AA's "Fat Flier" Got Whole Row
Ashley Dupre On Tiger Woods' Babes: "At Least I Kept My Mouth Shut"
Same-Sex Marriage Blame Game Aims at Paterson, Addabbo
Wife Tries To Abort And Poison Husband's Lovechild
Rihanna's Random Airport Search
Residents of the 1,003-unit Roosevelt Landings complex on Roosevelt Island are used to paying for their electricity as part of their rents, but come April they'll start receiving separate bills for the first time. Last week the managers of the complex handed out sample electricity bills based on the readings of submeters installed in apartments, and now residents are shocked to learn that electricity is freaking expensive. One tenant who lives in a three-bedroom unit got a bill for $1,050.43, which was about half of what she pays in rent. Another tenant, Missy Feliciano, tells the Times, "I almost died when I opened the package." Assemblyman Micah Kellner wants officials to re-examine the submetering plan; he contends that "this is a de facto rent increase on this building," which used to be part of the state’s moderate-income Mitchell-Lama housing program. But the COO of the complex, Douglas F. Eisenberg, says, "They haven’t been responsible for their electric bills. Now they are. I think at the end of the day, I feel pretty good that we’re doing the right thing here."
Roosevelt Islanders About to Get Zapped by High Con Ed Bills
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (26) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
Latest Tip:
Hello! I specialize in household appliances.It has all sorts of great deals and reviews on deep fry
[more]
Douglas F. Eisenberg, you sound like an insensitive douche.
He does sound like a douche, but these tenants need to be more engery efficient.
Welcome to the real world folks. That said, how the hell can the bill be over $1000? Does she leave every light and tv on all day long?
I live in a rental building where electricity is included because the apartments aren't individually metererd. I can attest that people will run their air conditioners when it's
nice - it swallowed the rest of my comment when i used the less than sign. Should read ... less than 60 degrees outside.
hahahaha welcome to the real world is right!!
1053? Is that normal? I've never seen a bill that large for electricity -- maybe $200 at the most.
If they're able to fix the heaters so that the bills go down to normal, then fine -- that's a good thing, because heaters using that much juice were on the fritz anyways. But if not...well, wow, a grand a month for electricity?
Used to spend a lot of time there.
The deal at Roosevelt Landings (Formerly Eastwood) is that most units have a relatively old inefficient electric heater in every single room. They are manually controlled with knobs that are on each unit. You have to bend down and turn the knob to the off position to get it to stop drawing power.
Most people who don't pay for their own usage would obviously not have any issue with keeping it cranked all the time rather than bend all the way down and turn the knob and if it gets a little too warm they would just maybe crack a window. In the summer it's even worse, you have the whole complex running air conditioners 24 hours a day. There is ZERO incentive to conserve. Beyond being wasteful it's also not very green.
I believe this is a good thing, accountability and all. But no doubt, it will impact tenants life styles. I live in rental housing where i have to pay for my own heat and believe me, I have to be very picky about when to run it so I don't get sodomized by National Grid.
It amazes me the level of entitlement that people feel in this city. I want free electric and heat too. GIMME GIMME GIMME.
Baseboard electric heat is a killer. Bills start at $400. That building needs gas heat and the tennants need to organize to demand this. How a manager of that building could have swallowed those kinds of bills for so long is beyond comprehension.
i pay about 300 a month in my 2 bedroom apt. its all electric.. we dont go grocery shopping much anymore and i lost 20 pounds because we cant afford shit anymore.
They are not sure not going to like the summer with the AC on.
$1000+ for a 3-bedroom electricity bill is INSANE unless they have a server farm there.
How on EARTH do you use $1000 in electricity in a month for one family? If the sample bills for tenants in 3-BR apartments ranged from $80 to $1,050 then clearly the people who are spending $1,050/month are doing something wrong.
In any case, this sort of thing is important if we want to encourage people to minimize their energy consumption, which I think we can all agree that we do. I don't have my electricity included in my rent at home but it's included in the rent we pay at my office and I can certainly attest to the fact that we leave things on that we don't need to (A/C, lights, computers) as a result.
Whether the change to paying for electricity based on consumption amounts to a rent increase depends on whether the corresponding rent reduction is appropriate, and it's certainly possible that it might not be, of course. But that doesn't invalidate the concept that these tenants should pay for electricity based on usage.
In my former building we had steam heat that was included in the rent but the valves were prone to sticking. If that happened the unit would automatically go to electric heat backup. It never happened to me but I read in a tenant complaint website that some of my neighbors racked up $800/monthly electric bills in the winter. The electric unit didn't put out nearly as much heat as the steam so I could see how someone might leave it on all much of the time. And I only know this because a maintenance worker told me during a repair visit. My guess is that few in the building knew about it.
did anyone's conEd bill go up this month?
mine went up by $10, it's close to what I pay during the summer when I turn on the AC.
I used to live in a building where elec was in the rent,
but they imposed a surcharge per AC unit year round.
so it kinda evens out.
I wasn't going to comment but there are several facts not presented in this article.
I live on Roosevelt Island but in a different complex. I have a friend, however, who lives in one of these buildings.
1) The management of her building refuses to heat the hallways. My friend spends most of the time freezing even with the heat turned up full blast because all of her heat leaks into the hallway. (Note the hallway circles the outside of the building and is the layer adjacent to the outdoors.) This is also due to the horrible insulation of all the apartments that the management won't fix.
2) The management has told her that she will be paying the standard Con Ed rate moving forward for her electricity. However, we also pay electricity at our complex and, on our bill, the Con Ed rate is much less than the rate her management company has quoted. They aren't giving out the contact information for Con Ed or the meter readings so there is no way for the tenants to confirm that they are being given a fair rate.
3) Half of this building is rent controlled and half is listed at market rate. The management company has been accused multiple times of pulling stunts like overcharging for electricity and refusing to make repairs in order to drive out all the rent-controlled tenants so they can flip the remaining apartments to market rate. (I'm sure everyone is familiar with similar stories in this city.) In the past few months, I have heard stories about multiple fires in the buildings, appliances installed incorrectly and not fixed for months, maintenance requests being ignored and when questioned, the management company lying about repair work, shutting down all the laundry rooms that serve 3000 tenants for a week, etc.
Fortunately, a lot of the tenants are trying to organize and get their rights acknowledged in this situation. I wouldn't be surprised to see an update about the company being taken to court.
I agree with you on all but the second point -- and there only about the tenants not being able to confirm market rates because management won't give them the contact information for Con Ed. Con Ed is in the phone book -- the tenants can and should call them and ask for that information. If Con Ed won't tell them, then that's something to take up with regulators and elected officials (if not a court of law) -- but it's certainly worth a shot just to call Con Ed first.
Agreed, but the problem is most of the complexes have special agreements with Con Ed for a bulk rate - and they all are rather reluctant to comment on how much the bulk rate is. The tenants have been trying to find out but it's been a slightly complicated process.
As a resident of Roosevelt Landings/Eastwood, I can confirm you've got it right tmesis. This submetering is nothing more than a thinly veiled scheme to drive out tenants and bring in more profit for a shady building management/ownership.
The alleged goal of greening the building is admirable but this shouldn't leave families shivering in the dark pinching pennies to fuel antiquated and inefficient heaters. If the building truly wanted to reduce energy consumption they would install more efficient heating systems and thermostats which give users reasonable control over the heat. A plan like this would credit residents with enough money to cover at least as much energy as they use, encouraging conservation with the incentive of a lower rent. Instead Urban American (the management corporation), has left the outdated heating system and drafty apartments and has insulted tenants with an inadequate credit and mysterious inflated bill.
Our apartment got a bill of 300$ for a month when we left the apartment unheated for two weeks while out of town!
This is not a story of wasteful families finally held accountable and it is not the story of a building "going green." Here we see an irresponsible landlord using questionable means to oust long term and vulnerable tenants.
A final word to anyone thinking about moving to Roosevelt Landings or another Urban American building. This submetering situation is not the only problem but rather a symptom of a generally clumsy and neglectful management. I would not be surprised to see this poorly maintained building find more unusual rent increases in the future. Renters beware.
It is certainly important for people to minimize their energy consumption, but what y'all don't seem to realize is that the RI buildings in question are being run by giant scumbags who have stuck the tenants with 1970's era appliances, little insulation and baseboard electric heaters. I'm lucky enough to live in a place on RI which is run by a company that actually cares about its tenants, but I know someone in Eastwood (one of the RI buildings in question). She keeps her apartment at a maximum of 60 degrees, and still got a $300+ bill.
You should realize we're not talking about a fancy co-op with included hot-water heat and Energy-Star appliances here, which you'd be able to determine by virtue of actually reading the article. We're talking about a 70's-era housing project which hasn't been updated since it was built.
Many of the tenants in the building are on Section 8, so they can little afford any kind of increase, let alone $500 / month. Which of course is the ultimate goal of the building's owner.
I had a store lease once that allowed the landlord to bill the electric charges. Those charges, especially in the summer, could run to $9000 a month. When deregulation set in, we got a visit from a couple of guys, ConEd ex employees that went into business as consultants. When they saw our bills they went nuts. It seems the landlord marked up the electric charges by about 3 times. We had to sue to get the privilege of direct billing by the utility and our electric charges dropped dramatically. Either that $1000 residential bill was for multiple months or they too are being hosed by the landlord.
The building across the street from mine collectively pays the electricity. Friend of mine who lives knows an elderly widow who leaves the lights and TV on allnight, AC when it's a little warm and electric heaters when it's a little chilly. Why should she care about the money or the enviroment? Imagine how much her bill would be if she was submetered.
I looked at an apartment on the northwest end of RI about 5 years ago (can't remember the name of the complex); we ended up taking a place elsewhere because we read online that the energy bill due to electric heat would eat up any money saved on rent.
I've done research on submetering for my coop. Here's the deal. If you have a single meter for the whole building, you buy power from ConEd at bulk rate. If you switch to submetering, the individual units pay retail pricing; much more expensive. Our coop didn't switch over for exactly that reason. If RI has electric baseboard heating, they've had the heat cranked for January at retail prices, and no doubt they're getting slammed with big bills now.
As a resident of Roosevelt Island, and as a lifelong scrimper on my electric bill (I have been accused of living in an ice cave), if I am being charged $410 for one month of electric, for a one-bedroom apartment in a large complex, something's not right. I was charged less in New Jersey (where the rates are comparable) when I had a larger apartment with no neighbors to insulate me from the wind, and similarly terrible electric heaters.
The landlords say they are "greening" the building. No, they are not. If they wanted to green it, they would insulate it instead of having a wall of windows to the outside that just leak heat from the hallway that all our apartment doors lead onto-- these doors weren't designed to shield us against outdoor temperatures, so they are not insulated.
Second, management would put in thermostats so that people would not have to constantly fiddle with the baseboard heater knob in order to have their apartments just warm enough.
Third, we would have energy start appliances, which we don't. In order to save on their budgets, not ours, they get the cheapest, oldest appliances, and then have us foot the bill.
Urban American recently bought the building recently for around $1 billon. That's right, a billion dollars for 1,003 mostly Section 8, LAP, and disabled-rated apartments, which I am sure they wanted to quickly convert to market-rate apartments due to the housing boom that was trailing off as they bought it. They refuse to say how much in the red they are. This is all about money, and has nothing to do with the environment.
Oh, and I'm market rate, so I am the kind of tenant they theoretically want to keep.
Good luck with that.
People live on Roosevelt Island?