Here is an update on the latest regarding land use legislation and lawsuits that concern local homeowners and residents.

City of Yes
Since the City of Yes passed on December 18, 2024, we have been diligent about acting. In March, our attorneys, Jack Lester and Lawrence Marks, filed a lawsuit against Mayor Adams, the Department of City Planning and the City Council to overturn the City of Yes based upon the fact that the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was basically a piece of junk, did not include real numbers in terms of the amount of units that would be generated by the massive baseline increases to our zoning and did not provide mitigation whatsoever, even when it was directly identified in the EIS.

Our hearing on July 16 went well and the attorney speaking for the Adams administration stated something remarkable: the reason that the administration could not follow environmental law or do mitigation to lessen the harm of City of Yes because that would take away the amount of housing that could be built. We argued to the contrary, stating that A), it isn’t the City’s right to ignore environmental law or not do mitigation when identified and necessary and B) if they did do mitigation, it could result in more and (as importantly) better housing.

We had been waiting for four months for a decision, which came in November. The judge, Lisette Colon, dismissed our case in its entirety. Her decision can only be described as completely off base with many, many blatant errors, and a clear lack of understanding of SEQRA, New York State’s environmental law that guides development (and which the EIS is a critical part of that process). Our attorney has filed a Notice of Appeal.

The development of concern on 79 Place in Middle Village (pictured) is a direct result of the passage of City of Yes.

Charter Ballot Questions
As for the Charter Ballot questions: these were put into motion exactly four days after the City Council approved the City of Yes by Mayor Adams, stating that the City of Yes was NOT ENOUGH and that the City Council had to have their land use power significantly weakened to build more housing.

The three Charter questions pertaining to land use – 2, 3 & 4 – were finalized in July. All take away power from the City Council as well as the residents of neighborhoods and communities across the city; all will allow massive increases in density that make the City of Yes look mild by comparison.

Question #3 will legalize spot up-zonings on ANY PARCEL OF LAND IN THE CITY with no recourse from the City Council. The City Council had the opportunity to kill these questions over the summer but – and this is not surprising to anyone – completely dropped the ball ON PURPOSE because many council members would rather not negotiate land use and be accountable to their constituents.

On September 30, we filed another lawsuit, this time against the Charter Revision Commission to invalidate Questions 2, 3 & 4. On October 15, our case was heard by one Judge Jeffrey Pearlman – the former Special Counsel to Governor Kathy Hochul and a political fixer extraordinaire – after being switched from another judge three days previously. Judge Pearlman denied our request for an immediate injunction and acted with great impropriety at the hearing; his decision has virtually no basis in established case law and had to do with election law, not SEQRA and environmental law, which is what we brought forward in our argument. You see, the Charter Revision Commission NEVER FILED AN EIS for some of the most sweeping changes to land use EVER PROPOSED.

We filed a Notice to Appeal two days later; in the meantime, the BALLOT QUESTIONS PASSED ON ELECTION DAY, by a margin of 56-44 for each question – not a large margin, but they passed, nonetheless. If we don’t stop these changes to our land use procedures, we are in for life-altering scenarios that no one could have dreamed of just last year.

In brief, our options to respond to both enormous crises are very straightforward.

Intro 948-A (formerly Intro 1107)
As if this wasn’t enough, we are facing yet another crisis being foisted on us by our elected officials: Intro 948-A, otherwise known as the AirBnB bill.

Short history: In early 2024, the new CLO of AirBnB – Ron Klain, the former Chief of Staff to former President Joe Biden – began an aggressive campaign to open up the floodgates across the United States to unrestricted AirBnB short-term stays. The result in NYC was Intro 1107 which would undo Local Law 18, which in 2023 essentially prohibited AirBnB short-term stays.

Intro 1107 stayed bottled up for over a year in committee until a few weeks ago, when Speaker Adrienne Adams – now term-limited and out of office on December 31 and angling for a private sector job, pushed for another Councilmember to take it over. The result: Intro 948-A, which was submitted by Mercedes Narcisse (pictured) in October.

What is INTRO 948-A? It will allow AirBnB short-term stays in all one and two-family homes across New York City.

Each unit will be allowed FOUR ROOMS (so, a two-family house could have up to EIGHT ROOMS) to be rented at once to FOUR DIFFERENT CLIENTS PER NIGHT. Also, THE OWNER DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PRESENT.

This will create the incentive for hedge funds, financial interests and real estate investors to start buying up one and two-family homes here and turn them into full-blown AirBnB short-term hotels in the middle of quiet residential neighborhoods – a complete commercialization of our communities.

There was a single hearing on Intro. 948-A on Thursday, November 20 with written testimony taken for 72 hours afterward. Thank you to all who weighed in against this horrible bill.

AirBnB has already spent over $700,000 lobbying Councilmembers this year and has promised to spend $5 million to get this bill passed.

They have created several phony organizations including RESTORE HOME OWNERS’ AUTONOMY AND RIGHTS (RHOAR) who they have funded to the tune of $150,000; and HOMEOWNERS FOR FINANCIAL EMPOWERMENT who they have given $450,000 so far. There is also a group of clergy members that is being funded by them as well, called MOBILIZING PREACHERS AND COMMUNITIES (M-PAC), who have been shilling for AirBnB for almost a decade – and just got started again with the introduction of this bill.

I’ll update you on all of these efforts in the next issue of the Juniper Berry.