C
ity Council faces a deadline to decide on bill 407‑a, which would end the opaque practice that lets co‑op boards deny applicants without explanation. The measure would require boards to tell rejected prospective shareholders why they were turned down, a change that could dismantle a long‑standing source of discrimination in New York’s housing market.
Under current rules, co‑op boards interview candidates and can refuse to approve them for any reason, from weak finances to a “sport jacket,” as Christopher Bonanos described. The lack of transparency has fueled stories of celebrities—Madonna, Barbra Streisand, Richard Nixon, Calvin Klein—being blocked from apartments by unnamed board members. Even Harry Belafonte, after being denied a unit in the 1950s, bought the building outright and converted it into co‑ops for friends. While the wealthy can simply move elsewhere, ordinary buyers are left in the dark, unable to challenge potentially unlawful decisions.
Co‑op communities are not private clubs; they are subject to fair‑housing laws that prohibit exclusion on the basis of race, religion, nationality, and other protected categories. Yet the secrecy surrounding board decisions makes it nearly impossible to prove discrimination in court. “Secrecy leaves rejected families without information about the reason or reasons for turndown and with limited ability to assess whether the rejection was motivated in whole or in part by an unlawful discriminatory process,” Craig Gurian, executive director of the Anti‑Discrimination Center, told the council.
Unlike Nassau, Suffolk, and Westchester counties, which require disclosure of rejections, New York City has shielded boards from providing any explanation. The Washington‑based Poverty & Race Research Action Council testified that co‑op secrecy is widespread, with hundreds of thousands of units in the city and an estimated one‑fifth of board decisions influenced by discrimination. Public Advocate Jumaane Williams cited the city’s “Where We Live” report, noting that discrimination in co‑ops contributes to the city’s persistent racial segregation, which in turn harms public schools and parks.
Nyah Berg, executive director of New York Appleseed, argued that expanding housing access cannot be limited to certain neighborhoods. “Any suggestion that housing discrimination no longer curtails opportunity in 2025 is, at best, naïve and, at worst, knowingly false,” she said. For decades, co‑op leaders have warned that full disclosure would trigger a flood of lawsuits, a sign that illegal discrimination is occurring. Elaine Gross, founder of ERASE Racism, emphasized that secrecy preserves board‑member unaccountability and privilege, and that the council must stop tolerating it.
The political calculus has kept the bill stalled. Councilmembers fear that a large co‑op electorate could mobilize against them in future elections, especially in Speaker Adrienne Adams’s district, which includes Rochdale Village in Jamaica—a community of 25,000 residents in 20 buildings. Despite 30 of the 51 council members co‑sponsoring 407‑a, Adams has not yet allowed a vote, perhaps due to concerns about the real‑estate lobby’s influence.
However, public opinion suggests that fear may be misplaced. A 2023 Slingshot Strategies poll found 68 % of New Yorkers support co‑op transparency, while a 2006 Anti‑Discrimination Center poll showed similar support among non‑board co‑op owners. These findings indicate that the majority of residents and co‑op members favor disclosure, undermining the argument that the measure would be politically risky.
Speaker Adrienne Adams, the first Black woman to serve as New York City’s Speaker and the first majority‑woman in the city’s 400‑year history, now has a chance to set a precedent. By moving forward with a vote on 407‑a, she could demonstrate the courage and leadership that have defined her tenure, and help the city live up to its reputation as a haven for fairness and diversity.
In short, bill 407‑a seeks to remove the veil that allows co‑op boards to discriminate without accountability. It would require boards to explain rejections, thereby enabling victims to challenge unlawful decisions and reducing the city’s racial segregation. The measure enjoys broad public support but faces political resistance rooted in fear of backlash from the real‑estate lobby. If Speaker Adams pushes the bill to a vote, she could close a long‑standing loophole in New York’s housing system and affirm the city’s commitment to equal opportunity.
