Watchdog says affordability preserved through Stuy Town deal was exaggerated

de Blasio talking

Mayor Bill de Blasio and other elected officials with tenants in October, 2015 announcing the sale of Stuyvesant Town (Photo by Sabina Mollot)

By Sabina Mollot

In October of 2015, a grinning Mayor Bill de Blasio stood alongside other elected officials to declare that the sale of Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village to The Blackstone Group and partner Ivanhoe Cambridge was the “mother of all preservations deals.”

However, the Independent Budget Office of the City of New York (IBO) is now suggesting, in a report released Friday, that the amount of affordability preserved was inflated.

The IBO estimated that while the deal was supposed to preserve 100,000 “apartment years” (the equivalent of 5,000 apartments for 20 years), 64,000 of those apartment years would have remained affordable anyway through rent stabilization. This would mean the deal really only saved 36,000 apartment years, not 100,000. The report also noted that when the sale took place, just over 5,000 apartments were already renting at below-market rates due to rent stabilization.

While there has been plenty of debate over just how “affordable” the 5,000 apartments that are preserved and leased through a lottery system actually are, according to the IBO, only three percent of those 100,000 apartment years are reserved for low-income households. Twenty-seven percent are intended for middle income households while the remaining six percent of apartment years are units that will remain rent-stabilized longer than they would have without the deal. For its report, the IBO said it considered all of the newly created lottery apartments as well as ones that remain stabilized to be benefits to the city.

Additionally, the report indicated that the city used some misleading numbers at the time of the property sale.

The IBO estimated that without the deal, just under 1,800 apartments would have remained rent-regulated through 2035. The mayor’s office’s information wasn’t too different, saying at the time that without the deal, about 1,500 apartments would have remained stabilized through 2035, anyway.

But, the IBO argued, the mayor’s office “still counted the full 5,000 units of housing preserved through the deal towards its affordable housing goal.”

The report does however note that under the deal, “Roberts,” tenants in 1,400 apartments will have some protections they wouldn’t have had otherwise. Those tenants will get rent five percent rent increases for five years once the tax break that re-regulated those units expires in 2020 and those tenants lose their stabilized status.

The city gave $220 million in tax breaks and a loan that didn’t have to be paid back, along with transferable air rights, towards the owners’ $5.45 billion purchase. The air rights, still unused, the IBO said, may prove to be the “most lucrative part of the deal.”

Meanwhile, the report has already been slammed by the mayor, the Department of Housing, Preservation and Development and Stuy Town tenant leaders. The HPD cited the IBO’s own numbers to point out how many apartments would have been churned without the deal even if they remained in rent-stabilization. Based on the predicted loss, HPD Commissioner Maria Torres-Springer said not having any guarantees of continued affordability was a gamble the city couldn’t make.

“Rent regulation is not the shield the IBO is purporting it to be,” said Torres-Springer. “By IBO’s own analysis, Stuy Town had lost 50 percent of its units to the market in the decade before our agreement. Given that trajectory and not knowing for certain what the future will bring, we were not prepared to leave a single below-market unit on the table when we had an opportunity to protect all 5,000 below-market units. Our intervention offers far greater protections to the tenants in those units and guarantees that those units will remain affordable and serve low-and middle-income residents upon turnover. And we secured the affordability for less than half the cost, in a neighborhood with some of the highest market rents in the city, making this an incredibly valuable deal for taxpayers.”

Melissa Grace, a spokesperson for the mayor, also defended the deal.

“We stand by our actions at Stuy Town,” she said. “The last time this complex sold without protections, thousands of affordable apartments were lost. Anyone who thinks sitting this one out was an option is ignoring what tenants went through.”

Former Council Member Dan Garodnick, who was heavily involved in the negotiations, also disagreed with the IBO’s findings.

“The IBO really missed the boat on this one,” said Garodnick. “The number crunchers obviously just don’t understand how critical it was to have an ironclad commitment to preserve 5,000 units, after prior owners systematically attacked rent-stabilized tenants using every trick in the book. Rather, the IBO states the obvious – that there would have been some number of units protected under rent stabilization without the deal. That is surely true for a small group – but after the tumultuous recent history, nobody in Stuy Town or the city was going to sit back, relax, and wait to see how that played out.”

ST-PCV Tenants Association President Susan Steinberg agreed, pointing out the need to de-incentivize harassing rent-stabilized tenants in an effort to replace them with those willing to pay higher rents.

“The IBO analysis brazenly overlooks a key fact: without the agreement’s guarantees, a new landlord would have had massive market incentives to keep deregulating affordable units,” Steinberg said. “And we could have expected more aggressive and unscrupulous ways to get people out of their rent-stabilized units.”

Steinberg also said the IBO report doesn’t take into account how what happens in the state legislature affects tenants on the ground.

“IBO has based its report on a projection of stability – of the willingness in Albany and in the real estate industry to do the right thing by rent regulations,” Steinberg said. “Without the intervention of the city and of Blackstone’s commitments, we might still be in a situation of wholesale mid-term rent increases and Golub (nonrenewal) notices. I don’t know anyone here who wants to turn back the clock.”

City Council Member Keith Powers, a lifelong resident, also said it would be a mistake to leave tenants at the mercy of Albany.

“Residents of Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village know the importance of safeguarding rent regulation to avoid another period of high turnover,” said Powers. “Most importantly, the report identifies the need to modernize our housing laws in the city and state to protect affordable housing.”

Under the deal, 4,500 apartments must be rented to middle-class households earning no more than $141,735 for a family of three (165 percent of the area median income), with the remaining 500 rented to moderate-income families earning no more than $68,720 for a family of three (80 percent of the area median income). Maximum household incomes vary for other family sizes and rents are to be be no higher than 30 percent of the residents’ household incomes. As apartments turn over, half become lottery apartments, the other half market.

 

Other interesting tidbits from the IBO report:

While originally built for families, currently only 12 percent of households in ST/PCV have a child under 18 living in them, which is significantly lower than the citywide average of 30 percent.

Despite frequent jokes about the place having turned into a dorm, the reality is that the community is still aging. At this time, 28 percent of apartments have a resident who is 65 or older, compared with a citywide average of 25 percent. “While not an official designation, the development may be considered an example of a naturally occurring retirement community, colloquially referred to as NORCs,” the IBO said.

Analysis of Census data shows that the average household in the complex has two occupants, and the median income of residents in Stuyvesant Town is $93,010 and Peter Cooper Village is $106,310. Under the preservation regulatory agreement, middle-income units are reserved for a household of two making up to $119,625 in 2016.

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “Watchdog says affordability preserved through Stuy Town deal was exaggerated

  1. Of course phony Dan has an issue with the IBO’s findings, it shows his true colors. As many have said, Dan and the TA sold us out with this deal, and this just confirms what we all already knew.

    Also, the time has come for our TA to completely distance itself from all politicians. People don’t trust politicians, and rightfully so, and the TA continues to be buddy buddy with all of them.

  2. I do like the fact that Powers doesn’t slam the report and instead has an actual action item. I wish Steinberg had done the same instead of getting defensive .

  3. I wasn’t the only one during the election to question the mayor’s numbers. I saw this article in the Post. By the watchdog’s numbers, the actual units saved here would be around 1800. Lower than I first projected. But lower numbers were so transparent at the time…when about 5500 units were still at truly affordable levels. Of this 5500, in 20 years many of the same tenants would still be alive. Or take a case like this. An ST 1 BR @ $1000/mo. in 2015, turn it over 2 or 3 times and it still would be affordable. So the numbers here were bogus from the start, and only all the spin coming from many sides might make anyone think otherwise. But does it really make a difference? If people knew the numbers were obviously cooked, would it make any difference in the long or short runs?

    • Our TA (Susan) stood hand-in-hand with these corrupt politicians, as they lauded the preservation of affordable housing at Stuy Town. The TA’s relationship with politicians and management needs to end immediately, as nothing they have done over the past decade has been in the best interests of the tenants they are supposed to represent.

      I do agree that Powers is as corrupt as they come, but he has the eyes of a lot of people that know him from this community watching his every move closely. He has to be very careful with his words, and I think in this case he did.

  4. The practice was shady. There wasn’t a concrete process for the affordable program, even though each lottery spent anywhere from 30,000 to 1 million dollars. There were preferential selection given to existing tenants and board members. Just as long assets we’re hidden or overlooked.

  5. Looks like diBlasio may run for President. Expect more who know little about stats to attack the IBO’s numbers. Kind of reminds you of the GOP attacking the CBO, no?

  6. Re: report by Stuyvesant Town committee

    I never heard Nobel prize laurete Bob Dylan ever sing a song entitled: “l pity the poor landlord!.”

    Thank you town and village for your contuing honest and objective treporting even though Stuyvesant frequently runs advertising in your newspaper.

    I remember when l first met Daniel garodnick when he was running for the first time for political office. He seemed to be an affable young fella. But being a cynical person concerning the human condition l added to him that you may be idealistic now but you may eventually become just another pol who sacrifices his integrity for the many perks which will inevitably become available to you.

    Reading the article… It seems that my remark which l made to you about 12 years ago were precient

    Manhattan has now become the town only for the very wealthy. As Manhattan goes… Now Brooklyn… Followed by queens and Staten island… Then the Bronx…

    The real estate industry controls almost all the politicians in the city and in Albany as well.

    Senators Sanders and Warren know the deal quite well. So in the coming elections vote the sobs out as they in the main don’t care about the electorate…

    Just about the big doners!

    • Re: Mr. Powers

      I voted for him! “Why?” you may ask.

      One prior to the primary l ran into a former student who had been a student of mine at baruch… Cuny. He told me that his high school was running for a political position and both long time Peter Cooper residents.

      My student had been a serious and curious one. So l believed him and voted for powers.

      It now appears to have been a mistake… Not for one to infer that any of the others would be better.

      So what have l learned? Just because a former and superior former college student gives you political advise l should have investigated the person independently.

      And, there seems to be a correlation between interest in becoming a politician and having dubious ethical standards.

      There l said it!

        • Steve, thanks

          And you’re right on about that both the democrats as well as the republicans are both involved. Remember that both Bill & Hillary Clinton began as progressive liberals.

          Now with having gained power they with hubris are an integral part of the establishment!

          Where is Daniel Patrick Moynihan? No where to be found!

          Sad!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.