New York Assembly Bill A10546

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/13/26
• Refer: 3/13/26

Caption

Establishes the community development financial institution disability housing program within the New York state urban development corporation

Summary

This bill amends the New York State Urban Development Corporation Act to create a new Community Development Financial Institution Disability Housing Program. The legislature states that expanding housing for people with mental and developmental disabilities is a state priority and that community development financial institutions (CDFIs) can help leverage public funds to finance construction of such housing. The program would authorize the corporation to allocate up to $25 million from the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund to CDFIs that finance and develop supportive living facilities and supervised living facilities. Those facilities are defined by reference to the Mental Hygiene Law, tying the bill to existing state frameworks for disability-related housing and services. The bill also directs the corporation to consult with the Office of Mental Health, the Office for People With Developmental Disabilities, and the Office of Addiction Services and Supports when adopting rules and regulations, and it makes all allocations subject to the existing requirements of section 16-o of the act. In practical terms, the bill would expand state-supported financing tools for housing serving individuals with developmental and mental disabilities, while leaving the actual development and lending to CDFIs. It would not directly create housing units itself, but it would establish a dedicated funding stream and administrative structure within the Urban Development Corporation to support such projects. The general sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of expanding specialized housing for vulnerable populations. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes available, there is no documented opposition or debate in the provided materials. The bill appears to be framed as a targeted housing and financing initiative with a public-benefit purpose rather than a controversial policy change. No specific points of contention are recorded in the available context. Potential issues that could arise, based on the bill’s structure, include the size and use of the $25 million allocation, how funds would be distributed among CDFIs and projects, and the extent of agency discretion in implementing the program, but these concerns are not documented in the provided record.

Impact

The bill would add a new section 16-bb to the New York State Urban Development Corporation Act, creating a dedicated disability housing financing program within the Community Development Financial Institutions Fund. It would authorize up to $25 million in allocations to CDFIs for financing supportive and supervised living facilities, and it would require rulemaking in consultation with mental health, developmental disability, and addiction services agencies. The measure would affect the Urban Development Corporation, CDFIs, and providers or developers of housing for people with mental and developmental disabilities, while incorporating existing Mental Hygiene Law definitions and section 16-o funding rules.

Sentiment

The available text suggests a positive, policy-driven sentiment focused on expanding housing options for people with mental and developmental disabilities. The bill is presented as a targeted public investment that uses CDFIs to leverage state funds, and there are no recorded votes or committee transcripts indicating opposition, amendments, or divided views. In the provided record, the measure appears to have been introduced and referred to committee without documented controversy.

Contention

No explicit contention is shown in the provided materials because there are no committee transcripts or votes. If debated, likely issues would include whether dedicating up to $25 million is the best use of the CDFI fund, how to ensure equitable distribution of financing, and whether the program’s reliance on CDFIs and agency rulemaking could limit speed or transparency. However, these are inferred policy questions rather than documented objections.