I would respond by making the observation that it is not simply them "telling [their clients] what they charge."

When approach it as win-win, that you care about them winning, and seeking them to help you to also win, and simply finding a path HOW, that's how results are made potential. 

Any mentorship, advice, and simply fellowship would be appreciated. 

City planners advocate for this sort of treatment to preserve the ratio of homeowner to renters, or planners are attempting to change the direction of investment in their city altogether.  

I did ask if they would need the house furnished (in an attempt to find out what they were really looking for/needing), she said they would prefer the house be furnished, however they would just buy furniture if they had to. 

We simply hand them a letter that says the evidence they provided does not meet HUD guidelines and we consider the animal to be a pet.If you have a "no pet" policy, they are not accepted.  

I am thinking about sending a carefully worded certified letter as my first attempt to contact them.  

What @Jay Hinrichs is saying is that if you go before a judge, and you show that these leases were signed for significantly under market value and signed just a few days before closing, there is a good chance the judge will side with you because it is an obvious attempt to pay less rent and take advantage of the new owner.I think your next move should be to contact an attorney in your area who specializes in landlord tenant laws in NJ, and see what they recommend. 

I would reach out to your state representative and let them know that PG&E is attempting to overrule state law.

I simply allow the buyer to be unrepresented.