Summary#
A-11709 would amend New York’s Real Property Law, section 233-b, which concerns rent increases in manufactured home parks. Its stated goal is to exclude qualifying resident-owned manufactured home communities from that section. The bill was introduced and referred to the Assembly housing committee; it is not law. If enacted, it would take effect immediately.
- The exclusion would apply only if residents own and govern the community, monthly occupancy charges are set solely to recover listed operating and related costs, and a government housing program imposes an affordability restriction.
- The bill defines a resident-owned community as a manufactured home park whose land is owned by a cooperative, nonprofit, LLC, or other legal entity in which a majority of resident homeowners have membership, shares, or voting rights in park governance.
- The bill would exclude qualifying communities from section 233-b; it does not say that they are exempt from all other laws about rent or occupancy charges.
What it means for you#
- Residents of qualifying communities: The rent-increase provisions in section 233-b would not apply to your community. The bill does not set a new limit on occupancy charges or require the community to raise or lower them.
- Resident-owned communities: To qualify, the community must meet all the ownership, governance, cost-recovery, and affordability conditions. Monthly charges must be established solely to recover operating expenses, capital reserves, debt service, infrastructure improvements, or other operating costs.
- Other manufactured-home residents and park operators: The bill does not change section 233-b for communities that do not meet those conditions.
- Taxpayers and the public: The bill creates an exemption in an existing law; it does not create a new agency or front-line service.
Money#
No publicly available information gives an estimate of costs or savings.
- The bill does not appropriate money or set a fee.
- It requires qualifying communities’ monthly occupancy charges to be limited to recovering specified costs, but gives no estimate of the amounts involved.
What is unclear#
- The current text of section 233-b was not supplied, so its existing rent-increase rules and the precise effect of removing qualifying communities from them could not be verified.
- The bill does not explain how eligibility would be checked or who would decide whether a community qualifies.
- It does not define “other costs of operating the community” or explain how that condition would be enforced.
- It does not say how the new exclusion would interact with other laws or agreements that may limit occupancy charges.
- The bill does not specify how residents could challenge a community’s eligibility or its charges.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to distinguish communities governed by resident homeowners from other manufactured-home parks.
- A possible argument for the bill is that applying section 233-b’s rent-increase provisions may not fit communities that set charges only to recover costs and are already subject to a government-imposed affordability restriction.
- The conditions on ownership, resident governance, charges, and affordability narrow who could receive the exclusion.
Case against#
- One concern is that residents in qualifying communities would lose whatever protections section 233-b provides, though the supplied material does not include that section’s rules.
- “Other costs of operating the community” is not defined, and the bill does not provide a process for checking whether charges meet the cost-recovery condition.
- It is unclear how residents could question an exemption or a charge they believe falls outside the bill’s conditions.