Sunday, September 14, 2014

No, Lois Weiss, The City Council Lease Proposal Will NOT Hurt Landlords And The City

I make it a habit NOT to read the New York Post.  Rupert Murdoch already has more loyal followers than he needs.  Or deserves, for that matter.  But I confess that I do go so far as to regularly visit the Post's Real Estate section (on the paper's Web site, only, where I'm giving them nothing but clicks).  It's a good way of tracking the transformation of my beloved 18th and 19th century Gotham into a poor copy of 21st century Dubai.

But, of course, this is the Post.  So it's impossible for idiocy not to seep into something even so seemingly straightforward as reports on leasing, buying, demolishing and building.  Which brings me to the subject of a recent column by Lois Weiss.

Ms. Weiss, as a rule, limits her written ramblings to recent leasing transactions.  On this particular occasion, however, she ventures into Op-Ed territory with her opposition to a bill, currently under consideration--I repeat, only under consideration--by the New York City Council, intended to address the wholesale and abrupt eviction of long-standing city businesses by developers chasing the next luxury bubble.

According to Ms. Weiss, these evictions simply aren't a problem.  They are the natural, indeed inevitable, clearing out of "inefficient" small businesses, so that luxe developers can build luxe buildings with luxe tenants that, invariably, pay more taxes and benefit us all--including, theoretically, the recently dispossessed (and now unemployed) owners of the former tenants.  Never mind that these tenants provided affordable goods and services to a broad spectrum of city residents and tourists.  Never mind that these tenants are often city landmarks, the kind of places that attract tourists (i.e., half of New York's population on any given day) on a steady basis over decades.  And, speaking of decades, never mind the fact that they provided the city and state with a stable source of tax revenue during New York's leanest years, as hundreds of corporations left for the theoretically greener pastures of Connecticut and the Sunbelt (only to then die in a series of mergers and acquisitions).

To Ms. Weiss, these concerns simply aren't relevant, if (in her mind) they exist at all.  Indeed, any attempt to address those concerns, to put even a little speed bump into the current casino-style pace of city development is nothing less--and I'm quoting her now--as "tortious interference with real estate business decisions."  Oh, and did I mention that she's insecure enough about her argument to employ the C-word, Communism, in the sentence that follows her foray into legalspeak?  And to do so with apparent pride at this verbal act of "bravery"?

Ms. Weiss' column is ultimately little more than another puerile exercise in verbal bullying against anything that even looks like it might stop business interests from getting 100% of what they want.  I would have thought that recent nearly-tragic events (think 2008) would have us all on the same page when it comes to thinking that no one (even this blogger) should ever get 100% of what they want.  Nope.  Not Ms. Weiss.  She knows better.

Except that she doesn't.  The painful, disturbing truth is this:  there simply aren't enough luxe buyers and luxe tenants for all of those new, shiny, look-alike skinny glass towers with pointed tops.  That's especially the case when it comes to retail, and especially in an Internet economy.  When it comes to retail space, and the street vitality they create (economically and culturally), we need tenants at all levels of rent.

Don't believe, me, Ms. Weiss?  You don't have to.  Just take a look at what your Post colleague, Steve Cuozzo, has to say about the current leasing market, untrammeled by your vision of the City Council's Red Menace.  Maybe some of that space will be marked down to a level at which the dispossessed could pay for it.  Maybe "the magic of the marketplace" will make that happen, even after the 1% have effectively closed the marketplace to everyone but themselves.

And, in that case, Ms. Weiss, maybe, just maybe, there's a nearby bridge I could sell you.

No comments: