Letter to the editor, Mar. 12

Cartoon by Jim Meadows

Questions about Blackstone’s agreement

1. Why doesn’t the expiration of J-51 allow Blackstone to deregulate the remaining stabilized apartments, if they leave 5000 affordable, per the agreement with NYC? (But which 5,000 will they choose?)

2. Who does this deregulation effort really affect, other than long term tenants? Market rate tenants get very little benefit from stabilization. Frankly, it feels like market rate tenants are subsidizing others. I believe stabilization started for good reasons, but that too many folks are just plain greedy.

3. Why don’t Roberts tenants, who not only received money, but had their rents “frozen/managed” till 2020, have to abide by that agreement and return to “normal,” which might mean destabilization in some cases? They signed an agreement, didn’t they?

Name withheld
Stuyvesant Town

2 thoughts on “Letter to the editor, Mar. 12

  1. “Market rate tenants get very little benefit from stabilization.”

    This statement and the rest of the letter is beyond clueless. This is a person who no idea about the NYS RS law. Example one of the many NYS RS protections that currently one has is the right of renewal of one’s lease for a 1 or 2 year period. And here are many more currently for ALL apartments here.

    “Frankly, it feels like market rate tenants are subsidizing others. I believe stabilization started for good reasons, but that too many folks are just plain greedy.”

    This talking point is not true and is beyond despicable. It’s a REBNY lie. Why the T&V printed this letter without a fact check context/reply is beyond me.

Leave a Reply

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