Governor David Paterson had the following to say to the New York Times:
I want to put to rest any questions that my neighbors and New Yorkers may have about my home at Lenox Terrace. My family and I have resided at Lenox Terrace for more than 20 years. Lenox Terrace has been, and always will be, my home. It was my home before I became governor of this great state, and it will be my home long after.
The State of New York affords me a beautiful mansion in our capital, which is where my family and I live when we are in Albany, but the Governor’s Mansion is the people’s house.
It is a place where I enjoy welcoming visitors from around New York and abroad and from which I fulfill my duty of serving our great state.
That includes fighting hard not only to protect our existing affordable housing but also to continue to create new affordable housing across New York.
David A. Paterson
Governor
New York, July 18, 2008
sue
July 22, 2008
This guy is a fake. He is the most powerful man in the state; his family pulls in hundreds of thousands a year; and he pays $1200 for a luxury rent-stabilized apartment while his neighborhood is gentrifying under his feet. It is always say one thing, do another with Paterson.
Yusef
July 21, 2008
Wonderful example of what David Paterson is a lousy Governor. He basically declared entitlement based on longevity. Lovely. The fact is he and his wife combined income exceeds $175K/year and as I recall, his rent is about $1,200/Month of a rent stabilized apartment.
He said it will be his home long after. He should have been specific and said “it will be my rent stabilized home long after”. And then how long David Paterson? Will you increase the destabilization income level from $175K to $250K? Or will you increase the desabilization rent level from $2,000 to $3,000?
David Paterson is a coward. Why? He entirely avoided all the meaningful issues around his words. For example, it’s very likely he and his wife will have an income of $300K+ / year once he’s out of office, and David Paterson should have addressed why someone like him, a person with a household income of $300K+ should have a rent stabilized apartment while young people that take jobs as teachers, etc. cannot afford to live in Harlem.
The point? David Pater and Charles Ranel both feel longevity is the only metric that matters in entitling one to have a rent stabilized apartment. The youth be damned!
These are politicians who in their actions are saying longevity is the metric and means test, not income. Meanwhile young professional can’t afford Harlem.
And that’s what Harlem is, a land of generational subsidy dwelling people. The public housing (projects) crowd is just like David Paterson and Charles Rangel. They too feel regardless of their incomes, they are entitled to their public housing of $300/month and free Con Edison. Why? Longevity, it’s what they always had.
On any given day go to the projects trash section. You will see dozens of 50″ flat plasma screen TV cartons and all sorts of luxury item refuge and garbage. People from the projects walk out of the projects and into SUVs and Luxury Cars on a daily basis.
Everyone has their sense of entitlement. Paterson and Rangel set horrible examples and standards. Paterson and Rangel can afford to pay market rate, as can 80% of those in the projects. Those project people might have to pay market rate in Yonkers, yes the real world of being priced out. God forbid we require people to pay their on freight.
Welfare culture in Harlem, alive and well!