A state judge ruled that the City Council cannot expand a housing voucher program that was vetoed by Mayor Adams due to cost concerns. The Council overrode the veto, but the judge deemed the expansion invalid and preempted by state law. The Legal Aid Society and the Council are considering an appeal. The program, CityFHEPS, aims to move people out of shelter into permanent housing, but the cost estimates vary significantly. The Mayor and others are concerned about the program’s projected cost and lack of fiscal planning.
In a recent development, a state judge has ruled that the City Council does not possess the legal authority to expand a city housing voucher program, which was initially vetoed by Mayor Eric Adams due to concerns about its cost implications. Judge Lyle E. Frank concurred with the Adams administration’s argument that the Council’s bill was invalid and preempted by the state’s social services law, signaling that the Council overreached its authority in attempting to expand the program.
The disputed legislation, known as Family Homelessness and Eviction Prevention Supplement (FHEPS) or CityFHEPS, aimed to broaden the eligibility criteria for housing voucher programs with the goal of transitioning individuals from shelters to permanent housing. Among the proposed changes was a modification to the qualifications for voucher recipients. Despite Mayor Adams’ veto, the Council proceeded to override it, compelling the city government to enact the new laws. However, the Department of Social Services Commissioner Molly Wasow Park later communicated to the Council that implementation was unfeasible due to significant financial, operational, and legal challenges.
Subsequently, the Council and the Legal Aid Society initiated legal action against Mayor Adams and his administration for failing to adhere to the new legislation. CityFHEPS, managed by the Department of Social Services, assists New Yorkers facing eviction and earning a gross income at or below 200% of the federal poverty level. Approximately 36,000 households benefit from the program annually, with cost projections for the proposed changes varying between $3 billion to $36 billion over the next five years, as per the Independent Budget Office.
Following the court’s ruling, Robert Desir of Legal Aid mentioned that they were exploring all options, including a possible appeal, expressing concerns about the adverse impact on vulnerable New Yorkers and the city’s finances. City Council spokesperson Rendy Desamours also stated their intent to pursue an immediate appeal, highlighting the urgency of preventing evictions and homelessness amidst a housing crisis.
In response, Mayor Adams emphasized his administration’s success in facilitating a record number of New Yorkers securing permanent housing through CityFHEPS in the past year. While acknowledging the court’s validation of the administration’s stance on legislative authority, he called for collaboration with the Council to address the housing needs of residents effectively.
Concerns have been raised about the program’s expansion costs, with E.J. McMahon from the Empire Center emphasizing the lack of fiscal considerations during the bill’s introduction. McMahon criticized the Council for not securing additional budget allocations for the potentially expensive program, underscoring the need for more prudent fiscal management and planning.
In conclusion, the legal dispute over the expansion of the CityFHEPS housing voucher program reflects a broader challenge in balancing the imperative to address housing insecurity with fiscal responsibility. The court’s ruling underscores the importance of adherence to legal frameworks and the necessity for comprehensive planning to ensure the sustainability of social programs. It remains to be seen how stakeholders will navigate these complexities to meet the pressing housing needs of New Yorkers effectively.
Source: TheCity.NYC
