All comments to posts have to await approval. Please be aware that, depending on when I'm logged onto the internet, it may take me hours, even longer, to moderate comments, so if they don't turn up in a speedy fashion, they are still in the queue. Comments that cross a line I'm not comfortable with will not get approved. Please note: Posts that overdo their passion and veer into name-calling or that make serious accusations without proof are going to have a hard time getting through.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Management Spins Bad Survey Reports: Yes, Stuy Town is Happy with Rose Associates!
If you listen to the spin from Adam Rose, co-president of Rose Associates (our management firm), you'd think most people are happy with the way things look and are being run here.
This weeks Town & Village's front page article, "Residents Rate Changes in ST/PCV," contains the following mind-blowing statement in its introductory paragraph:
"... the firm has said tenants have responded most positively when asked about the conditions of the grounds and buildings as well as their quality of life." [Emphasis mine.]
The justification for such a statement?
First off, there were two surveys conducted a while back, around May. One was done by Dan Garodnick's office and the other by the Kingsley company for Rose Associates. Over 400 tenants responded to the Garodnick survey, while 2,400 responded to the Kingsley one. There are over 25,000 tenants in ST/PCV, with some knowledgeable people stating the number is over 30,000 if every single tenant, legally here or not, is included. Already, in these two surveys, we have a very small pool of tenants upon which to base a generality on, but, whatever.... Let's try to glean from the article the numbers. Unfortunately, a detailed listing of the results and the questions asked were NOT presented in T&V article, so we have to do a little detective work here and guessing at the precise questions, as we extrapolate the info found in the T&V article.
Condition of grounds: 44% Improved greatly or somewhat. 20% Gotten worse. 36% No difference. Summary: Less than half of the respondents thought the grounds had improved.
Response to service calls: 32% Improved since Tishman Speyer. 12% Gotten worse since Tishman Speyer. 56% No change. Summary: Only a third of respondents felt there was an improvement in service calls responses since Tishman Speyer days. (Remarkably, the T&V article spins this as Rose getting "a passing grade.")
Cleanliness: 19% Improved. 38% Worsened. 43% No change. Summary: Only 19% of respondents thought that Rose Associates had cleaned up Stuy Town/PCV better than Tishman Speyer.
Noise: 13% Improved. 38% Worsened. 49% No change. Summary: Only 13% of respondents thought that Rose Associates had dealt with the noise issue better than Tishman Speyer.
Dog Policies: 16% Better. 51% Worse. 33% No change. Summary: Only 16% of respondents thought that Rose was dealing with the dog issue better than Tishman Speyer. (Adam Rose's response to this is completely dumbfounding! "It seems very clear that the dog policy is fair and rational, and that most residents do not object to the way that it is being run." WTF!!!)
Laundry facilities: 8% Better. 55% Worse. 37% No change. Summary: Only 8% of respondents thought that the laundry facilities had improved since Tishman Speyer days.
Now let's head over the Kingsley survey, which was only mentioned by Rose AFTER the Garodnick survey was released.
Cleanliness: 2/3 of respondents stating that the state of cleanliness is either "good" or "excellent." (I'd love to see the breakdown here. Fat chance, I know. My hunch is that the majority of this 2/3 stated "good." From this, Adam Rose opines: "We are pleased to noted that two thirds of the PCV/ST tenants express happiness about the state of cleanliness...." [Emphasis mine.] Of course, it should be remembered we are talking about "respondents," as his survey is missing over 23,000 tenants voices, the vast majority of tenants living in ST/PCV.)
Security: More than 50% stating it was a major factor in their likelihood of renewing their lease. (It's not clear if this comes from the Kingsley survey, but I assume so.) On this survey, dogs were not an important issue as regards whether a tenant would renew a lease or not.
Bottom line is that both surveys, when combined, do no paint a favorable picture of the current management of Stuyvesant Town and Peter Cooper Village. I'll be doing a "grade report" on management soon, and I will be fair and balanced. Believe it or not.