Property owners and real estate brokers in New York City are expressing concern over the potential passage of the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act (COPA), a bill that would grant city-approved nonprofits the first opportunity to purchase residential buildings with three or more units.
The legislation, first introduced in 2021, has undergone several hearings and was recently close to being eligible for a City Council vote. However, it was removed from the agenda for further negotiations between Council member Sandy Nurse, who sponsors the bill, and the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), according to sources familiar with the discussions.
Broker Bob Knakal voiced apprehension on social media platform X last week, stating that the City Council “dropped a bomb on the multifamily market.” He warned that COPA could disrupt property transactions by tying up inventory and deterring investors.
Matt Cosentino, head of multifamily sales at TerraCRG, commented on the potential impact: “It will slow transactions dramatically. A lot of the owners that we deal with are smaller, so-called mom and pop owners, who don’t necessarily have time to waste.” Cosentino also noted that COPA’s timeline would interfere with 1031 exchanges—transactions allowing investors to defer capital gains taxes if they reinvest proceeds within 180 days—since closings under COPA could be delayed beyond this window.
Cosentino added: “The idea of having to tell your government that you are selling your property seems like the most basic, un-American idea.”
Developer Humberto Lopes criticized COPA as unfairly favoring certain buyers. “What gives you the right to supersede everybody?” he asked.
If enacted, COPA would require owners seeking to sell qualifying properties to notify HPD at least 180 days before proceeding. They must also provide detailed records such as income and expense reports. Qualified nonprofits or community land trusts would then have a set period—60 days to express intent and up to 120 days total—to make an offer before other bids could be accepted.
Supporters argue that COPA would help prevent speculation in housing markets and allow nonprofits greater access to property acquisitions. Hannah Anousheh of East New York Community Land Trust explained how her organization is converting a recently purchased building into co-ops for tenants: “This is about helping to bring tons of buildings under responsible ownership,” she said.
Other cities have adopted similar policies. San Francisco allows nonprofits 30 days for first refusal rights; Washington D.C.’s Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) dates back to 1980; Chicago is testing its own version; and New York State has proposed TOPA-like legislation. In Washington D.C., amendments were made this year following critiques similar to those raised against COPA. Since 2006, thousands of affordable units have been preserved in D.C. through TOPA programs.
Both critics and supporters agree that these programs’ effectiveness depends on whether nonprofits can access sufficient funding and whether tenants can organize effectively.
Some stakeholders suggested piloting COPA on a smaller scale or shortening its timelines as potential compromises.
Council member Nurse stated her bill has backing from 33 council members and 35 affordable housing providers: “We are in an affordability crisis in New York City and COPA gives us another tool to preserve and create more affordable housing,” she said. “We are thrilled to be engaging with many stakeholders to develop a program that helps us address the housing crisis.”
Jay Martin of the New York Apartment Association argued that while adding nonprofit buyers is not problematic itself, few organizations have resources necessary for major purchases or renovations: “Another buyer into the market isn’t the problem. It is that the resources needed to buy the buildings aren’t there,” he said.
There are also concerns about HPD’s ability to manage increased administrative demands under COPA. At a June hearing, HPD recommended narrowing eligibility criteria for properties involved in order not to overwhelm staff or destabilize housing markets.
HPD spokesperson Matt Rauschenbach confirmed ongoing discussions with Nurse: “When legislation is proposed that may significantly impact the housing landscape, we are committed to providing input and feedback to ensure that all potential effects are fully evaluated and considered,” he said.
Meanwhile, broader legislative efforts continue at City Hall regarding construction wages for large projects receiving public financing as well as new requirements for apartment types and affordability levels in city-funded developments.
One anonymous affordable housing developer suggested these moves reflect an effort by City Council members—amid shifting powers after recent ballot measures—to reassert their role in overseeing city housing policy: “Overall, they just keep making it harder to do business in New York City,” said the developer. “We are at a point where the city council and certain advocates are viewing investors as a negative.”
