This bill is a fascinating clash of incentives — a perfect case study in second-order effects. On the surface, it looks like a win for labor: force out-of-state modular plants to pay New York prevailing wages if they want a piece of state-funded projects. More wages, more fairness, more middle-class jobs. Hard to argue with that soundbite. But tilt the lens just slightly, and you see the inversion: New York is already the most expensive construction market in the country. Developers are desperate for tools like modular to speed up timelines and reduce costs. This law effectively removes one of the few levers left for affordability — importing lower-cost fabrication from outside the state. What happens when you add another cost layer to housing and public infrastructure in a city where affordability is already a crisis? Units get killed in pro forma—projects stall. The gap between policy goals (more affordable housing, faster builds) and actual outcomes (fewer projects, higher costs) widens. It’s also a perfect reminder of how regulatory intent and market reality rarely move in sync. Labor wants fairness. Developers need feasibility. The public needs housing. The question is: which priority actually wins when the rubber meets the road? This “pro-worker” bill may deliver the exact opposite result for the very low-income New Yorkers it claims to help. https://lnkd.in/erP7GWAb