RSS Feed
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
Starrett City Bid Again Rejected As Financially Unfeasible
A day after federal housing officials rejected the resubmitted bid for the sale of Starrett City, hundreds of residents packed the complex's Brooklyn Sports Club as Brooklyn Congressman Edolphus Towns joined Rep. Maxine Waters, chairperson of the Housing and Opportunity Subcommittee, at a Tuesday morning hearing to emphasize the importance of keeping the 140-acre complex affordable. Several hundred Starrett City residents and members of tenants groups were among those who packed the hearing to confirm their support for the continued reduction of federally funded housing that has decreased by more than 300,000 units since 1995. On Monday, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) rejected Clipper Equity's $1.3 billion bid to purchase Starrett City, the nation's largest federally subsidized housing complex, for the second time in four months. In announcing the decision, HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson said, "(Starrett City) is an essential housing resource for the city of New York."
Nonetheless, while tenants celebrated the HUD ruling, another bidder may revive the process as well as concerns over the 33-year-old housing complex's future because the owner indicated in a statement submitted at the hearing, "It is now time for our 250 investors to profit from their investment." Marie Purnell, president of the Starrett City Tenants Association, told the New York Times after the hearing, "A sale is inevitable, however, retention of all subsidy programs should be a priority." Two months after the current owner, Starrett City Associates, put the complex up for sale last December, it accepted Equity's bid to purchase the 5,900-apartment housing complex east of Canarsie. The real estate deal required federal and state approval, but HUD turned it down last March and requested they reconfigure the offer and resubmit it to reassure the government that "subsidized residents" would not be affected by the sale. At the time HUD, and others who opposed Clipper Equity's proposal, contended that they couldn't possibly continue to support affordable rents since their bid averaged out to more than $220,000 per apartment. After the bid was originally submitted, New York City housing officials noted that Clipper Equities partner David Bistricer owns 71 other buildings, which have been cited for more than 8,700 violations, "including some dangerous ones." Bistricer was not present at Tuesday's hearing, though he submitted written testimony, in which he said, "…we are committed to maintaining Starrett as affordable housing. We have developed a plan in which we commit to remain in the Mitchell-Lama program…for the next 15 years." When Towns announced the hearing over the weekend, he said, "If we do not do all we can to keep Starrett City affordable, then this is a fight that all affordable housing tenants across the country must wager." Despite cheering the government's ruling, New York senior senator Chuck Schumer was among those concerned about the future of Starrett City and called for a plan to ensure that it "remains a middle class oasis well into the 21st century." Tenants advocate group ACORN called the HUD decision "a major victory," but pointed out that the fight to maintain reasonably-priced rents was far from over and called for city and state leaders to develop a long-term preservation plan to "once and for all" save Starrett City. Towns pointed out that there are a few proposals being considered to guarantee reasonable rents at Starrett City and would protect low-income tenants in danger of losing their apartments, save valuable rental units, and in some cases make it possible to mark rents up to market to facilitate rehabilitation. "One thing that I would like to see done which may involve the introduction of legislation at both the state and federal level is that if the purchaser of a housing development that is currently in the Mitchell-Lama program decides to opt out of the program, they must give the residents at least three years notice. This is a courtesy when you consider that people may be uprooted from their homes primarily for profit," Towns said.
|
for larger version       |
|||||||||||||||||||
)
