New audit highlights potential for savings in city's rental aid program, complicating Mayor Mamdani's pledge to expand it.
A recent state audit of the CityFHEPS assistance program has identified several areas where inefficiencies and problems drive up costs, potentially threatening Mayor Zohran Mamdani's plan to dramatically expand access to housing aid.
The audit found that increasing oversight of the program, vetting relationships between brokers and landlords to prevent overpayment, and refusing to contract with property owners whose apartments have hazardous violations could free extra money to cover rents for more tenants.
Critics argue that strengthening monitoring processes is essential to help individuals and families access safe housing and protect taxpayer dollars. Deputy Comptroller Tina Kim stated that eliminating larger rent payments and requiring safer apartment conditions would make the program more efficient and effective.
However, officials from the city's Department of Social Services disputed the report's findings, claiming it contained inaccuracies and misstatements about their quality of oversight. They also pointed to the housing crunch as a major factor contributing to poor living conditions in many apartments.
Mayor Mamdani had vowed to expand the program under terms approved by the City Council last year, which would allow more New Yorkers facing eviction to qualify for vouchers, including low-income families and individuals with higher incomes than the current threshold. However, some economists and budget watchdogs have argued that expanding the program could cost the city billions of dollars more in rental assistance.
The added cost is offset by hundreds of millions of dollars in shelter savings, according to councilmembers and homeless rights advocates. As an ongoing court battle over the future of the measures continues in appeals court, it remains to be seen whether Mayor Mamdani's plan will move forward as planned or face further challenges.
A recent state audit of the CityFHEPS assistance program has identified several areas where inefficiencies and problems drive up costs, potentially threatening Mayor Zohran Mamdani's plan to dramatically expand access to housing aid.
The audit found that increasing oversight of the program, vetting relationships between brokers and landlords to prevent overpayment, and refusing to contract with property owners whose apartments have hazardous violations could free extra money to cover rents for more tenants.
Critics argue that strengthening monitoring processes is essential to help individuals and families access safe housing and protect taxpayer dollars. Deputy Comptroller Tina Kim stated that eliminating larger rent payments and requiring safer apartment conditions would make the program more efficient and effective.
However, officials from the city's Department of Social Services disputed the report's findings, claiming it contained inaccuracies and misstatements about their quality of oversight. They also pointed to the housing crunch as a major factor contributing to poor living conditions in many apartments.
Mayor Mamdani had vowed to expand the program under terms approved by the City Council last year, which would allow more New Yorkers facing eviction to qualify for vouchers, including low-income families and individuals with higher incomes than the current threshold. However, some economists and budget watchdogs have argued that expanding the program could cost the city billions of dollars more in rental assistance.
The added cost is offset by hundreds of millions of dollars in shelter savings, according to councilmembers and homeless rights advocates. As an ongoing court battle over the future of the measures continues in appeals court, it remains to be seen whether Mayor Mamdani's plan will move forward as planned or face further challenges.
On one hand, you got these people who need help so badly with housing, and the mayor is trying to do something good for them. But on the other hand, if we're gonna spend billions more dollars, that's a lot of taxpayer cash being thrown around 
It's not rocket science, right? But I guess when you're trying to help a lot of people, there's always gonna be some complexity involved 
I don't think we should be so quick to dismiss Mayor Mamdani's plans for expanding the rental aid program just because there are some potential savings to be had. I mean, have you seen the state of housing in this city? It's a crisis! 
We need more people getting help, not less. And yeah, maybe there are some inefficiencies that need to be ironed out, but do we really want to just cut corners and risk leaving people without safe places to live? I'm all for finding ways to make the program more efficient, but let's not sacrifice too much in the process. 
? mayor mamdani has been promising to make housing more accessible but now there's a chance that expanding the program might cost us even MORE 
but still... shouldn't be that hard to figure out ways to make it more efficient? like, don't they have accountants or something for this stuff? 
anyway, gotta keep an eye on this one and see what happens next 
it seems like they're trying to balance two things: saving money for more people vs making sure those people are not being taken advantage of... can anyone tell me what's going on with this "hazardous violations" thing? why would that affect the program's cost? 
. It's like, where do we draw the line? Do we prioritize helping people find safe places to live or do we try to save some cash 
or maybe they're right about those monitoring processes and it's not all just a waste of taxpayer dollars? 
. It's all about finding that balance, right? 
Maybe instead of just expanding the program, we could look at ways to make it more efficient and cost-effective 
?
. And what about the homeless rights advocates who are counting on this program to help them? It's just not right 
. Can't we just find ways to improve the program and make it more efficient, without cutting corners or hurting those who need it most?