In April, New York State enacted the Good Cause Eviction Law, which not only limits a landlord's ability to remove a tenant from a residential unit but also caps rent increases. The law automatically applies to New York City, but other municipalities in the state can opt in to the law. So far, six municipalities have done so: Albany, Kingston, Poughkeepsie, Newburgh, Ithaca, and Beacon. Hudson is now considering opting in to the law.
At the Common Council meeting on August 20, advocates for the law showed up in force to urge the Council to adopt the law. Council president Tom DePietro responded by saying, "I'd like to think you're preaching to the choir."
On Wednesday, the issue was taken up by the Legal Committee. There are two aspects of the law that can be tailored to the specific municipality: the percentage of fair market rate that qualifies a unit as "luxury" and hence exempt from the law (in the original law, it is 245 percent); and the number of units that exempts a landlord from the law (in the original law it is 10 or fewer). At the Legal Committee meeting, there seemed to be some consensus that only landlords with just one rental unit should be exempt from the law. It was agreed that the two issues should be left to the full Council to decide. An exchange between DePietro and Councilmember Vicky Daskaloudi (Fifth Ward), however, raised a whole new issue--possibly one unique to Hudson.
When Councilmember Margaret Morris (First Ward), who chairs the Legal Committee, wanted to recognize Daskaloudi, who was attending the meeting virtually, for a comment, DePietro interrupted, asserting that Daskaloudi should not be part of the discussion because she is a landlord. Daskaloudi reacted by telling DePietro, "I wasn't planning to say something against your law that you love so much." Gossips has since learned that at some time prior to the committee meeting, Daskaloudi had made it known that she was considering recusing herself from this issue. The recusal had not been made officially or publicly, but DePietro was apparently aware of it. Recusal would require that Daskaloudi not participate in the discussion.
The exchange raised an interesting question for the Common Council: Should councilmembers who have tenants or who are tenants recuse themselves from deciding on opting in to the Good Cause Eviction Law? If the answer to that question is yes, it would leave, according to Gossips' calculation, only four members of the Council who are unaffected. Four is not enough to take any action.
Crystal Peck, legal counsel to the Common Council, said she would look into the situation. The committee, meanwhile, agreed to move the issue to the full Council. The informal meeting of the Common Council takes place on Monday, September 9, at 6:00 p.m.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CAROLE OSTERINK
The comically lax NYS ethics laws as they apply to elected officials won’t stop any member of the council from speaking or voting on the proposal. Of course Tom, exhibiting the keen legal mind we’ve all come to associate him with, failed to raise the converse point based on his sputtering thoughts — if a landlord can’t speak or vote on the issue how can a tenant? So how many of our Solons are renters? Does anyone on the council think before they flap their gums?
ReplyDeleteI'm sure he's very concerned about the mayor voting on a PILOT proposal from his landlord at the IDA.
DeleteSeriously, a threshold of one rental to be exempt from yet another burden on property owners? And what fees will be imposed ?
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to housing everyone has an interest. Everyone is a tenant, landlord, or homeowner who is interested in protecting their rights as a potential landlord or future tenant. If put to a referendum, the outcome is predictable as most likely there are more tenants than landlords voting.
ReplyDeleteI don't see how this law will do much to address the problem of housing costs. This is the real problem, which all comes down to greed. Everyone needs to live someplace, just as they need to eat. Profiteering off of tenants is pretty low down on the ethical ladder, but no one seems to have the will to address that problem.
What a total waste of our government’s time. All a landlord needs to do is form separate LLCs for each unit to get around this. Guess it’s a boon to lawyers and accountants.
ReplyDeleteRead the statute (for a change) and then comment: the law goes to beneficial ownership, not corporate form. Frankly, if it was so easy to avoid its teeth who would care? But knowledgeable landlords are, rightly, aghast. This law will be the end of private landlords. All those tenants pushing for this — soon they’ll be homeless or living in section 9 housing. Like sheep.
DeleteI’m all for property rights. I just read thru the state legislation. I guess for existing large scale rentals it can’t be so easily avoided. Not sure if there are any 6+ unit buildings in Hudson - other than the Depot being built. I imagine most Hudson rental units are in dwellings with 5 or fewer units. So a landlord could pretty easily get a 15% approval to condo than buy up the units and get around the law. Anywho I agree Good Cause is going to have more negative consequences than positive in a few years.
DeleteShouldn't a council member who owns a house in Greenport and lives there with wife and children but can't prove, and isn't interested in proving, that he actually lives in Hudson recuse himself from all matters brought before the council? Should he, or anyone not living in Hudson full time, be allowed on the council?
ReplyDelete