105
pot (“charges within a charge”). At the rst level, if
the tenant’s proportionate share is known (or capable
of being calculated), the basic operating expense
provision should satisfy the statute because multi-
plying such share times “all” operating expenses is
a “method.” Nevertheless, since the method itself
involves other calculations and discretionary deci-
sions by the landlord to determine the makeup of
the expense pot, the statute may also require compli-
ance by secondary lease provisions dealing with how
individual expense items are calculated or selected
for inclusion in total expenses.
The statute may be less problematic for triple-net
leases and so-called bondable leases, which, depending
on the degree of “netness,” shift all or practically
all property obligations to the tenant. For example,
if the tenant pays only base rent to the landlord but
pays all property obligations, e.g., taxes, insurance
and maintenance, directly to third parties, there may
be no other “charges” in the lease that are payable
to, or assessable by, the landlord. The landlord is in a
passive role under this type of lease and does not “as-
sess” any charges to the tenant. The landlord sim-
ply collects a net rental, and the tenant effectively
assumes all burdens and obligations of operating the
leased premises during the lease term.
Transactions Covered by the Statute
Although the types of transactions covered by the
new statute are straightforward, they may take on a
variety of forms, including:
• Leases entered into on or after September 1,
2001, and renewals or extensions of those
leases.
• Amendments to pre-September 1, 2001 leases
to (1) renew or extend the lease term, or (2)
lease new space to the tenant, whether as a
result of the exercise of an expansion option,
right of rst refusal or other preferential right,
or otherwise.
• Renewals or extensions of pre-September 1,
2001 leases that become effective without
formal amendments, e.g., where the lease xes
the rent for the renewal term, and the renewal
is implemented merely by the tenant’s exercise
of its renewal option.
Landlords should be mindful of the new statute
when amending older leases, which may become
subject to the new statute when amended. For pur-
poses of the state, a lease “entered into” may mean
not only the execution of a new lease document,
but also any transaction involving a lease grant. For
example, the lease of additional space, even if docu-
mented as an amendment to an existing lease, is a
new lease as to such space because it involves a new
lease grant. It is less clear whether the statute covers
pre-September 1, 2001 leases that provide for a post-
September 1, 2001 “staged” delivery of the original
premises or a mandatory expansion as to “must-
take” space. Arguably, in those cases, the lease grant
as to all of the premises occurred upon lease execu-
tion, and only the rent commencement date as to
the subsequently delivered space has been delayed
under the terms of the original contract. Likewise,
substituting new space for space leased under a pre-
September 1, 2001 lease can be problematic. If the
substitution is made under a specic substitution
clause in the existing lease, the transaction could be
viewed as a lease of space under a grant that had its
inception in the original lease, which authorized the
substitution and continues to apply to the substi-
tute space. On the other hand, the transaction could
be viewed as a new lease because it involves a new
lease grant as to space not identied in the original
lease.
Dealing with Charges in the Lease
Until the statute is claried by the Legislature
or interpreted by the courts, commercial landlords
should proceed cautiously when assessing charges
under provisions other than those of base rent.
Clauses that are vague or that give the landlord too
much discretion could easily run afoul of the new
statute. Following are several ways for landlords
to deal with the uncertainties created by the new
statute.
Agree on “Compliance” with the Statute
As an overall approach, the parties should agree
that the prescribed ways of determining additional
charges in the lease are “computation methods” for
purposes of the statute. Additionally, since the stat-
ute does not expressly prohibit or void a waiver of
rights or duties under the statute, the parties should
consider including an express waiver in the lease.
If challenged in court, these approaches may not be
upheld, but at least they indicate that the parties
have negotiated calculation methods they consider
acceptable and reasonable.
Be More Specic, Even With Estimated
Payments
Whenever possible, the lease should state the
initial amount of estimated payments required by
the tenant. The same goes for nonrecurring charges
such as administrative fees and charges for overtime
air-conditioning. Even though the stated payments
may be adjusted or re-estimated periodically under
provisions that are not true formulas, disclosing the
estimated amount when the lease is entered into
will minimize any claim of surprise by the tenant
and reinforce the landlord’s position that the amount
of the charge has been stated in the lease.
Reexamine Sharing and Escalation Formulas
Landlords should review other lease provisions
intended to be true formulas — such as those that