[Agamemnon]

I’m sorry, under what principle of law is a landlord allowed to raise someone’s rent retroactively?

Contracts themselves are enforced under principles of law. "Principles of law" have nothing at all to say about the content of a contract. For instance, whose rent do you know has remained the same since 1972? What "principle of law" allows that ... apart from the fact that "a contract is a contract?"

There may be provisions in the contract as written that allows ConEd to do what its doing and some patriot is sticking it to the muzzies if ways Bloomberg refused to do.

You're not "sorry." Pissed maybe, but not sorry. Looks like like your "sorry" place of "worship" may not be built any time soon -- if at all.

Kudos to ConEd.

[jdege]

I’ve never been a supporter of the mosque, and it seems quite reasonable, to me, that the rents for a property be higher now than they were in 1972. If I were on the board of Con Ed, I’d be asking just who within the company managed the property, how it was they let it go so long without a rent adjustment.

But it still seems odd, to me, that a contract would allow rent increases to be imposed retroactively.

[elcid1970]

IMHO the Ground Zero Mosque will never be built. It’s far too radioactive an issue and has long since gone too national for its supporters. Even Mayor Nanny Bloomberg complains bitterly that the rest of America should just butt out this is a local New York isue blah-blah-blah.

I hope Con Ed presses forward. And if the muzzies start growling and making threats, they should receive phone calls with the sound of a racking shotgun on the other end and then step out their front doors and slip ‘n trip in pig grease.