ENHN TS GNEIEHBUBS New York State Tenant Neighborhood Coalition Number 28 Spring 1994 Another Bite Taken Out of the Rent Regulat BY SAMUEL I. HIMMELSTEIN 9? AND MICHAEL MCKEE he real estate lobby has pulled off an? other coup by persuading the New York City Council and Mayor Rudy Giuliani to deregulate more apartments. In voting to renew rent control and rent stabiliza- tion until March 3 l. 1997. the City Council made a seemingly minor change in the law which in fact will have broad impact. This new decontrol bill. Intro 220. passed March 21 by a narrow margin because the land- lords had powerful allies. chiefamong them City Council Speaker Peter Vallone. Joe Strasburg. Vallone's chief of staff until two months ago. is now the president ofthe Rent Stabilization Asso- ciation. the landlord organization. Under City Council rules he is barred from lobbying his former employers for one year: however. he was quite visible at City Hall in the weeks leading up to the vote. His RSA salary isreportedly 3250.000 per year. Republican Mayor Rudy Giuliani also helped the landlords while claiming to support legisla? tion to extend rent regulation without weakening amendments. Giuliani ignored repeated appeals from tenant groups and elected of?cials. including Repub- Iican City Councilmembers Andrew Eristoff and Charles Millard (both Manhattan). to speak out against the bill in the weeks before it came up for a vote. He did not lobby a single member of the Council. where the bill ultimately passed by only two votes more than needed. Council SOurces acknowledged that if Giuliani had opposed Intro 220. Vallone would have dropped it and passed the clean extender bill. Intro 215. sponsored by Councilmembers Stanley Michels (Dem. Manhattan 1. Eristoff. and 23 others. Thus. Giuliani allowed the decontrol bill to happen. then claimed he was forced to sign it to prevent expiration of rent stabilization. When he signed it into law March 30. the mayor at least dropped the hypocrisy and called the legislation ?a reasonable compromise." Can anyone imag? ine that this bill would have passed if David Dinkins were still mayor? The real estate lobby also owes a debt to many members of the media who allowed the wool to be pulled over their eyes about the actual content ofthe bill. which was widely reported as affecting only ?rich tenants." Intro 220. now known as Local Law 4 of 1994. passed by a vote of 28- 1 8. two more than the 26 votes needed. Four Democratic Councilmembers who had promised local tenant groups that they would vote against the bill reversed their positions and voted for it: Una Clarke. Martin Malav?- Dilz?tn and Lloyd Henry. all of Brooklyn, and Antonio Pagan of Manhattan. Four days before the March 21 vote. Pagan's chief of staff sent a memorandum to Good Old Lower East Side. a local community organization. stating that Pagan would vote against Intro 220. Pagan later denied any knowledge of the memo and referred to several tenant leaders as "liars." DECOITBOLS HIGH APARTMENTS The change made by the Council eliminated the October 1, 1993 base date for triggering the "luxury" decontrol provisions enacted by the State Legislature last July. Under More than 400 tenants from all parts of New York City turned out for a March 10 news conference at City Hall to call for renewal of the rent laws wirlmm weakening amendments. Hilda Charis (center) of the Northwest Bronx ammu- niryand Clergy Coalition served as spokesperson forthe Tenant Unity Coalition. Left to right, Councilmembers Freed (Dem. Manhattan) and Una Clarke (Dem. Brooklyn 1. Steven Sanders (Dem. Manhattan. behind larke J. Hilda Charis. ouncilmembers Torn Duane and Stanley ichels (both Democrats from Manhattan). At cgly'grence Councilman Clarke made a fiery ech in defense of rent regulation but later hanged he. position and voted for decontrol. that state law. only apartments that reached a rent of $2,000 per month by last October I were subject to two kinds of decontrol: vacancy decontrol. where the apartment is per- ion System manently deregulated upon turnoverzand income based decontrol. where households with annual incomes exceeding 8250.000 suffer decontrol. and possibly eviction. not upon vacancy but within a matter of months. The Legislature had provided a short time frame of less than three months for apartment rents to reach the $3.000 threshold. This cutoff date prevented most landlords from jacking up rents in order to deregulate. Nevertheless. land- lord law firms sent notices to their clients with instructions on how to get rents up to $2.000 by October 1. especially for vacant apartments. and Apartment Low Insider published an article with similar advice. But the number of units affected by this kind of manipulation was limited due to the narrow window ofopportunity. Now. thanks to the City Council andthe Mayor. this window is permanently wide open: any apart- ment that reaches $2.000 per month at any time in the future. a year from now or ten years from now. will be subject to decontrol. This is an enormous incentive to indixidual owners to inflate rents. It will mean that virtually every time a vacancy occurs in neighbr?i?ooddvith a viable real estate market. apartments that rented in the $1200 a month range?or even for $800 or S900?will now rent for $2.000 or more. SWEENEYICHELSEA CLIN TON NEWS continued on page 7 Central Towers Tenants Block Rent Increase HUD Overules State Housing O?icials BY JOHN J. BYRNES ho says you can?t beat City Hall? And who says you can't win"? Tenants at the Central Towers apartment complex in Albany. New York. didjust that. And with the help oer. Billy Easton ofthe New York State Tenant and Information Service. Ms. Maria Markovics of United Tenants of Albany. and Ms. Barbara Weiner of the Greater Upstate Law Project. we helped set the stage for further victories by Mitchell-Lama tenants throughout the state. In August 1993 tenants at the Towers. a 308-unit. 23 story Mitchell-Lama high rise. were noti?ed by the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) that the owners. Central Towers Company. had requested a substantial rent increase 0821.67 per room per month. to be implemented Over a two-year period. ThUs began a complicated and tortuous process that gave the appearance that DHCR was advocating on behalf of the owners. Though the tenants won a major victory by persuading the US. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to rescind DHCR's approval of a $15.16 rent increase scheduled to take effect January I. -1994. the battle is far from over. The rent increase request notice. distributed to tenants in August. asked that the increase go into effect July 1. 1993. Tenants had until October 14 to submit written comments. and another week after that to prepare for a conference on the issue. This they did. beginning with organizingarent increase opposition task force and calling Ms. Maria Markovics of United Tenants of Albany. Tenants were skeptical about our ability to influence the rent increase determination process. We had been through this before. We did a solidjob of presenting opposition to an earlier substantial rent increase in May 1991. We came away from the May 15. 1991 DHCR confer- ence dismayed and insulted. Despite the support of numer- ous political representatives. from Ward Alderman on up to our Congressman. and despite the efforts ofour accoun- tant Glenn Baer?hired with the owner's funds. as required by comprehensive and detailed objections to the rent increase were ignored. We left the conference convinced that the process was a Charade. with DHCR simply going through the motions. This experience in 1991 made us skeptical of the possibility of success in 1993. Fortunately. Ms. Markovics brought a couple of new players on board to assist the tenants: Ms. Weiner and Mr. continued on page 2 8c NEIGHBORS, SPRING 1994 Meet Laurie Miller 11 February Laurie Anne Miller began work as the New York City organizer for the HUD Tenant Organizing Project of the New York State Tenant and Neighbor- hood Information Service. The Information Service was formed by members to work on federal housing issues: helping tenants in federally-assisted housing organize themselves to preserve their hous- ing is a central goal of the project. Laurie is a Brooklyn native who inher- ited her activism from her late mother. a registered nurse. ?She was always involved in protests. especially for health care." Laurie ?rstbecameinvolvedin housing in herowncity-owned building on Quincy Street in Brooklyn. where she moved in 1985. Every winter the tenants in this 16- unit building went not only without heat and hot water. but water at all. because the lack of heat caused the pipes to burst. Tenants had to get water from a basement pipe for bathing and cooking. In 1987 the tenants heard about the city?s Tenant Interim Lease program. applied, and were accepted. But TIL did not work because the tenants did not receive adequate support or training to be able to manage the building. Thrown out of TIL, the tenants brought an (Housing Part) action against the City of New York. Judge Bank ordered the City to correct the conditions. Between January 1988 and March 1989 the building was substantially rehabilitated, with tenants temporarily relo- cated to other city-owned buildings one line at a time as new plumbing and electrical work was performed. Through St. Nicholas Neighborhood Preservation Corporation the tenants then got into the Community Management program. where local community groups Laurie Miller manage buildings. In 18 months the tenants will buy the building, which is now in last phase of renovation. Laurie previously worked as a tenant organizer for the Pratt Area Community Council and the Northeast Brook- Housing Development Corporation. assisting tenants ofbothcity-owned and privately-owned buildings. She has been active with the City-wide Task Force on City-Owned Property. She has a daugh- ter. Adina. who is 15 and in her first year of high school. and a three-year-old son, Anderson. Concerning her recent work with HUD tenants. Laurie stated: ?Just as the city doesn?t take care of its buildings. the federal government is neglecting its re- sponsibilities. It?s just on a much greater scale. Many tenants don?t know their rights. or don't even know that their building is federally subsidized. Recently we have made some headway with HUD and the agency seems more willing to listen to tenants. That?s good, but all the more reason tenants need to be organized." Among the individual tenant associations Laurie is helping are Fulton Park Plaza in Brooklyn, Metro North Riverview in Manhattan, and Jose de Diego Beekman Houses in the Bronx. ?We?re working with the Mitchell- Lama Residents Coalition and they have been tremen- dously helpful, especially where tenants are facing rent increases," Laurie said. The initial phase of the project involves a good deal of networking. ?Right now we?re trying to reach out to as many buildings as possible and get people together to compare experiences and help each other." she continued. She is planning workshops for tenants which will c0ver HUD Tenants Hold Historic Meeting with Cisneros BY ARLAYNE SEARLE a newly-elected board member of the National Alliance of HUD Tenants I was part of a NAHT delegation attending an hour-long meeting with Henry Cisneros, US. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development on March 19 in Washington. Deputy Assistant Secretary Helen Dunlap was also in attendance. Never before has HUD given tenants so much respect. It was my impression that Secretary Cisneros was eager to hear tenant stories and concerns. He committed to site visits in Newark. Dallas, Los Angeles, Chicago and Burlington, Vermont. In addition, he said he would meet with the board of NAHT twice a year and that his top staff would meet with us on the national and regional levels at least four times a year. He made a commitment to bring HUD tenants into the regulatory process and expressed a great deal of concern about conditions of buildings and communities in assisted housing. His manner was personal and sensitive. Each request made was responded to with a personal remark and/or commitment for action he would take. He mentioned previous site visits to HUD-assisted housing. Both Cisneros and Dunlap asserted that HUD ?eld staff should receive ongoing training to help in problem-solving with tenants. Several of the issues that Helen Dunlap had committed to work on in partnership with NAHT the day before were reiterated in the presence of the Secretary and received his endorsement. Seeing communications occur from the grass roots up was tremendously invigorating. Bureaucrats listened. fol- lowed a process which truly involved HUD tenants. and made concrete commitments. Helen Dunlap made a par- ticularly strong impression during a meeting with 200 tenants the day before the Cisneros meeting when she recorded her commitments with magic marker on a ?ip chart for all to see. We've waited a long time for a responsive HUD. In the past we couldn't even get a list of which owners and man- agement companies were responsible for which properties. Now we will get that and much more. That's exciting! When we go door to door in our own buildings, we are now part of a national HUD tenant movement that truly has access to the HUD powers that be in Washington. DC. I Arlayne Searle is president of the Harrison House Tenants Association in Syracuse. She was elected a New York regional representative to the board of the National A lliance of UD Tenants during the annual meeting in March, and was also elected NAHTSecretary. If you are a HUD Tenant in New York or New Jersey, Arlayne joins Joan Wheeler of Staten Island and Bill Good of Newark as your represen- tatives on the NAH Board. Worms Published by The New York State Tenant 8: Neighborhood Coalition 505 Eighth Avenue, 24th Floor New York, NY 10018-6505 (212) 695-8922 Editor: Michael McKee Contributors to this issue: Francine Brewer. John . Bymes Herb Callender. Billy Boston, James D. Samuel . Himmelstein, Laurie Anne Miller, Semle, Sharon Sherman, Dorleen Smith Design /Produc?on: Chip Ch??e rent increase procedures, regulations governing the sale or conversion of federally assisted low income housing, maintenance and repairs, and other issues. The HUD Tenant Organizing Project is supported by grants from New York Community Trust, . P. Morgan and Company. New York Foundation. Chemical Bank and Edna McConnell Clark Foundation. I For More Information: Laurie Miller. YS Tenant and Neighborhood Information Service. 505 Eighth Avenue (24th Floor). New York. N. Y. 10018-6505. telephone 695-4204. cont'dfrom page I Easton. It was then that things turned around in a big way. What became an issue of the highest import was the entire DHCR noti?cation process. What brought it to a head was documentation by the tenants that the owners had. since 1979. ignored energy ef?ciency measures at Central Towers. This in turn escalated into documented charges that DHCR itself had been made aware of the issue that far back. and had failed to address it. This point was simply brushed aside by DHCR at the October conference. Those of us present resigned our- selves to what we believed would be a small. prearranged reduction in the rent increase request, burdening us with another hefty rent hike. This was indeed the result. But this time the inconsistencies and contradictions were so glaring that even the politicians present at the conference were appalled. As reported in a Legislative Gazette article November 1, the elected of?cials felt the conference was an embarrassment to state government. Right from the git-go. troubling flaws in the process manifested themselves. The original noti?cation from DHCR included both the landlord?s estimated budget and DHCR's revised budget. Yet DHCR regulations require that tenants benoti?ed by theowners thathey momma: ing a rent increase 30 days before they submit a request to DHCR. This was not done. At the hearing itself, DHCR staff insisted that they would take tenant concerns to the Commissioner. When questioned on how that could be done when no detailed notes or record of the conference were being taken, DHCR reps replied that such a record was not necessary because the conference was informal. This prompted one tenant leader to protest that given the fact that the lives of more than 600 residents at the building were at stake, such a claim by DHCR was absurd. When Mr. Easton asked if tenants could be sent a copy of the conference report which would be used to make a final recommendation to the Commissioner, he was told yes. No such report has been received. It was apparent to the tenants that when the conference ended we would have to meet again. It was during these meetings that Ms. Weiner found some glaring failures on the part of DHCR to adhere to either its own or HUD's regulations pertaining to Mitchell?Lama apartment com- plexes. Among these failures: the notice to tenants was not in the form set forth in HUD regs; tenant comments were not forwarded to HUD by DHCR (required by nor were the tenants informed in any way that HUD was the ?nal arbiter with respect to any increase. Based on these oversights by DHCR, Ms. Weiner contacted HUD, requesting that they withhold approval of the rent increase. On December 29. 1993. three days before the rent increase was due to take effect, HUD noti?ed management that it had not approved the rent increase. This gave us a bit of breathing room. Mr. Easton then set up a meeting between the tenants association and Mr. Myron Holtz, Deputy Commissioner of DHCR. This meeting was scheduled and re-scheduled. It ?nally took place on February 1, 1994 at of?ces in Albany. At this meeting a DHCR staff member produced a HUD document dated January 31, 1994 which gave DHCR the go-ahead to approve the rent increase in the amount already established, effective March 1. What we did not know at Continued on page 8 TENANTS 8t NEIGHBORS. SPRING 1994 Charlotte Lakeview Family Tenants Win Respect BY DORLEEN SMITH hat a shock to hearthat your rent is going up. again. Itdidn?tseem fair. How would I pay yet another increase and keep the roof over my kids' heads? These were the questions asked not only by myself but by my neighbors too. This was 1991. Aftera few phone calls I was able to connect with Rochester It changed my line ofthinking and my life. Management was not the ?nal word. not the only word. like we had ban led to believe. Charlotte Lakeview Family Homes is a town house complex for 99 families in Rochester. It is subject to state supervision under the Mitchell?Lama program. and also falls under thejurisdiction of the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment (HUD) because it has a subsidized mortgage under the 236 program. Next door to us is Charlotte Lakeview. a high rise 250-unit building for senior citizens. and a mile away is a third part of the complex. Charlotte Riverview. another senior citi- zen high rise building with 200 apartments. All are owned by The Finch Group of Boston. which owns many government-assisted complexes in upstate New York, and all three have tenant associations. With help and guidance, we were able to ?nd a great accounting ?rm. Cortland Brovitz and Company. and excellent attorneys from Monroe County Legal Assistance Corporation and the Greater Upstate Law Project. The state Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) requires land- lords of Mitchell-Lama buildings to pay for the tenants? accountant. We beat the rent increase in early 1992?no increase for two years! It wasn?t easy but it was a great learning experience. We continued to have problems with roaches. security. maintenance. parking. and our playgrou nd. Management' 5 response was. ?We'll look into it." Nothing was getting better and it was depressing. We had an election and got an Executive Committee in place. Over the next few months we learned quickly how much real power tenants can have in organizing and making changes where we live. The ?rst year we concentrated on educating tenants about their rights and explaining over and over again that you cannot be evicted if you belong to a tenants associa? tion. We started out with just a few involved people but we have grown into a large group. With the help of we set up a free summer lunch program. We stopped three evictions (my greatest joy). Tenants worked together in a ?ower garden contest. with prize money going to the three top winners. We invited guest speakers from the Police and Fire Depart- ments. We worked closely with Western New York Com- munities Against Drug Abuse. this has been a real asset to our complex. We had a huge Easter party for our 200~plus kids. Ten moms got together and hid more than 400 eggs all over the complex. we rented an Easter Bunny for an hour. and local stores donated free Easter gifts. We've taught our kids that if you want something bad enough. you have to put in some effort and they sure did. To earn money for a pizza party they collected empty bottles from residents. Not one child left the party hungry. We have had some of the biggest bake sales anyone could imagine. This has been our way of supporting the Tenants Association and providing for our residents. In May 1992 we had a Beauti?cation Week. We all pitched in and cleaned up our back yards. planted flowers. washed windows. Seeing the difference gave everyone a good feeling. Our teen boys got into this with their parents and swept up two large parking lots that had been badly Members of the Charlotte Lake View amin Tenants Association, left to right: Dorleen Smith. John Sadler, MaryAnne Corruba-Brown with Shelby Brown in stroller, Joseph Goodrell, and Esther Ravenel. neglected. When management saw this activity they sent down better brooms. shovels. and two large bags of soft drinks. Two days later management sent us a thank you letter. THE OTHER SHOE DROPS In 1993 management applied to the State for another rent increase. The amounts asked were extremely high: $75 for a 2-bedroom. $92 on a 3-bedroom. and $108 on a 4? bedroom apartment per month. This was to be the hardest battle with The Finch Group we had yet faced. The ?rst thing we worked on was to persuade DHCR to mow the rent increase heating from Buffalo. where DHCR has an of?ce. to Rochester. Buffalo is two hours away. so not many tenants would be able to participate. We had learned from meeting with tenants from Syracuse about the impor- tance of having the hearing on your home ground. and that tenants have the power to get hearings moved. We called our State Senator. Mary Ellen Jones. and asked for help. We also wrote to DHCR Deputy ommis- sioner Myron Holtz. telling him ofthe hardship this would cause for so many tenants?those with no cars. no child care. the elderly and disabled. and those with no time allotted off from work and who could not afford to lose an entire day's pay to drive to Buffalo. lust when we were starting to believe that this meeting would never be moved. the call came from Senator Jones? of?ce with the news that the hearing was being moved to Rochester. We had won our ?rst battle. Many long hours went into gathering infonnation to present to DHCR. We had many problems that had de vel- oped this winter. With 90 plus inches of snow. our side- walks. driveways and parking lots were not being plowed properly. preventing many tenants from getting to work. Work orders for repairs were not being done properly and tenants were therefore calling in the same problems over and over. Plus. we had contractors with keys to our town housesjust walking in without prior notice. All this and much. much more was brought to the State?s attention at the hearing on February 17. The tenants really pulled together and the rent increase conference turned out better than any of us could have possibly hoped. We could not have done it without the help we received from Sharon Sherman of Syracuse and the New York State Tenant and Neighborhood Information Service. We met with Mr. John Smith of DHCR after the conference. He congratulated us on our efforts and strongly suggested we meet with management and present three to ?ve problems to work on together. I was not comfortable with this idea because of past unpleasant experiences in meeting with manage- ment. But we decided to give it one more try. With more help from Sharon we prepared for a meeting with management in March. I had visions of disaster the minute the meeting started. but it went well?no. better than well. As a result of this meet- ing. the sidewalk and driveway problem has been resolved?me have had two more snow storms since then and management did a goodjob both times. The Tenants Association is now being asked for input on notices being sent to the tenants on work order policy. And no contractor will ever again enter our homes without prior notice. On April 1 DHCR approved a rent increase. but it was only one-third of what The Finch Group re- quested. We are all pleased that our effort paid off so well. We will continue to work together for a better complex. One of our biggest assets is the tenant newspaper which we put out once a month. It is a teaching tool and it helps keep our tenants informed of activities they can join. It has been hard work. but it has brought forth many great joys for all of us. In February we were able to stop one more unnecessary eviction. of a young Mom and Dad with two children under the age of 4. People ask me is it worth the time and energy? De?nitely yes. Just look at where we were in 1991 and where we are today! It's well worth itDorleen Smith is president of the Charlotte Lakeview amily Tenants Association. i Regional uverc/ Offices Albany (note new address and phone/F AX numbers): 248 Hudson Avenue Albany. NY. 12210-1802 Telephone: (518) 465-1813 FAX: (518) 465-1815 New York City: 505 Eighth Avenue. 24th Floor New York. NY. 10018?6505 (212) 695-8922 (212) 695-4204 . FAX: (212) 695-4314 Rochester: 12l North Fitzhugh Street. Room 325 Rochester. N.Y. 14614-1214 (716) 325-5957 Syracuse: 101 Gertrude Street Syracuse. NY. 13203?3417 5 (315)425-1032 - i YSTN IS Annual 1 The New York State Tenant and Neighborhood Coalition and New York State Tenant and Neighborhood Information Service jointly sponsored a two?day conference and annual meeting on February 25 -26. The event took place at the AYH International Hostel at 1 03 rd Street and Amsterdam Avenue on Manhattan ?5 Upper West Side. More than 120 tenant and neighborhood leaders, organizers, and advocates from many parts of New York State attended. At Friday night's dinner participants heard a keynote speech by Donald Halperin, the new State Housing Director and Commissioner of the State Division of Housing and Community Renewal. Mr. Halperin announced the revoca- tion of two controversial rent regulation policies concerning service reduction cases adopted by his predecessor: Tenants TENANTS 8t NEIGHBORS, SPRING 1994 had long complained of these policies, which were never legally promulgated but were implemented in violation of the state ?s own housing code. The keynote speaker at Saturday ?s lunch was Vito Lopez, the new chairman of the Assembly Housing Committee. Mr. Lopez made it clear that he will be an advocate for tenant protection laws and for housing and that he wants to work in partnership with grass roots advocates. Another featured speaker was Deborah Austin, lobbyist for the National Low Income Housing Coalition, who provided valuable information about the housing budget and housing legislation being considered in Congress. Several workshops dealt with substantive issues. They are brie?y summarized on the following page. Meet the New Board February 26. the members of elected a new statewide board of directors. after approv- ing a By-laws amendment which reduced the size of the board from a maximum of 9 to a maximum of 1 members. eight to be elected by the membership and an additional three to be appointed by the board. The By-laws amendment also adopted term limits of four years for the elected board members. with staggered terms so that no more than half the board will be new at any time. The purpose of the reduction was to make it possible for the statewide board to meet more frequently. With the larger board the costs of transportation to and from board meetings was expensive and it was often hard to assemble a qurirumwthus the board could not meet often enough to function properly. The newly-elected board members have made a commitment to attend board meetings every other month. The following eight board members were elected: RAY BAILEY. Ray lives in Manhattan where he is the head of the Lower Manhattan Loft Tenants. Ra} proved to be a motivated worker and strategic thinker during last year's cam- paign to preserve the state rent regulations. Ray isacabinetmakerand has Board for 3 years. He lives in a loft with his companion Bob Petrucci. a tenant lawyer. HERB CALLENDER. Herb lives in Yonkers and is employed in New York City as Assistant Director of the Citywide Task Force on Housing Court. He's married to Jenny Ramos and is the father of two beautiful little girls. He has been on the Board for 3 years. DELAINE GREENE. The former Delaine Cook got married this past year. but her commitment to was so great that she told her South Carolina husband he'd just have to wait for her to relocate until she could get a few more things done. Delaine is a community activist and HUD tenant leader in Rochester. where she works as a housing specialist at the Baden Street Center. She is president of the Rochester Chapter of and was on the statewide Board from 1978 to 1982. then again from 1987 to the present, a total of 12 years. LUCIUI WAN. Lucille is a ?rst-grade teacher in Harlem and a grandmother. She is a resident of 3 Mitchell? The newly-elected statewide board of directors of From left to right. standing: Lucille Hoberman. Lucy Johnson. Doris ll?innie Salmon, Delaine ook'Greene. Seated: Ray Bailey. Herb Callender. Emily Margulis. Lama coop in Manhattan and a founder and board member of the Mitchell-Lama Council. Anyone who has attended a conference knows Lucille as the tough but nice lady who wants your registration fee. Lucille continues in devoted service after 17 years on the board. LUCY JOHNSON. Lucy is president of the Kennedy Square Tenants Association in Syracuse where she gained renown for having a management in?ltrator removed in handcuffs from a tenant meeting. (Other Board members are cautioned to toe the line at meetings or else). Kennedy Square is a HUD-assisted Mitchell-Lama rental development. Lucy cooks great chicken dinners and makes delicious baked goods. raising a lot of money for the Greater SyracUse Tenants Network. She is a new board member. but not new to EMILY MARGOLIS. Emily is a leader of the Park West Village Tenants Association in Manhattan. PWVTA set an historic court precedent af?rming the Warranty of Habit? ability law while Emily was presidentin theiatc l9705. She is a retired nursing school teacher. Emily has served on the Board for 18 years and has been very active in the ?ght to preserve the rent laws. Not one to let moss grow under her feet. Emily volunteers many hours a week in the of?ce in New York City. DORIS ROSENBLUM. Doris is retired as District Manager of Community Board 7 on Manhattan's Upper West Side. a post she ?lled for many years. She currently serves as Borough Historian. a volunteer position in the Man- hattan Borough President's of?ce. Don's is the co-chair of the Mitchell-Lama Residents Coalition. She is known in Albany and in New York City for her friendly demeanor. tireless energy. assertive nature and ?ery speeches on behalfof Mitchell-Lama housing. Doris lives in Manhattan with her husband Paul and has been on the Board for I year. SHARON SHERMAN WINNIE SALMON. Winnie lives in Camillus outside Syracuse in HUD-assisted senior housing. Winnie is president of three boards: Fairmount Gardens TenantAssociation. Greater Syracuse Tenants Network. and New York State Tenant and Neighborhood lnfonnation Service. She has served on the board for 4 years. Winnie is retired from the state Department of Social Services. Ask any landlord?Winnie is not one to give up a ?ght for tenants rights. The Board is now charged with electing three additional members. Ifyou have any suggestions. please send a letter. including your candidate?s name and why you think she or he would be a valuable board member. to: Board President. 248 Hudson Avenue. Albany. NY. 12210- 1802. We wish to thank outgoing board members: Victor Bach. Ceil DiDomenico. Mickey Gensler. iilla Gordon. Henry Lee. Michael McKee. Maria Markovics. Stanley Panesoff. Bill Rowen. Sharon Sherman. and Sherece West. I /Ieeting, Feb Rent Regulation An afternoon-long workshop on Friday focused on developing strategies to prevent the continued phaseout of the rent and eviction control laws. The ?rst'session was a panel moderated by Ray Bailey of Lower Manhattan Loft Tenants. Panelists Jenny Laurie of MetrOpolitan Council on Housing and Joseph D?Agosta. Deputy Commissioner of the NYS Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) discussed last year's enactment of decontrol legislation by the State Legislature and the factors that led to this result. During the second segment. participants broke into 5 small groups and. acting on instructions from facilitator Francine Brewer of the Park West Village Tenants Asso- ciation. generated 53 ideas and strategies for tenant activists to use. These fell into four categories: organizing. legisla- tive. media, and public education. During the third session these ideas were posted on ?ip charts for all to see. and discussed. Everyone agreed that during the next three years tenants have to work hard in order to make sure that additional decontrol amendments are not enacted when the rent laws come up for renewal in 1997. On Saturday morning New York City tenants heard City Councilmember Torn Duane (Dem. Manhattan) encourage them to join the campaign to renew the city rent laws without weakening amendments. Mitchell-Lama Three workshops covered issues of concern to Mitchell- Lama tenants in buildings regulated by New York State or New York City. The NYC workshop was moderated by Doris Rosenblum. co-chair of the Mitchell-Lama Resi- dents Coalition, and featured Robert Klehammer. Assis- tant Commissioner of the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD). The state workshop was moderated by Arlayne Searie. representing the Greater Syracuse Tenants Network. Participants included Myron Holtz. Deputy Commissioner. NYS Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR): attorney Michael Hanley. Greater Upstate Law Project: and Doris Rosenblum. Commissioner Holtz was presented with a document. ?Seven Ways to Improve DHCR Oversight of the Mitchell-Lama Rent Structuring Process? (see below). An outgrowth of this panel discussion is a committee which is continuing to pursue these changes with DHCR. In the afternoon we were lucky to have the participation Ed Sullivan (Dem. Manhattan). the chief sponsor of legislation to stop the buyout of Mitchell-Lama housing and a forceful advocate for the program. During the third session representatives of tenant asso- ciations were given an opportunity to ask questions of Deputy Commissioner Holtz. Many questions related to the Major Capital Improvements program (see Tenants 6.- Neighbors. No. 27). Mr. Holtz stated that applications totaling $1.25 billion were received from owners. but that only $67 million in funding was available. Tenants requested more information and to have input on the selection process. Security was a major concern. and many participants asked for clari?cation from DHCR about security initiatives the agency is undertaking. Seven Ways to Improve DHCR Oversight of Mitchell-Lama Rent Structuring Process Rent Increase Notices 1) Format and language should be clear and straightforward. TENANTS NEIGHBORS, SPRING 1994 2) A list of tenant advocacy resources should be enclosed with each rent increase proposal sent to tenants. 3) Copies of notices requesting rent increases should be sent to tenant advocates. Rent Increase Conferences 4) Conferences should be held locally. 5) Make tenant comments an of?cial part of the record for both DHCR and HUD review. 6) Provide DHCR response to tenant comments. Marketability Study 7) The study should be made available to tenants and their representatives as a condition of the owner?s rent increase request. HUD Tenants Tenants of federally assisted buildings from various parts of New York State came together for a slide show presentation by representatives of the Boston HUD Tenants Alliance. The Boston tenants vividly illustrated their numerous successes over the past decade: how they forced HUD to foreclose on slumlords, how they forced HUD to recognize the tenants as bona ?de bargaining agents, and how some tenants are now taking over ownership of their buildings. Joan Wheeler of Park Hill Apes-Mon Staten Island talked about the National Alliance of HUD Tenants and increasing success in negotiating with HUD over tenant concerns. Joan's talk got people so pumped up that 6 HUD tenants decided on the spot to join the delegation to the annual NAHT meeting in March in Washington. DC. The last part of the workshop. led by Sharon Sherman of the Greater Syracuse Tenant Network. was devoted to a ?how to" session on documenting complaints. Participants were given a hypothetical situation and asked to break into working groups and come up with proposals to address the problem. These proposals were then presented by each group and discussed by the whole workshop. Code Enforcement This Saturday session focused on funding for local code enforcement and ?re prevention programs. and on legis- Our Vision On November 5. and 7. 1993 the Boards of Directors of the New York State Tenant and Neigh- borhood Coalition and the New York State Tenant and Neighborhood Information Service held ajoint retreat in the Catskills at which we clarified the shared vision and action plans of the two organiza- tions. The joint vision statement adopted reads: 1 It is our goal to build a uni?ed and powerful statewide structure to: empower and educate tenants: . preserve affordable housing and livable neighbor- hoods; and strengthen tenant protections. i ruary 25? 26, 1994 lation to enhance code enforcement in landlord-tenant proceedings. Panelists included Assembly Housing Committee Chairman Vito Lopez (Dem. Brooklyn). Southern Region Chairperson Herb Callender. and Northern Region Chairperson Sharon Sherman. The workshop followed the luncheon session where Lopez was the keynote Speaker. Moderator Callender briefly explained the evolution of modern code enforcement and the various state and local laws which form the basis for the program. He and Sharon Sherman discussed the differences between code enforcement in larger urban areas and smaller com- munities. and among the various courts throughout New York State. The panelists discussed the gradual erosion of funding for code enforcement during recent years. necessitating a reduction in the number of inspectors. and how this has signi?cantly impaired the ability of tenants to raise repairs as a defense in eviction proceedings. Until 1992 the State of New York appropriated $8 million for New York City code enforcement and $9 million for other cities. towns and villages throughout the state. Two legislative proposals were mentioned. one to increase the surcharge on commercial ?re insurance premiums and dedicate the proceeds to restoration of state contributions to local code enforcement. the other a full and fair disclosure bill to require landlords to list code violations in their eviction papers. Vito L0pez stated that he and other Assembly Demo- crats were pushing for code enforcement funding in this year?s state budget. If such funds are restored. language will be inserted into state law to prevent municipalities from reducing their own share of funds; thus new state funds would result in more inspectors being hired. I Greater Syracuse Tenants Network Annual Dinner Friday, June 3, 1994 i 5:30 pm. 9 I I Presentation of 1994 Tenant Leadership Award Keynote Speaker: 1 Donald Halperin . YS Director of Housing Commissioner: Y5 Division of Hous- 1 ing and omnumit_\' Renewal Park Central Presbyterian Church i 504 East Fayette Street. Syracuse 1 i For more information: Greater Syracuse Tenants Network I Po. Box 6908 Syracuse. NY 13217 (315)425?1032 i 8r NEIGHBORS, SPRING- 1994 RTC Wins Right to Evict Kappell Appeals to US. Supreme Court By JAMES D. GARST tate Attorney General G. Oliver Koppell is appeal- ing a Federal court decision permitting the US. Resolution TrustCorporation to evict tenants from rent controlled and rent stabilized apartments in New York State. The 2nd US. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay of execution pending determination of the US. Supreme Court to hear the appeal. RTC has stated it will hold off any attempt to evict until the Supreme Court determines whether it will take the case. A ?nal ruling could affect thousands of tenants in New York City and Westchester County, where RTC controls many rent regulated apartments in buildings converted to co-ops and condos. The ruling also could involve a broad test of the ability of a federal agency to override state laws and contracts executed pursuant to them. The case started when the RTC began eviction proceed- ings against tenants at 444 East 57th Street in Manhattan. as a means of increasing the value of the building prior to reselling it. RTC was created by Congress in 1989 to bail out failed thrift institutions. It acquires the assets of such institutions and conducts its operations ?in a manner which maximizes the net present value return from the sale or other disposition" of such assets. according to its statutory instruction. The law armed RTC with the powerto disaf?rrn or repudiate contracts or leases that it determines in its discretion to be burdensome. The 2nd Circuit said: ?The reach of that power is the primary issue in this appeal." The 57th Street building had been converted to acondo- minium in 1983. and the 3 tenants now involved in the case were non-purchasers. The conversion sponsor pledged their apartments to the Nassau Federal Savings and Loan Association as collateral for a loan of $3.2 million. When the sponsor defaulted in the summer of 1987, title to the apartments passed to Nassau, which subsequently failed. RTC became receiver and conservator in two separate actions in 1990. Using its power of repudiation. RTC sent the tenants two letters. In the summer of 1990. RTC determined it was suffering a net Operating loss. later calculated to be approximately 518.924 per month. and noti?ed the tenants it was repudiatin their tenancies. It gave each tenant three options: (1) accepting termination and moving out: (2) remaining in possession for the balance of the lease term; or (3) purchasing the unit on stated terms. The tenants rejected the alternative offers and disputed 5 power to repudiate. Several of them ?led complaints against RTC with the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR). RTC responded that DHCR was ?without jurisdiction over the RTC and this matter." The New NYC Housing andVaeancy Survey What the Numbers Show BY MICHAEL he rent control and rent stabilization laws require New York City to conduct a survey every three years in order to determine if a housing emergency still exists. This study. kn0wn as the Housing and Vacancy Survey (HVS). looks at rental vacancy rates. rents and housing conditions. It is conducted by the U. S. Bureau of the Census under contract with the City. For rent regulation to continue, the net citywide vacancy rate must be 5 percent or less. The just-released 1993 HVS determined that thecitywide rental vacancy rate is 3.44 percent. a reduction from the 3.78 percent found in 1991. (The HVS normally would have been done in 1990, but the Census Bureau was unable Tenant Lobby Day Come To Albany! Tuesday, June 7, 1994 For information: call Emily Margolis at the NYC of?ce: (212) 695-8922. I . to undertake it because that was the year of the 10-year federal census.) Vacancy rates by rent level differ substantially from the overall rate. For units renting for less than $300 a month the vacancy rate is .58 percent, which essentially means that apartments are unobtainable at this low rent level. The vacancy rate for units renting for less than $500 is only 1.10 percent. These numbers show that there continues to be a housing emergency in New York City and it is particularly severe for lower income households. The most striking ?gure reported in the 1993 HVS is a dramatic decline in the incomes of renters. Median renter income dropped from $20.000 in 1990 to $19,005 in 1992. Over the two-year period covered in the reports. the Con? sumer Price Index (CPI) for the region increased by 8.3 percent. so that in in?ation-adjustul terms. the drop was even steeper: real median renter income declined by more than 12 percent. The economic climate of the early 19905 wiped out all of the improvement in income experienced by renters during the mid-19805. ln in?ation-adjusted terms median renter incomes in 1992 were 4 percent lower than they were in 1980. Rents did not follow the same pattern as income. In spite of the strong erosion of tenants' purchasing power. con- tract tents continued to rise at a rate which almost compen? sated for in?ation. Between March 1991 and March 1993 the rise in the CPI for New York City was 7.5 percent. Median contracts rents citywide increased by 5.5 percent from $475 in 1991 to $501 in 1993. while in?ation- adjusted rents fell by 1.8 percent. The overall ?gure masks the fact that all of the decrease in inflation-adjusted median rents came from units which were either in public housing, in rem. federally assisted or Mitchell-Lama rentals. Median rents for privately-owned rental units increased more than the cost of living. Median stabilized rents increased 9.4 percent before in?ation. and .7 percent after Median rents Went' The Attorney General then protested in a letter to RTC that it had exceeded its power in repudiating tenancies protected by state law governing the condominium conver- sion and various rent laws and regulations. In response. RTC sent a second letter to the tenants, advising them that it had adopted a policy under which no tenant of low or moderate income would be subject to lease repudiation. The income limit was set at 115 percent of median income determined by the US. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). with adjust- ments for family size. None of the tenants quali?ed under this formula. They went to court. as did the Attorney General and DHCR. In August 1992 Federal Judge Robert L. Carter ruled in their favor, holding that RTC could not evict. The 2nd Circuit reversed. ?nding that sweeping powers extended to overriding rent regulation. The appellate opinion holds that the tenants' occupancy rights are granted by contract (lease), not by statute. so they may be repudiated by RTC. ?While these tenancies are regulated and policed. such a regime does not eliminate the contractual nature of the relationship. any more than do the regulatory schemes governing the provision of such services as elec- tric power. natural gas. medallion taxi rides or cable television." the opinion said. ?Some contracts are more heavily regulated than others, but they are not thereby transformed into something non-contractual or super- contractual." is a party to a friend of the court brief supporting the appeal to the US. Supreme Court. I Jim Cars: is Legislative Representative. up 14.4 percent before in?ation and 6.4 percent in inflation- adjusted dollars. Unregulated rents wentgup 75 percent before in?ation and down less than 1 percent after adjustment. The median rent for the 979.000 rent stabilized units counted by the 1993 survey was $525. For the 102,000 controlledunits it was $366. and for the 552,000 unregu- lated units $600. Gross rents (which include utility payments made directly by the tenants and which better reflect actual housing costs) increased faster than in?ation. The median gross rent was $509 in 1991 and $551 in 1993. a rate of 8.2 percent. The net result of the increase in rents and the decrease in tenant income is that gross rent:income ratios (the percentage of income tenants spend on rent) rose steeply, from 28.4 percent in 1991 to 30.7 percent in 1993. This is the highest level that the gross rent:income ratio has reached since the HVS series was begun in 1960. as well as the biggest survey-to-survey jump. A general rule of thumb which is recognized in various federal housing programs is that a household should not spend more than 30 percent of its income for housing costs. The 1993 ?gures mean that more than half of the renters in New York City are paying rents which they cannot afford. Not surprisingly. there has also been a signi?cant rise in the number of renter households with incomes below the federal poverty level. In 1991, 27 percent of renter hou5e- holds were in this category; the 1993 number is up to 30 percent. an increase of roughly 60.000 households. There is little hope that there will be an improvement in affordability in the near future. Households cannot easily ?nd less expensive units if they must move. Asking rents for vacant units are considerably higher than rents cur- rently being paid. In fact the relationship between the rent an average household can afford and the average asking rent for vacant units is considerably more unbalanced now than at any time measured by the HVS. In 1993 fewer than 14 percent of vacant units had asking rents affordable to the household earning the median income. As recently as 1984 almost half of vacant units were affordable to households with the median income. There are numerous other data in the HVS that shed light on the housing situation in New,York. City. This article merely skims the surface. I I i . TENANTS 8t NEIGHBORS, SPRING 1994 cont ?d from page I Some of the means landlords have for achieving this are perfectly legal. For example, if a landlord spends $40,000 refurbishing an apartment before renting it, he is allowed to raise the rent by 1,000 per month (1/40 of the total cost of improvements). Improvements totaling $20,000 entitle him to raise the rent by $500 a month. Plus he can tack on the normal rent guidelines increase and vacancy allow- ance. Farfetched? Some owners replace perfectly fine kitchen and bathroom fixtures in order to raise the rent. Others will enlarge a closet, or move a wall several inches. then claim that they have created a ?new? apartment. which is not subject to any regulation. But landlords can also raise rents illegally, and chances are they will get away with it. It is only if the new tenant ?les a challenge. something few tenants do even when they know they have the right, that the state housing agency investigates the legality of the rent. And if the landlord registers the rent with the state housing agency at an amount above $2.000 per month while actually charging the tenant a preferential rent signi?cantly less, he can claim the apartment is decontrolled on turnover even though this maneuver is not lawful. Because the investigation of legal rents is not undertaken unless a tenant ?les a challenge. landlords will get away with this scam if the incoming tenant takes no action. Thus many landlords will likely register rents at above 32,000. even in neighborhoods that cannot command such rents. because they will see it as a way to get out from under rent and eviction controls. Landlords will resort to a scheme common in the 19805 known as "illusory" or ?sham? prime tenancy, where tenants moving into an apartment are told that they are the subtenants of a non- existent prime tenant and the newcomers are persuaded that if they make trouble the prime tenant will reclaim the apartment. This vacancy decontrol feature is the major damage in the new rent bill. Its existence was concealed by rhetoric about tenants earning more than $250,000 a year. Speaker Vallone created a widespread impression that the change was minor tinkering that affected only rich tenants. In fact apartments renting above $2,000 are subject to vacancy decontrol regardless of income, and many people paying high rents are far from being rich. Moreover, Council staff told reporters that only 1,500 apartments would be decon- trolled, a number they, or real estate lobbyists, apparently made up. But the impact on the rent regulation system is likely to be far greater. Apart from the effect on individual households?4hme who will lose their protections and those who will move into deregulated apartments where they will have few rights?the new decontrol measure adds up to an immense hit on the market. Rental housing will become less afford- able all the way around. There will likely be an upsurge of harassment of sitting tenants. Echoing the period of full vacancy decontrol (1971-1974) and the co-op conversion boom of the 19805, this new incentive to obtain vacancies will be eagerly employed by that sub?class of landlords who are unre- strained by normal human decency. There will be more holdover (eviction) cases, and the courts will be clogged as landlords and their lawyers refuse to settle these cases where the tenant is unwilling to surrender the apartment. More cases will therefore go to trial, and more decisions will be appealed to higher courts, because the stakes are now much higher. Because deregulation also removes eviction protections. tenants will be less likely to complain about bad building conditions. Although the vacancy decontrol feature is the more serious threat to affordable housing, the means-tested income decontrol provisions will also do damage. The Council and Mayor Giuliani ignored State Housing Direc- tor Donald Halperin's plea not to expand the income-based decontrol program by repealing the October I, 1993 dead- line. In his testimony before the Council?s Housing and Buildings Committee on March 10 and in a March 15 letter to Vallone. Halperin opposed Intro 220. He reported that the state Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR). which administers rent regulation, is having serious problems implementing the means test enacted last . Voted For Deoontrol Voted Against Decontml (18): Ruiz, Jr. (D. Bronx). Absent (4): How They Voted March 21, 1994 Michael Abel (R. Queens), Herbert Berman (D. Brooklyn). Una Clarke (D. Brooklyn). Lucy Cruz (D. Bronx). Michael DeMarco (D. Bronx). Martin Malave-Dilan (D. Brooklyn), Kenneth Fisher (D. Brooklyn), Wendell Foster (D. Bronx). John Fusco (R. Staten Island), Julia Harrison (D. Queens). Lloyd Henry (D. Brooklyn). Walter McCaffrey (D. Queens). Jerome O'Donovan (D. Staten Island). Thomas Ognibene (R. QueenS). Antonio Pagan (D. Manhattan). Mary Pinkett (D. Brooklyn). Jose Rivera (D. Bronx). Annette Robinson (D. Brooklyn). Victor Robles (D. Brooklyn). Archie Spigner (D. Queens). Al Stabile (R. Queens). Peter Vallone (D. Queens). Lawrence Warden (D. Bronx).Juanita Watkins (D. Queens), Anthony Weiner(D. Brooklyn).Thomas White.Jr. (D. Queens). Enoch Williams (D. Brooklyn). Priscilla Wooten (D. Brooklyn). . Sal Albanese (D. Brooklyn), Stephen DiBrienza (D. Brooklyn). Thomas Duane (D. Manhattan). June Eisland (D. Bronx). Ronnie Eldridge (D. Manhattan). Andrew Eristoff (R. Manhattan). Freed (D. Manhattan). Karen Koslowitz (D. Queens). Howard Lasher (D. Brooklyn). Sheldon Leffler (D. Queens). Guillermo Linares (D. Manhattan), Helen Marshall (D. Queens). Joan Grif?n McCabe (D. Brooklyn). Stanley Michels (D. Manhattan). Charles Millard (R. Manhattan), Morton Povman (D. Queens), Adam Clayton Powell IV (D. Manhattan). Israel Noach Dear (D. Brooklyn). Virginia Fields (D. Manhattan). David Rosado (D. Bronx). John Sabini (D. Queens). summer. Thus an already-backlogged agency will now be even more overburdened. GENUINE REFORMS While cooking up this Luxury Landlord Assistance Act. the City Council stonewalled on genuine reforms which could save at-risk housing in low income neighborhoods. High on the list of needed changes is an overhaul of the real property tax system, which would require action by the State Legislature as well as the Council. Apartment build? ings are taxed at an effective rate about six times greater than the rate on 1-, 2- and 3-family homes. Coupled with soaring water and sewer charges, these heavy real estate taxes are an enormous burden on low income housing. including not only smaller rental' buildings bu't tenant cmperatives as well. While Speaker Vallone has called for tax relief for co?ops and condos, he has ignored the issue of tax equity for rental buildings. Giuliani has ignored the entire issue. There' an interesting bit of hypocrisy at work here. The politicians who resist reforming the property tax system come from districts dominated by one- and two-family homeowners. They have frustrated efforts to end this subsidy of their constituents by apartment dwellers. while simultaneously Spearheading the new decontrol measure? all the while expressing their concern for mom and pop landlords. none of whom will bene?t from the new bill. The next few years will see increasing losses of afford- able rental housing: at the upper end, through decontrol: at the lower end. through abandonment for reasons unrelated to rent regulation. And what of the future of rent regulation? The new weakening amendment comes at a time when rent and eviction controls are under attack from all directions. The federal courts recently ruled that the U. 5. Resolution Trust Corporation can evict rent regulated tenants in buildings it takes over from failed savings banks. A similar case involving the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie MAC) is pending. And the real estate lobby is gearing up to deregulate more apartments in 1997. when the rent laws come up for renewal again both in the City Council and in the State legislature. I Sam Himmelstein is a partner in Himmelsrein. McConnell and Gribben. a law?rm which specializes in representing tenants. Michael McKee is editor offenants Neighbors. The New York State Legislature enacted rent regulation laws in [920 and allowed them to expire in I929. Don't let this happen in I997. when all rent regulation laws will be up for Wake Up, Tenants! in I926. the legislature began to exempt increasing numbers of apartments?based on rent per room?from renewals of the Emergency Rent Laws. For the tenant associations. this spelled the Start of a cycle of decline: each reduction in the number of tenants covered by the rent laws decreased the constituency available to resist further cuts. By I928 the movement was so weak that it could put up only token resistance. and the rent laws were phased out over the next two years." From "The Post-World War I Housing Crisis" by joseph A Spencer, I wish to take a stand for tenants rights by contributing to _$500 5 other I am unable to make a contribution today. but wish to take my stand by pledging to contribute. Pledge: _$25 _350 in The Tenant Movement in New York City. ?904-1984, Ronald Lawson, editor, Rutgers University Press, 1986 .J grabs in Albany! _$250 5 other Name Address . Z. The Rent Laws? '9 one Make A Contribution to I I I I Help Us Save I I I I Today! I I would like to receive Tenants 8: Neighbors I would like to volunteer my time with Mail to: New York State Tenant 8r Neighborhood Coalition 505 8th Avenue. 24th Floor New York, NY IONS-6505 8c NEIGHBORS, SPRING 1994 Inter?Active Forum Can Tipper Gore Find Happiness in a Homeless Shelter? BY LAURIE ANNE MILLER undreds of housing activists came together on January 3lst at the Omni Park Central Hotel in New York City. People who work in the trenches from the states of Virginia. North Carolina. New Jersey. and every corner of New York State were there to "interact" withthe U. S. Department ofHousing and Urban Development. although HUD picked all the topics and controlled the agenda. The real interaction took place in the hallways. eleva? tors. food stops and phone banks as we stopped and compared notes with each other. The ?ve sessions were held up and down: three on the mezzanine and two on the 26th floor. Does that give you a clue to the flow of information"? At midday we were all privileged to attend a ?plenary? session. The Master ofCeremonies. Roy Priest of HUD's Of?ce ofEconomic Development. lavished praise on New York City Council President Peter Vallone. Tipper Gore. the Vice President?s wife. and our own native son. prob- ably adopted/gone national. Andrew Cuomo. Priest opened by enumerating President Bill Clinton's many initiatives and how he stayed at HUD because of them. The Speaker of the City Council was lauded as a longtime advocate for the homeless. I guess he advocated for more people to be put in that situation because he sure hasn?t advocated for solutions. Al Boyars lbert Boyars. a prominent advocate for tenant rights and better health care. died February 18 following a brutal attack ?ve days earlier by an unknown assailant near his home on Manhattan' 5 Upper West Side. His murder remains unsolved despite an ongoing police inves? tigation. He was 69 years old. Al was a member of the 98 Riverside Drive Tenants Association. and an active member of and the Metropoli- tan Council on Housing, the city-wide tenant union. He campaigned tirelessly to expose the unfairness of the Maximum Base Rent formula which allows land? lords of rent controlled apartments in New York City to raise rents by 7.5 percent per year. far greater than the annual increase in operating costs. Because this system has been in place since 1972, and as most rent controlled tenants are elderly people with limited incomes. the MBR is a burden for them and a windfall to landlords. He was also instru- mental in the enactment of the ?pooper-scooper? law. Al was a World War II Navy veteran who served on the aircraft carrier Shenandoah under Admiral Chester Nimitz. After the war he worked as a publicist at Metro Mayer. then for many years at the Trans-Lax Corporation. where he was vice president for public relations until his I. the additional funds). me details and an application. organization, check the last box above. NAME Boyars testifying are hearing on the Maximum Base Rent fannula November 30. 1993. New York State Tenant 8: Neighborhood Coalition IT TIME YOU BECAME A YES. I want to take a stand for tenants rights and affordable housing in New York State. Please check the appropriate box(es). complete the form below, and send to: MYSTIC, 505 Eighth Avenue, Floor, New York, ?10018-6505 For more details on membership, call (212) 695?8922. Annual individual Membership: $20 dues enclosed (if you can afford more. we would appreciate . I can't afford full individual membership; $10 low-income annual dues enclosed. Organizational Membership (dues vary according to each group?s size and budget): Please send PLEASE NOTE: Individual memberships must be in the name of a person. If you want to join as an Tm Idem Autumn Don?t forget to enclose a check for one year?s dues, payable to ?sm. retirement in 1989. This violent death has left many tenant and health care activists wondering if was the victim of an attempted robbery or random violence. or if he was targeted for assassination. The Sunday evening attack was apparently motiveless but had elements of a stalking. According to witnesses. his attacker had apparently waited for Al to pass a dark doorway on West 82nd Street just east of 98 Riverside Drive, then stepped out of the shadows and struck him on the head with a metal pipe. His wallet and watch were not taken. His activism had indeed earned him many enemies. As a co?founder of the Association of Concerned HIP Enrollees (ACHE) he was asharp critic of the Health Insurance Plan of New York. In numer? ous public forums he assailed HIP for frequent rate increases, declining medical care, and the bloated salaries of its execu- tives. He attacked hiring of Barry Feinstein. the ousted teamsters union leader who was accused of misus- ing funds, at an annual salary reported to be $200,000. As recently as January 27 he had testi?ed bitingly about HIP mismanagement at a State Assembly oversight hearing. He is survived by two sisters. Hilda Barton and Martha Skora. two nieces and a nephew. I BECKET COUNCIL ON HOUSING 50$ ADDRESS CITY ZIP PHONE (WORK) Tipper. ?anked by Secret Service agents. talked about her awakening to the homeless situation on a drive with the kiddies to meet Daddy who was then still in the U. S. Senate. She was most impassioned on the plight of the mentally ill. It made me wonder how long it will take her to join the ranks and see her out there. Andrew waxed poetic about the earthquake in Cali- fornia. equating it with the homeless situation in New York. The dislocation out there is the same as displacement here. although the earthquake only lasted 60 seconds and back home it has taken many years. He commended his agency. several times. for increasing the federal budget for homeless programs from $800 million to $1.6 billion for Fiscal Year 1995. Also HUD. for coming to cities to see and hear what is needed. instead of running the agency from Washington. I had hoped for more than this session of mutual back- patting. Perhaps a bit of ?re and brimstone. As we were leaving this traveling road show billed as an "inter-active" (HUD will do all the talking and you will listen) conference. I heard more than one person ask the same question: How many families could have been housed for h0w many months in each city visited for the money spent on this conference"? And let's not forget the cost of security and secret service. I cont'd from page 2 the time was that Mr. Jack Still. building rep to the Towers, had hand carried a copy of that document to the manager of Central Towers a full four hours earlier. He did not inform management that the document was interde? partmental correspondence between HUD and DHCR and that taken as DHCR approval of the rent increase. Mr. Kenneth LoBene of HUD's Buffalo of?ce had already informed Mr. Michael Hanley, Ms. Weiner's asso- ciate in Rochester, that given the date of the memo, and the fact that it could not possibly be in the hands of the tenants by February 1. the requirement for 30 days notice to the tenants could not be met. and therefore the earliest the rent increase, if any, could go into effect would be April 1. Lo and behold, management put the notice out on February 3. Tenants were. of course. forced to assume that this was notice of rent increase effective March 1. When asked if this was the intent. the Towers property manager replied yes. When told it would be challenged, she asked, ?Why?? She explained that she had asked DHCR and was informed that there was no need to give another 30 days notice because it had already been given with the original notice. This despite LoBene's assertion to the contrary. Obviously, not only did DHCR and HUD not know what the other was doing, HUD Buffalo wasn?t even on the same page. Ms. Weiner went immediately into action, requesting that HUD rescind the rent increase and begin the process all over again. We all felt that appealing to HUD was the only meaningful avenue left open to us. At the same time Mr. Easton forwarded the materials to top HUD of?cials in Washington, D. C. through the National Alliance of HUD Tenants. One day we wrote up our challenge. the next day it was hand delivered to the highest level of HUD. At this point HUD instructed DHCR to disapprove the rent increase. and the owners of the Towers were told they had to start from scratch. HUD also instructed DHCR to correct its flawed procedures for processing landlord applications throughout the state. And there it stands. It will be four to six months before the tenants and our advocates have to sit down at another conference with DHCR, but we are con?dent that the issues will be heard, the statistics which suggest that there is nojusti?cation for any rent increase will be overwhelm- ing, and. just as important, the tenants will be accorded the respect due them not only as tenant consumers, but as human beings seeking the same dignity as everyone else. I John Bymes is president of the Central Towers Tenants Association.