Authorizes the compensation to Catholic Guardian Services for fair and equitable holding expenses associated with lands transferred to Catholic Home Bureau which reverted to the state upon termination of their use for public purposes.
This bill authorizes the Commissioner of General Services to compensate Catholic Guardian Services for fair and equitable holding expenses related to property at 2322 Valentine Avenue in the Bronx. The property was previously conveyed to Catholic Home Bureau under a 2004 law for use in providing housing and shelter for homeless, destitute, refugee, delinquent, and/or disabled persons in New York City.
The bill also recognizes that the property is subject to reversion to the State of New York under the terms of the earlier conveyance once the public-purpose use ends. In effect, the measure provides a mechanism for the state to reimburse the current holder for certain costs associated with maintaining the property while it is in this reverted or reverting status, and it directs that the property be conveyed from Catholic Guardian Services back to the state.
If enacted, the bill would amend the state’s handling of a specific Bronx property by expressly authorizing state compensation for holding expenses incurred by Catholic Guardian Services. It does not create a broad new program or change general property law; rather, it applies to one parcel and operates within the framework established by chapter 243 of the laws of 2004 governing the original conveyance and reversion of the site. The practical effect is to shift certain maintenance or carrying costs to the state and facilitate the transfer of the property back to state ownership.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available record. Based on the bill’s narrow, corrective nature and its focus on reimbursing expenses tied to a public-purpose property transfer, the measure appears administrative and likely noncontroversial on its face. The bill text suggests an effort to resolve a property-management and reimbursement issue rather than to advance a broader policy dispute.
The main potential point of contention is whether the state should pay Catholic Guardian Services for holding expenses, and what qualifies as “fair and equitable” compensation, since that determination is left to the Commissioner of General Services. Any disagreement would likely center on the amount of reimbursement, the timing of the reversion, or whether the expenses are properly attributable to the state under the prior conveyance terms. Because the bill concerns a single property and a specific nonprofit entity, any opposition would likely be limited to fiscal or administrative concerns rather than ideological objections.