Administrator was placed in 
charge of each office with authority over the same territory as that 
which had been allocated to the Federal Area Office. 

At the inception of operations an innovation was introduced by 
the Administrator into the actual application of rent control. This 
was in the public distribution of guiding directions to the staff called 
"Administrator's Opinions", enabling everyone to understand the 
reasoning behind administrative decisions as they were made, and 
thus more easily to conform to them. 

Volume of Work 

As of November 30, 1950, there were 3,034,251 housing accommo- 
dations under the control of the Commission, of which 294,210 were 
units in rooming houses. This was an increase of 62,132, of which 
43,607 were accommodations in rooming houses. This increase was 
due largely to the recontrol of Saratoga County, the Town of Coey- 

81 



mans, the City and Town of Geneva in Ontario County, and Seneca 
County, which is discussed elsewhere in this document. 

During the seven months of operation, 215,037 applications of all 
types were received by the Commission. Of these, 174,765, or 81.3 
percent were disposed of and 40,272 were pending as of November 
30, 1950. 

The type of application and the numbers docketed, disposed of, 
granted and pending are given in Table Al. 

The steady increase in the volume of applications received and 
disposed of by the Commission is indicated in Chart 1. 

The ability of the staff to keep abreast of the steadily increasing 
volume of work is shown graphically in this chart. Up until Novem- 
ber there was a progressive increase monthly in the number of cases 
docketed, except for September when there was the usual seasonal 
falling off. Because the first month of operations was spent largely 
in explaining the new regulations to the public and in familiarizing 
the staff with the new processes, substantial progress in the disposal 
of cases did not begin until June. 

In June more than 10,000 cases were disposed of; in July the 
number was more than twice that; in August it was in excess of 
30,000. Due to vacations, for which the staff was not eligible until 
September, and then only for very brief periods, there was a slight 
decline in that month, but the volume of work accomplished rose 
sharply in October. In November it exceeded the number of cases 
docketed and the number of cases pending began to decrease. All 
of this was accomplished despite the fact that a large part of the 
staff was engaged in the survey for the new rent control plan. 

The number and type of applications received and the number 
disposed of, as well as the ratio to the total number received 
throughout the State, is given in Table A5. The disposition of cases 
by types and percentage of each type is given in Chart 2. 

From May 1 to November 30, 525,217 persons called at the Local 
Rent Offices; 876,531 telephone calls were received; there were 
496,039 pieces of incoming mail and 610,697 pieces of outgoing mail. 
In addition there were 222 hearings, 15,622 conferences and 80,896 
interviews. The details are in Table A2. 

While these figures show a tremendous volume of work accom- 
plished, they only partly reflect the many complexities and unique 
problems confronting the Local Rent Offices. 

The work of each of the Local Rent Offices is shown in Table A3. 
It gives the number of cases docketed, disposed of and granted and 
the number pending as of November 30, 1950. It also shows State 
totals for each month from May through November, and reflects a 
steady increase in the number of applications disposed of each 
month, which reached a total of 43,356 in November, 1950. 

The New York City Local Rent Offices received a total of 
186,458 applications, or 86.7 percent of the total cases docketed in 
the State. Table A4 shows the number of the various types of 
applications received in the New York City offices and in all other 
offices, and also the percentage ratio to the total number received 
throughout the State. 

82 



Of the total of 215,037 applications received throughout the State, 
by far the largest number consisted of agreed increases in maximum 
rent for increases in services or facilities. These numbered 123,152, 
or 57.3 percent. 

The capacity of the staff to handle and dispose of agreements be- 
tween landlords and tenants for voluntary increases in rent in pay- 
ment for agreed increases in additional services or facilities, such 
as a new refrigerator, a stove, or a television antenna, is illustrated 
in Chart 3. 

A similar cumulative picture is given in Chart 4 of the disposal 
of applications by tenants for decreases in maximum rent because 
of the failure of landlords to paint and decorate apartments, and for 
failure to supply other required services. This type of application 
can not be disposed of as rapidly as others since more detailed 
processing is required. 

Public Information 

The basic policy of the Commission has been to inform the public 
regularly of the progress of operations. Monthly reports have been 
issued regularly from the Principal Office, giving the operations of 
the Commission throughout the State, and each Local Rent Office 
has made public corresponding figures for its own jurisdiction. 

With the cooperation of virtually all radio stations and newspapers 
in the controlled areas there has been a constant stream of informa- 
tion for both landlords and tenants, given objectively, with full expla- 
nations of Commission policies on problems of general interest. 

In the actual administration there has been complete opportunity 
for all parties to a proceeding to examine all of the documents and 
data submitted by their adversaries. There are no "confidential poli- 
cies," no "secret formulae," no "secret instructions" to Local Rent 
Offices. The Commission, indeed, has operated in a goldfish bowl of 
public scrutiny and individual examination where there is justifiable 
interest. 

What It Cost 

The total cost of the Commission from the beginning of operations 
until November 30, 1950, was $1,542,070.78. On November 30 there 
were 601 employees; the personal service cost up to that date was 
$1,218,518.74. The second largest item of expense was rental, which 
totalled $108,136.95 for the same period. The next largest items 
were: printing and advertising — $58,503.87; communications — 
$45,505.53; travel— $36,820.95; equipment— $32,311.99; and general 
office supplies and expense — $25,247.39. 

Many of these expenses are non-recurring. Much of the printing 
cost was due to the necessity of issuing new regulations and new 
forms. Much of the travel and printing expense was to carry out the 
mandate of the Legislature and make a survey of the whole State — 
decontrolled and uncontrolled areas as well as controlled areas. This 
survey was for the purpose of showing rental conditions and all of 
the economic factors concerning housing, so that the Commission 
would have an adequate basis upon which to present to the Legisla- 
ture for its consideration in 1951 the Rent Control Plan which is 
the core of this document. 

83 



The survey material was published in survey of rents and was 
available to the Commission for the preparation of the interim 
regulations, which it was required by law to issue on December 1, 
1950, for the temporary relief of landlords suffering loss and severe 
hardship because of inequalities and gross inequities. Much of the 
printing cost was allocable to the publication of survey of rents, 
which gave in detail the results of the study required by the Legisla- 
ture, and which immediately was recognized as the most extensive 
and complete study of rental conditions ever made in this country. 

The cost of this study and investigation, $152,785, representing 
approximately 10 percent of the Commission's operating costs up to 
November 30, 1950, was distributed among all the items in the table 
below. Since all of the personnel were either from the Principal 
Office or from the Local Rent Offices (both permanent and tem- 
porary employees engaged for this particular purpose, or permanent 
employees from the Local Offices), the cost of their travel, and of 
their maintenance when away from base stations, is distributed in the 
table below and is not shown separately as a lump sum. 

STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES 

(Including Accruals and Deferred Items) 
November 30, 1950 

Number of 
Controlled 

Housing Number of Personal 

Offices Registrations Employees Service 

Albany 128,994 16 $38,691.28 

Binghamton ••... 67,541 12 25,782.59 

Buffalo 224,359 28 61,370.54 

Rochester 72,796 11 22,278.05 

Syracuse 85,063 13 25,801.23 

Utica 41,457 6 13,000.09 

Watertown 29,288 5 11,356.68 

Bronx ....••.... 445,769 79 143,287.95 

Brooklyn 653,654 93 188,534.57 

Lower Manhattan 487,288 76 154,723.77 

Upper Manhattan. 261,666 55 104,659.84 

Queens 345,450 52 104,680.46 

Poughkeepsie .... 79,798 11 22,799.10 

White Plains ... . 111,128 16 33,102.54 

Principal Office... 128 268,450.05 



Totals 3,034,251 601 $1,218,518.74 

Maintenance and Operation Expense 

Travel $36,820.95 

General Office Supplies and Expense • • . . 25,247.39 

Printing and Advertising • • 58,503.87 

Communication 45,505.53 

Utilities • • 4,796.83 

Food 411.05 

Special Supplies and Expense ••.... 8,396.83 

Repairs 3,420.62 

Rentals ■ ■ 108,136.95 

Equipment — Additional 32,31 1.99 

$323,552.04 



Total Expense $1,542,070.78 

84 



<S2 






£2 

Ui_J 



oo. 



g 





DBS 




I 




* 




5 




Ui 




o5E 




° <= <-> 
fc£- 

* P o 
5 S5jZ 


a 


§o£ 




Li 



^\\\\\\\mv\\\\\m\\\w 




85 



1 

I 

CO 

g 

i 

"F $; 

li | 

COO ^ 



Q. 



I 
£° 

gro 

CO ^* 

LU O 



£ 

CO 

O 



s 



CO 






** 



co 

Z 
Q 

I 

£ 



< 
z 
u 

i 



<M 



>5 

CM 

GO 

I 

CO 



o o 

> I- 

Lu CJ 

U. < 

O UJ 

CO ^ 

e s 

P z 

° < 



R3 



i 



^ § 



y 1 



»o 
i 

CO 

z 
o 

UJ 
o 

1 

of 

s: 
o 
o 

1 



I 

UJ 
CO 

5 

O 

UJ 

O 



o 



U. i 



CO 

z 
o 



1* 



CO 



5 1 



3 



1 

o 
or 
o 

-J 
o 

I 



H 



§: s 



ft 

o 

z 
o 
o 

UJ 

Q 

S3 



UJ 

Q 
CO 

Z 

o 

o 

UJ 

q: 



THOUSANDS 



DISPOSITION OF APPLICATIONS BY LANDLORDS AND 
TENANTS FOR INCREASES BASED ON AGREED 
INCREASED SERVICES-CUMULATED MONTHLY 



JO 



M> 



_5P 



JB> 



LEGEMD 

PENDING ■ 

DISPOSED OF 



I I 



I I 



1 



I 



I I 



1 I 




MAY3I JUNE 30 JULY 31 AU6UST3I SEPTEMBERS OCT0BER3I N0VEMBER3O 



CHART 3 
87 



DISPOSITION OF TENANT APPLICATIONS FOR RESTORATION 
OF PAINTING AND OTHER SERVICES-CUMULATED MONTHLY 



LEGEND 
PENDING ■ 

DISPOSED OF 



THOUSANDS 



2P 



J2 



I 



■ ■ ■ 







1 



MAY 31 JUNE 30 JULY 31 AUGUST31 SEFTEMBER30 OCTOBERS! M0VEMKR3O 



CHART 4 



///. Surveys 

General 

In addition to the complete study and investigation of all factors 
affecting residential rents and rental conditions in the State, which 
was reported on November 1, 1950 in survey of rents, the Com- 
mission surveyed various decontrolled sections of the State to de- 
termine whether they should be recontrolled. 

Saratoga County 

At the time the Commission took over controls from the Office 
of the Federal Housing Expediter there was pending a request by 
the Schenectady County Rent Advisory Board asking recontrol of 
Saratoga County. Pursuant to this request the Office of the Housing 
Expediter had surveyed these rental conditions and in anticipation 
of the transfer of control to the State had forwarded to the Gover- 
nor all data connected with the problem. 

Accordingly, the Commission examined the Federal data and sup- 
plemented that with its own survey. The combined Federal and State 
surveys indicated that rents had increased an average of 38.9 per- 
cent. A public hearing then was held in Saratoga Springs at which 
landlords, tenants and the public generally were given opportunity to 
present their views. As a result of the surveys and the testimony 
the Administrator placed Saratoga County under the Rent and 
Eviction Regulations, effective July 1, 1950, with a roll-back to the 
date of decontrol. 

Town of Coeymans, Albany County 

The Commission received a number of complaints of excessive 
increases in rents from tenants in the Town of Coeymans, in Albany 
County, which had been decontrolled by the Federal Housing Ex- 
pediter. The Commission surveyed all rental accommodations which 
had been so decontrolled and found that rents had increased an 
average of 39.5 percent. The Administrator then placed the Town 
of Coeymans under the Rent and Evictions Regulations, effective 
August 1, 1950, with a roll-back to the date of decontrol. 

Geneva-Seneca County 

During World War II the Navy operated a training station at 
Sampson in Seneca County. The Seneca Ordnance Depot is at 
Romulus, also in Seneca County. These installations were ex- 
tremely active during World War II. As many as 50,000 naval 
recruits were under training at Sampson from time to time and ac- 
cordingly the surrounding Defense Area, consisting of the Counties 

89 



of Seneca, Ontario and Yates, had been placed under Federal rent 
control. At the end of World War II the training station was de- 
activated and thereafter the Federal Housing Expediter decon- 
trolled the three counties mentioned. 

In November, 1950, the Navy transferred the station at Sampson 
to the Air Force, which plans to use it as a training base, accommo- 
dating 30,000 recruits and approximately 5,000 civilian and naval 
personnel. At the request of the Air Force the Administrator placed 
the City and Town of Geneva in Ontario County and Seneca 
County under the Rent and Eviction Regulations, effective Decem- 
ber 1, 1950, with a roll-back to October 1, 1950. At the same time 
the Commission began a survey of the balance of Ontario County 
and all of Yates County, to determine whether rental conditions re- 
sulting from the reactivation of the Sampson Base and the expansion 
of activities at the Ordnance Depot required action by the Adminis- 
trator. This survey is now in progress. 

Delaware County 

The Principal Office and the local office at Binghamton received 
a number of complaints of excessive increases in rent in Delaware 
County, which had also been decontrolled by the Federal Housing 
Expediter. A survey of that County was made by the Commission 
and the report of that survey is Appendix D of this document. 

Chenango County 

Because of the number of complaints of large increases in rents in 
Chenango County, which had also been decontrolled by the Federal 
Housing Expediter, this Commission surveyed all decontrolled rents 
in that county. The report is now in preparation. 

Wayne County 

This County is another which was decontrolled by the Federal 
Housing Expediter. Because of complaints from tenants, particu- 
larly from labor organizations, the Commission surveyed a large 
representation of decontrolled rents in the county. The report is now 
in preparation. 

Conclusion 

This Commission has been concerned with the large number of 
complaints from tenants throughout the State occupying accommo- 
dations in other areas which were decontrolled by the Federal Hous- 
ing Expediter. Because of the tremendous work-load placed upon 
the Commission's Survey Division in making the statewide survey 
for the new comprehensive Rent Control Plan, it has not been pos- 
sible up to this time to survey more areas. 



90 



IV. Protests 

Evidence of Thorough Consideration 

Any person subject to any provision of the Regulations, or ag- 
grieved by an order of a Local Rent Administrator, may file a pro- 
test under the Act. 

The Administrator is required to take final action within ninety 
days from the date of filing of a protest. It is a rule of administrative 
law that no recourse may be had to the courts until administrative 
remedies have been exhausted; therefore no proceeding under 
Article 78 of the .Civil Practice Act may be begun until the Adminis- 
trator has determined the protest. 

The right to protest to the Administrator gives a dissatisfied land- 
lord or tenant a simple method of obtaining a thorough review of the 
order in accordance with the procedure contained in Part IX of the 
Regulations. 

Protest review by the Principal Office is not pro-jorma. The 
cumulative report on protests from June 1 to November 30, 1950 
shows that of the 638 cases disposed of by final order as many as 
seventy-four were remanded to the local rent offices for further 
processing ; seven were modified ; and sixty-one were granted. Thus, 
142 cases, or 22 percent of the total number of protests, resulted in 
changes of Local Rent Administrators' determinations. Four hun- 
dred and ninety-six protests were denied. 

Since the protest review is de novo, consideration is not limited to 
an inquiry as to whether the order was arbitrary or capricious. The 
question considered is whether the Local Rent Office has properly 
processed and decided the case, as is indicated by the substantial 
number of instances in which the Principal Office overruled the 
Local Rent Administrators. In this way the protestant is given a 
far more thorough review on the merits than the courts can give in 
an Article 78 proceeding, where the court is limited by law to the 
single consideration whether the Administrator has been arbitrary 
or capricious. 

Benefit to Courts 

All Local Rent Offices throughout the State are apprised of signifi- 
cant decisions in protest cases. Excerpts from all important new 
protest decisions are reported semi-monthly to all Local Rent 
Administrators. 

The protest procedure keeps to a minimum the number of orders 
of the Commission brought into court for review. During the period 
covered by this report only seventy-one proceedings for judicial 
review were begun. 

The Administrator's decisions on protest contain a statement of 
facts, an analysis of the issues, and the reasons for his conclusion. 

91 



Because of this, relatively few proceedings have been instituted 
under Article 78 of the Civil Practice Act. 

The protests first received were directed against various provi- 
sions of the Regulations. The number started to rise in July, when 
140 were filed. It continued to rise in September, when 583 were 
filed. A smaller number was filed in October — 552, and a still smaller 
number in November — 471. The Administrator has now attained a 
disposal rate of more than 500 cases per month. In November 559 
cases were disposed of. As of November 30 there were 1,189 cases 
pending and 966 had been closed. Judicial review had been sought 
of less than 6 percent of the Administrator's rulings on protests. 



V. Litigation 



Four Classes 



Almost from the beginning of its operation the Commission has 
been engaged in litigation ranging from a test of the constitutionality 
of the Act itself to a review of the Administrator's decisions in 
individual instances. All litigation has been handled for the Commis- 
sion by the Attorney General, acting as its counsel. 

Up to December 22, two hundred and eighty-three cases had been 
referred to the Attorney General by either the Principal Office or by 
Local Rent Administrators. 

In general this litigation has been divided into four classes: (1) 
petitions for review by the Supreme Court under Article 78 of the 
Civil Practice Act to determine whether the Administrator had 
acted capriciously or arbitrarily in the issuance of orders; (2) simi- 
lar petitions to determine whether the Commission had exceeded its 
authority under the Act in issuing a regulation; (3) actions insti- 
tuted by the Commission to compel compliance with the law ; and 
(4) actions brought by private parties in which the Commission 
intervened because a question of interpretation of the law was in- 
volved. 

Most cases were in the first group ; the next largest group was the 
third, the smallest was the second. 

Of the 283 cases, 161 had been completed by December 22. Of 
these, the Commission had won 153 and lost eight. 

Teeval Case 

The most important litigation was the so-called Teeval Case in 
which the constitutionality of the Act was challenged. The Court of 
Appeals upheld the constitutionality of all of the Act except Section 
13(a) which banned liability for rent increases granted by the Office 
of the Housing Expediter after March 1, 1949, and prior to May 1, 
1950, barred or purportedly barred by the local laws of the City of 
New York. The Supreme Court of the United States refused to re- 
view the decision of the Court of Appeals. 

92 



The result of this decision was to validate these rent increases up 
to May 1, 1950, which the State law had invalidated. However, to 
prevent the collection of these increases from providing a basis for 
the eviction of tenants, the Commission issued an Amendment to its 
Regulations generally providing that no tenant could be evicted solely 
because of the failure to pay such accrued increases. 

Another important issue presently before the Appellate Courts is 
the validity of the Commission's Regulations establishing maximum 
rents within the City of New York where different maximum rents 
existed under the Federal and local laws. The Commission's Regula- 
tions state that the lower of the two is the maximum rent. The 
Commission's position has been sustained in the Appellate Division, 
First Department. However, in the Second Department the Com- 
mission has appealed an adverse decision which has not yet been 
determined. 

Other issues now before the appellate courts involve the questions 
of whether an order issued by the Office of the Housing Expediter 
after March 1, 1950, affecting property outside the City of New York, 
and an order issued after March 1, 1949 by the Office of the Housing 
Expediter affecting property within the City of New York, are ef- 
fective under the State law where these orders were made effective 
prior to those dates. It was the Commission's opinion that such orders 
could not validly establish maximum rents under the State law. The 
Appellate Term, Second Department, has sustained the Commission's 
position and has held that such orders are effective only up to and 
including April 30, 1950, and that the rent reverts to the lower amount 
on and after May 1, 1950. A few lower courts have held to the con- 
trary. 



Other Litigation 

The Supreme Court, New York County, has declared invalid Sec- 
tion 42 of the Regulations which placed additional housing accommo- 
dations within the City of New York created by conversion on and 
after February 1, 1947, under State rent control. The Commission 
is appealing this decision. 

The Commission has been uniformly successful in the courts in 
establishing that a tenant has the right to those services, equipment 
and furnishings to which he was entitled on the date his maximum 
rent was established. 

The Commission also has been uniformly successful in obtaining 
restitution to tenants where landlords persisted in demanding rents 
in excess of the maximum, and requiring excess security deposits, 
bonuses and the purchase of furniture as conditions of renting. In 
some cases the courts granted injunctions against future violations. 

The great majority of the proceedings brought under Article 78 
involved either the issuance or denial of Certificates of Eviction. 
With a few exceptions the Administrator's findings and orders have 
been sustained. 

The Commission has generally been successful in restoring to pos- 

93 



session tenants who have been evicted contrary to the requirements 
of the Regulations. 

The Commission also has been successful in establishing that 
judicial review generally may be obtained only of an order issued 
by the Administrator on a protest. The courts have upheld the Com- 
mission's right to reject a protest that is not filed within the thirty- 
day period required by the Regulations. 

The courts have held that the Commission was not arbitrary or 
capricious in issuing an order based upon documentary and other 
written evidence where no oral hearing was held involving the taking 
of testimony. 



Detailed Organization 



The State was divided into two districts, Upstate and Downstate. 
Each district is supervised by a Deputy State Administrator. Upstate 
is directed from Albany and includes the areas administered by 
the Local Rent Offices in Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, Utica, Water- 
town, Binghampton, and Albany. Downstate is directed from 
New York City and includes the five Local Rent Offices there and 
the Local Rent Offices in White Plains and Poughkeepsie. In both 
areas there are a number of Branch Offices and Rent Stations. The 
former are permanently staffed and the latter are manned in ac- 
cordance with the varying requirements of the local communities. 
Upstate Branch Offices are located in Schenectady, Elmira, James- 
town and Geneva. Downstate they are located in Staten Island, 
Mineola, Yonkers, Mount Vernon and Kingston. 

In the New York City Area it has been found most economical 
to have two offices in Manhattan, one for the area above 110 Street 
and the other for the area below; to have the Brooklyn Local Rent 
Office administer Staten Island, and the Queens Office administer 
Xassau and Suffolk counties. Accordingly in the statistical tables 
two figures are given for Manhattan, and no separate figures are 
shown for Staten Island, Nassau and Suffolk. 



Tables 

There follow twenty-nine tables giving in detail the sendees 
required of the Commission by the public up to November 30, 1950, 
with separate figures for each Local Rent Office and summaries 
for the Upstate and Downstate .districts. The tables also show the 
volume of work done by the Commission in administering the law. 
The number of housing units for which adjustment applications 
was filed in December under the interim Regulations is also given. 



94 



TABLE Al 

SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS BY ITEMS 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 

Disposed —Granted Pend- 

Type of Action Docketed of Number Percent ing 

Total Cases 215,037 174,765 145,750 83.4 40,272 

Adjustment Increases— Total 123,152 105,598 98,639 93.4 17,554 

Increase— 3/1 to 5/1/50 20,133 15,433 12,907 83.6 4,700 

Voluntary Increase— After 5/1/50. 103,019 90,165 85,732 95.1 12,854 

Adjustment Decreases— Total 6,747 5,450 4,686 86.0 1,297 

Voluntary Decrease 225 201 181 90.0 24 

Decrease (Vacant) 165 135 93 68.9 30 

Permissive Decrease 6,357 5,114 4,412 86.3 1,243 

Tenant Applications— Total 30,355 20,285 16,815 82.9 10,070 

Restoration of Painting 20,766 13,957 12,368 88.6 6,809 

Restoration of Other Services.... 9,589 6,328 4,447 70.3 3,261 

Administrative Actions— Total 17,639 12,470 7,437 59.6 5,169 

First Rents 1,467 1,239 539 43.5 228 

Section 36 Determinations 13,799 9,026 5,280 58.5 4,773 

Prior Opinions 2,373 2,205 1,618 73.4 168 

Decontrol Applications— Total 2,131 1,574 1,238 78.7 557 

Certificates of Eviction— Total 19,748 17,382 10,625 61.1 2,366 

Landlord Occupancy 9,515 8,697 5,820 66.9 818 

Landlord Family 4,365 3,766 2,663 70.7 599 

Cooperative 29 22 17 77.3 7 

Tax Exempt 86 81 56 69.1 5 

Premises Not Used by Tenant ... . 807 655 262 40.0 152 

Alteration— Safety 397 361 82 22.7 36 

Alteration— Subdivision 1,127 907 342 37.7 220 

Demolition— Safety 93 91 69 75.8 2 

Demolition— New Housing 517 503 378 75.1 14 

Demolition— Non Housing 136 113 73 64.6 23 

Withdrawal 993 882 392 44.4 111 

Other 1,683 1,304 471 36.1 379 

Compliance Actions— Total 12,731 10,262 5,222 50.9 2,469 

Overcharge 5,715 4,055 1,959 48.3 1,660 

Evasive Practice 1,288 1,221 194 15.9 67 

Illegal Eviction 1,242 1,174 782 66.6 68 

Other 4,486 3,812 2,287 60.0 674 

Reconsideration Actions— Total .... 2,534 1,744 1,088 62.4 790 



95 



TABLE 

MISCELLANEOUS 
MAY 1- 



Rent or 

Personal Services 

Calls at Incoming Verifi- 

Rent Phone Incoming Outgoing cations 

Office Calls Mail Mail (Units) 

New York State 525,217 876,531 496,039 610,697 112,894 

Upstate District 142,709 133,570 46,247 94,695 27,046 32,875 

Albany 18,811 22,592 10,836 19,584 790 5,370 

Binghamton 10,763 16,475 4,174 10,178 93 6,995 

Buffalo 40,156 48,394 17,405 35,248 9,458 7,358 

Rochester 45,933 18,585 5,861 9,131 9,383 3,154 

Syracuse 19,581 17,387 4,532 11,881 3,095 4,021 

Utica 5,213 6,909 2,358 5,848 3,426 3,855 

Watertown 2,252 3,228 1,081 2.825 801 2,122 

Downstate District 382,508 742,961 449,792 516,002 85,848 48,021 

Westchester 12,976 21,321 10,605 23,286 510 2,631 

Poughkeepsie 4,839 6,583 5,622 10,719 180 1,685 

New York City 364,693 715,057 433,565 481,997 85,158 43,705 

Lower Manhattan 95,798 227,686 47,260 82,481 12,334 3,674 

Upper Manhattan 37,233 44,359 93,499 56,675 7,794 6,535 

Bronx 72,625 148,784 52,148 120,352 15,996 22,817 

Brooklyn 118,438 238,735 203,134 153,013 24,726 6,371 

Queens 40,599 55,493 37,524 69,476 24,308 4,308 



96 



A2 

WORKLOAD 
NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Confer- 
ences 
15,622 


Hear- 
ings 
222 


Field 
Inspec- 
tions 
(Units) 
22,903 


Change in 

Identity of 

Landlord 

3,609 


First Rent 
Registrations 

Rooming 
House 
(Maxi- 
mum 
Housing Rents) 
5,261 2,199 


Late 
Registrations 

Rooming 
House 
(Maxi- 
mum 
Housing Rents) 
4,680 1,061 


Late First Rent 
Registrations 

Rooming 
House 
(Maxi- 
mum . 
Housing Rents) 
1,919 690 


2,622 


97 


4,836 


1,026 


1,393 


120 


1,236 


72 


701 


59 


16 


32 


256 


189 


169 


9 


116 


6 


139 


1 


369 


14 


1,319 


149 


232 


48 


229 


16 


44 


10 


1,105 


10 


2,010 


237 


334 


6 


340 


30 


230 


24 


768 


18 


239 


85 


259 


23 


193 


4 


101 


9 


189 


20 


427 


103 


193 


24 


252 


6 


88 


10 


109 





400 


152 


62 


5 


89 


9 


54 


5 


66 


3 


185 


111 


144 


5 


17 


1 


45 





13,000 


125 


18,067 


2,583 


3,868 


2,079 


3,444 


989 


1,218 


631 


527 


1 


483 


229 


251 


18 


252 


5 


56 


8 


498 


5 


724 


140 


118 


26 


99 


16 


142 


15 


11,975 


119 


16,860 


2,214 


3,499 


2,035 


3,093 


968 


1,020 


608 


2,260 





8,686 


298 


1,234 


1,118 


323 


112 


30 


13 


605 


64 


1,604 


732 


327 


323 


147 


580 


235 


172 


3,382 


17 


2,454 


208 


139 


213 


212 


106 


231 


268 


2,338 





2,395 


816 


1,451 


248 


1,810 


124 


130 


19 


3,390 


38 


1,721 


160 


348 


133 


601 


46 


394 


136 



97 



I 

r 



TABLE A3 

SUMMARY OF OPERATIONS BY OFFICES 

TOTAL— ALL CASES 
MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



New York State 

Upstate District 

Albany 

Binghamton 

Buffalo 

Rochester 

Syracuse 

Utica 

Watertown 

Downstate District . . 

Westchester 

Poughkeepsie 

New York City 

Lower Manhattan 
Upper Manhattan 

Bronx 

Brooklyn 

Queens 



Docketed 


Disposed of 


Granted 


215,037 


174,765 


145,750 


19,921 


16,786 


13,012 


3,321 


2,890 


1,922 


2,347 


1,996 


1,456 


7,660 


6,130 


4,954 


2,069 


1,720 


1,393 


2,466 


2,278 


1,816 


1,350 


1,144 


944 


708 


628 


527 


195,116 


157,979 


132,738 


6,840 


5,632 


4,830 


1,818 


1,547 


1,044 


186,458 


150,800 


126,864 


35,223 


30,044 


22,708 


24,307 


17,620 


14,736 


52,704 


38,787 


34,614 


53,864 


46,368 


40,428 


20,360 


17,981 


14,378 



SUMMARY— BY MONTHS 
MAY-NOVEMBER 



New York State 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 



Pending 
Beginning of 
Month 



13,430 
27,401 
30,248 
32,658 
32,862 
40,879 



Docketed 
During 
Month 
13,792 
24,492 
26,653 
33,273 
28,654 
45,424 
42,749 



Disposed 

of During 

Month 

362 

10,521 

23,806 

30,863 

28,450 

37,407 

43,356 



Granted 

During 

Month 

208 

7,996 

18,643 

25,440 

23,593 

32,502 

37,368 



Totals 



215,037 



174,765 



145,750 



98 



TABLE A I 



TOTAL CASES DOCKETED BY TYPES SHOWING NUMBER AND 

PERCENT IN NEW YORK CITY OFFICES AND IN 

ALL OTHER OFFICES 



MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 

New York City 
Offices- 
Percent 
of 
State 
Totals 
86.7 



All Other 
-Offices- 



Number 
128,579 

13,195 

378 

1,190 
3,100 



Percent 

of 

State 

Totals 

13.3 



All 
State 
Offices Number 
Total Cases ....... 215,037 186,458 

Adjustment Applications 

for Increase ........ 123,152 109,957 89.3 

Adjustment Applications 

for Decrease 6,747 6,369 94.4 

Tenant Applications for 

Restoration of Services 30,355 29,165 96.1 

Administrative Actions.. 17,639 14,539 82.4 

Applications for Decon- 
trol Based on Conver- 
sion after 5/1/50. ... . 2,131 1,278 60.0 853 

Applications for Certifi- 
cates of Eviction.... 19,748 12,895 65.3 6,853 

Compliance Actions based 
on Overcharges, Eva- 
sive Practices, Illegal 
Eviction and Other.. 12,731 10,176 79.9 2,555 20.1 

Applications for Recon- 
sideration of Adminis- 
trative Order 2,534 2,079 82.0 455 18.0 



10.7 

5.6 

3.9 
17.6 



40.0 
34.7 



TABLE A5 

TOTAL CASES DOCKETED, DISPOSED OF AND PENDING, 

BY TYPES 
MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



-Docketed- 



-Disposed of— 
Per- 



Pending 



Type Number Percent Number 

Total Cases ....... 215,037 100.0 174,765 

Adjustment Applications 

for Increase ........ 123,152 57.3 105,598 

Adjustment Applications 

for Decrease 6,747 

Tenant Applications for 

Restoration of Services 30,355 

Administrative Actions.. 17,639 

Applications for Decon- 
trol Based on Conver- 
sion After 5/1/50 .... 2,131 

Applications for Certifi- 
cates of Eviction .... 19,748 9.2 17,382 

Compliance Actions based 
on Overcharges, Eva- 
sive Practices, Illegal 
Eviction and Other . . 12,731 5.9 10,262 

Applications for Recon- 
sideration of Adminis- 
trative Order 2,534 1.2 1,744 



3.1 

14.1 
8.2 



1.0 



5,450 

20,285 
12,470 



1,574 



cent November 
Docketed 30,1950 
81.3 40,272 



85.7 



66.8 
70.7 



73.9 
88.0 



80.6 



68.* 



17,554 

1,297 

10.070 
5,169 



557 
2,366 



2,469 



790 



99 



TABLE A6 

TOTAL APPLICATIONS FOR INCREASES BASED ON 
AGREED INCREASED SERVICES 

Applications for increase under the two adjustment sections of the regula- 
tions totaled 123,152. Of the 105,598 disposed of, 98,639 were granted and 
6,959 were denied, as shown in table below. 

Chart 3 shows the steady rise in the number of applications by landlords and 
tenants for adjustments based on agreed increased services. The chart shows 
cumulative monthly totals and also disposition of the applications. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 

Disposed of Average 

Granted Dollar Percent 

Per- Adjust- Adjust - 

Docketed Total Number cent Pending ment ment 

New York State 123,152 105,598 98,639 93.4 17,554 $3.82 7.9 

Upstate District .... 8,353 7,064 6,129 86.8 1,289 11.33 36.5 

Albany 1,369 1,256 934 74.4 113 13.15 46.4 

Binghamton 910 802 674 84.0 108 10.85 34.8 

Buffalo 3,233 2,467 2,189 88.7 766 10.25 32.2 

Rochester 833 717 643 89.7 116 11.75 34.4 

Syracuse 997 945 891 94.3 52 12.95 40.3 

Utica 678 586 526 89.8 92 10.46 36.0 

Watertown 333 291 272 93.5 42 10.44 38.4 

Downstate District... 114,799 98,534 92,510 93.9 16,265 3.32 6.7 

Westchester 4,049 3,504 3,308 94.4 545 3.81 6.5 

Poughkeepsie 793 723 595 82.3 70 10.77 36.5 

New York City 109,957 94,307 88,607 94.0 15,650 3.25 6.6 

Lower Manhattan 11,999 11,182 10,224 91.4 817 4.84 6.7 

Upper Manhattan. 13,006 11,137 10,611 95.3 1,869 2.68 5.7 

Bronx 39,560 30,787 28,751 93.4 8,773 2.56 5.6 

Brooklyn 34,366 31,077 29,704 95.6 3,289 3.31 7.4 

Queens 11,026 10,124 9,317 92.0 902 4.11 8.3 



100 



TABLE A7 

APPLICATIONS BY LANDLORDS AND TENANTS FOR 

INCREASES BASED UPON VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS 

TO INCREASE SERVICES 

Provision was made under the law to permit filing of applications for adjust- 
ment to increase the maximum rent otherwise allowable on the grounds that : 
"On and after May 1, 1950, the landlord and the tenant in uctual occu- 
pancy have entered into a voluntary written agreement **to increase 
the dwelling space, or the services, facilities, furniture, furnishings, or 
equipment provided zvith the housing accommodations**." 

The total of 103,019 applications for increase under this section far exceeded 
that of any other type of application, and comprised 47.9 percent of the total 
of 215,037 received. Of these 103,019 applications, 90,165 or 87.5 percent were 
disposed of, and 12,854 were pending on November 30th. The Commission 
granted 85,732, or 95.1 percent of the total disposed of. The table below shows 
the disposition by each Local Rent Office of these applications. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 





Docketed 


Disposed of 

Granted 

Per- 
Total Number cent 


Pending 


Average 
Dollar Percent 
Adjust- Adjust- 
ment ment 


New York State 


103,019 


90,165 


85,732 


95.1 


12,854 


$3.69 


7.6 


Upstate District 


5,937 


5,008 


4,386 


87.6 


929 


11.62 


37.4 


Albany 


1,093 


1,008 


769 


76.3 


85 


12.98 


46.0 


Binghamton 


557 


488 


407 


83.4 


69 


10.77 


35.0 


Buffalo 


2,140 


1,598 


1,443 


90.3 


542 


10.57 


32.7 


Rochester 


514 


430 


384 


89.3 


84 


12.23 


35.2 


Syracuse 


883 


839 


796 


94.9 


44 


12.84 


40.0 


Utica 


490 


418 


372 


89.0 


72 


11.22 


38.6 


Water town 


260 


227 


215 


94.7 


33 


10.48 


37.9 


Downstate District . . . 


97,082 


85,157 


81,346 


95.5 


11,925 


3.26 


6.6 


Westchester 


2,799 


2,452 


2,371 


96.7 


347 


3.42 


5.6 


Poughkeepsie 


379 


337 


312 


92.6 


42 


10.73 


34.8 


New York City. . . . 


93,904 


82,368 


78,663 


95.5 


11,536 


3.23 


6.6 


Lower Manhattan 


9,364 


9,053 


8,471 


93.6 


311 


4.72 


6.4 


Upper Manhattan. 


10,516 


9,610 


9,368 


97.5 


906 


2.59 


5.5 


Bronx 


36,928 


28,891 


27,233 


94.3 


8,037 


2.62 


5.8 


Brooklyn 


28,168 


26,336 


25,574 


97.1 


1,832 


3.40 


7.5 


Queens 


8,928 


8,478 


8,017 


94.6 


450 


3.94 


7.9 



101 



TABLE A8 

APPLICATIONS BY LANDLORDS FOR INCREASES BASED 

ON AGREED INCREASED SERVICES BETWEEN 

MARCH 1, 1950 AND PRIOR TO MAY 1, 1950 

Provision was made to permit applications to be filed on the grounds that: 
"There has been since March 1, 1950, and prior to May 1, 1950, an in- 
crease in the dwelling space or in the essential furniture, furnishings, 
or equipment provided in the housing accommodations , to which the 
tenant then in possession had agreed." 

Applications for increase under this section of the regulations totaled 20,133. 
Of these, 15,433 or 76 percent were disposed of and 4,700 were pending on 
November 30th, as shown in the Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 

Disposed of Average 

Granted Dollar Percent 

Per- Adjust- Adjust - 

Docketed Total Number cent Pending ment ment 

New York State 20,133 15,433 12,907 83.6 4,700 $4.66 10.0 

Upstate District 2,416 2,056 1,743 84.8 360 10.61 34.2 

Albany 276 248 165 66.5 28 13.91 48.0 

Binghamton 353 314 267 85.0 39 10.96 34.5 

Buffalo 1,093 869 746 85.8 224 9.65 31.1 

Rochester 319 287 259 90.2 32 11.04 33.1 

Syracuse 114 106 95 89.6 8 13.82 42.6 

Utica 188 168 154 91.7 20 8.60 29.6 

Watertown 73 64 57 89.1 9 10.30 40.2 

Downstate District.... 17,717 13,377 11,164 83.5 4,340 3.73 7.6 

Westchester 1,250 1,052 937 89.1 198 4.81 9.2 

Poughkeepsie 414 386 283 73.3 28 11.18 38.7 

New York City.... 16,053 11,939 9,944 83.3 4,114 3.43 6.9 

Lower Manhattan 2,635 2,129 1,753 82.3 506 5.43 7.8 

Upper Manhattan. 2,490 1,527 1,243 81.4 963 3.42 6.6 

Bronx 2,632 1,896 1,518 80.1 736 1.64 3.6 

Brooklyn 6,198 4,741 4,130 87.1 1,457 2.71 6.3 

Queens 2 098 1,646 1,300 79.0 452 5.13 11.1 



102 



TABLE A9 

APPLICATIONS BY LANDLORDS FOR DECREASES BASED 
ON DECREASE IN SERVICES 

The regulations provide that landlords may apply for a rent decrease where 
the landlord and the tenant then in actual occupancy have entered into a 
voluntary written agreement to decrease the dwelling space or the services, or 
without the tenant's consent in certain cases. 

When accommodations become vacant the landlord may, prior to renting to 
a new tenant, decrease the dwelling space, essential services, or equipment, but 
must file a report with the Local Rent Administrator showing that fact. 

Applications by landlords for decreased rent, based upon decreased services 
in all categories, totaled 6,747. Of the total of 5,450 disposed of, 4,686 were 
granted, 764 denied, and 1,297 cases were pending on November 30th, as shown 
in Table below. Of the granted cases the rents of 440 units were decreased. 
The average amount of rent decrease was $6.31 a month. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 

Average Per- 

Disposed of- Dollar cent 

— Granted — Rents Ad- Ad- 
Per- De- just- just- 
Docketed Total Number cent Pending crease ment ment 
New York State 6,747 5,450 4,686 86.0 1,297 440 $6.31 11.7 

Upstate District 300 228 198 86.8 72 197 6.14 14.2 

Albany 21 17 10 58.8 4 10 4.60 20.2 

Binghamton 37 34 29 85.3 3 28 6.92 14.1 

Buffalo 115 72 64 88.9 43 64 4.95 11.3 

Rochester 33 26 22 84.6 7 22 7.75 16.7 

Syracuse 37 34 31 91.2 3 31 7.58 15.4 

Utica 52 40 37 92.5 12 37 5.88 15.5 

Watertown 5 5 5 100.0 .. 5 6.00 14.8 

Downstate District 6,447 5,222 4,488 85.9 1,225 243 6.45 10.3 

Westchester 42 33 28 84.8 9 28 7.52 9.4 

Poughkeepsie 36 34 28 82.4 2 28 7.01 15.8 

New York City 6,360 5,155 4,432 86.0 1,214 187 6.21 10.0 

Lower Manhattan 4,866 4,251 3,733 87.8 615 23 18.46 11.3 

Upper Manhattan .. 933 607 505 83.2 326 84 2.26 4.9 

Bronx 200 92 85 92.4 108 7 4.13 8.9 

Brooklyn 266 167 94 56.3 99 58 6.93 13.8 

Queens 104 38 15 39.5 66 15 7.73 14.4 



103 



W 

> ' 

W 

m 

Q 
W 

< 
W 

w 

Q 

O 
Pw 

Q 
W 

< 
PQ 

in 

H 

H 

m 
o 

H 

< 

PM 

PL, 
< 

< 

H 
O 
H 



re >> *» 

§ "I 

fcfl ■*- v 

* J «£ 

s 11 



00© 

ION 
NTJ- 

Ofco" 

.s~ 

5 s 

m 

it"- 

.11-8 



.5 h^< 9 



'H.g.sj'o 



re v s 









us -o "is 

a. 



§ 2 

re ^s 
2 §.§§ 

I. Ill 

re '-2^^ 
12 5 <*> © 



o £ rt 5 

. <D G ft 

JM3 

y *i£ rt 
ft <i «, W) 

rt.5 
re ^ 

™ ao ft 
§ S > « 

^ ^ft^ 

re (/) (fl 



*>% 



•r 1 r i P 



^ <U .4) 

«-i 4J 'J5 

y w gjS 

<u a> <u 

IS .2 ° 



CO 



04 r 



I 



~o rt 

lilt 

C 



£} S S P NONNTj;ir,cO; OOvOO ONKfOOCoO 



§5 



~(S2 S ^coc'iovduit^rj-o' t^uoltj ^4* to to ro ^ to 



S 3 
^5 r^ lo tj- r>j ex: 

T§ o i-h 



Ci, - 






gg'O <=* ^ ^5 '-"-' \OvOr-. 0Q tJ- u-5 Tf ro <5 

Sli~0 O Ot5vOroOvOrr> 






^8 



^ $> CO rH^-^O 



l^tSlO IV. CO CO 



o^ 



ro 



l^rHOON^OO 

fOOONOfOn 

fvf cvf r-T co co i-T 



o c^^OiOTtio^oo Nom 



vo — i vorr co o 



^ co ro-— ico-^-io-^-Oco 00 r 



§ CO -h 



t}- vOO t-h O co CO 



vCrf 



^ - 



vO CO C\) Tf to ^-, 



■~» uo n. fo oo ^ r* ^ ^ Q cocoes ^ooooott 
a oo t^.— icoovjr-ico'— i - ^- oloco --ii-<aofON 

7< CM PO •— ' •— < 






c> 



Tf O^ vO vO 00_ (N 

o" ^f" c\T t*-" in of 



"a 

-S lO fOOOOO^-OON-H fNir^O UTtNrj-vO^ 

<^ iO coloiOO^-icOt-itJ- CMOlo nO rn n -i (M N 

jg CO lo >— i C\J COvO t-<»— iCMvOmvO 






o" vd "^ oo* bC of 
oi 



3. 



II 111 



o 
9 

y re i> 

re (i ■*-> 



.Si U re re 
ft^S 






rt 



be 



S,< pq pq 0> t»'p ^ §; 



"5^ I^pS^ 

Q 



104 



T3 d> 



^'^?% o ........ O^Oco 



O; oq on so •-; o 

o' 0* o^'aoc 






o 


C «2 




£ 


o.2 




H 


tF rt 




5 


CN.^i 






d a 




< 


~& 




1 


.fjtflB 




OO 


rt « O 




w 


art" 




u 


2^ 






00 W 




> 


•3 ^3 




c^ 


KrH Cd 




w 


£ d^ 




CO 


•2 1 - d 




Q 

w 

CO 

< 


el* 




w 


S £ c^ 





ti 


^s* 




u 


^30" 


■-< 


Q 


bfl<+H SO 


0" 


BLE All 
D UPON 


^ c/3-o 

,g 




-o ^-S 


w 

> 


< W 


*- rt O 
C (J ro 





H co 
< 
PQ 


® 3^ u 


1 


j_ *O.Q 




£ 3 S 




CO 

H 


< 


< 


S3 d 




fc 


og ^ 




W 


^*» M 




H 


w d £ 

> £^ 
"53 d 

« « 




M 


OJ <3 d< 




CO 


c/) ^ v 




£ 


p i> c/j 

5 <» 03 




O 


•2 S^ 










H 


.Sg-d 




< 


•3,<>S 




y 

3 


^•3 
.5 S* 




P.. 


"S^ * 




Ph 


5 d +e 




< 


•*-• d w 
"d "J 

2 O be 

-*-• d 

.c « d 
■^ bo a 

"Si 

— V 





^^SN MOO 



s: on 

ti no 









" a 
•a « 

o 



CO CM t>. C3 " On 



On(ni . (NQOt^NO-^- 

OnO • ^ O OO 10 10 10 

OO^ • K^ON OO n rO M 

O ' vO" rOr-T 



j2J2oo oourt aaNrHoo 

^ ^ On On_ OO^rofvjr^ror-t 

[V u m" r<T c\f 1-4 



org • oOiriTtCMoio 

nOsO • On LT) On CN^l — 1 O 

Tt r- 1 • O^t^ Cg LO t^ O 

on" • CN~i-r.-r(\Tc\f.-r 



NO no On O mOOCMOrHlO 

00 ; ; l I I I I I oonoq oooNNdoood 

CX3 . 00 On O 00 CO 00 On On t^ 



^00 OOt^Tf K*HOrtH 

~ sO nO OO t^ On 1^ rH Tj- \0 

§ CO r *^. 1— ' HOiOtoOn 

S of .... ^ rvfrvT'-<"~<rrTt r-n" 



~S r^ NrOTj- O r-i t>» On tJ- On 

Q LO LT) On OtOQl^OON 

q On_ °\ T ~' l^rooOOrf tT 



-?3 

■^ no vOiOTt 1 NHNOOtO 

<njnO nolo OfOXi- iTtro 

-fti r^ r^oi iriNvOOOON 

£ Oi CM ?>1 



u 



2 . u 

>, OS ^O "So 3 

«.^ d*5 ^ ^ 



d 

o 

y 15 



D 



o^£ 



s^ 



d o 9. 



o a 
j^pqpqO 






105 



co 
u 

r— < 

w 

co 

& 
W 
HI 
H 
O 
to 
O 

w 

co 
U 

w 

Q 

O 
Pu 
P 

Q 
W 

CO 

< 
pq 

CO 

H 
< 

pq 

CO 

O 
i— i 
H 
< 
U 

r-H 

Ph 
P4 

< 



*T3 CO 

.Syo 
£§^ 

is? 
^-^'^ 

l* C3 c 

<u y o3 

£•£§ 
*> 6^ 

w 05 C 

E 3 Jr, 

J"B§ 

^ C/) .in 

*°£ S 

« ctf 

•3-g.-, 

r3 £oo 

(13 OOO 
<-w +-> r 

m ii • * 



S c c 

.a £-« 

c en 55 

t> g £ 
3 <-> <u 

c/> •-* tn 

GtJ C 
rt <u <u 

«o>8h 
5.3 -a"" 

U2-S 



£ § S ^ (MONK-tioOO; CO to © 00NhOO>O 
VlT^^O KO^NiO^iOfOK C> K OO O^OvTtOOONT-H* 

<^^3^T— (T— ( T— I t— t ,— I ,_| ,— | ,— < CM T— I «-H t— I 



?>2 S g Q\ — i 0>-0 O O *— i O*-" f^ CM Tj- OOhhiono 

& "oS ' «-> <i> *-; *> ^ °S <-> ^ ^ ^N. 'I P ^ *> pOHt^foq 
^ Ci ^ ^ "^ vo cxi i-n \d lo tvi ^i- <> io-^lo vo vd o co -*t vd 



S — ' \0 to t-h CM co "3- ..-h 
^ <M_ -H 



42 SO NN^vOvOOOa 



G 2 00 t-HTj-^Qv 



"*5^ 



^> CO O^iOTfiOHOO 

V ©' t< OO C> Tf rf rf © LO 

^ t^. CO f-H CO ""T m "^" O CO 

0, -« 



S t^ CO >— I LO lO V© lO t^ Tj" 

git ^ NrH1/) ^Hr-Hl— I 



lONi-i CM O t^ t^ \0 \0 

o a^ r-i oo^vomn^ 

^h O >— i vO ^O co •— i 



t^O\CM "O O VO T-H CM oo 

U") CO t-I O-HNOrHTt 
O O CO Ht^H 



rsvooo covOloooo-^- 

CM^'— i O O ^- lo vO co 

erf ro"»-r 



C^lOrH CO O O CO CO O^ 



t^ COiO t^CJO 



r^-ioO OOOOCMCM 
OCMCM in\ONO\0»0 
COCM OcoiOt^OTj- 



-2 00 



KfOOOrTrHTj-NO y— iO«-n O l^ co •— ' O 

t^ t-i co cm *— " co »— " "^r lo \o co inooooTj-Ln 

CO t-H ^h O CM vO vO 00 O CO 



C>CM 






■^ O^ CO O0 O vO Tt" OO t^ t-h vO CM O OOcqOOOvO'-h 

<a oo co to lq o »— i co t— < "^" io>-OTf moomOvoO'* 

►^ to vo »— • cm O co vooovnunvoo 

^ oT o" oo" cm"" ^h ^h i-T 



cS rt 



<u C«fl as 



<U <L> 

"' y nJ <u 






Q ij <^ 

sol 

Q 



In 

o h «- 









52; 



106 



TABLE A13 



TOTAL APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTIONS 

Except for certain grounds based upon misconduct of the tenant, the regu- 
lations provide that before a landlord may commence a court action to evict, 
he must obtain a certificate of eviction from the Local Rent Administrator. 

Applications for certificates of eviction totaled 19,748. Of these, 17,382 were 
processed, 10,625 were granted, and 6,757 denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed Total 

New York State 19,748 17,382 

Upstate District 5,662 5,248 

Albany 957 909 

Binghamton ., 442 419 

Buffalo 2,305 2,126 

Rochester 646 590 

Syracuse 802 743 

Utica 325 292 

Watertown 185 169 

. Downstate District .... 14,086 12,134 

Westchester 867 768 

Poughkeepsie 324 294 

New York City 12,895 11,072 

Lower Manhattan . . 1,965 1,677 

Upper Manhattan.. 1,049 671 

Bronx 1,594 1,360 

Brooklyn 5,695 5,157 

Queens 2,592 2,207 



isposed of 

Gran ted 

Per- 
N umber cent 


Pending 


10,625 


61.1 


2,366 


3,940 


75.1 


414 


644 


70.8 


48 


287 


68.5 


23 


1,657 


77.9 


179 


473 


80.2 


56 


491 


66.1 


59 


236 


80.8 


33 


152 


89.9 


16 


6,685 


55.1 


1,952 


429 


55.9 


99 


142 


48.3 


30 


6,114 


55.2 


1,823 


822 


49.0 


288 


278 


41.4 


378 


631 


46.4 


234 


3,102 


60.2 


538 


1,281 


58.0 


385 



107 



TABLE A14 

APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTION- 
PERSONAL OCCUPANCY 

Of the 19,748 applications, 9,515 were from landlords desiring the housing 
accommodations for their own personal use. Of these, 5,820 were granted and 
2,877 were denied, as shown in table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



-Disposed of- 



-Granted- 



Docketed 

New York State 9,515 

Upstate District 3,309 

Albany 552 

Binghamton 270 

Buffalo 1,357 

Rochester 413 

Syracuse 395 

Utica 189 

Water town 133 

Downstate District . . . 6,206 

Westchester 402 

Poughkeepsie 185 

New York City 5,619 

Lower Manhattan . 195 

Upper Manhattan . 228 

Bronx 984 

Brooklyn 2,693 

Queens 1,519 



Total 

8,697 

3,076 

531 

257 

1,244 

381 

366 

174 

123 

5,621 

356 

164 

5,101 

166 

164 

876 

2,502 

1,393 



Number 

5,820 

2,442 

401 

188 

1,006 

309 

277 

142 

119 

3,378 

219 

84 

3,075 

67 

83 

444 

1,675 

806 



Pending 

818 

233 

21 

13 

113 

32 

29 

15 

10 

585 

46 

21 

518 

29 

64 

108 

191 

126 



TABLE A15 

APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTION- 
OCCUPANCY BY LANDLORD'S IMMEDIATE FAMILY 
In 4,365 cases, landlords stated that they required the housing accommoda- 
tions for the use and occupancy of their immediate families. Of these, 2,663 
were granted and 1,103 were denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 









Disposed of- 












Granted— 












Per- 






Docketed 


Total 


Number 


cent 


Pending 


New York State 


4,365 


3,766 


2,663 


70.7 


599 


Upstate District 


1,470 


1,372 


1,060 


77.3 


98 


Albany 


252 


230 


149 


64.8 


22 


Binghamton 


83 


83 


65 


78.3 




Buffalo 


714 


680 


552 


81.2 


34 


Rochester 


143 


127 


103 


81.1 


16 


Syracuse 


166 


148 


101 


68.2 


18 


Utica 


92 


85 


73 


85.9 


7 


Watertown 


20 


19 


17 


89.5 


1 


Downstate District . . . 


2,895 


2,394 


1,603 


67.0 


501 


Westchester 


244 


210 


113 


53.8 


34 


Poughkeepsie 


65 


56 


29 


51.8 


9 


New York City 


2,586 


2,128 


1,461 


68.7 


458 


Lower Manhattan . 


49 


34 


17 


50.0 


15 


Upper Manhattan . 


55 


40 


17 


42.5 


15 


Bronx 


230 


176 


101 


57.4 


54 


Brooklyn 


1,629 


1,422 


1,006 


70.7 


207 


Queens 


623 


456 


320 


70.2 


167 



108 



TABLE A16 



APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTION- 
SUBDIVISION 

In 1,127 instances, applications for certificates of eviction were made on the 
grounds that landlords desired to sub-divide tenant-occupied housing accom- 
modations. Of the 907 cases of this type disposed of, 342 were granted and 
565 denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 1,127 

Upstate District 217 

Albany 46 

Binghamton 35 

Buffalo 32 

Rochester 34 

Syracuse 43 

Utica 13 

YYatertown 14 

Downstate District 910 

Westchester 62 

Poughkeepsie 23 

New York City 825 

Lower Manhattan . 291 

Upper Manhattan. . 129 

Bronx 84 

Brooklyn 258 

Queens 63 



Total 


Disposed of 

Gran ted 

Per- 

N umber cent 


Pending 


907 


342 


37.7 


220 


189 


88 


46.6 


28 


43 


24 


55.8 


3 


31 


17 


54.8 


4 


25 


2 


8.0 


7 


32 


27 


84.4 


2 


36 


10 


27.8 


7 


10 


4 


40.0 


3 


12 


4 


33.3 


2 


718 


254 


35.4 


192 


60 


27 


45.0 


2 


23 


10 


43.5 





635 


217 


34.2 


190 


248 


85 


34.3 


43 


49 


20 


40.8 


80 


72 


12 


16.7 


12 


214 


95 


44.4 


44 


52 


5 


9.6 


11 



109 



TABLE A17 

APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTION— DEMOLI- 
TION OF ADDITIONAL HOUSING 

Landlords filed 517 applications to evict tenants where they intended to 
demolish structures and replace them with structures containing a greater 
number of housing accommodations. Of these applications, 378 were granted 
and 125 denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 517 

Upstate District 110 

Albany 

Binghamton 2 

Buffalo 1 

Rochester 13 

Syracuse 94 

Utica 

Watertown 

Downstate District ... 407 

Westchester 10 

Poughkeepsie 

New York City 397 

Lower Manhattan. . 384 

Upper Manhattan . 

Bronx 2 

Brooklyn 3 

Queens 8 



Total 


Disposed of 

Gran ted 

Per- 
Number cent 


Pending 


503 


378 


75.1 


14 


110 


44 


40.0 

















2 


2 


100.0 





1 


1 


100.0 





13 


7 


53.8 





94 


34 


36.2 





























393 


334 


85.0 


14 


9 


1 


11.1 


1 














384 


333 


86.7 


13 


373 


327 


87.7 


11 














2 











3 


2 


66.7 





6 


4 


66.7 


2 



110 



TABLE A18 

APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTION— DEMOLI- 
TION FOR OTHER THAN HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS 

There were 136 applications for certificates of eviction where the landlord 
desired to demolish for construction of other than housing accommodations. 
Of these, 73 were granted and 40 were denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 136 

Upstate District 45 

Albany 11 

Binghamton 10 

Buffalo 4 

Rochester 4 

Syracuse 12 

Utica 1 

Watertown 3 

Downstate District 91 

Westchester 1 

Poughkeepsie 

New York City 90 

Lower Manhattan . . 75 
Upper Manhattan.. 9 

Bronx 3 

Brooklyn 2 

Queens 1 



Total 


Disposed of 

Gran ted 

Per- 
N umber cent 


Pending 


113 


73 


64.6 


23 


44 


16 


36.4 


1 


11 


1 


9.1 





10 











3 


1 


33.3 


1 


4 


1 


25.0 





12 


10 


83.3 





1 











3 


3 


100.0 





69 


57 


82.6 


22 


1 


1 


100.0 

















68 


56 


82.4 


22 


54 


52 


96.3 


21 


9 











3 


2 


66.7 





2 


2 


100.0 














1 



111 



TABLE A19 



APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF EVICTION— ALL OTHER 

Applications for certificates of eviction in all other cases totaled 4,088. This 
category includes withdrawal of the housing accommodations from the hous- 
ing rental market, alteration and demolition for safety purposes, premises not 
used by tenant, and others. Of these, 3,396 were disposed of, of which 1,349 
were granted and 2,047 denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 4,088 

Upstate District 511 

Albany 96 

Binghamton 42 

Buffalo 197 

Rochester 39 

Syracuse 92 

Utica 30 

Watertown 15 

Downstate District . . . 3,577 

Westchester 148 

Poughkeepsie 51 

New York City 3,378 

Lower Manhattan. . 971 

Upper Manhattan . . 628 

Bronx 291 

Brooklyn 1,110 

Queens 378 



D 

Total 


isposed of 

Gran ted 

Per- 
N umber cent 


Pending 


3,396 


1,349 


39.7 


692 


457 


290 


63.5 


54 


94 


69 


73.4 


2 


36 


15 


41.7 


6 


173 


95 


54.9 


24 


33 


26 


78.8 


6 


87 


59 


67.8 


5 


22 


17 


77.3 


8 


12 


9 


75.0 


3 


2,939 


1,059 


36.0 


638 


132 


68 


51.5 


16 


51 


19 


37.3 





2,756 


972 


3S.3 


622 


802 


274 


34.2 


169 


409 


158 


38.6 


219 


231 


72 


31.2 


60 


1,014 


322 


31.8 


96 


300 


146 


48.7 


78 



112 



m 


-h' bfl 


£ 


S^ 


O 


cm c 

0J 


H 


TJ 


u 


.£ « 




iS ^ 


> 


r= 


W 


** u 




*oo 


< 


°3 


-C CM 


o 


c 


w 


JS a 


J 


., v 




J: £ 










u 


O 


>1 u 
X3 flJ 


C/f 

W 


1^ 


u 


'5 1) 


*— ( 


w .2 


H 




U 

< 


*« £ 


Oh 




w 


°.l 


> 


e/5 


GO 


'•S C 


< 


y"«3 


> 


£a 


w 


a £ 




« q 


A 20 
GES, 




W & 


41 ~ 


d < 


to", 


< u 




H p* 


2 S. 

•71 1> 


W 




> 


O M 
> 


o 


O CM 

CM 


fc 







Cfl ,- 




= "* 


p 


"c3 ~ 


w 


"3 w 


(72 


e .5 


< 


C r. 


pq 


^ *C 


m 


Z M 


5 


5 £ 


O 


Q u 


H 




U 


oj 


< 


TJ & 


u 


O W O 


< 


PL| 


•2$^ 
8&.S 


£ 


O, ns 





= cm^ 


u 


*n* 


< 

J— 1 







♦-•s 


H 


O cd 



O^ M ^- ^ O M O K a ^ M K K x ""- X OO OO 

-CiT.N^(>OtXM^O C X 1; O ^ N 

00 c- ' ^-< cri o' o fo ^t <^i t< o lo ■ n 00 2 Q -f cj 

ir, LO TT O lo OO wo «— 1 O LO O <~0 ""• 1*5 T CON 



? 1? oc o »— 1 



a 

S 



nN't , OOONO*^00O v ".(M^lX'X". 
73 c>TrT}-oOrocv)Ln~o\ L nor^ I >- r ir. o oc oc 



5 5 

g IV ~i lo cvf rrT TfPTJ 



-iX^FNiO-^-'.CCO 



^-5 



^1 Cs] 



^TfOvOX*Ox^O 









-H r-l O^^- r-H ^] O -^ 



i"Knrs 



;~ C OOrHf0MNM^rr^iHC000\O , 'tMf0p 

C cr '^ ro crS cvi cK o ^i oc ^' c> ^ ^ o o r<i crJ vd 
~ wo Tj-rgTfvO'^r'vO'^-LnLr;rO'^" L 0'^' v Oro>-nvo 






Q ~C ~ (M^fOvOCM^fOOOiO^'-'iOX'MMC^X 

a r, "S MCioOfOoOfOfOTj-^ocgc-tioTfOx 

»-i ^r 00 lo cnj r^ o 



ft 






O 






<M tM CM (N CM t-i rg 



ocMCM'^t-avocc^'^-Tf 

0C*ro »-Tr-T 



p r)f)0»000^ , 0»C>'tN^'HXfONN 
^ r^0C< v ^fO^T ,f ^CM^H OOtOfO-rfCNOOC 



c 

£ n 2% 

O to 3 









s^ 



Q 



*i -Si j3 -^ > «-> a> 



X^i c 

c o 
o o 



113 



TABLE A21 



COMPLIANCE ACTIONS— OVERCHARGES 

The regulations provide that it shall be unlawful to receive any rent for 
any housing accommodation in excess of the maximum rent. 

Compliance actions based on overcharges totaled 5,715. Of the 4,055 
disposed of, compliance was obtained in 1,959 cases and 2,096 were denied. 
There were 1,660 cases pending, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 5,715 

Upstate District 1,278 

Albany 390 

Binghamton 193 

Buffalo 351 

Rochester 146 

Syracuse 102 

Utica 57 

Watertown 39 

Downstate District 4,437 

Westchester 266 

Poughkeepsie 95 

New York City 4,076 

Lower Manhattan . 1,053 

Upper Manhattan . 463 

Bronx 849 

Brooklyn 832 

Queens 879 



Total 


Disposed of 

Compliance 

O b ta ined 

Per- 
Nutnber cent 


Pending 


4,055 


1,959 


48.3 


1.660 


817 


354 


43.3 


461 


225 


53 


23.6 


165 


142 


59 


41.5 


51 


185 


121 


65.4 


166 


98 


39 


39.8 


48 


85 


53 


62.4 


17 


46 


11 


23.9 


11 


36 


18 


50.0 


3 


3,238 


1,605 


49.6 


1,199 


165 


62 


37.6 


101 


58 


22 


37.9 


37 


3,015 


1,521 


50.4 


1,061 


929 


457 


49.2 


124 


357 


212 


59.4 


106 


585 


171 


29.2 


264 


393 


217 


55.2 


439 


751 


464 


61.8 


128 



114 



Total 


-Disposed of 

Compliance 

Obtained 

Per- 
N umber cent 


Pending 


1,221 


194 15.9 


67 


34 


22 64.7 


11 



TABLE A22 
COMPLIANCE ACTIONS— EVASIVE PRACTICES OF LANDLORD 
Compliance actions based on evasive practices totaled 1,288. Of 1,221 dis- 
posed of, compliance was obtained in 194 cases. There were 67 cases pending, 
as shown in the Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 1,288 

Upstate District 45 

Albany 

Binghamton 6 

Buffalo 

Rochester 

Syracuse 

Utica 

Watertown 39 

Downstate District . . . 

Westchester 

Poughkeepsie 

New York City 

Lower Manhattan . 
Upper Manhattan . . 

Bronx 

Brooklyn 

Queens 



COMPLIANCE ACTIONS BASED ON ILLEGAL EVICTIONS 
Compliance actions based on illegal evictions totaled 1,242. Of the 1,174 
processed, compliance was obtained in 782 cases and 392 complaints were dis- 
missed, as shown in Table below. 



30 



21 



25.0 



70.0 



,243 1,187 

20 15 

2 2 


172 
5 
1 


14.5 
33.3 
50.0 


56 

5 


,221 1,170 

,125 1,086 

28 21 

37 33 

6 5 

25 25 


166 

131 

10 

3 

2 

20 


14.2 
12.1 
47.6 
9.1 
40.0 
80.0 


51 

39 

7 

4 

1 


TABLE A23 









MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 



1950 

-Disposed of 

Compliance 

O b tained 

Per- 



Docketed Total 



New York State 

Upstate District 

Albany 

Binghamton 

Buffalo 

Rochester 

Syracuse 

Utica 

Watertown 

Downstate District 

Westchester 

Poughkeepsie 

New York City 

Lower Manhattan , 
Upper Manhattan . , 

Bronx 

Brooklyn 

Queens 



1,242 

51 

7 

7 

1 

2 

16 

12 

6 

1,191 

49 

37 

1,105 

323 

476 

113 

31 

162 



1,174 

49 

5 

7 

1 

2 

16 

12 

6 

1,125 

45 

34 

1,046 

311 

440 

107 

31 

157 



Number 
782 
33 



1 

15 

7 

3 

749 

24 

21 

704 

188 

318 

65 

21 

112 



cent 
66.6 
67.3 

100.6 

50.6 
93.8 
58.3 
50.0 
66.6 
53.3 
61.8 
67.3 
60.5 
72.3 
60.7 
67.7 
71.3 



Pending 
68 
2 
2 



66 
4 
3 

59 

12 

36 

6 



115 



TABLE A24 



COMPLIANCE ACTIONS— ALL OTHER 

Compliance actions in all other cases totaled 4,486. Of the 3,812 disposed 
of, compliance was obtained in 2,287 cases. There were 674 cases pending, 
as shown in table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 4,486 

Upstate District 459 

Albany 1 

Binghamton 94 

Buffalo 49 

Rochester 153 

Syracuse 122 

Utica 35 

Watertown 5 

Downstate District 4,027 

Westchester 10 

Poughkeepsie 243 

New York City .... 3,774 

Lower Manhattan. 1,910 

Upper Manhattan . . 13 

Bronx 39 

Brooklyn 1,207 

Queens 605 



Total 


Disposed of 

Compliance 

b tained 

Per- 
Number cent 


Pending 


3,812 


2,287 


60.0 


674 


366 


194 


53.0 


93 

1 
1 


93 


39 


41.9 


37 


18 


48.6 


12 


81 


49 


60.5 


72 


118 


65 


55.1 


4 


32 


20 


62.5 


3 


5 


3 


60.0 




3,446 


2,093 


60.7 


581 


8 






2 


170 


81 


47.6 


73 


3,268 


2,012 


61.6 


506 


1,638 


1,072 


65.4 


272 


13 


12 


92.3 




38 


7 


18.4 


1 


1,015 


529 


52.1 


192 


564 


392 


69.5 


41 



116 



TABLE A25 

APPLICATIONS FOR DECONTROL BASED ON CONVERSION 
AFTER MAY 1, 1950, TO CREATE ADDITIONAL HOUSING 

Section 11 provides that additional self-contained housing accommodations 
resulting from conversion of housing accommodations consisting of a struc- 
tural change, created on or after May 1, 1950, may be decontrolled upon 
application of the landlord. Where housing accommodation is tenant-occupied, 
the landlord must first obtain a certificate of eviction pursuant to the provi- 
sions of Section 57(2). 

Applications for decontrol orders totaled 2,131. Of these, 1,574 were 
processed; 1,238 were granted and 336 denied, as shown in Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 2,131 

Upstate District 718 

Albany 80 

Binghamton 149 

Buffalo 175 

Rochester 102 

Syracuse 69 

Utica 99 

Watertown 44 

Downstate District .... 1,413 

Westchester 74 

Poughkeepsie 61 

New York City 1,278 

Lower Manhattan . 588 

Upper Manhattan . 169 

Bronx 29 

Brooklyn 349 

Queens 143 



Total 
1,574 


Disposed of 

Granted 

Per- 
Number cent 

1,238 78.7 


Pending 

557 


583 


479 


82.2 


135 


80 


66 


82.5 




131 


111 


84.7 


18 


146 


110 


75.3 


29 


79 


62 


78.5 


23 


56 


51 


91.1 


13 


55 


50 


90.9 


44 


36 


29 


80.6 


8 


991 


759 


76.6 


422 


47 


33 


70.2 


27 


54 


43 


79.6 


7 


890 


683 


76.7 


388 


396 


349 


88.1 


192 


93 


56 


60.2 


76 


21 


8 


38.1 


8 


264 


179 


67.8 


85 


116 


91 


78.4 


27 



117 



TABLE A26 
OTHER ACTIONS 

Section 36 of the regulations provides that where facts are in dispute, in 
doubt, or not known, the Administrator at any time, upon written request of 
either party, or upon his own initiative, after taking into consideration all factors 
involved, may issue an order determining the maximum rent, dwelling space, 
or other matters in dispute. Other administrative actions consist of prior 
opinions and review of "first rents." 

Administrative actions throughout the State totaled 17,639. Of the 12,470 
disposed ,of, 7,437 were granted, 5,033 denied, and 5,169 were pending on 
November 30th, as shown in Table below. Of the 17,639 actions in all cate- 
gories, 13,799 represented determinations under Section 36; 2,373 were prior 
opinions; and 1,467 were "first rents" determinations. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 17,639 

Upstate District 2,243 

Albany 291 

Binghamton 438 

Buffalo 1,061 

Rochester 138 

Syracuse 247 

Utica 63 

Watertown 5 

Downstate District 15,396 

Westchester 690 

Poughkeepsie 167 

New York City 14,539 

Lower Manhattan . 4,904 

Upper Manhattan . 3,886 

Bronx 1,161 

Brooklyn 2,809 

Queens 1,779 



Total 
12,470 


Disposed of 

Gran ted 

Per- 

N umber cent 

7,437 59.6 


Pending 
5,169 


1,808 


1,335 


73.8 


435 


252 


169 


67.1 


39 


316 


225 


71.2 


122 


850 


629 


74.0 


211 


115 


97 


84.3 


23 


218 


181 


83.0 


29 


52 


29 


55.8 


11 


5 


5 


100.0 




10,662 


6,102 


57.2 


4,734 


475 


423 


89.1 


215 


132 


80 


60.6 


35 


10,055 


5,599 


55.7 


4,484 


4,339 


2,186 


50.4 


565 


1,556 


567 


36.4 


2,330 


819 


598 


73.0 


342 


1,811 


1,282 


70.8 


998 


1,530 


966 


63.1 


249 



118 



TABLE A27 



APPLICATIONS REQUESTING RECONSIDERATION 

The regulations provide that the Local Rent Administrator, on application 
of either party or on his own initiative, may modify, supersede, or rescind 
any order issued by him. Applications by landlords or tenants requesting 
reconsideration of orders totaled 2,534. Of the 1,744 disposed of, 1,088 were 
granted, 656 denied, and 790 were pending on November 30th, as shown in 
Table below. 

MAY 1-NOVEMBER 30, 1950 



Docketed 

New York State 2,534 

Upstate District 279 

Albany 47 

Binghamton 12 

Buffalo 164 

Rochester 2 

Syracuse 36 

Utica 12 

Watertown 6 

Downstate District .... 2,255 

Westchester 166 

Poughkeepsie 10 

New York City 2,079 

Lower Manhattan . 376 

Upper Manhattan . 47 

Bronx 508 

Brooklyn 777 

Queens 371 



Total 
1,744 


Disposed of 

Granted 

Per- 
Number cent 

1,088 62.4 


Pending 
790 


212 


185 


87.3 


67 


33 


25 


75.8 


14 


10 


9 


90.0 


2 


122 


111 


91.0 


42 


1 


1 


100.0 


1 


29 


23 


79.3 


7 


12 


11 


91.7 




5 


5 


100.0 


1 


1,532 


903 


58.9 


723 


119 


106 


89.1 


47 


7 


7 


100.0 


3 


1,406 


790 


56.2 


673 


217 


86 


39.6 


159 


35 


26 


74.3 


12 


345 


276 


80.0 


163 


614 


295 


48.0 


163 


195 


107 


54.9 


176 



119 



5 H * 

< & w 

W W « 

J H S 

m o 



"3 ES' 
IV, 



^ to o ^) -r c^ 
.* o.-. CM cm 



S 3: ^ ~) **? ~i 

g3<M -t~ 



3 



CMr>x o CM tJ- 

Tf co Of^ 



T3 

'2 P co 'i^ 00 ^- vO 

a t^ in Tt 55 lo cm 

<a OH r- 1 CM 



% \0 00fO00ON 
X? v£5 ro on — i — ( CM 



£§&!* 



CO CO 






* B « 

5 s- 



P4 



C C 

Q-3 



=.Lj.y 



c/j 



X3 crj 

5 c 



i-> en 

•3 OS o 

c B *« 

rt 4>CL 



CO CM • -f-i 



CO t^x r-H r-. r-H 



i— < CM ^O "3" O O lo O CM 

CO CM OvO co O On 
vO vO -— i CM 



O CM CO l^ Tt CM r-i . 0\0 vC OCOiOOv Tt- O 

<— ' • CM CM DO a ri rH ro ro 

O OO CM T}- ,— i 



i£>CMO coCMCMO'-HCM 
O^trt rj- tJ- Tf -O t^ CM 
CD O CM co «-• CM 

CM' of r-T 



£?ct:-u 
o 



J*- B 



a as s 



>> 2 S3 



SSIjdSs 






(1J QJ <1> O 



o Q« 



„ O <U 

o o w 



3 SJ^WWO 



120 



TABLE A29 

APPLICATIONS BASED ON INTERIM REGULATIONS 
DECEMBER, 1950 

Interim regulations, providing for individual rent adjustments to meet hard- 
ship conditions claimed by landlords, became effective under State law on 
December 1, 1950. These regulations provide for rent adjustments where Operat- 
ing costs exceed rental income — Form 37 — where a maximum rent is substantially 
lower or higher than comparable rents because of unique or peculiar circum- 
stances — Form 38 — and because of severe hardship arising from certain gross 
inequities — Form 39. 

As shown in the following schedule, adjustment applications received through- 
out New York State during the month of December covered 1,680 units on 
Form 37 ; 764 units on Form 38 ; and 274 units on Form 39. 



DECEMBER 1950 



New York State 

Upstate District 

Albany 

Binghamton 

Buffalo 

Rochester 

Syracuse 

Utica 

Watertown 

Downstate District . . . 

Westchester 

Poughkeepsie 

New York City 
Lower Manhattan 
Upper Manhattan 

Bronx 

Brooklyn 

Queens 



Form 




Form 


37 


Form 


39 


Operating 


38 


Gross 


Loss 


Comparability 


Inequities 


1,680 


764 


274 


164 


137 


43 


19 


36 


5 


11 


19 


1 


58 


34 


9 


31 


44 


24 


6 


3 




36 


1 


4 


3 






1,516 


627 


231 


32 


8 


2 


9 


11 


3 


1,475 


608 


226 


569 


347 


31 


6 


68 


57 


262 


74 


108 


538 


118 


30 


100 


1 





121 



PART 4 

Conclusions from 
Survey 

/. The State's People 

Population 

The population of New York State as of April 1, 1950, was 
14,830,1 92. a This is the final figure of the United States Bureau of 
the Census. The increase in population since 1940 was 1,351,050, or 
10 percent. 

High concentration in urban areas — meaning cities and their 
suburbs — is characteristic of the State's population, and all evidence 
indicates that this concentration has increased in the last decade, with 
the farm population continuing to decline relatively. 

New York City gained 380,000 persons during the decade 1940-50 
— its smallest gain since 1900. The population of the remainder of 
the State, and particularly the New York City suburban areas, 
increased considerably. The population increase for the State outside 
New York City was the greatest for any recent ten-year period. b 

While Clinton, Hamilton and Lewis Counties had slight declines in 
the last decade, the other fifty-nine counties had increases ranging 
from less than 1 percent in Washington to 63.8 percent in Nassau. 
The New York Metropolitan Area counties had the largest increases ; 
that of Nassau County, almost 260,000, was the largest numerically 
and percentage-wise in the State. 

Almost all the areas subject to rent control increased at a greater 
rate than either the decontrolled or uncontrolled areas. The pre- 
liminary Census figures for these areas as presently constituted are 
as follows : d 



Controlled Areas . . . 
Decontrolled Areas . 
Uncontrolled Areas . 


1940 

Population 

... 12,359,431 

789,317 

330,394 

Total 


1950 

Population 

13,542,860 

851,348 

347,237 


Percentage 
Increase 
9.6% 
7.9 
5.1 


Percentage 
Distribution 
91.8% 
5.8 
2.4 




14,741,445 


100.0% 



The major cities (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, New York, 
Rochester, Syracuse and Utica) show percentage increases from 1940 
to 1950 considerably below the Statewide percentage increase. 6 An 
analysis of the population changes in these cities and the metropolitan 

122 



areas which center about them is presented in Table 4. (A metro- 
politan area as defined by the Bureau of the Census, and as used in 
this report, contains at least one city of 50,000 or more in 1950. Each 
metropolitan area comprises the county containing the city and any 
other contiguous counties deemed to be closely and economically 
integrated with that city.) 

The metropolitan areas in New York State contained 83.8 percent 
of the population in 1940 and 84 percent in 1950. Nearly 86 percent 
of the increase in the population of the State occurred in these 
metropolitan areas. The seven major cities have gained less popula- 
tion both numerically and percentage-wise than their suburbs, indi- 
cating that the pattern of city decentralization and suburban expan- 
sion which began a generation ago has continued and applies to the 
smallest city among them as well as the others. 

Marriages, Births and Family Formation 

Very sharp increases in the birth rate and number of marriages 
during the past decade in all areas of the State are reported by the 
State Department of Health. After V-J Day and demobilization the 
increases were accelerated. The peak for marriages — 183,000 (25.9 
per thousand) — was reached in 1946, and for births — 323,400 (22.5 
per thousand) — in the following year, 1947. For the first nine months 
of 1950 there were 107,158 marriages and 227,819 births in the 
State. g Following the commencement of the armed conflict between 
the United Nations and Communist forces in Korea the number of 
marriages in New York State increased considerably. 

Family size in the State is declining slowly, as it is in the nation. 

Using the concept "average size of household" (all members of the 
household, including lodgers, servants, and other unrelated persons 
having no other usual place of residence, as well as students away 
from home at school below the college level, and other members 
temporarily absent) on the basis of occupied units only, the Bureau 
of the Census finds a national decline in family size from 3.67 per- 
sons in 1940 to 3.39 in 1950, or 7.6 per cent. h 

Another Federal bureau, the Housing and Home Finance Agency, 
using a different concept, "number of persons per dwelling unit," 
which means the result of dividing the total population by the total 
number of housing units, and which uses all units, whether occupied 
or not, asserts that the decline was from 3.53 in 1940 to 3.26 in 1950. 
which is also a decrease of 7.6 percent in the nation. 1 The difference 
in concept inevitably causes the difference in the factors, but which- 
ever concept is used, the conclusion, even down to the percentage, 
is the same. 3 

Census figures have not yet been broken down completely for the 
individual States, but the Agency's have. The Agency shows the 
number of persons per dwelling unit in this State as 3.34 in 1940 
and 3.17 in 1950, a decline of 5.1 percent. The Census figures reveal 
that the total number of dwelling units in this State was 4,651,857 
in 1950, against 4,032,460 in 1940, an increase of 15.4 percent. Ac- 
cording to the 1940 Census there were 3,662,113 occupied dwelling 

123 



units — or households — in the State, giving an average size household 
of 3.68 persons. 

Assuming that all the existing units reported by the Census in the 
preliminary 1950 figures are occupied, and using the HHFA factor 
of 3.17 persons per dwelling unit, the decline during the last ten years 
in the average size household in the State would seem to be 13.8 
percent instead of 5.1 percent as indicated above. 

"Average size of household" and "number of persons per dwelling 
unit" primarily measure the gross change in family size and indicate 
a trend, but they are subject to many qualifications before they can 
be used to analyze this trend. As stated by the HHFA : "In order 
to interpret the significance of these changes properly, additional 
data — not yet available — are needed as to the relative condition and 
adequacy of the housing as well as data on family size, number of 
persons per room, and other important family and housing character- 
istics. In the absence of such data which is essential for meaningful 
analyses of the situation, the figures * * * furnish merely a compari- 
son of gross changes in the number of housing units and number of 
persons in the population from 1940 to 1950 and point to possible 
trends, the implications of which can only be analyzed when more 
data are available." 

The trend of family size in the New York Metropolitan Area has 
been progressively downward for the last fifty years : 1900 — 4.7 
persons, 1940 — 3.7 persons, and 1947 — 3.5 persons. This trend is 
the result of many factors, social and economic, some simple and 
some complex. But in this report we are concerned not with the 
causes, but with the resultant facts. In any event the Regional Plan 
Association estimates that it now takes nearly 300 housing units in 
this area to accommodate 1,000 persons against about 210 units in 
1900. 

From their own studies, Harrison, Ballard and Allen, engineering 
consultants of New York City, deduce that the average family size 
in New York City will decline to about 3.1 in 1970, compared with 
3.64 in 1940, on the basis of present trends. 

Based on a 1950 k population of 7,835,099 and a dwelling unit count 
of 2,442,684, the average number of persons per unit in New York 
City is 3.2. Using the above figure of 3.1 persons per family in 
1970, and the Consolidated Edison Company's 1 population estimate of 
8,585,000 for the same year, the estimated number of units required 
to house the population would be 2,769,355 in 1970. 

Conclusions 

The population growth of the State as a whole in 1940-50 was at 
a rate slightly above that of 1930-40; the trend in the rural areas 
as a whole was toward a diminished rate of growth, although some 
areas showed increased rates ; the metropolitan areas grew at increasd 
rates as the decentralization trend in the cities persisted ; the popu- 
lation growth of the major cities continued, but generally at a lower 
rate. 

Both the birth and marriage rates increased throughout the State, 

124 



but family size, in consonance with the national trend, underwent an 
indicated decrease of 13.8 percent, indicating a need for more hous- 
ing units per capita. 

On the basis of an average household of 3.2 persons in the major 
cities, whose population increased 409,500 in the decade, about 
128,000 new homes would have had to be created for them alone, 
either by new buildings or conversion of old ones. 

The ultimate effect upon the housing problem of the diminished 
family size is best understood when it is realized that even if the 
total population of the State had remained stable in the decade 
1940-50, there would have been need for more than 500,000 new 
housing accommodations. 

The increased growth of population and the decline of the average 
family size both intensified the housing shortage. 



• This final figure was issued officially by the Bureau of ^ the Census after publication of 
Survey op Rents, and accordingly, the figure given in Table I and throughout that 
document is the preliminary one. The adjustments made in determining this final figure 
have not as yet been reflected by final figures for the 62 counties. The final count was 
88,747 greater than th^ preliminary count of 14,741,445 issued by the Bureau of the Census 
on October 3, 1950. Since the adjustments have not been made, all conclusions and calcu- 
lations, except for the State as a whole, are being made on the basis of the preliminary 
data. The increase from 1940 to 1950, both numerically and percentage-wise, was greater 
than that betzveen 1930 and 1940, but considerably less than that between 1920 and 1930. 

*— Table 1. 

c— Table 2. 

* — These figures reflect the transfer of Seneca County and Geneva City and Town from 
the decontrolled area to controlled area effective December 1, 1950; Table 3. 

* — Table 4. 

f— Table 5; Table 6. 

o— Table Bl; Table B2. 

h — Bureau of Census Report. Series P-20, No. 31; page 11 SR. 

<— Housing Statistics, HHFA. September 1950. 

I — Census of Housing 1940, Vol. 2, Table 1, paae 269. 

*— Table 41. 

1 — Netv York City's Population Growth 1790-1970, Consolidated Edison Company of New 
York, 1946. 



125 



//. The People at Work 

Business Indicators 

Substantial gains in general business activity, business formations, 
savings and income have marked the latest decade in the State's 
economy. In the index of general business activity a of the State De- 
partment of Commerce the most important elements — factory output, 
retail trade, and construction — have made significant increases ; the 
latest figure on factory output shows a 13 point rise from July to 
August, 1950. 

There was very healthy growth in the number of business firms 
and in the savings of individuals. 5 The gradual rise in the number 
of new businesses and the small number of business failures have 
resulted in an increase of more than 100,000 new firms since 1940. 
Savings of individuals exceeded $29,336,000,000 in August, 1950; in 
1941 they were $13,097,000,000. 

Gains in income payments to individuals increased the per capita 
income from $864 in 1940 to $1758 in 1949. The largest source of 
income is wages and salaries — 69 percent in 1949. Property income 
(interest, rent, dividends and royalties) accounted for 13.9 percent 
of total income in 1949, and was the only income source having a 
substantial gain between 1948 and 1949. 

Labor Force 

The latest study of the labor force d , giving the trend between April, 
1940 and March, 1948, shows it has been able to adjust itself to 
varying requirements. In 1940, 56.5 percent of the population 14 
years of age and over was in the labor force ; in 1945, at the height 
of war production, the percentage was 66.7; and in 1948 it declined 
to 60.3. 

Employment and Wages 

Non-agricultural employment 6 gained from 1943 to September, 
1950. From an average of 5.1 million persons in 1945 the number 
rose to an average of over 5.6 million in 1948. In 1949 it dropped 
to 5.5 million, and in September, 1950, it increased to over 5.7 mil- 
lion, the highest for 1950. The increase in September employment 
was primarily due to the sustained construction boom and stock- 
piling by civilian goods industries. 

The increase in employment has been accompanied by an increase 
in average weekly earnings. Average earnings of manufacturing pro- 
duction workers increased from $27.09 per week in 1940 to $49.40 
in 1946. Earnings increased from $57.64 in January, 1950, to $59.69 
in September, 1950, an increase of 120.3 percent from 1940 to Sep- 
tember, 1950.' Increases for industrial areas varied considerably, 
ranging from slightly over 100 percent in New York City to 163.3 
percent in the Kingston-Newburgh-Poughkeepsie area. 

126 



Manufacturing 

Basic improvements have been made in many manufacturing 
plants. g During the period 1939-1947 over 15,100 new manufactur- 
ing plants were established. Over 475,300 production workers were 
required for these new plants and expanded facilities of old estab- 
lishments. Value added by manufacture increased from $3,300,000,- 
000 to $9,700,000,000, or 191.7 percent. This was reflected in in- 
creased prices as well as in considerably increased output. 

Many counties showed phenomenal rates of increase, exceeding the 
statewide growth many times over. Nassau and Suffolk Counties 
showed the largest gains percentage-wise. Production workers in 
Nassau increased nearly 300 percent and value added by manufacture 
increased almost 800 percent. 

In 1939 the ten leading counties accounted for 79.8 percent of the 
total value added by manufacture compared to 79.3 percent in 1947. 
The number of production workers in the ten leading counties in- 
creased from 75.1 percent in 1939 to 75.4 percent in 1947. 

The character of the State's production has remained compara- 
tively the same. The production of durable goods in 1947 increased 
to nearly 40 percent of total production compared to 34 percent in 
1939. 

Retail, Wholesale and Service Trades 

Retail trade in 1948 exceeded $14,500,000,000, h being more than 
two and one-half times the 1939 total, an increase of 161 percent. 
The study of Business Activity by the Bureau of the Census showed 
that many upstate areas increased at a greater rate than the New 
York Metropolitan Area in total sales, sales per capita and sales per 
store. However, in actual dollar volume the New York Metropolitan 
Area still led with two-thirds of all sales in the State. Manhattan 
led all counties with more than $3,700,000,000. Rural areas grew 
most rapidly percentage-wise. 

The establishment of major retail business centers away from 
Manhattan accounted for the large percentage increases in per capita 
sales in Brooklyn and the Bronx. 

New York State retained its predominant national position in 
wholesale sales. These exceeded $41,700,000,000 in 1948, and were 
188 percent greater than in 1939. Service trades income, which was 
$589,100,000 in 1939, increased 160.3 percent to $1,534,000,000 in 
1948. In both categories the rate of growth was greater upstate than 
in the New York Metropolitan Area. 

The Consumers' Price Index 

Retail prices of goods and services which enter into the cost of 
living of moderate income families are measured by the Consumers' 
Price Index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The constant increase 
in the cost of food, clothing, shelter and other items has resulted in 
the gradual decline of the purchasing power of the dollar. 

127 



Compared to the average 1935-39 value of the dollar, the pur- 
chasing power in 1950 remained under sixty cents and in Octo- 
ber was fifty-seven and two-tenths cents 1 . After the Korean dif- 
ficulties started prices advanced in the United States 1.3 percent, 
and in both New York City and Buffalo 0.6 percent, to October 15. 
Since the end of Federal price control prices have advanced over 20 
percent in Xew York City and 23 percent in Buffalo up to that date. j 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics having recognized that its Con- 
sumers' Price Index did not accurately reflect the entire increase 
in consumer prices due to a "downward bias" inherent in the 
way one of its components, rent, was calculated, has adjusted its 
published October figure. The index rise of the individual com- 
ponents in New York City*, from the base period to October 1950. 
ranges from a 9.1 percent increase in rents to over a 107.2 percent in- 
crease in food. The index for all items increased 71 percent. k If an 
adjustment were made in this index on the basis of the correction in 
the rent index, 1.1 points would be added to the index of all items and 
5.0 points added to the rent index, resulting in a percentage adjust- 
ment of 0.6 percent and 4.6 percent from 1940 to the present. For 
Buffalo the rise in the index was much greater. All items increased 
73 percent, rent 26 percent and food 103.1 percent over the base 
period. 1 Giving due effect to the adjustments in the rent index, all 
items would have been increased 1.8 points and the rent index 9.9 
points with a percentage adjustment of 1 percent and 7.9 percent 
in these categories for the period 1940 to October, 1950. It should 
be noted that the rent component by itself is not the sole measure 
of housing costs, since many expenses of home operation and main- 
tenance, included in the index items of fuel, electricity and refrigera- 
tion, house furnishings and miscellaneous, are paid by some tenants, 
especially those living in one- to four-family homes. 

Conclusions 

The economy of the State prospered. The trend of industrial and 
commercial activity was sharply upwards. Employment and wages 
increased. 

The cost of living increased to an all-time record high. All items 
in the Consumers' Price Index showed continuous rises. 

Average earnings of manufacturing production workers (the wage 
figures most pertinent to New York State) increased 120.3 percent 
from 1940, income payments to all individuals increased 103.4 per- 
cent, and the cost of living increased 74 percent. 

There were increases in all items of maintenance and operation 
of housing accommodations, including the cost of labor and of ser- 
vices purchased both by owners of rentable properties and home 
owners. 

In those areas of the State where tenants customarily assume such 
operation and maintenance costs as fuel, electricity, refrigeration and 
house furnishings, the ultimate cost of shelter was even greater than 
that revealed by the rent index. 



For footnotes, see page 131. 

128 



HI. The Cost of Housing the People 

Trends in Controlled Areas 

This Commission's analysis of controlled rents throughout the 
State indicates an average increase of 4.7 percent in the genera! 
level a from the start of Federal controls in 1942-43 to August, 1950. 

The Commission's study, which was based upon a one percent 
sample of 2,465,200 Federal freeze date registered units, 1 ' disclosed 
that 30 percent of the sample had rent increases, 4 percent had de- 
creases and 66 percent were unchanged. Since New York City sup- 
plied 74 percent of the entire sample, the totals were heavily weighted 
by results there. The general level average increase in New York 
City was 4.6 percent; it ranged from 3.4 in Buffalo to 10.9 in 
Watertown. 

For those units that had rent rises the average increase was 14.5 
percent in the State, and for those that had reductions the average 
decrease was 9.4 percent. The averages for New York City were 
13.4 increase and 9.3 decrease; for Buffalo 16.7 and 16.4; and for 
Watertown 32.4 and 6.4. 

In Survey of Rents the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics 
was shown as having indicated a slow but steady climb between 1940 
and 1950 in the rent levels of New York City and Buffalo, the only 
cities in the State which it studies. Survey of Rents c quoted the 
Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumers' Price Index, of which the 
rent index is a component, but since the report was published the 
Bureau has corrected an "accumulated bias" in its figures/ 

For New York City the correction increases the October rent index 
by 5 points, bringing that figure to 114.1. The adjusted increase in 
rents from 1940 to October 1950 is 11.2 percent compared to a 6.3 
percent rise before adjustment. 

For Buffalo a correction of 9.9 points must be added to October 
bringing it to 135.9 and the increase over the 1940 average to 27.9 
percent instead of 18.6. 

These corrections do not reflect the very substantial volume of new 
construction during 1950. If the Bureau of Labor Statistics adjust- 
ments took this into account the rent index and the percentage in- 
creases for New York City and Buffalo, of course, would be even 
higher. 

Trends of Uncontrolled Rents in Controlled Areas 

All evidence indicates that newly constructed units are entering 
the market at rentals far above those of controlled units. Since Con- 
gress removed controls from all rental units completed on or after 
February 1, 1947, and since this exception was continued under the 
State law, there are now a considerable number of uncontrolled units 

129 



in controlled areas. This Commission has analyzed a variety of 
sources to determine the levels of these rents. 

The most important source was the Federal Housing Administra- 
tion. In its Veterans Emergency Housing program under Section 
008 of the National Housing Act, the FHA insured mortgages cover- 
ing 109,747 rental units in multi-family buildings out of a total of 
194,300 units started in the country in 1949. For New York City 
only 15.9 percent of all monthly rentals in Section 608 projects 
covered by commitments issued in the first six months of 1949 were 
for $89.99 per month or less. e 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics recently surveyed 8,500 new apart- 
ments in the New York Metropolitan Area completed between July 
to December, 1949. Only 6 percent rented for less than $75 per 
month; 64 percent were in the range $75-$115; the remaining 30 
percent were $115 and up. f 

This Commission has brought to date its analyses of replies from 
local public officials and real estate brokers to questions on these 
trends. g Of the 410 officials of thirty-three upstate counties who 
replied, 153 gave no information, 14 reported no increases, 65 re- 
ported a moderate increase, and 29.3 percent of all reporting said 
there had been a substantial increase; 53, or 12.9 percent, said the 
increases exceeded 25 percent. 

Three hundred and thirteen real estate brokers in thirty-one up- 
state counties also replied. While thirty-five reported no increase, 
eighty-six reported moderate increases and nineteen substantial ones. 
For New York City 65 percent in the five boroughs who replied 
gave no estimate, twenty-eight said rents had decreased, an equal 
number that they had increased, and twenty-six that rents were 
unchanged. 

Rental Trends in Decontrolled and Uncontrolled Areas 

A survey h of registered rental units in decontrolled Delaware 
County by this Commission in November, 1950, to determine the 
trend of rentals since decontrol, found that out of a total of 1,110 
tenant-occupied units, 495 had rental increases, without service 
changes, averaging 44.6 percent. 

Other evidence indicates that rentals in areas Federally decon- 
trolled have risen precipitously. Last September a sample survey 
by this Commission 1 in the decontrolled cities of Batavia, Geneva 
(since re-controlled), Glens Falls, Hornell, Oneida and Salamanca, 
found that thirty-eight of 130 units had rent increases with no in- 
crease in services. Most increases were in the low-rent categories ; 
63 percent applied to rentals of less than $29.50. Over half of these 
increases were 25 percent or more ; the average was in the 25 to 34.9 
percent range. 

Revised tabulation of 263 replies from local officials and brokers in 
twenty-three counties in decontrolled areas 3 shows 120 reporting 
moderate increases, nineteen substantial ones, and twenty-five indi- 
cating increases over 25 percent. Forty-one said no increases had 
occurred and forty-five gave no information. 

130 



Of ninety-nine public officials in the uncontrolled areas, forty-nine 
reported rental increases of more than 25 percent ; twenty-one said 
increases had been moderate, and seven reported that increases had 
been substantial. Of twenty-seven real estate brokers in the same 
areas, only one reported increases of more than 25 percent ; nine said 
the increases had been moderate and none said the increases had been 
substantial ; six reported there had been no increases and one re- 
ported decreases. k The Commission made no statistical study of its 
own of rents in uncontrolled areas. 

Conclusions 

Since controls began in 1942-3, rents then in existence have not 
been changed in 66 percent of controlled housing accommodations in 
this State. 

Rents were increased in 30 percent of such housing accommoda- 
tions and were decreased in 4 percent. 

When the rent increases and decreases in 34 percent of such con- 
trolled housing accommodations are spread over all such controlled 
housing accommodations in the State, the average increase is com- 
puted at 4.7 percent. 

Rents were substantially higher in uncontrolled units constructed 
since 1947 than in similar controlled units. 

Substantial rent increases have occurred where rent control has 
been abolished. 



'—Table 23. 

b —Page 41 SR. 

c — Tables 19 and 20. 

d — See Appendix "C". 

e — p a g e 56 SR. 

f—Page 57 SR. 

o — Tables 31 and 32 (as revised but not published). 

h — See Appendix "D". 

* — Tables 34, 35, and 36. 

I — Table 33 (as revised but not published). 

* — Tables 37 and 38 (as revised but not published). 



Footnotes for II. The People at Work 

a — Table B-3 ; Table 7. 
»— Table B-5; Table 8. 
c — Table 9. 
d —Page 19 SR. 
»— Table 12; Table B-4. 
f— Table B-6; Table B-7. 
9— Table 15; Table 183; Page 20 SR. 
"— Table 16; Pages 21, 22 SR. 
. *— Table B-8 ; Table B-10; Table 17; Pages 35, 36 SR. 
'—Table B-9. 

k — Appendix "C" Table 19; Table B-10. 
i— Table 20; Table B-10. 



131 



IV. The People's Housing 

New Construction 

Perhaps the most significant aspect of the addition of 619,397 
dwelling units to the State's housing supply during the last decade 
— which was an increase of 15.4 percent — was that it occurred at a 
greater rate in suburban areas than in the major cities themselves. 5 * 
This was true of every metropolitan area with the exception of 
Utica-Rome. While the percentage increases in the cities varied 
from 5.3 percent for Albany to 10.1 for Binghamton and New 
York, the increases in the suburbs ranged from 12.5 percent in 
Utica-Rome to 46.1 in the Buffalo area. 

In 1949 contracts were awarded for 75,287 dwelling units in the 
State, the greatest number in any year since 1940. b Yet 1950 sur- 
passed this record. Current construction data from the F. W. Dodge 
Corporation reveal that contracts were awarded for 83,737 dwelling 
units in the first ten months of 1950, c exceeding the total 1949 volume 
by 8,450 unit starts. This should not obscure the fact that, while the 
number of units in one- and two-family houses principally offered 
for sale in the first ten months of 1950 exceeded the 1949 total for 
similar accommodations by 20,049, contracts awarded for rental 
units fell 11,599 short of the 1949 sum. 

Nor did all counties share in this 1950 volume. Indications were 
that residential construction in 1950 would fall short of 1949 in 
Oneida, Rensselaer, and Schenectady counties. d 

In New York City contracts were awarded for 33,602 dwelling 
units in the first ten months of 1950; in 1949 the number of units 
contracted for was 39,272, indicating that the difference in the total 
between the two years would not be large. However, in 1950 Queens 
was the only borough to show an increase over 1949 on the basis of 
the ten months' figure. 

The very substantial building rate in Nassau, Suffolk and West- 
chester Counties more than made up for any possible lag elsewhere 
in the New York Metropolitan Area. In Nassau alone 24,727 starts 
were recorded up to November 1, of which 23,148 were in one- and 
two-family houses; this compares with a total of 17,617 for 1949, e 
an increase of 40.4 percent. 

The volume of home building fell off sharply in the New York- 
Metropolitan Area in October — 7,450 units were started, 6,000 fewer 
than the near record volume begun in September. f While seasonal 
factors undoubtedly were reflected in this decline, Federal credit 
restrictions also had some effect which cannot be evaluated in the 
light of existing circumstances. 

There can be no doubt, however, that the volume of residential 
construction will be drastically reduced by the rearmament program 
and the accompanying economic controls. But even before rearma- 
ment began, limitations on construction and financing credit under 

132 



the Defense Production Act of 1950, placing responsibility for con- 
trol of real estate credit with the Federal Reserve System, were 
having an adverse effect. These restrictions were a sharp reversal of 
Federal financing policy of the past decade, when the Government 
encouraged home ownership by promoting easy financing. 

Thus it had become clear in November, even apart from the mili- 
tary emergency, that construction volume would decline sharply in 
1951. O. J. Hartwig, executive secretary of the Long Island Builders 
Institute, in a recent letter to this Commission said that housing and 
construction volume, both rental and for sale, would decline about 
ZZYz to 40 percent from the 1950 rate of production in the four 
counties on Long Island. Similarly, George F. Brunner, Executive 
Vice President of the Niagara Frontier Builders' Association, said 
that while new construction reached a peak in 1950 it was tapering 
off because of credit restrictions and shortages of material. 

Housing Demand in the State 

In April, 1950, State Housing Commissioner Herman T. Stichman 
estimated that 250,000 homes were needed, including 150,000 in New 
York City* This is the most recent state-wide estimate available. 
As heretofore suggested, a variety of data indicates that the average 
size of the American family, and consequently the average size 
household, is steadily declining. 

No reasonable estimate can now be made of the housing need of a 
particular area or community on the inadequate statistics available, 
particularly in view of world-wide developments. Additional data 
are needed concerning important family and housing characteristics, 
since a one-tenth of one percent change in the estimate of average 
family size would make a very substantial difference in the number 
of units required. 

A number of analyses were made by this Commission of recent 
housing studies in several areas of the State, including Rochester 
Metropolitan District, New York-Northeastern New Jersey, New- 
York City, Buffalo Area, Poughkeepsie Area and Broome County. 
All of these are discussed at length in Survey of Rents, pp. 
83-108. 

An idea of the demand throughout the State can be obtained from 
the number of applicants on waiting lists of both public and private 
developments, a large percentage of whom live doubled-up with rela- 
tives. Close to one-third of all applicants for apartments managed by 
the New York City Housing Authority had incomes of $3,500 per 
year. These are from applicants who filed requests between Novem- 
ber, 1948 and September, 1950. h In October more than 34,000 fami- 
lies in eighty-nine communities occupied temporary accommodations 
built for the post- World War II demand. 1 

Vacancies 

While vacancy data of the 1950 Census have not yet been re- 
leased, all other evidence showed clearly that practically every dwell- 
ing unit in the non-farm areas of the State was occupied. 

133 



There was a drop in the vacancy rate in New York City from 7.3 
percent in 1940, to 4.6 percent in 1943 and to 0.8 in 1950. j In Octo- 
ber, 1950, the Real Estate Board of New York surveyed 88,437 
apartments in Manhattan and found only 123 unoccupied, which 
was 0.14 percent. In the Buffalo area the vacancy rate was 1.2 
percent in January, 1950. Only 118 vacancies were found in Syra- 
cuse in the Spring of 1950. A total of 19,929 controlled and uncon- 
trolled dwelling units in 537 blocks in six cities — Albany, Bingham- 
ton, New Rochelle, Rochester, Syracuse and Utica — visited by 
representatives of this Commission in September, 1950, revealed that 
the highest rate was 0.32 percent in New Rochelle ; a total of thirty- 
six vacant dwelling units in the six cities combined represented less 
than 0.2 percent of all units surveyed. 1 ' 

Contacts with real estate brokers, owners, and managing agents of 
rental properties in various areas throughout the State confirmed the 
survey result that very few dwelling units were vacant. Of 36,302 
units owned or managed in several controlled areas only 140, or 0.38 
percent, were vacant and the vacancy ratio did not reach 1.0 percent 
in any area. 1 Similarly, in response to a questionnaire of this Com- 
mission, 101 real estate brokers in fourteen controlled, decontrolled, 
and uncontrolled cities reported that of a total of 3,475 dwelling 
units which they managed, only fourteen were vacant; in ten of 
these cities no vacancies at all were reported. 111 

On October 1, 1950 the "New York Herald Tribune" published 
several guides to new apartment houses in New York City, Long 
Island and Westchester. These listed the name and location of the 
project, room sizes and the minimum monthly rental charged. This 
Commission tabulated the information. 11 Thirty-nine rental develop- 
ments were offering two-room apartments varying from $60 to under 
$200 per month; ten projects advertised such units for $100 per 
month, or more. 

A summary of rental offerings appeared in the "New York Times 
Apartment Directory" of October 11, 1950.° Over 46 percent of these 
rentals were being put on the New York City housing market for 
more than $150 per month; the average rent per room was $41.46 
per month. In the suburban areas advertised rents were somewhat 
lower ; the average rent per room was $30.25 per month. 

Shift from Tenant to Owner Occupancy 

The decided shift from tenant to owner occupancy in the major 
cities and metropolitan areas of the State is also discussed thoroughly 
in Survey of Rents. p While this shift was evident in the New 
York City area, it was sharper in the Rochester, Syracuse and 
Utica-Rome areas. q 

More Recent Evidence 

This Commission has supplemented and revised its tabulation of 
responses from local public officials and real estate brokers 1 * as re- 

134 



ported in Survey of Rents. Contact was made with all groups in 
order to ascertain the demand for housing as well as related data in 
all controlled, decontrolled and uncontrolled areas. Four hundred 
and ten local public officials in 33 controlled or partly controlled 
counties were interviewed by representatives of this Commission. 
Ninety-six, or 23.4 percent, said they did not know the demand in 
their communities ; 8.3 percent replied that no demand existed. How- 
ever, 6.1 percent maintained that the demand was acute, and seventy, 
or 17.1 percent, said more than 200 families needed housing in their 
particular communities. In twenty-three decontrolled or partly con- 
trolled counties 210 officials presented a somewhat different picture. 
Only 1.9 percent of them said a moderate demand for housing ex- 
isted, while none felt that the demand was acute; seventy-nine, or 
37.6 percent, answered that less than fifty families in their particular 
localities needed accommodations. 

A very similar distribution of replies was received from ninety- 
nine officials in various uncontrolled counties. 

With the co-operation of the New York State Association of Real 
Estate Boards, Inc., this Commission tabulated 313 replies from real 
estate brokers in the various controlled counties; 24.3 percent gave 
no estimate of demand; 15.3 percent did not know the extent of this 
demand. Nineteen brokers, or 6.1 percent, said there was an acute 
demand and 13.1 percent reported no demand. On the other hand 
thirty-two brokers, or 10.2 percent, found 200 families seeking accom- 
modations. 

Since most of the responses from real estate brokers in New York 
City related to particular sections of the city, rather than to the city, 
or to a borough, as a whole, conclusions could not be established on 
a city-wide basis. However, of 249 who replied, 151 gave no esti- 
mate and thirty-one indicated that they did not know the extent of 
the demand. Thirteen brokers said there was small demand, nine 
that a moderate demand existed, and twenty-five felt that there was 
large demand. These replies indicated a total of 4,370 families on 
brokers' waiting lists. 

Rental and Purchase Prices in Greatest Demand 

Local public officials' reports from 155 controlled cities, towns 
and villages indicated that most families seeking rental accommoda- 
tions were looking in the $30-to-$60-per-month class. The upper 
limit was higher, however in Syracuse, Albany, Beacon, Yonkers, Mt. 
Vernon, White Plains and New Rochelle. 5 This did not differ sub- 
stantially from rental demand in decontrolled and uncontrolled areas 
in the $25-$50 range. 

Costs of Materials and Wages 

A very significant upward movement in construction costs had 
brought the various indexes to all time highs in August and Septem- 
ber, 1950. In 1948 the United States Department of Commerce com- 

135 



posite index and the residence construction cost index of E. H. 
Boeckh and Associates were 209.3 and 214.7, respectively, a rise of 
more than 100 percent since 1939. The peak year was 1948, a slight 
decline occurred in 1949/ 

In early 1950 construction costs resumed their upward climb. 
Spurred by the effects of events in Korea upon prices and wages in 
the building industry, construction costs rose 8.6 percent from Janu- 
ary to August, as measured by the United States Department of 
Commerce Composite Index, and jumped as much as 3.7 percent 
from July to August. 11 

The January to September trend in wholesale building materials 
prices for the entire nation rose similarly/ 

In the Spring of 1950, before the outbreak of fighting in Korea, 
the number of new dwelling unit starts reached record-breaking 
proportions. The announcement of a long term defense program 
faced many builders with unfinished projects and uncertain materials 
delivery. Builders accumulated excessive inventories as a hedge; 
this pushed prices even higher. 

Thus the combined building materials index rose from 202.1 in 
June to 219.6 in September, an increase of 8.6 percent. The price of 
lumber had advanced 15 percent. In September wholesale prices of 
all building items, excepting paint and paint materials, reached all- 
time highs. The National Production Authority accordingly insti- 
tuted inventory controls on a variety of essential items. Effective 
September 18, its Regulation No. 1 restricted receipts or deliveries 
to no more than a minimum working inventory to all except ultimate 
consumers. These limitations applied to Portland cement, gypsum 
board, lumber and plywood. 

Wages in the construction trades also rose appreciably during the 
decade. w 

Property Taxes 

The upward trend in property taxes, particularly in 1945-1949, 
was an important item for landlords. An analysis of income and 
expenses of controlled housing shows that property taxes took be- 
tween 16 and 22 percent of rental income/ (A detailed treatment on 
property tax technicalities and equalization methods throughout the 
State is given in Appendix "B" of this report.) 

During the period 1940 to 1949 four counties showed decreases in 
the average tax rate per $1,000 of from 50 cents (in Monroe County) 
to $9 per thousand (in Clinton County), while fifty-eight counties 
showed increases from 69 cents (in Sullivan County) to $29 (in 
Rockland County). Thirty-nine counties had increases of $10 or 
more in the average rate in the same period. 

Assessed valuations (unequalized) of real property in the State 
increased $2,800,000,000 in the decade (they fell during the war 
years, but rose from 1945 to 1949 by more than $3,400,000,000). 
Much of this was due to construction after the war/ 

Every county showed an increase in assessed valuation, much of 

136 



which resulted from new construction, particularly in Nassau 
County. 

In twelve selected cities, aggregate taxes increased during 1940- 
1949 from 10.6 percent in Rochester to 62.5 percent in Niagara 
Falls. Nine of the twelve had increases exceeding 20 percent. z 
The increases in the average tax rates of the twelve cities from 1942 
to 1949 ranged from 4.5 in Syracuse to 43.7 in Niagara Falls. 

Conclusions 

Virtually every habitable housing accommodation in non-farm 
areas in the State was occupied. 

While accurate estimates for specific localities were not available, 
there was an estimated shortage in April, 1950, of 250,000 housing 
accommodations in the State. Thirty-four thousand families still 
lived in such temporary accommodations as Quonset huts. 

Construction costs, including wages, were at an all time high in the 
autumn of 1950 when new construction began to slacken. 

The trend in property taxes also was upward, and since they repre- 
sented 16 to 22 percent of rental income, this increase was significant. 

When uncontrolled accommodations became available they were 
usually priced considerably out of reach of the low- and moderate- 
income groups. 

Public and private housing developments reported large waiting- 
lists. 

Area studies measured needs and found existing housing inade- 
quate in the face of growing population, new family formations and 
declining family size. 

More dwelling units were started in 1949 and in the first ten 
months of 1950 than in any similar period, indicating that this short- 
age in housing could have been overcome within a forseeable time. 

The international situation caused changes in lending policies in 



a_ Tables 39 and 41. 

b— Table 42. 

c_Table B-12. 

*— Table B-16. 

*— Table B-17. 

/ U S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, N. Y. Regional Office, 12/5/50 release 

9— Page 83 SR. 

h —Page 92 SR. 

*— Table 65; Table 66. 

(1940 — U. S. Bureau of Census. 16th Census, Housing. 

i — \ 1943 — O. P. A. Docket No. MRH-NY-1-P, Consolidated. 
[ 1950 — U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

"—Page 114 SR; Table 67. 

'— Table 68. 
m — Table 69. 

n_ Table B-15. 

°— Tables B-18 and B-19. 

v—Page 124 SR. 

t— Table 72. 

r — Tables 73, 74, 75, 77, (as revised but not published). 

S —Page 126 SR. 

t— Table 79. 

«__ Table B-13. 

v— Table B-14. 
*>— Table 187. 

r—Paoe 148 SR. 

v— Tables 83, 88, 188 and page 148 SR. 

z— Tables 84 and B-20. 

137 



October that in themselves would have curtailed new housing con- 
struction. As the national mobilization grew the prospects for new 
housing progressively diminished. 

There was a shift, less marked in the New York City area than 
elsewhere, from tenant to owner occupancy. 

Housing supply increased as did the population in almost all sur- 
burban areas at a greater rate than in the cities which they adjoined. 

The preliminary census figures indicate that the supply of new 
housing in the major cities should have exceeded the requirements of 
the added population in those cities, but this cannot be accepted as 
conclusive until the preliminary census housing figures have been 
audited and the final figures made available. It is impossible to recon- 
cile these estimates in view of the absence of housing vacancies. 



V. Financial Results of Operating 
Controlled Housing 

Income and Expense 

Survey of Rents reported in considerable detail operating results 
for the year 1949 of 4,908 structures containing 56,467 rental units 
in fifteen upstate counties and New York City. The information was 
gathered from many sources and the coverage was designed to reflect 
statewide conditions. Of the 4,908 buildings surveyed, comparative 
information on 167 upstate was gathered for the years 1942 and 
1949 and on 921 for 1943 and 1949 in New York City. a The small 
number of units in the upstate sample subjects it to statistical quali- 
fications. 

Comparative Income 

Despite a rise in operating expense, and despite operating declines 
or even losses in individual buildings, net income of a sample of 921 
multi-family buildings in four boroughs of New York City increased 
an average of 17.2 percent from 1943 to 1949, and of 167 buildings 
in five counties (Albany, Erie, Monroe, Onondaga and Schenectady) 
upstate decreased an average of 3.2 percent form 1942 to 1949. b 

An analysis was made of the comparative income statements for 
five upstate counties and four boroughs of New York City for which 
data were available. 



A comparative table shows: 






1942 


1943 


1949 




New York 


New York 


Upstate 


City 


Upstate City 


Total Earned Income. 100.0% 


100.0% 


100.0% 100.0% 


Total Expenses 63.9 


63.7 


69.8 62.6 


Net Income 36.1 


36.3 


30.2 37.4 



This shows upstate counties having proportionately greater ex- 

138 



penditures to total earned rental income in 1949 than in 1942; the 
range of increases was from 2.2 percent in Monroe to more than 
26 percent in Schenectady. d In New York City there was a decline 
in the ratio of 1.7 percent for the city as a whole; there were slight 
increases in the Bronx and Brooklyn, but decreases in Manhattan 
and Queens — 4.1 percent and 4.8 percent, respectively. Although 
prices and costs increased during this period, many owners of rental 
property were able to postpone additional expenditures on their prop- 
erties or to limit expenditures and still maintain high occupancy. 

The ratio of net income to earned income, of course, varied 
inversely with the ratio of total expenses to earned income. All 
upstate counties showed a lower ratio of net income to earned in- 
come. Manhattan and Queens in New York City showed a higher 
ratio; Bronx and Brooklyn had slight declines. 6 

Conceding that sampling limitations affected these results, it was 
obvious nevertheless that size of structure determined the degree to 
which economies could be made by property owners. Large apart- 
ment houses permit more economical purchases of fuel, equipment 
and supplies, and enable owners to make other savings of which the 
owner of small rental property cannot take advantage. 

Rent Ranges 

In making this study structures were divided into four rent ranges, 
as follows : 

First range: consisting oj buildings with units renting at $30 per 

month or less; 
Second range: consisting of buildings with units renting at $30- 

$49.99 per month; 
Third range: consisting oj buildings with units renting at $50- 

$74.99 per month; 
Fourth range: consisting oj buildings with units renting at $75 

and above per month. 

These ranges were common both upstate and in New York City, 
'but because the data were more abundant for New York City the 
second range has been subdivided for buildings there into two 
further classes:— "A", $30 to $39.99 and, "B", $40 to $49.99; the 
third range has been further subdivided into two sub-classes: — 
"A", $50 to $59.99, and "B", $60 to $74.99; and the fourth range 
has been subdivided into two sub-classes :— " A", $75 to $99.99, 
and "B", $100 and above. 

Rental Income 

Although rental income increased 15.4 percent upstate and 13.7 in 
New York City, buildings throughout the State with units renting 
for $75 and more (the fourth range) received greater increases in 
earned rental income than those with units under $75. f 

Upstate buildings with units renting under $30 (first range) had 
an average increase of 9.3 percent; those $30-$49.99 (second range), 
15.7 percent; those between $50 and $74.99 (third range), 16.1 per- 

139 



cent and over $75 (fourth range), 20.6 percent. In New York City 

the first and fourth ranges had increases greater than the second and 
third. 

The increases were distributed as follows : 

Upstate New York City 

(First range) Under $30 9.3% 167% 

(Second range) $30-$49.99. . . . 157 8.6 

(Third range) $50-$74.99. .... 16.1 10.2 

(Fourth range) $75 and over . . 20.6 227 

All ranges 15.4 137 

Expenses 

Expenses in the five upstate counties increased 25.9 percent com- 
pared to 117 percent in New York City. g The expenses were higher 
in the first range for both areas — 38.1 percent higher upstate 
and 15.8 percent in New York City. Upstate the percent increase 
in expenses in the second and third ranges was substantially less 
than the other ranges, while the increase in the fourth range was 
highest. 

The increases in expenses were distributed as follows : 

Upstate Nezv York Citx 

(First range) Under $30 38.1% 15.8% 

(Second range/ $30-$49.99 .... 20.5 14.8 

(Third range) $50-$74.99 24.0 8.5 

(Fourth range) $75 and over . . 397 97 

All ranges 25.9 117 

Net Income 

As shown above, net income increased 17.2 percent in New York 
City and declined 3.2 percent upstate. h (Net income represents the 
difference between earned income and total expenses excluding fixed 
charges (mortgage interest and depreciation).) Despite the overall 
decline upstate, the second and third ranges there showed increases. 
In New York City all ranges except the second showed substantial 
increases; the second showed a decline of 1.2 percent. The largest 
increase — 51 percent — was in the fourth range. 

The percentage changes were distributed as follows : 

Upstate New York City 

(First range) Under $30 —47.3% 18.5% 

(Second range) $30-$49.99. ... 6.2 —1.2 

(Third range) $50-$74.99 3.2 12.9 

(Fourth range) $75 and over. . — 9.8 51.0 

All ranges —3.2 17.2 

All analyzed structures in New York City except those in "A" of 
the second range showed substantial gains in net income. 

To establish the relationship of 1949 net income to earned income 
in New York City and in fifteen upstate counties, analysis was made 

140 



of an expanded sample, consisting of 1,698 buildings in New York 
City and 3,210 upstate. 

In New York City the average net income of 16.8 percent of 
buildings in the sample was less than 20 percent of earned income ; 
38 percent earned 20 to 34.9 percent ; 36.5 percent earned 35 to 49.9 
percent, while 8.7 percent earned 50 percent or more. 1 Upstate, the 
distribution was as follows: 25.8 percent earned under 20 percent; 
20.5 percent, 20 to 34.9 percent; 26.9 percent, 35 to 49.9 percent; 
and 26.8 percent, 50 percent or more. j More than 86 percent of the 
surveyed buildings containing 20 units or more in New York City 
earned 20 to 49.9 percent. This represented the largest group of 
rental units in the sample. 

An analysis of the increase in net income of buildings for which 
comparative data were available shows that of 935 buildings in New 
York City containing 32,611 units, 41.2 percent showed a decline in 
net income between 1943 and 1949, while 58.8 percent showed in- 
creases. 1 ' Of all buildings in the sample 38.4 percent showed declines 
ranging up to 49.9 percent ; the majority of the 38.4 percent showed 
declines between 5 and 19.9 percent. On the increase side, 12.9 
percent of the whole sample ranged between 10.1 and 20 percent and 
more than 11 percent indicated increases greater than 100 percent. 

Most buildings showing net income declines contained eleven to 
twenty units. The analysis indicated that the percentage declines in 
net income had not been affected by building size. 

In Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens, more buildings showed in- 
creases than decreases ; the contrary was the fact in the Bronx. 

Return on Assessed Valuation 

The Commission analyzed the 1949 return on assessed valuation 
which buildings in New York City earned and, so considered, found 
that over 49 percent of them earned 6 percent or more. 1 Thirty-seven 
percent earned before fixed charges between 6 and 8.9 percent ; 12.5 
percent earned 9 percent and more. Thirty-five percent showed earn- 
ings of 3 to 5.9 percent; 15.5 percent had returns under 3 percent. 

The majority of analyzed buildings with twenty units or less 
earned under 6 percent on assessed valuation; 54.1 percent of build- 
ings containing over twenty units earned 6 percent or more. 

Mortgages 

Sixty-seven and three-tenths percent of the properties surveyed 
reported mortgages information ; the average mortgage was 64.6 per- 
cent of assessed valuation.™ 

While the Commission did not examine actual mortgage payment 
and depreciation data, a fair inference from the comparative study of 
net income data would indicate that net income after fixed charges 
was greater in 1949 than in 1943. Many owners have been able to 
refinance mortgages to take advantage of higher valuations, of lower 
interest rates and of longer amortization periods, and often so re- 
duced fixed charges. A study of income and expenses of rental 

141 



property in New York City made by the Office of Price Administra- 
tion in January, 1945, revealed that, while net income before fixed 
charges in 1944 had increased generally over 1939 only 0.5 percent, 
such net income after fixed charges of those structures for which 
interest and depreciation data were available showed an increase of 
54.7 percent. 

Since in New York City there was an indicated increase of 17.2 
percent in net income before fixed charges in 1949 over 1943, it is 
obvious that even if fixed charges had remained the same there 
would have been a substantially greater increase in net income after 
fixed charges at the end of the same period. 

Conclusions 

The majority of buildings studied had greater net income in 1949 
than at the inception of rent control. 

This resulted from full occupancy of rentable units and the reduc- 
tion in the ratio of overall expense to earned income. Although costs 
increased during the period 1942-1949, the amount of money actually 
spent for such items as payrolls and repairs-maintenance indicates 
that there has been curtailment both of service and repairs-main- 
tenance. Thus, operating economies have tended to produce increases 
in net income. At what loss to service and maintenance — loss not 
only to tenants but to property values — this was accomplished is, 
unfortunately, not deducible from accounting figures. 

In New York City, according to the Census in 1940, large struc- 
tures containing ten or more rental units accounted for more than 
fifty-seven percent of the total number of units available for rent. 
More than 40 percent of such structures contain twenty or more 
units. 

The study reveals that earnings are affected by building size and 
rental range. 

Large buildings had a relatively greater return on assessed valua- 
tion than small buildings, and larger percentage increases in net 
incomes in 1949 over 1943 as well. 

Structures containing units with an average rental of $75 per 
month and above increased their net income a greater percentage 
than any other rental group. Conversely, structures with lower rentals 
showed relatively lower incomes and lower returns on assessed valua- 
tion. This was especially true upstate where the majority of rental 
units are in small buildings, particularly one- to four-family structures. 

Efficient operation and economies in the purchase of materials such 
as fuel and equipment are more available to owners of larger struc- 
tures. Many owners of multi-family rental property retain handymen 
who do many of the common types of repairs, thus eliminating hiring 
of plumbers, electricians and other skilled mechanics. In comparing 
rental units in New York City with rental units upstate the difference 
in services and facilities is often great. A tenant in a small structure 
in many cases provides his own heat and other services, which must 
be provided by the landlord in large multi-family structures. 

Entering into the cost of operation is age of structure. More than 

142 



57 percent of all rental structures in New York City are 30 years old 
or more 11 and in the lower rent ranges. The physical condition of 
these structures and the age of their equipment reflect their higher 
operating costs. 

This analysis probably understates the increase in net income before 
fixed charges. An analysis of the units in fifteen upstate counties, 
including the five heretofore referred to, revealed that net income 
before fixed charges was 35.4 percent of earned income, compared to 
30.2 percent for those units in the five upstate counties studied for 
which 1942 and 1949 comparative data were available. For New 
York City the ratio was much closer for the two samples studied. 1 ' 
(These conclusions on data from the upstate counties are subject to 
considerable qualification due to limited representation in the various 
rental ranges.) 

"—Page 152 SR. 
''—Table 86SR; Table 130 
c — Table B-21. 
d — Table B-22. 
'—Table B-23. 
'—Table B-24. 
o— Table B-25. 
h — Table B-26. 
'—Table 172. 
i— Table 173. 
*— Table B-27. 
l — Table 171. 
m — Table 170. 
"— Table 50. 
"—Table 85. 
p— Table 129. 

On the following pages are twenty -seven tables which give de- 
tailed figures relating to this Part. 



TABLE Bl 

VITAL STATISTICS— MARRIAGES*-STATE, SELECTED COUN- 
TIES AND NEW YORK CITY-JANUARY TO SEPTEMBER. 1950 

Estimated 
Tanuary 1 to 

Tune 30, 1950 July August September 

New York State 65,473 11,492 14,485 15,708 

New York City 40,057 6,040 8,698 8,634 

Remainder of State 25,416 5,452 5,787 7,074 

County 

Albany 754 265 219 193 

Broome 631 177 158 184 

Cattaraugus 320 78 97 . 70 

Chautauqua 610 159 178 178 

Chemung 361 89 103 94 

Clinton 193 36 51 44 

Dutchess 458 109 140 140 

Erie 3,107 750 565 1,229 

Jefferson 288 73 89 86 

Monroe 1.600 406 500 387 

Nassau 759 357 109 591 

Niagara 780 152 235 244 

Oneida 777 135 203 235 

Onondaga 1,141 267 231 288 

Orange 575 98 118 165 

Oswego 237 66 79 79 

Rensselaer 381 139 49 167 

St. Lawrence 302 92 94 91 

Saratoga 245 57 62 73 

Schenectady 453 128 117 140 

Steuben 329 • 87 90 70 

Suffolk 791 162 246 233 

Ulster 282 S3 90 82 

Westchester 2,118 370 561 680 

* Number of marriage licenses issued in the specified month, by place where 
license was issued. 

Source: Estimated data (excluding New York City) provided by State De- 
partment of Health, Office of Vital Statistics. New York City data from City 
Marriage License Bureau. 



144 



NO'<trfioOKOOC>^'t*riO'tvOOOOr-no>'^X^ 
O00'0'<tNO00 | ONf^OOM00«0Nir J r-.<5i0v00Qi^C 



t/3 



Sis fO<r> 



P^irf 10 On 
*3 t^<> ^ 

•— >v©cg CO 
0) 

c 

3 
1 — >jt t^Tf co 

too^ti-™ 



Ttr-irt00OC\00fO>O00 , tMCMOMNr-i^HKn>ClCvN'^ 



Ttt^OOOvfOOOOOiO-rl-'rfl^OvvOCVjTf 

iomrjoo^roonoo\'rn(NMvo l o 



rf roC>NOMOOO 







TOoOri t^ 



mKKO 

3NNO 

n3(N — 1— . 



TO 

§** 

U U <u 
O OT3 

<u <u 53 



•'tOOfOKvOOOOMMOONMOOOKiOOO'-'^l^^lK'tK 
Tj-OOv^tOvOO "^r ^ r " H °9.'~' r *i l *\ r ' 3 OO CO •— ' f^- >0_O lONTf 



N'OiOMvO'^^M-OOronN'HvOrfT^oOnXOKOOO^l 
tOfOOvONO>00(*5vO'- | ^ , vO'H0^0 1 0»-irH c«^ OO r^ CM LT> Tf 

Tf" CO ^H CVJ -— « rHvO'H(^'trOTfO(V)^H^M^Mr^Tf-0 



^-Hio^K\0^)05MOOiO\0( v 5^0T)-MnvO'^MnOO't 
OvvO'tfOO<-i^OOOISKO'HrHK(\jniOOfOtNKrs^)Tf 
fOrO'— <C<lr-ii— (^hlt)^hoOco , «^-"^-vOCM'— ifMCNJ.— 'CM— <-0— .00 



■"tOOvONOOCOOnCO^OOfOOOOONMO^OOaOO 



»-n-ovO'*>J^or^a\NOciQvO'^-r^vpf\jTi-^H^-irt'^ooLorvjro K 

TtrO'-i^'-i'-i'-i'O'HOOfOrOrOOrvi'-iMM'-iMr-Tj-rHCh 



> 

Ih 

OOr-<\OKONOOiOMOOPOfOK\OOCMOOin , + CM»iO , t 3 
TprHroNLOO , tC>>000\OfO^-COOroCKOOfO(^^OOOMiO r/) 






o ^ 

'-5 5 
73 « 



K-i ;=- w at (/> 

o siSsis-g 



TO 
TO^3 



« ^ C 

tfcJ o 



3 - 

TO TO T3 

TO 



<u o 






<«UUUUQW^§!z;!30000«wwwwtf35 



TO £ G 






145 



e to 

TO «- 

G = TO — 
;— tn rt 
Lii C <u 

eg 

o .2 u 






fa £ 



am m 10 ro k oo 10 n lo 
n*^S '° "^ l ° ^ ""* T *" "* "**" 



CO 

W 
Q 

H 

i— i 

pq ^ On 

< co £ 

I— I 
CO 

O 

a 

3 
o 

3 



CJ 



CO lOOOiNOrHCMX) 






CO 



r-l r- 1 ,-H l-H ,— I ,_ r- . r-l £ 



S 



CNjTt-LONOvOOOlOOO 



«0 






> n TO p <j —- s 






to 



to 



< 

H 

ED 
U 

2 

c 

< 
& 



CO 

c^ 
W 

o 

< 
< 

Q 
< 

o 

pq 

Q 
W 
H 

< 

H 
co 



^ 1= 

- to 

§ s 

2 ^ 

CO ** 
>^ 

s 

p< 

H 

CO 

D 

Q 
i— i 

PQ 

co" 
H 
!? 

w 

CO 
< 

H 

CO 

W 



.5 2 



U 

*- 12 !£ £2 ^ o oc <> rt o r\i 

O 

O 

u 

to 

LXj CO<- ' <T5 Tt" <T> wi vo T+ 1 cj 

„ ocococococococococoo 
rt fTl (^ rO ro r^ r, (^ r^ to f^ 

u 



.3 -a 



r- OyqiOrONMOOOu-.io 

> c — £2 L2 £i o c> tt i/-i c rvi <r> 

U. 5 — ???^ v Ot s OCOOKK 

CO a 



"O co o o cm (Nj t< cK u-j rf CO 

TO O0\0«— <f— 1»— 'OOCVJfO 
U, (N — i (M00C\3CM(NJ(NJ(\J(NJ 



•^3 u 



a^ 



H 



- OOiocXJi^rovOiOLori-O 



TO CJ fOTfOOOOfONOONO 


U 



w C>00CX)O(\lrO'^"T)-L0in 
g '-"-"-'CVJ(N(NJ<MCVJCMvN 

O 

U 






"cj^ -iCXJOioNOOMTtfN 

to « doiadOHOHrtH 

£•0 ^ "- ^ ^ *- ^ — '- 

X c 



TO boCX)vqp^-(prot^rl-vqc> 

"ti c HcrJipcNicKrfu-icNiu-jt^ 






U, TO _ — 
TO 3 *g^ 
3 >r u-r 



o 



to 

'5 



146 



TABLE B5 

MONTHLY GENERAL BUSINESS INDICATORS— 1950 

Accumulated 
Estimated Total W w Industrial and Savings of 

Business Firms Incor- Commercial Individuals 

1950 (Thousands) porations Failures (Millions) 

January 579 2,496 207 $28,745 

February 580 1,983 159 28,853 

March 579 2,366 193 29,023 

April 577 1,991 193 29,094 

May 574 2,337 203 29,268 

June 576 2,206 153 29,432 

July 577 1,625 162 29,312 

August 580 1,840 221 29,336 

Source: Current Business Statistics, State Department of Commerce. 



TABLE B6 

AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS OF MANUFACTURING 
PRODUCTION WORKERS, BY INDUSTRIAL AREAS 

Percent Increase 

■ Over 1940 ■ 

September October September 

1940 1946 1950 1950 1946 1950 

New York State $27.09 $49.40 $59.69 $61.75 82.3% 120.3% 

New York City 28.52 54.82 57.26 60.63 92.2 100.8 

Industrial Area 
Albany-Schenectady-Troy.. 29.52 46.28 66.31 66.28 56.8 124.6 

Albany, Rensselaer and 
Schenectady Counties 
Binghamton-Endicott- > 

Johnson City 23.16 43.32 60.75 59.87 87.0 162.3 

Broome Count v 

Buffalo 30.29 48.95 68.63 68.42 61.6 126.8 

Erie and Niagara Counties 

Elmira 25.15 46.88 60.64 62.48 86.4 141.1 

Chemung County 
Kingston-Newburgh- 

Poughkeepsie 21.60 42.47 56.87 58.31 96.6 163.3 

Dutchess, Orange and 
Ulster Counties 

Rochester 28.59 47.71 64.22 65.49 66.9 124.6 

Monroe County , 

Syracuse 27.81 49.07 65.47 66.84 76.4 135.4 

Onondaga County 
Utica-Rome-Herkimer- 

Little Falls 22.74 45.85 58.88 61.02 101.6 158.9 

Herkimer and Oneida 
Counties 

Note — Production workers include working foreman and all non-supervisory workers closely 
associated with actual production. It excludes supervisory employees above the working 
foreman level and their clerical staffs, routeman, salesmen, etc. 

Source: Handbook of New York Labor Statistics 1948, and November 1950 Labor Market 
Review, State Department of Labor. 



147 



co 

< 
W 

to 
< 

to 
< 

5 

to 
co 
to 
Q 
g 

« 

CO 

to 
to 

o 
o 



g 
3 

H 
U 
< 
to 
P 

< 

to 
O 

t/3 

C 
g 

s 

< 
to 

a 

w 
> 

to 

<j 
Oh 
w 



<U LO 

P, ^ 

o no 

o ** 



u 



on 
45 lo 

<u 
CO 



•s> co 
3 o 

be _; 



3 On 






p s 

U 

P 
C 
ft! 

to 



2 < 



LO 



U co 



.O LO 

to 



u n- o 
rt so lo 

g LO 'lO 



oo 


3 


00 


co 


§ 


3 


CM 

o 


on 

LO 


00 


nO 


00 

LO 


LO 

nO 


vd 

NO 


NO 


LO . 


CO 

NO 


vO 


oo 


CM 
CM 




oo 

oo 


o 

NO 


OO 

no 


O 

vO 


no 

LO 


to 
vO 


LO 

NO 


00 

LO 


nO 

^1- 


* 

LO 


5 


CO 


to 


PH 


>o 


LO 


NO 


o 

nO 


vO 

LO 


CM 

nO 


CO 

NO 


00 
LO 


m 


U") 


Cv 
vO 


CM 

LO 


ON 

00 


NO 

CO 


nC 

NO 




vO 


LO 


LO 


CO 
nC 


NO 




oo 

ON 


o» 


sO 

co 


vO 

ON 


LO 


CM 
CM 


ON 


LO 


nO 


OO 

LO 


LO 


CO 
sO 


00 

LO 


NO 
LO 


no 


ro 


CM 
lO 


CO 
CM 


CN 

00 


CM 

CO 


00 
CO 


LO 
LO 


LO 

nO 


LO 


LO 


o< 

LO 


ON 
LO 


NO 
LO 


o 

ON 


CM 
CM 


CO 


<* 


ON 
LO 


NO 

o 


s 




s 


LO 


cm 


ON 
LO 


oo 

LO 


NO 
LO 


cm 

NO 


O 

nO 


LO 




o 


OO 
LO 


ON 
ON 




CO 

vO 


LO 
LO 


cm 

LO 


o< 

LO 


LO 


LO 
LO 



CM 

ON 


LO 


LO 

p 


LO 


LO 
LO 


o 


CO 

LO 


CO 

NO 


LO 
LO 


CM* 

LO 


00 

LO 


LO 


* 

ON 
ON 


ON 


o 


CM 


o 

CM 


CM 

ON 


CO 
LO 


CM 

NO 


NO 
LO 


CM 

LO 


ON 
LO 


LO 

LO 



§ 



■n 

? % 



d <s> c 
-*-; t^i O 
O m o 

o _"0 
CO >>5 

« ■-: 

X2< 



to 





V3 




tu 




















o 




o 




u : 




03 • 




u 


i ^ 


03 




tuO • 


' c 


c3 


• o 




• o 


2 : 


:<J 






X) : 


a 


B 






03 



S 



^° c 
to rt 

i: « 
bog) 

3 03 

!Z »•- 

,!. <U C 

o-6 3 o 



u 

c 

o to 

U • 

o3 c 
bc C 
03 q 

P °r 

is «< 
So .§ 

5 





NJ 


C 


c^ 





^j 


U 


N\> 

-fie 


rt 


V 


-o 


5 


'5 
c 


4 





5 


T3 


-o 


e 


e 


OS 


.KJ 


u 


T3 


<U 


ID >, 


E 


W ^ 


'J2 




In 





^ 



in 



148 



TABLE B8 

PURCHASING POWER OF THE CONSUMER'S DOLLAR 

IN THE UNITED STATES 

1939 TO NOVEMBER, 1950 



(1935-39 = $1.00) 



Year 



Purchasing 
Power 



1939 $1,006 



1940 
1941 
1942 
1943 
1944 
1945 
1946 
1947 
1948 
1949 



.998 
.951 
.858 
.809 
.797 
.779 
.718 
.628 
.584 
.591 



Year and Month 

1950 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 



Purchasing 
Power 



$.599 

601 

599 

598 

593 

588 

580 

578 

September 15 575 

October 15 572 

November 15 569 



Source: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 



TABLE B9 

PERCENTAGE RISES IN THE CONSUMERS' PRICE INDEX FROM 

SELECTED DATES TO OCTOBER 15, 1950— UNITED STATES, 

NEW YORK CITY AND BUFFALO 

U.S. 

From Average New York Buffalo 

August 1939 63.6% 72.7% 75.6% 

December 1941 36.8 36.4 34.5 

June 1946 23.8 20.6 23.4 

October 1949 3.6 3.1 3.3 

July 1950 1.3 0.6 0.6 

September 1950 0.6 0.4 N.A. 

Source: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. 



149 



3 
o 
<v 

C r-lrHOOOfOfON-HOOlOlO O OO OO — > >-n r^ CM Tf to fO CO 

ro 



CD 






a 



CO 

H 

o 

PQ 
I 

W 

I— I 

< 

w 

o 
u 

g 

w 

< 

p3 
w 

P 
O 
3 

O 

r ^ 

w 
p 

I— I 

g 

2 

CO 

W 

S3 

co 

% 

o 
u 



bo 
cu-S r^co^NO'ri-CNj'^co'^oqco 
£? "51 "tJ-' i n i n "S 10 lo o On ^ O^ fvj 

5'- ooooooooooooooootx^O 



u-j cm co oq cm oq os ^ c\i p <-; 

NNNNNNNNOOCM> 



ON^vO 



3 rt - 



S0Tt*3-'3- T 3-cococoT-t-Ti-TtTt- 



o<on 

CO CO rf ^f 



io io CM CM 






C^ 



c^ 



o °o On i 

CM* cm CM* co i CO i co t)- Tf Tt" m u-) 

(\|CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM 



o6o6odododc>cysaN < ^aN' 

OOOOOOOOt-^Oi 



£^£ 







t- coo o 


(vi cm <M cm 


Ik 






u poqO'-j'-^Of^ON^'^p 

5? lOTj" y"i lOlOlOTfloOfO^O 



"tiOr-iOKN'OMsONro 



rMcvjco-^-cococo-^-ONcNco 

g< 00 OO 60 00 OO OO OO OOO O On CO OO OO OO 00 CO OO OO OO O On 



OO ^00 CM 

o"od\dcd 
i^r^r^oo 



id ooqoNOcovooo'Lopio 

5 sd 't o o d ^ o ov oo on c^' 



O CO t^. i-H r-H CO ON 1,0 CO CM Q\ 



^ vO ""T nO no o ■n- O On oo on cjn iDi^iDrsqjTroNrorNrNoc 
O oOmJnCNOOhOOOO OOOOOOOOOOo 

\J_I ,-H^HT-lt— ICNjCNjCNjrNJ^Nl^NjsNl r-4»-Hr-l,-HC\|CMCMCMCMCM<\] 



OOfOO'- 
o< CO COCO 
OOOn OO 

rHrHCMN 



3 

I 

1 

Q 

to 



£ O <n O ro vO fNjirj O°0 0O no 

£} vONO^NoddtNito'fO'NtiO 
l_J nOvOnOOONNNNKN 



t^r^our^ooof-oo^-, 
nfOTj-'-rtiotsdodd-^rxi 

nOnOvOnOnOvOK^OKNk 



oq copp Cq 



\OKN 



r o 



CD CD 

g^ ' : : '•% s% s. 

<Dw3 a jS 3*3 3 v£o 



< c-S * art' c^ 



CD 

£_£ £ tfcjo »- 

_j CD'" oj s >o ro •— i 
>>« ^Sl^ P > f^O 3 






a; 



oo OS 






;cq 



•X- n>) 



150 



TABLE Bll 

Latest Rent Index for the Cities Included by the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics in the Compilation of its Consumers' Price Index 

(1935-1039=: 100) 

Latest Available Rent 

City Month in 1950 Tndex 

Atlanta November 128.9 

Baltimore September 120.6 

Birmingham November 171.8 

Boston September 120.1 

Buffalo October 126.0 

Chicago September 143.6 

Cincinnati September 116.7 

Cleveland November 131.3 

Denver October 127.5 

Detroit October 131.1 

Houston November 147.8 

Indianapolis October 136.1 

Jacksonville September 144.7 

Kansas City October 130.2 

Los Angeles November 134.5 

Manchester, N. H October 117.7 

Memphis September 133.1 

Milwaukee November 143.4 

Minneapolis September 136.8 

Mobile September 131.7 

New Orleans November 117.9 

New York October 109.1 

Norfolk ' November 124.7 

Philadelphia November 122.8 

Pittsburgh October 123.2 

Portland, Maine September 115.9 

Portland, Oregon October 131.9 

Richmond October 128.6 

St. Louis September 123.5 

San Francisco September 118.0 

Savannah October 132.2 

Scranton November 1 16.6 

Seattle , November 128.7 

Washington, D. C November 107.9 

United States Average November 125.4 

Source: Bulletins of U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 



151 



TABLE B12 



NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS FOR WHICH 

CONTRACTS WERE AWARDED IN NEW YORK STATE, 

1950 BY MONTHS 

(Includes new units and alterations; private and public ownership) 



1950 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

January-October 

January-November 

Source: F. IV. Dodge Corporation 



1 and 2 
Family 

Units 

2,715 
2,648 
4,388 
4,626 
5,574 
7,125 
5,231 
6,006 
4,039 
6,805 
4,831 



Large 

Residential 

Units 

2,887 
2,312 
4,829 
5,833 
2,586 
1,834 
5,274 
2,364 
2,916 
3,745 
3,616 



49,157 34,58C 

53,988 38,196 

'Contracts Azvarded". 



Total 

Dwelling 

Units 

5,602 
4,960 
9,217 

10,459 
8,160 
8,959 

10,505 
8,370 
6,955 

10,550 
8,447 



83,737 
92,184 



TABLE B13 

INDEXES OF CONSTRUCTION COSTS, MONTHLY IN 1950 

(1939 = 100) 

-E. H. Boeckh & Associates- 
U. S. Department American Apartments, 

of Commerce Appraisal Hotels and 

Composite Index Company Residences Office Buildings 

January 206.2 242.3 206.7 194.3 

February 208.8 242.3 208.8 195.6 

March 208.5 242.3 210.4 196.5 

April 209.8 243.3 211.3 197.1 

May 211.5 244.3 217.9 201.1 

June 214.1 248.3 220.6 202.6 

July 216.0 250.2 224.2 205.3 

August 224.0* 253.2 228.3* 207.6 

September N.A.** 255.7* 227.8 208.0* 

* All time high. 

** Not Available. 

Source: Housing Statistics, October 1950, Housing and Home Finance Agency. 



152 



CO 
.J 

< 

2 
w 

H 

< 

O 
g 

3 

►j 

5 

w co~2 

So 

to 
W 

O 

K 



£J iOH(\jONONO*oo J ' 

J3 © —J cm' eg cm* lo t^ <x> cm" -. : 

Q ^t—t,— ..-Hi— I,— Ir-lr- (.—.(-C,,-!^ 



tl U h'h -I 2J -« rH —' ^ ^-I < < 
£ CO ^-(T-C^-lr-fr-l^Hr-lT-H^M^^ 

CO 



bO bo * * 

3 *"2 +3 r-I oo ^-1 tj- vd \d ^c5 "^"o og <^i 

C C\l 1) ,_,,_«,— I.— It— It-H»— '»— I,— I.— 'r-H 

Pu 



.5a, h <>o'odvC)vc5t<oc5cgooood 
cj^+i eocOcococococo-'tf-Tt-Tf"^- 

Q.*0 Ctf r-Hi— llH»HHl-l»- I t-H ,_( r-H r-H 



^q mr-<o\Tt;o;\qOvq6o;0\ 

Sr* - cm lq On © cm od r>! ,— ; u-j id 



C 00 On On On On On CO >-n r\] vO no 

£} 'ti : T) : 5'tTtin>ovddd 

u 



"C ' l— t^H i— ( t-H 

pq 



■J O^O^CKCflOOOHHHH 

£_( ^^.-..-..-HrN^CMCMCMCMCM 



CO 



CO 



.£3 






N\> 
s 



o 

EC 

s 

o. 

i 

a 

Q 



<0 

a 



PP 

owe 



PQ 1 



-I :::::::- |- S 
«§ ::--:: :- |« g 



V<N G 

i-k O 

-* o 



o 

P4 



G 03 

° r 

CO c/1 



X 



^o 
cm q 






CM CO CM t^ •— ' 



hM |h 



co^ CM 



in 




rt 


^0 




C 




3 


o 




o 






-C 


*jj 






T3 




£ 


"T3 










en 


o 




bl) 






c 












J-l 


o 




<u 






te 






o 


<l> 


CM 




■^ 




Ih 


rs 




<u 






£ 


c3 




o 


> 



12 



CM O vO vO O •-" 

O '— ' 



2; ^ 

CO ^ 



ST* J? 



•5 c« g 

w 



HHfOH 



1^ 



Li 



Sag 



^ mDlo rod 
W CM CM CM 



4> On rO O O 
^D CO COCM 






COO 
CM "^ 



ON^t co O 





Si c 


o 


.SrtO 


o 




o 


c S rt 

D X _ 






c <u C 

Sa.2 


o 


v-3t! 


CO 


rt « * 


t—t 







l| 

O aJ 



O^ On On On On On On 1> 
O^ O; On On On On On_ > 
On On On On t}- On On ® 
NOt^OOONCM'^ON'O 



©oooomoo 

NONOOO^OMiOO 

t— t t— I r-H CM 

4^9- 



O G 
• U C g 

c3 — O 

Spa 

< rt as ^ 

o H fc 



153 



% 

a 





>» 




■6 




rt 




+-» fOON 




g 00vOr-H 




£ 


■s 


►— 1 


c/] 


fl 


Ih 

J3 «— «io vo 


w 


Q 


O Old O 


tf 




< 


c 


& 


tf 


< 


nJ 


W 


!H o\rtio 


4) ts vO *— • 


P4 


C NioM 



CM CM© 
lOtsOO 



CO 

H 
U 

< 

* -g 

s *wg 



bo 
O 



w) fO\ON 



o 



w 



3w£ 
^ot 

< 
»— i 

H 

!z; 
W 

Q 

Lo 
w 
c* 

to 

O 

w 

pq 



§ ONCMfs 

as 

o 
a 

u 
<v 

~3 .s © o © 

<i Vh \0 0000 

_. W ^-" co 

G 

a 



I ass 



*2 i ^NN 

.2 _o Ohio 

o ;=! cm cm 

£ <! 



3 
_, O 

•"2 £ 






CM 

a5 rd rt 

H 



^ 



OOCMO 
TtCM CM 



rsOts 



CM coOn 
ON r-l ts 

ts.-ivO 



fOrOO 

rHNt 
OO Tj- CO 



^•»-ico 

O\00rH 
IOt-Tt^ 



TJit'lo 

LOtSvO 

^T co 



ONTTlo 



* • co 

• • (L> 

! ° 



NON 
lO ©lO 
CM CM 



o • g^ 

ts :s-g 

O. co c 

t>0 • CM 

— — *-' ►* 

j3 rt rt cs 



fS on 



u-> -in 

co • ro 
CM CM 



CO© co 
00 vO CM 

VO r-llO 



OO -OO 



oo -oo . 

I 

• . <v r^ 

: • S o 

:„ o <o 



Q 
W 

Q 

< 

& § 

go 
U 

^^•^ 

pq c/igtf 



73 oo_r^H 

•£ io"co"CM" 






^ OOON 

ft 



C On CM •— 1 1— i 
^^H CM^CMON 



*T3 

O MDCMrf 

e ^-OOvO 

C3 coisio 



fc^; ? 



■a! 



ta 



ON 



o ^ 



I— I H->»7 

Wcoon 

gu 

C0K> 



P4 



CO 



3 *-< 00 CM* 



XT On Oo 
»-' ON_vOco 

o-ToT 



kh pq 



M 



o •^tvo oo 

►» OOvO-h 



>< lOcoCM 
C COLO 00 

O T-HIOVO 

oCoo" 



ON t^CM 
O cots 
lO 0_rt 

O" co"co" 



00 ON 00 
ts co co 



N O\00 
CM N't 



CM ©CM 
© CM 00 
vO KO0 



CO ©CO 
© 00 CM 
ON 00 



>0 CO CM 
CO \Ots 
CO rtOO 



© cols 

»— i cots 
CM \OiO 

vo" io" 



co tooo 

ON ON 



oCOoo 
vO © vO 

r-> 00 CO 



CMOOrJ- 

CO tSLO 

"^T-h CM 

cm" cm" 



oooo© 

OO COLO 
tsCMuo 
CM" CM" 



oovn co 
vO 00 OO 
cO©CM 



3 
• ^ O 

:."2 g 

CM 

rt n5 rt 

H 



>^2 



o ; 
o .' 

o : 

j= .' 

bO • 
3 • 
O 
»-. — 

^ O 

30 
CiO 
rt on 



ON CM 
'-'© 
vOO 



— O 

•2K 

^1 

p>fe 

CM 

b^-g 



tsts 

»oio 



rf i— i co 
LOCOCM S 
LOlO o 



CM •S 



© • 

LO ' 

ON • 



c2 
<v o 

I 

o 



154 



•*-i*3-CMOCMOO©CMsO I r£ P 



NMNCMOiOto 



CO o 
CM o 

o 



m 





m 




cm 


o 


*9- 


m 


i 


o 


vO 




CM 




CM 


„ 


w- 


t-H 




l—t 






m 


tf 


CM 
CM 


w 


<&■ 


PQ 


»— i 


O 


O 
CM 


H 


<fr 


U 




o 


© 

o 


1 


» 


>* 


1 


u^ 


r^ 



£0- 



O '-' <o 
CM ^CM 



co o 

IT) 



^H • -^H .H I^O 



a B 
o o 
o o 

Pi Pi 



c c 

<U <D 

Pi Pi 



,-H -r-HCO • 



on 



Tj- CM -HIO • 






CO CM CM CO 



s 

o 
o o 
Pi 9 

^Pi 

^ a 
c t{ 

^Pi 
<u ^_, 
bjO w 

> M 



Q <E 



c 

as U 
o <u 
H Ph 



V« \N \N \N 

rHCMCMcOfO-^-^-iO 



Ho 

wg 

coH 

£° 
^ I 



t/iO 

X £^ 

WpiZ 

Pin 

WW 

>^ 



X~ - 

S3 «■ 

^ a 

... <u 

£u ^ 

, vO 
£ >> CM 

£ S ** 

§^ 2 

fe o 

Vh t— I 

si 

to 1 — > o 

>£ "? 

sl 






T-l O 



CON - 

o £R 



- 
o 

CO r- 



ON (J O 
'-' xA O O 



i— i CM CM u"> CM • "- 1 



CO Tj" 



S 



^ ^ ^ ^N ■ 

T-H^HCMCMCOCOTh^f-Lni 



ID 5 





CO 


lO 
CM 


o 
o 




o 


in 




CO 


rt 




<*>■ 


09- 




i 


fl 




o 


n 




o 


o 






p^ 


M 




c 




u 

c 




o 


4_> 








c 

Pi 






3 
U3 


d 

Pi 




Ih 

00 


bo 






Q 








+j 


> 


CJO 


rc a 


< 


ffi 








O QJ 






h 


Ph 







155 



TABLE B20 

AVERAGE TAX RATE PER $1,000 IN SELECTED CITIES 
1942 and 1949 

Amount of Percent of 

Cities 1942 1949 Increase Increase 

Albany 34.99 43.99 9.00 25.7 

Binghamton 38.22 43.70 5.48 14.3 

Buffalo 42.20 44.80 2.60 6.2 

Elmira 41.57 51.41 9.84 23.7 

New York 27.90 30.80* 2.90 10.4 

Niagara Falls 34.12 49.02 14.90 43.7 

Poughkeepsie 40.03 43.82 3.79 9.5 

Rochester 41.17 43.56 2.39 5.8 

Syracuse 41.23 43.07 1.84 4.5 

Utica 44.67 48.99 4.32 9.7 

Watertown 36.81 47.95 11.14 30.3 

White Plains 35.28 41.53 6.25 17.7 

* 1950 Rate 

Source: 1942 Annual Report of the State Tax Commission; 1949 figures 
from State Department of Audit and Control and local tax 
offices. 
Nezv York City figures from Reports of the City Tax Depart- 
ment and City Tax Commission. 

ADDITIONAL CITIES 

Amount of Percent of 
Increase or Increase or 

Cities 1942 1949 Decrease Decrease 

Auburn 29.30 36.80 7.50 25.6 

Beacon 43.66 36.73 —6.93 —15.9 

Cohoes 51.72 49.00 —2.72 —5.3 

Dunkirk 47.14 41.78 —5.36 —11.4 

Ithaca 29.31 41.47 12.16 41.5 

Jamestown 35.40 45.01 9.61 27.1 

Lackawanna 46.50 56.85 10.35 22.2 

Middletown 29.23 44.38 15.15 17.6 

Newburgh 37.76 41.94 4.18 11.0 

Oswego 49.46 58.83 9.37 18.9 

Pittsburgh 96.53 33.16 —63.37 —65.6 

Rome 43.12 60.37 17.25 40.0 

Schenectady 37.08 45.59 8.51 22.9 

Yonkers 40.79 38.06 —2.73 -6.7 

Source: 1942 Annual Report of the State Tax Commission; 1949 figures from 

State Department of Audit and Control and local tax offices. 



156 



TABLE B21 

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF EARNED RENTAL INCOME FROM 
RENTAL UNITS, UPSTATE NEW YORK AND NEW YORK CITY 

Upstate 

Classification 1942 1949 

Total Earned Income 100.0% 100.0% 

Expenses 
Operating 

Fuel 7.3 10.7 

Electricity and Gas 4.2 4.3 

Water 1.6 1.8 

Telephone 0.3 0.6 

Payroll 10.9 12.4 

Other Operating 1.9 2.1 

Total Operating 26.2 31.9 

Administrative 6.1 4.6 

Repairs and Maintenance 9.4 10.4 

Insurance 2.1 2.4 

Taxes 

Property 19.8 20.2 18.5 16.1 

Social Security and 

Unemployment 0.3 0.3 

Total Taxes 20.1 20.5 

Total Expenses 63.9 69.8 

(before fixed changes) 

Net Income 36.1 30.2 36.3 37.4 

(before fixed charges) 



New York City 


1943 


1949 


100.0% 


100.0% 


7.2 


7.9 


1.7 


1.6 


1.9 


1.7 


0.1 


0.1 


11.9 


14.4 


1.8 


1.3 


24.6 


27.0 


4.9 


5.1 


12.9 


11.6 


2.3 


2.2 



0.5 


0.6 


19.0 


16.7 


63.7 


62.6 



157 



rs] 

pq 
W 

pq 
< 



W 
C 
g 
H 
W 

Q 
W 

04 
< 

c 

H 



bo 
C 

W C 



-N^ 

W o 

s° 

Kg 

go 

sp 

u w 

XI 55 
S W 

^ CO 

wfr 

Oh <-> 

< £ 

O £ 

O p> 

H 

< 

O 
O 

CO 

I— I 

3 

< 

O 
U 



0) 

_s! 

ctf c/) y 
H c.*o 

■sag 



LO N (V] O CM 

fONM'a vO* 
— ' CM 



« « — tx ^ , r ; H ,f 



w 



o c 



00 ir, <-< 00 
— < CM Tf 



T 



S3" 



Stoats? 

v"0 j= On co vO 
as * <u 



-ri fl , so -3- <o n «— i 
r c o lOTt-Kvoo 



£* 



w'o £ 

<u <u o 

w c y v0 

c ^ c ^ 

o,m~ ^oq^-ooio 

X cd ^piovdodr-. 

t] OS t^vOvOvOOO 



Ss 



04 



w 



£ bo & ^ £» *^ °o "fr 

g.5 u to CM rj- o io 



<o 



m 5 n JM vn o «o s© 
W 73 L; cm cm cm--< 

^ X-O 

Ow x **- 



•O O 

<U CJ 

C C 
«-> i — i 

cs_ 
W3 



i£ nO CM sO CM 
OO lo vO On On 
*-• ON~u-f C\f tvT 
On OO.— i ON 
CM CO CO CM 



c 



Si ^ 

i J-sji-l 

U <W^Oco 



O O rOOC 
Csi On NO iO 



ro ON^»fO 

> n <~n ro Cn) 
On_nO r ~*J~l 
ro io"No"fO no" 
C\ OncmCXOtJ- 



COrtlONO 
f^ On nO On 
tC(vfoo"(NT 

oonoio 
'— i OO CV] OO 



^ ^ SO «-H 

nO so sOiO 



CMo CMO 
CnJ O0 *— ' "^f 

NO_ON_t^<r> 

fM'so'oTrrT 

JM^ON^-H 
On] rf NOlO 

f^fcsf^x" 
60- 



II- -^"OOnO 
fN)OK OO 

>0 CO On NO 
IJ-) O O On 



U 

g § 81 Si 

J2I Wpq^O 



o 



On l-H 



vO so 



On *^ 



rvj oo 

C<} On 
ON 



SO 





OOsO 


SO 




o^oi 

NO so 



000 
hN 
tJ-nO 

^HCsf 

On On CO 

T^- 00ON 



t}-On 
On) CO 
ON ON 

Nro 
CM no 

~8" 



oi: 

o o-> 
HZ 



158 



m 

cm 

PQ 

w 

PQ 
< 



o t» 

O <u Q 



o 
u 

2 Ph 

< 
Ph 

Q 

So 

n^ 
S° 

w ^ 

o£ 

Eh 

p u 
to 

W W 

pq H 

a£ 

O Ph 

H * 



cp2~ B 






fill 






hj^LiJ cm" od lo no lo 
H 



* 



C CNOOO O t^ 

b P, t-ros"»-roru-r 

W,_q CM COCM'-H 



0J CM cot^ 00 CM 






s- o 



t^ CM nO CM lo 

ci tj- co «-h od 

CM CO co CO i— • 



Ph 



03 

-£ sO CMi-O >— ' O 

p. flJ lo nO CM vO CM 

1| g OOiOvO O^On 

-O O OOOhON 

a; y CM CO CO CM 



<U CMlo OOCO nO 

->-> C On »— < On O O 

<U C CM CO r-H COTf 

JZ; 8 oCco"o co"^ 

C vOCOOOt-h 



II" 



^ "S & 

o-a a 



U <W^Oco 



ONO--* 
CM' CO 00 vO 



O «— ' t^CM I CO 



CO^t i-O vO 
Tf CO Tf t^. 

ro t ^i. C5 \ v0 - ( - rs 
rj- ^"cm"oo"cm" 

On O0 CO CMO 

r-l t-^OO^CM 00 

ro COO 



i—l LOCO CO 

On Old 

r^CM^»-n oq^ 

t-H CO O t^ 

CM lo Tj- CO 



OsvOrt Os 
nOOO vO vO 
CO CO CO -^F 



U 



^ ^-03 



I s o o 5 <u 
£ pqpq^a 



CO o 
vO CO 



i— i co 



CO 

Sr c\j oo 

On CO On 

'-' TfCM 

*2 '^^ 

03 »— i r— t 

cm ^-Too* 

On 6^- 



CO^t 
On'o" 

ON CN 

co»-q^ 

5 no" 
.2 &■ 

3 



y cvii- 

Ph COCO 



ON 

r->. 

CM^ 


CO CO On Tt 
Tj- Tt COnO 

co Tr^Ct^u-r 

LO CO On vO 
LOO O ON 


On 
CO 
On 
CO" 

LO 

NO 


C 

c 


P CM CO 

HNrO 

t^LO 

CM no 


4^ 


co"^CM" 


o" 

CM 




ho" 
CM 


T— I 

in 


tTOOOO 
nO^O^O lo 


NO 

CM_ 




TfrH 

LOCM^ 


no" 
00 
CO 


OC5~CO"fM" 
i— I vO On LO 
COLO CO Tj- 


CM 




vo"t*-T 

CO CM 

cor^ 


vs- 


*r* 









u 



o^ 



o o 



159 



pq 

pq 
< 



3 
O 

s^ 

g* 

S^ 

< w 

§a 

< W 

« o 

w z 

w 
w 

< 
H 
w 

p* 

P 






LO 



4J vO 

> s^ 

r^ o cao 

<^-*t3 On 

c '-' 

ns 



eg £2 






Cd 



S > 
© o 

5J.*o 



LOCO LOfVJ 









<=* &£Es. ^ <** ^ <*> ^ 



"ma 

/-\*^ on 



^> cm c\] \o ro 



u&«5-£i£3£!2 2 



On 
On 

So© On' ^t- oo t^ vN 

S&&292 00 ' 
u 









sg: ^ 






^H<M 



&k£S 



505; ^ 



On' ^"l^ 00 . \ —[ 






cr2^ — vo -vO 

D 2^~ '*> 



'S 

03 

y 



oo< Lf ? T -! t >—: 

T— I T— I r}" 



fcfc 



•O^ VOOOrH . I t^ 

c ^9. c\j as* vd ' vc> 



2g ^ 

©On' ^^P 






&<> 



fa < 

°* 

< 



ifliOOOOn 



I — v NV - 



J.S 
II 



rj- O 00 10 vO 
OCMO r\) lo 
LOO NO CO •— 1 



.ti -a OO CM O O0 
c c cooor^Lo 

£<2 v °" vcr ^- r 



vt > NO vcfsb*'«-r 



s? 


W3 rt On PO 


2: 


.ti "S 00 ON 


^ 


C C vOTf 


ro 


»(S N "^ 




<-M 




O 




h bo 


r^ 


JO.- OnI^ 


0" 

CO 


Num 

Dwell 

2,63 

30,74 



be ■*-* 
5i rt H 

i S w c « 
Q ^'C o c-g 




H 



u 
o 



c 

C rt 

o o S nu 



£ pqpqSo 



o 

H 



1 ^ 

0,0 



160 



lo 

pq 
W 

< 



CO 

H 
£ 

5 

< 

to 

o 

co 

co r 

s& 

PL) 

X w 
w tf 

CO <• 

w ^ 

& a 

sp 

w >* 
Q & 

*% 

£ "- 1 

W 
U 

w 

to 

to 

O 

CO 
I— 1 
CO 

>H 



to co«-<-HcoTf I ^ 






o 

si* 

J3 

oo 



CM 



S bo UO ONOO i r^ 

< C co^CM^ ,_< 

g^ | - 



O-r-l «-• ^ 



2 <=* *§ 



2 o *& 
o o «^ 

V© +-» J<, .— I CM ^H CO 



~ be on t^ 



CO 


•O 


cm" 


c 

J3 lr ^ 




82*^ 




jn °^ 



£ 



«^ — '— <~ *-H _£5 



o 

"^^ ~, 

SON ^°° 
2 Co*/* «M 
69- 



+ om 



"Sto 



_ • On i— < u-) Tf LO 

ONt ododu-JTfod 

co^9- co -HMrr 



On <"-> 

~to§ g$ 

n ° 
u to 



irj 



S-i O V$ 

13^ OnJ^co «nO I '-' 

c r?; i< *.m cm' * oo cd 

rf co io co 



p& 



— LOLO OOO-H 

•x> £3 *— ' >— < nO co nO 
■*J "£ u-) o nO CO »— < 



-D^ 



^ LOON NO CO— I 

II 



ON 

O On 



COTt'Tt^* 



* ooNrvtNt cni 



o oo 



CO NO NO On} 



CO On nO On O t^ 



^3 • -^- CO CM 
^co Or^Tt" 
\D<4- COCM-^ 



a? 

§ is ill 

U <W^Oco 



•— Mtrso 

c/i _5 OO CM o oo 

*J c co^oo^ t^^n 

G O nO nO nO '- 1 



XJ c r^ Tf on oo 

C -J3 Tf On rf lo 
§ *^J CM nO CM iO 
hp ^ nO*0"no""'-h'' 



o 

O On n^» 
Oo< wo 00 
Or}- OTJ- 
co«A CM — • 
V3- 



«JO $- 
T3 --: «— i 00 



|DW- COl-H 



rr On co 

v; jr OO On 

.ti c ^"^ 

C <U CM'-' 

^P^ co 



^ > (MO 



U 



c 
ci5 



cr. 



? o o 5 ^ 



IS 

73 "c3 
o 



161 



8 

W 
< 



co 
W 
O 

< 

u 

Q 
W 

X >H 

E^ 

* U 

Ph W 

O (^ 
to o 

PP. ^ 

< 
^ o 

~> 

co S 

< z 

W w 

Q co 
O p 

w 5 

CO 
< CO 

W H 

£^ 
~ J 

H < 

£ H 

W £ 

U W 

Ph P* 

O-i to 
O 
fa 

o 

CO 

i— i 

CO 

< 
< 



4) ^ 
^ b0 CM «— i Olo O 



Ph 7 I 



3 OS 



COOOONrH 



bO 1 

c _ 
re re 



re** 
1*5 



sO Os CM Tj- LO 



bC CM SO OS r-l 



<; c oo^'vo 



CM •— i 



S bfl cm CM 

Ph- I 



o 

o -a u 

o c « 

2 rt o 



OsOO • 



CO 

^t 2 On 

Cs O os 

n^ Os ^^ 

ii^e- <&. com 



&8 £g 

U$5- fe -h-hcmcm 



&*£ 



tJOO °CTs 

u 






<u o 6 s 
"O - r-N. o cvj . *x 

CfO nNr-i * Os 



«0 Os 

u O O a 



t>o Ooq 

CO»-Olo 



77 f'T 



■— ; ioiooooh 

re r-H ^H -O CO SO 

jjh in o so co T-< 

C S r-T 



o& 



bfl 



X! C rj-OOOiOO 
C U3 OOsloCMlo 

§13 LOOSvOCOr^ 



si 

3 ^.g g S^ 

o — ■ ^ w-i c o 
U <W^Oco 



S ^ 

o o^ ^ -^>n 

«e- ^ CM t-hCNJ 



X3 **-: co lo os 
C O __: ,_• — »• 



v) eg oocsj oco 

CI <U so" so" sO*~ r-T 



^3 C t^rJ-OsOO 

a '-=3 rf Os rt- to 

3 13 CMvO^CMiO 

►^ ^ so"vo"so"^-T 
Q 



CX5 
Os' 



CX50 

OJr-.* 



O 

4^0S V£ 

re^ 
3 



re 

O^ CM CM 



CroNOO 



T 



"^3 Os co 
O ?S 00 Os 



oJ bo 

^2 £ ON 
C« corf 



rt 

c 
H 



U 

JS> 

Ih 

' mSTJ E 

c o-5 « 



U 



re 
c o*§ « o 

PoSJi H 



> c ° c 

S 22J5 



3^a 



Ih 

<f> O 

o <u 



re re 
o o 



162 






u 






►J o 



a 



3^ 

is 



C 
O OO 

P .*c 



pq 






t< rrj (\i i n oc u-i <r> — ! od 



iri o N oq o ^ 

(V, _ 






COCVj | O 
CC^ O 

LOT}- O 



moo ci 



,O00fONC>\O^^N 

g Tj- rH Ul rt tO fO (*) M 



CM C\J 00t-h 




t^u-)oor<iu-)oo^-HOO 



00 CM | O 

~ eg 



J-OOOOOOOO 

yiooooou-ioo 
^q TH^nioNoo 

wl l I i l mT 



u a O; o> O O 
O Tt o' o' o o 



c/1 

S Si '3 
pq 



OlooOOOlo > 
CM CO lo t^ O 



w UJ w 

Ih 

u 

- 



£p 



-- 



163 



PART 5 

Surveys 

/. Special New York City Survey 

"Luxury" Apartments 

After Survey of Rents was completed a special study was made 
to determine whether it would be proper to decontrol the so-called 
"luxury" apartment structures in New York City on the assumption 
that there was a high ratio of vacancies in this group. The area 
selected was the 34th to 96th Streets, Fifth Avenue to the East River, 
which contains more apartments in this group than any other. 

Field representatives of the Commission personally visited the 
thirty-six apartment buildings constructed since January 1, 1946, or 
now under construction, in the area (according to the New York City 
Department of Housing and Buildings) and interviewed owners and 
managers regarding vacancies, rents of vacant apartments, numbers 
of rooms, and types of accommodations and services. 

There were twenty completed buildings containing 1,672 dwelling 
units. Nine additional buildings with 1,138 units were not completed ; 
of these seven were being rented from floor plans ; the other two 
were in the early stages of construction. Seven buildings with 601 
units were co-operatives, and unsold apartments, if any, were not 
counted in the survey. 

In the twenty buildings containing the 1,672 dwelling units the 
investigators found thirteen vacancies ; eight were in one building 
only recently completed ; the remaining five were in three other build- 
ings. The vacancy ratio was less than 0.8 percent. 

Six vacancies were two-room units offered at $120 per month. 
One two-and-one-half room unit was offered at $120 and another at 
$190. One unit of three rooms was listed at $135 and two others at 
$140. One three-and-one-half room unit was priced at $170, and 
another at $240. 

However, real estate managers expected that these vacancies would 
be rented after the holidays; December usually is a poor month for 
renting. 

The apartments that rented at $1,000 per room annually were all 
occupied. However, brokers renting from floor plans said it was 
becoming less easy to rent ; in most cases 65 percent of these apart- 
ments were rented at varying stages of building completion. 

The New York City Department of Housing and Buildings re- 
ported that 1,588 new units were added to the 34th-96th Street area 
by conversions since January, 1946. These conversions were both 
in the high and low price brackets. 

164 



Another Survey 

The Real Estate Board of New York, Inc., in October, 1950, made 
a survey of 384 buildings containing 23,123 units in the area be- 
tween 34th Street and 102nd Street. Fifth Avenue to the East River. 
The Board reported 51 vacancies, or 0.2 percent. This, of course, 
included all types of apartments, not only so-called "luxury" accom- 
modations. 

This was part of a more general survey by the Board covering a 
sample of 1.729 structures distributed over Manhattan and excluded 
public housing, old-law tenements, apartment hotels, converted dwell- 
ings and one- and two-family dwellings. This was 24.2 percent of 
all such multi-family structures on the island, and contained 88,437 
units, or 32.3 percent, of all such units. 

The number of vacancies was 123, or 0.14 percent, compared to 
0.1 percent in a similar survey by the Board as of October 1, 1949. 

The text of the Board's survey report, with pertinent tables (re- 
printed by courtesy of the Board) follows on the next page. 



165 



//. Real Estate Board Survey 

The copyrighted text of the report (Apartment Series No. 39, Octo- 
ber, 1950) prepared by the Research Department of the Real Estate 
Board of New York, Inc., is reproduced herewith by courtesy of the 
Board, with the Board's tables most pertinent to this document, and 
with the Board's accompanying map: 

VACANCY SURVEY 

Competitive Apartments in Manhattan 
October 1, 1950 

VACANCY — 1,729 competitive apartment buildings com- 
posed of 88,437 dwelling units reported 123 vacancies on 
October 1, 1950. This compares with the 42 vacancies re- 
corded for October 1949 and only 3 for the same month in 
1948. The vacancy percentage for 1950 is 0.14. 

TREND — 207 buildings reported changes in layouts with a 
preponderance of the changes centered on the break-up of 
large units into smaller and additional apartments. In the 
East Side District, 100 large units in 4 buildings were re- 
ported in the process of extensive alterations to provide 
smaller apartments. In addition, 13 buildings with 332 units 
changed from private to cooperative ownership. In the 
West Side District, 6 buildings consisting of 224 apart- 
ments reported conversion into furnished apartments, fur- 
nished rooms and a transient hotel. 

The Bureau of the Census reported as of April 1, 1950 a 
preliminary listing of 642,157 dwelling units of all kinds in 
Manhattan indicating an increase of 24,784 units since 1940. 
The ^ity-wide total of dwelling units was reported at 2,442,- 
684 indicating an increase of 224,312 units during the past 
decade. 

POST-WAR CONSTRUCTION— 111 apartment build- 
ings composed of 14,945 dwelling units were completed dur- 
ing 1947-1950. There are at present 30 buildings with 3,583 
units in various stages of construction. Dwelling units com- 
pleted in 1950 and those scheduled for completion in 1951- 
52 represent an increase 1.7% in this category. 

SURVEY SAMPLING— There are 7,131 apartment build- 
ings with 273,876 dwelling units in Manhattan — elevator 
and walk-up — according to the December 31, 1949 report 
of the Department of Housing & Buildings — Bureau of 
Records. These totals do not include public housing, old-law 
tenements, apartment hotels, converted dwellings nor one 
and two family buildings. 

This survey, reporting on 1,729 buildings and 88,437 
units, represents 24.2% of comparable buildings and 32.3% 
of the dwelling units. 

166 





1 
s 


<srs 




ooc 


15 


















rt 














> 








I : 








Pt-HO 














•— > »H 










C/3 


u 












w 


V 














■V 


*1 o 




pq^H»- 


1 "* 




£ 


1 


O 2 




ooc 


1 o 




< 












10 


u 












c 
o 


< 
> 




No. of 
Units 
Vacan 




fOrna 
OCM 


1 £P 


e 

til 

p, 

a 


H 


LH 

o 

6 


Dwelling 

Units 
Surveyed 




mooc 

vO lo «— 

VO »-H ■- 


CO 

od 

OO 




< 










.5 


< 




o. of 
ldgs. 
rveyed 








u 


< 






CM—* OC 
0-> CO ^ 


1 c* 


XI 




*"£ 






-* 


t C 


H 












o 


< 












fl 


K 












Cfl 


< 






(4 




• u 

• o 

• -4-> 

• OS 




£ 






H 

bo 


o3 


. > 










c 


>■ 


•*«* 










is 


o 


O I- ^ 




£ 

rt 






'3 


en 


rt £*- 


3 


hJ 






ffl 


1 

c 




H 


o 








fe 




* 



a o r t: 



g-spnja 





ti 


; ' -•- 










t/* 


"••.'.'.'•"-■. 






a! 


a 

Ul 

a 




'AS .TO 1*3 










5/ 


0) 








c 1 




I---C' -•: 




_ i 



<n 
O 


1 * 


13 




b / 


3 




<-> 




£ 


Zi 


?.gsm 


'i.\ : ;'\\ 




Q 








3 *ld 








ao a 










JU 


£SM 






3 

ifl 


XS.9 








i:o 






1S>C>A 




J-S 


>£ ^ 




V 


^>Kg 


5 


1 


£«o 




Sy *J.S>I M 


o 


,x: 


°* ) 










1 


US.t" 


3 



167 



> CO 



tf 00 

So 
C/3 



j 10 .^,1« 



ro .-i i-> re 

dodo 



o 



rt 
> 



■CM >*H 

d '~ 






as 

>m ti O ro ro CO 0\ O — i O "O <^» 

O u 0\ ro —c 00 io O t1- o 0\ ro 

. 3 W ■<* CSVO io \q ■* »-i «*> N 
°C/3 CMVO^PO^CMrt 









<£dcdc'ddcdcd 



O^u^ O 00 ro t^ CM rf i-i tj- 
CN 00 t^ i-i VO rCrf CM* i-< ^ 



Q 

O 
to 
c/) 
W 

u 

2 



2 ' 6 d d d d 



W 

H 

-A; 

5: 

!> ^ °* 

Q Ctj- 

(flW 
H 

< 



^10 i-H CM CM CSJ •* »-h CM CM fO 00 

q2 oo'dddo'dddo 



VM g "- 1 00 •* t-» C?\ <*5 f»J 04 CNJ O 

on - 1 -• 



o c 

I 



u- si CM t^ On f; "". ■* v>-> tr> 00 r}- 

O L OHinHoonm'OOi 

. 3 ^o © ■* «o cm 00 \o cvj r-» ,4 

°t/! "^ooioeMCM^'i-i ^T 



o < 

W d to 

Kg; 



W 

H 

W 
O 

-J W r P 
d to 

o>.« 

^ ££ 

w So 

w 



i/i O) OJ t^ o\ ^ . 
roVOC0»-i 



cnjcooocmoocmoi 

i-c m 10 it, W « 



to . 



< 



«o£^§i 



. . " w> w" . <2 « • ! 

l«iilW 



JUilljfEUi 8 6Ji.gjiglJ8 ' s distils 

OHHfefewwWJZH OHHfctewwWJSH OHHfefewwWSZH 



SI 

M 1- 



168 









o c 

£2 



?5 



CNN 

ee 



1QM 
o - 



' O C C C o d o o o 



co 








H 


t-H 








H 






o~ 


CO 
















Q 




1 




W 




c-m 


Q 

►— 1 




>q2 


CO 




£-» 


H 








CO 








< 


6 





'"lo 






•< 


" = 


5 


O^ 



<~ 



O * 



c. 5 

g fOrJ-t^«N 



•CN)T-.Ci 

'odd 



if0C-^Tl-t^<7Mv;00~O 

N O00noONCNO 



> 



« T3 
cm CJPQ^. 
d 



do 



IS 



O rt 



3 s 



1 WW 



13 






■ r^ coo o^C — ■ «-• 
c«» »*» m «-« 






-< £Eg§g s ggi> 



o c > 
3 -O 












3< 



■r c ii „; & & -2 



liiiiaJJii 2 



<< 



3 £.<■£.■£,_ . 

.. r " u U UX ^ 

« § >- 3 > * ►*S C = 



< B 

E- u 

- 



169 



m 
O 

g 

Q 

3 

O 
H 
< 
> 

W 

o 

H 

in 

On 
i — i 
CO 

g 

Q 

O 
to 

c/) 

W 

D 

< 
u 



o~ 



> CO\ 



.•2 a 



o c 
£2 



bo 

So 

4>CM 



U 



<3 g 



O (TJ 



< ?? 



^ ^ VOTf-Tj-OOONPDCMOO 



<=(/! 



C>~ 



CM to m CM CM .-< r-i 



5 » 

•"J j=Cq , -;cN'-<rtcvjrocg 
o £ oodod 



>oo 



oco^O'to 
«-i n cm .-« 



i m Tf ro r<-, rf i-h 



CnO^CmOsCMioCM 



> CON 



Sm 



o c 

£ 2 









■ VO 00 ro — < 

d eg t>I «*> 



to 
OvO 






1 5 



00 "- 1 00 -H 10 CV1 t^ 



g* 



00 <M h <* CM vo 

"0»0 00 O r-l 



OaHM 00lW ^ 

i- " VO lo CM 10 cj\ fO 

csfcM~,-r 



o. e H ° S £ _, oO 
< §S°ooEo 

r">t3>K>bfl 



bcoSH- oO 
s S ° ° o E o 

JJ K «Ji K * 



1> o 



* c~ 



£ $ « J*J3 






^ P < c > 

e E o E E - 1° 
5 o o o § £ 5 



> x ?: .5? 



«* *«£ 



< c 



170 



On CM 

do 



>§2 



o c 
£3 



w 



C/] 

O 

s? 

I— I 

Q 

13 
PQ 

H 

H 

< 

PL. 

< 

PL. 

S3 

CO 



£ £ 






a*. 

<3 c 



fc s 



p. « 

2 



H to 

<5 



O • • .-H 



O ts i^i Ov O] tc X 
N OioOM„W 
VO CM O 00 ^O LT) rH 






> CO 



Q 


feS 


£20-0 — 


d M§ 


fc 

P 




5 

r 


(j eg 


O 




01 


|X| 


H 


d. of Apt 
Vacant 

1 


W 

n 




< 

ft 


1 

i 


CM 




U 






£ 






% 












< 






3-< 






u 






<j >> 






< 
> 






O t -HCMt^vOiOt-, 
J3 01 


o 












K 







H 

O 

~B 

d W 



o c 

£5 



be 



< 



hCiXOO^O 
CM ^i" t^ -<j- CM CM 
.-ICMCM 



O On CM CM f rH 00 

ro fO O 00 *0 vo 00 

fOCMO^fi 

cm'cm*-^ 



^«° 



« I III If* 






S£ 



E|ll|s° 

., o « b O U 
£ P In 3 > v; > 



§ g i 1 1 e° 



„o 



3* 

O <y 



5.>.*£ 



OHHPh£c/5c/3 



171 



DWELLING UNITS IN NEW YORK CITY— ALL TYPES 

By Boroughs 

Staten 
Year New York City Manhattan Brooklyn Bronx Queens Island 

1950 1 2,442,684 642,157 815,233 432,883 496,208 56,203 

1940 2 2,218,372 617,373 762,526 395,245 394,389 48,83Q 

1949 3 2,326,497 635,283 778.852 421.625 442.583 48.154 

Source : 

1. U. S. Bureau of Census — April 1, 1950 (Preliminary) 

2. U. S. Bureau of Census— 194C 

3. Nezv York City Dept. of Housing & Buildings — Bureau of Records — Annual Reports 
1945-49 

SURVEY CHANGES 

East West Greenwich Wash. 

Side Side Chelsea Village Hts. 

Buildings withdrawn . . 35 16 3 7 21 

Co-op 13 

Furnished apartments . . . . 6 . . . . 

Demolition 4 2 

Alterations 4 

No co-operation 12 7 3 6 19 

Miscellaneous 2 1 .. 1 2 

Buildings added 28 27 . . 2 6 



PART 6 

Assessed Values 

/. Ratio of Land to Building Value 

This Commission has made a study of the 1949 relationship of 
assessed valuation of land to total assessed valuation of residential 
properties in the City of New York and in up-state counties. 

The data show the number of residential buildings in each county, 
the total assessed valuation, the assessed valuation of the land, and 
the relationship of the land to the total. For the City of .New York 
the data also specifies the information for each of the more common 
types of residential structures by borough. 

In New York City the ratio of land to total assessed valuation 
varied from 11 percent for elevator buildings in Staten Island to 68.4 
percent for one-family dwellings in Manhattan, with an average ratio 
for the City of 34.67 percent. Upstate the ratio ranged from 17.2 in 
Chatauqua County to 28.3 in Rockland County. 

So far as elevator apartment houses in New York City are con- 
cerned the ratio of land value to total value indicated that the assess- 
ments attributed to the building value ranged from twice to nine 
times the value of the land- on which the structures stood. 

Breakdowns of property by apartment houses, one-family houses, 
etc., were not available outside New York City. 

Explanatory tables follow: 

172 



ASSESSED VALUATIONS, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, 
SELECTED COUNTIES AND NEW YORK CITY, 1949 



Total Assessed 

Number of Assessed Valuation 

Residential Valuation of Land and 

County Buildings of Land Buildings 

PC Albany 63,269 $53,227,926 $197,399,427 

PC Broome 45,682 30,288,895 121,801,882 

PC Cattaraugus .... 7,257 1,603,263 9,037,079 

PC Cayuga 16,137 8,951,981 45,431,686 

PC Chautauqua 47,414 14,433,985 83,797,138 

PC Chemung 23,514 10,343,460 44,118,880 

PC Fulton 17,055 6,368,516 34,350,945 

C Jefferson 22,377 10,047,218 44,988,265 

PC Monroe 131,926 102,961,886 450,739,428 

PC Montgomery .... 13,739 5,855,949 21,736,212 

C Niagara ..'.... . 55,820 25,060,560 127,089,045 

C Oneida 54,018 31,002,750 134,458,918 

C Onondaga 93,045 70,106,286 249,736,204 

PC Ontario 14,819 7,886,192 40,185,647 

C Orange 47,958 24,215,855 99,947,839 

C Rockland 28,490 11,606,625 41,055,121 

C St. Lawrence... 19,750 5,609,505 26,596,556 

C Schenectady .... 51,015 31,436,655 134,604,606 

C NEW YORK 

CITY 636,153 3,356,779,373 9,682,010,313 

Manhattan 49,495 1,439,146,600 3,069,013,510 

Bronx 63,340 411,885,110 1,489,518,005 

Brooklyn 251,463 902,781,738 2,870,282,608 

Queens 233,777 546,726,640 2,045,861,475 

Staten Island . . . 38,078 56,239,285 207,334,715 

* PC — Part of area controlled. C Area controlled. 



Percent of 
Assessed 
Valuation 
of Land 
to Total 

27.0 
24.9 
17.7 
19.7 
17.2 
23.4 
18.5 
22.3 
22.8 
26.9 
19.7 
23.1 
28.1 
19.6 
24.2 
28.3 
21.1 
23.4 



34.7 
46.9 
27.7 
31.5 
26.7 
27.1 



173 



ASSESSED VALUATION, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES 
NEW YORK CITY. 1949 



A. 
B. 
C. 
D. 



A. 
B. 
C. 

D. 



Ratio of Land to Total 
MANHATTAN 



Number of 

Buildings Land Total 

One-family Dwellings.. 6,421 $126,256,475 $184,474,800 

Two-family Dwellings.. 1,581 21,856,555 32,783,770 

Walk-up Aprs 37,741 716,535,660 1,275,619,580 

Elevator Apts 3,752 574,497,910 1,576,135,360 

TOTAL 49,495 $1,439,146,600 $3,069,013,510 

THE BRONX 



Percent of 
Assessed 
Valuation 
of Land 
to Total 
68.4 
66.6 
56.2 
36.4 



46.89 



One-family Dwellings.. 22,857 

Two-family Dwellings.. 20,400 

Walk-up Apts 18,534 

Elevator Apts 1,549 

TOTAL 63,340 



$70,532,750 $173,151,780 

69,730,490 188,582,960 

194,493,700 717,563,340 

77,128,170 410,219,925 



$635,442,053 
841,960,185 
995,884,490 
396,995,880 



$956,529,965 
505,477,170 
328,989,580 
254,864,760 



40.7 
37.0 
27.1 
18.8 



$411,885,110 $1,489,518,005 27.65 



BROOKLYN 
One-family Dwellings.. 88,641 $243,575,470 

Two- family Dwellings.. 96,039 294,602,370 

Walk-up Apts 65,210 286,077,293 

Elevator Apts 1,573 78,526,605 

TOTAL 251,463 $902,781,738 $2,870,282,608 31.45 

QUEENS 
One-family Dwellings.. 155,225 $271,675,120 
Two-family Dwellings. . 62,515 144,906,215 

Walk-up Apts 15,122 81,709,665 

Elevator Apts 915 43,435,640 

TOTAL 233,777 $546,726,640 $2,045,861,475 26.72 

STATEN ISLAND 

One-family Dwellings.. 29,543 $41,306,545 $143,345,095 28.8 

Two-family Dwellings.. 7,923 12,662,490 53,163,495 23.8 

Walk-up Apts 600 1,976,750 8,152,125 24.2 

Elevator Apts 12 293,500 2,674,000 11.0 

TOTAL 38,078 $56,239,285 $207,334,715 27.12 



38.3 
35.0 
28.7 
19.8 



28.4 
28.7 
24.8 
19.0 



174 



Appendix "A" 
Analysis of Minutes of Public Hearings 

The Emergency Housing Rent Control Law required that before the Com- 
mission submitted a rent control plan and proposed regulations it "hold public 
hearings at such places and times as it may deem appropriate." 

Accordingly, public hearings were held in Rochester, Binghamton, Syracuse, 
Buffalo, Albany and New York from November 14 to 22. Tenants and land- 
lords, their representatives and those asserting disinterested public interest, 
expressed their opinions and offered suggestions. 

More than 3,000 persons attended, an average of 250 upstate and about 2,000 
in New York. All the proceedings were reported, and the recorded testimony 
(700 typewritten pages) is in the Commission's files. 

A thorough analysis of this testimony, and of 35 briefs filed with this Com- 
mission, was made and all comments and suggestions were studied. 



Upstate Hearings 

At the five upstate hearings there were 160 speakers. Landlords were repre- 
sented by 143 who suggested revision or modification of the present Act and 
Regulations. Most were owners of two-and-three-family dwellings and pre- 
sented individual problems. In addition, there were representatives of real 
estate boards, landlord leagues, and owners of large properties who were con- 
cerned more with general problems. 

The most frequent recommendation made by landlords was summary repeal 
of rent control. 

Other recommendations were : 

Separate treatment for New York City and the upstate areas 
because of differences in housing and rental conditions. 

Introduce more flexibility into administration of the Regulations. 
Allow for increased taxes and maintenance costs. 
Relate rent increases to rises in other cost of living items. 
Base increases upon individual situations rather than allow 
across-the-board increases. 

Increase rents immediately 50 to 60 percent above 1939. 
Protect tenants by limiting landlord's profit on investment. 
Adjust rent to tenant ability to pay. 

Provide for repossession of property without requiring establish- 
ment of "necessity." 

Relax control of evictions of tenants, particularly those persona 
non grata. 

Limit tenant recovery of overpayments to one month's overpay- 
ment. 

Decontrol registered units when owner-occupied for twenty- 
four consecutive months. 

Decide complaints of tenants and owners in a court of law 
rather than by an administrative agency. 

Decontrol gradually by a "fair rent formula" which would limit 
competition among controlled, decontrolled and uncontrolled prop- 
erties. 

Decontrol rooming houses. 



175 



Stricter controls were urged by the Liberal Party, the American Labor 
Party and the Communist Party, the only organizations appearing for tenants 
generally. (The recommendations of Liberal Party representatives are given 
in the following section covering New York City.) The American Labor Party 
asked for a non-discrimination provision and for labor representation on the 
Commission. The Communist Party called for relief of owners of small prop- 
erty at the expense of large real estate operators and commercial real estate 
interests ; for tenant representation on the Commission ; and a complete mora- 
torium on rent increases. 



The Mayor of Binghamton through his representative asked for continuance 
of rent controls but added that the various rent regulations should be simplified. 



New York City Hearing 

In New York City ninety persons spoke for the tenant, sixty-one for the 
landlord. Many were concerned with individual grievances ; some tenant speak- 
ers argued extreme political views against landlords. 

The following organizations made specific recommendations for the improve- 
ment of the landlord position : 

Metropolitan Fair Rent Committee 

Greater N. Y. Taxpayers Association 

West Side Taxpayers Association 

Heights Taxpayers Association 

Property Owner's Union of Queens County, Inc. 

Greenpoint Property Owner's Association 

Allied Taxpayers Defense, Inc. 

North Queens Home Owners Civic Association 

Harlem Taxpayers and Property Owners Association 

Howard Funding Company 

Bensonhurst & Boro Park Realty Ozvners Association 

Associated Hotel and Residence Clubs, Inc. 

Commerce and Industry Association of New York 

Bronx Boro Taxpayers Association 

Fifth East Agency 

Real Estate Board of the Bronx 

Most of their suggestions dealt with (1) increased rents, (2) easier eviction 
of tenants, and (3) decontrol. Among specific recommendations were: 

1. Include depreciation and interest on mortgage in calculating net income. 

2. Authorize increases approved by the Office of the Housing Expediter 
during the period March 1, 1949 to and including April 30, 1950. 

3. Authorize immediate rent increases to offset increased real estate taxes, 
water, labor and other costs since March 1, 1949. 

4. Allow tenants voluntarily to pay increases not exceeding 25 percent 

5. Allow 5 percent return on investment. 

6. Provide increases in residence clubs to insure a "fair return." 

7. Allow profits comparable to those obtainable under Commercial and Busi- 
ness Rent Control Laws. 

8. Subsidize landlords entitled to increases which low-income tenants cannot 
afford; Rent Administrator to control subsidies. 

9. Amend Section 190 of the Public Housing Law to provide for mandatory 
municipal exemptions on limited dividend housing for stated period to protect 
investment against loss and assure fair return, and increase construction of 
new units. 

176 



10. Provide across-the-board increase above March 1, 1943 level. 

11. Relieve landlord hardship where foreclosure is threatened. 

12. Restore rents reduced because of curtailed services after restoration of 
services. 

13. Exempt from control five-, six- or seven-room apartments occupied by 
one or two persons. 

14. Decontrol apartments renting for $40 per room or more. 

15. Decontrol, partly or fully, apartment and hotel room rents within one 
year. 

16. Decontrol units previously decontrolled by OHE. 

17. Decontrol vacant apartments or allow across-the-board increases. 

18. Allow increases for landlord owning one or two housing units. 

19. Eliminate requirement "immediate and compelling necessity," as a pre- 
requisite to repossession. 

20. Decontrol where tenant takes roomers without owner's consent, or per- 
mit eviction of tenant, or increase in rent. 

21. Protect landlords from tenants who misuse properties. 

22. Allow eviction of tenants persona non grata. 

23. Use state-wide uniform building code to reduce building costs 10 percent. 

24. Special treatment for "small landlord" to whom retention of paid counsel 
is burdensome. 

25. Remove controls. 

26. Provide reasonable return on "fair value." 

27. Adopt Office of Housing Expediter schedule in figuring expenses upon 
which rent increases may be predicated, including service of special painting 
and decorating. 

28. Permit withdrawal of housing accommodations from the market. 

Tenant recommendations were in general concerned with (1) stricter con- 
trols with a minimum of increases and decontrol provisions, (2) protection 
against eviction, and (3") hearings at which opposing parties can present and 
examine evidence and witnesses and be represented by counsel. 

Briefs and remarks on behalf of the tenants were submitted by the following 
individuals and organizations, among others : 

American Veterans Committee 

United Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers of 

America 
Port Morris Community Council 
Nezv York County Democratic Committee 
Disabled American Veterans 
Liberal Party * 

Workmen's Circle 

Joint Board of Fur Dressers' and Dyers' Union 
Communist Party 

Bensonhurst Consumer's and Tenant's Council 
New York Tenant's Council 
Distributive, Processing and Office Workers of 

America 
Brownsville Neighborhood Council 
Harlem Trade Union Council 
Graham Court Tenant's Association 
New York City Consumer's Council 
Youth Neighborhood Council 
Assemblyman Louis Peck 
Tenant's Housing Consulting Service 
West Side Tenant's Council 
Assemblyman Jacob H. Gilbert 
International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union 
Congressman Jacob Javits 

177 



Assemblyman Samuel Roman 

Joint Rent Action Committee 

East Harlem Health Council 

National Lawyers Guild 

New York Hotel Tenant's League 

Americans for Democratic Action 

Henry Street Settlement 

Inwood Tenant's Council 

Central Trades and Labor Council 

A T ew York City CIO Council 

Jewish War Veterans 

Metropolitan Life Insurance Tenant's Association 

(Queens) 
Young Democratic Club of New York 
Stuyvesant Town Tenant's Committee 
Federal Workers Union (UPWA) 
Educational Alliance, Adult Division 
Young Progressives of America 
National Maritime Union 
American Communications Association 
New York Tenant's Council on Renting and Housing 
New York Federation of Post Office Clerks 
United Rent Action Committee 

United Neighborhood Houses of New York, Inc. 
Tenant's Committee of 270 Park Avenue 

Tenants' representatives made the following recommendations : 

1. Repeal all decontrol provisions. 

2. Prevent decontrol based upon percentage or number of vacancies. 

3. Survey continuously vacancies in specific areas and in specific rental 
categories for automatic recontrol and decontrol of rents, based upon normal 
vacancy ratios. 

4. Eliminate higher rentals charged for pretended use of part of rented 
premises for professional or commercial purposes. 

5. Continue rent controls as now enforced. 

6. Refuse increases where otherwise allowable until landlord clears violations 
and premises are habitable and safe. 

7. Compel prompt restoration of discontinued services without involved 
litigation; or authorize alternative of substantial rent reduction to force service 
restoration. 

8. Limit increases under voluntary agreements to specified amounts author- 
ized by Commission for improvements. 

9. Prevent increases based upon "fair net operating income'' or similar 
provision. 

10. Allow no more than one increase in any 12-month period, such increase 
to produce net income equal to net income in 1943. 

11. Apportion increases equitably among all tenants of building, having due 
regard for quality of accommodations, rents, and previous increases. 

12. Limit increases to 15 percent above freeze-date rent. 

13. Refuse increases when rental income exceeds operating expenses by 25 
percent. 

14. Prevent across-the-board increases; tailor adjustments to individual case. 

15. Tighten controls and refuse increases for comparability in absence of 
fair and reasonable standards; deny increase for hardship under any formula. 

16. Require for administration of comparability regulation : statement of 
standards, basing standards on both geographical location of comparable units 
and minimum number thereof ; enumeration of physical factors considered ; 
physical inspection by Commission staff; make available to tenant and land- 
lord rental data in Commission files. 

17. Limit comparability to building under consideration. 

18. Retain comparability regulation only pending new rent control plan. 

19. Drop comparability regulation and base increases upon severe and 
individual landlord hardship. 

178 



20. Prevent eviction until tenant lias found accommodations at approxi- 
mately similar rental in all cases where landlord's immediate family member 
is to occupy unit ; or property is to be demolished for non-housing ; or prop- 
erty is to be withdrawn from rental market. 

21. Control rent and evictions in converted dwellings and in new dwelling 
accommodations completed after February 1, 1947. 

22. Protect veterans against unwarranted eviction. 

23. Give to tenant occupying dwelling unit right to first occupancy of any 
unit resulting from conversion, at rental fixed by Commission. 

24. Limit conversion for additional self-contained units to units containing 
no less than seven rooms and occupied by less than one person per living room, 
as defined by Multiple Dwelling Law. 

25. Declare immediate moratorium on increases and evictions. 

26. Make retroactive decreases for failure to provide services. 

27. Prevent by law collection of retroactive OHE increases. 

28. Deny facilities of Commission to any landlord who discriminates on the 
ground of race, color, creed, national origin or ancestry. 

29. Control public housing projects which come under the Urban and Re- 
development Company Laws now exempt. 

30. Give tenant privilege to erect television antenna without charge. 

31. Require replacement of worn-out refrigerators and stoves without 
charge to tenant. 

32. Provide hearings at which parties are accorded an opportunity to pre- 
sent and examine evidence and witnesses, and to be represented by counsel. 



179 



Appendix "B" 



Taxes 



Equalization 

The various counties of the State assess real property at varying percentages 
of full value. An equalization table is required to bring the varying percent- 
ages to 100, so that all counties will be treated on an equal basis by the State 
in the distribution of State aid funds, and for other State purposes. The 
agency which establishes the equalization table is the State Board of Equaliza- 
tion and Assessment. 

The Board was created in 1949 as a temporary State commission. Governor 
Dewey appointed to it Spencer E. Bates, President of the State Tax Commis- 
sion; John E. Burton, former Budget Director; and, as Chairman, Frank C. 
Moore, then State Comptroller and now Lieutenant Governor. 

To the new Board were transferred the functions, powers, and duties of the 
State Tax Commission, the State Board of Equalization, and the Department 
of Taxation and Finance which pertained to equalization rates and real prop- 
erty assessments. The act charged the new Board with the review and revision 
of State equalization rates in all counties. The Board was also to recommend 
a permanent assignment of its duties. 

The equalization rates set by the Board are the basis of apportioning State 
aid for education, for the assessment of special franchise property, for the 
determination of the tax limit base for municipalities, for the allocation of 
State aid to towns for highway purposes, and are used to establish town, city, 
and village equalization rates. In addition, the rates are used for the appor- 
tionment of school taxes where a school district embraces parts of two or 
more tax districts ; for the equalization of assessments among towns within 
special districts; and for the apportionment of certain court expenses to coun- 
ties within judicial districts. The rates will be used to determine full valua- 
tion of property as a debt limit for municipalities on the adoption of an 
amendment to the Constitution which was approved at the last session of the 
Legislature. 

In creating this new Board the Legislature determined that the State's exist- 
ing equalization rates in many communities are inequitable. It is the duty of 
the Board to gather data on which sound' and equitable rates can be computed. 
This consists of, but is not limited to, appraisals, sales and similar factors. 

Before a county survey is started a joint meeting of all Supervisors, Mayors, 
and Assessors is held, methods and procedures are explained and local co-opera- 
tion is enlisted. Typical properties are selected with concurrence of the 
assessors who accompany the Board's appraisers. A second meeting of the 
Town Board or City Council and Mayor and the Tax Assessors goes over the 
new appraisals, which may be challenged. 



Assessment Jurisdictions 

Assessments of real property are made by villages, towns and cities. Counties 
adopt the assessment rolls of each tax district within their borders, equalizing 
the rolls for tax purposes, except in Nassau County where the towns adopt 
the county rolls. School districts adopt the town rolls again except in Nassau 
County where the county rolls are accepted. 

180 



Town Assessors' Calendar 

July 1— Date of taxable status. All property should be assessed ac- 
cording to its condition on this date. (Tax Lazv, Sec 9) 

July 24 — Assessment rolls completed and a copy made. Notice 
completion posted in three public places, statin- where rolls ma\ 
be examined and where grievances will be heard. (Tax J.aiv, 
Sec. 25) 

July 24-29 — Assessors mail notices of increased assessments. (Tax 
Law, Sec. 26 A) 

Notices of valuation mailed to non-residents who have requested 
the Town Clerk. (Tax Law, Sec. 26) 

August (second Tuesday) — Grievance day. 

Between Grievance Day and September 15 Assessors make appor- 
tionments of railroad, telegraph, special franchises, etc., to school 
and special districts. (Tax Law, Sec. 30) 

September 15— Last day for filing copy of roll with Town Clerk and 
posting of notice of filing in three places, and also for publishing 
notice thereof. (Tax Law, Sec. 29) 

September 20-30 — Every administrative officer, board, department, 
commission, etc., files budget estimates of revenues and expendi- 
tures for year with Town Clerk. (Town Law, Sec. Ill) 

October 1 — On or before, original roll must be delivered to Town 
Supervisor. (Tax Law, Sec. 29) 

November 1 — Town Clerk delivers copy of roll to Supervisor who 
makes any corrections in copy that Board of Supervisors make in 
original roll, and extends the tax thereon. (Tax Law, Sec. 29) 

The following dates apply to all towns operating under the General Tax 
Law, but not in counties governed by Special Tax Acts, such as Erie, Monroe, 
Nassau, Suffolk and Westchester. 

The fiscal year for all towns begins January 1. All budgets are 
adopted in November, except in Westchester County where De- 
cember is the month. 

Village Assessors' Calendar 

May 1 to November 1 — Subsequent to May 1 and on or before 
November 1, prepare assessment roll of persons and property 
taxable within village in same manner and form as required for 
preparation of town assessment roll. Upon completion of roll, 
and at least three days prior to November 4. Assessor files roll in 
duplicate with Village Clerk. (Tax Law, Sec. 104) 

November 8 — On or before November 8 the Clerk publishes notice in 
official newspaper, and posts in at least five conspicuous places in 
the village, advising where roll may be examined until the third 
Tuesday of November, when, at a specified place and during at 
least four consecutive hours, the Board of Trustees or a com- 
mittee of such board and the Assessor meet to complete the assess- 
ment roll, and to hear and act upon complaints. (Tax Law, Sec. 105) 

January 1 — The verified roll filed with Village Clerk. 

February 1 — Village Clerk publishes notice in official paper and posts 
in village, specifying date of filing. Roll remains with Clerk for 
inspection for fifteen days after date of notice. 

May 15 — Upon completion of budget, and on or before the fifteenth 
day of May, the Board of Trustees levy tax for fiscal year upon 
the last completed assessment roll. 

The fiscal year for villages begins March 1, except the following: 
January 1 — Ossining. 
February 1 — Alden, Bath, Ilion, Mohawk. 

April 1 — Alexander, Chaumont, Galway, Palmyra, Pine Hill, Port- 
chester, Stillwater, Water ford. 

181 



TAX CALENDAR FOR 



Albany 

Assessment Period 1/1 to 12/31 

Field Period for Assessors. .. . 4/15 to 8/31 
Taxable Status Date 1/2 to 12/31 

Tentative Assessed Valuation.. 9/1 for 20 
Open for Public Inspection . . working days 

Protest Period 10/19 for 20 

working days 

Hearing Period 10/19 for 20 

working days 

Final Assessed Valuation 3rd Thurs. thru 

Open for Public Inspection. . 4th Thurs. in 
November 

Assessment Rolls delivered to 4th Thurs. in 
Council November 

Tax Rate Fixed by the Council 3rd Tues. of 

December 

Assessment Rolls delivered to 1/2 
Treasurer 

Last Day to bring Certiorari 30 days after 
Proceedings November 24 



Binghamton 
8/31 


Buffalo 

7/1 to 6/30 


New York City 
7/1 to 6/30 


8/31 


5/1 toll/15 


8/1 to 1/25 


Last Sat. in 
July 


12/1 


1/25 


No tentative 


12/1 to 12/31 


2/1 to 3/15 


1st Tues. in 
August for 10 
days 


12/1 to 12/31 


2/1 to 3/15 


Immediately 
following pro- 
test period 


12/1 thru 2/28 


2/1 to 5/25 


1st Tues. in 
August 


3/12 


5/25 


None 


None 


6/20 


30 days after 
Mayor pre- 
sents Budget 


5/1 


6/25 


None 


Held in As- 
sessment Dept. 


6/30 


Within 30 days 
of last meet- 
ing of the 
Board 


3/17 


10/24 



June 1 — Asharoken, Bayville, Belle Terre, Bellport, Brightwaters, 
Bronxville, Brockville, Centre Island, Cove Neck, Dering Harbor, 
East Hampton, Fillmore, Great Neck, Hamburg, Huntington Bay, 
Johnson City, Kings Point, Lattington, Laurel Hollow, Lawrence, 
Lisle, Lloyd Harbor, Matinecock, Mill Neck, Muttontown, Nisse : 
quoque, North Haven, Ocean Beach, Old Westbury, Oyster Bay 
Cove, Poquott, Quogue, Saltaire, Sands Point, Silver Creek, 
Shoreham, South' Nyack, Upper Brookville, Warsaw, Westhamp- 
ton Beach. 



County Assessment Calendar 

The county adopts assessment rolls of each tax district and levies taxes, 
including the State tax, upon the valuations as equalized by it. 



Equalization by Board of Supervisors 

The Board of Supervisors, at annual meeting, examines assessment rolls of 
the several tax districts to determine whether the valuations of each district 
bear just relationship to valuations of all tax districts in the county. Board 
may increase or diminish the aggregate valuations in any tax district in accord- 
ance with the following equalization rule: 

First, the ratio or percentage which assessed value of real property in 
each district bears to full value, upon proper inquiry and investigation by the 
Board, and subsequently stated in resolution. 

Second, from such ratio or percentage values the Board determines aggregate 
full value of all real property of each tax district by dividing the assessed 
value thereof by the ratio or percentage value as fixed for that district. 



182 



SELECTED CITIES 



Poughkeepsie 
1/1 to 12/31 


Rochester 
1/1 to 12/31 


Syracuse 
7/1 to 6/30 


Utica 
8/1 to 7/31 


Watertown 
1/1 to 7/1 


White Plains 
2/1 to 7/1 


1/1 to 7/1 


1/1 to 4/1 


7/1 to 6/30 


8/1 to 7/31 


1/1 to 7/1 


2/1 to 7/1 


1/15 


4/1 


7/1 


10/1 


7/1 


7/1 


7/24 


4/1 


None 


8/10 


8/1 


7/1 to 7/10 


7/24 to 1st 
Wed. in 
Sept. 


4/15 to 4/27 


7/17 to 7/31 


8/10 to 8/21 


8/1 to 8/31 


7/1 to 7/10 


1st Tues. and 
Wed. in Sept. 


4/15 to 4/27 


8/1 to 9/30 


8/21 Grievance 
Day 


8/1 to 8/31 


7/1 to 7/10 


After 2d Tues. 
in Sept. 


7/1 


7/17 


10/1 


Varies 


7/1 to 7/10 


2d Tues. in 
Sept. 


10/1 


10/15 


10/10 


No fixed date 


9/1 


12/1 


10/15 to 11/15 


10/15 


3/1 to 3/31 


No fixed date 


10/20 


1/15 


7/1 


12/15 


5/1 to 5/31 


No fixed date 


11/1 


30 days after 
2d Tues. in 
Sept. 


11/21 


10/15 


11/1 


15 days after 
Roll is filed 


30 days after 
filing Roll 



Third, average rate of assessment of real property in county then is deter- 
mined by dividing the aggregate assessed value of the real property in all 
tax districts by the aggregate full value thereof. 

Fourth, the true equalization value for each tax district then is determined 
by multiplying the full value of the real property in that tax district by aver- 
age rate of assessment for county. 

Fifth, by deducting from or adding to assessed value of several tax districts, 
difference between assessed value and equalized value, the amount which 
respective tax districts are increased or diminished from assessed value will be 
shown, as is total assessed value for county. (Tax Law, Article No. 3, Sec. 50) 



Levy of Tax 

Board of supervisors of each county at its annual meeting levies taxes for 
county, including State tax, upon valuations, as equalized by it. Such assess- 
ment roll becomes tax roll of tax district. (Tax Law, Sec. 58) 



Tax Roll and Collector's Warrant 

On or before December 15, or such date as may be designated by Board of 
Supervisors of any county, but not later than January 15, Board of Super- 
visors annexes to tax roll a warrant under the seal of the Board, signed by 
the chairman and clerk, commanding the Tax Collector to collect taxes from 
persons named in tax roll, on or before the first day of the following February, 
where the same is annexed on or before the fifteenth of December ; but where 
the time of annexing is deferred to a later date, on or before the first of May. 
(Tax Law, Sec. 59) 



183 



Fiscal Year of Counties 

The fiscal year of counties generally begins on November 1. The exceptions 
are as follows: 

January 1 — Allegany, Broome, Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Chemung. 
Erie, Essex, Herkimer, Jefferson, Monroe, Montgomery, Nassau, 
Niagara, Oswego, Sullivan, Tompkins, Westchester, Wyoming. 
October 1 — Genesee. 
December 1 — Oneida. 

Beginning January 1, 1951, the fiscal year of all counties will be the calendar 
year January 1 to December 31 ; the budget will be adopted before December 
20 ; and the warrant of levy issued not later than December 30. 

Fiscal Year of Cities -^^ 

The fiscal years of cities generally are the same as the calendar year. The 
exceptions are as follows: 

April 1 to March 31 — Hornell. 

May 1 to April 30 — Hudson. 

June 1 to May 31 — Olean. 

July 1 to June 30 — Auburn, Buffalo, Corning, New York, Watertown. 

August 1 to July 31 — Rensselaer. 

November 1 to October 31 — Albany. 

December 1 to November 30 — Glens Falls, Long Beach, Middletown. 

School Districts 

Education is not a town function. School districts other than city school 
districts are municipal districts superimposed upon towns with no regard to 
town lines. 

The School Boards of the various school districts adopt the assessment rolls 
of the towns, except in Nassau County where they use the county assessment 
rolls. City school district budgets are included in city budgets. 

The budget is adopted in September by the School Board in other than city 
school districts. The fiscal year of school districts in towns begins July 1 ; 
the fiscal years of city school districts generally vary with the date of the 
adoption of the city budget, except the following, with dates noted: 
May 1 to April 30 — Hudson. 

August 1 to July 31 — Geneva, Kingston, Oneonta, Rensselaer. 
September 1 to August 30 — Watertown. 
November 1 to October 30 — Albany. 
December 1 to November 30 — Middletown. 

January 1 to December 31 — Amsterdam, Beacon, Binghamton, Cohoes 
Cortland, Elmira, Fulton. Glen Cove, Little Falls, Lockport, Mt. 
Vernon, New Rochelle, Ogdensburg, Oneida, Oswego, Plattsburg, 
Poughkeepsie, Rochester, Rome, Salamanca, Saratoga Springs, 
Schenectady, Syracuse, Tonawanda, Troy, Utica, Watervliet, 
White Plains, Yonkers. 

Fire Protection Districts 

Fire protection in cities and villages is the function of these communities and 
is included in the taxes levied by the particular municipality. Outside of these 
municipalities fire districts are created through a petition of the property 
owners to the Town Board which, after a public hearing and the approval of 
the Town Board, requires the approval of the State Comptroller. The budget 
of a fire district is submitted to the Town Board and upon approval is 

184 



included in the town tax, but levied against only the properties in the particular 
district based on the assessment roll of the town. 

A fire protection district is created through a petition of property owners and 
protection contracted for from a fire district. The contract after public hear- 
ing must be approved by the Town Board, and the cost assessed to the district 
through the town tax. 

All fire districts use the calendar year. 

Water Charges 

Water is dealt with more as a commodity than as a service, but in most 
instances unpaid bills become a lien on the property. Most water systems are 
owned and operated by municipalities; about 10 percent are privately owned 
and operated. 

Effective July 1, 1931, an amendment to the Public Service Law placed under 
the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission every privately owned and 
operated water plant or water works, except where water is distributed solely 
on or through private property solely for the use of the distributor or his 
tenants, and not for sale to others, and such property is valued at $10,000 or 
less. 

Rates include a flat charge per family unit or front footage. In Hudson the 
deficit resulting from operations of the Water Department is included in the 
budget and passed on to the taxpayer. The majority of rates, however, are 
based on a cubic foot or gallon consumption of water, as shown by meters. 

Sewer Charges 

Sewer rent in Buffalo is based on a charge levied by the Buffalo Sewer 
Authority ; charges are based on assessed valuation of real property and water 
consumption. Present charges are $0.93234292 per $1,000 assessed valuation 
and 45 percent of flat rate water charge, or $0.18 per cubic foot of water 
consumption. The fiscal year of the Authority begins on July 1. 

Sewer Rent_in New York City, which went into effect July 1, 1950, payable 
January 1, 1951, is one-third the flat rate of water charges for the fiscal year 
July 1 to June 30; except those using cesspools or Mater used in the produc- 
tion of any product. 

Sewer Rent in the City of Plattsburg is based on a charge of $6.50 for 
each familv unit. 



185 



Appendix "C" 

Changes in the Consumers' Price Index 

The Commissioner of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of 
Labor on October 24, 1950, notified all users of the Consumers' Price Index 
of impending changes in that important indicator. His m-emorandum said: 

This memorandum is advance notice to you, the users of the Consumers' 
Price Index, of changes which are planned to improve the method of calcu- 
lating the index. The indexes for September 1950 and some earlier months of 
this year are subject of revision of few months hence. 

For the past several years the Bureau of Labor Statistics has been engaged 
in a large-scale project looking toward the revision and modernization of 
the basis of compiling all of its price indexes, to make them more accurate 
measures of price changes. The revision of the Wholesale Price Index and 
the Daily Index are scheduled to be completed this year, and the revision 
of the Consumers' Price Index is scheduled to be completed by the middle of 
1952. The details of this program have been widely publicized in order that 
users of the index might expect some changes at that time. 

Our original plan was that no important changes would be made in the 
Consumers' Price Index until the general revision was finished. Had prices 
remained comparatively stable, as they were during 1949 and early 1950, the 
index on its present basis would have served reasonably well as a measure of 
consumer prices until 1952. The events of the past few months, however, have 
forced us to reconsider our plans. 

Since the outbreak of the righting in Korea last June, sharp price changes 
have already occurred in a number of commodities and similar changes may 
take place in others. The economic stabilization legislation passed by Congress 
requires careful comparison of current and future prices with those which 
existed prior to June 25, 1950. These developments make it absolutely essential 
that the Consumers' Price Index be as accurate a measure of today's and 
tomorrow's price movements as we are able to make it. Therefore, we are 
planning to introduce into the index certain medernizations and improvements 
which can be made immediately. 

For example, we are planning to correct a downward bias in the rent index, 
which we have recognized for some time but only now are able to measure. 
(The amount of that correction will be published with the release of the 
October index in November.) As another example, we are planning to use 1950 
Census figures, instead of earlier population estimates, in weighting together 
the city indexes into the all-city index. Only such changes will be made as 
can be shown to result in improvements in the index. 

These improvements in the index cannot be completed for several months. 
Nevertheless, they must date back to the period prior to Korea. Accordingly, 
the Bureau must do two things: (1) publish the index on the present basis for 
some months to come; and (2) when the improvements are introduced about 
the turn of the year, revise the published index back to some month of 1950 
prior to the outbreak in Korea. The Bureau expects to publish both the present 
and the revised indexes during 1951, at least. 

Information will be issued to users of the index when the changes are intro- 
duced. In addition, a complete description of the extent and character of these 
interim improvements will be published in the Monthly Labor Review about 
the time the revised indexes are published. We hope that the publication of 

186 



both the old and the new indexes will assist many users in adjusting to the 
change. If, despite these precautions, you encounter any special problems, please 
let us know, so that we may provide any information or assistance we can. 

The following was issued by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, 
Neiv York Regional Office, on November 29, 1950, concerning the "downward 
bias" : 



A Correction of the Rent Index 

Along with the announcement of the indexes for October, the Bureau of 
Labor Statistics announced also a correction in its indexes for rent. This is to 
correct an error which has been accumulating since 1940. The rent indexes, as 
published heretofore, have measured the changes in rents of houses after they 
were in the rental market, but did not reflect the higher rents charged for new 
dwellings when they were first rented. In July 1949 the Bureau made a rough 
estimate that as a result of this "downward bias" the rent index in February 
of that year was too low by something between V/z and 5 index points and as 
a result the all-items Consumers' Price Index was too low by something be- 
tween 0.6 and 0.9 index points. 

Early in 1950 the Bureau conducted extensive field surveys of rent which 
now make it possible to estimate more precisely the amount of this accumulated 
"downward bias." The correction accumulated from 1940 to January 1950 is 
5.7 percent of the rent index. Applying this to the October index w r ould raise 
the rent index by 7.1 index points and the all-items index by 1.3 points. 
Further details of this correction are included in the attached note, and a 
complete description will be included in an article in the Monthly Labor Review 
in the near future. 

The amount of this correction is a little higher than the original rough esti- 
mate, primarily because it takes account of the very high rate of building of 
new dwellings during 1949. The earlier estimate was as of February 1949. 

This correction of 1.3 index points has accumulated gradually over a decade, 
and most of it during the period from 1947 through 1949, when most of the 
new home building occurred. No part of this correction reflects developments 
during the year 1950. Although a great many new dwellings were built during 
1950, rents were decontrolled in 1950 in a number of cities. While the addi- 
tional building would add to the accumulated bias, the decontrol would diminish 
it; the Bureau has, therefore, no way of estimating the net effect since 
January 1950. 

Additional Adjustments Early in 1951 

The correction for the "new unit bias" is to be considered an official figure, 
but it has not been incorporated by adding it to the index numbers for October. 
This is because the Bureau, as previously announced, has planned certain other 
adjustments of the Consumers' Price Index, which are scheduled to be intro- 
duced in the January 1951 index to be published in February. In order to 
avoid two separate adjustments to the index numbers, the Bureau has decided 
to publish these corrections for October separately from the index numbers and 
to delay their incorporation into the index until the other changes are made 
in the indexes for January 1951. 

The Bureau recognizes that changes of this kind raise questions of the appli- 
cation of the indexes t6 contracts of various kinds, particularly collective 
agreements of labor and management. For the convenience of these users, 
the Bureau will publish both the index in its present form and the index with 
the interim adjustments retroactively for all of 1950 and through all of 1951. 
These changes will complete the Bureau's program for the interim adjust- 
ments of the index, and no further changes are planned until the major revision 
to be introduced in the latter half of 1952. 

187 



Note on the Correction of Rent Indexes for October 1950 

With this release, the Bureau of Labor Statistics is publishing a final esti- 
mate of the effect on the rent indexes and the all-items indexes of a "new 
unit bias" that accumulated during the past decade. This "downward bias" 
was primarily the result of the failure of the index to measure the differential 
in rents for existing housing and the rents charged for new dwellings when 
they were first rented. A detailed description of the nature and extent of this 
"new unit bias" was published in the Monthly Labor Review for December 
1948 and January and July 1949. 

Rents are obtained from tenants in each of the 34 large cities, three times 
a year by mail and once a year by personal visit. The rent index measures 
changes in rent from one period to another for the same rented dwellings, 
with the same facilities, furnishings, and services. It is designed to measure 
only changes in rents — not changes in the amount of money families spend for 
housing as a result, for example, of moving from town to city, or to better or 
poorer quarters, or of shifting from renting to owning, whether voluntary or 
forced because of shortages of homes for rent. The rent index does not 
reflect such price changes as costs of repairs made by tenants, or "extras," or 
premiums charged by some landlords when they rent to new tenants. 

The sample of tenants from which rents are currently collected, were recently 
brought up to date on the basis of comprehensive housing surveys conducted 
in each of the 34 city areas between December 1949 and February 1950. These 
up-to-date samples are representative of tenants living in new as well as old 
houses and apartments in all sections of each city and its surrounding suburbs. 
Since 1940, the tenant samples have been revised twice (in 1942 and 1944-46) 
to keep them representative of rental housing but the rent index has not 
reflected the differences between the rents at which newly-constructed or^ con- 
verted dwellings enter the rental market, and the rents for comparable existing 
housing. Up until now no accurate measure of the resulting "new unit bias" 
was possible; but on the basis of the comprehensive housing surveys conducted 
early this year, the Bureau is able now to estimate more accurately the cumu- 
lative effect from 1940 to 1950 of this understatement, not only on the rent 
index for each city and for the 34 cities combined, but also on the corre- 
sponding "all items" indexes. * * * The indexes shown in this report are not cor- 
rected for this understatement. This correction to the indexes will be made 
at the time of the interim revision of all the components of the index to be 
completed in early 1951. 



188 



Appendix "D" 

Survey 

of Residential Rents and Rental Conditions in 
Delaware County 

Introduction 

Delaware County was brought under Federal rent control on October 1, 1942, 
and all rents were stabilized at the March 1 level of that year. Originally part 
of the Sidney Defense-Rental Area, which also embraced Chenango and Otsego 
Counties, Delaware remained under Federal rent control until January 6, 1950, 
when, with the exception of the Town of Sidney, it was decontrolled by the 
Federal Flousing Expediter on his own initiative. 

In view of many complaints to this Commission, particularly from those 
employed in the extension of the New York City water supply system, the 
situation was re-studied by this Commission. 

GENERAL ECONOMIC DATA 

Population 

Preliminary data of the United States Bureau of the Census give the popu- 
lation of Delaware County as of April 1, 1950, as 44,182. This is an increase 
of 3,193 or 7.8 percent over 1940 and is a reversal of the long time downward 
trend in the county. In fact, the increase not only exceeds the loss of popula 
tion suffered between 1920 and 1940, but brings the total to almost 1,500 higher 
than in 1920. 

Population changes in the last decade can be summarized in the following 
table : 

Town of Rest of 

County Sidney County 

1950 44,182 6,631 37,551 

1940 40,989 4,509 36,480 



Increase 3,193 2,122 1,071 

Percent Increase 7.8 47.1 2.9 

There has been an increase in population of 3.3 percent in the 30 years since 
1920. As shown in Table Dl, the 1950 total of 44,182 is the sum of the figures 
for all towns in the county. (A subsequent preliminary release by the Census 
Bureau corrects the figure at 44,185.) 

While eleven towns and villages had decreases in population from 1940 to 
1950, twenty had increases. Sidney became the most populous town in the 
County. Moreover, it had a faster rate of growth than any other. In 1920 
Sidney had 4,133 persons; in 1930 the figure was 3,854. By 1940 Sidney had 
wiped out this loss and had increased to 4,509. The preliminary 1950 Census 
placed the population at 6,631, a 10-year increase of 2,122 or 47.1 percent. 
Only the Village of Sidney (which is included in the Town of Sidney) 
showed a greater rate of increase — from 3,012 to 4,788, or 59 percent. Other 
towns and villages with large rates of increase are : 

189 



Percentage Increase 
Community 1940 to 1950 

Colchester (town) 11.7 

Downsville (village) 23.4 

Delhi (town) 12.0 

Delhi (village) 20.4 

Deposit (village) (Delaware County portion) 13.0 

Franklin (village) 15.8 

Margaretville (village) 10.3 

Only three communities showed substantial percentage decreases in popula- 
tion. The Town of Bovina lost 98, 12.2 percent; Hancock Town dropped 8.2 
percent to 3,502, while Fleischmanns Village in Middletown lost 81, or 14.8 
percent. Middletown as a whole, however, gained 5.3 percent. 

Even though the urban population had increased largely between 1930 and 
1940, the rural dominance of the county persisted, as shown in Table D2. In 
1930 only 3,496 persons, or 8.5 percent, lived in urban areas ; they had increased 
to 6,709, or 16.4 percent, in 1940. The rural non-farm population declined 10.6 
percent and the rural farm group decreased 7.2 percent from 1930 to 1940, 
while the urban population rose 91.9 percent. This rise was due principally to 
the statistical inclusion of the Village of Sidney as an urban area in 1940. It 
is estimated that if the Villages of Walton and Sidney continue (under the 
Census classification) as the only urban communities in the county in 1950, as 
they were in 1940, the urban population will be 30 percent over 1940, and 
constitute almost 20 percent of the county's population. 

The Town of Sidney remains the only controlled community in Delaware 
County. With a population of 6,631, it now has 15 percent of the county's 
inhabitants and has experienced during the past decade a substantially larger 
rate of growth than the remainder of the county. 

Marriages and Births 

Table D3 presents the number of marriages and the marriage rates per 
thousand in Delaware County and in the State. While the ratio of births in 
Delaware was higher than the statewide rate, the reverse is true of the rate 
of marriages. With the exception of 1944, the number per thousand persons of 
those marrying was higher in the State than in the county in each year from 
1940 to 1949. The figures for the first nine months of 1950 indicate that the 
1949 level will be reached. 

In 1940, as shown in Table D4, there were 18.7 births per thousand persons 
in Delaware County. This had increased to 24.7 per thousand in 1947 and then 
fell to 23.0 per thousand in 1949. The number of births in the first nine months 
of 1950 indicate the 1950 figure will probably not exceed that for 1949. The 
trend closely followed the statewide rates from 1940 to 1948. 

General Business Activity 

Although primarily an agricultural county, Delaware has shown rapid de- 
velopment in business and industry from 1939 to 1948. The 1947 United States 
Census of Manufactures disclosed that the number of manufacturing estab- 
lishments rose to sixty-five from fifty-five in 1939, while the average number 
of production workers went from 1,331 in 1939 to 2,583 in 1947, an increase of 
94 percent. Value added by manufacture (the) amount by which the value of 
shipments exceeds the cost of materials and supplies) increased from $3,686,000 
in 1939 to $14,762,000 in 1947, a gain of over 300 percent. 

The county gains in retail, wholesale and service trades are shown in Table 
D5. Even though the number of establishments declined, preliminary data 
from the 1948 Census of Business indicate a substantial trade expansion in 
dollar volume as well as in the number of emplovees. Retail sales in 1948 
aggregated $42,000,000, an increase of 171 percent over the $15,500,000 in 1939. 
There was also an increase of 53 percent in the number of retail trade 
employees from 1,034 in 1939 to 1,582 in 1948. Sales and receipts in the 

190 



service trades rose from $433,000 in 1939 to $1,276,000 in 1948, an increase of 
195 percent; the number of service employees rose 86 percent. 

For all the trades shown in Table D5, sales and receipts in 1939 totalled 
$20,751,000 and rose to $63,373,000 in 1948, an increase of slightly more than 
200 percent. Employees in these trades numbered 1,286 in 1939; by 1948 they 
were 1,958, a rise of 52 percent. 

It is significant that business activity increased at a faster rate in the 
remainder of the county than in the Towns of Sidney and Walton, the princi- 
pal communities. Outside these towns retail sales and receipts rose almost 175 
percent between the Business Censuses, while sales advanced 162 percent and 
160 percent in Sidney and Walton respectively. The same trend applies to 
retail employees. In the selected service trades, which include personal business, 
automobile repairs and miscellaneous repair services. Sidney increased sales and 
receipts by 272 percent; Walton, 155; and the remainder of the county, 192. 



Employment 

Total employment in the county rose from 6,000 in 1941 to 10,000 in 1943. 
when employment volume was at its peak, and declined to 6,295 in 1949, 
which was scarcely higher than the pre-war level. The same trend applied to 
manufacturing employment. 

The western half of the county, including the Towns and Villages of Sidney, 
Walton, Delhi, Downsville and Hancock, is the industrial area. The rest of 
the county is agricultural, mostly dairy farming. The principal industries are : 

Industry Location 

Scintilla Magneto Division Sidney 

East Sidney Dam 

(in construction Januarv 1949) East Sidney 

Kaiser Silk Mills ' _ Walton 

S. J. Bailey and Sons Woodworking Company Walton 

Walton East Branch Foundry Walton 

Breakstone Brothers Creamery Walton 

Sheffield Dairy Creamery Walton 

Downsville Dam and Reservoir 

(in construction January 1949) Downsville 

Summer Resorts Stamford 

Small Creamery, Sporting Goods, 

Manufacturing and Printing Stamford 

Creamery Roxbury 

Summer Resorts . . . Fleischmanns 

Lumbering Arkville 

Ferndale Farms Creamery Hamden 

The largest industry, Scintilla Magneto in Sidnev, employed 2,500 in Januarv 
1949, and 2,400 in September, 1950. 

A series of dams is being erected in various parts of the county to extend 
the New York City water system, which brings business to areas otherwise 
completely rural. The impact on housing and rentals is discussed in a later 
section of this report. 

Four hamlets will be displaced by the Pepacton Reservoir — Shavertown, 
Arena, Union Grove and Pepacton. While 300 now work on this project, the 
number will increase to 600 in the next three years. This dam is to be com- 
pleted in 1955. 

The completed East Sidney Dam, a Federal flood control project in the 
north-western portion of the county, employed 300 men at its peak, while on 
November 15, 1950, the State Water Power and Control Commission approved 
the construction of a $140,000,000 dam and reservoir at Cannonsville in the 
extreme western portion of the county. The Cannonsville project, still under 
study is planned as a third stage of the Delaware Water System now under 
construction and would take about ten years to construct. 

191 



RENT LEVELS 

This Commission studied the changes in the county's level of rents since 
decontrol. Two thousand three hundred and fifty-five registered rental units 
were surveyed in all towns and villages (except the controlled Town of 
Sidney). This showed 1,110 registered units still tenant-occupied; 710 or 64 
percent of these had rent increases since decontrol. Table D6 indicates that 
495 or 44.6 percent of all tenant-occupied units had rent increases with no 
service changes ; that 167 had services added ; that 33 had rental increases 
though some services had been reduced; and fifteen had reductions in services. 
Only 36 had rent decreases, including one where services were added, and 
eleven where services were reduced. 

Three hundred and sixty-four tenant-occupied units or 32.7 percent of all 
such units had no rent changes. 

The average rental increase was $6.45 or 33.5 percent as shown in Table D7 
The average increase was $8.47 or 46.2 percent where there had been increases 
and no service changes. In the Village of Downsville, center of dam construc- 
tion, the average increase without service change was 91.3 percent. 

Most increases in the county applied to units renting under $24.49 per month ; 
78 percent of all increased rents without service changes were in that category. 
Table D10 shows this distribution for the county and for the principal towns 
and villages, disclosing that eighty-three units, or 16.7 percent, had increases 
of 95 percent or more. 

As shown in Table D6 there were thirty-three units that received rent 
increases and decreased services. The average rent had been increased from 
$19.60 to $30.24, an average of $10.64 or 54.2 percent. 

HOUSING SUPPLY AND DEMAND 

Construction 

On April 1, 1950 there were 14,678 dwelling units in Delaware County, 
according to the preliminary Census, an increase of 1,306 or 9.8 percent, over 
the number of dwelling units in 1940. Additional detailed 1950 data for towns 
and villages have not yet been released by the Census Bureau. However, in 1940 
only 15.7 percent of all dwelling units were in urban areas. In view of the fact 
that the urban population of the county has shown a relatively larger increase 
than the rural non-farm and rural farm population in the past decade, pro- 
portionately more urban dwellings were undoubtedly added than rural non-farm 
or rural farm units. 

Construction permit data for the Villages of Sidney and Walton are presented 
in Table D8. These are the only communities defined as urban in the Census 
of 1940 and the only areas for which such data are available. In 1948 and 
1949 permits were issued for the construction of eighteen dwelling units in 
Sidney and for only thirteen in Walton. During the first ten months of 1950, 
twenty-six dwelling units were authorized in Sidney and eleven in Walton. It 
is interesting that with the exception of June 1950, all construction from 
January to October was of single family units, indicating very limited rental 
building activity. 

A survey of the county by the Office of the Housing Expediter on January 
24, 1949, disclosed the following estimated construction activities from VJ-Day 
to that date in eighteen towns and villages : 

Units 
Community Constructed 

Arkville 

Davenport 

Davenport Center 

Delhi 10 

Downsville 10 

Fleischmanns 5 

Franklin 2 

Grand Gorge 3 

Hamden 

192 



Units 
Community Constructed 

Hancock 8 

Margaretville 14 

Meridale 

North Franklin 1 

Roxbury 6 

Sidney 75 

Stamford 10 

Walton 20 

West Davenport 1 

Housing Characteristics 

The Census of 1940 showed 13,372 dwelling units in Delaware County. The 
villages of Sidney and Walton had 944 and 1,160 dwelling units respectively, 
while there were 6,641 units in the rural non-farm areas. The remainder, 4,627 
were in rural farm areas. 

The characteristics of all dwelling units in the county, as well as a similar 
analysis of the urban and rural non-farm accommodations, is presented in 
Table D9. While 39 percent of all units in the county were tenant-occupied 
in 1940, tenant occupancy was 59.5 percent of the total in Sidney and 42.5 
percent in Walton. In the rural non-farm areas there was a slight preponder- 
ance of home ownership. 

The vacancy rate (based on vacant units for sale or rent) was 8 percent 
of all dwelling units in the county. Vacancies, however, were much more 
prevalent in the rural non-farm portions, where 10.2 percent were unoccupied 
in 1940. Of these almost a third were seasonal. On the other hand only twenty- 
one dwelling accommodations, or 2.2 percent of all units, were vacant in the 
Village of Sidney in 1940 and thirty-six, or 3.1 percent, were vacant in Walton. 

In 1940 the number of persons per occupied unit in the county was 3.59 
compared with 3.69 persons per family in 1930. This slight decrease in family 
size was also characteristic of Walton where the number of persons per 
family was 3.43 in 1930 and 3.34 in 1940. However, in rural non-farm areas 
family size rose slightly in the 1930-1940 decade, advancing from 3.32 persons 
in 1930 to 3.38 in 1940. 

The predominant type of structure in the county is the one-family house. 
In 1940, 10,397 homes were in that category, 1,848 units were two-family, and 
1,127 were of three or more units. However, in the rural non-farm areas over 
25 percent of all units were in two-or-more-family structures, while in Sidney 
and Walton, units in two-or-more-family structures comprised 80 percent and 
61 percent of their respective totals. 

Table D9 further indicates that the average monthly rent (contract or 
estimated) in 1940 was $18.86 in the county. It was somewhat higher in the 
Village of Sidney, where the average was $23.69, and in Walton, with an 
average of $21.10. 

Temporary Housing 

With the exception of the Town of Sidney there are very few temporary 
dwelling units in the county. The General Housing Directory of December 31, 
1949, listed 256 accommodations of a temporary character in the controlled 
community of Sidney, and indicated that in Delhi there were ten family units 
and twenty-four dormitory accommodations. The New York State Veterans 
Emergency Program, under the sponsorship of the State Division of Housing, 
lists twenty-six dormitory accommodations and sixteen family dwelling units at 
Delhi which are connected with the State Agricultural and Technical Institute. 

Other Evidence Bearing on the Demand for Housing 

This Commission contacted several public officials in the decontrolled 
villages of Delhi and Walton to determine the extent of the housing demand. 

193 



These individuals were interviewed on September 1, 1950, and based their 
estimates on personal knowledge of the community. 

One in Delhi indicated that ten families were in need of housing accom- 
modations and that rentals between $30 and $40 per month were in demand 
while sales properties were wanted in the $6,000 to $10,000 range. He also 
said that no vacancies existed in Delhi and that he expected the supply of 
housing to become normal in four or five years. 

Another in Delhi indicated that fifteen families needed dwelling accommo- 
dations in that community. He said the need was for rentals in the $35 to $40 
per month range and for purchase-properties at $10,000 to $12,000. While 
he felt that the increase in rents had been slight during the past several years, 
he also reported that vacancies were non-existent. He maintained that there 
was a normal supply of dwelling units in the community. 

According to an official in Walton, it will be three to five years before the 
supply of housing will be normal. He estimated that twenty-five families 
needed dwelling accommodations and that the demand was for rental units 
from ^35 to $50 per month and for purchase prices between $8,000 and $12,000. 
He stated that rents increased 33 1/3 percent in the past several years in the 
Village of Walton. 

Based on inquiries received for houses to rent in the Town and Village of 
Walton, another official said that between twenty and thirty families were in 
need of dwelling accommodations. This source explained that the rentals in 
greatest demand were from $30 to $40 per month, and that houses selling 
between $5,000 and $9,000 were wanted. While he felt that rents had more 
than doubled in this decontrolled community, he held that there would not be 
a normal supply of dwelling units for at least five years. 

Several realtors in Delaware County responded to a questionnaire sent by 
this Commission to all active real estate brokers in the State to determine the 
current need for housing. One stated that there were about five families 
needing housing accommodations in the Village of Hancock on September 12, 
1950. He also held that there had been a slight increase in the demand for 
rental dwellings last fall and that the most popular rental range was $25 to 
$50 per month. He did not maintain a waiting list and was aware of one 
five-room vacancy renting for $35 per month in Hancock. 

Another realtor indicated that even though there is no actual housing short- 
age in Stamford, he receives about one call a week for rental units from $40 
to $50 per month and that there is a demand from twenty families for rental 
accommodations in that range. While he manages five or six rental units, none 
of which was vacant, he was aware of ten or twelve vacancies in Stamford. 
Another broker said there was no current need for housing. Sales prop- 
erties sought were in the range from $4,900 to $12,500; the demand for 
rental accommodations was from $35 to $50 per month. He knew of one six- 
room vacancy renting for $40 per month. 

A broker said that in the Village of Walton construction on the Pepacton 
Reservoir had created need for thirty housing accommodations. He indicated 
that demand for sales properties was slow and prices high, while there was 
a substantial demand for rental units in all ranges, particularly the higher 
brackets. This rental demand increased steadily over the past year, according 
to this broker, and none of the fourteen units which he was managing was 
vacant. He thought that the supply of dwelling units would be normal in 
about five vears. 



Effect of Reservoir Construction on the Demand for Housing 

The impact of dam building on the demand for housing continues to be 
sharp. In its January 24, 1949, survey, the Office of the Housing Expediter 
quotes the Chief Engineer of the Downsville Dam and Reservoir as reporting 
that 400 dwelling units would be displaced by flooding the area of Papacton, 
Shavertown, Union Grove, Arena and Dunraven. This survey also disclosed 
that the East Sidney Dam, a Federal flood control project in the northeastern 
portion of the county, would displace approximately twenty-five more units. 
In response to an inquiry from this Commission, the Deputy Chief Engineer 
of the New York City Board of Water Supply indicated on November 21. 



194 



1950, that the Pepacton Reservoir (synonymous with the Downsville Dam and 
Reservoir) will displace 943 persons living in 236 homes. 

Not only do these displaced families create a housing pressure in adjacent 
communities, but it is now evident that a significant number of construction 
and other workers are seeking dwelling accommodations in the area. The 
OHE survey indicated that half of 200 workers employed at the Downsville 
Dam in the early part of 1949 were seeking housing accommodations. Since 
the State Water Power and Control Commission only recently approved the 
construction of a $140,000,000 dam and reservoir at Cannonsville, in the western 
portion of the county, no data is yet available concerning the number in that 
area who must find accommodations elsewhere. 

Building Costs and Real Property Taxes 

All major elements of building costs and operations have risen sharply in 
the county since 1940, corresponding to a similar trend in the State as a whole 
and in the adjacent counties. A survey conducted by this Commission in all 
counties revealed that the price in the county of common brick had risen from 
$32 to $55 per thousand from 1940 to July 1, 1950; that cement had advanced 
from $2.80 per barrel to $4.40 in the same period; while roofing shingles which 
were $575 in 1940 were selling for $7.00 on July 1, 1950. 

Hourly wage rates in the building trades also advanced steeply. The State 
Department of Labor records show carpenters at $.90 per hour in 1940 and 
$2.25 on July 1, 1950. Wages for bricklayers rose from $1.50 to $2.50 per 
hour and for plumbers from $1.20 to $2.50. 

Stove and nut coal increased from $11.25 per ton in 1940 to $19.25 per ton 
on July 1, 1950, a rise of 71 percent, while No. 2 fuel oil, which was selling 
for 8.7 cents per gallon in 1940 climed to 12.5 cents on July 1, 1950, an increase 
of almost 44 percent. 

While the aggregate property taxes in the county was almost $1,500,000 in 
1940, it reached $1,789,000 in 1946, and climbed to $2,482,000 in 1949. The 
average rate per $1,000 of assessed value rose from $39.26 to $60.58 from 
1940 to 1949 in Delaware County. This increase of 54.3 percent in the tax 
rate is significant when measured against the rise in rates in the neighboring 
counties of Chenango and Otsego, where the total aggregate taxes in 1940 did 
not differ substantially with the aggregate in Delaware. Compared to the 
54.3 percent rise in the Delaware rate, the Chenango rate advanced 33.3 percent, 
and the Otsego rate 39.1. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The foregoing may be summarized JDriefly, as follows : 

1. The population of the county has increased 3,193 or 7.8 percent since 1940. 
The population of the Town of Sidney (under rent control) has increased 
47%; the population of the remainder of the county has increased only 3%. 

2. The general business activity has increased substantially since 1940 and 
the number of production workers as well as workers in the retail, wholesale 
and service trades has risen sharply in the past decade. 

3. Rentals in all towns and villages have increased substantially since January 
6, 1950, the date of Federal decontrol. 

4. The present construction activities relating to the dam and reservoir pro- 
gram have resulted in an influx of workers seeking accommodations near the 
construction sites. When the dam is completed in 1955 it will bring about the 
displacement of approximately 400 families. 



195 



TABLE Dl 

POPULATION OF DELAWARE COUNTY 

INCREASE OR DECREASE BY TOWNS AND VILLAGES 

1940 to 1950 

1950 
Increase or Decrease 

1950 over 1940 

Towns and Villages 1940 (Preliminary) Amount Percent 

Delaware County 40,989 44,182 3,193 7.8 

Andes Town 1,687 1,655 — 32 — 1.9 

Andes Village 409 429 20 4.9 

Bovina Town 806 708 — 98 —12 2 

Colchester Town 2,092 2,336 244 11.7 

Downsville Village 582 718 136 23.4 

Davenport Town 1,240 1,231 — 9 — .7 

Delhi Town 2,950 3,303 353 12.0 

Delhi Village 1,841 2,216 375 20.4 

Deposit Town 1,443 1,567 124 8.6 

Deposit Village, Total 2,028 (a) 

In Delaware County 776 877 101 13.0 

In Broome County 1,252 (a) 

Franklin Town 2,019 2,143 124 6.1 

Franklin Village 481 557 76 15.8 

Hamden Town 1,177 1,112 —65 —5.5 

Hancock Town 3,813 3,502 —311 —8.2 

Hancock Village 1,581 1,560 — 21 — 1.3 

Harpersfield Town 1,200 1,259 59 4.9 

Stamford Village, Total.... 1,088 1,158 70 6.4 

In Harpersfield Town. .. . 358 (a) 

In Stamford Town 730 (a) 

Kortright Town 1,288 1,237 — 51 — 4.0 

Masonville Town 931 1,006 75 8.1 

Meredith Town 1,182 1,130 —52 —4.4 

Middletown Town 3,520 3,706 186 5.3 

Fleischmanns Village 546 465 — 81 —14.8 

Margaretville Village 812 896 84 10.3 

Roxbury Town 2,277 2,204 — 73 — 3.2 

Sidney Town 4,509 6,631 2,122 47.1 

Sidney Village 3,012 4,788 1,776 59.0 

Stamford Town 1,993 2,110 117 5.9 

Hobart Village 638 606 — 32 — 5.0 

Stamford Village (part) ... 730 (a) 

Tompkins Town 1,642 1,681 39 2.4 

Walton Town 5,220 5,661 441 8.4 

Walton Village 3,697 3,933 236 6.4 

(a) — Not available. 

Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census. 



TABLE D2 

POPULATION OF DELAWARE COUNTY 

URBAN, RURAL-NONFARM, AND RURAL-FARM AREAS 

1930 and 1940 

Percent Percent Increase or Decrease 

1930 of Total 1940 of Total Amount Percent 

TOTAL 41,163 100.0 40,989 100.0 — 174 — .4 



Urban 3,496 8.5 6,709 

Rural-nonfarm 19,983 48.5 17,870 

Rural-farm .. 17,684 43.0 16,410 

Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census. 



16.4 


3213 


91.9 


43.6 


—2113 


—10.6 


40.0 


—1274 


- 7.2 



196 



TABLE D3 

MARRIAGES IN DELAWARE COUNTY, 1940 to 1949 
AND JANUARY TO SEPTEMBER 1950 

State Rate, 

Persons Marrying Persons Marrying 

per 1,000 per 1,000 

Marriages 1 Population Population 

1940 377 18.4 19.6 

1941 345 16.8 21.2 

1942 422 19.8 20.6 

1943 275 13.9 17.7 

1944 301 16.4 15.6 

1945 315 16.7 17.3 

1946 490 22.8 25.9 

1947 378 16.9 23.0 

1948 320 14.5 21.5 

1949 313 14.1 18.4 

1950 January- 
September ... 237 10.8 14.4 
*Based on place of residence of the bride 1940-1949 ; place where license was 
issued January to September 1950. 

Source: 1-1940-1947 Annual Yearbook of Vital Statistics, Vol. 2, State De- 
partment of Health. 

2-1948, 1949 and January to September 1950, State Department of 
Health. 

TABLE D4 

BIRTHS IN DELAWARE COUNTY, 1940 to 1949 
and JANUARY TO SEPTEMBER, 1950 

Total Rate per State Rate 

• Live 1,000 per 1,000 

Births Population Population 

1940 767 18.7 14.6 

1941 809 19.7 15.5 

1942 822 19.2 17.8 

1943 892 22.6 18.1 

1944 867 23.5 16.5 

1945 864 23.3 16.8 

1946 997 23.3 20.2 

1947 1,075 24.7 22.5 

1948 996 22.6 20.7 

1949 1,024 23.0 20.5 

1950 January-September... 738 16.7 15.4 

Source: 1—1940-1947, Annual Yearbook of Vital Statistics, Vol. 2, State De- 
partment of Health. 
2 — 1948 Provisional Data-Vital Statistics Review, State Department 
of Health Supplement, March 1949. 
1949 Provisional Data-Vital Statistics Review Supplement, March 
1950; January-September 1950, State Department of Health. 



197 



IT) 

P 

w 

< 





•S«*- o 




£ Oft 


*j 








(J 


Cfl 


In 





o i eg 
o c\i 
oc »o 



o 


rv. 


t^ 


od 


vd 


os" 


eg 

1 


»o 


sO 



^2 



r^ oc r^ 

•5 n a-> o od "* 

rt rt <-> i^ ^H os 

CO « — ' *o -h 



oo m rg I io 

\D C\J ^H Os 



q 


^r 


OO 


rr> 


o 


LO 


^ 


c\i 


2 


LO 


r*s 


cs 




CM 



CO 



M 



OO o 

rCo" so 

1- in i^ 

o o cm 

cm~o~ —T 



o 


o 


o 


o 


Q 


o 




s 


© 


o 
o 


o 
o 


s 


o 
o 




of 




o" 
2? 


On" 
OO 


CO 


cm 




rv._ 


" —l 


CM 




o 


ON 




ltT 




so 




o" 

co 







oq 



qj t/> ZZ 

§ ° rt g 



>o — _ 



^- v> 



Q 
< 

W 

Q 

CO 

cq 




£W 






C/3 






moo 

O >-H 



OO 

— < r^ 

fOOO 
ION 



<0 Os 






£ 



»0 CO CO 

CM vO CO 

SO 



SH : : 
.Sfc • : 

at >-^ • * 

mo :.g w 
•o o • g.y 

£<:_ 3 w. 

*o hJ su rf Vi r- 
H Q 



C/3 




198 



m vu« |5 5 a 

5 S O O c 3 



?OOOcOTfCfJN"° M X © ""■ Ul CtCu p . OOOOr^ — CtK 

•*r cm cm cm re in cm cm -t © re 1-1 i/> e»j re f N "-, re i/j — ~-. ~~. *e cq 



CM r-t^ -r ^j K 



o oovc c - •* -: - - " — c i "■ " * j r r i ^ — t-^ 









c/2« 









»H 




g 




w 




pq 




S^ 




y 




> -5 




C <h 




2 u, 




n ^ 




„ 




H E 




ph 




< 3 




a - 


NO 


, +* 












^ H 


- 


«r2 




£ . 


< 


0^ 


H 


UH 




W £ 




3 p 








Is 

< 








< 




z H 




23 M 




u 




H 




£ 




W 




« 



a*£ 



fill 



«3 O — 

IK 55 (i to cd . "O 



— ; w 



ScSfS rS 

id 

V 



>5.ti 






e(n rt 



«3_ 



■>2 vo 
III 
u £ 



CflfJ 



33 3.2 



°S 



od^iN\dddridddiXai(Ni'*'-di^dKddddiHc i 'dd 

•■ru-.r^ue^-Tj-u-.-eX''^ — - ^- cm re re Le u-. 10 — u-j u~, 1/-. CM T I 



— 'OO^O^O'OWt-OjMC"". «/l 0^"~<OOOOre-nO^C' 



5 r^ re vo >c > 



'f^NOOJO • CM t^ CM ^" CM Cn 

^-1 r^ re 03 • 1- u-, ^c 






cm re— — -e — — x-r ■* th — re 10 ti- — cm oc re 

— — eg 



o c > 
HP U 



re <-> CM — 



2* 



u a ^ 

% ° " 

»H - 









cs 



- 1).- 



o > 



= uu5 g s § ^ c 3 u~ s « £ 2 « « oU « rt w ^ 



>< rt c « 



199 



1^ 

Q 

3 
< 



e 

in 

s 



O 

o :s 

j i 

w 1! 

Q ft 

W £ 

w o 

is 

*p 

< 2 
tf . 
w g 
> w 

<c 
fcfc 

OH 
W 



q 

o 
u 
i_ 

<u « 

bo Pi 



2 «? 


• co o 


• cm • 


• 3- • 


• r^ r*j 




.'fM '. 




,coc> 



Q 



a; a 
u - 

u 



iU 



•a o cPh 



p « 

en boPn 

3 53 

15 rt 



O 

a 

o 

c 

a 
u 






U, O 

C V3- 



rt oo 
o <o 






en 

b cm 



en to 

£ eg 



CO 

S 1 

*3- 



OCMO 



cm oc • »q cm 



4 



co co 
Oco 



vd O 
vOm 



88 

oc'lo 



0C 0C >N 



o o • oo 



op -oo 
o m' ; o od 



LOLO O • (N) 
■ rf OO LT5 • C> 

u-; o rt ; o 



888 :8 

r^j Os IO | C> 



?-: 


• 00 ro 




c 


»— Jirj 


lodod 


CO* 

to- 


E 

1 
u 

u 


o o 

ON 


•o^c 
io'oc 


N 

5 


g 


88 


:8£ 




cr. 

CU 

bo 
Q 


ooo 


!oc" cn 




c 



o" cm' <rj cm' 

u-)CM ^h CV) 



r^Lo o o 
vd-^OLn 
vO"^ ^tCM 



fOU",00>OrHC\C>N 

o o o in <rj ^h' cm cm o 

rHVQM--I^Ot\rHin 



IT^ OO 

C i vC C^l CM lO Ov t— < CM* °0 



CMO'^CM^TtppO'-; 

fodu"]g\'d'tcifoN 
i^r^r- < 6imooro ,! t 



fo'Tfp 


• 00 • 


•rONO 


• oo r^ 


crj'-'a' 

^t-CMCM 




:o'r>*c> 


'odod 
. mcM 



pooogoo 



co O Old O O i 

vdt^ CM c-Jt^'t^'CMmOO 



to o\ sq • vo 

Tt rdu-j 'CO 



fO^tN • O 
cd vo uS * iri 
cOi-<CM ', CM 



Ot>vO • o 

O^Om • O 

CO CM Tt" |lo 



^-;0Oc> 
^ VO CO 



: oc co 



•oo 

:oo 



poo 
>-dt^ fN) 



5h 



<u S > - 






c en O -. 

>-a c 



bo <L> 



M u: _ ji <d 
o 



Si c 



> —3 r» CO rt 

rC cu a; O 



c ( i p u n u 



en i^ -* 

- >^ ? C 
a3 <U 00 O 



«<PQpQUUUUQQPQWfcOffiffiffiWW^S 



IS 



hCU 






GJ2 



200 



TABLE D8 

BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PERMITS IN VILLAGES OF 
SIDNEY AND WALTON, DELAWARE COUNTY 





:>ian 


Additions, 


- - VV dll 


Additions 




New Residential 


Alterations 


New Residential 


Alterations 




Building — 


and Repairs — 


Building — 


and Repairs — 




Number 


Number 


Number 


Number 


Period 


of Units 


of Buildings 


of Units 


of Buildings 


1948 


10 


15 


1 


3 


1949 


8 


(a) 


12 


(a) 


Jan. 1950 


1 








1 


Feb. 














March 





1 


3 


2 


April 


2 


1 


2 


1 


May 


6 


4 


2 





June 


8 


3 








July 


1 


3 


3 


2 


August 


4 


3 


1 


2 


Sept. 


1 


2 








Oct. 


3 


4 









Jan.- 

Oct. 1950 26 21 11 

(a) Not Shown. 

Source: Building Permits December 1948 and 1949. 
Labor; Jan.-Oct. 1950, State Division of Housing. 



State Department of 



TABLE D9 

CHARACTERISTICS OF DWELLING UNITS IN DELAWARE 

COUNTY AND IN URBAN AND RURAL NON-FARM AREAS ,1940 



All dwelling units 

All occupied units 

Owner occupied units 

Percent of total occupied 

Tenant occupied units 

Percent of total occupied 

Vacant units for sale or rent .... 

Percent of all dwelling units . . 

Ordinary 

Seasonal 

Not reporting 

Population per occupied unit — 1940 
Population per private family — 

1930 

Type of Structure 

1-family 

2-family 

3-family or more 

State of Repair 

Not needing major repairs 

Needing major repairs 

All dwelling units 

Average monthly rent, contract 
or estimated 

Source : U. S. Bureau of Census. 





Urban 


Rural 


Delaware 


Sidney 


Walton 


Non-Farm 


County 


Village 


Village 


Areas 


13,372 


944 


1,160 


6,641 


11,414 


914 


1,107 


5,282 


6,958 


370 


637 


2,715 


61.0 


40.5 


57.5 


51.4 


4,456 


544 


470 


2,567 


39.0 


59.5 


42.5 


48.6 


1,070 


21 


36 


676 


8.0 


2.2 


3.1 


10.2 


780 


21 


36 


449 


271 






219 


19 






8 


3.59 


3.30 


3.34 


3.38 


3.69 




3.43 


3.32 


10,397 


524 


720 


4,884 


1,848 


258 


292 


982 


1,127 


162 


148 


77} 


10,712 


796 


776 


5,520 


2,256 


134 


325 


oil 



1.86 



$23.69 $21.10 $17.78 



201 



TABLE 



RENTED UNITS, WITH INCREASED RENTS AND NO 
RENT INCREASES— NUMBER AND PERCENTAGE INTERVALS— 

Delaware County 



Rent When Decontrolled 

Under $14.49 

19.49 

24.49 

29.49 

39.49 

49.49 

59.49 

74.49 

99.49 



14.50 
19.50 
24.50 
29.50 
39.50 
49.50 
59.50 
74.50 



to 



99.50 and over. 



Total 



Percent Increase 
Under 14.9%. 
15.0 to 
to 

to 
to 

to 
to 
to 

to 



25.0 
35.0 
45.0 
55.0 
65.0 
75.0 
85.0 
95.0 
105.0 



24.9 

34.9 

44.9 

54.9 . 

64.9 

74.9 . 

84.9 . 

94.9 . 
to 104.9 , 
and over . 



Total 

* Includes the following Towns and Villages: 
Andes Cooks Falls Hobart 

Arena DeLancey Roxbury 

Bloomville East Branch Trout Creek 

Bovina Center Franklin 

Cadosia Grand Gorge 

Cannonsville Halcottsville 



(Except Town 


















of Sidney) 


Arkvi 


Corb< 


Del 




Percent- 




Percent 




Percent- 




Percent- 


\" umber 


age of 


Numbe 


r acre of 


Numbe 


r age of 


Number age of 


f Units 


Total 


of Units Total 


of Units Total 


of Units Total 


168 


33.9 


18 


72.0 


27 


84.3 


14 


16.5 


133 


26.9 


5 


20.0 


3 


9 


4 


21 


24.7 


85 


17.2 


2 


8.0 


2 


6 




13 


15.3 


ss 


11.1 














16 


18.8 


39 


7.9 














18 


21.2 


11 


j \ 














-> 


2.4 


3 


.6 


















1 


.2 
















1.1 


495 


100.0% 


25 


100.0% 


32 


100.0% 


85 


100.0% 


73 


14.7 


1 


4.0 






17 


20.0 


76 


15.4 


1 


4.0 


3 


9.4 


19 


22.4 


90 


18.3 


1 


4.0 


3 


9.4 


18 


21.2 


40 


8.1 






1 


3.1 


1 


1.2 


38 


7.6 


3 


12.0 


8 


25.0 


2 


2.4 


12 


2.5 










2 


2.4 


48 


9.7 


5 


20.0 


9 


28.1 


9 


10.6 


17 


3.4 


2 


8.0 


3 


9.4 


j 


3.4 


18 


3.6 


2 


8.0 


4 


12.5 


2 


2.4 


19 


3.8 


6 


24.0 






9 


2.4 


64 


12.9 


4 


16.0 


1 


3.1 


10 


11.6 


495 


100.0% 


25 


100.0% 


3 


2 


100.0% 


85 


100.0% 



202 



D10 

SERVICE CHANGES, BY DECONTROLLED RENTAL RANGES 
DELAWARE COUNTY (Except Town of Sidney) 





















'Ktir.aipdeo - 


3ownsville — - 


H 


ancock — — 


- Margaretville 


Stamford — 


Walton- 


of County 


Percent 




Percent 




Percent 




Percent- 




Pereent- 




Percent 


mber age of 


Number age of 


Number age of 


Number age of 


Numbe 


r age of 


Number age of 


Jnits Total 


of Units Total 


of Units Total 


of Units Total 


of Units Total 


of Units Total 


7 30.4 


16 


23.2 


3 


12.0 


10 


27.0 


17 


17.9 


56 


53.8 


4 17.4 


30 


43.5 


6 


24.0 


11 


29.7 


26 


27.4 


27 


25.9 


6 26.2 


14 


20.3 


6 


24.0 


8 


21.7 


24 


25.3 


10 


•<.7 


4 17.4 




7.2 


5 


20.0 


5 


13.5 


14 


14.7 


6 


r.$ 


1 4.3 




4.*3 


2 


8.0 


2 


5.4 


8 


8.4 


5 


4.S 






1.5 


2 


8.0 


1 


2.7 


5 


5.3 






1 4.3 






1 


4.0 






1 


1.0 






>3 100.0% 


69 


100.0% 


25 


100.0% 


37 


100.0% 


95 


100.0% 


104 


100.0% 


3 13.0 


14 


20.3 




20.0 


10 


27.0 


15 


15.8 


S 


7 ; 


2 8.7 


11 


15.9 




12.0 


4 


10.8 


20 


21.0 


13 


12^5 


3 13.0 


15 


21.7 




20.0 


8 


21.6 


15 


15.8 


-> -> 


21.2 




8 


11.6 




20.0 


6 


16.6 


13 


13.7 


(5 


5.8 


i 4.3 


2 


2.9 




4.0 


2 


5.4 


6 


6.3 


13 


12.5 




4 


5.8 




4.0 






2 


2.1 


3 


2.9 


1 4.3 


2 


2.9 




4.0 


3 


s'.i 


7 


7.4 


11 


10.5 




3 


4.4 






1 


2.7 


2 


2.1 


3 


2.9 


i 4'. 3 


1 


1.4 










4 


-.2 


4 


3.8 


1 4.3 


2 


2.9 










2 


2.1 


6 


5.8 


1 48.1 


7 


10.2 


4 


16.6 


3 


8.1 


9 


9.5 


15 


14.4 


3 100.0% 


69 


100.0% 


25 


100.0% 


37 


100.0% 


95 


100.0% 


2 04 


100.0% 



203 



32 



Tf^ 



WBm 



BHi 



.■■'■■: i,,:i ■■."■' 



«• Mti'. i'' ! i'' : -i ''»:')' !■