The City Council on Thursday resurrected a controversial housing bill vetoed by former Mayor Eric Adams, approving a dramatically scaled-back measure that would give nonprofits first crack at buying certain apartment buildings.
The Community Opportunity to Purchase Act, or COPA, passed on Oct. 22 after lawmakers narrowed its reach by nearly 80%, from roughly 10,000 buildings to 2,100, following months of negotiations aimed at addressing legal concerns and opposition from the real estate industry.
The legislation, sponsored by Brooklyn Council Member Sandy Nurse, would give qualified nonprofit housing organizations an early opportunity to purchase certain distressed and affordable residential buildings when their owners decide to sell, with the goal of preventing displacement and preserving affordable housing.
The bill passed by a vote of 38 to 9, with two abstentions, and now heads to Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who has pledged to sign it.
Its passage marks a political comeback for legislation that appeared to be in trouble earlier this year, when the city’s Law Department raised legal concerns about the previous version and the Council declined to override Adams’ veto.
Speaking ahead of Thursday’s vote, Council Speaker Julie Menin said lawmakers had spent months working with Nurse, the real estate industry and other stakeholders to address those concerns.
“The universe of properties was narrowed to about 2,100 buildings from the original approximately 10,000,” Menin said, describing the revised legislation as a more targeted approach.
She said the changes had made some Council members and industry representatives who previously opposed COPA more comfortable with the measure.
City Council Speaker Julie Menin pictured during Thursday’s stated meeting. Photo John McCarten/NYC Council Media Unit
Nurse, meanwhile, celebrated the end of a legislative fight that began six years ago and spanned three mayoral administrations.
“Today we are going to end the six-year saga of the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act here in the council,” she said.
“The bill has been through the fire,” Nurse added, recounting its repeated introductions, Adams’ veto and what she described as an intense lobbying campaign by real estate interests to defeat it.
Nurse argued that preserving existing affordable apartments is one of the fastest ways to address the city’s housing crisis, particularly when new housing developments can take years to complete.
“Buying and preserving some of the housing we already have is the most immediate way to stop displacement, and that’s what COPA does,” she said.
At the COPA: Changes are now in fashion
The newly approved legislation generally targets residential buildings with at least four apartments that meet specific criteria, including serious unresolved housing violations, extended participation in the city’s Alternative Enforcement Program, certain tenant harassment findings, or qualifying affordability agreements overseen by the Department of Housing Preservation and Development.
The revised bill also excludes buildings covered solely by affordability restrictions imposed through the 421-a tax incentive program and limits eligibility based on HPD-managed affordability agreements to buildings with no more than 100 apartments. Owner-occupied properties with five or fewer apartments are also exempt.
When an owner of a covered building decides to sell, certified nonprofits would have 20 days to express interest in purchasing it, followed by a 70-day window to submit an offer. Those deadlines are shorter than the 25- and 80-day periods in the legislation Adams vetoed.
If no nonprofit expresses interest within the first 20 days, the owner can proceed with the sale without further obligations under that portion of COPA.
Council Member Sandy Nurse speaks to reporters ahead of Thursday’s stated meeting. Photo by John McCarten/NYC Council Media Unit
The latest version also gives property owners more flexibility. Unlike the previous bill, landlords would be allowed to list their buildings, obtain appraisals, and negotiate with other prospective buyers while nonprofits consider making an offer, although restrictions on completing a sale would remain in place.
If a landlord rejects a nonprofit’s offer, the nonprofit could later have an opportunity to match an offer from another buyer under the law’s right-of-first-refusal provisions.
The bill also includes a financial hardship exemption for property owners and penalties of up to 15% of the sale price for those who bypass required notifications.
The measure would take effect one year after becoming law.
The legal punches flew
The revisions follow a dispute over legal advice that helped derail the legislation earlier this year.
As previously reported by amNewYork, the Council passed COPA in December by a 31-10 vote, only for Adams to veto the measure shortly before leaving office. Nurse said the Law Department had initially considered the legislation legally defensible, but the agency later raised additional concerns as lawmakers weighed whether to override the veto.
Menin criticized the timing of those warnings during a confirmation hearing for Corporation Counsel Steve Banks earlier this year, arguing that the Council should not be learning about potential legal problems weeks after passing a bill.
On Thursday, she said the legal memo had arrived on her desk shortly after she became speaker and helped prompt the subsequent revisions.
“We were able to address some of the legal issues that the law department had raised,” Menin said.
Nurse sought to clarify that the earlier bill had not been deemed unconstitutional, saying the Law Department had instead identified potential grounds for lawsuits.
“The version we passed in December, the law department said, was legally sound,” said Nurse. “It was more that there was a number of different points that could be sued over. So it wasn’t that there was anything unconstitutional in it. It’s just they wanted an opportunity to re-strengthen now that they’ve had a third review of it.”
She added that many of the latest changes were designed to make the program easier for HPD to administer, particularly by allowing the agency to more precisely identify buildings subject to COPA and notify their owners.
The Council’s October 22 committee report confirms that the revisions also narrowed enforcement provisions and adjusted the purchase process in response to concerns raised by property owners and housing organizations.
Not everyone’s feeling the passion
FILE: Former Assembly Member Kenny Burgos, who is now CEO of the New York Apartment Association. Photo by Dean Moses
Despite the concessions, landlord organizations continued to criticize the now-passed legislation, arguing that it fails to address the financial pressures already affecting the city’s housing stock.
“The Council has been responsive to stakeholders, but we’re still missing the forest for the trees,” said Kenny Burgos, CEO of the New York Apartment Association.
Burgos argued that rising operating costs and insufficient revenue have made it increasingly difficult for both private and nonprofit housing providers to maintain their buildings.
“Nonprofits already own and operate housing across our city, and they’re showing us how untenable it has become,” he said. “Celebrating legislation without tackling the root issue puts the housing New Yorkers depend on at risk.”
Small Property Owners of New York took a sharper stance, warning that the legislation would further disadvantage smaller landlords, including immigrant and multigenerational property owners.
“COPA will devalue buildings, forcing small, often immigrant and multigenerational, owners to sell their buildings for pennies on the dollar,” said Ann Korchak, the group’s board president.
Korchak accused the city of worsening the financial challenges facing landlords through existing housing policies and then using COPA to intervene in distressed property sales.
The legislation does not, however, force owners to sell their buildings or authorize the government to seize private property. It allows qualified nonprofits to bid on certain buildings when owners choose to put them up for sale.
Supporters argue that the measure could prevent affordable apartments from falling into the hands of speculative investors and help nonprofit housing providers preserve existing housing.
The Council’s committee report points to a similar program in San Francisco, which it says has preserved 436 homes and prevented the displacement of more than 1,000 residents as of December 2025.
Still, the report acknowledges that nonprofits face their own financial obstacles, including lengthy delays in securing city funding that can make competing with private buyers difficult.