|
| | | | | | | | | |
Roll call
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1898-2020
| * | Mark Gjonaj | | Proposed Int. No. 1898-A | Telephone order charges by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | The bill would prohibit third-party delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, from charging restaurants for telephone orders with customers that did not result in an actual transaction during the call. The prohibition would apply only to periods when a state of emergency is in effect in the city and restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. Violations would be subject to civil penalties of up to $500 per restaurant per day. | Hearing Held by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1898-2020
| * | Mark Gjonaj | | | Telephone order charges by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | The bill would prohibit third-party delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, from charging restaurants for telephone orders with customers that did not result in an actual transaction during the call. The prohibition would apply only to periods when a state of emergency is in effect in the city and restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. Violations would be subject to civil penalties of up to $500 per restaurant per day. | Amendment Proposed by Comm | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1898-2020
| * | Mark Gjonaj | | | Telephone order charges by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | The bill would prohibit third-party delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, from charging restaurants for telephone orders with customers that did not result in an actual transaction during the call. The prohibition would apply only to periods when a state of emergency is in effect in the city and restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. Violations would be subject to civil penalties of up to $500 per restaurant per day. | Amended by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1898-2020
| A | Mark Gjonaj | | | Telephone order charges by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | The bill would prohibit third-party delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, from charging restaurants for telephone orders with customers that did not result in an actual transaction during the call. The prohibition would apply only to periods when a state of emergency is in effect in the city and restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. Violations would be subject to civil penalties of up to $500 per restaurant per day. | Approved by Committee | Pass |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1908-2020
| * | Francisco P. Moya | | Proposed Int. No. 1908-B | Fees charged by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | This bill would restrict the fees that certain third-party food delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, may charge restaurants during states of emergency when restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. During such time periods, third-party delivery services would be prohibited from charging more than a 15% fee per order for providing delivery services to a restaurant, and more than a 5% fee per order for all other types of charges. Violations of the prohibitions in this bill would be subject to civil penalties of up to $1000 per restaurant per day. The Corporation Counsel would be empowered to enforce the bill’s provisions by instituting civil action against third-party delivery services in violation, and by conducting investigations pursuant to such civil action. | Hearing Held by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1908-2020
| * | Francisco P. Moya | | | Fees charged by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | This bill would restrict the fees that certain third-party food delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, may charge restaurants during states of emergency when restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. During such time periods, third-party delivery services would be prohibited from charging more than a 15% fee per order for providing delivery services to a restaurant, and more than a 5% fee per order for all other types of charges. Violations of the prohibitions in this bill would be subject to civil penalties of up to $1000 per restaurant per day. The Corporation Counsel would be empowered to enforce the bill’s provisions by instituting civil action against third-party delivery services in violation, and by conducting investigations pursuant to such civil action. | Amendment Proposed by Comm | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1908-2020
| * | Francisco P. Moya | | | Fees charged by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | This bill would restrict the fees that certain third-party food delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, may charge restaurants during states of emergency when restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. During such time periods, third-party delivery services would be prohibited from charging more than a 15% fee per order for providing delivery services to a restaurant, and more than a 5% fee per order for all other types of charges. Violations of the prohibitions in this bill would be subject to civil penalties of up to $1000 per restaurant per day. The Corporation Counsel would be empowered to enforce the bill’s provisions by instituting civil action against third-party delivery services in violation, and by conducting investigations pursuant to such civil action. | Amended by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1908-2020
| B | Francisco P. Moya | | | Fees charged by third-party food delivery services during, and for 90 days after, a declared emergency that prohibits on-premises dining. | Introduction | This bill would restrict the fees that certain third-party food delivery services, entities that provide restaurants with online order and delivery services, may charge restaurants during states of emergency when restaurants are prohibited from offering food for consumption on-premises, plus an additional 90 days thereafter. During such time periods, third-party delivery services would be prohibited from charging more than a 15% fee per order for providing delivery services to a restaurant, and more than a 5% fee per order for all other types of charges. Violations of the prohibitions in this bill would be subject to civil penalties of up to $1000 per restaurant per day. The Corporation Counsel would be empowered to enforce the bill’s provisions by instituting civil action against third-party delivery services in violation, and by conducting investigations pursuant to such civil action. | Approved by Committee | Pass |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1914-2020
| * | Adrienne E. Adams | | Proposed Int. No. 1914-A | COVID-19 Relief Package - Harassment of commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would make threatening a commercial tenant based on their status as a COVID-19 impacted business or person a form of harassment punishable by a civil penalty of $10,000 to $50,000. | Hearing Held by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1914-2020
| * | Adrienne E. Adams | | | COVID-19 Relief Package - Harassment of commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would make threatening a commercial tenant based on their status as a COVID-19 impacted business or person a form of harassment punishable by a civil penalty of $10,000 to $50,000. | Amendment Proposed by Comm | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1914-2020
| * | Adrienne E. Adams | | | COVID-19 Relief Package - Harassment of commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would make threatening a commercial tenant based on their status as a COVID-19 impacted business or person a form of harassment punishable by a civil penalty of $10,000 to $50,000. | Amended by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1914-2020
| A | Adrienne E. Adams | | | COVID-19 Relief Package - Harassment of commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would make threatening a commercial tenant based on their status as a COVID-19 impacted business or person a form of harassment punishable by a civil penalty of $10,000 to $50,000. | Approved by Committee | Pass |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1932-2020
| * | Carlina Rivera | | Proposed Int. No. 1932-A | COVID-19 Relief Package - Personal liability provisions of leases for commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would temporarily prohibit the enforcement of personal liability provisions in commercial leases or rental agreements involving a COVID-19 impacted tenant. This would apply to businesses that were impacted by mandated closures and service limitations in the Governor's Executive Orders. Specifically, it covers (1) businesses that were required to stop serving food or beverages on-premises (restaurants and bars); (2) businesses that were required to cease operations altogether (gyms, fitness centers, movie theaters); (3) retail businesses that were required to close and/or subject to in-person restrictions; and (4) businesses that were required to close to the public (barbershops, hair salons, tattoo or piercing parlors and related personal care services). Threatening to or attempting to enforce such a provision would also be considered a form of harassment. | Hearing Held by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1932-2020
| * | Carlina Rivera | | | COVID-19 Relief Package - Personal liability provisions of leases for commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would temporarily prohibit the enforcement of personal liability provisions in commercial leases or rental agreements involving a COVID-19 impacted tenant. This would apply to businesses that were impacted by mandated closures and service limitations in the Governor's Executive Orders. Specifically, it covers (1) businesses that were required to stop serving food or beverages on-premises (restaurants and bars); (2) businesses that were required to cease operations altogether (gyms, fitness centers, movie theaters); (3) retail businesses that were required to close and/or subject to in-person restrictions; and (4) businesses that were required to close to the public (barbershops, hair salons, tattoo or piercing parlors and related personal care services). Threatening to or attempting to enforce such a provision would also be considered a form of harassment. | Amendment Proposed by Comm | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1932-2020
| * | Carlina Rivera | | | COVID-19 Relief Package - Personal liability provisions of leases for commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would temporarily prohibit the enforcement of personal liability provisions in commercial leases or rental agreements involving a COVID-19 impacted tenant. This would apply to businesses that were impacted by mandated closures and service limitations in the Governor's Executive Orders. Specifically, it covers (1) businesses that were required to stop serving food or beverages on-premises (restaurants and bars); (2) businesses that were required to cease operations altogether (gyms, fitness centers, movie theaters); (3) retail businesses that were required to close and/or subject to in-person restrictions; and (4) businesses that were required to close to the public (barbershops, hair salons, tattoo or piercing parlors and related personal care services). Threatening to or attempting to enforce such a provision would also be considered a form of harassment. | Amended by Committee | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
Int 1932-2020
| A | Carlina Rivera | | | COVID-19 Relief Package - Personal liability provisions of leases for commercial tenants impacted by COVID-19. | Introduction | This bill would temporarily prohibit the enforcement of personal liability provisions in commercial leases or rental agreements involving a COVID-19 impacted tenant. This would apply to businesses that were impacted by mandated closures and service limitations in the Governor's Executive Orders. Specifically, it covers (1) businesses that were required to stop serving food or beverages on-premises (restaurants and bars); (2) businesses that were required to cease operations altogether (gyms, fitness centers, movie theaters); (3) retail businesses that were required to close and/or subject to in-person restrictions; and (4) businesses that were required to close to the public (barbershops, hair salons, tattoo or piercing parlors and related personal care services). Threatening to or attempting to enforce such a provision would also be considered a form of harassment. | Approved by Committee | Pass |
Action details
|
Not available
|