New York Assembly Bill A06170

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

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

Caption

Requires rent stabilized housing accommodations lost or destroyed due to fire, natural disaster, act of God, act of war or eminent domain, to be replaced in any succeeding construction on the same parcel.

Summary

This bill would require that certain rent-regulated housing units in New York City and elsewhere in the state be replaced if they are lost or destroyed because of fire, natural disaster, an act of God, war, or eminent domain. If a covered building is rebuilt on the same parcel, the replacement housing accommodation must be substantially similar to the one that was lost. The bill also ties the replacement unit to the prior regulated status and rent level. For rent-controlled and rent-stabilized housing covered by the affected laws, the new unit would remain subject to the same rent regulation framework, and the initial or maximum rent for the replacement unit would be set equal to the maximum rent of the destroyed unit. The measure amends the Emergency Housing Rent Control Law, the Emergency Tenant Protection Act of 1974, and the New York City Administrative Code provisions governing rent regulation.

Impact

The bill would create a new statutory obligation for owners or developers rebuilding on the same parcel after a qualifying loss to include a substantially similar replacement unit subject to the same rent-regulated status and rent cap as the original unit. It would affect rent-controlled and rent-stabilized housing accommodations under state law and New York City rent regulation provisions, limiting the ability to convert a destroyed regulated unit into an unregulated or higher-rent unit after reconstruction. The bill would also preserve these requirements only for as long as the underlying emergency rent laws remain in effect.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials, the measure appears to be a tenant-protection and housing-preservation proposal with an intent to maintain regulated housing stock after catastrophic loss or government taking. The caption and structure suggest support for preserving affordability and preventing the permanent loss of rent-regulated units. No contrary positions are documented in the provided record, so there is no visible formal opposition or recorded vote sentiment to assess.

Contention

The main policy tension is between preserving rent-regulated housing for tenants and constraining property owners’ flexibility after a unit is destroyed or taken by eminent domain. Supporters would likely emphasize replacement of affordable housing and continuity of tenant protections, while critics could argue that requiring a substantially similar regulated replacement and capping rent at the prior level may increase redevelopment costs, complicate reconstruction, or reduce incentives to rebuild. Because no committee transcript or vote history is provided, specific named opponents or supporters are not identifiable from the record.