Posted by Another opinion on May 13, 1997 at 04:25:03:
In Reply to: Analysis of Pataki's Rent Reg Proposal posted by MikeW on May 12, 1997 at 21:07:19:
I agree ... it's over. I predict that in the future there will be a small property owners group coming up and out in front ... look what happened in MA, in CA ... in other words, we ain't seen nothing yet.
: So that's the his compromise - vacancy decontrol and lower luxury decontrol limits. This is a very predictable, but still interesting move. Outside of the city it will sound very moderate. No old little old ladies turned out in the street. The only people who will be actively opposed to it are in the tenant community, who donít tend to vote Republican anyway, so Pataki doesnít lose any votes there.
: It puts Sheldon Silver in a very difficult position. Bruno, sticking to the role that has been carefully scripted for him, attacked Patakiís proposal for not providing any phase out of the rent regs. This counterbalances Silverís position that he wonít accept any modifications. This puts the fulcrum of the issue at Patakiís compromise. If Silver accepts this, heíll be crucified by the tenant community, which is a large part of his constituency. If he stands his ground, the regs expire, and Pataki says he tried, but the Democrats wouldnít be flexible.
: I saw one of the Democrats new pro regulation commercials as I was watching coverage of Patakiís news conference. To anyone who doesnít follow this issue closely, Patakiís position would significantly negate the effect of the commercials.
: Defending regulation has not gotten any easier, and may be getting significantly harder.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup