Boston officials rely on Globe newspaper ads
heavily biased toward high-rent districts

A lot of people will make a lot of money if the State Legislature coughs up millions for more subsidized housing – all because there’s a "housing crisis." So don’t be surprised that the statistics quoted for a "housing crisis" are bunk. A speaker from the Boston Tenant Coalition recently insisted that the Boston median rent was "$1,400 a month" and Boston renters can’t afford any more than "$681 a month." All bunk. That $1,400 figure comes from Boston’s Department of Neighborhood Development. Wouldn’t it like new millions to administer! It calculated that $1,400 median rent figure using apartment-for-rent listings in the Boston Globe – surely not an accurate sample of the city’s rents. That $1,400 figure was based, in part, on 2,036 ad listings from Back Bay / Beacon Hill but just 34 listings from Dorchester. Two small high-rent districts got 60 times more weight than the single largest low-rent district, a gross imbalance. (See Table below.)

A simple correction

So why didn’t city researchers do a simple adjustment for population? Since Dorchester is 3.06 times larger than Back Bay / Beacon Hill, give Dorchester listings 3.06 times more weight than BB/BH in the final rent calculation, and similarly with other neighborhoods. It’s simple – if you don’t have an agenda.
Recalculated, it turns out the citywide population-weighted median rent was $1,094 for 1998 and $1,135 for 1999 (the latest available), a lot less than $1,400.
But these new figures are still too high. They are still based solely on Boston Globe ads, which market high-rent apartments from high-rent neighborhoods, including newly renovated apartments. Look at Herald ads. You’ll find lower rents. Ads also reflect new rents at turnover, not older rents on long-term tenants. We want the total rent picture. Boston’s true citywide median rent is much more likely $1,000.

What’s affordable?

Can Bostonians afford that rent? It all depends on incomes. The Boston Tenant Coalition’s "affordable rent" of $681 is based on single-person incomes. Come on, now, people live in households. The city’s latest income estimates, based on updated 1990 census data, show that the 1998 citywide median household income was $40,854 a year. So what’s affordable at $40,854? Allowing one third of household income for rent, Bostonians can afford $1,123. Or using a 30% standard, they can afford $1,021. Both figures are above the median Boston rent of $1,000. So where’s the housing crisis?

A close fit

The fit between median income and median rent is close. In the current boom incomes have risen at the same pace as rents. If rents were really taking a much bigger chunk out of everyone’s income, as the "housing crisis" people claim, everyone would have a lot less to spend on everything else – and Boston would be in a recession. It isn’t. It’s booming like everywhere else.
Of course, not everyone pays exactly 30% or 33% of their income for rent. Every household faces choices: location, transportation, space, spending money. But overall, rents and incomes are in alignment.

A few more facts

Yes, South Boston, East Boston and Jamaica Plain have had "gentrification," but the resulting median rents are still mid-range rents ($1,000 to $1,200). Even if every rent in these neighborhoods went up to the advertised levels – and they didn’t – it would affect only 11.5% of Boston’s entire population. The "housing crisis" people greatly exaggerate – and don’t tell us that just as many Boston neighborhoods have had the opposite trend: rents rising slower than incomes over the past four years.
They also ignore the fact that Boston’s lowest-income family neighborhoods (Roxbury, Dorchester, Hyde Park, Mattapan and Roslindale), with 41% of Boston’s population, have had the most stable, lowest rents in the city, holding between $700 and $900 from 1995 to 1998 and still holding almost everywhere. Then there’s the fact the citywide advertised rents rose just 3% last year, right in line with inflation. Finally, Boston is losing population (another 1,642 households by 2003), gaining empty apartments and increasing supply.

So where’s the crisis? The crisis is for the bureaucrats, developers and housing advocates who won’t have jobs if they can’t get millions of tax dollars out of the State Legislature for their subsidized housing projects. It’s big money to build a scant few units, but nice government jobs.

Answering technical objections

Income data

Some people may object that the income statistics we are using are skewed upward because they include Boston homeowners as well as renters. That is true. But Boston is 70% renters; the homeowners are a minority component; the upward skew because of owners will not be great. Moreover, the higher incomes of the homeowners are offset by two facts about the renter households: 22% of them are subsidized and a significant chunk are student households. Both of these groups have lower reported incomes which are being supplemented by the government, in one case, and by parents and future earnings, in the other. These groups tend to pull the income statistics down. Thus, we think the median income figure is pretty close to accurate. And until better statistics come down the road, what we have calculated here is the best available.

Gentrification in Dorchester, Roxbury?

In the past year, the advertised rents for Dorchester and Roxbury have shown a significant upward shift. Suddenly this past year, Roxbury’s median advertised rent jumped from $775 to $1,200 and Dorchester’s jumped from $750 to $1,000. Have rents throughout these neighborhoods gone up by $250 to $425? No way! Once again, here is a lesson in the dangers of using advertised rents as a yardstick of real rents. From 1995 to 1998, Roxbury’s and Dorchester’s median advertised rents remained very stable, around $750 a month. That long-term stability indicates the general pattern in these neighborhoods. These latest jumps in advertised rents reflect gentrification in small sections of Dorchester and Roxbury, with rental agents pushing newly renovated apartments in these small areas. The vast majority of Dorchester and Roxbury remains stable and still well below these advertised rent levels. And about gentrification anywhere: it’s that – or deterioration. Gentrification is what needs to happen every generation or so to upgrade and maintain housing.

What housing crisis?
The Boston Globe invented it.

For several years now, the Boston Globe has paraded one article after another claiming a "housing crisis." Usually a single tenant is profiled and often the same tenant more than once. We are left to guess the tenant’s income, whether the rent was low to start with, the size and location of the apartment. Who can judge with incomplete reporting of a few cases?
For general trends, the Globe lies, ignoring the facts printed in its own paper. Not long ago, it said "market rents are over $1,000 for small apartments in the city’s most modest neighborhoods." Yet two weeks before, the Globe had printed statistics showing median rents between $700 and $900 for all advertised apartments in five of Boston’s lowest-income neighborhoods. Oops!
The latest Globe invention: a claim that "many families" live in "overpriced, substandard units." America has the highest standard of living in the world.

Now take a look in the article here to see how the Globe’s apartment listings get used to distort what Boston rents really are.

Median Asking Advertised Rent &
Volume of Advertised Apartments

From City of Boston Department of Neighborhood Development,
"Real Estate Trends," Third Quarter, 1999

 

	MEDIAN RENT			VOLUME OF APT LISTINGS
	Jan-Sept 1998 and 1999			Jan-Sept 1998 and 1999
NEIGHBORHOOD	1998	1999	% Change	1998	1999	%Change
Allston/Brighton	$1,150	$1,200	4%	2146	1016	-53%
Back Bay/Beacon Hill	$1,650	$1,650	0%	3626	2,036	-44%
Central	$1,700	$1,700	0%	366	225	-39%
Charlestown	$1,350	$1,450	7%	187	124	-34%
Dorchester	$813	$1,000	23%	52	34	-35%
East Boston	$700	$850	21%	21	18	-14%
Fenway/Kenmore	$1,150	$1,150	0%	108	112	4%
Hyde Park	$900	$900	0%	15	21	40%
Jamaica Plain	$1,100	$1,200	9%	133	101	-24%
Mattapan	*	*	*	6	2	**
Roslindale	$900	$1,000	11%	51	58	14%
Roxbury	$850	$1,200	41%	13	21	62%
South Boston	$1,200	$1,200	0%	134	133	-1%
South End	$1,400	$1,500	7%	153	157	-38%
West Roxbury	$975	$1,080	11%	43	49	14%
CITYWIDE	$1,375	$1,400	2%	7154	4107	-43%
** Insufficient data (less than 10) to calculate reliable figures. Comments: The table above is based on Boston Globe apartment listings tabulated by the city. The data on the right ("Volume") show the whopping number of listings from Back Bay / Beacon Hill and other higher-rent districts, and very few listings from low-rent districts.