| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
 Some New York City politicians and neighborhood activists have protested MetLife's attempt to sell its Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper Village, an 80-acre Manhattan apartment complex with 7,840 rent-stabilized apartments, for more than $5 billion because the city helped fund its development. Despite the negative attention and the enormous price tag, bidders are still lining up to take part in what would represent the biggest real estate deal of a single U.S. property. The New York Sun reported Sept. 26 MetLife has received 50 offers from prospective buyers, and the deadline for bids is still almost a week away on Oct. 5. Politicians argue that MetLife has no right to sell this property — often considered the last bastion of middle-class housing of this size in Manhattan — for market rate because it received the property through eminent domain after World War II and received hefty tax breaks over 25 years once the property was built. The public-private partnership was meant to provide affordable housing in the city for returning American GI's. However, 60 years later MetLife feels it has fulfilled its obligation. With the New York Sun pointing out that a MetLife spokesman said the average income of a Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper tenant exceeds $100,000, MetLife CEO Robert Henrikson, consequently, views the complex as no longer fitting the purpose of affordable housing and is more on par with similar market-rate and rent-regulated apartments in Manhattan. What do you think? Should the city allow MetLife to sell the Stuyvesant Town/Peter Cooper development, which it help build through eminent domain and support through tax breaks? Let us know in the comments section below. — Gerald Magpily Read New York Sun related article
CategoriesComments
From: Gerald,
Good point. However, I feel MetLife has already profited immensely from the complex through the years. In a time where affordable housing has become few and far between in Manhattan, the government should do whatever it in can to preserve rent stabilized apartments.
Posted on:
September 28, 2006 4:04 PM
 Deal Video
    Community
 Elsewhere on The Deal.comDealwatch
The Deal MagazineCorporate Dealmaker
The Deal VideoCategories
Blog roll
Archives
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think that Metlife can be prohibited from selling the property, but I think that the government should step in to negotiate for the public good; especially since the public subsidized Metlife for decades.