Skip to content
S291Senate2015-2016 SessionSame asA6154

Relates to the criminal enforcement of violations of the state's uniform fire prevention and building code

Sponsor Jack M. MartinsSD-7Affects Housing
Status
In Senate Committee
Housing, Construction And Community Development
Impact
Pending
Passage
Pending

Bill progress

Step 2 of 7

In committee · Housing, Construction And Community Development

What's happening

Writing a plain-English summary… Track this bill to get it by email.

Why it matters

The daily · weekday mornings

Albany, before your first meeting.

Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.

Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.

Who cares

Headline styles

Sponsors

Primary sponsor
Jack M. Martins

Senator · Senate District 7

Chair, Labor

No co-sponsors yet.

History

  1. Referred to housing, construction and community development
  2. Print number 291b
  3. Amend and recommit to housing, construction and community development
  4. Print number 291a
  5. Amend and recommit to housing, construction and community development
  6. Referred to housing, construction and community development

Companion bill

The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.

A6154Assembly

Relates to the criminal enforcement of violations of the state's uniform fire prevention and building code

In Assembly Committee · Codes · Sponsor Michelle Schimel

Full text

The text isn't available here yet. Check nysenate.gov.

Sponsor's memo

BILL NUMBER:S291B

Title of bill

An act to amend the executive law, in relation to the criminal enforcement of violations of the state's uniform fire prevention and building code

Purpose or general idea of bill

To clarify the procedures for commencing a criminal action for violating the State's Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code (Uniform Code). The provisions of Executive Law S 382 have proven to be ineffective at serving as a deterrent to ensure compliance with the fire prevention and building code. The ambiguous and vague provisions have led courts to reach the conclusion that criminal actions may not be commenced against a defendant until a notice of violation (NOV) has been issued, see People v. Caravousanos, 2 Misc.3d 138(A) (Sup. Ct. App. Term 2004). Such a reading of Executive Law S 382 significantly hampers local government officials' ability to enforce the uniform code and deter flagrant violations of regulations designed to protect the public's health, safety and welfare. The amendment also creates a "violation" for a uniform code infraction, as some judges have expressed reservations about finding defendants guilty of misdemeanors for building and fire code violations.

Read the full memo (634 words)

Summary of specific provisions

Section 1 of the bill amends S 382 of the Executive Law, removing superfluous language, which the Courts have erroneously interpreted as requiring local governments to issue a NOV as a prerequisite to commencing a criminal action.

The bill also amends S 382 of the Executive Law to clarify that Individuals who "knowingly" violate the state's uniform fire prevention and building code may be found guilty of a misdemeanor.

Justification

The Courts have erroneously interpreted Section 382 of the Executive Law as requiring local governments to issue a notice of violation as a prerequisite to commencing a criminal action. In addition, the reference later in this subdivision to "lawful order" makes the first part of subdivision 2 unnecessary.

This bill also clarifies that a knowing violation of the uniform code is a misdemeanor. Furthermore, this bill creates a strict liability "violation" for a uniform code infraction. Some Judges are reluctant to find individuals guilty of a misdemeanor for a building code violation. This would give the courts the option of finding defendants guilty without giving them a criminal record, particularly in those instances when properties come into quick compliance. It also allows defendants to enter into plea agreements to "Violations" instead of misdemeanors.

Finally, a recent court decision in Westchester County highlights the third serious infirmity with Executive Law S 382. In People v.

Plateau Associates, LLC, 46 Misc. 3d 1, 997 N.Y.S.2d 590 (App. Term 2014), the court ruled that, because the Secretary of State had failed to promulgate regulations establishing time periods to correct violations of the Uniform Code, as is required by Executive Law S 382, local governments lack the authority to charge or prosecute violations of the Uniform Code. Executive Law S 382 should be amended to remove the requirement that the Secretary of State promulgate regulations, fixing the time within which violations of the uniform Code must be corrected. On Monday, January 12, 2015, the Department of State adopted a regulation that establishes the time within which a person served with an Order to Remedy violation(s) of the Uniform Code must comply with that order. Specifically, the regulation provides that an Order to Remedy a violation of the Uniform Code must be complied with within 30 days of the Order's issuance. Unfortunately, this one-size-fits-all time period to comply with an Order to Remedy is inadequate with (a) violations that threaten the public's health, safety, and welfare and thus need to be remedied more quickly or (b) recidivist violators.

Prior legislative history

2014: S.901-A/A.645-A; 2012: S.7235/A.10194

Fiscal implications

None.

Effective date

This act shall take effect on the ninetieth day after it shall have become a law.

Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.