New York Assembly Bill A10245

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/12/26
• Refer: 2/12/26

Caption

Permits land bank officers and employees to participate in the New York state and local retirement system

Summary

A10245 would amend the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law to expressly classify each land bank created under that article as a public organization engaged in public service deriving its authority from the New York State Legislature. Based on that designation, a land bank board could adopt a resolution allowing its officers and employees to participate in the New York State and Local Retirement System. The bill is narrowly focused on retirement eligibility for land bank personnel. It does not require participation, but gives land banks the option to extend public pension coverage to their officers and employees if their governing board chooses to do so. The measure takes effect immediately upon enactment.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would change state law governing land banks by adding a new provision to the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law. It would create an explicit statutory basis for land bank officers and employees to join the New York State and Local Retirement System, subject to a board resolution, potentially affecting pension administration, employer obligations, and recruitment/retention for land bank entities and their workers.

Sentiment

The available legislative history suggests cautious or mixed support rather than broad consensus. The bill was introduced and referred to the Assembly Committee on Local Governments, and a later committee vote of 14 yeas and 6 nays resulted in the measure being held for consideration, indicating some support but also enough concern to prevent immediate advancement. No transcript discussion is available to show detailed debate.

Contention

The main point of contention appears to be whether land banks should be treated as sufficiently public in nature to allow participation in the state and local retirement system, and whether extending pension eligibility to their employees is appropriate. Supporters likely view the bill as recognizing land banks’ public-service role and helping them attract and retain staff, while opponents may be concerned about pension costs, precedent for quasi-public entities, and the fiscal or administrative implications for the retirement system.