In a final legislative onslaught at the end of his term, former Mayor Eric Adams vetoed 19 City Council bills. With Adams now out of office, the Council voted recently to override 17 of these vetoes—three of which affect co-ops and condos: Int 1120-B, Int 994 and 1391-A.
1120-B - Co-op Admissions Timing
Int 1120-B, set to go into effect this summer, sets limits on the amount of time co-op boards have to review prospective buyers’ purchase application packages and render their decision. It also mandates that boards communicate with buyers to confirm that all the necessary documents and information are included.
Attorney Mark A. Hakim, a partner with Manhattan-based firm Schwartz Sladkus Reich Greenberg Atlas LLP, notes that “The bill requires the co-op to have a standard application for all prospective purchasers and transferors. The co-op must advise the purchaser within 15 days of receipt of the application whether it is complete or requires additional documents; the board then has 45 days to determine if the application is approved, rejected or approved with conditions. The co-op may still request additional documentation from the prospective purchaser during the process to substantiate and/or supplement information provided in the original purchase application.”
If a board does not meet over the summer—and that seasonal hiatus is noted in the board’s minutes—the bill does allow for extensions. “While there are a few co-op permitted time extensions,” says Hakim, “the prospective purchaser may request the deadlines be extended.
“Many buildings may already have this policy in place,” Hakim continues, “but [the law] may come as a shock to those that operate a bit more loosely. Boards are going to have to come to grips with the new reality here which, as with other changes in the law, will just ultimately become second nature, allowing for more certainty in the timing for all parties involved.”
Int 994 - Installation of Cooling Mechanisms
Int 994 requires the owner of a tenant-occupied “covered dwelling unit” to install cooling devices in that unit’s primary sleeping places upon the tenant’s request. In an apartment with centralized cooling, the owner must ensure that sufficient AC is available to the tenant during the summer cooling season.
Concerned that the original language of Int 994 would impose undue landlord-tenant compliance obligations on co-ops and condos, the Council of New York Cooperatives and Condominiums (CNYC) requested carve-outs exempting owner-occupied units from the law, asking that only actual rented/sublet units trigger the cooling requirements. Their goal was to limit administrative burden on boards and protect co-ops and condos from unintended legal and operational consequences.
To implement the carve-out, lawmakers defined the owner of a “covered dwelling unit” as the condo unit owner or the shareholder of record named on a co-op unit’s proprietary lease. “In theory,” says Hakim, “this definition of an owner should insulate the co-op or condo from obligations meant to pertain to landlords, including notification, installation and inspection requirements.” Since the obligation is triggered by tenant request and not imposed universally across all units, “The opt-in nature of the law ensures owner-occupied units are exempted.”
In co-op and condo units that are subleased, leased or rented, the law requires that the owner of the unit provide cooling equipment sufficient to maintain an indoor air temperature less than 78 degrees Fahrenheit between June 15 and September 15 of each year if requested by the tenant. The rooms that must be cooled vary, based on whether the building has central air or individual air conditioning units. The requirement to provide a requested cooling unit will go into effect on June 1, 2030. Notification requirements go into effect on March 30, 2028.
Hakim also notes that “While the impact on most co-ops and condos will likely be minimal due to the exemption of owner-occupied units and the opt-in nature of the law, we will be monitoring this closely to provide our clients additional guidance as may be necessary.”
Int 1391-A - Compensation for Security Guards
Int. 1391-A requires any employer with at least one security guard to pay those guards “prevailing wages.” This includes meeting specific minimum wage levels beginning in January 2027, providing paid time off starting in January 2028, and offering supplemental benefits starting in January 2029. However, if the security guards are covered by a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) or a designated agreement that was signed before October 2025 and has a set expiration date, the new prevailing wage requirements will not take effect until that agreement expires.
The applicable minimum wage, paid time off, and supplemental benefits will be posted by the City no later than September 1 of 2026. Employers in violation of the law may face civil penalties per occurrence and per guard, as well as civil action.
“This applies to any co-op or condominium buildings that employ a security guard, either directly or through a contractor,” says Hakim. “It’s important that the boards of these buildings review their current contracts and agreements to ensure compliance as the new law imposes civil penalties for noncompliance.”
Leave a Comment