Jerry and Rob Speyer Toss 115 People onto the Jobless Pile

How do you know it's an upgrade?!?

Um, because at Home Depot primer is like 50 bucks a can? (Although I do recommend Gripper.)

Luxie: Is there a link to the layoff news?

Perhaps, but there are no Blue Light Specials at HD and, to me, that represents a diminution of service...

You just gotta bring your hatred for Obama into every discussion.

I don't hate Obama. I hate his policies which are ruining this country

"I hate his policies which are ruining this country."

Bullshit. Try the Fox Noise forum -- they thrive on lies and misinformation over there, like your ridiculous claim that we have "the best health care system in the world." But thanks for the laugh.

Right. George Bush and his war criminal administration did so much good for this country. Not. If Obama is apologizing to other countries it is for the deeds of last administration not the one from 60+ years ago. It's true we have outstanding health care here, but only if you can afford it. If you have a job that offers insurance you are ok, just so long as you keep the job. If you are jobless and uninsured forget it. If you want to buy insurance and aren't 100% healthy forget it.

"best health care system in the world"? Spoken like a person who has never worked in health care.

The families of the ~200,000 people who die every years due to medical errors may have a different opinion. And please don't get me started on hospital acquired infections.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/967022-overview

http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=deaths-from-avoidable-medical-error-2009-08-10

I just heard from one of my neighbors who claims to have seen the Unity Pledge the TA leadership is distributing in a couple of days. He claims that it says that by signing the pledge the signer agrees to the TA board being their representative !!!

If that is true, I urge everyone NOT to sign and wait to see what happens at the March 13 meeting

I suppose it really depends on how it is worded.

I wonder if it is it necessary or appropriate to designate a representative before there are negotiations or a proposal to evaluate.

A lot more transparency on a few key issues seems warranted at this point. Perhaps they should hold off on the pledge until we know what we are pledging to?!?

Yet so many people feed into them.

Representative in what specific matters ? Anyone know ?

Wouldn't the TA need to go to the bargaining table with some sort of commitments from the tenants ? Obviously, nobody's committing to anything sight unseen, but there should be a general framework that most should agree to.

I'm tired of guessing about all of this stuff. The TA didn't share 1 scintilla of information with us during the last "bid", offering 4.5 billion dollars in a scheme that would have been disastrous for all. While I expect better results this time around, it would seem logical that at least SOME of the cards need to be on the table in order for us to individually proceed in any intelligent way.

Show me.

More falsehoods spread by Ziggy. Yes, world leaders with fat wallets can certainly afford to fly in and visit a top doctor or specialist at, say, the Cleveland Clinic, but too many American citizens can't even afford basic health insurance for themselves and their families. Once again, this obvious point went waaaaay over your head.

Ziggy, please stop posting your misinformation here. This board is a much better fit for you:

http://www.rushlimbaughforum.com/

Definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result...

I'd like to see those cards, too.

And since I'm a little short this week, I hope it's not $4.5 billion this time around.

I agree that the TA should be more open and forthcoming with information. However, it wouldn't do for them to broadcast the kind of information that the circling sharks might find useful. Ole Wilbur (and no doubt many others) are keeping a low profile, but in the way a crocodile stays hidden in the murky waters until its prey is within jaws reach!

"And as for GWB being a war criminal. Do you know that Biden recently said on a Sunday morning show that Iraq has become a great success (and of course gave sole credit to the Obama administration). So GWB's part in the war makes him a "war criminal" but obama is the "genius" because Iraq is free and holding democratic elections."

Bush is guilty of not only war crimes...........

Dennis J. Kucinich of Ohio
In the United States House of Representatives
Monday, June 9th, 2008
A Resolution

Resolved, that President George W. Bush be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate:

Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against President George W. Bush for high crimes and misdemeanors.

In his conduct while President of the United States, George W. Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has committed the following abuses of power.

Article I
Creating a Secret Propaganda Campaign to Manufacture a False Case for War Against Iraq.

Article II
Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression.

Article III
Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.

Article IV
Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States.

Article V
Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.

Article VI
Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114.

Article VII
Invading Iraq Absent a Declaration of War.

Article VIII
Invading Iraq, A Sovereign Nation, in Violation of the UN Charter.

Article IX
Failing to Provide Troops With Body Armor and Vehicle Armor.

Article X
Falsifying Accounts of US Troop Deaths and Injuries for Political Purposes.

Article XI
Establishment of Permanent U.S. Military Bases in Iraq.

Article XII
Initiating a War Against Iraq for Control of That Nation's Natural Resources.

Article XIIII
Creating a Secret Task Force to Develop Energy and Military Policies With Respect to Iraq and Other Countries.

Article XIV
Misprision of a Felony, Misuse and Exposure of Classified Information And Obstruction of Justice in the Matter of Valerie Plame Wilson, Clandestine Agent of the Central Intelligence Agency.

Article XV
Providing Immunity from Prosecution for Criminal Contractors in Iraq.

Article XVI
Reckless Misspending and Waste of U.S. Tax Dollars in Connection With Iraq and US Contractors.

Article XVII
Illegal Detention: Detaining Indefinitely And Without Charge Persons Both U.S. Citizens and Foreign Captives.

Article XVIII
Torture: Secretly Authorizing, and Encouraging the Use of Torture Against Captives in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Other Places, as a Matter of Official Policy.

Article XIX
Rendition: Kidnapping People and Taking Them Against Their Will to "Black Sites" Located in Other Nations, Including Nations Known to Practice Torture.

Article XX
Imprisoning Children.

Article XXI
Misleading Congress and the American People About Threats from Iran, and Supporting Terrorist Organizations Within Iran, With the Goal of Overthrowing the Iranian Government.

Article XXII
Creating Secret Laws.

Article XXIII
Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

Article XXIV
Spying on American Citizens, Without a Court-Ordered Warrant, in Violation of the Law and the Fourth Amendment.

Article XXV
Directing Telecommunications Companies to Create an Illegal and Unconstitutional Database of the Private Telephone Numbers and Emails of American Citizens.

Article XXVI
Announcing the Intent to Violate Laws with Signing Statements.

Article XXVII
Failing to Comply with Congressional Subpoenas and Instructing Former Employees Not to Comply.

Article XXVIII
Tampering with Free and Fair Elections, Corruption of the Administration of Justice.

Article XXIX
Conspiracy to Violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Article XXX
Misleading Congress and the American People in an Attempt to Destroy Medicare.

Article XXXI
Katrina: Failure to Plan for the Predicted Disaster of Hurricane Katrina, Failure to Respond to a Civil Emergency.

Article XXXII
Misleading Congress and the American People, Systematically Undermining Efforts to Address Global Climate Change.

Article XXXIII
Repeatedly Ignored and Failed to Respond to High Level Intelligence Warnings of Planned Terrorist Attacks in the US, Prior to 911.

Article XXXIV
Obstruction of the Investigation into the Attacks of September 11, 2001.

Article XXXV
Endangering the Health of 911 First Responders.

Excellent post, Girl! Thank you. I would love to see Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, et al be tried for war crimes. The current administration inherited an illegal war which we cannot extricate ourselves from in a hurry; a tanked economy and the scorn and disgust of most of the civilized world. That asshole, Blair of GB, should be tried along with them as well.

"I would love to see Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, et al be tried for war crimes."

Exactly, and I'm very disappointed that it looks like Obama isn't going to do that.

Got it.

Read first. Sign later...

It's irrelevant what you think of Dennis Kucinich. Putting him down is just your predictable way of trying to distract people from the real issue - Bush's horrific crimes. Are you also dismissing those who wrote the Constitution? That is what's important, not whether or not you like Dennis Kucinich. Bush was supposed to "preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and take care that the laws be faithfully executed." Bush abused his power in several instances and also committed war crimes, that's what Kucinich is bringing attention to. Don't blame the messenger.

On this Board a moderate Dem like me equals a tea partier in your minds.That is why the Dem party can't get anything done these days
As for pledge _ i wouldn't sign unless what I hear at March 13 meeting makes saense to me

We really should pay attention to what's posted on the TA website. The info on the Unity Pledge is right there.

"While not legally binding, the pledges formally designate the Association to negotiate on tenants’ behalf; to express support for a plan that gives people an option to buy or continue to rent their apartment, keeps the community affordable, and preserves open space and quality of maintenance; and promises that, prior to making any agreement to purchase their apartment, tenants will first give the Tenants Association the opportunity to present a plan for their consideration."

Not legally binding sounds about right, yet gives them the go ahead to present a plan.

Precisely and I am no tea partier, certainly when it comes to most social issues

Anon
If they were truly a representative Board but their historical lack of transparency and their failure to hold elections for directors gives me and others great pause that these are the people who should lead the process.

Garodnick seems to be willing to work with them, and I don't see any other likely candidates. If there was another group that fit the bill then that's a different story, but it looks like they get a shot at doing it. I'm forced to assume that they're mucking in the trenches as we speak. What exactly they hope to accomplish I hope to hear from them at the meeting.

That said, I totally understand your point.

I agree completely with Ziggy about the "Unity Pledge." Let's see how Al Doyle and Co. answer the questions next Saturday before deciding anything.

My initial reaction, though, is complete cynicism. It's a nice fantasy to have apartments selling at that price while keeping rent stabilization for those that want/need it. But this little survey they're sending around is pure pie-in-the-sky stuff.

For starters, it would be $1.5 to $2 billion minimum to take PCV/ST off the creditors hands. That assumes enough tenants are willing to put up anywhere from say $20,000 to $100,000 of their own money along with creditors lending support. If 5,000 people put up an average of $50,000 as collateral, that's only $25 million down on a theoretical $2 billion buy. The rest would be financed.

Then we'd have to run the complex to the standard which its residents expect. Buying apartments at those low, low prices means that every coop tenant would have to pay a LOT more than $1,000/month in maintenance every month to cover the nut.

How many people would be willing to put their life's earnings into that scenario? And what syndicate of debt holders would see this as a good idea? To me, a PCV/ST co-op corporation run on that economic model would be in default even faster than Tishman Speyer/BlackRock. Please, someone with real knowledge of the economics -- tell me why I'm wrong to believe this is not a sustainable idea.

Besides, none of this will happen any time soon. Given the legal actions already under way, this mess will be in the courts for years.

Finally, the Tenant's Association has never acted with any transparency. Given what this place is about, why is Al Doyle so interested in playing real estate mogul? Shouldn't TA be working Albany to get rent stabilization laws renewed and strengthening the tenant protections on the books? With TA, I don't know their agenda nor do I trust them automatically. I wouldn't let them speak for me, nor would I sign such a document until I knew more....lots more.

While I'll acknowledge my prejudices, I'll do my best to keep an open mind at next Saturday's Baruch meeting.

Just how did you ANONYMOUS come up with $1,000 for maintenance for each apartment???????????

nothing "secretive"- just virtually all of the neighbors in my building with whom i spoke yesterday as people emerged from their hibernation on the beautiful day

Seriously, don't pay attention to him, StuyInEyePetie is a shill.

I didn't mention that subject in any post in this thread.

Everybody saw TS's default coming, it dragged on, almost in slow-motion, like a dream...There was a time for what you are proposing, ziggy. The time was then, not now. We no longer have the luxury of time. The foreclosure process could take anywhere from two months to a year. Having seen the TA's organizing process firsthand (I am a building captain and attended meetings for zone captains -- they were trying to recruit me), it's my humble opinion that this is hardly the time to begin doing what you are suggesting. What you are suggesting seems foolhardy if not downright insanely self-destructive.

I know you trust Dan G. Why not ask him at the meeting, on the sly, what he thinks of your idea?

what are you referring to?

I have to relate a recent experience. First, let me say that whenever I call maintenance, I get through to someone, usually without waiting too long. Recently I phoned in a request for a light bulb change. A week went by and nothing happened. Then I submitted the request via the Web site. I got an email response right away with a time when the bulb would be replaced (same day, I think)--and it was! I was astounded.

I have thought about that. We don't have legal standing but I wish that the equity investors in the deal like CALPERS and the Florida Pension Board would sue Speyer for misleading them into investing. It would be a hard case to win but what terrible PR for Jerry and THe Boy Wonder

This. As you well know.

the important thing is to show up on Sat and voice your opinions
my issue is that we should not be asked to sign a Unity Pledge until a consensus emerges among tenants. We should not blindly follow whatever the TA board wants to do.Without doubt, the Unity Pledges will be used by the TA Board in justifying whatever approach is taken with third parties like CW Capital and Fannie And Freddie
Clearly we need some group to lead the effort. But that group must act based on the consensus reached at the tenants' meeting and NOT based on what a very small group of tenants believes is best for us all.

This "survey" you're talking about is NOT being circulated by the TA. It's an independent venture.

Your cynicism is justified. We've had detailed discussions about the facts. It's obvious that the community can't just pick up the mess that MetLife caused by walking away with 5.4 billion.

We all know there are a number of scenarios that could occur. I don't think most of them will be that good. I personally am praying for a miracle that will save the community and return it to its intended purpose, but I'm not confident that can be accomplished.

If a real estate company buys us, we're screwed, nothing changes. If we can pull a rabbit out of the hat, we better hope that the financials are sound, and that the management company understands the rules that need to be in place to make the quality of life here tolerable again. As it stands now with dogs run amok, a large transient population with a "me first" attitude and bare floors/party central being more the norm than not, I think it makes the community a less desirable place to live, not to mention buy into.

But my perspective is one of a long time resident. Perhaps those that don't know what they're missing won't care.

You're right about the survey being an outside company and not the TA. I don't know who this outside company is, what their motives are and who is sponsoring it, but it seems to be causing a lot of confusion and dissension among tenants. As for buying into ST as it is now: I wouldn't even entertain the idea. I think it would be the American Nightmare, not the American Dream. The units are old and falling apart. When I can pay $1,500 per month rent to live here and can walk away anytime I want, why would I want to get saddled with a huge mortgage plus maintenance costs for what would probably be a lifelong albatross? I don't think these apartments have any investment value unless you are very young and have lots of money to bring them up to scratch. You make a good point too about the quality of life here. I don't want to buy into a dorm community. It's tolerable as a rental, but I sure as hell wouldn't want to an "owner" who is actually owned by an old money pit apartment with neighbors from hell!

That is why a noneviction plan works. Those who want to buy, can do so, and those who choose to continue to rent can continue to do so.
that is true of all noneviction plans and that it why I cannot understand the antipathy to such a plan expressed by some of the posters on this website.
A rental-only plan hurts those of us who might want the option to own our homes and build equity rather than give rent to a landlord

A noneviction plan does NOT work if the goal is moderate/middle income affordable housing for the long term, and the condo/co-op is not of a limited equity or limited profit nature.

How's the PR business?

Boo, do you know what specifics must be in place to support executing such a plan? I do not & would be curious to know.

Not surprised to see you avoid replying to my question.

I think the $1000 number for average monthly maintenance is a reasonable estimate.

I've posted the 2005 operating expenses here twice before. If you take the actual operating expenses for calendar year 2005 that were set forth in MetLife's sales packet in 2006, and divide that by 11,200 apartments, you get an average of $814 a month per apartment. Allowing for changes in operating expenses, my estimate is that the average monthly maintenance will be between $700 (if the place qualifies for tax breaks for affordable housing) and $1000 per apartment. Then of course the monthly maintenance for any particular apartment will depend on the usual factors of size, building location, floor, light, view, renovations, etc.

And it's the size of a pill box!

I'm not an affordable housing expert by any means (although I do have some experience in this area -- I was co-counsel to the developers of a large affordable housing complex in the City).

But basically, I don't think ST-PCV can be long term affordable housing for moderate/middle income people without A LOT of help from government, e.g., low interest financing and tax abatement/reductions for affordable housing, eminent domain ....

That's why I've been wondering for the longest time about the TA's business plan in 2006 ... Exactly how was it going to pay $4.5 billion for the property and maintain it as affordable housing for the long term?

Maybe he's a member of the new PCVST Owners Association that has written a couple of letters to T&V.

"Then of course the monthly maintenance for any particular apartment will depend on the usual factors of size, building location, floor, light, view, renovations, etc."

Roger that, and don't forget property taxes, electricity (they may not have factored in the A/C), Con Ed Steam, and the large property maintenance expense for the huge amount of grass and gardens.

Take one look at Speyer's vision after a winter of neglect and you see the difficulty. Met kept the place affordable by using perennial ground cover shrubs and grass. It was less fancy to look at but easier and cheaper to maintain. Remember, the reason they planted all this crap was to make the place look less like the (middle class) housing project it is.

Did they say that retaining affordability was one of their goals the last time around? I don't recall.

Regardless, without special assistance, I don't know how that would have been possible. Someone's gotta make the monthly nut. If it's not going to be borne by the people who continue to rent 'affordably' then it must be borne by the owners. In which case, you would have to be pretty foolish to want to own.

No. Last time around, they spoke vaguely about creating a "mix" of Market Rate, Rent Stabilized and tenant owned apartments. Specifics were never publicized.

At NO time has anyone spoken about finding a housing advocacy group to lobby Washington and get Fannie and Freddie to forgive some of the mortgage in contemplation of keeping this place affordable. I hate to beg for a bailout, but geez.. talk about getting the dirty end of the stick from Jerry and Robbie Speyer.

At NO time has anyone spoken about finding a housing advocacy group to lobby Washington and get Fannie and Freddie to forgive some of the mortgage in contemplation of keeping this place affordable. I hate to beg for a bailout, but geez.. talk about getting the dirty end of the stick from Jerry and Robbie Speyer."

Now THAT would be a very worthwhile goal for the TA to pursue.

Do you know if they still replace the fluorescent strip in the kitchen? MetLife always did this at a small charge to the tenant and they would send a handyman in the evenings or on the weekend if necessary. I know these strips last for years, but for some of us they are too difficult to replace as the ceiling is too high!

Why do we need forgiveness of the mortgage? The mortgage lenders will sell the property free and clear of the mortgage.

Boo, how could one insure long term affordability with a 4.5 billion dollar bid ? The debt service sunk the Speyers, it would have done the same to others.

I'm just SO curious to hear something concrete at this "meeting".

Really? I thought the new owner would have to assume the debt.

Yes long term affordability was the stated goal in '06.

They do replace the kitchen light. Not sure about nights and weekends and I don't know what they charge for it now.

err.. Parkchester perhaps ?

The bulb costs like $3 at the 1st avenue & 20th st hardware store.

It's pretty easy to replace the bulb, one of your tall neighbors and a step stool can do it. If the whole transformer is gone, then ST has to replace it.

That NY1 piece was about today's press conference/rally at MetLife's sister project, Riverton (the place that MetLife built for black people to justify their exclusion from ST-PCV ... "separate but equal").

Of course I meant Riverton, sorry... brain fart.

I have them all the time!

Just great, how's the business of being a troll?

Sure you do.

I'm still waiting for an answer as to the different options to mailing in your rent. Everybody who lives here knows what they are and where they are.

Huh????

Amen, ProTenants. Everybody needs to chill out until we really know what's going on. At this point, everyone is bloviating about next steps, which is fine, but how much real knowledge do we have?

Also, I misspoke in thinking the "Unity Pledge" survey came directly from TA. I now realize it didn't.

Why do you even bother responding to this boxo?

Thanks for your answer. You passed!

Now that that's squared away, the TA could probably use a good PR person like you! I understand the pay sucks (ie: non-existant), but it's for a good cause. Seriously. Consider volunteering.

We're all boxos on this bus.

Thank you ProTenant
I agree that this process will be lengthy and complicated . I further agree that apts for $100K is an idea not based on reality and , in fact, unwisely sets expectations for prices too low.
As for a united front among tenants. Conceptually that's a good idea and a noble goal.
But why are we being asked to sign a "Unity Pledge" BEFORE the March 13 meeting. Noone (other than the handful of TA Board members) has any idea about what will transpire at that meeting. What if I and others don't like their ideas? Our "Pledges" will still be on file. While they are not legally binding (Paul Weiss inserted some legalese) , these pledges will undoubtably be used by the TA Board when discussing options with third parties.
So those who sign the Pledges will be giving their support to the TA Board BEFORE even knowing what direction the Board is going.
Moreover, I am concerned about the historical lack of transparency of the Board and the fact that to the best of my knowledge few, if any, of the Board members have any experience in dealing with complex transactions .

OK. That's a good one. Gotta give you credit for that one!

Typing on this stupid netbook, I can't even insult you properly...

Is there any reason we couldn't or shouldn't cross out any language in that pledge that we find unacceptable?

My recommendation is to wait until after the March 13 meeting. If you like what is decided , by all means sign the pledge as is. But I see no reason to sign before the meeting

It's easier than having to deal with the nonsense, Lifer.

Thanks, RR. Are you recruiting for TA, or just kidding around? While I'll be there Saturday, I'm not volunteering for anything now -- except talking with my neighbors and furthering my own education on this.

I'm not with the TA.

I was kind of kidding because I've been riding you. But also not kidding. It's my opinion that the TA should make good use of residents' professional talents, and that a good PR person would be a very valuable asset. If that base isn't already covered, and if you like what you hear on Saturday, you might want to consider it pitching yourself. It's in your own best interest...

Boo,

No person or organization, let alone the TA, can allow an un-moderated forum on their website. The TA was able to recruit exactly one volunteer during the entire course of the old Forum's existence, and that volunteer did it all day long, seven days a week. I wouldn't expect to see it come back anytime soon, if ever.

Since when are we able to pay rent online? I've never heard of that, and the link you posted doesn't work.

All excellent suggestions. Given the circumstances, they are almost obliged to do it.

Thanks! I have actually tried to register there before and it doesn't work. I tried again just now and got this message:

We're sorry!
We can not locate your tenant record.
Please make sure that you are registering for the appropriate site. Peter Cooper Village residents should register at resident.petercoopernyc.com.
If this is not the issue, please click here or call Resident Services, at 212-420-5000, to verify your tenant information.

When you call they have no idea what you're talking about!

You have to call them or email them and give them the last 4 digits of your SS number. IMHO, the best part of the site is seeing which washers and dryers are free. But you can also submit maintenance requests and get info about appliances, moving, etc.

great - thanks!

I don't think you can pay rent online.

According to the Web site, the only way is to arrange to have your bank send a check to the P.O. box, if your bank will do that.

GreenGirl,

I haven't seen it. (But maybe I'll go buy a copy of T&V.)

Anyways, is it really clear that it's from T&V? I'm guessing that it may be from a potential vulture purchaser or one of the existing lenders who hired a marketing firm to see what interest there is in converting this place to 100% appreciating free market condos.

Here's a description:
Top of sheet of 8.5 x 11 white paper: Photocopy of T&V of 3/4, p. 3, showing listing of "Events in Stuy Town in March."

Below that: Follow us on Twitter! Visit Twitter.com/thetandv.

Below that in a box that takes up 3/4 of the paper, it says:

Advertisement
Stuyvesant Town, Peter Cooper Condo Conversion Survey
Based on a non-eviction, non-exclusionary, non-elitist plan
All residents are urged to express their opinion

1. Would you invest by buying your apartment? Yes No
2. Would you need a mortgage? Yes No
3. Could you raise capital to buy more than 1 apt? Yes No

Projected cost of unrenovated: 1BR $110,000 to $120,000
2BR $185,000 to $220,000
3BR $295,000 to 330,000

Note: Renovated & Peter Cooper larger apartments would cost more.

All personal information hereafter will be kept confidential
Name (optional)
Address
Apt. #
Email address

Comments: please include on a separate sheet

Return ASAP in a stamped envelope to:
The LAMALLE Survey
c/o T & V
20 West 22nd St., suite 906
New York, NY 10010

Please feel free to copy and pass on to your neighbors

Thanks GreenGirl. It does sound like it's from an interested party (existing or potential lender or vulture investor) who hired a marketing firm to conduct the survey, the results of which will be factored into the calculus for its next move.

I Googled "Lamalle Survey" and got nothing, so I guess this is an internal code name.

Forgot to say--if this survey is being conducted by someone other than T&V, their journalistic ethics, such as they are, are severely compromised. It's one thing to accept an ad, it's another to disseminate it and serve as the drop box for the survey. But who takes T&V seriously anyway? I'm amused that they don't have a Web site, but they do have a Twitter account.

Am I alone in thinking that giving these people this kind of information is a BAD idea?

Without knowing who they are, I think most of us think it's a BAD idea to give them any information.

Hm. Ad revenue keeps print rags in business. If people are feeling free to copy and distribute doesn't mean the paper is responsible. As far as papers being mailboxes? Dunno, but the Village Voice used to do it. Shrug.

Concerning circling vultures? That's a DEF.

The paper is collecting the responses so it's part of the ad, not just selling space. And who made the copies and dropped them in our lobbies? I'm guessing someone from T&V. So who is paying really? The line of demarcation is blurred. Where is the truth in this ad?

You can find some T&V articles on the Bronx News site.
http://www.bxnews.net/http%3A__www.bxnews.net/Bronx_News.html

You're not alone in thinking that, Lifer. I grew up during Watergate and my childhood hero is Jim Rockford. To me, cynicism is very healthy in this context. That's why I resent what these surveys imply -- that PCVST residents are dupes to be played.

People are great, I really like them a lot, but when there's this kind of money at stake, trust is relative. I want to know who the players are, what's their angle, who stands to gain what and what, etc.

GreenGirl,

Concerning the 115 layoffs: It might be a case of what an employer has to do--notify the State. It isn't clear that there will be layoffs necessarily but said employees will be discharged from TS.

I think.

115 is low. Maintenance, plumbers, electricians are easily 200.

I think.

One can return it with a message along the lines of xxxx xxx and the horse you rode in on. :-)

It's definitely what an employer has to do. And 115 employees will be let go, although we don't know which. Conceivably there are people at the TS mother ship assigned to ST/PCV who will be let go. I don't follow the distinction you make between people being laid off and people being discharged, though.

Re: T&V on Twitter--5 followers. Lux Living, Dan Garodnick, Scott Stringer, Brokers Weekly, and the Onion.

Correction: T&V is following LL, Dan, etal. Not the other way around.

What I meant is that while employees may be "discharged" from TS's payroll, it doesn't necessarily mean they will be on the unemployment line. Rose may well pick them up.

BTW. That survey ad? No mention of T&V within the ad that I noticed. FWIW.

People are great, I really like them a lot, but when there's this kind of money at stake, trust is relative. I want to know who the players are, what's their angle, who stands to gain what and what, etc.

I couldn't agree more.

It seems odd to me that the TA would have responses to a survey sent to the T&V office.

I heard they laid off Manny, but offered him the job of Maitre'd at the Speyers exclusive Top of The Crock restaurant at Cockerfella Center. I hope we hear from him soon.

The TA is ABSOLUTELY NOT behind the LaMalle Survey ad in the T&V. That is a fact.

RR is correct. The TA did not put that ad in T&V (and neither did I )

I repeat. The TA is not connected in any way, shape, or form to the survey in the T&V.

If you were to tie me down and waterboard me into making a guess, I'd probably blurt out that it's likely the same folks who have already used the editorial page of the T&V to advance their agenda.

I never thought the TA was behind the ad. I was pointing out to StuyInEyePetie—who thought it was—that it would have been an odd thing for the TA to do. I should have been clearer.

True dat.

StuyInEyePetie said:

"As for the survey ad, read this from TA's site and tell me they aren't behind it:

http://www.stpcvta.org/ta/post/organize_tenant_bid/ "

That's one of the most unfounded and speculative assertions I've seen here.

The TA is not behind it.

The flyer that was in my lobby does not have the TA letterhead or anything else that identifies it as coming from the TA, and the TA doesn't do things anonymously. The TA would not include a photocopy of listings from T&V (see my earlier post for a complete description of the flyer). The wording of the ad doesn't sound like any other communication from the TA. The ad asks for the survey to be returned ASAP, and the TA is sending out its own packet of info this week. The responses are to be sent to the T&V office, not the TA post office box. I volunteer as a building captain, and no one asked me to distribute the flyer. Is that enough for you? (Rhetorical question, no need to reply.)

The flyer is not in my building, I don't get the T&V, and there are 156 posts on this thread, so no, I did not see your earlier post. And I wasn't referring to you.

I do volunteer work for the TA that involves my working with copy for their flyers, bulletins, ads in T&V, etc. I did not receive copy from them for the survey in the T&V so I asked my contact about it, the person who sends me their copy. It's not their ad.

OK, I believe all of you!

But in the context of the flyer going around, this statement from TA makes things more confusing:

"The Tenants Association has mobilized a network of volunteers to reach all 11,232 apartments with unity pledges for residents to sign."

If that outreach is under way, is the T&V ad's language in any way similar to what TA will be distributing?

I guess it's something else TA will have to address on Saturday.

I've been paying my rent on-line thru my bank (Chase) for years. I have it set up as an automatic payment, and Chase sends a check. It's always worked well until recently--twice in the past 6 months, ST has said that they didn't receive my check, when the bank has clearly sent it. Don't know what the deal is--lack of staff? trying to say that I (a RS tenant) am not paying my rent on time? The most amazing thing to me is that there is not an electronic transfer system set up. (i.e., my AMEX bill gets paid via a funds transfer from Chase to AMEX, whereas ST still requires a paper check.) As a (failing) landlord, wouldn't you want to receive your money more quickly?

"As a (failing) landlord, wouldn't you want to receive your money more quickly?" Sure, but I'm guessing that TS hasn't invested in whatever it takes to make electronic transfers work. Some companies are slow to adopt new technology.

One of the many things I don't understand is how a "non-binding pledge" carries any weight at all.

Without any pledge, I think it would be reasonable for a seller or creditor to assume that tenants would give serious consideration to a bid on generally favorable terms. With the pledge, the TA really has no ability to negotiate on our behalf because we really haven't granted them the right to do so.

Is this thing just a well-intentioned 'paper tiger' gesture or are we really giving them rights we are not aware of? Neither of those alternatives seem particularly positive to me.

You can set up automatic payment from your credit card with Imperial Parking. I have been using that for several years.Works fine

Why would you give a Unity Pledge to ANYONE until you knew what their plan is?
I will wait to hear what happens on Saturday. If I like what I hear I will sign, if not, I won't. Seems absurd to be asked to be unified about a plan we currently know nothing about.

Well, sure. I get that point. But what is the value of the pledge thereafter? If the pledge were specific and binding, I could see where it could provide bargaining power.

Without specifics or the ability to act on our behalf in a meaningful fashion, what is the point? Is the TA just trying to appear potent? Is there some commitment that is not evident?

What is it?

Pledging with a better understanding of what I am pledging to.

Limits of authority.

Plans for the structure of the complex going forward.

Dollars and cents involved.

Grasp of the qualifications of the individuals or organizations that will be negotiating on my behalf.

Compensation for or future or future role of those involved in the negotiations.

I want some greater understanding of the parameters of the deal they might be contemplating, what the players have in mind and what they have at stake to gain or lose. Will these people also be benefiting from any mortgage or property management contract going forward, etc.

No one likes people that 'ask too many questions' but you better believe, for every person like myself that asks, there are ten that have the same questions and simply decline to get involved instead of voicing concern.

Please take this as constructive criticism and take it to the people that are calling the shots right now because, if they don't play it right, they won't be calling the shots for too long--to all of our detriment.

As I see it, the purpose of the Unity Pledge is to demonstrate to the outside world that we tenants are organized and united, that we are interested in purchasing Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village, and the road to Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village has to go through us and our organization, the Tenants Association.

Subject to seeing the language of the Unity Pledge, I have no problem with signing such a statement.

As to what detailed plan the Tenants Association has with respect to a purchase of the property, I do not believe there is such a plan yet, nor will there be one on Saturday. At this point, it's way too early for a detailed plan. I always understood that no detailed plan will be formulated until the tenants have had an opportunity to express their desires.

For me, the only criterion I have for assessing any plan or proposal is how well will it effect the goal of providing long term affordable housing for moderate/middle income people.

* * * * * * *

I understand that all tenants will be receiving a mailing this week from the Tenants Association that will include the Unity Pledge.

NOT if you have a good website and a valid blast email address list.

Yes, you will not get a response from my mother or father, but you will hear from me and most all of my neighbors.

RR
I am also a building captain and I received an email from a member of the TA Board last week that the pledges would be distributes to each apt this week.My commment was based on tthat email.
Lifer
If the people at the meeting can reach a general consensus (not unanimous because that is impossible) then a Unity Pledge (while not legally binding) could be used as evidence of solidarity when negotiating with third parties.
Let's wait and hear what happens on Sat.

Agreed. But then why the specific language used?

I have a background in regulation and documentation and I have to wonder why the document is worded the way it is--at least as presented here.

We'll see. No need to continue debating this in advance of further info. Of course, at this point, I'd be disinclined to sign it.

ziggy,

To repeat, it's logistically impossible to collect and organize paperwork from 11,250 apartments before the meeting. Like the TA website clearly states (emphasis mine):

"Volunteers in all 110 buildings will be distributing and collecting signed pledges on an ongoing basis to illustrate the unity among residents."

Lifer

Those are all reasonable, valid points. I would hope to see most addressed at the meeting (talking actual dollars and cents pre-appraisal strikes me as not realistic).

RR
I am just repeating the contents of an email I received from a TA board member. Perhaps she was mistaken

My guess is that most of this will NOT be addressed at the meeting this weekend and that the logistical issues faced by the TA could have been addressed, at least partially if not substantially, by using technology.

Without a meaningful web presence, they will never be able to organize the tenants. They don't have it now. Please tell me that they have a plan to put it in place soon!

I'll bet that the TA leadership thinks it HAS a meaningful web presence. They have a website, and they post what they WANT to post on it.

That's the way it's always been, and I'm not holding my breath expecting anything different.

BTW, How do you spell Lefrak ? I'm practicing writing my rent checks. ;-)

Got it.

You spell it "LeFrak" but you are supposed to pronounce it "LeFrock."

If these TA guys don't get their respective acts together, we're going to be right back where we started with the last bid. Which would be OK if the RE market craps out again from here...

What do you mean you are not going to take sides?

Look, if they don't have a good database of members and the ability to reach out to them and interact, then they don't really have a website worth talking about.

If the only plan they have in 2010 is to go "door-to-door" with pieces of paper then they really don't have a plan.

It's really frightening because we are supposed to count on them to go head to head with the toughest negotiators in NYC real estate. Not going to work with a 19th Century approach.

What's next? Pitchforks and burning torches?!?

Roundly Roger said:

"Boo went off on the TA website the other day ..."

Uh, care to put stuff in context, elaborate or link instead to my subsequent post detailing my ideas as to why and how the TA website can be improved?

I believe I am on record as agreeing with you. Much needs to be improved so that we can work together as a force to be bargained with.

That thing is so ugly and so wrong.

LOL ! Lovin' it !

"BTW, How do you spell Lefrak ? I'm practicing writing my rent checks. ;-)"

I believe it's actually "LeFuck".

New website coming soon... LeFuck Living !

OK, OK, you know I kid.....

To GreenGirl 3/9 roughly 1:45 am.

(Hey--get an icon--anything. It'd be easier to find you.)

Anyhoo, say the 115 is from the "mothership." Between the Amenities and the rental office that's one dozen, give or take. The rest?

I meant the offices of TS in Rock Center. There must be someone there who deals with TS, although not 115 people. As I mentioned in my first post, I hope these employees are getting laid off because they'll be transferred to Rose Associates.

This is a test--I added an icon.

RR, thanks for quoting :)

I still stand by my original post, their website is fine design wise, I'm assuming they just lack the team to update and maintain it. I recommend that everyone understand what exactly the problem is (their lack of a web admin, not a need for a redesign) and ask around for someone willing to help, or even volunteer yourself. Judging from their layout, it looks like they use some sort of wordpress blog system which makes it super easy to add/edit content. If you know how to write an e-mail, you can update their news section or blog, easy.

Don't get me wrong, they do need to restructure their online presence, but until someone is willing to devote a huge amount of time, I'm sure volunteers assigned to updating their web content would do wonders.

Who made YOU the fucking hall monitor ??

I'm out of kitschy phrases in my Yiddish-English dictionary. You're gonna have to take this one...

You had me up until your 3rd paragraph.

Even if I disagree with them-- all people are entitled to their opinions & have the right to make them known. Unfortunately, the perennial armchair gripers (who tend to be the loudest & idlest) truly grow tedious & annoying.

Mitten drinnen.

nah, this one needed English, but I held back, unless the poster wants me to tell them how I really feel !

I stand by what I said. If you can spend this much time griping on Lux Living, you can help out the ta rather than just complaining about them.

BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE.