!!!DONATIONS are NOT required !!! 
(Change.org automatically asks for money to run their site. We do NOT get financial support for this cause from any donations you make to this site!)

Dear Governor Hochul and all our New York State Elected Officials,

Please Stop Housing Compact Bills: Assembly: A1075 and Senate: S2276 

We, your N.Y.S. constituents want to express our deep concern about, and strong opposition to, certain elements of your "Housing Compact" for the New York 2023 budget proposal submitted to the State Legislature on Feb. 1, 2023. The signatures on this petition are evidence of our desire, for you to eliminate "Housing Compact" from the 2023 NYS budget proposal.

We are homeowners, civic associations, community leaders and residents, representing all over New York State, especially Queens and Nassau Counties with current zones for one-family homes, two-family and multifamily homes. If adopted, these bills will have disastrous impacts on our communities and our quality of Life. This bill would only benefit greedy investors, not affordable housing as claimed by the Governor. 

Summary of reasons we want to eliminate the Housing Compact proposal:

1. We disagree with the proposed mandatory development cycles/housing unit targets in NYS.

2. We disagree with state government oversight and removal of local home rule in the zoning and land use process in NYS.

3. We disagree with blanket increases in housing density to areas within 1/2 mile of rail and subway stations.

4. We disagree with the blanket amnesty for illegal conversions (including basements and cellars) in NYC. "Home Compact" does not have any concern for tenant safety.

5. We believe that relaxation of multiple dwelling laws, which also relaxes their construction and safety standards, is wrong and unsafe!

6. Property tax exemptions for ADUs creations, would put the burden on other homeowners and residents. ADUs should not be allowed on smaller properties, where parking is already a concern and a problem. If allowed, ADUs should only be allowed on larger home properties (at least over 60x100) that have room for parking spaces for extra ADU renters. 

7. The proposed budget, allocated for this legislation, would not cover any enhancements to our public services, school capacity, education, current residents, trains, buses, police, fire stations, roadway adequacy, parking availability and more.

More Details under the Action Plan.

________________________________________________________________

TO N.Y.S. NEIGHBORS:

IT'S URGENT THAT WE TAKE ACTION NOW, TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE:

1. Please sign this petition, if you agree and then share. (Comments are not required.)

http://www.change.org/stopNYS2023Upzoning

2. Flood the Governor with Emails, Faxes, Phone Calls 

     Let her office know your objections!

     Office hours: 9:00am to 5:00pm

     1-518-474-8390   press option # 3,

     Then press either: # 1 to leave a Voicemail or #2 to speak to an Agent

3. Contact her By Mail:

The Honorable Kathy Hochul
Governor of New York State
NYS State Capitol Building
Albany, NY 12224

4. Fax# (518)474-1513

5.  Send a Message to the Governor:

https://www.governor.ny.gov/content/governor-contact-form

6. Please vote against this bill on your NYS Senator's webpage. Please Copy and paste link if it doesn’t work. https://www.nysenate.gov/

7. For Additional Info, Please Visit https://www.save1familyny.org/

________________________________________________________________

More details regarding the above objections:

Among the elements of the budget proposal to which we are opposed are the following:
Mandatory increased density through Transit Oriented Development
(TOD): 
We agree that transit hubs and associated "downtown" areas near transit stations are logical areas for higher density zones. However, the budget proposal would create density that is greatly excessive for many of the affected areas.

The TOD proposal requires a density of at least 50 units per acre in a half mile radius around transit stations in and within 15 miles of New York City, decreasing to 30 units/acre within 30 miles of NYC and 20 units/acre within 50 miles of NYC.

For example, the combined Little Neck-Douglaston area, the TOD proposal would require an increase from the current total of approximately 2,976 units to more than 18,135 units -- an astounding and disastrous 605% increase. Such an increase will dramatically and unfavorably change the character of these stable, predominantly middle-class neighborhoods. 

Another example is the Landmarked Historic District of Addisleigh Park, a predominantly middle-class neighborhood that is similar to Douglaston. There are plenty more NYC neighborhoods, like these that homeowners bought over 50 years ago, because of their suburban like character and single-family zoning.

Importantly, there is nothing in the proposal that would require or even incentivize the creation of affordable housing in TOD areas; on the contrary, these would all be market rate housing units and the investors would be the only people that benefit from these up-zonings.

These areas have already been zoned/or downzoned by the responsible local governments as part of a thoughtful, contextual zoning plan that provides a reasonable balance among different density limits. We see the investor taking advantage and ruining our communities now, with the zoning as is. We have lots of apartments in downtown Jamaica that are vacant. There is still plenty of development downtown, so why bother low density communities which people strive to live in?

The large majority of New York City, including much of Queens, is zoned for very high densities. Eastern Queens is one of the few areas of the NYC's zoned communities with lower density. Many new residents have moved from the overcrowded and high-density Brooklyn to Queens to get a yard and a driveway. Why eliminate Southeast Queens homes, the only area where NYC blacks are in the minority and mostly own single-family homes? This proposal is also considered an environmental and economic injustice due to the possible takeover of investors since they will be the only people that can afford the homes once they are upzoned and are unaffordable, with inflated prices. 

The TOD proposed housing budget entirely ignores the existing development patterns which give communities and neighborhoods their desirable diverse character. For example, thanks to thoughtful zoning, many of the areas near transit stops on the
LIRR's Port Washington and Jamaica branches already have "downtown" characters (including but not limited to Woodside, Flushing, Murray Hill, Bayside, Great Neck, etc.), and these already have appropriate higher density zoning with larger apartment buildings and supporting commercial development for food shopping, etc. By contrast, the area immediately around the Little Neck station and St. Albans, are almost entirely residential, with virtually no commercial development.

 The TOD proposal completely ignores the sensible, existing development pattern in our communities and blindly imposes high density requirements in precisely the wrong places.
The TOD and associated proposals would have very significant impacts on the adequacy of infrastructure, including roadways, parking, and school capacity; none of these are addressed in the budget proposals. On the contrary, a mere $250 million is provided for infrastructure improvements statewide -- an almost trivial amount considering that the TOD proposal itself would generate far more than a million new units in Long Island alone, and many more in Queens, other parts of NYC, and Westchester. 
As noted at the outset, the goal of focusing increased density near rail stations is reasonable, but it is very important that the detailed judgments be left to local governments, which are best able to balance the needs for additional housing with the need to maintain appropriate zoning diversity and quality of life considerations. It is precisely for this reason that zoning has always been understood to be a local issue, appropriate for local decision-making.

Importantly, and in that context, we note that the TOD proposal, as well as other elements of the budget proposal, violate the State constitution and the rights of local governments to do their own planning. 

Legalization of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), regardless of local zoning: 
This budget proposal would allow basement and attic apartments, garage conversions, and additional building units, regardless of local plans and zoning regulations. This is disastrous for contextually planned, single-family zoned areas such as ours. Among other concerns, the proposal has no on-site parking requirements, and no reference to safety requirements (e.g., with respect to basement dwellings where flooding can be fatal, as tragically demonstrated during Hurricane Ida in 2021). The proposal ignores impacts on local infrastructure (parking availability, roadway adequacy, school capacity, etc.). 
Even worse, the proposal would give property tax exemptions to those owners creating ADUs, thus reducing the revenues available to local governments that will be necessary to respond to the
increased infrastructure needs of the affected communities!

And as with the TOD proposal, the proposal includes no requirement to ensure -- or even incentives to promote -- affordability. On the contrary, the ADUs would be market-rate rentals. 
Amnesty for all illegal conversions in NYC:
This proposal is deeply flawed, as it ignores the fact that many illegal conversions are highly dangerous. Fires from faulty wiring and flooding from poor design have caused many injuries and fatalities. The proposal includes no obligation on the owners of these illegal and often dangerous units to self-identify and bring their units up to code. Indeed, because the owners who do self-identify will pay higher taxes (both property and income), there is a strong disincentive for them to come forward. There is also no provision to provide for increased funding and staffing sufficient to enable local building departments to oversee the amnesty program and enforce safety codes. As with other proposals, here too there is no requirement that the illegal units be affordable. 
Violation of Home Rule principle: 
The budget proposals provide for mandatory housing density targets on a 3-year cycle in all municipalities, with State-level intervention and over-ride if the targets are not met. This is another serious violation of the Home-Rule principle in the State constitution. This principle recognizes that planning and zoning decisions are best made at the local level, with proper contextual consideration of existing development patterns and thoughtful targeting of future development. 
Inappropriate use of the budget process to carry out complex legislative initiatives: 
It is entirely inappropriate to seek to enact legislation as sweeping, complex and consequential as this through the annual -- and notably opaque -- state budget process. With a scant two months for public review and engagement, this is the antithesis of a transparent, informative and
informed political process.

Absence of public engagement, and ignoring the concerns of homeowners:
The proposals fail entirely to consider the concerns of the residents of the affected areas. Instead, after three years the state would indiscriminately impose the density changes without any local feedback or recourse, until recently, Feb 22, 2023, at an inconvenient time and place. The proposals fail to recognize the changes to the qualities of life that brought every homeowner to purchase in that area. While change in a community is inevitable, and there is never a guarantee for any homeowner that no unwanted changes will occur, these proposals impose changes by fiat in a way that would never happen under local jurisdiction. 
People cherish the freedom to choose the type of neighborhood they want for themselves and their families; and they expect to have a reasonable opportunity to influence the pace and nature of change through their local elected officials. Thoughtful urban planning has always promoted diversity, with a vibrant and interesting city being made up of a wide variety of different types of neighborhoods. These proposals are wholly inconsistent with that sensible approach.
We urge that these proposals be removed from the budget process, and that any further consideration of these or similar proposals take place through the appropriate legislative process. 

Special Acknowledgements:

Thank you to Walter Mugdan, Pres/Westmoreland Assoc Inc, for use of this letter to Hon, Kathy Hochul, NYS Governor

Thank you to Paul Graziano, Urban Planner, for your leadership and priceless knowledge and keeping Southeast Queens informed on important issues that could affect our mostly minority community.

Thank you to Queens Civic Congress for having an organization where all of Queens can support each other, especially when we all agree on quality-of-life issues. 

Thanks to the S.A.V.E. 1-Family New York Coalition for the Press Event.

Thank you to William Scarborough, Addisleigh Park President and Bryan Block, CB13 Chairperson and Cambria Heights Civic Leader that took action to inform their communities in a timely manner.

Thanks to Bill Perkins, President of the Federated Blocks of Laurelton for your action and rallies on Thursday, February 23, 2023, at 5pm at the Laurelton and Rosedale LIRR stations.

Thank you to the NYC Community Board Leadership, that will take action and have resolutions voted on, in order to show opposition. 

Please check back for updates and share this petition. Thank you, R Hill