80/20 hell

[TenantNet]

If you're in GP, then contact People's Firehouse.

[Done&Done]

Nope, not in GP. That's my point about the building, which is in an area you couldn't call affordable to begin with (so the 20% is a leg up for working people, it's not 80% of overdevelopment dumped on some mom-&-pop 'hood). And I'm not in GP in the meantime, either. At the point of desperation, I wrote to everybody in the world. Going through "proper channels" got me nowhere. What more could I lose?

I'd like to spend my time reading up on the theory of housing trends across the city but can't really do that until I got a proper roof over my head (is the irony). Pain management, illness, etc., takes up the rest of the day... people in a situation like this are least able to deal with LL attacks, but of course get them constantly. So stabilization really counts for something -- even if you still have to fight some jerk, you at least have some rights.

[Done&Done]

Given the previous, what does TenantNet think of this? And what happened? Did it get vetoed? I can't find anything more about it.

[TenantNet]

That happened a year ago. Problem is both the Bloomberg-Quinn version and the Vito Lopez version were horrible, if only by a matter of degree. It speaks of so-called "80/20 housing" which comes from Chapter 421(a). It's complicated, but essentially the program gives developers tax abatements for a period of time, city-wide. In certain areas, called "exclusion zones" in order to get the tax abatement the developer must set aside 20% of the units as allegedly affordable. It also involves tax-free municipal bonds (so the govt. pays for a substantial part of the luxury tower) and low-income tax credits (another way of rewarding developers of luxury housing.

Is there any real affordable housing? Yes -- although it's temporary. There are many reported problems with the 20% including units built with inferior materials, usually on lower floors (without a view) and in some cases the low-income tenants are forced to use a separate entrance. In other words, the low-income tenants are ghetto-ized amongst the towers.

In the process neighborhoods are often destroyed through direct and secondary displacement, and core retail stores are often replaced with more expansive alternates. (been to am expensive grocery store lately?)

So who supports this crap? Often democrats as it creates the illusiong they are doing something for you, but the reality is far different.

So-called tenant groups like Housing Conservation Coordinators, Goles and others and so on support this stuff. So do Tenants & Neighbors, whose sole purpose is to shill for bad politicians.

There was a lot of debate as to how to "reform" the 421(a) program which required renewal last year. But the debate was focused on how bad to make it (Bloomberg/Quinn v. Lopez), not how to make it go away.

[Done&Done]

That happened a year ago.

The News item I saw was about six months.

Is there any real affordable housing? Yes -- although it's temporary. There are many reported problems with the 20% including units built with inferior materials, usually on lower floors (without a view) and in some cases the low-income tenants are forced to use a separate entrance. In other words, the low-income tenants are ghetto-ized amongst the towers.

Jeez. And -- inferior materials in the same building? Wouldn't that jeopardize the whole structure?

So-called tenant groups like Housing Conservation Coordinators, Goles and others and so on support this stuff. So do Tenants & Neighbors, whose sole purpose is to shill for bad politicians.

Wow, you can't tell by looking. T&N actually got me in touch with a needed person at a key agency, though I'm still waiting to see how that goes.