[NYtenants-online] Albany: Rent Law Aftermath 6-29-03

[Tenant]

NYtenants Online/TenantNet                                6/29/03
=================================================================

IN THIS ISSUE ...

1. TenantNet Editorial
2. Pataki's Poison Pill (Met Council)
3. Senate Bill S. 5693 (text of the Rent Law Extender)

=================================================================
TENANTNET EDITORIAL

Below is an article from MET COUNCIL'S TENANT/INQUILINO assessing the 
damage from the recent rent laws renewals. You can access the entire issue 
in PDF format at http://www.metcouncil.net.

While properly asking questions as to Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's 
resolve (or alleged blundering), we must remind readers that we believe 
this outcome was essentially scripted and neither Silver nor his 
hatchet-man Assembly Member Vito Lopez were out-foxed. Whatever they are, 
they're not dumb and the real poison pill wasn't from Pataki; rather it was 
the intentional failure by Silver to use leverage when it was available.

Tenants and Neighbors must bear the burden of focusing completely on Pataki 
and Bruno as the 'boogie men' and keeping the focus off of Silver -- as 
they did in 1997. We saw what happened then and history has repeated 
itself, and perhaps it's now too late.

As we recently said to one tenant advocate, when you're in trouble, would 
you go to a gravedigger (Pataki/Bruno) or to a doctor (Silver)? Neither 
Pataki or Bruno can or should be excused for their agenda.  And we've seen 
they can be pressured when the Senate majority is at risk. But we know who 
they are.

At the same time tenants are led to believe that Democtats will protect 
tenants simply because they're Democrats. And that's just not true. While 
there are individual legislators who would put tenant protections ahead of 
their political careers, perhaps questions should be asked as to who elects 
their leaders.

While we agree with much of the article, we think it should more aptly be 
entitled "Democrats Cave Again."

Also see:
http://tenant.net/pipermail/nytenants-online/2003-June/000247.html
http://tenant.net/pipermail/nytenants-online/2003-May/000245.html

=================================================================
PATAKI’S POISON PILL
Rent-Law Renewal Retains Decontrol, Toughens Urstadt
Met Council Tenant/Inquilino - June 2003
By Jenny Laurie

The state’s rent laws have been renewed in a poison-pill legislative move 
that promises landlords greater profits and tenants higher rents. In a 
secretive, back-room ploy, Governor Pataki and State Senate Majority Leader 
Joseph Bruno engineered the renewal of the laws in a way that guarantees 
the loss of hundreds of thousands of units of affordable housing in the 
next eight years.

What does the new law do?

The rent laws were renewed for eight years, until June 15, 2011, and three 
seemingly innocuous changes were inserted. One change allows landlords to 
renege on “preferential rents” negotiated with tenants. The second 
strengthens the Urstadt Law, further restricting the City of New York from 
making any changes to the way the rent laws are administered. The third 
tightens up the $2,000 vacancy-decontrol provision, so landlords can rent 
apartments to tenants for less than $2,000 after registering the rent at 
$2,000 or more.

Rent Wars 2003

The fight over the renewal of the rent laws this year was much, much milder 
than the fight in 1997. Fewer tenants went to Albany to lobby, and the 
focus on the issue by the media was nonexistent compared to ’97. While the 
issue was in discussion in Albany for the entire 2003 session, it wasn’t 
until close to June 15, the date the laws were to expire, that media 
outlets started paying close attention to the messages from Pataki, Bruno, 
and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver on the form that the renewal might 
take. The three leaders sent out a variety of messages.

As all Albany observers will report, legislation is done only when Pataki, 
Bruno, and Silver agree on the issue and the same language. Generally, the 
three decide all budget and legislative issues in closed-door sessions; 
very rarely do any issues come out for open or honest debate. Close to the 
sunset date of June 15, Pataki was quoted as saying that he wanted to 
“tinker” with the rent laws. Some of the Republican Senators from New York 
City announced that they supported raising the vacancy-decontrol threshold 
from $2,000 to $2,500. Bruno announced at one point that he supported 
renewing the laws, but with a lower vacancy-decontrol limit, somewhere 
around $1,500.

Silver stuck to the position the Assembly had taken in February when it 
passed its renewal bill: repeal vacancy decontrol completely, lower the 
vacancy allowance (the rent increase landlords are permitted between 
tenants) from 20% to 10%; tighten eviction protections; and extend coverage 
to the Mitchell-Lama and Section 8 units that were leaving subsidy programs 
but would not otherwise be protected by rent stabilization.

June 15 came and went without any announced agreement, as the legislature 
passed what would be the first of four 24-hour extensions of the laws. 
Rumors held steady that Bruno might be willing to settle for a straight 
extender with the only debatable issue being the term—how many years the 
law would be extended for. Pro-tenant Democrats supported the shortest term 
possible, so the vacancy-decontrol provisions might be lifted at the next 
renewal date. Bruno’s fellow Republican Senators from downstate kept 
assuring their constituents not to worry, that if any changes were made, 
they would be minor.

Word went out that the three had reached an agreement late in the evening 
of Tuesday, June 17, for a straight four-year extender. While many tenants 
were unhappy that the bill contained no measures to remove the 
vacancy-decontrol provisions, they got very nervous when no deal was 
announced publicly on Wednesday or Thursday.

The beginning of the end came on Friday, June 20, at 3 a.m., when the bill 
came out on the Senate floor for a quick debate and passage. After 
completing a few more pieces of business, Bruno declared that the Senate 
had completed its work for the session, and allowed his members to go home. 
The vote was pretty much along party lines, with a couple of exceptions: 
Republicans Guy Velella (Bronx and Westchester) and Martin Golden (Bay 
Ridge) voted against the measure to escape criticism from their tenant 
constituents, and Frank Padavan (Queens), considered by many to be 
genuinely pro-tenant, also voted no. Olga Mendez (East Harlem), Serphin 
Maltese (Queens), and John Marchi (Staten Island) all voted for the measure.

Once that bill was sent to the Assembly, Sheldon Silver reportedly left it 
up to his members to decide whether or not to pass it. Apparently terrified 
that the Republican Senate would offer nothing else and the laws would be 
allowed to expire permanently, the Assembly passed the bill. The only 
Democrats to break ranks with Silver and vote against the bill were Scott 
Stringer (who also voted against the renewal bill in 1997) and Danny 
O’Donnell from Manhattan, and Mark Weprin of Queens.

“It was a terrible bill and we should never have been put in the position 
that we had to deal with the issue the day after the session ended,” 
O’Donnell told Tenant. “This issue should have been dealt with at the 
beginning of the session.”

The bill, having passed both houses, went quickly to the governor, who 
signed it with praise: The renewal would continue the great reforms started 
in 1997 and would further New York City housing along in an “orderly 
transition” to the free market.

What is the meaning of the four components?

For many observers, the law’s eight-year term is the killer. In eight 
years, hundreds of thousands of units will be deregulated, so that at the 
next renewal date in 2011, there will be far fewer rent-stabilized tenants 
to lobby for their renewal.

The law also tightens the Urstadt Law, which means that pending bills in 
the City Council to reform the Rent Guidelines Board (an attempt to get 
fairer rent increases for rent-stabilized tenants) and to change the 
rent-increase formula for rent-controlled tenants (to give them relief from 
the 7.5% increases and fuel passalongs each year) will be barred. Another 
change clarifies that a landlord can charge less than $2,000 on an 
apartment that was decontrolled and registered at $2,000, without the 
apartment going back into rent stabilization.

What next?

Who is to blame? All the media coverage, and the elected officials who 
would talk about the events, pointed to the blatant bluffing and 
maneuvering of Pataki and Bruno. O’Donnell suggests tenants blame the 
Republicans who represent New York City: “Ask Olga Mendez why she voted for 
this bill. How can those Republicans who voted for the bill be allowed to 
represent the people of New York?” According to State Senator Liz Krueger 
(D-Manhattan), it was clear that Pataki and Bruno had mended fences by the 
end of the session. (They had earlier fought over the state budget, when 
Bruno and Silver joined forces to pass their own budget over Pataki’s 
veto.) Should Silver have foreseen this ploy and been more prepared? “I’m 
convinced no one knew this was in the works. It has taught everyone a 
lesson: If you actually believe anything that Pataki and Bruno promise 
before the ink is dry on the deal, you don’t understand Albany.”

Krueger said that there were many people and groups who thought they had 
good promises from Bruno and Pataki on other issues as well: lobbying 
reform, reporting of sexual abuse by clergy, and Timothy’s Law (money for 
mental-health services). “Clearly the plan all along was to offer promises 
and then pull a bait and switch.”

Tenant advocates, including those of us at Met Council who were involved in 
trying to get vacancy decontrol repealed, recognize that Silver gave away 
his bargaining power early in the session. By June 20, he had allowed 
himself to be boxed in. Could tenants have put enough pressure on him 
earlier in the year, before the budget agreement was made, to get the deal 
done for tenants? Clearly, that is a question we have to answer. As one 
columnist reminded readers, a recent Common Cause report shows that 
landlords gave Pataki and Bruno $2.7 million to continue the unraveling of 
the rent laws.

What next?

Liz Krueger was the most blunt on what tenants should do next: Go for home 
rule, because “there is no possibility for reforming the rent laws in 
Albany.” She explained that she felt that lobbying the state legislature to 
improve the rent laws would be hopeless for the future. “Albany should not 
be determining tenant protections or affordable housing issues for New York 
City,” she reiterates. “New York City elected officials, who are 
accountable to tenants, should be responsible for decisions on how New York 
City residents are housed.”

Mayor Mike Bloomberg also deserves blame for his lack of involvement. While 
previous mayors David Dinkins and even the generally anti-tenant Rudolph 
Giuliani had traveled to Albany to urge the renewal of the rent laws, 
Bloomberg never went to talk to his fellow Republicans about preserving 
affordable housing in New York City. The mayor’s involvement was limited to 
short-tempered comments made under pressure from reporters demanding a 
response from him on his stand on the rent-law renewal.

=================================================================
SENATE BILL S5693

S5693  RULES
Local Emergency Housing Rent Control Act
TITLE Extends the expiration of the provisions of law providing for rent 
control until June 15, 2011
06/19/03 REFERRED TO RULES
06/19/03 ORDERED TO THIRD READING CAL.1659
06/19/03 MESSAGE OF NECESSITY - 3 DAY MESSAGE
06/19/03 PASSED SENATE
06/19/03 DELIVERED TO ASSEMBLY
06/19/03 referred to housing

SUMMARY:

RULES COM -- Amd S1, Chap 21 of 1962; amd SS4 & 17, Chap 576 of 1974; amd 
SS26-5-4.2, 26-403 & 26-511, NYC Ad Cd; amd SS2 & 1, Chap 274 of 1946; amd 
S2, Chap 329 of 1963; amd S10, Chap 555 of 1982; amd S4, Chap 402 of 1983; 
amd S46, Chap 116 of 1997

Extends the expiration of the provisions of law providing for rent control 
until June 15, 2011; provides for the decontrol of certain rent controlled 
housing accommodations. Governor's Program


BILL TEXT:

STATE OF NEW YORK 5693
2003-2004 Regular Sessions

IN SENATE - June 19, 2003

EXPLANATION--Matter in CAPITAL LETTERS is new; matter in brackets
[ ] is old law to be omitted.

Introduced by COMMITTEE ON RULES -- (at request of the Governor) -- read 
twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the 
Committee on Rules

AN ACT to amend the local emergency housing rent control act, the emergency 
housing rent control law, the emergency tenant protection act of nineteen 
seventy-four, chapter 576 of the laws of 1974 amending the emergency 
housing rent control law relating to the control of and stabilization of 
rent in certain cases, the administrative code of the city of New York, 
chapter 329 of the laws of 1963 amending the emergency housing rent control 
law relating to recontrol of rents in the city of Albany, chapter 555 of 
the laws of 1982 amending the general business law and the administrative 
code of the city of New York relating to conversion of residential property 
to cooperative or condominium ownership in the city of New York, chapter 
402 of the laws of 1983 amending the general business law relating to 
conversions of residential property to cooperative or condominium ownership 
in certain municipalities in the counties of Nassau, Westchester and 
Rockland, and the rent regulation reform act of 1997, in relation to the 
regulation of rents

The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do 
enact as follows:

Section 1. Subdivision 5 of section 1 of chapter 21 of the laws of 1962, 
constituting the local emergency housing rent control act, the opening 
paragraph as separately amended by chapters 371, 373 and 1012 of the laws 
of 1971, the second undesignated paragraph as amended by chapter 679 of the 
laws of 1994, the third undesignated paragraph as added by chapter 69 of 
the laws of 1980, the fourth undesignated paragraph as amended by chapter 
1012 of the laws of 1971, the fifth undesignated paragraph as added by 
chapter 116 of the laws of 1997 and the closing paragraph as added by 
chapter 373 of the laws of 1971, is amended to read as follows:

5. Authority for local rent control legislation. Each city having a 
population of one million or more, acting through its local legislative 
body, may adopt and amend local laws or ordinances in respect of the 
establishment or designation of a city housing rent agency. When it deems 
such action to be desirable or necessitated by local conditions in order to 
carry out the purposes of this section, such city, except as hereinafter 
provided, acting through its local legislative body and not otherwise, may 
adopt and amend local laws or ordinances in respect of the regulation and 
control of residential rents, including but not limited to provision for 
the establishment and adjustment of maximum rents, the classification of 
housing accommodations, the regulation of evictions, and the enforcement of 
such local laws or ordinances. The validity of any such local laws or 
ordinances, and the rules or regulations promulgated in accordance 
therewith, shall not be affected by and need not be consistent with the 
state emergency housing rent control law or with rules and regulations of 
the state division of housing and community renewal.

Notwithstanding any local law or ordinance, housing accommodations which 
became vacant on or after July first, nineteen hundred seventy-one or which 
hereafter become vacant shall be subject to the provisions of the emergency 
tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four, provided, however, that 
this provision shall not apply or become effective with respect to housing 
accommodations which, by local law or ordinance, are made directly subject 
to regulation and control by a city housing rent agency and such agency 
determines or finds that the housing accommodations became vacant because 
the landlord or any person acting on his behalf, with intent to cause the 
tenant to vacate, engaged in any course of conduct (including but not 
limited to, interruption or discontinuance of essential 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 use or occupancy 
of the housing accommodations. The removal of any housing accommodation 
from regulation and control of rents pursuant to the vacancy exemption 
provided for in this paragraph shall not constitute or operate as a ground 
for the subjection to more stringent regulation and control of any housing 
accommodation in such property or in any other property owned by the same 
landlord, notwithstanding any prior agreement to the contrary by the 
landlord. The vacancy exemption provided for in this paragraph shall not 
arise with respect to any rented plot or parcel of land otherwise subject 
to the provisions of this act, by reason of a transfer of title and 
possession occurring on or after July first, nineteen hundred seventy-one 
of a dwelling located on such plot or parcel and owned by the tenant where 
such transfer of title and possession is made to a member of the tenant's 
immediate family provided that the member of the tenant's immediate family 
occupies the dwelling with the tenant prior to the transfer of title and 
possession for a continuous period of two years.

The term "immediate family" shall include a husband, wife, son, daughter, 
stepson, stepdaughter, father, mother, father-in-law or mother-in-law.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, no local law or ordinance shall here- after 
provide for the regulation and control of residential rents and eviction in 
respect of any housing accommodations which are (1) presently exempt from 
such regulation and control or (2) hereafter decontrolled either by 
operation of law or by a city housing rent agency, by order or otherwise. 
No housing accommodations presently subject to regulation and control 
pursuant to local laws or ordinances adopted or amended under authority of 
this subdivision shall hereafter be by local law or ordinance or by rule or 
regulation which has not been theretofore approved by the state 
commissioner of housing and community renewal subjected to more stringent 
or restrictive provisions of regulation and control than those presently in 
effect.

NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW, ON AND AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE 
OF THIS PARAGRAPH, A CITY HAVING A POPULATION OF ONE MILLION OR MORE SHALL 
NOT, EITHER THROUGH ITS LOCAL LEGISLATIVE BODY OR OTHERWISE, ADOPT OR AMEND 
LOCAL LAWS OR ORDINANCES WITH RESPECT TO THE REGULATION AND CONTROL OF 
RESIDENTIAL RENTS AND EVICTION, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PROVISION FOR 
THE ESTABLISHMENT AND ADJUSTMENT OF RENTS, THE CLASSIFICATION OF HOUSING 
ACCOMMODATIONS, THE REGULATION OF EVICTIONS, AND THE ENFORCEMENT OF SUCH 
LOCAL LAWS OR ORDINANCES, OR OTHERWISE ADOPT LAWS OR ORDINANCES PURSUANT TO 
THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT, THE EMERGENCY TENANT PROTECTION ACT OF NINETEEN 
SEVENTY-FOUR, THE NEW YORK CITY RENT AND REHABILITATION LAW OR THE NEW YORK 
CITY RENT STABILIZATION LAW, EXCEPT TO THE EXTENT THAT SUCH CITY FOR THE 
PURPOSE OF REVIEWING THE CONTINUED NEED FOR THE EXISTING REGULATION AND 
CONTROL OF RESIDENTIAL RENTS OR TO REMOVE A CLASSIFICATION OF HOUSING 
ACCOMMODATION FROM SUCH REGULATION AND CONTROL ADOPTS OR AMENDS LOCAL LAWS 
OR ORDINANCES PURSUANT TO SUBDIVISION THREE OF SECTION ONE OF THIS ACT, 
SECTION THREE OF THE EMERGENCY TENANT PROTECTION ACT OF NINETEEN 
SEVENTY-FOUR, SECTION 26-415 OF THE NEW YORK CITY RENT AND REHABILITATION 
LAW, AND SECTIONS 26-502 AND 26-520 OF THE NEW YORK CITY RENT STABILIZATION 
LAW OF NINETEEN HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE.

Notwithstanding any provision of this act to the contrary, any local law 
adopted pursuant to this act shall provide that notwithstanding any 
provision of such local law in the case where all tenants occupying the 
housing accommodation on the effective date of this paragraph have vacated 
the housing accommodation and a family member of such vacating tenant or 
tenants is entitled to and continues to occupy the housing accommodation 
subject to the protections of such act, if such accommodation continues to 
be subject to such act after such family member vacates, on the occurrence 
of such vacancy the maximum collectable rent shall be increased by a sum 
equal to the allowance then in effect for vacancy leases for housing 
accommodations covered by the rent stabilization law of nineteen hundred 
sixty-nine, including the amount allowed by paragraph (5-a) of subdivision 
c of section 26-511 of such law. This increase shall be in addition to any 
other increases provided for in this act and shall be applicable in like 
manner to each second subsequent succession.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, no local law or ordinance shall subject to 
such regulation and control any housing accommodation which is not occupied 
by the tenant in possession as his primary residence; provided, however, 
that such housing accommodation not occupied by the tenant in possession as 
his primary residence shall continue to be subject to regulation and 
control as provided for herein unless the city housing rent agency issues 
an order decontrolling such accommodation, which the agency shall do upon 
application by the landlord whenever it is established by any facts and 
circumstances which, in the judgment of the agency, may have a bearing upon 
the question of residence, that the tenant maintains his primary residence 
at some place other than at such housing accommodation.


2. Paragraph 13 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 amended by chapter 116 of the laws of 1997, is 
amended to read as follows:

(13) any housing accommodation with a legal regulated rent of two thousand 
dollars or more per month at any time between the effective date of this 
paragraph and October first, nineteen hundred ninety-three which is or 
becomes vacant on or after the effective date of this paragraph, or any 
housing accommodation with a legal regulated rent of two thousand dollars 
or more per month at any time on or after the effective date of the rent 
regulation reform act of 1997 which is or becomes vacant on or after the 
effective date of the rent regulation reform act of 1997. 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 act 
(a) by virtue of receiving tax benefits pursuant to section four hundred 
twenty-one-a or four hundred eighty-nine of the real property tax law, 
except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (i) of paragraph (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 multiple dwelling law. 
This paragraph 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, has 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 act 
shall also apply.


3. Section 10 of 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 subdivision a-2 to read as follows:

A-2. PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE AMOUNT OF RENT CHARGED TO AND PAID BY THE 
TENANT IS LESS THAN THE LEGAL REGULATED RENT FOR THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION, 
THE AMOUNT OF RENT FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION WHICH MAY BE CHARGED UPON 
RENEWAL OR UPON VACANCY THEREOF MAY, AT THE OPTION OF THE OWNER, BE BASED 
UPON SUCH PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED LEGAL REGULATED RENT, AS ADJUSTED BY THE 
MOST RECENT APPLICABLE GUIDELINES INCREASES AND OTHER INCREASES AUTHORIZED 
BY LAW. WHERE, SUBSEQUENT TO VACANCY, SUCH LEGAL REGULATED RENT, AS 
ADJUSTED BY THE MOST RECENT APPLICABLE GUIDELINES INCREASES AND ANY OTHER 
INCREASES AUTHORIZED BY LAW IS TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS OR MORE PER MONTH, SUCH 
HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SHALL BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ACT 
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH THIRTEEN OF SUBDIVISION A OF SECTION FIVE OF THIS ACT.


4. Subdivision a of section 26-504.2 of the administrative code of the city 
of New York, as amended by chapter 116 of the laws of 1997 and such 
paragraph as designated by local law number 12 of the city of New York for 
the year 2000, is amended to read as follows:

a. "Housing accommodations" shall not include any housing accommodation 
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 property tax law, except as otherwise 
provided in subparagraph (i) of paragraph (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 multiple dwelling law. 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.


5. Subparagraph (k) of paragraph 2 of subdivision e of section 26-403 of 
the administrative code of the city of New York, as amended by chapter 116 
of the laws of 1997, is amended to read as follows:

(k) Any housing accommodation which becomes vacant on or after April first, 
nineteen hundred ninety-seven and where at the time the tenant vacated such 
housing accommodation the maximum 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 maximum 
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 by virtue of 
receiving tax benefits pursuant to section four hundred eighty-nine of the 
real property tax law. This subparagraph 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, has 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.


6. Subdivision c of section 26-511 of the administrative code of the city 
of New York is amended by adding a new paragraph 14 to read as follows:

(14) PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE AMOUNT OF RENT CHARGED TO AND PAID BY THE 
TENANT IS LESS THAN THE LEGAL REGULATED RENT FOR THE HOUSING ACCOMMODATION, 
THE AMOUNT OF RENT FOR SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION WHICH MAY BE CHARGED UPON 
RENEWAL OR UPON VACANCY THEREOF MAY, AT THE OPTION OF THE OWNER, BE BASED 
UPON SUCH PREVIOUSLY ESTABLISHED LEGAL REGULATED RENT, AS ADJUSTED BY THE 
MOST RECENT APPLICABLE GUIDELINES INCREASES AND ANY OTHER INCREASES 
AUTHORIZED BY LAW. WHERE, SUBSEQUENT TO VACANCY, SUCH LEGAL REGULATED RENT, 
AS ADJUSTED BY THE MOST RECENT APPLICABLE GUIDELINES INCREASES AND ANY 
OTHER INCREASES AUTHORIZED BY LAW IS TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS OR MORE PER 
MONTH, SUCH HOUSING ACCOMMODATION SHALL BE EXCLUDED FROM THE PROVISIONS OF 
THIS LAW PURSUANT TO SECTION 26-504.2 OF THIS CHAPTER.


6-a. Paragraph (n) of subdivision 2 of section 2 of chapter 274 of the laws 
of 1946, constituting the emergency housing rent control law, as amended by 
chapter 116 of the laws of 1997, is amended to read as follows:

(n) any housing accommodation with a maximum rent of two thousand dollars 
or more per month at any time between the effective date of this paragraph 
and October first, nineteen hundred ninety-three which is or becomes vacant 
on or after the effective date of this paragraph, or any housing 
accommodation with a maximum rent of two thousand dollars or more per month 
at any time on or after the effective date of the rent regulation reform 
act of 1997 which is or becomes vacant on or after the effective date of 
the rent regulation reform act of 1997. 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. This exclusion 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, has 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.


7. Section 17 of chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, amending the emergency 
housing rent control law relating to the control of and stabilization of 
rent in certain cases, as amended by a chapter of the laws of 2003, 
amending chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, amending the emergency housing 
rent control law relating to the control of and stabilization of rent in 
certain cases, and various other laws relating to extending the dates upon 
which certain provisions thereof expire, as proposed in legislative bills 
numbers S. 5675 and A. 9105, is amended to read as follows:

17. Effective date. This act shall take effect immediately and shall remain 
in full force and effect until and including the [nineteenth] fifteenth day 
of June [2003] 2011; except that sections two and three shall take effect 
with respect to any city having a population of one million or more and 
section one shall take effect with respect to any other city, or any town 
or village whenever the local legislative body of a city, town or village 
determines the existence of a public emergency pursuant to section three of 
the emergency tenant protection act of nineteen seventy-four, as enacted by 
section four of this act, and provided that the housing accommodations 
subject on the effective date of this act to stabilization pursuant to the 
New York city rent stabilization law of nineteen hundred sixty-nine shall 
remain subject to such law upon the expiration of this act.


8. Subdivision 2 of section 1 of chapter 274 of the laws of 1946, 
constituting the emergency housing rent control law, as amended by a 
chapter of the laws of 2003, amending chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, 
amending the emergency housing rent control law relating to the control of 
and stabilization of rent in certain cases, and various other laws relating 
to extending the dates upon which certain provisions thereof expire, as 
proposed in legislative bills numbers S. 5675 and A. 9105, is amended to 
read as follows:

2. The provisions of this act, and all regulations, orders and requirements 
thereunder shall remain in full force and effect until and including June 
[19, 2003] 15, 2011.


9. Section 2 of chapter 329 of the laws of 1963, amending the emergency 
housing rent control law relating to recontrol of rents in the city of 
Albany, as amended by a chapter of the laws of 2003, amending chapter 576 
of the laws of 1974, amending the emergency housing rent control law 
relating to the control of and stabilization of rent in certain cases, and 
various other laws relating to extending the dates upon which certain 
provisions thereof expire, as proposed in legislative bills numbers S. 5675 
and A. 9105, is amended to read as follows:

2. This act shall take effect immediately and the provisions of subdivision 
6 of section 12 of the emergency housing rent control law, as added by this 
act, shall remain in full force and effect until and including June [19, 
2003] 15, 2011.


10. Section 10 of chapter 555 of the laws of 1982, amending the general 
business law and the administrative code of the city of New York relating 
to conversion of residential property to cooperative or condominium 
ownership in the city of New York, as amended by a chapter of the laws of 
2003, amending chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, amending the emergency 
housing rent control law relating to the control of and stabilization of 
rent in certain cases, and various other laws relating to extending the 
dates upon which certain provisions thereof expire, as proposed in 
legislative bills numbers S. 5675 and A. 9105, is amended to read as follows:

10. This act shall take effect immediately; provided, that the provisions 
of sections one, two and nine of this act shall remain in full force and 
effect only until and including June [19, 2003] 15, 2011; provided further 
that the provisions of section three of this act shall remain in full force 
and effect only so long as the public emergency requiring the regulation 
and control of residential rents and evictions continues as provided in 
subdivision 3 of section 1 of the local emergency housing rent control act; 
provided further that the provisions of sections four, five, six and seven 
of this act shall expire in accordance with the provisions of section 
26-520 of the administrative code of the city of New York as such section 
of the administrative code is, from time to time, amended; provided further 
that the provisions of section 26-511 of the administrative code of the 
city of New York, as amended by this act, which the New York City 
Department of Housing Preservation and Development must find are contained 
in the code of the real estate industry stabilization association of such 
city in order to approve it, shall be deemed contained therein as of the 
effective date of this act; and provided further that any plan accepted for 
filing by the department of law on or before the effective date of this act 
shall continue to be governed by the provisions of section 352-eeee of the 
general business law as they had existed immediately prior to the effective 
date of this act.


11. Section 4 of chapter 402 of the laws of 1983, amending the general 
business law relating to conversions of rental residential property to 
cooperative or condominium ownership in certain municipalities in the 
counties of Nassau, Westchester and Rockland, as amended by a chapter of 
the laws of 2003, amending chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, amending the 
emergency housing rent control law relating to the control of and 
stabilization of rent in certain cases, and various other laws relating to 
extending the dates upon which certain provisions thereof expire, as 
proposed in legislative bills numbers S. 5675 and A. 9105, is amended to 
read as follows:

4. This act shall take effect immediately; provided, that the provisions of 
sections one and three of this act shall remain in full force and effect 
only until and including June [19, 2003] 15, 2011; and provided further 
that any plan accepted for filing by the department of law on or before the 
effective date of this act shall continue to be governed by the provisions 
of section 352-eee of the general business law as they had existed 
immediately prior to the effective date of this act.


12. Subdivision 6 of section 46 of chapter 116 of the laws of 1997, 
constituting the rent regulation reform act of 1997, as amended by a 
chapter of the laws of 2003, amending chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, 
amending the emergency housing rent control law relating to the control of 
and stabilization of rent in certain cases, and various other laws relating 
to extending the dates upon which certain provisions thereof expire, as 
proposed in legislative bills numbers S. 5675 and A. 9105, is amended to 
read as follows:

6. sections twenty-eight, twenty-eight-a, twenty-eight-b and twenty- 
eight-c of this act shall expire and be deemed repealed after June [19, 
2003] 15, 2011;


13. This act shall take effect immediately, provided, that:

(a) the amendments to section 26-403 of the city rent and rehabilitation 
law made by section five of this act shall remain in full force and effect 
only as long as the public emergency requiring the regulation and control 
of residential rents and evictions continues, as provided in subdivision 3 
of section 1 of the local emergency housing rent control act;

(b) the amendments to sections 26-504.2 and 26-511 of the rent 
stabilization law of nineteen hundred sixty-nine made by sections four and 
six 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;

(c) the amendments to sections 5 and 10 of the emergency tenant protection 
act of nineteen seventy-four made by sections two and three 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;

(d) the amendments to section 2 of the emergency housing rent control law 
made by section six-a of this act shall expire on the same date as such law 
expires and shall not affect the expiration of such law as provided in 
subdivision 2 of section 1 of chapter 274 of the laws of 1946;

(e) the amendments to subdivision 5 of section 1 of the local emergency 
housing rent control act, made by section one of this act, shall not affect 
the effectiveness of such subdivision and shall cease to be in full force 
and effect pursuant to subdivision 3 of section 1 of such act; and

(f) if this act shall become a law after June 19, 2003, sections seven 
through twelve of this act shall be deemed to have been in full force and 
effect on and after June 19, 2003, and provided, further that sections 
seven through twelve of this act shall only take effect if a chapter of the 
laws of 2003, amending chapter 576 of the laws of 1974, amending the 
emergency housing rent control law relating to the control of and 
stabilization of rent in certain cases, and various other laws relating to 
extending the dates upon which certain provisions thereof expire, as 
proposed in legislative bills numbers S. 5675 and A. 9105, shall have 
become a law.

SPONSORS MEMO:
NEW YORK STATE SENATE
INTRODUCER'S MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT
submitted in accordance with Senate Rule VI. Sec 1
Memo Text Not Found
SPONSOR: RULES