ALBANY — Gov. Hochul stood by her housing plan Tuesday amid reports that she is backing off a central component of her budget plan that would force local governments to meet targets for creating new homes.
The governor’s $227 billion spending proposal included an ambitious housing compact meant to drive development and address New York’s housing shortage by allowing the state to step in and approve projects if a municipality fails to meet certain building goals.
Democrats in charge of the Legislature maintain that they’d prefer to use incentives to encourage new development in suburban areas where resistance to the governor’s plan has grown.
Budget talks have now stretched 18 days past the start of the state’s new fiscal year and led lawmakers to approve a series of stopgap measures to keep government operations funded and state workers paid.
Disagreements over Hochul’s proposed changes to the state’s bail laws have largely been responsible for the delay — but sources say housing is now holding up the process as legislative leaders remain at loggerheads with the governor.
“After weeks of negotiations, the legislature continues to oppose core elements of the Housing Compact, including the requirement that communities across the state meet growth targets,” the governor said in a statement. “We have not yet come to a final agreement, but it remains clear that merely providing incentives will not make the meaningful change that New Yorkers deserve.”
Hochul added that nothing has been finalized and she remains focused on “other elements of the plan and policy changes that will increase supply and make housing more affordable.”
Sources say one of the “other” elements the governor is pushing for is a replacement to the lapsed property tax breaks for developers who include affordable units, an abatement previously known as 421a.
Both chambers of the Democrat-led Legislature rejected Hochul’s plan — which would require downstate areas, including Westchester, Putnam and both Nassau and Suffolk Counties on Long Island, to grow their housing stocks by 3% every three years — in their budget rebuttals last month.
Upstate towns would have to meet a target of 1% growth every three years. Under Hochul’s plan, the state would be able to override local zoning laws and approve projects in towns that fail to meet those targets.
Lawmakers countered with a proposal that would provide $500 million as incentives to encourage new development.
Senate Majority Leader Stewart-Cousins (D-Westchester) said last week that while she agrees New York must address the current housing crisis, differences of opinion remain about how to approach the issue.
“It’s a difficult sell in many communities because there are a lot of elements that people may or may not want, or may not want it that way,” she said.
Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie (D-Bronx) told reporters Tuesday he wasn’t aware of Hochul’s statement and added that the leaders and the governor are “just discussing things.”
“I don’t think anything’s been finalized, unfinalized, I don’t know,” he said.
Both houses also back tenant protections in the form of “good cause” eviction and a long-sought voucher program meant to help struggling New Yorkers keep up with rent.
Good cause would give tenants a defense against unwarranted evictions and the right to challenge unreasonable rent increases, defined as more than 3% or 1.5 times the Consumer Price Index. Landlord groups have railed against the proposal, arguing it would act as a form of statewide rent control.
Tenant advocates and progressives rallied in support of increased protections for renters, as well as a voucher program for homeless and struggling New Yorkers at the Capitol on Tuesday and called for them to be included in the final budget.
“People who pay their rent have the right to live in peace and stability,” said Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal (D-Manhattan), the chair of her chamber’s housing committee. “We didn’t get elected to be complicit in letting evictions happen across the state. We stand firm that we need protections. We do not need a budget without good cause.”