3 thoughts on “Tenants Rip Program Tying Rent Hikes to Landlord Investments

  1. Please note Scott Stringer knew there was no oversight at DHCR when he was an assembly member. He did nothing. Complaints were addressed to him when he was Borough President – he did nothing.

  2. Let’s go back to the very root and raison d’etre for MCI assistance to landlords is to support and improve affordable housing. Therefore, almost by definition, no MCI should ever be granted to any converted (either condo or co-op) building because first, the act of conversion represents a cashing in and destruction of the very same “affordable housing” that an MCI is supposed to support. And, inevitably, such MCI “improvements” as in our own case, are clearly and simply geared to sprucing up, cosmetic and sales-oriented property projects to promote the conversion sales –NOT TO IMPROVE affordable housing! So, the converting landlords thereby succeed in putting these costs of conversion as a burden on to the very tenants that they are soon trying to get rid of and treating as second class residents. We have witnessed and suffered this first hand, and clearly made such behavior a part of our MCI objections and appeal. NO MCI rent increase, if MCIs are really about and have anything to do with preserving affordable housing, should ever be approved for ANY converted building, and any approval for such rent increases should be rescinded if a building is converted within five years of being granted an MCI rent increase.

    Either MCIs are meant to encourage and assist affordable housing and abide by the rules, guidelines and regulations mandated for approval, or they become as now, mere loopholes and boondoggle schemes by which the real estate industry is able to foist on tenants further increased rents and help them sell apartments out from affordable housing with the resulting goal of dismembering and destroying affordable rental housing –the exact opposite of the original MCI concept. The logic and incentives and practices could not be clearer and is borne out in numerous cases besides our own. Albany may be at fault for weakening the regulatory provisions due to industry lobbyists, but the DHCR is dysfunctional and scandalous in supporting landlord abuses and real estate industry interests at every turn, even to the point of ignoring tenant protections and MCI limitations that are basic safeguards of the pertinent MCI regulatory provisions.

  3. Pingback: East Harlem News - December 2014

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *