What's the best reason the State should deny a rent increase requested for Eastwood?

It's deficient service by RIOC's Public Safety Department (PSD), according to officials and residents who spoke earlier this month at a rent determination hearing conducted at the Chapel of the Good Shepherd by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR).

The biennial hearing was the first ever conducted on Roosevelt Island, and though it was held on a Tuesday during work hours, residents took advantage of proximity to appear and list reasons why rents should not increase. A majority cited the operations of PSD.

"Public Safety is a disaster. I could write a book on them," said Joan Christianson, a longtime Eastwood resident and former Vice President of the Residents Association.

Doryne Isley, General Manager of Roosevelt Island Housing Management, took pains to point out that she has no control over PSD: "Most of you here know that, unfortunately, the Public Safety Department is not under our supervision. The PSD works for RIOC. I know the concerns. Those of you that I work very closely with know how I do battle to make sure that we get as much as we can from Public Safety, but Public Safety is not under our supervision. I think that this Board is hearing very clearly what you are saying, and I think there are a lot of decisions to be made."

Residents cited a variety of other reasons for denying a requested rent hike - personal hardship, an unclean environment, vandalism - but, as one put it, "Public Safety seems to be the buzzword of the whole conversation here." No representatives of PSD or RIOC attended the hearing.

Some of the comments:

. Jessica Lappin, aide to City Council Speaker Gifford Miller: "It wouldn't be a meeting here if we didn't bring up the Public Safety issue, as we did at the Island House and Westview [rent determination] hearings. The [Eastwood] budget includes $382,000 for Public Safety... The tenants in this room are very unhappy, by and large, about the services that are being provided to them."

. Dan Quart of Community Board 8: "Residents here pay nearly $2.5 million a year for Public Safety. Fifty percent of this comes from tenant rent payments, nearly half of which come from the tenants in Eastwood, at a rate of $46 per unit per month. A fundamental issue then becomes, are the tenants in Eastwood receiving a fair share on their investment? From my perspective, the answer is no - Eastwood continues to receive an unacceptable level of protection. There are absolutely no vertical patrols in the complex..."

. Byron Gaspard, co-chair of the Eastwood Building Committee (EBC): "There exists little to no vertical patrol services at all, and with no doorstations and very little money invested by the owner, it makes us the least secure development on Roosevelt Island." Some of the items cited by Gaspard that might be improved with better patrols were drug trafficking, urination and defecation in stairwells, loud music, and loud gatherings of youth.

. Ron Vass, former EBC Chair: "This is the only place in America where the tenants are compelled to pay $46 per month in their rent [for public safety services], and we don't even have a contract that describes the work performance or obligation. The tenants in Eastwood are getting nothing out of this contract and they're constantly burdened with this expense, and I think this should be examined by the Attorney General of the State, while we're doing everything else."

. Matthew Katz, President of the Roosevelt Island Residents Association (RIRA): "Having attended the other rent determination hearings, there are recurrent themes that I can speak to. Clearly, Public Safety is first and foremost among those. Public Safety operates on the Island on the basis of a letter of agreement from 1995 between RIOC and Housing Management which requires internal vertical patrols. Either we see them sporadically, or not at all. I'll say that again - not at all. Most communities in New York City are served by the NYPD. What we get from NYPD is lip service. The reason we get - and it's a vicious circle that goes round and round - is that they don't need to patrol our streets because we have Public Safety. But Public Safety does not enforce the parking rules on the Island, does not enforce the traffic rules of the Island. You can park where you will, you can ignore the stop signs. Public Safety needs to be held to a series of codified requirements and they need to be required to exercise those requirements, and they also need to justify the $2.5 million expense that falls on the backs of the people in this room, and the other people of Roosevelt Island. Until they can do that, I would urge you not to grant any increases that involve costs for Public Safety." Katz's remarks were applauded, as were the comments of other residents.

. Another resident, whose name was unclear in The WIRE's recording of the meeting: "I have never felt safe, nor have my wife or my kids. I'll give you an example. Every time I come back home, I see different faces in the hallways that I have never seen before. As soon as they see me, they act like they're opening a door or something or they disappear. Whenever my wife comes back, I tell her, please call me, from wherever you are, tell me when you are going to be downstairs so I can escort you upstairs, because I can not trust this. I never see any of the public safety agents in the hallways. Sometimes I see them, yes, smoking or talking."

Katz later told The WIRE, "I find it interesting that, even though the meeting was on the Island, both RIOC and PSD were unrepresented - not by staff, not by administration, not by any Board member. Aren't they interested in this central concern of residents?"