The owners are challenging the DHCR regulations that bar "unique or peculiar" increases just because a building leaves Mitchell-Lama.

Gluck & Witkoff's "amended complaints" cite the many bills to get rid of "U or P" that have never been passed in the state legislature, and claim that "U or P" applications should be determined under the law that existed before the regulations came into effect.

We need to get a statute passed NOW. While it is unlikely that any pro-tenant bill will pass the state senate under majority leader Joseph Bruno, let's work on it. Write to Governor Paterson and urge his support for the Andrea Stewart-Cousins/Gary Pretlow bill. A sample letter is below.

Dear Governor Paterson:

Congratulations on your new position.

As one of your first moves, please support the immediate passage of S. 5284 A. 7811.

Tenants like me are drowning as landlords litigate against the new DHCR regulations barring "unique or peculiar" increases. Owners Gluck and Witkoff are trying to merge their cases against DHCR and emphasize that the state has never successfully passed a statute to bar the huge increases they seek in our rents. These are increases that will effectively destroy tens of thousands of affordable units -- both Mitchell-Lama and Section 8 -- in New York City.

Thus it is crucial to get the Andrea Stewart-Cousins / Pretlow bill passed: S. 5284 A. 7811 is the only one that explicitly applies retroactively and to Sec. 8 buildings as well. (A copy of the bill is below.)

My neighbors and I are spending more money than we can afford on legal fees to save our homes.

We need your help!

Thank you!

[Your name and address]

IN ASSEMBLY -- Introduced by M. of A. PRETLOW -- read once and referred to the Committee on Housing

AN ACT to amend the emergency tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four, in relation to limited-profit housing companies and other buildings or structures which received project-based rental assistance

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEMBLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Section 5 of section 4 of chapter 576 of the laws of 1974 constituting the emergency tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four is amended by adding a new subdivision c to read as follows:

C. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS SECTION, NOTHING SHALL PREVENT THE DECLARATION OF AN EMERGENCY PURSUANT TO SECTION THREE OF THIS ACT FOR RENTAL HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS LOCATED IN BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES WHICH WERE OWNED BY A COMPANY ESTABLISHED UNDER ARTICLE TWO OF THE PRIVATE HOUSING FINANCE LAW, OTHER THAN A MUTUAL COMPANY, WHICH ARE NO LONGER OWNED BY SUCH COMPANY BY REASON OF A VOLUNTARY DISSOLUTION PURSUANT TO SECTION THIRTY-FIVE OF SUCH LAW OR FOR RENTAL HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS LOCATED IN BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES DEFINED AS COVERED PROJECTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 8 OF THE UNITED STATES HOUSING ACT OF NINETEEN THIRTY-SEVEN, AS AMENDED, OR ANY SUCCESSOR STATUTE, AND ANY REGULATIONS PROMULGATED THEREUNDER IN WHICH RENTAL HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS RECEIVED PROJECT-BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT PURSUANT TO CONTRACTS WITH THE OWNERS OF SUCH BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES WHICH EXPIRED OR WERE TERMINATED. THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION A OF SECTION NINE OF THIS ACT OR OF SUBDIVISION A OF SECTION 26-513 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK SHALL NOT APPLY TO ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION WHICH BECAME SUBJECT TO THIS ACT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SUBDIVISION.