Relates to land owned by not-for-profit conservation organizations

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Rachel May says this is needed

Nonprofit land conservation organizations spend a substantial amount of time and resources defending against encroachments on conserved land. Existing mechanisms for addressing encroachments under New York law are insufficient in covering the costs of restoration, let alone the time and expense of monitoring for encroachments and pursuing legal action to compel restoration and recover damages. Conservation organizations face additional burdens in ensuring that encroachments do not mature into adverse possession claims, which may compromise the protected status of lands acquired and managed as open space. By streamlining the process of enforcing encroachments, better aligning the remedies available to conservation organizations and state govern- ment entities with the associated costs, providing for enhanced penal- ties to dissuade especially malicious and damaging trespasses, conserva- tion organizations would be better positioned to steward their protected lands and advance the State's land conservation goals. Moreover, conser- vation organizations would be shielded from future adverse possession claims and similar attempts to acquire property interests by hostile occupancy, significantly reducing the threat posed by such claims to the continued integrity of conserved lands. This legislation will block the acquisition of any interest in open space lands held by a not-for-profit conservation organization by adverse possession or prescription; and will create a cause of action by which not-for-profit conservation organizations and public bodies may compel the removal of encroachments on open space lands, or lands subject to a conservation easement, and recover restoration costs, reasonable attorney's fees, and multiple damages as appropriate, thereby shifting the cost burden of enforcing encroachments to the responsible party and discouraging further harm to open space managed for the public's benefit.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.