Senate Bill S4117A

2011-2012 Legislative Session

Makes provisions relating to previously deregulated housing accommodations which again became subject to rent regulation pursuant to a court of appeals decision

download bill text pdf

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee

Introduced
- In Committee Assembly
- In Committee Senate
- On Floor Calendar Assembly
- On Floor Calendar Senate
- Passed Assembly
- Passed Senate
Delivered to Governor
Signed By Governor

Please enter your contact information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

A valid email address is required.

Home address is used to determine the senate district in which you reside. Your support or opposition to this bill is then shared immediately with the senator who represents you.

Optional services from the NY State Senate:

Create an account. An account allows you to officially support or oppose key legislation, sign petitions with a single click, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Include a custom message for your Senator? (Optional)

Enter a message to your senator. Many New Yorkers use this to share the reasoning behind their support or opposition to the bill. Others might share a personal anecdote about how the bill would affect them or people they care about.

Actions

View Actions

Date of Action	Assembly Actions - Lowercase Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jan 04, 2012	referred to housing, construction and community development
Jun 24, 2011	committed to rules
May 10, 2011	advanced to third reading
May 09, 2011	2nd report cal.
May 04, 2011	1st report cal.544
Apr 28, 2011	print number 4117a
Apr 28, 2011	amend and recommit to housing, construction and community development
Mar 18, 2011	referred to housing, construction and community development

Votes

- May 4, 2011 - Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee Vote
  S4117A
  
  Aye
  
  4
  
  Nay
  
  3
  
  Aye with Reservations
  
  1
  
  Absent
  
  0
  
  Excused
  
  0
  
  Abstained
  
  0
  - - Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee Vote: May 4, 2011
      
      aye (4)
      
      Bonacic
      
      Grisanti
      
      Ritchie
      
      Young
      
      nay (3)
      
      Diaz
      
      Espaillat
      
      Krueger
      
      aye wr (1)
      
      Gallivan

Bill Amendments

Original

A (Active)

2011-S4117 - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Housing, Construction And Community Development
Law Section:: New York City Administrative Code
Laws Affected:: Amd §§26-504.1, 26-504.2 & 11-243, add §26-504.4, NYC Ad Cd; add §5-b, amd §5, Emerg Ten Prot Act of 1974; amd §489, RPT L

2011-S4117 - Summary

Makes provisions relating to previously deregulated housing accommodations which again became subject to rent regulation pursuant to a court of appeals decision.

2011-S4117 - Sponsor Memo

                                BILL NUMBER:S4117                REVISED 03/22/11

TITLE OF BILL:

An act
to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, the emergency
tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four and the real property tax
law, in relation to rent regulated housing accommodations

PURPOSE:

To make provisions for previously deregulated housing accommodations
which again become subject to rent regulation pursuant to the Court
of Appeals decision in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer properties.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

This bill would creates a mechanism whereby property owners adversely
impacted by the decision of the New York State Court of Appeals in
Roberts v. Tishman Speyer Properties may obtain relief from that
decision by repaying to the City of New York the amount of the tax
benefits they received from the city and by waiving the receipt of
further tax benefits to which they would otherwise be entitled.

The statute at issue in Roberts was enacted in 1993 and states that
housing accommodations which "became or become" rent regulated "by

virtue" of receiving tax benefits were not authorized to utilize the
deregulation provisions under the rent regulation statutes. Despite
the contrary, long-standing and unchallenged interpretation of the
State Division of Housing and Community and Renewal and the reliance
by property owners, managing agents, lending institutions, real
estate brokers and others upon that interpretation, the Court ruled
that the prohibition of deregulation applied not only to buildings
which were not rent regulated prior to the receipt of benefits but
also to buildings, such as those in Roberts, which contained
apartments which were already regulated at the time that the tax
benefits commenced.

The bill creates a mechanism for property owners affected by Roberts
to proceed in light of the Court's decision. First, it provides the
opportunity for those property owners to repay to the City of New
York the amount of the J-5 1 benefits, plus interest, that they have
received from the City and to waive the amount of future benefits to
which they would otherwise be entitled. Second, for those owners who
choose to not repay their benefits to the City, the bill establishes
a formula for the calculation of the legal rents and refunds due, if
any, to the affected tenants, as well as a timeframe for the payment
of such refund. It also mandates that owners provide affected current
tenants with a notice that
informs such tenants of the court ruling and provides a calculation of
the legal rent and refund amount, if any, due to the tenant. It would
also create a mechanism by which, after the owner has provided the
tenant with such notice, the parties may enter into a final and
binding written agreement regarding the legal rent and refund amount
due the tenant.
Lastly, the bill is intended to make absolutely clear and to remove


any doubt that Roberts in no manner whatsoever applies to rent
regulated buildings converted to cooperatives or condominiums.

JUSTIFICATION:

This bill would address the consequences of the decision by the New
York State Court of Appeals in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer properties.
In that decision, the Court of Appeals held that apartment buildings
which were rent regulated prior to the receipt of J-5 1 tax benefits
were prohibited from deregulating apartments during the period of
those tax benefits. The Court did so even though the deregulation of
those apartments occurred since 1993 with the express approval of
government agencies, including the State Division of Housing and
community Renewal, without challenge from affected tenants and
without any action to the contrary by the Legislature for all of
these years.

As the result of Roberts, building owners who deregulated thousands of
apartments throughout the city while they received these tax benefits
are subject to potential rent rollbacks and enormous rent overcharge
claims by thousands of tenants who entered into unregulated leases.
These claims represent a genuine risk to countless properties which
were financed by ending institutions and assessed by the city based
upon the accepted lawfulness of deregulation in J-51 buildings. Over
80,000 apartments have been deregulated through the mechanism of high
rent vacancy deregulation throughout the city by property owners
since 1993 and it has been estimated by the citizens Housing and
planning council that between 19,000 and 37,000 of that number are in
buildings that have received J-51 benefits. This situation is
untenable. Furthermore, the unregulated tenants who will benefit from
the Roberts decision entered into these unregulated leases
voluntarily, often at rents of several thousand dollars per month, in
contrast to the median rent regulated lease in the city of $950 per
month. These unregulated tenants are not the low-income and
moderate-income New Yorkers who need assistance and who deserve the
protection of the rent regulation laws.

The Court of Appeals specifically declined to rule on two major
aspects of this issue, namely, (1) whether its decision applied
retroactively and (2) whether the four-year statute of limitations on
rent overcharges applied to these claims and, if so, in what manner.
The Court's failure to provide guidance on these questions has opened
the door to years of litigation between tenants and owners, placing
burdens upon both the courts and the State Division of Housing and
Community Renewal.  In addition, the financial clouds that have been
placed over these properties as the result of
Roberts effectively has made many of these buildings
unmarketable until these questions are resolved.  Finally, prohibiting
deregulation in these buildings will, invariably, result in
lower property tax assessments, resulting in lower real estate
tax payments to the City. No one benefits from this uncertainty.

The Court of Appeals stated in Roberts that if its decision created
"unacceptable burdens," relief from those burdens was a matter for
the Legislature. This legislation is intended to provide that relief
but only under prescribed conditions. Building owners who
deregulated apartments in the past or who would do so in the future


but for Roberts and who seek to come out from under Roberts would be
obligated to return to the City all of the J-5 1 tax benefits they
received for their buildings and to waive any future benefits which
would otherwise be due to them.

By returning and waiving their benefits, building owners would be
allowed to continue to deregulate apartments in their buildings
notwithstanding Roberts, and would be insulated from any and all
liability resulting from Roberts for the apartments that were
deregulated. By making such payments to the City, these building
owners also would be providing the City of New York with a
critically-needed infusion of revenue at a time when it is most needed.

As a result of the Court's ruling, rents for the affected apartments
may have to be reviewed and, in many cases, reduced to bring them
into compliance with the requirements of rent regulation. In
addition, tenants may well be owed significant sums for the amounts
they have paid in excess of rent that they would have been charged
had their apartments been continuously rent regulated. Lastly,
because the rent rolls for the buildings affected by Roberts may be
reduced, the value of these buildings and their assessments would be
reduced, raising innumerable legal and financial problems both for
property owners and the City.

For those owners who do not repay their benefits to the City, the bill
would create a special rent setting procedure for the affected
apartment that could be applied uniformly to all of the apartments.
It adheres generally to rent-setting procedures applicable in other
situations under the rent laws, and would provide needed certainty
for tenants, owners and other affected parties. Most importantly, it
would establish a mechanism whereby owners and tenants can resolve
the Roberts issue between themselves, without the need for
intervention by DHCR or the courts.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

This is a new bill.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None to the State.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

This act shall take effect immediately, with provisions.

2011-S4117 - Bill Text download pdf

                            
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                  4117

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                             March 18, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sen.  YOUNG  -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
  printed to be committed to the Committee on Housing, Construction  and
  Community Development

AN  ACT  to  amend  the administrative code of the city of New York, the
  emergency tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four and the  real
  property tax law, in relation to rent regulated housing accommodations

  THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section 1.  The opening paragraph of section 26-504.1 of the  adminis-
trative  code  of the city of New York is designated subdivision a and a
new subdivision b is added to read as follows:
  B. NOTWITHSTANDING THE RULING OF THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS
V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS
WHICH WERE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT
OF  THE RECEIPT OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-
NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW OR WHICH WERE REMOVED FROM RENT  REGU-
LATION  AND AGAIN BECAME SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER PURSUANT TO SUCH RULING
SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WHICH BECAME OR  BECOME
SUBJECT  TO THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF RECEIVING TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO
SUCH SECTION FOUR  HUNDRED  EIGHTY-NINE;  PROVIDED,  HOWEVER,  THAT  THE
EXCLUSION  SET  FORTH  IN  THIS  SUBDIVISION SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO SUCH
HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SUBJECT TO SUCH RULING ONLY WHERE  THE  RECIPIENT
OF  TAX  BENEFITS  PURSUANT TO SUCH SECTION HAS MADE FULL PAYMENT TO THE
CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION  SEVENTEEN  OF
SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDI-
VISION  EE OF SECTION 11-243 OF THIS CODE. FOR HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN
BUILDINGS WHICH WERE, ARE OR BECOME THE SUBJECT OF CONVERSIONS  PURSUANT
TO  SECTION  THREE HUNDRED FIFTY-TWO-EEEE OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW, A
RECIPIENT OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR  HUNDRED  EIGHTY-NINE
OF  THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO ACT IN ACCORDANCE
WITH SUCH SECTIONS OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND THIS CODE TO QUALIFY
AS HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS NOT SUBJECT  TO  THIS  CHAPTER  BY  VIRTUE  OF
RECEIVING SUCH TAX BENEFITS.

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets

                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD10036-05-1

S. 4117                             2

  S  2.  Subdivision a of section 26-504.2 of the administrative code of
the city of New York, as amended by chapter 82 of the laws of  2003,  is
amended to read as follows:
  a. (1) "Housing accommodations" shall not include any housing accommo-
dation  which  becomes  vacant on or after April first, nineteen hundred
ninety-seven and where at the  time  the  tenant  vacated  such  housing
accommodation  the legal regulated rent was two thousand dollars or more
per month, or any housing accommodation which is or becomes vacant on or
after the effective date of the rent regulation reform act of 1997  with
a  legal  regulated rent of two thousand dollars or more per month. This
exclusion shall apply regardless of whether the next tenant in occupancy
or any subsequent tenant in occupancy actually is charged or  pays  less
than two thousand dollars a month. Provided however, that this exclusion
shall not apply to housing accommodations which became or become subject
to  this law (a) by virtue of receiving tax benefits pursuant to section
four hundred twenty-one-a or four hundred eighty-nine of the real  prop-
erty  tax law, except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (i) of para-
graph (f) of subdivision two of section four hundred twenty-one-a of the
real property tax law, or (b) by virtue of article seven-C of the multi-
ple dwelling law.
  (2) NOTWITHSTANDING THE RULING  OF  THE  STATE  COURT  OF  APPEALS  IN
ROBERTS  V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, HOUSING ACCOM-
MODATIONS WHICH WERE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER IMMEDIATELY  PRIOR  TO  THE
COMMENCEMENT  OF  THE  RECEIPT  OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR
HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW OR WHICH  WERE  REMOVED
FROM  RENT  REGULATION AND AGAIN BECAME SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER PURSUANT
TO SUCH RULING SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  WHICH
BECAME  OR  BECOME  SUBJECT  TO  THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF RECEIVING TAX
BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SUCH SECTION FOUR  HUNDRED  EIGHTY-NINE;  PROVIDED,
HOWEVER,  THAT THE EXCLUSION SET FORTH IN THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL BE APPLI-
CABLE TO SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SUBJECT TO SUCH RULING  ONLY  WHERE
THE  RECIPIENT  OF  TAX  BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SUCH SECTION HAS MADE FULL
PAYMENT TO THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION
SEVENTEEN  OF  SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX
LAW AND SUBDIVISION EE OF SECTION  11-243  OF  THIS  CODE.  FOR  HOUSING
ACCOMMODATIONS  IN  BUILDINGS  WHICH  WERE, ARE OR BECOME THE SUBJECT OF
CONVERSIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION  THREE  HUNDRED  FIFTY-TWO-EEEE  OF  THE
GENERAL  BUSINESS  LAW,  A RECIPIENT OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SECTION
FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL  PROPERTY  TAX  LAW  SHALL  NOT  BE
REQUIRED  TO  ACT  IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH SECTIONS OF THE REAL PROPERTY
TAX LAW AND THIS CODE TO QUALIFY AS HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS  NOT  SUBJECT
TO THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF RECEIVING TAX BENEFITS.
  (3) This section shall not apply, however, to or become effective with
respect  to  housing accommodations which the commissioner determines or
finds that the landlord or any person acting on his or her behalf,  with
intent  to  cause the tenant to vacate, engaged in any course of conduct
(including, but  not  limited  to,  interruption  or  discontinuance  of
required services) which interfered with or disturbed or was intended to
interfere  with  or  disturb  the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of the
tenant in his or her use or occupancy of the housing accommodations  and
in connection with such course of conduct, any other general enforcement
provision of this law shall also apply.
  S  3.  The  administrative  code of the city of New York is amended by
adding a new section 26-504.4 to read as follows:
  S 26-504.4 ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION OF
THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN  ROBERTS  V.  TISHMAN  SPEYER  PROPERTIES,

S. 4117                             3

L.P.,  13  NY3D279. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER,
THE EMERGENCY TENANT PROTECTION ACT  OF  NINETEEN  SEVENTY-FOUR  OR  THE
CIVIL  PRACTICE  LAW  AND  RULES  TO  THE  CONTRARY,  AND SUBJECT TO THE
PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION G OF THIS SECTION, ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION
THAT WAS REMOVED FROM REGULATION UNDER THIS  CHAPTER  AND  AGAIN  BECAME
SUBJECT  TO REGULATION UNDER THIS CHAPTER AS A RESULT OF THE DECISION OF
THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V.    TISHMAN  SPEYER  PROPERTIES,
L.P., 13 NY3D279, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
  A.  THE LEGAL RENT FOR A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION
SHALL BE (1) THE RENT CHARGED AND PAID FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ON
OCTOBER TWENTY-SECOND, TWO THOUSAND FIVE, PLUS  ALL  SUBSEQUENT  ADJUST-
MENTS AND INCREASES AUTHORIZED BY LAW THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PERMITTED HAD
THE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION  CONTINUED TO BE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER, OR
(2) THE LEGAL RENT AGREED TO BY THE TENANT PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION E  OF
THIS  SECTION  OR  (3)  SUCH  OTHER AMOUNT AS AGREED TO BY THE OWNER AND
TENANT IN A WRITING EXECUTED BY THE PARTIES AFTER RECEIPT BY THE  TENANT
OF  THE  NOTICE REQUIRED BY SUBDIVISION C OF THIS SECTION AND PAYMENT BY
THE OWNER OF THE REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, PROVIDED IN SUCH AGREEMENT.
  B. WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, THE  OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL OFFER TO REFUND
TO  THE TENANT RESIDING IN SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ALL RENT COLLECTED
FROM SUCH TENANT IN EXCESS OF THE LEGAL RENT  CALCULATED  IN  ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION A OF THIS SECTION.
  C.  WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AN OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN
NOTICE TO THE CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION  OF:  (1)  THE
FACT  THAT  THE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION  IS SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER AS A
RESULT OF THE DECISION OF THE STATE  COURT  OF  APPEALS  IN  ROBERTS  V.
TISHMAN  SPEYER  PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279; (2) A CALCULATION OF THE
LEGAL REGULATED RENT FOR THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION  IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH
THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION  A  OF  THIS SECTION; AND (3) THE TOTAL
AMOUNT TO BE REFUNDED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION B OF THIS SECTION.
  D. AN OWNER WHO MAKES A GOOD FAITH CALCULATION OF THE LEGAL  RENT  AND
MAKES  A REFUND OFFER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBDIVISION
B OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY OF THE  OVERCHARGE  PENAL-
TIES,  INCLUDING  INTEREST  AND  TREBLE DAMAGES, PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION
26-516 OF THIS CHAPTER.
  E. WHERE A TENANT OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS
OF THIS SECTION CONSENTS IN WRITING TO THE LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT,
IF ANY, SET FORTH BY THE OWNER IN THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY  SUBDIVISION  C
OF  THIS SECTION, AND THE OWNER MAKES THE REQUIRED REFUND TO THE TENANT,
OR AFTER THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY SUCH SUBDIVISION THE  OWNER  AND  TENANT
ENTER  INTO A WRITTEN AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR A DIFFERENT LEGAL RENT AND
REFUND AMOUNT AND THE OWNER MAKES THE REFUND, IF ANY, AGREED TO  BY  THE
PARTIES,  THEN  NEITHER  SUCH LEGAL RENT NOR SUCH REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY,
SHALL THEREAFTER BE SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE BY THE TENANT OR ANY SUBSEQUENT
TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION. HOWEVER, IF THE  AGREEMENT  ENTERED
INTO  PURSUANT  TO  THIS SUBDIVISION IS ENTERED INTO IN CONTEMPLATION OF
THE TENANT VACATING THE SUBJECT  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION  OR  ENCOMPASSES
SURRENDER  OF  POSSESSION OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION BY THE TENANT, IT
SHALL NOT BE BINDING UPON SUBSEQUENT TENANTS.
  F. IN NO EVENT SHALL A TENANT WHO FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE  DIVISION
OF  HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL SEEKING RELIEF UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION BE ENTITLED TO A REFUND FOR RENT PAYMENTS  MADE  MORE  THAN
FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE COMPLAINT IS FILED.

S. 4117                             4

  G.  AS  AN  ALTERNATIVE  TO  THE  PROCEDURES  SET  FORTH ABOVE IN THIS
SECTION, AN OWNER MAY, WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF  THIS
SECTION,  PROVIDE  WRITTEN  NOTICE  TO THE CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION THAT THE OWNER INTENDS TO MAKE  PAYMENT  TO  THE  CITY  IN
ACCORDANCE  WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION SEVENTEEN OF SECTION FOUR
HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDIVISION  EE  OF
SECTION  11-243 OF THIS CODE. AN OWNER WHO PROVIDES A NOTICE PURSUANT TO
THIS SECTION BUT WHO DOES NOT MAKE PAYMENT TO  THE  CITY  IN  ACCORDANCE
WITH  THE  REAL  PROPERTY  TAX  LAW AND THIS CODE BY JUNE THIRTIETH, TWO
THOUSAND TWELVE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE OVERCHARGE PENALTIES,  INCLUDING
INTEREST  AND  TREBLE  DAMAGES,  PROVIDED  FOR IN SECTION 26-516 OF THIS
CHAPTER.
  S 4. Section 4 of chapter 576 of the laws of  1974,  constituting  the
emergency  tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four, is amended by
adding a new section 5-b to read as follows:
  S 5-B. ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION OF THE
COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13  NY3D
279.  NOTWITHSTANDING  ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THE RENT STABILIZATION LAW
OF NINETEEN HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE, THIS ACT OR THE CIVIL PRACTICE  LAW  AND
RULES TO THE CONTRARY, AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION G OF
THIS SECTION, ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION THAT WAS REMOVED FROM REGULATION
UNDER  THIS  CHAPTER  AND  AGAIN BECAME SUBJECT TO REGULATION UNDER THIS
CHAPTER AS A RESULT OF THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS  IN  ROBERTS
V.  TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D279, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWING:
  A. THE LEGAL RENT FOR A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS  SECTION
SHALL BE (1) THE RENT CHARGED AND PAID FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ON
OCTOBER  22, 2005, PLUS ALL SUBSEQUENT ADJUSTMENTS AND INCREASES AUTHOR-
IZED BY LAW THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN PERMITTED HAD THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION
CONTINUED TO BE SUBJECT TO THIS ACT, OR (2) THE LEGAL RENT AGREED TO  BY
THE  TENANT  PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION E OF THIS SECTION OR (3) SUCH OTHER
AMOUNT AS AGREED TO BY THE OWNER AND TENANT IN A WRITING EXECUTED BY THE
PARTIES AFTER RECEIPT BY THE TENANT OF THE NOTICE REQUIRED  BY  SUBDIVI-
SION C OF THIS SECTION AND PAYMENT BY THE OWNER OF THE REFUND AMOUNT, IF
ANY, PROVIDED IN SUCH AGREEMENT.
  B.  WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, THE OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL OFFER TO REFUND
TO THE TENANT RESIDING IN SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ALL RENT  COLLECTED
FROM  SUCH  TENANT  IN EXCESS OF THE LEGAL RENT CALCULATED IN ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION A OF THIS SECTION.
  C. WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AN  OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN
NOTICE  TO  THE  CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION OF: (1) THE
FACT THAT THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IS SUBJECT  TO  THIS  CHAPTER  AS  A
RESULT  OF  THE  DECISION  OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN
SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D279; (2)  A  CALCULATION  OF  THE  LEGAL
REGULATED  RENT  FOR  THE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION A OF THIS SECTION; AND (3) THE TOTAL AMOUNT TO
BE REFUNDED PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION B OF THIS SECTION.
  D. AN OWNER WHO MAKES A GOOD FAITH CALCULATION OF THE LEGAL  RENT  AND
MAKES  A REFUND OFFER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUBDIVISION
B OF THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY OF THE  OVERCHARGE  PENAL-
TIES,  INCLUDING  INTEREST  AND  TREBLE DAMAGES, PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION
26-516 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
  E. WHERE A TENANT OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS
OF THIS SECTION CONSENTS IN WRITING TO THE LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT,

S. 4117                             5

IF ANY, SET FORTH BY THE OWNER IN THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY  SUBDIVISION  C
OF  THIS SECTION, AND THE OWNER MAKES THE REQUIRED REFUND TO THE TENANT,
OR AFTER THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY SUCH SUBDIVISION THE  OWNER  AND  TENANT
ENTER  INTO A WRITTEN AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR A DIFFERENT LEGAL RENT AND
REFUND AMOUNT AND THE OWNER MAKES THE REFUND, IF ANY, AGREED TO  BY  THE
PARTIES,  THEN  NEITHER  SUCH LEGAL RENT NOR SUCH REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY,
SHALL THEREAFTER BE SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE BY THE TENANT OR ANY SUBSEQUENT
TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION. HOWEVER, IF THE  AGREEMENT  ENTERED
INTO  PURSUANT  TO  THIS SUBDIVISION IS ENTERED INTO IN CONTEMPLATION OF
THE TENANT VACATING THE SUBJECT  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION  OR  ENCOMPASSES
SURRENDER  OF  POSSESSION OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION BY THE TENANT, IT
SHALL NOT BE BINDING UPON SUBSEQUENT TENANTS.
  F. IN NO EVENT SHALL A TENANT WHO FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE  DIVISION
OF  HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL SEEKING RELIEF UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION BE ENTITLED TO A REFUND FOR RENT PAYMENTS  MADE  MORE  THAN
FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE COMPLAINT IS FILED.
  G.  AS  AN  ALTERNATIVE  TO  THE  PROCEDURES  SET  FORTH ABOVE IN THIS
SECTION, AN OWNER MAY, WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF  THIS
SECTION,  PROVIDE  WRITTEN  NOTICE  TO THE CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION THAT THE OWNER INTENDS TO MAKE PAYMENT TO THE CITY OF  NEW
YORK  IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH  THE  PROVISIONS  OF SUBDIVISION SEVENTEEN OF
SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDI-
VISION EE OF SECTION 11-243 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF  THE  CITY  OF
NEW  YORK.  AN  OWNER WHO PROVIDES A NOTICE PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION BUT
WHO DOES NOT MAKE PAYMENT TO SUCH CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REAL PROP-
ERTY TAX LAW AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK BY JUNE
30, 2012 SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE OVERCHARGE PENALTIES, INCLUDING  INTER-
EST  AND  TREBLE DAMAGES, PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 26-516 OF THE ADMINIS-
TRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
  S 5. Subparagraph (i) of paragraph 14 of subdivision a of section 5 of
section 4 of chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, constituting the emergency
tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four, as added by chapter  253
of the laws of 1993, is amended to read as follows:
  (i)  housing accommodations owned as a cooperative or condominium unit
which are or become vacant on or after the effective date of this  para-
graph  REGARDLESS  OF  WHETHER  SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WERE, ARE OR
WILL BE IN A BUILDING WHICH RECEIVED OR RECEIVES TAX  BENEFITS  PURSUANT
TO SECTION 489 OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND REGARDLESS OF THE RULING
OF  THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V.  TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P.,
13 NY3D 279, except that this subparagraph  shall  not  apply  to  units
occupied  by  non-purchasing  tenants under section three hundred fifty-
two-eee of the general business law until the occurrence of a vacancy.
  S 6. Section 489 of the real property tax law is amended by  adding  a
new subdivision 17 to read as follows:
  17.    WHERE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  WERE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION
IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENE-
FITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION OR WERE REMOVED FROM RENT  REGULATION  AND
AGAIN BECAME SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT OF SUCH BENE-
FITS  PURSUANT TO THE RULING OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISH-
MAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, THE RECIPIENT OF SUCH BENEFITS
SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE TO THE CITY OF NEW YORK, AND THE CITY OF NEW
YORK SHALL BE OBLIGED TO ACCEPT, PAYMENT OF THE FULL AMOUNT OF ALL  SUCH
BENEFITS,  PLUS  INTEREST AT A RATE OF NINE PER CENTUM, RECEIVED BY SUCH
RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO ANY ORDER OR DETERMINATION  ISSUED  BY  THE  LOCAL
HOUSING AGENCY ADMINISTERING THIS CHAPTER OR THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY
RESPONSIBLE  FOR  REAL  PROPERTY  TAX  ASSESSMENT  WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN

S. 4117                             6

EFFECT AND TO WAIVE THE RECEIPT OF ANY  FURTHER  TAX  EXEMPTION  OR  TAX
ABATEMENT BENEFITS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE DUE TO SUCH RECIPIENT PURSU-
ANT TO ANY SUCH ORDER OR DETERMINATION CURRENTLY IN EFFECT. SUCH PAYMENT
AND SUCH WAIVER SHALL BE MADE NO LATER THAN JUNE THIRTIETH, TWO THOUSAND
TWELVE.    SUCH  PAYMENT  AND WAIVER SHALL ENTITLE SUCH RECIPIENT TO THE
BENEFIT OF THE EXCLUSIONS SET FORTH IN SECTIONS 26-504.1 AND 26-504.2 OF
THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHERE THE HOUSING ACCOM-
MODATIONS WERE SUBJECT TO  RENT  REGULATION  IMMEDIATELY  PRIOR  TO  THE
RECEIPT  OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION. SUCH PAYMENT SHALL BE
PAID INTO THE GENERAL FUND OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
  S 7. Section 11-243 of the administrative code of the city of New York
is amended by adding a new subdivision ee to read as follows:
  EE. WHERE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WERE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION IMME-
DIATELY PRIOR TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT  BENEFITS
PURSUANT  TO THIS SECTION OR WERE REMOVED FROM RENT REGULATION AND AGAIN
BECAME SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT  OF  SUCH  BENEFITS
PURSUANT  TO  THE  RULING  OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN
SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, THE  RECIPIENT  OF  SUCH  BENEFITS
SHALL  BE  AUTHORIZED TO MAKE TO THE CITY, AND THE CITY SHALL BE OBLIGED
TO ACCEPT, PAYMENT OF THE FULL AMOUNT OF ALL SUCH BENEFITS, PLUS  INTER-
EST AT A RATE OF NINE PER CENTUM, RECEIVED BY SUCH RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO
ANY ORDER OR DETERMINATION ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OR BY THE DEPARTMENT
OF HOUSING PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN EFFECT AND
TO WAIVE THE RECEIPT OF ANY FURTHER TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENE-
FITS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE DUE TO SUCH RECIPIENT PURSUANT TO ANY SUCH
ORDER OR DETERMINATION CURRENTLY IN EFFECT. SUCH PAYMENT AND SUCH WAIVER
SHALL  BE  MADE NO LATER THAN JUNE THIRTIETH, TWO THOUSAND TWELVE.  SUCH
PAYMENT AND WAIVER SHALL ENTITLE SUCH RECIPIENT TO THE  BENEFIT  OF  THE
EXCLUSIONS  SET  FORTH  IN  SECTIONS  26-504.1 AND 26-504.2 OF THIS CODE
WHERE THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WERE SUBJECT TO RENT  REGULATION  IMME-
DIATELY  PRIOR  TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION.
SUCH PAYMENT SHALL BE PAID INTO THE GENERAL FUND OF THE CITY.
  S 8. This act shall take effect immediately, provided,  that  sections
one  and  two of this act shall be deemed to have been in full force and
effect on and after July 6, 1993; provided, further, that:
  (a) the amendments to chapter 4 of title 26 of the administrative code
of the city of New York made by sections one, two and three of this  act
shall  expire  on the same date as such law expires and shall not affect
the expiration of such law as provided under section 26-520 of such law;
  (b) the amendments to the emergency tenant protection act of  nineteen
seventy-four  made by sections four and five of this act shall expire on
the same date as such act expires and shall not affect the expiration of
such act as provided in section 17 of chapter 576 of the laws  of  1974;
and
  (c)  the  provisions  of this act shall preclude in their entirety any
and all claims in any administrative or judicial proceeding relating  to
the  deregulation  of  housing accommodations which were subject to rent
regulation immediately prior to the receipt of tax benefits pursuant  to
section  489  of  the  real  property  tax law and section 11-243 of the
administrative code of the city of New York or which were  removed  from
rent  regulation and again became subject to rent regulation pursuant to
the ruling of the court of appeals in ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER  PROPER-
TIES,  L.P.,  13 NY3D 279, provided that the recipient of such tax bene-
fits has acted in accordance with sections three and four of  this  act,
regardless of whether such claims are brought prior or subsequent to the
effective date of this act.

co-Sponsors

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Details

Current Committee:: Senate Housing, Construction And Community Development
Law Section:: New York City Administrative Code
Laws Affected:: Amd §§26-504.1, 26-504.2 & 11-243, add §26-504.4, NYC Ad Cd; add §5-b, amd §5, Emerg Ten Prot Act of 1974; amd §489, RPT L

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Summary

Makes provisions relating to previously deregulated housing accommodations which again became subject to rent regulation pursuant to a court of appeals decision.

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

                                BILL NUMBER:S4117A               REVISED 04/29/11

TITLE OF BILL:

An act
to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, the emergency
tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four and the real property tax
law, in relation to rent regulated housing accommodations

PURPOSE:

To make provisions for housing accommodations which were subjected to
rent regulation pursuant to the New York state Court of appeals
decision in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer properties based on the use of
the J-51 benefit.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

This bill creates a mechanism for property owners and tenants affected
by the Court of Appeals decision in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer
properties to proceed in light of the Court's decision.

First it provides the opportunity for property owners to repay to the
city of New York the amount of the J-51 benefits, plus interest, that
they would have received from the city and to waive the amount of
future benefits to which they would otherwise be entitled. The return

and waiver of these benefits would remove the basis for subjecting
these housing accommodations to rent regulation based on the
application of the interpretation of the state Division of Housing
and community Renewal ("DHCR"). The bill also provides that owners
who intend to make a repayment can obtain a statement from the City
setting forth the amount due and the basis for that determination. It
also requires that the city provide this information within 30 days.

Second, for those owners who chose not to repay their benefits to the
City, the bill establishes a formula for the calculation of the legal
rents and refunds due, if any, to the affected tenants, as well as a
mechanism and timeframe for the payment of such refund. It also
mandates that affected owners provide current tenants with a notice
that informs such tenants of the court ruling and provides a
calculation of the legal rent and refund amount, if any, due to the
tenant. It would also create a mechanism by which, after the owner
has provided the tenant with such notice, the parties may enter into
a final and binding written agreement regarding the legal rent and
refund amount due the tenant. As part of the process of calculating
the legal rent, the baseline for that calculation is the amount of
rent that was payable on October 22, 2005, the date four years prior
to the decision of the Court of Appeals in Roberts. The various other
forms of rent increases that owners would otherwise have
received during the ensuing period had the units been considered as
rent regulated would then be added to that rental amount to determine
the current legal rent.

Third, the bill provides that owners who do not repay the City will be
obliged to provide so called "J-51 riders" to their regulated tenants


prospectively if they expect to deregulate these apartments upon the
expiration of these tax benefits.

Fourth, the bill is intended to make absolutely clear that and to
remove any doubt that Roberts in no manner whatsoever applies to rent
regulated buildings converted to cooperatives or condominiums.

Lastly, the bill authorizes owners of buildings built after January 1,
1974 and are now rent stabilized due only to the receipt of J-51
benefits to repay those benefits and to authorize any repayments that
may have occurred prior to this bill taking effect.

JUSTIFICATION:

This bill would address the consequences of the decision by the Court
in Roberts v. Tishman Speyer properties. In that decision, the Court
of Appeals held that apartment buildings which were rent regulated
prior to the receipt of J-51 tax benefits were prohibited from
deregulating apartments during the period of those tax benefits. The
Court did so even though the deregulation of those apartments
occurred since 1993 with the express approval of government agencies,
including the State Division of Housing and community Renewal,
without challenge from affected tenants, the codification of this
practice and policy by DHCR in regulations promulgated in 2000, and
without any action to the contrary by the Legislature for all of
these years.

Building owners who deregulated thousands of apartments throughout the
city while they received these tax benefits are subject, as the
result of Roberts, to potential rent rollbacks and enormous rent
overcharge claims by thousands of tenants who entered into
unregulated leases.

These outstanding claims undermine the economies of numerous buildings
which were financed by mortgages based on a rent roll and assessed by
the City based upon the accepted lawfulness of deregulation in J-51
buildings. Over 80,000 apartments have been deregulated through the
mechanism of high rent vacancy deregulation throughout the city by
property owners since 1993 and several thousand more have been
deregulated through the process of high income, high rent
deregulation, none of which were challenged over these many years by
their tenants or their representatives. It has been estimated by the
citizens Housing and Planning Council that between 19,000 and 37,000
deregulated units are in buildings that have received J-51 benefits.
This situation places these properties at risk and impacts city
revenues. Currently, the tenants who occupied unregulated units with
no expectation of rent regulatory protection will receive a windfall
from the Roberts decision. These tenants entered into these
unregulated leases voluntarily, often at rents several of several
thousand dollars per month, in contrast to the median rent regulated
lease in the City of $950 per month. These unregulated tenants are
not the low income and moderate income New Yorkers
who need assistance and who deserve the protection of the rent
regulation laws or
in fact had any expectation of rent protection: rather they entered
into free market leases.


The Court of Appeals specifically declined to rule on two major
aspects of this issue, namely, (1) whether its decision applied
retroactively and (2) whether the four-year statute of limitations on
rent overcharges applied to these claims and, if so, in what manner.
The Court's failure to provide guidance on these questions has opened
the door to many more years of litigation between tenants and owners,
placing burdens upon both the courts and the State Division of
Housing and Community Renewal. In addition, the financial clouds that
have been placed over these properties as the result of Roberts
effectively has made many of these buildings unmarketable until these
questions are resolved. Finally, prohibiting deregulation in these
buildings will, invariably, result in lower property tax assessments,
resulting in lower real estate tax payments to the City. No one
benefits from this uncertainty.

The Court of Appeals stated in Roberts that if its decision created
"unacceptable burdens," relief from those burdens was a matter for
the Legislature. This legislation is intended to provide that relief
but only under prescribed conditions. Building owners who deregulated
apartments in the past or who would do so in the future but for
Roberts and who seek to come out from under Roberts would be
obligated to return to the City all of the J-5 1 tax benefits they
received for their buildings and to waive any future benefits which
would otherwise be due to them.

By returning and waiving their benefits, building owners would be
allowed to continue to deregulate apartments in their buildings
notwithstanding Roberts, and would be insulated from any and all
liability resulting from Roberts for the apartments that were
deregulated. By making such payments to the City, these building
owners also would be providing the City of New York with a
critically-needed infusion of revenue at a time when it is most needed.

As a result of the Court's ruling, rents for the affected apartments
may have to be reviewed and, in many cases, reduced to bring them
into compliance with the requirements of rent regulation. In
addition, tenants may well be owed significant sums for the amounts
they have paid in excess of rent that they would have been charged
had their apartments been continuously rent regulated. Lastly,
because the rent rolls for the buildings affected by Roberts may be
reduced, the value of these buildings and their assessments would be
reduced, raising innumerable legal and financial problems both for
property owners and the City.

For those owners who do not repay their benefits to the City, the bill
would create a special rent setting procedure for the affected
apartment that could be applied uniformly to all of the apartments.
It adheres generally to rent-setting procedures applicable in other
situations under the rent laws, and would provide needed certainty
for tenants, owners and other affected parties. Most importantly, it
would establish a mechanism whereby owners and tenants can resolve
the Roberts issue between themselves, without the need for
intervention by DHCR or the courts.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

This is a new bill.


FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None to the State.

EFFECTIVE DATE:

This act shall take effect immediately.

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

                            
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                 4117--A

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                             March 18, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sen.  YOUNG  -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
  printed to be committed to the Committee on Housing, Construction  and
  Community  Development  -- committee discharged, bill amended, ordered
  reprinted as amended and recommitted to said committee

AN ACT to amend the administrative code of the city  of  New  York,  the
  emergency  tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four and the real
  property tax law, in relation to rent regulated housing accommodations

  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section  1.  The opening paragraph of section 26-504.1 of the adminis-
trative code of the city of New York is designated subdivision a  and  a
new subdivision b is added to read as follows:
  B. NOTWITHSTANDING THE RULING OF THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS
V.  TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS
WHICH WERE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER OR CHAPTER THREE OF THIS TITLE  IMME-
DIATELY  PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE RECEIPT OF TAX BENEFITS PURSU-
ANT TO SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW  OR
WHICH  ARE  OR  WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER PURSUANT TO SUCH RULING
SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WHICH BECAME OR  BECOME
SUBJECT  TO THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF RECEIVING TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO
SUCH SECTION FOUR  HUNDRED  EIGHTY-NINE;  PROVIDED,  HOWEVER,  THAT  THE
EXCLUSION  SET  FORTH  IN  THIS  SUBDIVISION SHALL BE APPLICABLE TO SUCH
HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SUBJECT TO SUCH RULING ONLY WHERE  THE  OWNER  OF
SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS HAS MADE FULL PAYMENT TO THE CITY IN ACCORD-
ANCE  WITH  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION  SEVENTEEN  OF SECTION FOUR
HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDIVISION  EE  OF
SECTION  11-243  OF  THIS  CODE. FOR HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN BUILDINGS
WHICH WERE, ARE OR BECOME THE SUBJECT OF CONVERSIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION
THREE HUNDRED FIFTY-TWO-EEEE OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW,  SUCH  HOUSING
ACCOMMODATIONS  SHALL  NOT  BE DEEMED TO BE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WHICH
BECAME OR BECOME SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER  BY  VIRTUE  OF  RECEIVING  TAX

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD10036-08-1

S. 4117--A                          2

BENEFITS  PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROP-
ERTY TAX LAW AND THE OWNER OR PROPRIETARY LESSEE OF SUCH HOUSING  ACCOM-
MODATIONS  SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO ACT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SUCH SECTIONS
OF  THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND THIS CODE TO QUALIFY AS HOUSING ACCOM-
MODATIONS NOT SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF  RECEIVING  SUCH  TAX
BENEFITS.
  S  2.  Subdivision a of section 26-504.2 of the administrative code of
the city of New York, as amended by chapter 82 of the laws of  2003,  is
amended to read as follows:
  a. (1) "Housing accommodations" shall not include any housing accommo-
dation  which  becomes  vacant on or after April first, nineteen hundred
ninety-seven and where at the  time  the  tenant  vacated  such  housing
accommodation  the legal regulated rent was two thousand dollars or more
per month, or any housing accommodation which is or becomes vacant on or
after the effective date of the rent regulation reform act of 1997  with
a  legal  regulated rent of two thousand dollars or more per month. This
exclusion shall apply regardless of whether the next tenant in occupancy
or any subsequent tenant in occupancy actually is charged or  pays  less
than two thousand dollars a month. Provided however, that this exclusion
shall not apply to housing accommodations which became or become subject
to  this law (a) by virtue of receiving tax benefits pursuant to section
four hundred twenty-one-a or four hundred eighty-nine of the real  prop-
erty  tax law, except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (i) of para-
graph (f) of subdivision two of section four hundred twenty-one-a of the
real property tax law, or (b) by virtue of article seven-C of the multi-
ple dwelling law.
  (2) NOTWITHSTANDING THE RULING  OF  THE  STATE  COURT  OF  APPEALS  IN
ROBERTS  V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, HOUSING ACCOM-
MODATIONS WHICH WERE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER OR CHAPTER  THREE  OF  THIS
TITLE  IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE RECEIPT OF TAX BENE-
FITS PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE  REAL  PROPERTY
TAX  LAW  OR  WHICH  ARE OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER PURSUANT TO
SUCH RULING SHALL NOT BE  DEEMED  TO  BE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  WHICH
BECAME  OR  BECOME  SUBJECT  TO  THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF RECEIVING TAX
BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SUCH SECTION FOUR  HUNDRED  EIGHTY-NINE;  PROVIDED,
HOWEVER,  THAT THE EXCLUSION SET FORTH IN THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL BE APPLI-
CABLE TO SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SUBJECT TO SUCH RULING  ONLY  WHERE
THE  OWNER  OF  SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS HAS MADE FULL PAYMENT TO THE
CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH  THE  PROVISIONS  OF  SUBDIVISION  SEVENTEEN  OF
SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDI-
VISION  EE OF SECTION 11-243 OF THIS CODE. FOR HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN
BUILDINGS WHICH WERE, ARE OR BECOME THE SUBJECT OF CONVERSIONS  PURSUANT
TO  SECTION  THREE  HUNDRED  FIFTY-TWO-EEEE OF THE GENERAL BUSINESS LAW,
SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SHALL NOT BE DEEMED TO BE  HOUSING  ACCOMMO-
DATIONS  WHICH  BECAME  OR  BECOME  SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF
RECEIVING TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO SECTION FOUR HUNDRED  EIGHTY-NINE  OF
THE  REAL  PROPERTY  TAX LAW AND THE OWNER OR PROPRIETARY LESSEE OF SUCH
HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO ACT IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH
SUCH  SECTIONS  OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND THIS CODE TO QUALIFY AS
HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS NOT SUBJECT TO THIS CHAPTER BY VIRTUE OF  RECEIV-
ING TAX BENEFITS.
  (3) This section shall not apply, however, to or become effective with
respect  to  housing accommodations which the commissioner determines or
finds that the landlord or any person acting on his or her behalf,  with
intent  to  cause the tenant to vacate, engaged in any course of conduct
(including, but  not  limited  to,  interruption  or  discontinuance  of

S. 4117--A                          3

required services) which interfered with or disturbed or was intended to
interfere  with  or  disturb  the comfort, repose, peace or quiet of the
tenant in his or her use or occupancy of the housing accommodations  and
in connection with such course of conduct, any other general enforcement
provision of this law shall also apply.
  S  3.  The  administrative  code of the city of New York is amended by
adding a new section 26-504.4 to read as follows:
  S 26-504.4 ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION OF
THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN  ROBERTS  V.  TISHMAN  SPEYER  PROPERTIES,
L.P.,  13  NY3D279. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER,
THE EMERGENCY TENANT PROTECTION ACT  OF  NINETEEN  SEVENTY-FOUR  OR  THE
CIVIL  PRACTICE  LAW  AND  RULES  TO  THE  CONTRARY,  AND SUBJECT TO THE
PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION C OF THIS SECTION, ANY  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION
THAT IS OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REGULATION UNDER THIS CHAPTER AS A RESULT
OF  THE  DECISION  OF  THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V.  TISHMAN
SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D279, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
  (1) THE LEGAL RENT FOR A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION
SHALL BE (I) THE RENT CHARGED AND PAID FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ON
OCTOBER TWENTY-SECOND, TWO THOUSAND FIVE, OR PROVIDED FOR IN  THE  LEASE
IN  EFFECT  ON SUCH DATE, PLUS ALL SUBSEQUENT ADJUSTMENTS AND INCREASES,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INCREASES ATTRIBUTABLE TO VACANCIES,  MAJOR
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, INDIVIDUAL APARTMENT IMPROVEMENTS, RENT GUIDELINES
BOARD  ORDERS, SURCHARGES OR ANY OTHER INCREASES THAT WERE NOT PRECLUDED
BY AN ORDER OF THE DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL AS TO OTHER
REGULATED HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN THE BUILDING  AND  THAT  WOULD  HAVE
BEEN  PERMITTED  NOTWITHSTANDING  THE  ABSENCE  OR OMISSION OF ANY FORM,
RIDER, NOTICE, REGISTRATION, APPLICATION  OR  ANY  OTHER  DOCUMENT  THAT
WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED OR OTHERWISE PROVIDED, OR
  (II) THE LEGAL RENT AGREED TO BY THE TENANT PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH FIVE
OF THIS SUBDIVISION OR (III) SUCH OTHER AMOUNT AS AGREED TO BY THE OWNER
AND  TENANT  IN  A  WRITING EXECUTED BY THE PARTIES AFTER RECEIPT BY THE
TENANT OF THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION AND
PAYMENT BY THE OWNER OF THE REFUND AMOUNT,  IF  ANY,  PROVIDED  IN  SUCH
AGREEMENT.
  (2) WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, THE OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL OFFER TO REFUND
TO  THE TENANT RESIDING IN SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ALL RENT COLLECTED
FROM SUCH TENANT IN EXCESS OF THE LEGAL RENT  CALCULATED  IN  ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (3) WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AN OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN
NOTICE  TO  THE  CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION OF: (I) THE
FACT THAT THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IS SUBJECT  TO  THIS  CHAPTER  AS  A
RESULT  OF  THE  DECISION  OF  THE  STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V.
TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279; (II) A CALCULATION OF  THE
LEGAL  REGULATED  RENT  FOR THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION; AND (III) THE TOTAL
AMOUNT TO BE REFUNDED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH TWO OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (4) AN OWNER WHO MAKES A GOOD FAITH CALCULATION OF THE LEGAL RENT  AND
MAKES  A  REFUND  OFFER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF PARAGRAPH
TWO OF THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY  OF  THE  OVERCHARGE
PENALTIES,  INCLUDING  INTEREST  AND  TREBLE  DAMAGES,  PROVIDED  FOR IN
SECTION 26-516 OF THIS CHAPTER.
  (5) THE TENANT SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO RESPOND WITHIN  THIRTY-FIVE  DAYS
OF  THE MAILING OF SUCH NOTICE TO THE TENANT.  WHERE A TENANT OF A HOUS-
ING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION CONSENTS  IN

S. 4117--A                          4

WRITING  TO  THE  LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, SET FORTH BY THE
OWNER IN THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION, AND
THE OWNER MAKES THE REQUIRED REFUND TO THE TENANT, OR AFTER  THE  NOTICE
REQUIRED  BY  SUCH  PARAGRAPH  THE OWNER AND TENANT ENTER INTO A WRITTEN
AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR A DIFFERENT LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT AND THE
OWNER MAKES THE REFUND, IF ANY, AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES,  THEN  NEITHER
SUCH  LEGAL  RENT  NOR  SUCH  REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, SHALL THEREAFTER BE
SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE BY THE TENANT OR ANY SUBSEQUENT TENANT OF THE HOUS-
ING ACCOMMODATION. HOWEVER, IF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED  INTO  PURSUANT  TO
THIS PARAGRAPH REQUIRES THE TENANT VACATING THE SUBJECT HOUSING ACCOMMO-
DATION  OR  ENCOMPASSES  SURRENDER OF POSSESSION OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMO-
DATION BY THE TENANT, IT SHALL NOT BE BINDING UPON SUBSEQUENT TENANTS.
  (6) IN NO EVENT SHALL A TENANT WHO FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE DIVISION
OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL SEEKING RELIEF UNDER THE PROVISIONS  OF
THIS  SECTION  BE  ENTITLED TO A REFUND FOR RENT PAYMENTS MADE MORE THAN
FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE COMPLAINT IS FILED.
  B. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS CHAPTER, THE  EMERGENCY
TENANT PROTECTION ACT OF NINETEEN SEVENTY-FOUR OR THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW
AND  RULES TO THE CONTRARY, AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION
C OF THIS SECTION, ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION THAT, PRIOR TO ITS VACANCY,
WAS SUBJECT TO REGULATION UNDER CHAPTER THREE OF THIS TITLE AND WHICH IS
OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REGULATION UNDER THIS CHAPTER AS A RESULT OF  THE
DECISION  OF  THE  STATE  COURT  OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER
PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
  (1) WHERE A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION PRIOR TO ITS VACANCY WAS SUBJECT  TO
REGULATION  UNDER  CHAPTER  THREE OF THIS TITLE AND WHICH IS OR WOULD BE
SUBJECT TO REGULATION UNDER THIS CHAPTER AS A RESULT OF THE DECISION  OF
THE  STATE  COURT  OF  APPEALS  IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES,
L.P., 13 NY3D 279, THE INITIAL LEGAL RENT SHALL  BE  (I)  DETERMINED  IN
ACCORDANCE  WITH  THE  METHODOLOGY  USED  FOR  FAIR MARKET RENT APPEALS,
PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE RENTS IN EFFECT FOR  COMPARABLE  APARTMENTS,
WHETHER  OR  NOT  REGULATED, ON THE DATE FOUR YEARS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF
THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE FIRST LEASE EXECUTED AFTER THE  VACANCY  BY  THE
FORMER  RENT  CONTROLLED  TENANT OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION, SHALL BE
UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE COMPARABILITY COMPONENT USED
FOR THE DETERMINATION OF FAIR MARKET RENT APPEALS, PLUS  ALL  SUBSEQUENT
ADJUSTMENTS AND INCREASES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INCREASES ATTRIB-
UTABLE  TO  VACANCIES,  MAJOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, INDIVIDUAL APARTMENT
IMPROVEMENTS, RENT GUIDELINES BOARD  ORDERS,  SURCHARGES  OR  ANY  OTHER
INCREASES THAT WERE NOT PRECLUDED BY AN ORDER OF THE DIVISION OF HOUSING
AND  COMMUNITY  RENEWAL  AS TO OTHER REGULATED HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN
THE BUILDING AND THAT WOULD  HAVE  BEEN  PERMITTED  NOTWITHSTANDING  THE
ABSENCE  OR  OMISSION OF ANY FORM, RIDER, NOTICE, REGISTRATION, APPLICA-
TION OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN  REQUIRED  OR  OTHERWISE
PROVIDED,  OR (II) THE INITIAL LEGAL RENT AGREED TO BY THE TENANT PURSU-
ANT TO PARAGRAPH FIVE OF THIS SUBDIVISION OR (III) SUCH OTHER AMOUNT  AS
AGREED  TO  BY THE OWNER AND TENANT IN A WRITING EXECUTED BY THE PARTIES
AFTER RECEIPT BY THE TENANT OF THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF
THIS SUBDIVISION AND PAYMENT BY THE OWNER OF THE REFUND AMOUNT, IF  ANY,
PROVIDED IN SUCH AGREEMENT.
  (2) WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, THE OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL OFFER TO REFUND
TO  THE TENANT RESIDING IN SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ALL RENT COLLECTED
FROM SUCH TENANT IN EXCESS OF THE LEGAL RENT  CALCULATED  IN  ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION.

S. 4117--A                          5

  (3) WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AN OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN
NOTICE  TO  THE  CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION OF: (I) THE
FACT THAT THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IS SUBJECT  TO  THIS  CHAPTER  AS  A
RESULT  OF  THE  DECISION  OF  THE  STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V.
TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279; (II) A CALCULATION OF  THE
LEGAL  REGULATED  RENT  FOR THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION; AND (III) THE TOTAL
AMOUNT TO BE REFUNDED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH TWO OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (4) AN OWNER WHO MAKES A GOOD FAITH CALCULATION OF THE LEGAL RENT  AND
MAKES  A  REFUND  OFFER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF PARAGRAPH
TWO OF THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY  OF  THE  OVERCHARGE
PENALTIES,  INCLUDING  INTEREST  AND  TREBLE  DAMAGES,  PROVIDED  FOR IN
SECTION 26-516 OF THIS CHAPTER.
  (5) THE TENANT SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO RESPOND WITHIN  THIRTY-FIVE  DAYS
OF THE MAILING OF SUCH NOTICE TO THE TENANT. WHERE A TENANT OF A HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION  SUBJECT  TO  THE  PROVISIONS  OF THIS SECTION CONSENTS IN
WRITING TO THE LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, SET  FORTH  BY  THE
OWNER IN THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION, AND
THE  OWNER  MAKES THE REQUIRED REFUND TO THE TENANT, OR AFTER THE NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SUCH PARAGRAPH THE OWNER AND TENANT  ENTER  INTO  A  WRITTEN
AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR A DIFFERENT LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT AND THE
OWNER  MAKES  THE REFUND, IF ANY, AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES, THEN NEITHER
SUCH LEGAL RENT NOR SUCH REFUND AMOUNT,  IF  ANY,  SHALL  THEREAFTER  BE
SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE BY THE TENANT OR ANY SUBSEQUENT TENANT OF THE HOUS-
ING  ACCOMMODATION.  HOWEVER,  IF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO
THIS PARAGRAPH REQUIRES THAT  THE  TENANT  VACATE  THE  SUBJECT  HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION  OR  SURRENDER POSSESSION OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION, IT
SHALL NOT BE BINDING UPON SUBSEQUENT TENANTS.
  (6) IN NO EVENT SHALL A TENANT WHO FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE DIVISION
OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL SEEKING RELIEF UNDER THE PROVISIONS  OF
THIS  SECTION  BE  ENTITLED TO A REFUND FOR RENT PAYMENTS MADE MORE THAN
FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE COMPLAINT IS FILED.
  C. AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISIONS A AND
B OF THIS SECTION, AN OWNER MAY, WITHIN NINETY  DAYS  OF  THE  EFFECTIVE
DATE  OF  THIS  SECTION, PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CURRENT TENANT OF
THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION THAT THE OWNER INTENDS TO MAKE PAYMENT TO  THE
CITY  IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH  THE  PROVISIONS  OF SUBDIVISION SEVENTEEN OF
SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDI-
VISION EE OF SECTION 11-243 OF THIS CODE. AN OWNER WHO PROVIDES A NOTICE
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION BUT WHO DOES NOT MAKE PAYMENT TO  THE  CITY  IN
ACCORDANCE  WITH THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND THIS CODE BY JUNE THIRTI-
ETH, TWO THOUSAND TWELVE SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE  OVERCHARGE  PENALTIES,
INCLUDING INTEREST AND TREBLE DAMAGES, PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 26-516 OF
THIS  CHAPTER.  DURING  THE PERIODS IN WHICH THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN
SUBDIVISIONS A, B OR C OF THIS SECTION ARE BEING UTILIZED, THE OWNER  OF
SUCH  HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SHALL BE AUTHORIZED TO CHARGE, AND A TENANT
OR FORMER TENANT OF SUCH A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SHALL BE  OBLIGATED  TO
PAY, THE AMOUNT SET FORTH IN THE LEASE THEN IN EFFECT.
  S  4.  Section  4 of chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, constituting the
emergency tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four, is amended  by
adding a new section 5-b to read as follows:
  S 5-B. ENFORCEMENT AND PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE DECISION OF THE
COURT  OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D
279. A.  NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THE  RENT  STABILIZATION
LAW  OF  NINETEEN HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE, THIS ACT OR THE CIVIL PRACTICE LAW

S. 4117--A                          6

AND RULES TO THE CONTRARY, AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF  SUBDIVISION
C OF THIS SECTION, ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION THAT IS OR WOULD BE SUBJECT
TO REGULATION UNDER THIS ACT AS A RESULT OF THE DECISION OF THE COURT OF
APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D279, SHALL
BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
  (1) THE LEGAL RENT FOR A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION
SHALL BE (I) THE RENT CHARGED AND PAID FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ON
OCTOBER  22, 2005, PLUS ALL SUBSEQUENT ADJUSTMENTS AND INCREASES INCLUD-
ING BUT NOT LIMITED TO INCREASES ATTRIBUTABLE TO VACANCIES, MAJOR  CAPI-
TAL  IMPROVEMENTS,  INDIVIDUAL  APARTMENT  IMPROVEMENTS, RENT GUIDELINES
BOARD ORDERS, SURCHARGES OR ANY OTHER INCREASES THAT WERE NOT  PRECLUDED
BY AN ORDER OF THE DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL AS TO OTHER
REGULATED  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  IN  THE BUILDING AND THAT WOULD HAVE
BEEN PERMITTED NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE  OR  OMISSION  OF  ANY  FORM,
RIDER,  NOTICE,  REGISTRATION,  APPLICATION  OR  ANY OTHER DOCUMENT THAT
WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED OR OTHERWISE PROVIDED, OR (II) THE  LEGAL  RENT
AGREED  TO  BY THE TENANT PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH FIVE OF THIS SUBDIVISION
OR (III) SUCH OTHER AMOUNT AS AGREED TO BY THE OWNER  AND  TENANT  IN  A
WRITING  EXECUTED  BY  THE  PARTIES  AFTER  RECEIPT BY THE TENANT OF THE
NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION  AND  PAYMENT  BY
THE OWNER OF THE REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, PROVIDED IN SUCH AGREEMENT.
  (2) WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, THE OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL OFFER TO REFUND
TO  THE TENANT RESIDING IN SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ALL RENT COLLECTED
FROM SUCH TENANT IN EXCESS OF THE LEGAL RENT  CALCULATED  IN  ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (3) WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AN OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN
NOTICE  TO  THE  CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION OF: (I) THE
FACT THAT THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IS SUBJECT  TO  THIS  CHAPTER  AS  A
RESULT  OF  THE  DECISION  OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN
SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D279; (II) A  CALCULATION  OF  THE  LEGAL
REGULATED  RENT  FOR  THE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION;  AND  (III)  THE  TOTAL
AMOUNT TO BE REFUNDED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH TWO OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (4)  AN OWNER WHO MAKES A GOOD FAITH CALCULATION OF THE LEGAL RENT AND
MAKES A REFUND OFFER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF  PARAGRAPH
TWO  OF  THIS  SUBDIVISION SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY OF THE OVERCHARGE
PENALTIES, INCLUDING  INTEREST  AND  TREBLE  DAMAGES,  PROVIDED  FOR  IN
SECTION 26-516 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
  (5)  THE  TENANT SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO RESPOND WITHIN THIRTY-FIVE DAYS
OF THE MAILING OF SUCH NOTICE TO THE TENANT.  WHERE A TENANT OF A  HOUS-
ING  ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION CONSENTS IN
WRITING TO THE LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, SET  FORTH  BY  THE
OWNER IN THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION, AND
THE  OWNER  MAKES THE REQUIRED REFUND TO THE TENANT, OR AFTER THE NOTICE
REQUIRED BY SUCH PARAGRAPH THE OWNER AND TENANT  ENTER  INTO  A  WRITTEN
AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR A DIFFERENT LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT AND THE
OWNER  MAKES  THE REFUND, IF ANY, AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES, THEN NEITHER
SUCH LEGAL RENT NOR SUCH REFUND AMOUNT,  IF  ANY,  SHALL  THEREAFTER  BE
SUBJECT TO CHALLENGE BY THE TENANT OR ANY SUBSEQUENT TENANT OF THE HOUS-
ING  ACCOMMODATION.  HOWEVER,  IF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO
THIS PARAGRAPH REQUIRES THE TENANT VACATING THE SUBJECT HOUSING ACCOMMO-
DATION OR SURRENDER POSSESSION OF THE HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION,  IT  SHALL
NOT BE BINDING UPON SUBSEQUENT TENANTS.

S. 4117--A                          7

  (6) IN NO EVENT SHALL A TENANT WHO FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE DIVISION
OF  HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL SEEKING RELIEF UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION BE ENTITLED TO A REFUND FOR RENT PAYMENTS  MADE  MORE  THAN
FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE COMPLAINT IS FILED.
  B.  NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS ACT, THE NEW YORK CITY
RENT STABILIZATION LAW OF NINETEEN  HUNDRED  SIXTY-NINE,  OR  THE  CIVIL
PRACTICE LAW AND RULES TO THE CONTRARY, AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
SUBDIVISION  C  OF  THIS  SECTION,  ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION THAT IS OR
WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REGULATION UNDER THIS ACT AS A RESULT OF  THE  DECI-
SION  OF THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPER-
TIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
  (1) WHERE A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IS OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO REGULATION
UNDER THIS ACT AS A RESULT OF A DECISION OF THE STATE COURT  OF  APPEALS
IN  ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D 279, THE INITIAL
LEGAL RENT SHALL BE (I) DETERMINED IN ACCORDANCE  WITH  THE  METHODOLOGY
USED  FOR FAIR MARKET RENT APPEALS, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT THE RENTS IN
EFFECT FOR COMPARABLE APARTMENTS, WHETHER OR NOT REGULATED, ON THE  DATE
FOUR  YEARS  PRIOR  TO  THE  DATE OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE FIRST LEASE
EXECUTED AFTER THE VACANCY BY THE FORMER RENT CONTROLLED TENANT OF  SUCH
HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION, SHALL BE UTILIZED FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING
THE COMPARABILITY COMPONENT USED FOR THE DETERMINATION  OF  FAIR  MARKET
RENT  APPEALS,  PLUS  ALL SUBSEQUENT ADJUSTMENTS AND INCREASES INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO INCREASES ATTRIBUTABLE TO  VACANCIES,  MAJOR  CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS,  INDIVIDUAL  APARTMENT IMPROVEMENTS, RENT GUIDELINES BOARD
ORDERS, SURCHARGES OR ANY OTHER INCREASES THAT WERE NOT PRECLUDED BY  AN
ORDER OF THE DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL AS TO OTHER REGU-
LATED  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  IN THE BUILDING AND THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN
PERMITTED NOTWITHSTANDING THE ABSENCE OR OMISSION OF  ANY  FORM,  RIDER,
NOTICE,  REGISTRATION, APPLICATION OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENT THAT WOULD HAVE
BEEN REQUIRED OR OTHERWISE PROVIDED, OR  (II)  THE  INITIAL  LEGAL  RENT
AGREED  TO  BY THE TENANT PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH FIVE OF THIS SUBDIVISION
OR (III) SUCH OTHER AMOUNT AS AGREED TO BY THE OWNER  AND  TENANT  IN  A
WRITING  EXECUTED  BY  THE  PARTIES  AFTER  RECEIPT BY THE TENANT OF THE
NOTICE REQUIRED BY PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION  AND  PAYMENT  BY
THE OWNER OF THE REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, PROVIDED IN SUCH AGREEMENT.
  (2) WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, THE OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL OFFER TO REFUND
TO  THE TENANT RESIDING IN SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION ALL RENT COLLECTED
FROM SUCH TENANT IN EXCESS OF THE LEGAL RENT  CALCULATED  IN  ACCORDANCE
WITH THE PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (3) WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS SECTION, AN OWNER
OF A HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SUBJECT TO THIS SECTION SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN
NOTICE  TO  THE  CURRENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION OF: (I) THE
FACT THAT THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION IS SUBJECT TO THIS ACT AS  A  RESULT
OF  THE  DECISION  OF  THE  STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN
SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D279; (II) A  CALCULATION  OF  THE  LEGAL
REGULATED  RENT  FOR  THE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF PARAGRAPH ONE OF THIS SUBDIVISION;  AND  (III)  THE  TOTAL
AMOUNT TO BE REFUNDED PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH TWO OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
  (4)  AN OWNER WHO MAKES A GOOD FAITH CALCULATION OF THE LEGAL RENT AND
MAKES A REFUND OFFER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE  REQUIREMENTS  OF  PARAGRAPH
TWO  OF  THIS  SUBDIVISION SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO ANY OF THE OVERCHARGE
PENALTIES, INCLUDING  INTEREST  AND  TREBLE  DAMAGES,  PROVIDED  FOR  IN
SECTION 26-516 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.
  (5)  THE  TENANT SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO RESPOND WITHIN THIRTY-FIVE DAYS
OF THE MAILING OF SUCH NOTICE.   WHERE A TENANT OF  A  HOUSING  ACCOMMO-

S. 4117--A                          8

DATION  SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION CONSENTS IN WRITING TO
THE LEGAL RENT AND REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, SET FORTH BY THE OWNER IN  THE
NOTICE  REQUIRED  BY  PARAGRAPH THREE OF THIS SUBDIVISION, AND THE OWNER
MAKES THE REQUIRED REFUND TO THE TENANT, OR AFTER THE NOTICE REQUIRED BY
SUCH  PARAGRAPH  THE  OWNER  AND  TENANT  ENTER INTO A WRITTEN AGREEMENT
PROVIDING FOR A DIFFERENT LEGAL RENT AND REFUND  AMOUNT  AND  THE  OWNER
MAKES  THE  REFUND,  IF ANY, AGREED TO BY THE PARTIES, THEN NEITHER SUCH
LEGAL RENT NOR SUCH REFUND AMOUNT, IF ANY, SHALL THEREAFTER  BE  SUBJECT
TO  CHALLENGE  BY  THE  TENANT  OR  ANY SUBSEQUENT TENANT OF THE HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION. HOWEVER, IF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO PURSUANT  TO  THIS
PARAGRAPH  REQUIRES  THAT THE TENANT VACATE THE SUBJECT HOUSING ACCOMMO-
DATION OR SURRENDER POSSESSION OF THE HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION,  IT  SHALL
NOT BE BINDING UPON SUBSEQUENT TENANTS.
  (6) IN NO EVENT SHALL A TENANT WHO FILES A COMPLAINT WITH THE DIVISION
OF  HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL SEEKING RELIEF UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THIS SECTION BE ENTITLED TO A REFUND FOR RENT PAYMENTS  MADE  MORE  THAN
FOUR YEARS BEFORE THE COMPLAINT IS FILED.
  C. AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISIONS A AND
B  OF  THIS  SECTION,  AN OWNER MAY, WITHIN NINETY DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE
DATE OF THIS SECTION, PROVIDE WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE  CURRENT  TENANT  OF
THE  HOUSING ACCOMMODATION THAT THE OWNER INTENDS TO MAKE PAYMENT TO THE
CITY OF NEW YORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF SUBDIVISION SEVEN-
TEEN OF SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL  PROPERTY  TAX  LAW
AND  SUBDIVISION  EE OF SECTION 11-243 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE
CITY OF NEW YORK. AN OWNER  WHO  PROVIDES  A  NOTICE  PURSUANT  TO  THIS
SECTION  BUT  WHO  DOES NOT MAKE PAYMENT TO SUCH CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW
YORK BY JUNE 30, 2012 SHALL BE  SUBJECT  TO  THE  OVERCHARGE  PENALTIES,
INCLUDING INTEREST AND TREBLE DAMAGES, PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 26-516 OF
THE  ADMINISTRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK.  DURING THE PERIODS IN
WHICH THE PROCEDURES SET FORTH IN SUBDIVISIONS A, B OR C OF THIS SECTION
ARE BEING UTILIZED, THE OWNER OF SUCH HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  SHALL  BE
AUTHORIZED  TO  CHARGE, AND A TENANT  OR FORMER TENANT OF SUCH A HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO PAY, THE AMOUNT  SET  FORTH  IN  THE
LEASE THEN IN EFFECT.
  S 5. Subparagraph (i) of paragraph 14 of subdivision a of section 5 of
section 4 of chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, constituting the emergency
tenant  protection act of nineteen seventy-four, as added by chapter 253
of the laws of 1993, is amended to read as follows:
  (i) housing accommodations owned as a cooperative or condominium  unit
which  are or become vacant on or after the effective date of this para-
graph REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS  WERE,  ARE  OR
WILL  BE  IN A BUILDING WHICH RECEIVED OR RECEIVES TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT
TO SECTION 489 OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND REGARDLESS OF THE RULING
OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V.  TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES,  L.P.,
13  NY3D  279,  except  that  this subparagraph shall not apply to units
occupied by non-purchasing tenants under section  three  hundred  fifty-
two-eee of the general business law until the occurrence of a vacancy.
  S  6.  Section 489 of the real property tax law is amended by adding a
new subdivision 17 to read as follows:
  17. WHERE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WERE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION IMME-
DIATELY PRIOR TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT  BENEFITS
PURSUANT  TO THIS SECTION OR WHICH ARE OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO RENT REGU-
LATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT OF SUCH BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THE RULING OF THE
COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13  NY3D
279,  OR ARE IN BUILDINGS COMPLETED OR SUBSTANTIALLY REHABILITATED AFTER

S. 4117--A                          9

JANUARY FIRST, NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-FOUR AND BECAME SUBJECT TO  RENT
REGULATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, THE OWNER OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SHALL
BE  AUTHORIZED  TO MAKE OR TO HAVE MADE TO THE CITY OF NEW YORK, AND THE
CITY OF NEW YORK SHALL BE OR HAVE BEEN OBLIGED TO ACCEPT, PAYMENT OF THE
FULL AMOUNT OF ALL SUCH BENEFITS, PLUS INTEREST AT A RATE  OF  NINE  PER
CENTUM,  RECEIVED  BY ALL OWNERS OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS PURSUANT
TO ANY ORDER OR DETERMINATION ISSUED BY THE LOCAL HOUSING AGENCY  ADMIN-
ISTERING  THIS  CHAPTER  OR  THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCY RESPONSIBLE FOR
REAL PROPERTY TAX ASSESSMENT WHICH REQUIRED THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION TO
BE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATIONS AND TO WAIVE THE RECEIPT OF  ANY  FURTHER
TAX  EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE DUE TO
SUCH OWNER PURSUANT TO ANY SUCH ORDER OR DETERMINATION AND THE  CITY  OF
NEW YORK SHALL BE OBLIGATED TO ACCEPT SUCH WAIVER. SUCH PAYMENT AND SUCH
WAIVER  SHALL BE MADE NO LATER THAN JUNE THIRTIETH, TWO THOUSAND TWELVE.
SUCH PAYMENT AND WAIVER SHALL ENTITLE SUCH OWNER TO THE BENEFIT  OF  THE
EXCLUSIONS  SET  FORTH IN SECTIONS 26-504.1 AND 26-504.2 OF THE ADMINIS-
TRATIVE CODE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK WHERE  THE  HOUSING  ACCOMMODATIONS
WERE  SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION IMMEDIATELY PRIOR TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX
BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION OR WHICH ARE OR WOULD  BE  SUBJECT  TO
RENT  REGULATION  DUE TO RECEIPT OF SUCH BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THE RULING
OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER  PROPERTIES,  L.P.,
13  NY3D,  279.  FOR HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN BUILDINGS COMPLETED AFTER
JANUARY FIRST, NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-FOUR  WHICH  BECAME  SUBJECT  TO
RENT  REGULATION  DUE  TO  THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT
BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, SUCH PAYMENT AND WAIVER SHALL  RESULT
IN  THE EXEMPTION OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS FROM RENT REGULATION AS
IF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION  HAD
NEVER  BEEN  RECEIVED  BY  ANY  OWNERS  OF  SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS.
PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL BE PAID  OR  HAVE  BEEN  PAID
INTO  THE  GENERAL  FUND  OF  THE CITY OF NEW YORK. THE CITY OF NEW YORK
SHALL, UPON REQUEST OF SUCH OWNER, PROVIDE WITHIN THIRTY  DAYS  OF  SUCH
REQUEST  A STATEMENT SETTING FORTH THE AMOUNTS DUE FOR PAYMENT AND WAIV-
ER, AND THE BASIS THEREOF. THE CITY'S FAILURE TO RESPOND TIMELY TO  SUCH
REQUEST SHALL TOLL THE RUNNING OF THE OWNER'S OBLIGATION TO MAKE PAYMENT
FOLLOWING THE DELIVERY OF NOTICE OF SUCH INTENT TO THE TENANT.
  S 7. Section 11-243 of the administrative code of the city of New York
is amended by adding a new subdivision ee to read as follows:
  EE. WHERE HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WERE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION IMME-
DIATELY  PRIOR TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION OR WHICH ARE OR WOULD BE SUBJECT TO RENT  REGU-
LATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT OF SUCH BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THE RULING OF THE
COURT  OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D
279, OR ARE IN BUILDINGS COMPLETED OR SUBSTANTIALLY REHABILITATED  AFTER
JANUARY  FIRST, NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-FOUR AND BECAME SUBJECT TO RENT
REGULATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS
PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, THE OWNER OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS SHALL
BE AUTHORIZED TO MAKE OR TO HAVE MADE TO THE CITY, AND THE CITY SHALL BE
OR HAVE BEEN OBLIGED TO ACCEPT, PAYMENT OF THE FULL AMOUNT OF  ALL  SUCH
BENEFITS,  PLUS  INTEREST  AT A RATE OF NINE PER CENTUM, RECEIVED BY ALL
OWNERS OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS PURSUANT TO ANY ORDER OR  DETERMI-
NATION  ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OR BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING PRESER-
VATION AND DEVELOPMENT WHICH REQUIRED THE HOUSING  ACCOMMODATION  TO  BE
SUBJECT TO SUCH RENT REGULATIONS AND TO WAIVE THE RECEIPT OF ANY FURTHER
TAX  EXEMPTION OR TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE DUE TO
SUCH OWNER PURSUANT TO ANY SUCH ORDER  OR  DETERMINATION  AND  THE  CITY

S. 4117--A                         10

SHALL  BE  OBLIGATED TO ACCEPT SUCH WAIVER. SUCH PAYMENT AND SUCH WAIVER
SHALL BE MADE NO LATER THAN JUNE THIRTIETH, TWO  THOUSAND  TWELVE.  SUCH
PAYMENT AND WAIVER SHALL ENTITLE SUCH OWNER TO THE BENEFIT OF THE EXCLU-
SIONS SET FORTH IN SECTIONS 26-504.1 AND 26-504.2 OF THIS CODE WHERE THE
HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS WERE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION IMMEDIATELY PRIOR
TO  THE RECEIPT OF TAX BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION OR WHICH ARE OR
WOULD BE SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION  DUE  TO  RECEIPT  OF  TAX  BENEFITS
PURSUANT  TO  THE  RULING  OF THE COURT OF APPEALS IN ROBERTS V. TISHMAN
SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., NY3D, 279. FOR HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS IN BUILD-
INGS COMPLETED AFTER JANUARY FIRST, NINETEEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-FOUR  WHICH
BECAME SUBJECT TO RENT REGULATION DUE TO THE RECEIPT OF TAX EXEMPTION OR
TAX ABATEMENT BENEFITS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, SUCH PAYMENT AND WAIVER
SHALL  RESULT  IN THE EXEMPTION OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS FROM RENT
REGULATION AS IF TAX EXEMPTION OR TAX  ABATEMENT  BENEFITS  PURSUANT  TO
THIS  SECTION HAD NEVER BEEN RECEIVED. PAYMENT PURSUANT TO THIS SUBDIVI-
SION SHALL BE PAID OR HAVE BEEN PAID INTO THE GENERAL FUND OF THE  CITY.
THE  CITY  SHALL, UPON REQUEST OF SUCH OWNER, PROVIDE WITHIN THIRTY DAYS
OF SUCH REQUEST A STATEMENT SETTING FORTH THE AMOUNTS  DUE  FOR  PAYMENT
AND  WAIVER, AND THE BASIS THEREOF. THE CITY'S FAILURE TO RESPOND TIMELY
TO SUCH REQUEST SHALL TOLL THE RUNNING OF THE OWNER'S OBLIGATION TO MAKE
PAYMENT FOLLOWING THE DELIVERY OF NOTICE OF SUCH INTENT TO THE TENANT.
  S 8.  Subdivision c of section 26-504 of the  administrative  code  of
the  city of New York, as amended by chapter 289 of the laws of 1985, is
amended to read as follows:
  c. [Dwelling] EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED BY SUBDIVISION SEVENTEEN OF
SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDI-
VISION EE OF SECTION 11-243 OF THIS CODE, DWELLING units in  a  building
or  structure receiving the benefits of section 11-243 or section 11-244
of [the] THIS code or article eighteen of the  private  housing  finance
law,  not  owed as a cooperative or as a condominium, except as provided
in section three hundred fifty-two-eeee of the general business law  and
not  subject  to chapter three of this title. [Upon] EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE
PROVIDED BY SUBDIVISION SEVENTEEN OF SECTION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE OF
THE REAL PROPERTY TAX LAW AND SUBDIVISION EE OF SECTION 11-243  OF  THIS
CODE,  the  expiration  or termination for any reason of the benefits of
section 11-243 or section 11-244 of [the] THIS code or article  eighteen
of  the  private  housing  finance  law  any such dwelling unit shall be
subject to this chapter until the occurrence of  the  first  vacancy  of
such  unit  after  such benefits are no longer being received or if each
lease and renewal thereof for such unit for the tenant in  residence  at
the  time  of  the  expiration  of the tax benefit period has included a
notice in at least twelve point type informing such tenant that the unit
shall become subject to deregulation upon the  expiration  of  such  tax
benefit period and states the approximate date on which such tax benefit
period  is  scheduled to expire, such dwelling unit shall be deregulated
as of the end of the tax benefit period; provided, however, that if such
dwelling unit would have been subject to this chapter or  the  emergency
tenant  protection  act  of nineteen seventy-four in the absence of this
subdivision, such dwelling unit shall, upon the expiration of such bene-
fits, continue to be subject to this chapter  or  the  emergency  tenant
protection  act  of  nineteen seventy-four to the same extent and in the
same manner as if this subdivision had never applied  thereto.  NOTWITH-
STANDING THE FOREGOING, WHERE THE NOTIFICATION REQUIRED BY THIS SUBDIVI-
SION WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR ANY HOUSING ACCOMMODATION WHICH IS OR WOULD BE
SUBJECT  TO REGULATION UNDER THIS CHAPTER AS A RESULT OF THE DECISION OF
THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS IN  ROBERTS  V.  TISHMAN  SPEYER  PROPERTIES,

S. 4117--A                         11

L.P.,  13  NY3D  279, THE FAILURE TO PROVIDE SUCH NOTIFICATION SHALL NOT
PRECLUDE THE DEREGULATION OF SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION UPON THE EXPIRA-
TION OF THE LEASE OR RENEWAL LEASE IMMEDIATELY SUBSEQUENT TO THE EXPIRA-
TION  OF  SUCH  TAX  BENEFITS,  PROVIDED  THAT THE OWNER OF SUCH HOUSING
ACCOMMODATION SHALL COMPLY WITH SUCH NOTICE REQUIREMENT FOR  EACH  LEASE
OR RENEWAL LEASE OFFERED FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION DURING THE PERI-
OD  BETWEEN  NINETY  DAYS AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE CHAPTER OF THE
LAWS OF TWO THOUSAND ELEVEN WHICH AMENDED THIS SUBDIVISION AND THE EXPI-
RATION OF SUCH TAX BENEFITS.
  S 9. This act shall take effect immediately, provided,  that  sections
one  and  two of this act shall be deemed to have been in full force and
effect on and after July 6, 1993; provided, further, that:
  (a) the amendments to chapter 4 of title 26 of the administrative code
of the city of New York made by sections one, two, three  and  eight  of
this act shall expire on the same date as such law expires and shall not
affect  the  expiration  of such law as provided under section 26-520 of
such law;
  (b) the amendments to the emergency tenant protection act of  nineteen
seventy-four  made by sections four and five of this act shall expire on
the same date as such act expires and shall not affect the expiration of
such act as provided in section 17 of chapter 576 of the laws of 1974;
  (c) the provisions of this act shall preclude in  their  entirety  any
and  all claims in any administrative or judicial proceeding relating to
the deregulation of housing accommodations (i)  which  were  subject  to
rent  regulation immediately prior to the receipt of tax benefits pursu-
ant to section 489 of the real property tax law and  section  11-243  of
the administrative code of the city of New York or which are or would be
subject  to  rent  regulation  pursuant  to  the  ruling of the court of
appeals in ROBERTS V. TISHMAN SPEYER PROPERTIES, L.P., 13 NY3D  279,  or
(ii)  are  in  buildings  completed or substantially rehabilitated after
January 1, 1974 and became subject to rent regulation due to the receipt
of tax exemption or tax abatement benefits pursuant to  section  489  of
the  real property tax law and section 11-243 of the administrative code
of the city of New York, provided that the owner of such housing  accom-
modations  under clause (i) or clause (ii) of this subdivision has acted
in accordance with this act,  regardless  of  whether  such  claims  are
brought,  or  any  payments  by  such owner permitted under this act are
made, prior or subsequent to the effective date of this act; and
  (d) if any provision or provisions of this act shall  be  held  to  be
invalid,  the  validity  of  the  remaining  provisions shall not in any
manner be affected or impaired thereby.

Comments

Open Legislation is a forum for New York State legislation. All comments are subject to review and community moderation is encouraged.

Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity, hate or toxic speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Attempts to intimidate and silence contributors or deliberately deceive the public, including excessive or extraneous posting/posts, or coordinated activity, are prohibited and may result in the temporary or permanent banning of the user. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday. By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.

Create an account. An account allows you to sign petitions with a single click, officially support or oppose key legislation, and follow issues, committees, and bills that matter to you. When you create an account, you agree to this platform's terms of participation.

Find your Senator and share your views on important issues.

Do you support this bill?

Senate Bill S4117A

Sponsored By

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee

Actions

Votes

May 4, 2011 - Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee Vote

Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee Vote: May 4, 2011

Bill Amendments

2011-S4117 - Details

2011-S4117 - Summary

2011-S4117 - Sponsor Memo

2011-S4117 - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Details

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Summary

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments

Do you support this bill?

Get Status Alerts for 2011-S4117A

Senate Bill S4117A

Share this bill

Sponsored By

Catharine Young

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Senate Committee Housing, Construction And Community Development Committee

Actions

Votes

Bill Amendments

2011-S4117 - Details

2011-S4117 - Summary

2011-S4117 - Sponsor Memo

2011-S4117 - Bill Text download pdf

co-Sponsors

George D. Maziarz

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Details

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Summary

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Sponsor Memo

2011-S4117A (ACTIVE) - Bill Text download pdf

Comments