Tuesday Links
Lincoln Place Mural. Photo by ec.kane. Stuy Town Tenants Roiled by Challenges on Residency [NY Times] Contractors Kept Busy Maintaining Abandoned Homes [NY Times] Ingersoll Community Ctr Still Not Open After 7 Yrs [NY Daily News] Report: Poorer Nabes Have Less Green Space [NY Daily News] Death at Crown Hts Construction Site [Queens Crap] Op-Ed:…
Lincoln Place Mural. Photo by ec.kane.
Stuy Town Tenants Roiled by Challenges on Residency [NY Times]
Contractors Kept Busy Maintaining Abandoned Homes [NY Times]
Ingersoll Community Ctr Still Not Open After 7 Yrs [NY Daily News]
Report: Poorer Nabes Have Less Green Space [NY Daily News]
Death at Crown Hts Construction Site [Queens Crap]
Op-Ed: Walentas School Needed [NY Post]
Commuters Can Rate City Buses [AM New York]
Amity Street Horror II Jeered [GL]
“We worked really hard to try to find a balance where we’re not invading people’s privacy.â€
Yeah, they’re just kicking people out, instead. Jerk.
What do you think if someone lived in Stuy under the guise of a relative who may have passed or is obviously living somewhere else and is subletting the rent controlled apartment and making a profit.
Please advise.
No, you are merely concluding that people who own outside property should not be eligible for subsidized rent.
Sounds reasonable on the face of it, but does not take into consideration that the article is talking about people who have lived there for 35 years, when, in 1973, I’m sure they didn’t move in with property on the side. They were literally paying middleclass people to stay in the city at that time, so don’t blame the tenants for taking advantage of a perfectly legal set up that allowed them to live in Manhattan. If, in the last 35 years, they did well, and were able to buy some property, then good on them.
Why do we insist on having people live hand to mouth in order to be “worthy” of something that they qualified for, when they first moved in? It’s just jealousy from those who were not around to take the same advantage. Sure, if you don’t live here, and are holding on to an apartment, don’t renew the lease. Terrorizing those who legitimately do live there is totally out of line.
Yes, it’s a god given right to have another private citizen subsidize your NYC apartment, otherwise known as rent stabilization.
And of course every rent stabilized tenant deserves a summer home! What’s the point of being subsidized if you can’t spend the savings on a beach house?
So based on the Stuy Town article….is it correct to conclude that there is a requirement to own a second home and/or out-of-state “property” in order to qualify for a rent stabilized apartment?