Affordable Housing For The Privileged, Not The Poor

A Study of the Impact of Rent Control In Cambridge , Massachusetts
by RolfGoetze, Ph.D., GeoData Analytics

Introduction

Part 1 Summary of Findings Rent Control: The Progressive Hypothesis versus Economic Reality

• Gentrification Defined 

• 1993 California Rent Control Study

• Rent Control as an Agent of Gentrification

• Testing for Rent Control as an Agent of Gentrification

Finding 1: Rents in Controlled Communities were Held Well Below Market

Figure 1: Median Gross Rents in Metro Boston , 1980 and 1990 Figure 2: Median Rents in Cambridge by Rental Housing Type, 1990 Figure 3: Controlled Rents in Cambridge Compared to Inflation-Adjusted Rents, 1967-1991

Finding 2: The Housing Market Tightened under Rent Control

• Rent-Controlled Communities Lost Many Rental Apartments

Figure 4: Change in Rental Apartments and Tenant Population in Metro Boston , 1980 -1990

• Rent-Controlled Communities Had Fewer Tenants per Apartment

Figure 5: Median Number of Persons per Apartment, Metro Boston , 1990.

Figure 6: Average Number of Rooms per Renter Occupant, Metro Boston , 1990

Figure 7: Change in Median Number of Persons Per Apartment, Metro Boston , 1980-1990

• Rent-Controlled Communities Had Low Vacancy Rates

Figure 8: Rental Vacancy Rates, Metro Boston , 1980 -1990

Finding 3: Rent-Controlled Apartments Became Gentrified

Figure 9: Recent Rental Turnover in Cambridge Apartments by Rental Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990

• Poverty Level Households Declined

Figure 10: Change in Poverty Level Renter Households Below Poverty, Metro Boston , 1980-1990

• Higher-Income Tenants Moved into Rent-Controlled Apartments

Figure 11: Median Per Capita Renter Incomes by Rental Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990

• More Single Persons, Fewer Families in Rent-Controlled Apartments

Figure 12: Average Persons per Apartment and Their Household Structure by Rental Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990

• More White-Collar Occupations in Rent-Controlled Apartments

Figure 13: Occupational Patterns by Rental Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990 Figure 14: Share of Employed Professionals by Rental Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990

•  Higher education levels in rent-controlled apartments

Figure 15: Share of College Graduates by Rental Housing Type, Cambirdge, 1990

• Fewer Elderly, More Thirty-something' Adults in Rent-Controlled Apartments

Figure 16: Age Groups According to Rent Control Status, Cambridge , 1990 Figure 17: Age of Renter Household Head by Rental Housing Type, 1990

• Fewer Minorities in Rent-Controlled Apartments
Figure 18: Share of White/Non-white Persons by Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990

Finding 4: Gentrified Tenants Achieved Light Rent Burdens

Figure 19: Rent Burdens in Boston Metro Area, 1990

Figure 20: Change in Rent Burdens, Metro Boston , 1980 -1990

Figure 21: Gross Rent Burden of Tenants by Housing Type, Cambridge , 1990

... in the Absence of Rent Control 

In Conclusion

Part 2 - Supporting Studies

Section 1: Cambridge in the Context of the 21 Largest Mass.

Communities, 1980 vs. 1990, applies the salient part of the 1993 California study methodology to this region;

Section 2: Overview of Cambridge Housing Demographics  

Broadly outlines the changes in the city since the 1960s;

Section 3: Age and Occupation Patterns Among Cambridge Residents, 1990

Compares the characteristics of rent control tenants with the balance of the city's residents; and

Section 4: Exploring the Sources of Diversity within Cambridge, 1990

Uses data from all the Census block groups with high concentrations of particular rental housing types - rent-controlled, public/assisted, and market-rate - to compare the renter

Appendix A: Analysis of the 1990 U.S. Census Data for Cambridge Block Groups

Appendix B: Methodology for Supporting Studies