Comment Policy

All comments to posts have to await approval. Approval does not happen immediately. NOTE: Comments reflect the opinions of the person writing them and should not be assumed to reflect the opinion of the blog.

Management has two priorities: 1) Making sure money is made, hence upgrading and filling up apartments is their goal. "Amenities" are important in selling the place, though few residents use them. 2) If someone needs medical attention, Public Safety will be there, if alerted.

Quality of life issues are not that important, however. They tend to be ignored, despite "the rules." So you will see a lot that isn't taken care of properly, and complaints will be met with a creative excuse and a smile.

"Peace and quiet" must be a cruel joke, though this property is sold that way. There can be no peace and quiet as ALL apartments must be upgraded, which includes the installation of an AC unit below the window. Aside from the continual construction about the neighborhood, there is a new and noisy subway extension being built along East 14 st and the shut down of the L line. "Choosing" to live in NYC, now the newest mantra, is a fabrication when the talk is of ST and PCV, which was traditionally quiet, with no construction noise.

Though money was always important, it is now more important than ever. Money rules many things, as you will find.

At this point, 30 years into living here and seeing many things, I can state that Management and their reps are BS-ing us. I can't say that loudly enough: We are being BS-ed. I don't see any genuine change. Sorry.

Wednesday, May 21, 2014

Another summary

Each day, it seems, we get a summary of the potential sale of ST/PCV.  This one is pretty thorough:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-19/fortress-circling-nyc-s-stuyvesant-town-draws-sale-closer.html

Note this, however:

In November 2012, CWCapital and MetLife reached an agreement to settle litigation by tenants alleging rent overcharges. There are 4,311 apartments whose rents are restricted under the settlement, reached after the state Court of Appeals found that tax breaks received by the former owners limited their rights to raise rents to the market rate, said Alexander Schmidt of the law firm Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, which represented the tenants in court.

The restrictions would expire starting in June of 2020, as each lease runs out, and the landlord would then be entitled to a market rent, Schmidt said. A renter who renews his lease that May for two years would remain rent restricted until 2022, he said.

“Between June of 2020 and May of 2022, they’ll be rolling off unit by unit,” he said in a phone interview. 

The above doesn't take into account the very real possibility of rent-stabilization renewal.  All apartments in ST/PCV are currently rent-stabilized. There'd be a lot of howling if such a renewal didn't happen.

59 comments:

Anonymous said...

Can't wait for this one! Another round of B.S.

Anonymous said...

A sale will definitely happen. For any tenant group, the operative lines are: "the outcome remains cloudy, Credit Suisse Group AG analysts said in a May 14 report. The potential for tenants, city politics or additional bidders to intervene make an immediate sale unlikely, they said."
We need to make bidders think long and hard about the type of plan they'll offer and the level of affordability.

Anonymous said...

I thought that it was a specific term of the Roberts settlement that brought those units umder stabilization until theJ-51 expired, at which point they return to market rate. Isn't there llanguage in those lease riders that says that ?

Anonymous said...

There'll be howling as usual. Be warned - we will not have RS and if we do - slews of m c i charges.

Anonymous said...



Aren't Mci charges a beautiful thing? What a way for landlord to increase the RS rents set forth by housing association.

Anonymous said...

Albany, HELP, PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Albany = politicians = dhcr = NOT THE TENANTS

Anonymous said...

By that point, the sink hole in my building will have spread, sucking down the rest of the property.

Anonymous said...

J-51 Rider Language last paragraph:

"It is understood and agreed, and the tenant acknowledges, that it has been informed by the owner that as of the expiration date of the tax benefit period... the tenants apartment will no longer be subject to rent regulation... The tenants apartment will be deregulated as of said date."

June 20, 2020 is the date. Upon the termination of the lease after that date, the apartment returns to deregulated status.

It's why I've always been saying that my apartment is not 'rent stabilized' but rather it is governed by RS law only until 6/20/20.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Oh, so this talk about all apartments in ST/PCV being RS is crafty bullshit, because eventually the Roberts apartments go back to being real MR and lose their RS status no matter what.

Anonymous said...

We all need to start thinking about what can happen and what we can do. If the winning developer goes the luxury rental route, then expect more churn, more student rentals, more MCIs. We need to demonstrate, make as much trouble as possible, get as much bad press as possible for the developer. If the developer goes conversion, are the prices far from affordable? If so, demonstrate. It's as bad as luxury rentals because the developer will hold the majority on the governance board and both buyers and renters will be at the mercy of the developer. Which may not mean more student rentals in this case, but definitely will mean more MCIs to push out the renters. There's only one real hope. If the units are affordable, the tenant-buyers might immediately occupy at least 51% of the units and that way we'd have shot at controlling our own fates.

Anonymous said...

I heard the Fortress pitch to its prospective equity investors today. The short of it is that Fortress intends to keep the place as a rental property. I don't think this surprises many of you.

Anonymous said...

3:51 Re: J-51 rider....
Are you saying there is some rider very specific to STPVC? Otherwise, there are cases around this stuff: http://www.rosenbergestis.com/New-York-Law-Journal-Articles/What-Happens-When-J-51-Benefits-End-010412.pdf

My reading of Schiffren with respect to STPCV is that when the J-51 benefits run out, all the apartments will be subject to luxury deregulation. Which means if the base rent is over $2000 and the combined income of the renters is over $175K per year, the unit is deregulated.

Anonymous said...

How could units be affordable if Fortress is paying 4.7 billion?

Anonymous said...

That is why it was so important the so called Tenant Association not be complicit with using mci's to raise rent rolls and unfairly so against RS tenants. The Tenant Association set a very bad precedent with this very bad mci negotiation. They showed their true colors yet again. They should have fought and set a better precedent.

Anonymous said...

4:44...I wrote this on the prior post. Even if a conversion were done with 4.7B paid, any developer would make a huge profit while still offering the units at affordable prices.

Here's a little math to consider. Let's say after a conversion 1/2 of the units aren't bought. We have 1BR, 2BR, 3BR and 5BR here. If I use an average of 900K as the market rate per unit (pretty low), 5550 units sold at this rate comes out to $4.995B. Not including money from rents or money from commercial spaces. Now factor in the money from the units sold.
At $400K avg per unit, that comes to over $2.2B. So you can see that a developer has a lot of leeway even bidding close to $5B and charging 'reasonable insider prices', the developer still stands to make $2-3B over 20 yrs. So in the end the winning developer could make a great profit and still have great relations with the community just by charging affordable prices. Or the developer could go toward the greedy side by charging more to buy. In which case the tenants have the option of trying to make the developer's life a public hell

Anonymous said...

4:25PM...Not surprised that Fortress wants to keep this place rental. CW knows the internals and the success of MCIs, renting to students and churning. This is why there need to be rallies and demonstrations now. And this is where the TA has done us and itself damage. In this, the MCIs aren't nearly as important as the TA's dumb alliance with Brookfield. What can the TA say under these circumstances...go with our predatory developer rather than theirs? Especially when we know that there are other conversion plans that have been proposed that are more tenant friendly than Brookfield's. No! A good TA would be rallying the community to demonstrate and support all plans that clearly favor tenants and end the rapacious speculation around this place.

Anonymous said...

and what does the MCI deal mean for tenants who moved in november 1, 2013?

Are charge in the rent or is that additional coming?

Anonymous said...

Bring back Al Doyle!

Anonymous said...

"Which means if the base rent is over $2000 and the combined income of the renters is over $175K per year, the unit is deregulated."

Amount caps now as per the last NYS RS renewal (6/24/2011) was $2,500 and $200,000 respectively.

http://www.nyshcr.org/Rent/factsheets/orafac26.htm

True that any apartment right now above those caps will lose NYS RS protections including the right to renew one's lease. If the NYS RS law is allowed to sunset in 6/2015, ALL PCVST apartments become MR since the RS law is no longer active. We will need to control both NYS houses (a plus 10 Democratic Party majority in the NYS Senate due to the DINO gang of 5) plus Cuomo (who not our friend but he will be reelected) in the 2014 elections for true rent regulation reform, MCI’s and the status of J-51 Roberts apartments.

Anonymous said...

Do the new -er tenants get automatic renewals or ?

IOW - can the landlord not renew should they wish to ....?

Anonymous said...

Why there's no point in playing softball with developers. Years ago I worked in a nerve-racked, show business-heavy building. One day a guy got on a crowded elevator smoking a cigarette. As the door starting closing, I asked the guy to put out his cigarette. He turned to me and said "Do you think I really give a fuck?" So far as developers are concerned with respect to 'community', that's what we're dealing with. It's time to start playing hardball now.

Anonymous said...

"Do the new -er tenants get automatic renewals or ?

IOW - can the landlord not renew should they wish to ....?"

One of the protections of RS (which we all are at the moment, the Roberts decision notwithstanding) is that the landlord must offer a renewal lease. In the market-rate world, a landlord doesn't have to renew your lease.

"what does the MCI deal mean for tenants who moved in november 1, 2013?"

The agreement covers everyone living here when the agreement was signed (April 17, 2014).

According to the handout from the TA at the 5/10 meeting, non-Roberts tenants paying a preferential rent (less than the legal rent) get 100% of the retroactive waived, and 100% of the permanent MCI will be credited for the duration of their tenancy.

Tenants who move in after April 17, 2014 (the date of the agreement), pay the full MCI.

Anonymous said...

If Fortress pitched keeping it rental it is a strategy move my guess until they have complete ownership and some ongoing matters behind them too late for anyone to do anything about - then they will go condo coop. Doubtful it is a long term genuine intention. these guys say what serves them best in that moment then acts contradictory when optimal time to get away with it. They are probably posturing which is another word for lying - posturing is a very common a practice used by politicians and lawyers and shifty business people who are trying to get away with something.
Posturing is rarely used by people or businesses or the very rare politician or lawyer of good intention.

Anonymous said...

well said 8:39 pm

Anonymous said...

It's too funny.

CWC gives the TA the runaround and maybeeeee we'll let you buy the place, and maybeeeee....

keeping the TA very busy and very well behaved. LOL - They're NEVER GOING TO SELL THIS PLACE TO TENANTS.

They're playing the TA and even a 10 year old could have figured this out by now!

Stuy Town Reporter said...

If the ultimate future of the complex is the bulldozing of the buildings and the erection of a new high-rise city here, why would the seller or buyer of this place want it to go tenant condo-conversion?

Anonymous said...



9:53 am

huh? what strategy - they will be the owners - we all know this. It will remain rental, why wouldn't they keep it that way? All is on their side.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Albany + politicians + dhcr = NOT THE TENANTS

Anonymous said...

Same boss as the old boss. We have absolutely ZERO say in anything that goes around here unless presented with an official contract to do something. Everything else is a waste of time to even think about it. OVAL LAWN BATHING SUITS, HERE WE GO AGAIN. ISN'T EVERYONE HAPPY NOW?
I'M NOT!

Anonymous said...

There's not going to be any bulldozing. These RE guys are all about money now. The whole corporate world lives quarter to quarter now. And if the land itself were such a big deal, just take a look at the prime empty lot between 38th and 41st on 1st. No building since they took down the old Con Ed station in 2006. If we stay rental, it's because of the elevated rents. Expect more students and MCIs. That's the game.

Anonymous said...

As the quality of life continues to drop around here.

Anonymous said...

We need the TA to be more supportive of extending and strengthening rent regulations and overturning the MCI laws. I know there are other organizations that work to such ends and I support them, but the Tenants Association here needs to be more aggressive about these issues instead of brooking on a damned conversion.

Anonymous said...

CW works like bloody hell to get the the rents jacked up, and then CW's parent company steps in based on inside information and offers a luxury rental plan. Anyone else get the feeling we're all being jobbed here?

Anonymous said...

Who says the TA is working on a conversion? I think they gave up a while ago.

Anonymous said...

Nothing will change. Until the people yammering away all day in comments get off their duffs and actually do something, other than complain, we're screwed. The TA won't save us. Handsome Dan won't save us. And neither would Al Doyle if he were still with us. Screwed.

Anonymous said...

8:19 You forgot to say if we don't individually save ourselves. Because if we individually save ourselves, collectively we will save Us. We are not helpless. We need to help ourselves and force those in positions who are not doing their jobs to do their jobs! (local politicians, ta boards, dhcr,) .

Anonymous said...



Noticed yesterday that some of the Yelp reviews have been removed from the site.

Anonymous said...

8:19
Nothing will change until we stop expecting others to do things for us.
If ever the books were cooked, the PCVST rent roll is certainly cooked. We need to correct overcharges, roll back our apartments, take back our community. We are responsible for our destiny.
It is our own fault for putting our lives in the hands of others even though it was their responsibility to handle these matters. They failed us.
Our only hope is for us is to take over and be responsible for ourselves.

Tommyboyardee said...

The line in the sand has been drawn, time for Mayor DeBlasio to put up or shut up!

Anonymous said...

This place gets worse by each and every passing day. What sucker would pay all this money to live hear is beyond me. I can't wait to see " Central Park" in my back yard (oval) this weekend. Nobody cares, nobody cares, nobody cares............................ And neither should you.

Anonymous said...

So does the landlord pay any taxes on this income from our checks?

what is J51 exempting them from EXACTLY?

this is entirely and totally ___ED up. i PAY over 3800$ to live here every month and none of this goes to nyc or nys?

Anonymous said...

OK, so first there were those who kept saying nothing's going to happen. Now it's clear something IS going to happen. Now there are some who say it's not worth caring. That's a great position for any developer to hear. They love tenants who don't care and do nothing. So it comes down to this. We have no one on our side. Politicians, media, even the TA. And the community is as apathetic as any. Also there's only one leverage point. Rallies, demonstrations that are very public. The media will report those. And with media attention, there will be political attention. Because de Blasio especially would look like an complete hypocrite if he didn't respond once there was visible media attention. But somebody has to organize the rallies. It should be the TA. But the TA won't do it. So who is willing to step up?

Anonymous said...

"Our only hope is for us is to take over and be responsible for ourselves."

And how, exactly, do we do that? Don't keep putting out this "Do it yourself" mantra unless you have some concrete suggestions.

Anonymous said...

All the new yelp reviews certainly make up for any missing ones. The truth hurts, doesn't it, you scum sucking leeches at CompostHeap Management?

Anonymous said...

Is anyone else disturbed by the thefts last year and Frank Scala's story about his watch stolen then mysteriously returned on his door knob in a plastic bag indicating there is communication between several involved parties in the thefts? I remember when the thefts were reported no one did anything to protect the tenants. The TA sent a message that tenants must give over keys but did not push for local politicians to amend the law putting severe criminal punishment for misuse and abuse of the keys and tighter language on restrictions on how, who, and how many people can use the keys. Am I correct that no lawmakers have done anything after that rash of thefts, no new laws, no due punishment for giving out keys to our homes?
Just continued carte blanche to abuse, harass, steal, and put our safety and the safety of our homes at risk.

Stuy Town Reporter said...

Yelp has a seemingly erratic system where some reviews are bounced and others kept. Algorithms and all that stuff. I can assure anyone that CW doesn't have a say in what stays up or stays down. Businesses that are reviewed on Yelp frequently bitch about it and the negative reviews they get.

Anonymous said...

10:31 am I am just agreeing with a lot of people who have said we need to stand up for ourselves. alot of people have posted a lot of different ways for each of us to do so - just read the blogs and stop attacking tenants already. You seem to think of yourself as smart - so why don't you put a few suggestions out there as several other people have put many. Just read the blog already.

Anonymous said...

"Who says the TA is working on a conversion? I think they gave up a while ago"

Uh......they did, about a week ago.

Anonymous said...

"huh? what strategy - they will be the owners - we all know this. It will remain rental, why wouldn't they keep it that way? All is on their side."

I think all was on Robbie's side when he took ownership of this project. Ask him how it turned out.

Anonymous said...

Are we to understand that after years of CW Compass Rock Fortress gutting the property to increase profit through commercialization and gutting the apartments through evictions to increase the rent roll with the local politicians and tenant association going along with it all and helping CW by keeping it secret from tenants and quieting tenants who spoke up - that after years of all that it was so that Fortress could buy PCVST. I hope Brookfield et al get what they deserve for betraying tenants for years. Nothing. CW is not laughing at tenants for speaking up. They are laughing at those who went along and betrayed the tenants for a promise of $.

Anonymous said...

3;15 pm - What? They were going to sell it to them all along. Nothing to do with their nonsense..

??? post makes no sense.

Anonymous said...

Many students choose Stuy Town because brokers often offer the apartments as no-fee rentals, and a majority of the listings on NYU’s off-campus housing registry are Stuy Town apartments.

Stuy Town has more perks than problems, and the student community in the complex continues to grow.

http://www.nyunews.com/2013/03/07/stuy-town/

Does anyone know how many apartments have been converted to dorm rooms? The DOB lists hundreds possibly thousands that have been converted. Anyone know the full count?

Anonymous said...

http://www.nyu.edu/life/living-at-nyu/on-campus-living/explore-the-residencehalls/grad-halls.html

Did NYU get billed its fair share for its block of apartments in the mci negotiations?

Anonymous said...

1-bedroom flex units (meaning the units either have or are equipped for pressurized walls that cut into the living space with additional bedrooms) in the apartment community Stuyvesant Town will very comfortably house two people for around $7,000 per semester. However, a 2-bedroom flex unit in Stuyvesant Town, which will house three people comfortably, rents for around $6,000 a semester each. Stuyvesant Town also includes all utilities in the price of rent, so the only additional fees you need to worry about are cable and internet.

Read more: Sexiling or Bedbugs? On-Campus Vs. Off-Campus Housing · NYU Local http://nyulocal.com/on-campus/2010/11/01/sexiling-or-bedbugs-on-campus-vs-off-campus-housing/#ixzz32ZcigQ1E
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

Anonymous said...

You know CWC is lol all the way @ the completely dysfunctional family here.

They may have created this, but you are certainly confirming it. Don't let them divide us - that's how they conquer.

Anonymous said...

Can someone please explain to me how the DHCR can approve some apts paying mci's and other not. I get that it was in the agreements that all parties agreed to but my question is how can the DHCR agree to something that certainly seems discriminatory? Is it somehow not discriminatory? The reasoning that "Fake R/S apts are already charged high rents" doesn't seem, to me, to be a valid or legal reason for doing this. Is it the kind of thing that if the DHCR views the TA as a representative of ALL tenants, and they are of with this deal than it's ok to do it? How exactly does this help a real R/S tenant who has no intention of ever buying a unit in this project? Above and beyond the nullifying of the retroactive portion, which in the grand scheme of things is paltry compared to the extra rents we now have to pay as a result of the mci's. Not to mention that extra rent being figured into all future increases.

Anonymous said...



Stop talking about buying, there's no buying except for a corporate landlord.

And above and beyond the unfair Mci increases ; what's worse is the 'renovated' units that are now fetching close to 4k when grandma just left and paid $1k a month. .. Really? You know that DHCR approved that, yet you don't care. Why is that?

Anonymous said...



9 :03 What? Who says we're not paying it? I am a MR tenant and i'm getting a new bill lately with Mci charges as EXTRA.

Stop posting that you're the only one being charged. WE GOT IT TOO.