New York Assembly Bill A08592

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/21/25
• Refer: 5/21/25
• Refer: 1/7/26

Caption

Establishes the offenses of reckless endangerment of an emergency service person in the first and second degrees.

Summary

This bill creates two new crimes in the Penal Law: reckless endangerment of an emergency service person in the second degree and in the first degree. It defines “emergency service person” broadly to include firefighters, police officers, peace officers, emergency services professionals, code enforcement officers, fire inspection personnel, and building inspectors. The second-degree offense applies when a person knows a building permit is required, fails to obtain it, and alters, converts, encloses, subdivides, or partitions a building or structure in violation of fire prevention or building code requirements in a way that impedes egress during a fire or other emergency evacuation, and that conduct results in injury to an emergency service person. The first-degree offense applies when that same conduct results in the death of an emergency service person, or when the person has a prior conviction for either degree of the offense within the previous ten years. Second degree is classified as a class E felony, and first degree as a class D felony.

Impact

The bill would add three new sections to the Penal Law and create new felony offenses tied to unsafe building alterations that obstruct emergency evacuation and harm emergency responders. It would expand criminal liability for property owners, contractors, or others who make unpermitted or code-violating changes to structures in a way that endangers responders during fires or other emergencies. The measure would also reinforce compliance with the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and related local construction and fire-safety laws by attaching criminal penalties to violations that cause injury or death to covered emergency personnel.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed as a public-safety and responder-protection bill with an emphasis on accountability for unsafe construction practices. The sponsors and cosponsors suggest support from members concerned with fire safety, emergency response, and building-code enforcement. No contrary positions are documented in the provided materials, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate, but the bill’s tone is strongly protective of emergency personnel and punitive toward conduct that creates evacuation hazards.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are the breadth of the conduct covered and the scope of the protected class. The bill reaches unpermitted alterations and code violations that impede egress, which could raise questions about whether criminal penalties are appropriate for building-code violations that already may be addressed through civil or administrative enforcement. Another possible issue is the definition of “emergency service person,” which extends beyond firefighters and police to include code enforcement officers, fire inspection personnel, and building inspectors, potentially broadening the statute’s reach. No specific objections or opposing arguments are included in the available record.