The NYC Council is on the verge of backsliding on its enormous accomplishment: passage of Local Law 97 aka “NYC’s Green New Deal”. Info-laden take action thread below! /1

Energy use in buildings is the source of ~70% of NYC’s climate pollution. Local Law 97 of 2019 is a world-first law requiring large buildings to slash their climate pollution. /2

Building owners have to upgrade their buildings to high energy efficiency. The law is beginning to create tens of thousands of jobs in design, renovation and construction. /3

The Council, led by @NYCSpeakerCoJo and @Costa4NY, led the charge for this landmark law, which the Mayor rightly supported. They passed it in 2019 against furious opposition from NYC’s deep-pocketed real estate lobby. /4

But now the Speaker’s pushing legislation, Intro 1982, that would weaken LL97. Intro 1982 would create a loophole in LL97 for building owners to use a polluting fossil fuel technology. /5

Specifically, the bill would reclassify gas fuel cells, which use a chemical process to convert “natural” gas into energy. It would assign gas fuel cells a much lower level of pollution than they actually generate. /6

Under Intro 1982, landlords could install this type of polluting fossil fuel infrastructure to get a false reward that they’re cleaning up their polluting buildings. When they’re not. /7

It’s a gift to the fuel cell industry and some well-connected large building owners. But it will cause more pollution if enacted. /8

I also bet good money that Intro 1982 would kill jobs because installing a fuel cell probably employs less people locally than upgrading building energy efficiency (think weather sealing, insulation, roofs, HVAC upgrades, etc) /9

Please take a moment and contact your Councilmember and urge them to oppose Intro 1982, which would cause more climate pollution! /10

Now let me be clear: this is a super technical matter involving measurements of a new tech. The manufacturer claims it is less polluting than other fossil fuel powered infrastructure. /11

Wouldn’t that be great? Sadly, it’s a mirage. Tempting... but a mirage. Councilmembers shouldn’t take the company’s word for it: they should listen to experts and not pass this bill. /12

Instead, the Council should strengthen Local Law 97 so it cuts more pollution from more buildings, and in the process creates more jobs. /13

They can do so by enacting Intro 1947. Intro 1947 expands Local Law 97’s provisions requiring large building owners to slash their pollution to cover more big buildings. /14

Specifically, Intro 1947 requires large, rent-regulated buildings with under 35% regulated units to slash their pollution. /15

Under new state rent laws that passed after Local Law 97 was enacted, those buildings’ landlords are not allowed to charge “Major Capital Improvement” (MCI) rent hikes. /16

Unlike other rent-regulated buildings, those landlords can’t raise rents to charge tenants with the cost of major capital improvements such as energy efficiency requirements (while pocketing the savings of lower bills) /17

Those buildings owners are huge polluters (remember how 70% of the city’s climate pollution comes from buildings?). They need to clean up their dirty acts, without sticking tenants with the bill. /18

So the Council, led by Speaker Johnson has a choice: it can weaken Local Law 97 and increase climate pollution by passing Intro 1982. /19

Or it can strengthen Local Law 97 and cut climate pollution while creating thousands of jobs by passing Intro 1947. /20

We hope they do the right thing and stand with working people, not fossil fuel polluters by stopping Intro 1982 and passing Intro 1947. /21

As of now, they’re gearing up for a floor vote on Intro 1982 tomorrow afternoon! Please call or email your Councilmember NOW. Urge them to oppose Intro 1982 and support Intro 1947! Thank you!
/22

*Whoops the council’s full meeting (aka “stated” meeting) is Thursday... I got a day ahead in my mind). That’d be the likely day for the council floor vote on 1982 that we’re hoping to stop.

Thursday is also my 15 year wedding anniversary so maybe they could lay off just for me