Letter: Vacancy Study for Rent Control Unethical, Unprofessional

To the Editor,

I am writing to express my concern about many problematic issues related to the Vacancy Study, which was recently conducted by Collective For Community Culture and Environment (CCCE) in the Village of Ossining. These issues reflect the haste in which this study was thrown together so that the results would be slanted towards an immediate vote on the Emergency Tenant Protection Act (ETPA). This study, therefore, was completely unethical, unprofessional and at fault. It would have made more sense and been much more cost-effective if a local Ossining-based group, such as the Landlord-Tenant Relations Council could have conducted the study throughout the summer months. Many of us in the Council agreed that this would have resulted in an unbiased and much more accurate conclusion.

We received the vacancy study letter via certified mail on Friday June 22nd at the end of the day. It was dated for the 19th but by the time the USPS reached us, it was three days later. Upon opening, we read that the deadline to report was by July 1st (a Sunday) or if we failed to report by then, our buildings would be listed as having no vacancies. This gave us less than five business days before a holiday weekend to try to mail back our response to offices in Brooklyn. The time frame for mailing during a holiday weekend seemed outrageous. The form given to us to report our vacancies had a typo – asking for our vacancies in June 2017. This further confused many landlords who were not made aware of this study. We received a corrected form after July 1st, past the deadline. For a $10,000 study at the expense of the taxpayers who already spent $50,000 for a housing study (which was ignored based on results) this unprofessionalism is shocking.

Due to the limited amount of time we had to respond combined with our concern about the reliability of the USPS, we scanned our vacancy study, emailed it over and called. We asked for a confirmation email from the email address provided and they never responded. We called the number provided, which was actually someone’s cell phone number — and not the official number for Collective For Community Culture and Environment. After someone answered “hello?”, she repeatedly asked us if we were from another management company. We told her three times that we were not. Did they ask this of every landlord? Why were they so confused as to who we were?

Whether it's gathering petition signatures or collecting information for a study, following rules and ethics are of utmost importance. Many landlords never received the study or simply threw it out. For those that didn't make the deadline, they are now listed as having 0 vacancies. There was no follow-up, as promised. For a campaigning trustee whose motto is “Ossining for ALL,” advocating for a vacancy study that only covers 20 percent of apartments seems reckless and political. If any of the trustees who are advocating for ETPA for a six family unit would like to tour our place and see how well it is maintained and meet our tenants — we would welcome the opportunity. However, none of the trustees advocating for ETPA have ever reached out to speak with us. As a member of the Landlord-Tenant Relations Council, I welcome the opportunity for all to meet with us before making one of the most devastating decisions in Ossining history.

I urge you to read the study for yourselves and send opinions to the Village Board of Trustees https://www.villageofossining.org/board-trustees.

Sincerely,
Julie Johnson, board member, Landlord-Tenants Association