Relates to the site selection of community facilities in cities with a population of one million or more

The sponsoring agency, upon selecting a site, shall notify the municipality in writing and include the address of the site and all data which can be reasonably expected to permit the municipality to evaluate all such facilities affecting the nature and character of the area. The municipality then shall have 40 days to (i) approve the site, (ii) suggest one or more suitable sites or (iii) object to the establishment of a facility of the kind because it would result in such a concentration of such facilities that the nature and character of the area would be substantially altered. Such response shall be forwarded to the sponsoring agency and commissioner of the office of the department responsible for issuance of license and operating certificate to the proposed facility. If the municipality does not respond within 40 days, the sponsoring agency may establish a community facility at a site recommended in its notice.

Prior to forwarding a response to the sponsoring agency and the commissioner, the municipality may hold a public hearing pursuant to local law. If the municipality approves a site recommended by the sponsoring agency, the sponsoring agency shall seek to establish the facility at the approved site.

If the municipality suggests a site or sites unsatisfactory to the sponsoring agency, the sponsoring agency shall so notify the municipality, which shall have 15 days to suggest an alternative site or sites.

In the event a municipality objects to the establishment of a facility because it would result in such a concentration of such facilities that the nature and character of the area would be substantially altered; or if the sponsoring agency objects to the establishment of a facility in an area suggested by the municipality; or if the municipality and sponsoring agency cannot agree upon a site, either the sponsoring agency or municipality may request an immediate hearing before the commissioner to resolve the issue. The commissioner shall conduct such a hearing within 15 days of such a request.

If the objection is a result of anticipated community facility concentration, the sponsoring agency shall have the opportunity to amend their request prior to such hearing to include a community benefits agreement, offering the municipality a choice between three additional improvements of equal or greater value compared to the proposed facility. Funding for such improvements shall be the responsibility of the city. If after reevaluation the municipality continues to object, the hearing process shall continue.

The commissioner shall consider the need for such facilities in the municipality and shall sustain the municipality's objection if the nature and character of the area would be substantially altered by establishment of the facility. The commissioner shall make a determination within 30 days of the hearing.

A licensing authority shall not issue an operating certificate to a sponsoring agency for operation of a community facility if the sponsoring agency does not comply with the provisions of this section, and any such certificate issued shall be considered null and void and continued operation of the facility may be enjoined.

Section 2 provides this act shall take effect immediately.

Existing law

Section 41.34 of the mental hygiene law, also known as the Padavan Law, contains similar provisions for group homes (community residential facilities for the disabled) only. This is a new section of the general municipal law expanding these provisions to cover several other facilities. However, these new provisions are only applicable to cities with a population of one million or more.

Note: The community benefits agreement provision is new to this bill.

Justification

Communities must have input concerning the establishment of facilities to be located within them. They know what their needs and capacities are and should be afforded the opportunity to receive pertinent information beforehand, conduct public hearings, object, suggest alternate sites, negotiate an acceptable compromise with developers and receive fair adjudication if necessary. Leaving them out of the process is unjust, disenfranchises residents, erodes quality of life and substantially alters the nature and character of such areas inequitably.

Legislative history

New bill

Fiscal implications

To be determined

Local fiscal implications

To be determined

Effective date

This act shall take effect immediately.