Speaker Quinn Bears Bad News for Real Estate Crowd
As the featured speaker at Tuesday’s quarterly gathering of the Brooklyn Real Estate Roundtable, Council Speaker Christine Quinn didn’t tell the audience of developers, property owners and brokers what they wanted to hear. If the City wrests control over rent stabilization from the State, as is expected, Quinn said that it would likely work to…
As the featured speaker at Tuesday’s quarterly gathering of the Brooklyn Real Estate Roundtable, Council Speaker Christine Quinn didn’t tell the audience of developers, property owners and brokers what they wanted to hear. If the City wrests control over rent stabilization from the State, as is expected, Quinn said that it would likely work to undo the pro-landlord steps that have been taken in recent years regarding decontrol and destabilization. She also didn’t give the impression that 421-a program would be reinstated anytime soon. The one bit of news that didn’t elicit a groan from the crowd: She does not expect that the city will raise property taxes later this year. Oh, and she also made glowing comments about Two Trees when asked about the prospects for its proposed Dock Street development.
Montrose, what do you really think about Christine Quinn getting a cheapy apartment, in the city, when some nurse who makes how much, pays free market and lives way out in Queens and has a long commute to her job? Christine Quinn can afford to pay free market. she can afford to buy a house in New Jersey! she can probably afford to catch cabs everywhere too. She is hoarding an apartment that should go to someone who is much needier than her. I agree there needs to be a safety net to help people, but Christine Quinn on $140k/yr does not need our help. She’s taking away resources that could go to someone who really needs them.
Did they laugh 😉
Bxgrl – I read a quote, I think from a debt counsellor trying to get a laugh among a not-pepared-to-see-the-funny-side crowd, along the lines of “Whoever dies with the most stuff wins right?”
There should be income limits on rent control and stabilized. Agree, IB- maybe 75k is a fair limit. 250k is outrageous.
Ok Montrose,
Than put a reasonable low income threshold on rent stabilized apartments . . . maybe 75k/yr. You claim those with stabilized apartments “NEED THE SUPPORT.” BS, most of them are just taking advantage of amazing deals and could find other housing elsewhere if they had to.
A 250k/yr rent stabilization income threshold, or whatever your buddy in pandering politics, Quinn, espouses is pure insanity.
My brother-in-law has a few choice words about the union too. Agree, dittoburg. The deifiniition of “rich” is a variable. Still, I have such a hard time listening to friends in that tax bracket talk about how they bought 15 pairs of an expensive shoe in every color because they liked it so much, and then hear them omplain about how poor they are. Maybe our real problem is that as a society we are geared to believing we can never have enough stuff. Lousy philosophy if you ask me 🙂
Thanks, Benson. I appreciate your thoughts, and to be honest, my wife also complains about “the union-mentality crap” just like Montrose’s relatives. Dave is also correct about “the benefits, vacation time and pension [being] enviable.” But having myself worked for businesses large and small including two Fortune 500 media companies, “do-nothing” bureauracracy and waste aren’t limited to the public sector.
It really is a scary thought, I agree.
But on the other hand, maybe Quinn, Rangel, and Patterson will screw things up so badly for NYC housing and subsequently the local economy that folks will vote Republican in the next city elections, and the rent laws will be abolished completely forever.
Imagine NYC with no rent laws. It would be “like a breath of fresh air. . .”
Folks with limited means could actually find an affordable apartment for rent at the same time that private landlords could actually CHOOSE their own tenants and not be forced to put up with lunatics living in their buildings.
Our housing market would be like Chicago’s or Boston’s. It would actually work for everybody.
I don’t like to get into these political discussions, mostly because both parties are no strangers to self interest, greed, pandering, ineptitude, waste and hypocrisy.
My mother was also a teacher, as is my aunt, a public school art teacher here in Bklyn, and both could fry the air talking about the unions, the entrenched stupidity, and the cronyism. But for both of them, it was still about the kids, and both, like Mrs. ENY, would go out of pocket for supplies, and well beyond their duties to make sure kids got educated well. In spite of the unions, etc, the good NYC teachers deserve to be paid more, and I know that that is a complicated idea which needs to be expanded on, but that’s not the discussion here.
I still say that for all of the welfare cheats, all of the tales of millionaires in rent controlled apts, the fact remains that the social systems that we set up to help those in need, still do that, and that is a good thing. I fully agree that those systems need a serious overhauling, but the vast majority of those in those programs are people who need help and support, not the cheats and get-over artists, and those people are housed and clothed, which is what a civilized society is supposed to do for the least among us.