Comment Policy

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.

NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog. Because of the anonymous nature of the commentary, specific agendas can be pushed by a sole individual and may not reflect a more popular belief by the residents of this community.

Thursday, January 9, 2014

Well, now that you mention it....

The TA-Garodnick lovefest continues....  Someone on the TA Facebook posted this as an example of Dan being in Albany fighting for tenants rights in NY, and asking if another poster was there with Dan.  First, let's watch this:



Now, how is that Roberts decision working out for ya? Previous market-rate tenants really aced it, didn't they? Their rents are now comparable to what true rent stabilized tenants are paying, aren't they? Everything worked out well for tenants, didn't it?

And, do you feel that tenant rights have been improved since the above speech?

Do you feel that CWCapital is being held accountable for the mismanagement going on here?

As for Dan showing up in Albany.... Bravo (truly), but it's his JOB to fight for the community and for tenants rights. His paycheck comes from doing things like this.

And as long as I have your attention, let me repeat my questions about Dan from a commentary post:

1) What does it say about Dan's influence in that he hasn't been able to get CWCapital to fix all of the problems created by Hurricane Sandy and still has to dump his garbage outside of his PCV building?

2) Is he not a major hypocrite in being against extending term limits and then using that extension to his own advantage?

3) Has he not supported the growth of high rises that mar the "postcard" nature of Manhattan, as in supporting "Vornado Tower" which will take away the view of the Empire State Building from the west? (Dan has, of course, received financial contributions from Vornado.)

4) After initially putting up a good fight did not Dan concede that CWCapital has a right to create business entities (ie, stores) around the Oval?

But, yes, he's a nice guy and pleasant to look at.

Thank you.

----------------------------

UPDATE: 1/10/14.  Defense of Dan on the TA Facebook:  "How can Dan, or any politician, change issues on private property?"

He showed that he could do something when he stood up, briefly, to CWCapital for its use of the Oval for business entities, but then he dropped the ball completely:

http://stuytownreport.blogspot.com/2012/04/what-zoning-regulations.html

As a lawyer, with a horde of lawyer compatriots behind him from his old law firm, Dan surely has much he can do legally to put pressure on CWCapital, yet, I believe, because the prize is tenant ownership of this complex, he doesn't want the process of potential conversion to remain in limbo in the courts due to any new lawsuits, etc. Look how long the Roberts case held everything in check before it was resolved. I believe that the TA has this same view, unfortunately. So we are allowing ourselves to be screwed because the hope is that one day in the near future the property will belong to its tenants.

It is amazing to think that Dan is really powerless regarding what's happening in his own building. While CWCapital is putting resources into building a new security office, concierge and management office--and continual wasteful "gardening"--it is proceeding at a snail's pace to finalize the work needed to be done in the PCV buildings affected by Hurricane Sandy. Is another year going to pass before Dan will be able to place his garbage in an appropriate place within his building, instead of outside of it?  I know if I were a city councilman (and a one-time hopeful city council speaker and possible future mayoral candidate), I would be pressing CWCapital so hard on this issue, that their balls would be popping out of their eye-sockets. New Yorkers need fighters who can be bastards when appropriate, who have the testicular fortitude to press on and on until a win is achieved, or if it's not, at least they will be bloodied and exhausted in the fight. Dan is too much of a pretty boy, with a pretty boy's nice guy "I'm a compromiser" attitude, to be such a fighter.
 

64 comments:

Anonymous said...

Right on target STR.

He may be a nice guy but constituent-wise he's basically ineffective.

Anonymous said...

Wow! Just wow! I hope he got his parade tickets from the TA for all his successes! Or some new skates for the rink! Or a free crab from the Greenmarket! He's connected! Wow!

Anonymous said...

Speaking of the TA, have you seen this gem on their Facebook page:

"Thomas Sevey has been repeatedly found to be in violation of the Moderation Policy. Posting racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise insensitive remarks will not be tolerated in this group. Past warnings and time outs have been made."

Sounds good so far.

"We have reluctantly decided to permanently ban him from the group."

If he was such a racist, sexist, homophobic jerk, why were they reluctant to let him go? And why did they allow him to behave this way for so long in the first place? Some leadership they show on that page.

Anonymous said...

"Thomas Sevey has been repeatedly found to be in violation of the Moderation Policy. Posting racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise insensitive remarks will not be tolerated in this group. Past warnings and time outs have been made."

So what did the poor guy say? I read the TA fb on a regular basis and I don't recall seeing any racist, homophobic blah blah comments by this Thomas Sevey. Maybe I just don't read it thoroughly enough. After all, it is full of very longwinded not very interesting posts.

Hippo said...

Danny Boy is basically an old school pol who has taken tens of thousands of dollars in campaign "contributions" from the real estate interests who seek unbridled "development" in the quest for the quick buck. Danny G gives lip service to the middle class concerns but in the final analysis he is in the pocket of the monied cabal that would put up a 30-story tower on the Oval if they could get away with it. Bottom line: He has done NOTHING to deal with the quality of life issues. Believe me, after his illegal third term is over he will reap a bonanza with a high-powered law firm and then hopefully fade into obscurity.

Anonymous said...

So every time someone posts something glowing or whatever about Dan G on the TA FB page, there's going be counter programming here on STR?

• I remember an angry guy at the mic a number of big TA meetings ago at the school on 20th St questioning Dan G about the skating rink on the Oval. Garodnick's response was that he'd look into it but that he hadn't gotten any calls to his office about it. And you know what, I believed him then and I believe him even more now. Commenting on a blog post is not the same thing to a pol as picking up the phone or getting out to do activist political stuff. I would posit that it was not at all obvious that there was a huge groundswell of opposition to the rink and Greenmarket anywhere other than this blog.

• The intra-RE fight over 15 Penn Plaza between Vornado and the owners of the Empire State bldg was over the iconography of the NY skyline and how much NYers cared about it. Apparently they didn't care as much as you and that was reflected in the City Council vote in favor by 47-1.

• NYers were not forced to override their own votes on term limits, but they cast ballots for Bloomberg's third term anyway, the hypocrites (I hate term limits). Voter apathy over this was so low that Garodnick faced no primary challenger for his third attempt and trounced his GOP rival by 70% in the general election. So if I were Dan G I would have run for a third term too.

As to the whys and wherefors of the ridiculously slow post-Sandy cleanup in ST and esp PCV, you reminded us that Dan G lives in PCV. So does the TA pres. Just for pure self interest, you'd think they'd do something about it. So why not? Is it because our faux owner's suuuuuper-sloooooow cleanup pace isn't breaking any laws or city ordinances? I honestly don't know. If you're really interested, why not take on the journalist role and ask Dan's office about it directly. I'd be interested in the response, maybe others too.

On an unrelated note. Who gives a damn about some guy named Thomas Sevey getting banned on the TA FB page except for TA FB regulars. Dragging grudge matches over here from other sites has a long history here on STR that I wish were ended.

Thank you.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>So every time someone posts something glowing or whatever about Dan G on the TA FB page, there's going be counter programming here on STR?<<

And why not? It's my blog. And, furthermore, I'm not allowed to post on the Facebook page as STR... or Lamont Cranston, so I can't add my two or three cents there.

As for your answers to Dan's problems, what you are basically saying is that the people don't care, so why should anyone else. That's doesn't fly with me. Sorry.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Garodnick's response was that he'd look into it but that he hadn't gotten any calls to his office about it. And you know what, I believed him then and I believe him even more now.<<

Gee, does he not read Town & Village? The rink and opposition to it were mentioned in the paper frequently. (Of course, this question could have come up before the rink was going to be actualized.)

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>The intra-RE fight over 15 Penn Plaza between Vornado and the owners of the Empire State bldg was over the iconography of the NY skyline and how much NYers cared about it. Apparently they didn't care as much as you and that was reflected in the City Council vote in favor by 47-1.<<

New Yorkers are beginning to wake up to the destruction of our skyline. (More news items are appearing about this.) Too late from some blocks, but maybe not too late for others. Dan, and the majority of the council, are on the wrong side of this issue.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>As to the whys and wherefors of the ridiculously slow post-Sandy cleanup in ST and esp PCV, you reminded us that Dan G lives in PCV. So does the TA pres. Just for pure self interest, you'd think they'd do something about it. So why not? Is it because our faux owner's suuuuuper-sloooooow cleanup pace isn't breaking any laws or city ordinances?<<

One would assume that the sluggish pace of the cleanup is "legal" until someone initiates a legal case against such a pace. It doesn't seem as if Dan is interested. At least we haven't heard him state that he is or that he has even investigated the possibility of such a case. As I wrote earlier, I wouldn't doubt that certain legal cases are not being brought up against CWCapital because they would cause a possible long time hold on condo conversion, which Garodnick and the TA are so enthusiastic about.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>So if I were Dan G I would have run for a third term too.<<

Then you would have been a hypocrite also--if you had voted against a term-limit extension, as Dan did.

So in his vote against term-limit extensions, Dan was denying the right of other council members to do exactly what he himself wound up doing!

Anonymous said...

I have called Dan G's office and complained about the skating rink and the commercialization of the grounds and actually spoke to the man himself. He gave me reassurances that he was "looking into it" and told me that he hoped that we eventually be able to buy the property. This was around the time when the rink first opened. I was reassured at the time, but now I know it was just lip service. He's a smoothie and he just really doesn't care about anything except buying this dump and getting business for his former law firm and the Brookfield RE company.

Anonymous said...

In addition to taking money from Vornado, Dan Garodnick took a lot of money from ST Owner LP through lobbyist George Arzt Communications Inc specifically for "Stuyvesant Town Initiatives". In other words ST Owner bought Dan Garodnick's silence so ST Owner can turn our buildings from residential to commercial for their Oval and First Ave Loop strip mall of businesses. We are lucky Dan Garodnick did NOT win the Speaker role! NYC would be one big strip mall with no residential gems as STPCV.

Anonymous said...

as for the skating rink - we tenants told the TA we opposed it and asked them TA to take that position forward. The TA replied with "the TA does not have a position yet". the
Ta then went and asked the politicians (garodnick) for his position the adopted garodnicks position as their. the TA refused to take the tenants position and chose to take the politicians position. the TA is a politician's association and not a tenants association.
what the TA should have done is replied to the TENANTS your position is ours and we will fight for tenants.

Anonymous said...

garodnick and the TA don't speed up CW because they are afraid of CW and are begging for CW to sell to them so they negotiated a position of "do whatever you want and we will help you keep it secret from the tenants by saying "the negotiations have to be secret" -

Garodnick and the TA approved the illegal commercial use of all oval buildings and the first ave loop.

tenants pushed back and demanded first ave loop remain residential forcing TA CW to get permission from the city to rezone Stuyvesant from residential to commercial. the TA and CW applied to rezone. The tenants are fighting it. call the dob and manhattan public advocate and tell them to keep stuyvesant town residential!
Public Advocate Letitia James (212) 669-7200

Anonymous said...

hippo
you are so right.
garodnick took tens of thousands$ from ST Onwer for"Stuyvesant Town Initiatives" through lobbyist George Arzt Communications. Its in the public records!

Anonymous said...

You are correct. Nobody cares about what TS said. What we do care about is the lapse in judgement of the TA who has SEVERAL moderators and let someone behave so offensively and for so long, do nothing about it, then say they are sorry to ban him. The do a poor job moderating the FB page and censor information, specifically about Dan Garodnick which is why there's a need for unfiltered conversation here.

Anonymous said...

January 10, 2014 at 12:14 PM
Dan got re-elected by some 70% of voters. They're not *his* problems, they're yours.

January 10, 2014 at 12:30 PM
I get the T&V every week. Anti-rink letters were not at all frequent. In fact the only one I recall was an angry after the fact letter from TA board member Jim Roth. You wanted to stop the skating rink? Easy, just overwhelm Dan G's office with phone calls , letters, and emails from residents across ST. That didn't happen. There was no groundswell of opposition from residents, so Garodnick and the city probably assumed that most residents either wanted it, or were OK with it. You may not like it, but it certainly didn't come back to bite him in the ass on election day so it seems like a smart call.

One further comment on this. Strategy matters in politics. At least one very smart commenter on this blog warned anti-rink people about bundling in the Green Market with the skating rink because it seemed to be pretty popular with tenants but all (s)he got for that effort was flames, not discussion.

January 10, 2014 at 12:35 PM
"New Yorkers are beginning to wake up to the destruction of our skyline?" Really, where is the evidence for that? Judging by the mayors race, average NYers are concerned about preserving affordable housing, our neighborhoods, longtime local businesses, etc. but apparently less so about preserving the skyline. As for historians, architects, and critics, they're still debating about whether to preserve the NYC skyline or letting it evolve. There's currently no consensus on the matter except in your own mind.

January 10, 2014 at 12:41 PM
You haven't heard, you wouldn't doubt, whatever. Why don't you just ask him, you've got a blog.

January 10, 2014 at 12:48 PM
Sure there's plenty of hypocrisy going around on term limits, including Dan G. You just choose to ignore the biggest hypocrites of all, the NYers who voted *yes+ to term limits and to Bloomberg's third term.




Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>"New Yorkers are beginning to wake up to the destruction of our skyline?" Really, where is the evidence for that?<<

Just Google it. Recently the NY Times also picked up on the mood.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>Sure there's plenty of hypocrisy going around on term limits, including Dan G. You just choose to ignore the biggest hypocrites of all, the NYers who voted *yes+ to term limits and to Bloomberg's third term.<<

New Yorkers said yes to term limits TWICE. That was their vote on term limits. The vote for Bloomberg had nothing to do with term limits. Oh, and he barely squeaked by, and if it wasn't for his money and the Democratic Party not fully supporting Thompson, Thompson probably would have won.

No matter how you want to deflect, Garodnick is a BIG HYPOCRITE.

Anonymous said...

What does the TA think they are going to accomplish with buying this nearly 70 year old dump? Flush out out all the college kids and transients and find 20,000 families to move in? The damage has been done and there's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube. Sure, they blow the whistle on important issues once in a while which aggravate CWCAPITAL but they don't bring change. Remember, it was the TA and Dan Garodnick who lead the tenants off the Roberts cliff. How many families had to move because they couldn't afford the rent hikes? The very families they want to attract to bring us back to the good ol days. Good work rubbing salt in the wounds of the working class.

Anonymous said...

January 10, 2014 at 6:37 PM

I did use Google. That's actually how I came across some interesting discussion on the subject of whether the NYC skyline should be preserved or allowed to evolve.

January 10, 2014 at 6:42 PM

What more you want from me? I conceded that Dan indeed was a hypocrite on this point. You insist on ignoring mine -- that 2 votes for term limits then a third term for Bloomberg says there's plenty of hypocrisy to go around.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>The damage has been done and there's no putting the toothpaste back in the tube.<<

Yeah, it's basically over. All we can do is hold on and not get shafted too much. Anyway, in 50 years time or so, I don't see these buildings as existing.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

I shouldn't be so negative. There is still a chance that with De Blasio things can turn around. But if he fails, that's it, I think. His replacement will be a mini-Bloomberg.

Anonymous said...

I am a tenant and I don't oppose the skating rink. Indeed, I told the TA that. So they listened to tenants--a lot of tenants like it, and they aren't all "narcissistic, entitled, evil yunnies" or the "stroller mafia" as some of you seem fixated on calling your neighbors. Some are very nice, quiet, long-term, polite tenants with rugs! Consensus isn't the standard or nothing would ever happen. We all don't agree on everything.

Anonymous said...

What they will end up doing is consolidating tenants into certain buildings and destroy and rebuild in other areas. Depending on what the air rights are in ST they can put a lot of people here.

Anonymous said...

"How can Dan, or any politician, change issues on private property?" on the TA facebook page is proof of two things

1. the TA is a messenger for Garodnick relaying his needs to tenants when they should be a messenger for tenants, relaying our needs to the politicians
and
2. Most of Garodnicks and politician's constituents live on and face issues on private property. if garodnick is professing his inability to help his constituents then he needs to leave public service.
politician's endeavors have effect on both private and public property. its bloody stupid to say politicians only effect public property. this is the TA most unintelligent defense of garodnick to date.
the stuy town reporter blogger is spot on.
and
politicians effect issues on private property thru policies and laws as on public property.
and that garodnick and his TA are saying he cant effect change as a politican and its on the residents doubles down on the stupidity as garodnick is also a resident of stpcv.
so TA, as a resident of stpcv what is garodnick doing to protect the property from illegal construction before it happens, from illegal rent increases before we lose our homes, etc?

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>I am a tenant and I don't oppose the skating rink. Indeed, I told the TA that. So they listened to tenants--a lot of tenants like it<<

Most tenants don't care and don't use the rink.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

>>What they will end up doing is consolidating tenants into certain buildings and destroy and rebuild in other areas<<

I think so, too. Eventually.

One way to get rid of the banging pipes problem, for sure.

Anonymous said...

Dear TA

STOP defending the politicians to the residents of STPCV.

START defending the residents of STPCV to the politicians!

or STEP DOWN!

You are destroying STPCV by pushing the politicians agenda on us. You should be pushing our agenda onto them.

Anonymous said...

to those saying cases are not brought up against CW out of fear of delaying sale of the property means that the TA and garodnick don't have the same level of tenacity as cw
and then
also are not fit to negotiate the purchase of the property. the reason to file legit cases and lawsuits on cw bad acts is 1. to right their bad acts and 2. to protect new buyer from same lawsuits due to bad acts by cw, 3. to strong arm a push for the sale, and 4. to leverage for a decrease purchase price.
one can always drop a lawsuit case if the other party makes amends.
to never file the court case is gross negligence.
there has got to be a better alternative for tenants to buy the property other than the garodnick TA weak-position fiasco.

Anonymous said...

There's approximately 30K tenants in Stuy Town. Do the math. How many use the rink? See.

The rink is popular to a niche group of residents and it's only here because Andrew MacArthur's kid suggested it. Thank god the kid isn't into archery!

Anonymous said...

from anonymous above "so TA, as a resident of stpcv what is garodnick doing to protect the property from illegal construction before it happens, from illegal rent increases before we lose our homes, etc"

let's include the $10+million spent on the business buildings in the Oval for the "amenities" and the 5+ million spent on new offices for the rose assoc now compass rock that includes office space for the ta.
$15+ million spent on new buildings that violate zoning and damage the integrity of STPCV while our plumbing is faulty and our building foundations are cracked. that $15 should have been spent on repairs but when we told garodnick of this misappropriation of money he chose to let it happen as it suits his agenda then brazenly published an article saying plumbing should be paid by an mci to tenants.
shame on you g!

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Could you fill us in about the article and Garodnick stating that plumping fixes should be paid by an MCI to tenants?

Anonymous said...

sure thing stuy town reporter -
we read it in town & village and
you informed us when you blogged about it on 11/14
http://stuytownreport.blogspot.com/2010/11/dan-garodnick-okay-with-hefty-mci.html
the article ran in town and village.

Last week's Town & Village contained an article about the value of ST/PCV. Titled "ST/PCV said to be worth 2.8B, but questions about plumbing remain," the article was troubling for two reasons: 1) The assessment of the worth of our complex had the complex's senior holder reps, CW Capital, "in charge" of conducting the appraisal, which completely invalidates a true appraisal of the property. That's like letting the Big Bad Wolf make an assessment of the safety of the woods for girls wearing red hoods. Let's hope no one is taken in by this scam. 2) The article mentions concerns about the plumbing in this complex and the possibility that "major repairs or upgrades" would be needed. Who would pay for this? Why the tenants, of course, with a significant MCI increase. Our Councilman Dan Garodnick's position? We quote from the article:

"In the event the plumbing system that services ST/PCV is in need of major repairs or upgrades, Garodnick said an MCI could be the way to deal with that, 'although nobody's ever enthusiastic about an MCI.'"

While the reality presented may be accurate, Garodnick's glib response is troubling, as it just about invites CW Capital to go for an MCI hit on tenants with our councilman's approval. It also places a potential wedge issue between those who seek conversion, who would definitely want an MCI upgrade, and those pro-rent stabilized tenants who would not want another MCI hitting their wallets.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

We're going back a few years. LOL. I forgot about this! One more thing to thank Dan for!

Anonymous said...

yup - 1 more thing to thank dan for that contains half dozen reasons NOT to buy into a garodnick TA CW negotiated purchase.
TA prospers
CW prospers
Garodnick and his lawyer and brookstone buddies prosper
NYC tenants lose
its a bad deal years in the making
we need a new deal on the table

Anonymous said...

The Tenants Association also gave up on their protests of the mid-lease Roberts Case rent hikes overnight. If it weren't for a few of very dedicated long term Stuy Town residents, there would have been no presence at all.

Anonymous said...

It amazed me how Dan Garodnick has a job in politics considering how defiled his own front door is.

Anonymous said...

I HATE THE RINK ANND CAMT WAIT FOR THE, TO BOX IT UP AND STUFF IT BACK INTO THR FLOODED BADEMENT FROM WCH IT CAME FROM. IR MAKES TP TOO MUCH NOISE AND THE KIDS ATE TERRIBLE DLATERS WJICH IS WJY ALL I HEAR IS OOOWWW AND WWWAAAH ALL DAY LONG FROM THEIR SCREAMING EVETUDIME THEYRE DOUGHY LITTLE DUFFS CRACK THE ICE CANT WE PUT SONETUING QUIET THERE LIKE A BUNCH OF TREES SPED EVEYRHING HERE HAVE TO BE A NEW JERSEY MALL EXPERIENCE ITS TAVLT AJD DIAGRACEFIL AJD WHO DIDMT SWEBRHAT COMING MONSTER MACARTHURS CHILDTEK OF THE CIRK SUGGESTED IT

Anonymous said...

with each day and every year the list of reasons not to buy our apartment under the garodnick brookstone ta cw deal gets longer and stronger.
shame.
we loved living here.
thanks dan.

Anonymous said...

Hear! Hear! @ 11:20

The TA and Dan Garodnick let us down. I had hopes for the TA when they infused some younger members last year or the year before, but they are doing little to help us. Some minor victories on minor QOL issues then they go invisible for six months hard at work on their ill fated scheme to buy this place. No thanks! What they SHOULD be doing is launching a very public investigation into the accounting department for all of the "accidental mistakes" such as non deposited rent checks immediately followed by an order to vacate and the dozens of other ways CWCAPITAL intimidates us on a monthly basis. Instead, they.... I don't even know what the TA does anymore. They have a Facebook page... and...an archaic web site... and...

Anonymous said...

CAPS, are you off the meds again? Reading you last comment reminded me of the time my daughter dropped her box of alphabet magnets on the floor.

Anonymous said...

Yes, so cute, the gimmicky ALLCAPS with bad spelling. So funny, yes, I'm so artistic.

Anonymous said...

yes Hear Hear - you are spot on. We need a very public investigation into the CW ST Owner accounting covered by the WSJ who started coverage when they published CW monthly take!

We need the Attorney General to investigate the accounting practices.

Every tenant needs to take 15 minutes and go to DHCR to get a Rent History on their apartment because most tenants are being overcharged. Don't go to the TA on a rent overcharge - go straight to DHCR 25 Beaver Street NY NY!

And the TA needs to either step down or step up to the plate because they are precisely as you described them.

Hear Hear!

Anonymous said...

Don't hold your breath, the TA won't step up.

Anonymous said...

wow - a lot of good comments. the TA is dead wrong on a lot of stuff.
including that politicians / dan should have implemented many things for the homes of these 30,000 new york city residents, when the property went into foreclosure.
he should have gotten court orders eg limit what overseer can do so no harm is done. from the above the politicians should have protected the homes of 30,000 people with a court order that money spent on the property goes to the infrastructure ONLY and not to frivolous new buildings for amenities.
$15+ million dollars spent on installing a strip mall in what was once an 80 acre park of homes is grossly stupid especially while the homes are in need of plumbing work! how greedy and stupid are these people?!
good lord - you don't build a home office when your house needs updates plumbing.

especially when your home is smack in the middle of one of the biggest office filled cities in the world.
STPCV used to look like upscale tree park with homes, families, community.
now it looks like an industrial wasteland downscale low class strip mall.
and soon it will look like every other overdeveloped block in nyc unless these greedy scheisters are stopped.
what did they promise the TA - a big corner office in their $5million new office to go with their oval gym across the the ta president's home?
time for a new TA that truly represents the tenants and not the politicians.
time for an owner who prioritizes the people living in stpcv and the integrity of the property rather than the get rich quick schemes of already filthy rich overseers.
time for a new council man - bye dan. you did us wrong.
time for a new purchase proposal on the table because the TA CW agreement with Dan and Brookstone will bankrupt not only the property but also all those who buy into it.

this is pure greed by the TA CW!
shame on TA CW!

Anonymous said...

the TA quietly slipped notices under doors in CW style inviting tenants from 272 274 276 278 280 300 first avenue to a meeting to "discuss" the office construction and pretended to invite the local pols garodnick hoylman kavanagh (who obviously didnt show up for the fake meeting) and invited cw compass rock although cw compass rock were not guests but actually they ran the meeting!

the TA oct 7 2013 invitation was a trick to get us to attend a CW Compass Rock meeting (see article link below).

when we arrived it was clear this was a trick by the TA as they had CW Compass Rock run the meeting with the TA speaking up here and there to make sure we don't oppose the CW Compass Rock plan.

the TA lied to us.

the TA also did NOT bring the construction plans but instead gave us a lot of lip service and more lies. they had the plans but didnt want to show us them.

shady shady.

don't trust the TA!

and don't attend a TA meeting its a trick to get you to attend a CW Compass Rock meeting!

mad as heck they did that to us!

http://town-village.com/2013/10/18/cw-talks-plans-for-new-management-office/

Anonymous said...



Would like to hear from those who have contacted DHCR.

I'm going this week. Between the lousy way they handle tenant problems on this property, and the high overpriced costs on our apartment now, I know they're overcharging. Advice needed on how to proceed.

Anonymous said...

HOW TO DHCR

very easy to proceed with dhcr. they are nice and professional.

short subway trip to 25 beaver street (bring id for lobby security who will give you the floor number)

ask at window for a "rent history" on your apartment.
they will print it while you wait. takes only a few minutes. is only a few pages.

at first glance you will see the increases each year and immediately be able to tell if the increase is greater than allowed. dhcr can help with this too while you are there.

after looking at your rent history if you are being overcharged, while you are there ask them for an "overcharge complaint". its short and easy to do this.

every tenant should do this.

a neighbor in a rent stabilized apartment was being overcharged (exceeded 6% cap on mci's and compounded mci charges). they were being overcharged almost $1000 each year.

a neighbor in a market rate apartment was paying over $4000 per month only to learn the previous tenant was rent stabilized at $1200. they were being overcharged by over $2000 per month.

ALL, rent stabilized and market payers should go to DHCR and get a rent history on your apartment!


Anonymous said...

that the TA doesn't inform and empower all tenants on how to check their rent charges and protect themselves from illegal deregulation when its well documented in the press illegal deregulation is rampant in stpcv is deceitful.

its easy to get a rent history and to navigate the dhcr.

how is it the TA doesn't have a web page with this basic wisdom for all tenants? the TA should be empowering the tenants. what are they doing?

Anonymous said...

@11:16 Scolding young women who wear bikinis on the Oval.

Anonymous said...

I would like to respond to January 12, 2014 at 8:12 AM.

I live in one of the buildings directly affected by the location of the new management office and was the guy who "quietly slipped notices under doors in CW style" in my building for the TA. It sounds like the commenter is trying to insinuate something by that. Are you?

In addition to these flyers, I got an email blast about the meeting. So did everyone else in the affected buildings who are on the TA's blast email list.

Both TA notices said the meeting was "To Discuss New Management Office In 276 First Ave and Its Potential Impact on Residents, Green Space and Playground #8." It ended on this -- "We think it advisable at this time to organize residents of the potentially affected buildings which surround the proposed site to share information."

And that is exactly what the meeting was about, sharing info. So I'm not sure why the commenter is "mad as heck they did that to us." 

I actually attended the meeting, along with about 30 others, tops. No way were 100 people there. John Marsh and Susan Steinberg ran the meeting. First CW Cap reps gave a presentation. The CW Cap reps neglected to bring visuals -- the architect's plans -- but they where very clear in describing what the plans are. The above commenter charges that the TA had the plans, but "didnt want to show us them." That's a pretty nasty accusation that should be backed up.

Then Marsh and Steinberg ran the questioning session. I was one of a number of hostile questioners. The subject hit again and again was other possible locations for the new mgmt office, including Security's old location on 14th St between Aves B and C. All of the least obtrusive locations discussed were on the flood plain. I'm not happy about it at all, but see no other options other than something on or near First Ave.

As for the structure itself. CW Cap reps were hit hard and repeatedly on it, especially the roof, skylights, and ventilation system. Who know if we made an impact, but we tried. That's all we could do. And that's all the TA could do, provide a forum for us to hear from CW Cap about their plans and for us to respond. Unfortunately, the rest was up to DOB and they approved the plans.

Anonymous said...

"Unfortunately, the rest was up to DOB and they approved the plans."

Was this the Bloomberg DOB or the DeBlasio DOB? If it was the Bloomberg-run agency, maybe these plans should be revisited by the new administration.

Anonymous said...

I agree with the poster that the TA website is archaic. Not so much with some of the other comments.

* One says Garodnick "should have gotten court orders eg limit what overseer can do so no harm." That's asking the impossible. City Council reps aren't in the business of foreseeing what landlords may do to their properties in the future and then getting court orders to thwart these future possibilities. Even when dealing with the present, how reasonable is it to assume the court would issue orders for Garodnick every time the landlord does something legal to the property that we don't like?

Also, there are laws to prevent illegal construction by landlords. What illegal construction is happening in ST-PCV?

* Since the Attorney General stepped in to smack down CampusRock for their reps lying to tenants about mid-lease increases, there's been a series of calls for the AG to do everything under CampusRock's sun. Now a commenter on this thread want the AG to oversee their accounting dept. And for the TA to step down. Is (s)he then volunteering to step up? I wouldn't count on it. See my next two paragraphs.

• The comment about TA "giving up on their protests of the mid-lease Roberts Case" rent hikes is flat wrong. I was one of those "dedicated long term Stuy Town residents" who kept it going. We gave up not because of lack of support from the TA. We gave up because of lack of support from other tenants.

• The comment about the TA prospering while tenants suffer is ridiculous. I volunteered to hand out stuff one of the freezing nights in front of the PCV building where CampusRock was trying to get residents to sign away their right to file PARs in response to the 3 latest MCIs. All of the people with me were either on the TA board or building captains. After we wrapped I went home to grab a late dinner. The board members went home to conference call about some other problem. Not out for drinks or to the Bahamas.

• The issue of old plumbing is real. But it's not going to be addressed by CWCapital on their way out the door when a plumbing MCI increase on rent bills is years away and doesn't impact property value now, when they want to sell.

Changing how long MCIs are paid for ought to be made a huge issue for Gov Cuomo in the upcoming election. It will only be one if tenants make a big stink about it. I don't think most of us would object to MCIs if they weren't fixed to our base rents. It would be another story if they were temporary and only covered the cost of the MCI.



Anonymous said...

I was at that "meeting" last October.
It was run by CW just like the news article reported.
I too felt they were evasive and tricked us into being there for no good reason when they refused to show the plans.
It was very clear they didnt bring the plans on purpose.
The meeting was strange.
It was the Tenants versus CW TA
Tenants wanted an existing location for the new offices.
CW TA wanted new offices built.

Anonymous said...

I disagree with you January 12 2:01 pm.
I've read the comment thread twice.

Rezoning our property from Residential to Commercial is something all STPCV should be aware of and not just those few buildings.

Spending that much money on an office while I still don't have a basement is something PCV should have been invited to and not just those few buildings.

It was quietly done. I heard nothing and feel I should have been involved.

Putting the office in the 6 buildings where kids run around and across of a playground and not near a garage is something every parent should have been involved with. Who hasn't been run down by their vehicles going the wrong way on a sidewalk.

I worked at MetLife - they never would have mixed the pedestrian and vehicle walkways with offices on First Ave Loop and worse Security Office in the Oval in between 3 playgrounds.

The reconfiguring of STPCV involves us all. We all should have been invited and involved. So I feel it was done quietly.

And what does this do to the purchase price - the new offices. Anyone thinking of purchasing their apartment should have been involved in your meeting.

Your invitation was too quietly done.

Anonymous said...

I was at that meeting. The TA sided with CW.
The TA isn't supposed to be a secretarial administrator event planner role where they provide forums.
That isn't all they could do.
They did a lot before that meeting collaborating with CW on these offices.
They only provided the forum to make it look like they were addressing the tenants outrage while not getting outraged themselves.
If they opposed the construction there is a lot more they could do if they were a "President" and "Chairman" of a "Board of Directors".
Hasn't anyone ever been to a Board meeting and witnessed the power of a Board of Directors? A Board Of Directors doesn't provide talk forums. Seriously if that is the best and all these guys could do - then we need a real Board of Directors and President and Chairman.
The TA CW could and should put the offices in an existing space. Anonymous 2:01 has a great idea putting the offices on 14th street.
Fact is TA CW want new offices and they want them above their new industrial metal storefronts for their srip mall design and never considered any other location, never explored other alternatives.

Anonymous said...

2:01 p.m. "The CW Cap reps neglected to bring visuals -- the architect's plans -- but they where very clear in describing what the plans are."

Can you elaborate? Are they taking away the playground? The whole open space in the middle? Blocking the whole walkway? Will it be a whole new structure? What will be there?

Anonymous said...

2:01 PM here again.

To the poster who insists that the invitation was too quietly done.

Please read more carefully. They were not *MY* invitations. I just distributed them under doors for the TA in my building. Building captains in the other affected buildings distributed them in theirs.

And an email blast went around to all the buildings affected.

But you heard nothing because live in PCV and are not directly affected. The decision to limit the meeting to those buildings that were directly affected seemed OK to me. It still seems OK to me, you are not gonna be put out by having a crappy roof with skylights sticking out of your building and backyard.

The did its job done getting the word out. I pushed this meeting hard in my building and only a couple of people attended. Only one person bothered to ask how it went after the meeting. Maybe now that it's on a blog people will get interested.

Anonymous said...

5:50 asks a lot of questions. Why so curious? Do you live in one of the buildings affected? Why didn't you attend?

Answers,

Playground remains as is (but will be closed during construction).

Open space going from 274 to where Belgian bricks are is gone. There will be a roof jutting up a bit covered in grass in its place. It will have skylights. There will be an exit.

Walkway on playground side of Belgian bricks remains.

Anonymous said...

10:04--not that I need to explain myself as a fellow resident, but no, I don't live in those exact buildings and obviously never even heard about it until that ugly fence went up or I wouldn't be asking. Of course I'm curious, I live here, I walk through and enjoy that open space all the time. But thank you for your answers. I didn't want crazy rants about "TA CW" or Dan Garodnick betraying us or someone deliberately misspelling in ALLCAPS as some sort of personality statement. I just wanted real information. Thanks again.

Anonymous said...

I am really surprised by the comments on these posts. I've only had very positive experiences with Dan and his staff.

Anonymous said...

Oh he's pleasant enough. He just does NOTHING for his constituents.