Will Eric Adams Veto COPA?

The mayor thinks the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act is “shortsighted.”

That was the term a City Hall spokesperson used to describe the bill, along with various housing bills approved by the City Council on Thursday.

“Fortunately, Mayor Adams is in office until December 31 and we will be reviewing our next steps regarding the bills passed today,” the spokesperson, Fabien Levy, said in a statement.

For landlords and brokers, this offers a glimmer of hope that the mayor could veto COPA, a measure they say is an unfair intrusion into private deals that could deter investment, delay closings and make it harder to line up financing.

The measure gives city-approved nonprofits, as well as nonprofits that form a joint venture with not-for-profit companies, the first opportunity to bid on certain multifamily buildings with four or more units.

In the lead-up to the bill’s passage, landlord groups railed against the measure, with some rallying outside of City Hall on Thursday and showing up to Council committee meetings to express their distress over the law. After the Committee on Housing and Buildings voted in favor of the measure on Thursday, some yelled out “Shame!” and “Thieves, they are thieves!”

“COPA will make New York City an affordable housing wasteland and trigger the extinction of small owners,” Ann Korchak, board president of the Small Property Owners of New York, said in a statement after the measure passed the full Council. “COPA is a dangerous blueprint that puts a target on every other free enterprise and privately owned small business.”

If the mayor vetoes the measure, it would be up to the next City Council, should it elect to do so, to override.

The chances of that happening, at this point, appear slim.

The bill secured 30 yes votes, while 10 members rejected it and eight abstained. At least 34 Council members must vote to override a veto.

Three of those “yes” votes came from Council members Justin Brannan, Diana Ayala and Adrienne Adams, all of whom are leaving office. Three abstentions were from outgoing Council members Francisco Moya, Rafael Salamanca and Keith Powers, and two nos were from the departing Council members Bob Holden and Kristy Marmorato.

Given those exits, members would need to flip a combination of seven “no” votes or abstentions to get to the two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.

Even then, the decision to try to override would likely be up to Council member Julie Menin, the presumed next City Council speaker. Notably, Menin abstained from voting on COPA. A spokesperson did not immediately comment on Menin’s decision.

COPA’s sponsor, Council member Sandy Nurse, declined to comment on Friday.

Meanwhile, Menin voted in favor of bills that would create new restrictions on the kinds of housing that the city finances and would set minimum construction wages and benefits for certain projects. The administration has estimated that these bills would add $600 million to the Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s annual budget needs.

The mayor is also reviewing these measures, which passed with a supermajority of support.

COPA, first introduced in 2020, was the subject of multiple City Council hearings, but only gained traction in the past month or so.

The measure underwent several changes that reduced the pool of eligible buildings, focusing on distressed properties and those with soon-to-expire affordability requirements, and shrunk the period of time that nonprofits and eligible joint ventures can exclusively vie for properties.

When owners of certain multifamily buildings with four or more units want to sell their buildings, they must first notify the city and its approved prospective buyers. Those city-approved entities would then have 25 days to notify an owner that they are interested in bidding on a property. Once that time runs out, the interested qualified entities have 80 days to submit an offer. Qualified entities also have 15 days after a competing bid comes in to match it.

The administration wanted COPA to apply solely to buildings involved in an enforcement program. Under the measure, buildings enrolled in the city’s alternative enforcement program for at least one year are subject to COPA. The bill includes other criteria for distress, however, and also applies to buildings that have affordability requirements expiring in the next two years.

Proponents of the measure believe it will help steer troubled multifamily buildings to new owners focused on affordability. Deyanira Del Rio, executive director of New Economy Project, said COPA will help community land trusts “take land and housing off the speculative market and bring them into permanently affordable community control.”

Ahead of Thursday’s vote, Nurse noted that the city is already “putting a ton of money” into helping these distressed buildings and that COPA creates a “tiny chance” that these properties will be bought by nonprofits the city trusts. She also expressed frustration about misinformation around COPA, including that it applies to homeowners. Owners who live in their buildings are exempt if the property has five or fewer units.

“I ask all of my colleagues to do their reading before they come to vote on bills,” she said. “Make sure you know what you’re talking about.”

Republican Council member Inna Vernikov called the measure a “stunning example of government overreach” and referred to it as part of a “communist agenda” pushed under “the guise of helping the poor and the underprivileged.”

If COPA ultimately becomes law, Eliad Shapiro, a partner at Herrick, thinks the measure could face a legal challenge.

“The right to negotiate, to dispose of your property however you want, sell it to whoever you want, is viewed by the courts as a fundamental property right,” he said.