Council shuts down rent control
Protest erupts after defeat of measure
The Boston City Council voted down a rent control proposal yesterday, sparking a dramatic protest by tenants and housing activists, who shouted ''shame!" and had to be cleared from the council chamber by municipal police.
The 8-to-5 defeat of the ''community stabilization act," a milder version of one proposed by Mayor Thomas M. Menino and killed by the council two years ago, probably means the end of efforts to cap rents and provide other tenant protections in the city -- at least for the foreseeable future.
''It's very clear to me that the present membership of the City Council and the city administration on the executive side do not support rent stabilization," said Maura A. Hennigan, one of the five councilors who supported the measure. ''If you're talking about any sort of protection for tenants, it's very clear that if you continue with the same faces, there is not an appetite to do it."
The debate was a showdown between councilors who called rent control a relic and protesters who say Boston is increasingly becoming a city for only the affluent.
Some councilors said rent control would choke property taxes at a time when the city desperately needs revenue. Several pointed out that apartment rents recently have fallen. But tenants groups said yesterday's vote was a betrayal of Boston's poorer residents scraping to get by.
After the vote was tallied, some rent control supporters began shouting and had to be removed by police.
''We are outraged," said Kathy Brown, coordinator of the Boston Tenant Coalition, which drafted the legislation. ''The majority of the city council did not stand with the vast majority of Boston residents, tenants, and homeowners, who would have greatly benefited from this legislation."
Menino had remained neutral on the measure, a markedly different stance than he took two years ago when he declared rent curbs an important element of his housing agenda. Menino had pushed hard for the 2002 measure but was defeated by the council amid heavy lobbying by the real estate industry. Yesterday, he said the time to impose rent controls has passed.
''The tenant groups did a good job of making their case, but the timing is off," Menino said. ''There is a downward spiral of some rents, and we are seeing many more vacancies than we did two years ago."
He added that having been defeated twice in two years, rent control is probably dead.
''I don't think it's going to come back," he said, adding that the measure's backers are ''real good people. They're probably not happy with Tom Menino who didn't take a strong stand in this."
Ted Jankowski, chief executive officer of the Greater Boston Real Estate Board, which opposed the measure, praised the council for ''a stronger vote than two years ago."
''I'm hopeful people realize that rent control is a failed social policy of the '70s," he said. ''I'm hopeful now that the rent control debate is behind us."
The measure, also supported by councilors Charles C. Yancey, Chuck Turner, Felix D. Arroyo and Michael P. Ross, would have allowed elderly, disabled, or low-income tenants to appeal rent increases of more than 5 percent to a city board. Others could contest increases of more than 10 percent. Landlords who own small buildings, with six units or fewer, would be exempt.
The measure eliminated an earlier provision that capped at 5 percent the rent increases when a tenant moves out and another moves in.
Tenant groups and activists were lobbying the councilors for weeks leading up to the vote. They were incensed by the measure's defeat and vowed to try again.
''The issue is not going away, and the people are not going away," Brown said. ''We will have discussions about what is the best way to move forward on this issue and see housing justice realized."
About 50 supporters filled the council chamber during the debate, holding sheets of purple paper that said ''Bravo" on one side and ''Shame" on the other.
They flipped the signs, depending on whether councilors spoke in favor of the measure or against it.
After the vote was announced, they shouted ''Shame."
One activist stood up and shouted: ''You'd better call security because that's what it will take to shut me up."
Another yelled, ''We'll see you on Election Day."
Municipal police escorted them from the room.
Until the last minute, it was unclear exactly how the vote would go.
Three councilors took no public position until a few days ago, when Paul J. Scapicchio and Robert Consalvo said they would oppose the measure.
''I tried very hard to support this legislation," Consalvo said as spectators showed their disapproval with ''Shame" signs.
''In my heart I don't think it's the right thing to do. The cons far outweigh the pros," he said.
Stephen J. Murphy, who has regularly received campaign donations from members of the real estate industry, said he was uncommitted until the end -- meeting with tenants groups as late as Tuesday afternoon. He finally voted against the measure.
Though two representatives of the real estate industry said they told Murphy they would help raise campaign funds for him after the vote, he said that was untrue.
''I pointed out to several of them that they reward their friends and enemies equally," he said. ''I don't know who they promised. Not me."
Murphy said he made up his mind after meeting with the city assessor, who convinced him that rent control devalues real estate and hurts the city's ability to tax property.
''The issue for me was whether this was the right thing at the right time for the majority of the people in the city. We all live with the consequences," he said.
According to Galen Nelson, director of the Money and Politics Project, Murphy received at least $10,000 in contributions from representatives of the real estate industry this year. Nelson analyzed donations received by several city councilors. 