The Major Capital Improvements(MCI) program allows landlords to submit applications to improve the living conditions of tenants through repairs for rent-regulated apartments. While repairs are made to the apartments, landlords can charge their tenants for these MCI repairs through rent increases. Tenants feared being exploited by their landlords because these rent increases would never go away, even if it was paid for. Landlords state that rent increases are necessary to maintain the building because making repairs would be costly. Tenants see MCIs as a method of gentrification because landlords can possibly displace tenants from their residential buildings through the raise in rent, making rent-regulated apartments less affordable for tenants. 

In 2019 a leelumlaw article titled “New Rent Increase Limits On Major Capital Improvements And Individual Apartment Improvements” written by Robert J. Lum explains that with the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019, MCIs were weakened. Prior to this act, MCIs authorized landlords to raise the total rent of tenants by 6 percent annually. With the act in place, the rent is reduced to 2 percent per year. The Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 disincentives landlords to make repairs because the investment made may not be as generous. Landlords are not able to charge their tenants for more than the price of the repairs. Repairs may not be affordable without having to charge their tenants for larger amounts of money. Residential buildings may deteriorate over time without any repairs, rendering it uninhabitable. 

In the last article, Lum explains the effects of the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 on landlords, a therealdeal article titled “Major Capital Improvements: 2019 Rent Reforms New York” include landlord’s perspectives in favor of  Lum’s statement on maintaining their residential buildings and without the MCI increases, their buildings will deteriorate as repairs become expensive. Authors Will Parker and Decca Muldowney (2019) introduced a new perspective on the exploitation of tenants by landlords that replaced windows that were previously adequate for tenants, but landlords used that justification for implementing MCIs for profit gain. “‘They put these new windows in. The buildings didn’t need new windows…They put the cheapest ones in. The windows are paper thin’(Parker & Muldowney, 2019)” said a tenant. In addition, with the new changes to Major Capital Improvements on rent-stabilized apartments, landlords are rushing to submit their applications to exploit tenants before the opportunity is weakened. 

The previous article explained that MCIs simple repairs were made as a justification to implement MCIs, for landlords to obtain profit. In a housingjusticeforall report, statistics support that theory of landlords exploiting tenants through MCI for profit gain. The housing justice for all organization (2019) states, “Prior to 2019, MCIs have been responsible for an average of $140 million in permanent rent increases each year(Housing Justice For All, 2019)”. The amount of permanent rent increase is substantial as this applies to rent that continues to rise per year. MCIs are affecting tenants and the report explains that landlords use MCIs for profit rather than to improve the housing of tenants within their building. Furthermore, landlords invest in MCI repairs to increase their profits and the overall value of their assets. Subsequently, the MCIs pay for the cost of repairs and landlords continue to raise the rent. Tenants feel that landlords should be covering the cost of repairs since the residential buildings are owned by them but tenants are obligated to pay for these costs.

In 2019, an Indypendent article written by Emma Gaffney gives context about an event that occurred in Harlem with many tenants gathering to push for housing rent rights. Tenants explain that landlords abuse MCIs in order to push low-income tenants out of rent-regulated apartments and call MCIs “eviction notices”. This article supports the previous article because many tenants are coming together with activists and public officials to speak out on the issues with implementing MCIs and having tenants displaced. Nathylin Flowers Adesegun, a tenant of Harlem became homeless because she was not able to afford rent, “she confronted Mayor de Blasio at the gym spoke during at the rally, saying that her monthly preferential rent of $475 was increased to $1319, ultimately rendering her homeless. She now resides in a women’s homeless shelter in the city(Gaffney, 2019)”. Rent-stabilized apartments are supposed to be consistent, but MCIs are giving landlords the option to gradually remove low-income tenants out of their apartments, rendering them to become homeless These articles provided help to formulate the idea to conduct the study of Major Capital Improvements as it takes place in Harlem. The articles explain the two sides of the implementation of Major Capital Improvements within residential buildings. Landlords claim to require MCIs to maintain their residential buildings and cover the cost of these improvements. On the other hand, tenants are suffering because these rent raises are unaffordable for them and sometimes these repairs are not very helpful to improve their living conditions in the apartment. Thus giving both sides an argument on how MCIs are either beneficial for some or detrimental for others.