The Fair and Prompt Coop Disclosure Law, Intro 119, has strong support in the Council. The bill has 31 co-sponsors (not including four additional Council Members who indicated their support for the bill when surveyed about it in the course of their last campaign), and is supported by more than 40 civil rights and allied organizations. Read the bill text.
The bill is a response to the fact that, when coops turn down applicants, they routinely refuse to provide reasons to the rejected prospective purchaser. This practice -- explicitly encouraged by the industry's trade organization -- prevents existing fair housing laws from being enforced properly in the co-op sector. Secrecy emboldens discriminators, makes it difficult for people to assess whether a turndown is really just a pretext for discrimination, and provides an open door for discrimination defense attorneys to invent after-the-fact justifications if a fair housing lawsuit is ultimately brought. Read a fact sheet on the bill.
As pointed out by a group of leading civil rights law professors in New York City, Intro 119 "will act as a much-needed deterrent against discrimination in a housing sector that now accounts for more than 300,000 units." Read the full letter from these scholars asking Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn to take action.
If coops were required at the time they turn someone down to provide their reasons for rejection, no burden would be imposed on them. Contrary to the misinformation that has been spewed forth by the coop industry, its hired guns, and its Council puppets, a disclosure law would not change in any way the lawful reasons for which a coop could turn an applicant down. Read "Debunking Myths."
Nevertheless, the Council Speaker has not permitted a hearing on the bill, even though it was introduced a full two years ago. This despite the fact that she herself (when running for re-election in 2005) went on record in favor of the disclosure required by the bill.
The issue of limousine liberalism was put starkly in a National Law Journal column on the bill: "some otherwise die-hard liberals have swelled the chorus of catcalls from building owners and managers, attacking the bill as an undue burden on shareholders and a threat to their freedom to select their neighbors. This critique boils down to a plea to maintain the 'clubby' status quo, at the cost of enhancing protection from bias in a critical segment of the housing market."
As stated by the Council's Black, Latino, and Asian Caucus, "some coop trade associations have sought to stoke fear and misinformation, asserting that the coop way-of-life depends on secrecy. As Council Members, we must look at the greater public interest - an interest that surely demands the transparency that would be mandated by Intro 119." Read the full Caucus letter.
Please contact the Center by email (center@antibiaslaw.com) to join the effort to pass this bill.