According to 2009 figures, 51.5% of renters are spending at least 30% or their income on rental costs. Under the government's parameters, housing is considered unaffordable if households are spending 30% or higher on housing expenses including utilities and rental fees. The 2009 percentage is slightly higher than 2008 when around 50% of renters are spending that much on housing expenses.

The increase in the percentage of renters living in unaffordable units is largely attributed to the decline in the average household income. Based on 2009 figures, median income for households declined by 2.9%, mainly because unemployment jumped to 10.2% for the year. In addition, housing expenses rose by 3% from $818 in 2008 to $842 in 2009. Most analysts believe that the affordability of housing will continue to become a problem as long as incomes are declining and job loss is escalating.

Housing analysts have also stated that the lack of cheap houses for rent also reflects increased demand as foreclosure problems continue to discourage families and individuals from purchasing homes. They further added that, with the current market condition, most Americans feel that renting is more practical and beneficial than owning a residence.

One good thing that the 2009 housing market data revealed is that among people who actually own homes, only 37.6% are spending at least 30% on housing expenses, including taxes, utilities, insurance and mortgage loan payments. This can be considered good news since the figure is almost the same as the percentage recorded in 2008, which means that expenses for homeowners had remained steady since rising steadily beginning in 2002.

Despite difficulties in finding cheap houses for rent, the number of people renting dwellings has risen by almost one million, while the number of people who own houses declined by as much as half a million. Rental housing data for 2010 is expected to show almost similar trends.

During a Property Maintenance Appeals Board meeting held at the Ames City Hall, proposed revisions to Municipal Code Chapter 13 were on top of the agenda. According to the board, they will draft recommendations during a two-week workshop discussion. The discussions will be available to all, but input from landlords and residents will not be entertained until a meeting between the board and the Ames City Council has taken place.

In the midst of all the discussions, some owners of rental housing have stated that they do not see the need for the changes as their properties have passed inspections easily for years now. Code requirements, according to the owners, have forced some of them to spend over $5,000 on electrical, heating and plumbing repairs just to bring the houses for rent up to code.

They argued that they upgraded their rental properties just the way the city asked them to do and they do not relish the idea of doing so again just after four years. Landlords have asserted that the upgrades were expensive four years ago and the latest changes will likely require double the amount they shelled out during earlier upgrades.

Meanwhile, some owners of real estate rental homes who are trying to sell their properties have complained that potential buyers have backed out due to the repairs and upgrades that the city is planning to implement. They also lament the fact that the city is asking for improvements that are sometimes not even needed with areas of properties already in good working condition.

Landlords have stated that there are at least 20 proposed changes to the current code, with some just geared toward aesthetics. They stated that, as owners of houses for rent, they understand the need for better looking properties, but they are worried about the costs these improvements will entail.

In response, some code officers from Gettysburg have stated that this will not be the case. They claim that years of having the same rules in place at Gettysburg have not resulted in declining home values and landlords leaving town. As a matter of fact, officers have claimed that the rules have contributed to landlords' ability to attract good tenants and have actually led to property value increases.

The proposed new rules will be discussed by the Borough Council within the week and a vote is expected to be called a few days after council deliberation. The rules were reportedly introduced by Borough Manager Jason Bobst in June.

Under the proposed new home rentals regulations, absentee landlords would have to have a manager who resides within a five-mile radius of the borough. Landlords would also be required to have annual licenses for each unit being rented, with renewals available only to those with good records. In addition, yearly inspections will be held and a deposit for each unit designed to cover abandonment and non-maintenance costs would be paid to the borough.

Pottstown borough officials have stated that the rules will be effective in improving rental property situations in the area as proven by Gettysburg which already has the same guidelines in place. However, critics of the proposed rules have stated that officials have not canvassed the public's opinion about the rules.

Meanwhile, a number of landlords have opposed the new regulations, claiming that they are oppressive and can lead to abuse of power. They added that the current rules in place are standard regulations and have served the area well so they should not be changed or modified.

The debate surrounding the proposed new rules on home rentals will soon be resolved as the council is set to deliberate within the week. The final decision on whether these rules would be implemented or not will be known to all residents in the coming weeks.

According to reports, the president of Harvard lives at Tory Row in Cambridge in a Colonial residence with an estimated monthly rental value of $8,000. Meanwhile, the Northeastern president lives at Beacon Hill in a five-story town house with an estimated monthly rent of little over $6,000, while his MIT counterpart occupies a home near Charles River which rents for $5,800 per month.

According to the IRS, the new rule aims to present a more transparent picture of the way school administrators are rewarded. However, an examination by Globe shows that colleges vary in the way they interpret the IRS requirement. Some schools assessed the value of entire luxury homes for rent, while others considered only the portions that qualify as private residences.

The variation happens because some college presidents’ houses reserve the ground floor for entertaining students, alumni, faculty and visiting dignitaries and is considered public space. As an example, Boston University president Robert Brown describes his home as an apartment located above a restaurant because the house serves as venue for university functions every week. Brown’s home is considered the most expensive, with an estimated monthly rent of over $20,000.

The instructions from the IRS, according to universities, did not specify the portions of the houses that should be included when executive compensations are added up. Most private colleges admitted that they just decided to value the entire property without considering which parts serve as their presidents’ personal living quarters.

Some local realtors who specialize in luxury homes for rent have argued that some universities have undervalued the rental rates for their top executives’ homes. They also asserted that most of these homes would fetch significantly higher rents in the open market than what the schools reported.

The proposal was meant to prevent owners of apartments from implementing rent increases between May and October 2010. The ordinance was reportedly proposed to give tenants some respite from the impact of the nationwide recession. The City Council ended up voting 10 to five against the proposal. It has now been sent to a committee for another study. Meanwhile, landlords can raise rents starting July 1 by up to three percent.

Following the vote, protesters made up of tenants and tenants’ rights advocates, reportedly caused chaos at the council meeting by shouting at council members and waving slogans. The protesters were said to have waited for five hours to hear the result of the vote. Upon hearing the result, they reportedly filled the aisle of the Council Chamber and police had to be called in to get them to leave.

According to some council members, the protesters expressed their anger over the vote for the property for rent measure in a violent manner and refused to heed the call for order. Three protesters were arrested after police officers were called in to restore calm to the Chamber. Some members of the Los Angeles Community Action Network, an advocacy group that participated in the protest, have revealed that one of the three arrested individuals was injured while being restrained by the police.

The group of protesters had stated that they will go to the Los Angeles Police Department’s Central Division station in support of the arrested individuals. Those who were arrested will be booked at the station and members of the demonstrating group have vowed to remain at the same station until their three colleagues were released.

The measure that would have prevented property for rent owners from raising rents have been voted down by the Los Angeles City Council. The ordinance is now in the hands of a special committee that will review the proposal further.

Many communities managed by HOAs have strict rules about renting out or requirements that must be followed by owners who decide to rent out their homes.

But because of the hard times, HOAs have been forced to relax some of their rules to help homeowners struggling from financial troubles and to prevent unoccupied foreclosed units from causing blight.

At Heritage Isles, a middle-income community in New Tampa, the percentage of renters has increased to about 28 percent of all households in the area. The community owns a golf course, but it is not able to sustain the required maintenance because of inadequate funds. Townhouse prices in the community have dropped to just $100,000.

According to Heritage community manager Michael Tillotson, since the community has allowed renting out since the opening of the community in the late 1990s, it has developed rules for homeowners turning their properties into homes for rent. Landlords are required to hire a landscaping firm to maintain the properties and to submit copies of their notarized leases and the rental certificates issued by city officials.

Tillotson said Heritage Isles has not had serious problems with compliance so it has not experienced some of the problems faced by communities with a lot of troublesome renters.

Even the upscale gated community Cheval in Lutz is now seeing a sharp surge in renters. HOA president Tim McClain said that problems arise when owners do not tell their renters the restrictions. He added he understands the need to rent out because there are now a rising number of Cheval owners who can no longer afford to stay in Cheval.

In FishHawk Ranch, enterprising realtors are making rentals as part of their business. They look for homeowners who want to rent out their homes and then manage the rentals for the owners.

In some communities facing problems arising from rentals, some residents plan to ban renting out. But according to investor-owners, it is not easy revising the rules. HOAs need the majority vote to make amendments to HOA regulations.

All in all, residents of communities do not like banning homes for rent because renting out helps owners; they just like to remind owners to ensure that renters follow community rules.

The analysts predicted that apartment rents in Tampa will drop further by four percent even if demand will rise slightly. The average vacancy rate is expected to rise to 10.8 percent from the previous month’s rate of 10.5 percent.

The average apartment rent is also expected to fall this year to $767 from $797 in 2009. Rents have fallen by about 10 percent from the average rent of $843 in 2008.

Over the same periods, vacancy rates have grown sharply from 6.9 percent in 2007, when a lot of condo conversions occurred, to 8.7 percent the following year. The months between 2008 and 2009 experienced drastic vacancy increases as the period accumulated nearly 180 basis points in rate growth.

In the Marcus & Millichap study, which surveyed 544 major rental markets across the U.S. for its 2010 apartment report, Tampa again ranked 40th based on economic performance. It was preceded by Fort Lauderdale in the ranking, but it performed better than West Palm Beach. Jacksonville ranked the lowest among Florida markets.

Washington, D.C. remains the strongest market in the U.S. for multifamily properties for rent despite a strong competition from San Diego, which surpassed four places in the ranking to become the second strongest.

According to real estate analysts, the U.S. capital is expected to emerge from the downturn much ahead of other metro areas. San Diego, meanwhile, is expected to continue experiencing lower vacancy rates and higher rental rates.

One concern that could affect rental property recovery is the shadow rental sector – comprised by properties not formally registered or not yet approved as rentals. Fannie Mae has been planning to allow distressed owners of Fannie-guaranteed homes to rent the properties for up to one year as they find out ways to reorganize their finances and weigh their housing options. This could further beef up the shadow market.

Investors looking to enter the property rental sector can explore student housing, Marcus & Millichap advised. In 2009, student housing exceeded rental expectations and surpassed apartment rental performance, posting a nationwide vacancy rate of only 7 to 7.5 percent.

Additionally, investors can also consider properties for rent in Tampa, where the median price in rental communities have dropped from $58,438 per apartment unit in 2008 to $54,671 per apartment unit in 2009.

Because of low rents, landlords cannot collect enough money to make repairs, even emergency repairs like burst pipes. Banks that foreclose on rental properties also refuse to make repairs, arguing that the properties have become nonperforming assets.

One rental building in Arbor Hill facing foreclosure is the multi-unit apartment complex at 299 Clinton, which is owned by nonprofit affordable housing entity St. Joseph’s Housing Corporation.

Due to financial difficulties, St. Joseph’s defaulted on its loan payments for its rental buildings in Arbor Hill, including 299 Clinton. Mortgage lender JP Morgan Chase Bank was forced to file foreclosure actions against St. Joseph’s Housing.

In December 2008, lawyer William Keniry was appointed by a New York Supreme Court judge as receiver for the Clinton property and other buildings owned by St. Joseph’s which are in foreclosure.

But despite the receivership, tenants of 299 Clinton and other buildings failed to get the repairs and maintenance that they needed. Keniry explained that St. Joseph’s did not have enough money to pay for repairs and that the rents collected were not enough to repair the homes for rent.

Keniry added that JP Morgan Chase also refused to provide funds for repairs, stating that the rental buildings were nonperforming assets. According to housing advocates like Roger Markovics of advocacy group United Tenants of Albany, disputes between landlords and mortgage lenders have become common during the economic downturn.

Markovics said that oftentimes landlords facing foreclosures have given up and therefore have no more interest in or money for making repairs. Similarly, bank lawyers make arguments about the lack of accountability of banks for needed repairs and maintenance work.

In December last year, St. Joseph’s Housing filed documents in court for bankruptcy protection to block JP Morgan from auctioning off the rental buildings. Martha Hobbs, head of St. Joseph’s, also blamed the receiver for not winterizing the buildings and for the worsening of the conditions of the buildings.

But according to housing advocates, St. Joseph’s Housing has a history of not being able to maintain its properties and properly screening renters. In response, St. Joseph’s argued that it cannot raise rents to a level where it can collect enough to be able to make needed repairs and maintenance on its homes for rent.

A lot of apartment rentals in Modesto are being offered at only $400 per month, with the first months free for renters signing one-year lease agreements.

According to RealFacts, the apartment vacancy rate in Modesto over the past three months was 10 percent, among the highest rates in California. The average apartment rent in the 28 biggest apartment buildings in Modesto has gone down to $816, not including further discounts given such as free rent.

At the Meadowlakes Apartments, two-bedroom apartment units are being rented out at $695, a 19-percent drop from their usual rate of $830. Wanda Francek, manager of the 196-unit Meadowlakes, said she had to offer deep discounts because of the rising vacancy in the complex.

There is also another trend being observed in San Joaquin – tenants are now moving out of apartment rentals and moving into rental homes. Because of plenty of cheap foreclosures purchased and turned into rentals by investors, there are now a lot of houses for rent in the area.

Over the past 3 years, over 16,400 homes in Stanislaus County were foreclosed, including 7,800 foreclosures in the Modesto area. Many of these homes were sold by banks and other lenders to investors who converted them into rental homes.

In Stanislaus County, the number of rental units has risen by almost 6 percent from around 57,500 units in 2005 to over 60,800 rental units in 2008.

Ben Sweet, manager of Sweet Properties in Modesto, said that apartments and other multifamily properties have suffered because of the increased number of single-family homes that can be rented for the same amount.

Sweet said that he has reduced the rent for a two-bedroom house to $575 and a three-bedroom house to $950 and offers a 50-percent discount on the rent for the first month.

According to Sweet, rates for rental homes have gone down by five to 10 percent over the past year. A three-bedroom house with two bathrooms now rent for only around $1,100, down from around $1,250 during the boom.

Bigger houses are even tougher to rent out, according to rental managers. Houses for rent offered above $1,350 are not being rented. These big houses were easily rented out at $1,600 during the boom.

Considering the situation in the housing industry and the declining average rent price, it is not really surprising that a lot of people are opting to go with rental homes instead of home buying. But sometimes, renters make the mistake of under-calculating the cost.

As a would-be renter, you should also factor in the security deposit on top of the monthly rent. You will also have to set aside money for paying credit check that is usually required by the landlord as well as the move in deposit. Such fees will vary depending on the policies being followed in the building.

Because of such costs, renters are advised to make inquiries regarding these extra fees in order to avoid being surprised. This should be done before you even schedule to see the apartment.

You will find that compared to other properties for rent, rental buildings have set fees and straightforward policies.

For instance, an applicant will have to pay for the application form, usually amounting to $100. The landlord will then make a credit inquiry and employment verification. Once the applicant has been found to be qualified, moving in will be the next step.

On the other hand, renting coops or condos might be more complicated. Application fees can be as high as $1000 and you will still have to consider the other fees that could average for about $150 for every renter.

In addition, there is still the board to consider. A full financial disclosure might be required which means providing bank statements and tax returns. There is also the interview that one must go through. All these things will take up much of your time.

While looking through the properties for rent carefully, asking questions regarding the upfront costs is perhaps the smartest thing to do. You should learn all about the small details, even your rights and responsibilities in order to determine if you can afford the place and be happy living in it.