Something Different After Day 181. Gov. Elliot Spitzer and his NYS Division of Housing and Community Renewal (DHCR) dramatically altered and improved the housing fate of tens of thousands of Mitchell-Lama tenants. When the owners of Mitchell-Lama projects opt out of the program, the usual rule of law had been that those tenants become rent-stabilized – no big windfall for the owner. However, some owners, seizing on language in the enabling legislation, had won a court ruling that opting out of Mitchell-Lama was itself such a “unique and peculiar circumstance” that the apartments could instantly be converted to market rate. Yesterday, the Governor and the DCHR closed that loophole. NYDN article here. This was a key issue for tenants and community groups. Unable to get relief from the legislature, Mike McKee (a founder of NYS Tenants & Neighbors) and Bertha Lewis (ACORN) praised the Gov.’s action. In my opinion, landlords will now turn to the courts and, where they find sympathetic judges, will begin to undermine this rule. Indeed, Sue Susman, M-L organizer/leader reports the legal challenge is already under weigh. She writes:

Gluck (a litigious Mitchell-Lama landlord who has been withdrawing his buildings from the program --DM) and his cohorts (and attorneys Rosenberg & Estis) obviously foresaw Governor Spitzer's policy when they filed the Article 78 proceeding against DHCR asking the court to order that DHCR's policy be to grant "U or P" increases -- and that based on the KSLM decision there could be no other policy. Several people have assumed that the Article 78 judge will send the case back to DHCR, which will now deny the U or P applications -- at which point Gluck will then file another Article 78 proceeding asserting that DHCR's decisions were "arbitrary and capricious." And then we're back in court on DHCR's policy.

The very best victory would be embodied in a change the state law, but – until the legislature is more tractable – cherish and enjoy this most-of-the-way victory. Do you want to know more? Click here for a fuller, perhaps more readable discussion. Let Them Eat Cake . When she announced her goal in January (at Riverside Church) Marion Wright Edelman to enact health coverage all uninsured children and pregnant women, I thought she was settling too cheaply and that an expanded State Child Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) would pass in a heart-beat and than not even Scrooge McBush would dare object to it. Silly me. Now, Mr. Bush proposes to veto the program. . In a blistering column Monday (now out from under the Times-Select wall) Paul Krugman points to Mr. Bush’s wonderfully nutty remark that children don’t need health insurance, they can get care in the emergency room. Who would have thought we have to fight for half a stale loaf – but we do. You Don’t Need No Stinking Lawyers A federal judge has dismissed criminal charges against thirteen defendants because the Dept. of Injustice had forced KMPG, the large accounting firm, to refuse to pay for the criminal defense of these employees. The issue is somewhat technical (and perhaps most enjoyable for the criminal defense bar), but – if you have a taste for this sort of thing -- Talk Left has the story, links to the decision and to very interesting (to me at least) commentary.