New York Assembly Bill A04569

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Refer: 2/4/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Authorizes the assessor of Richmond county to grant the Silver Lake Foundation Inc. retroactive real property tax exempt status upon an application therefor.

Summary

This bill authorizes the Richmond County assessor to accept a late application from the Silver Lake Foundation Inc. for a real property tax exemption under section 420-a of the Real Property Tax Law for the 2023 general taxes. The exemption would apply to the parcel at 203 Port Richmond Avenue in Staten Island, and the application would be treated as though it had been filed by the normal taxable status date. If the assessor determines the organization would have qualified for the exemption had it filed on time, and if the New York City Council approves, the assessor may correct the tax rolls accordingly. The bill also allows, at the discretion of the applicable governing body or tax department, for refunds of taxes already paid and for cancellation of unpaid taxes, penalties, liens, fines, or interest tied to the parcel. The act takes effect immediately.

Impact

The bill creates a narrow, one-time exception to the usual filing deadlines for property tax exemption applications under Real Property Tax Law section 420-a. It gives Richmond County authority to process a retroactive exemption request for a specific nonprofit parcel in Staten Island and, if approved, to adjust the tax rolls and potentially refund or cancel taxes and related charges. The measure affects the Silver Lake Foundation Inc., the Richmond County assessor, and the New York City Council, but does not broadly amend statewide tax law beyond this special authorization.

Sentiment

The available record suggests the bill is administrative and targeted rather than controversial, with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials. Its purpose appears to be to remedy a missed filing deadline for a nonprofit organization that may otherwise have qualified for exemption. The lack of opposition or recorded dissent indicates the measure was likely viewed as a routine local tax relief bill.

Contention

The main point of contention inherent in the bill is whether a late-filed exemption should be granted retroactively, since that can reduce tax revenue and potentially require refunds or cancellation of outstanding charges. Any concern would likely center on fairness to other taxpayers, adherence to filing deadlines, and whether the organization truly met the substantive requirements for a 420-a exemption. The bill addresses this by requiring the assessor to determine eligibility and by making refunds and roll corrections discretionary and subject to approval by the New York City Council.