New audit reveals potential for significant savings in rental aid program, complicating Mayor Mamdani's expansion plans.
A scathing audit by New York State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli has identified key issues with the CityFHEPS assistance program, which serves over 60,000 low-income households. The audit finds that the city could save millions of dollars by increasing oversight, vetting relationships between brokers and landlords to prevent overpayment, and refusing to contract with property owners who have hazardous violations.
According to the audit, a lack of oversight has driven up costs for the program, which currently has a price tag of nearly $1.2 billion. The city's Department of Social Services disputes the report's findings, arguing that the agency is already doing enough to protect tenants and taxpayer dollars.
However, Deputy Comptroller Tina Kim says that eliminating larger rent payments and requiring safer apartment conditions would drive down costs and make the program more efficient. "These are basic things that will make the program more effective because you want to serve as many tenants as possible," she said.
The audit also found that the city agency had agreed to pay rent for a tenant moving into the same unit it had previously allowed a tenant to transfer out of due to dangerous violations, and that the program paid rents higher than comparable units in 11 cases outside of the city. These findings suggest significant waste and mismanagement within the program.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani's pledge to expand access to housing aid has been complicated by these findings. Critics argue that expanding the program would force the city to pay potentially billions of dollars more in rental assistance, while proponents say that the added cost will be offset by hundreds of millions of dollars in shelter savings.
As the city struggles with its affordable housing shortage, where less than 1% of apartments priced under $2,400 are vacant, the audit's findings have raised questions about the effectiveness and efficiency of CityFHEPS. With the program facing a critical juncture, policymakers will need to carefully consider the implications of these recommendations in order to ensure that the city's most vulnerable residents receive the support they need.
A scathing audit by New York State Comptroller Tom DiNapoli has identified key issues with the CityFHEPS assistance program, which serves over 60,000 low-income households. The audit finds that the city could save millions of dollars by increasing oversight, vetting relationships between brokers and landlords to prevent overpayment, and refusing to contract with property owners who have hazardous violations.
According to the audit, a lack of oversight has driven up costs for the program, which currently has a price tag of nearly $1.2 billion. The city's Department of Social Services disputes the report's findings, arguing that the agency is already doing enough to protect tenants and taxpayer dollars.
However, Deputy Comptroller Tina Kim says that eliminating larger rent payments and requiring safer apartment conditions would drive down costs and make the program more efficient. "These are basic things that will make the program more effective because you want to serve as many tenants as possible," she said.
The audit also found that the city agency had agreed to pay rent for a tenant moving into the same unit it had previously allowed a tenant to transfer out of due to dangerous violations, and that the program paid rents higher than comparable units in 11 cases outside of the city. These findings suggest significant waste and mismanagement within the program.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani's pledge to expand access to housing aid has been complicated by these findings. Critics argue that expanding the program would force the city to pay potentially billions of dollars more in rental assistance, while proponents say that the added cost will be offset by hundreds of millions of dollars in shelter savings.
As the city struggles with its affordable housing shortage, where less than 1% of apartments priced under $2,400 are vacant, the audit's findings have raised questions about the effectiveness and efficiency of CityFHEPS. With the program facing a critical juncture, policymakers will need to carefully consider the implications of these recommendations in order to ensure that the city's most vulnerable residents receive the support they need.
I think this audit is like, super important because it shows there's room for improvement in CityFHEPS. The idea of vetting relationships between brokers and landlords sounds legit 
- you don't wanna be paying for some landlord to do nothing but collect rent. But at the same time, expanding the program could help more people get affordable housing. It's like, a trade-off, right? 
Maybe they can find ways to make it more efficient so everyone gets the help they need? The city's gotta make sure they're using taxpayer dollars wisely 
- that's what this audit is all about.
the city is losing millions of dollars on rental aid program due to lack of oversight lol what a waste. and now mayor mamdani wants to expand it?
. I guess we'll see if Mayor Mamdani's team can figure out a way to make it work, but right now, it seems like the program's more trouble than it's worth 
. I mean, I get why Mayor Mamdani wants to expand access to housing aid, but if we can save millions of dollars by just making some changes to how the program works 
. That just doesn't seem right. I think it's time for Mayor Mamdani to take another look at how CityFHEPS is being run and make some changes to ensure that we're not wasting taxpayer dollars 
. We need more affordable housing options ASAP! I hope policymakers will take the audit's findings seriously and work towards making CityFHEPS more effective and efficient 
.
. The city's already gotta deal with an affordable housing shortage, what's a few more bucks gonna hurt 
this whole thing got me thinking, what's the cost of "help" really? is it just about throwing money at the problem or is it about creating a system that actually works for everyone involved? 
I've been struggling to find a place to live in NYC for ages, and it's hard enough without feeling like my money is going straight into some landlord's pocket. And don't even get me started on the fact that they're paying for someone to move into the same unit they used to kick out because of safety issues... what? Like, isn't that just crazy talk?! 
I'm not saying we should cut corners or anything, but come on! Can't we find a way to make this program work without breaking the bank?! 
, folks! Just 'cause there's potential for savings doesn't mean we should just gut the program altogether 
. I mean, we're talkin' about people who are already strugglin' to make ends meet here - they need a safety net, not some half-baked fix that's gonna leave 'em with nowhere to go 
. And let's be real, over 60k households? That's a lot of lives on the line 
.
. It seems like there are some major issues with the CityFHEPS program, and it's not just about overspending 
. And what's up with those 11 cases where they paid more than comparable units? It's like, come on, city officials! 
. It's not like he's trying to waste taxpayer dollars or anything 
. but seriously, $1.2 billion for rent aid program? that's a lot of dough 
, then the city should do it. eliminating larger rent payments and safer apartments would be like adding a new node to the diagram - it makes sense 
.
. if we can make the program more effective, we'll save taxpayer dollars in the long run 
. I mean, why bother trying to fix a system that's already flawed? We'll just end up making things worse by trying to tweak it too much. And what's the real problem here - we're spending way too much on something that doesn't really work anyway 
. So yeah, I say let's just abandon ship and start from scratch - it'll be a refreshing change of pace 
.
like if the gov can save millions by vetting those landlords n stuff i'm down 4 it! 
. idk if expandin the program would b a good idea or not, prob just depends on how they plan 2 implement it