top of page

Housing and immigration advocates oppose Riverhead rental restrictions


Wally Ramirez, of OLA of Eastern Long Island, at Riverhead Town Hall on Wednesday. Immigrant advocates oppose a town bill that would require rentals to be occupied by a single "family" or "family equivalent." Credit: Elizabeth Sagarin


A Riverhead Town proposal would require landlords to rent homes to a single family or a "family equivalent" to cut down on overcrowding — but housing advocates say the bill could lead to discrimination against immigrants.


The bill would require landlords to rent to people who are "one family" or comprise the "functional equivalent" of one. A group that shares a common living space and household expenses would qualify under the town's rental code.


The proposal also sets maximum occupancy limits for rental homes. The changes also set new guidelines for driveway widths and ban more than two commercial vehicles from being parked on a single driveway.


The measure would limit the number of bedrooms to two in a basement in a single family home rental. Bedrooms in attics or third floors also would be prohibited in all rentals. 

Town officials say the changes are needed to prevent large numbers of people from occupying a single rental home and parking on narrow neighborhood streets. But housing advocates say the changes unfairly target people in shared living spaces, including immigrants. The high cost of housing on the East End has often forces friends and co-workers into communal living spaces.


"This is the immigrant experience here, and also the young adult experience," said Ian Wilder, executive director of Long Island Housing Services in Bohemia, a fair housing nonprofit. 


At a public hearing Tuesday at Riverhead Town Hall, housing and immigration advocates opposed the plan. Enforcing the law could lead to invasive inquiries about tenant relations, they said.


Renters may "feel like now they're going to be on trial for choosing to live in a particular way that really is working best for them," said Minerva Perez, executive director of the nonprofit Latino advocacy group OLA of Eastern Long Island.


But Richard Downs, a senior investigator in the town’s code enforcement office, said the changes are needed to protect tenants and first responders when they are called during emergencies.


During rental inspections, Downs said, "Quite often we’ll see basements completely occupied with just mattresses and makeshift bedrooms and blankets and people occupying those areas next to boilers, water heaters, gas appliances."


The town has 1,900 rentals and receives 10 to 15 complaints of overcrowding each month, Downs said.


The penalty for violating the proposed rental laws range from $500 to $6,000 or 15 days in jail.


Advocates said the town should focus on doing a better job of enforcing occupancy limits in rental homes.


"We do not stand by unsafe living or unsafe overcrowding, but the answer to that is not to patrol what makes up a family," said Wally Ramirez, a community advocate who works for OLA of Eastern Long Island.


In Riverhead, the median rent is $1,833, according to U.S. census data. 


The restrictions could cut off "critical" networks for immigrants, especially those who are here alone, said Pilar Moya-Mancera, executive director of Housing Help, a nonprofit based in Greenlawn.


"When it comes to immigrants, we create our own families. Friends and neighbors end up becoming our family," she said. "Ask an immigrant who they spend their Christmases or their Thanksgivings with."


The law will not prevent people from living with roommates, Town Supervisor Tim Hubbard said at the hearing. The idea is to prevent dangerous sublets, he said.


For example, Hubbard said, the town wants to prevent a situation in which multiple tenants have "their own living area [and] it’s possibly padlocked on the outside with a hot plate and a mini fridge inside."


He added, "That’s when it becomes dangerous."


In 2021, Riverhead officials attempted to enact a similar law


The Long Island Progressive Coalition and 25 other groups submitted a letter to the town board arguing that the proposal was "discriminatory and unnecessary."


1 view0 comments

Comments


bottom of page