Affordable Housing

Subterms

    Latest story

    175 Shares55 Views

    She Spent Nearly $600,000 on Her Council Race and Lost. Was It Worth It?

    by

    If nothing else, Elizabeth Lewinsohn’s failed bid for a New York City Council seat highlights two great needs: housing and idealistic candidates.Last December, Elizabeth Lewinsohn, a longtime TriBeCa resident, entered the Democratic race to represent her district in New York’s City Council, eventually raising and spending far more money than any of the other 216 people running for the Council. Of the $568,665 her campaign put toward securing the Democratic nomination in a district that covers the bottom tip of Manhattan, $522,000 came from a source with whom she was intimately acquainted: Elizabeth Lewinsohn.The return on investment did not inspire; she effectively spent $72 per vote and lost by 20 points to the incumbent, Chris Marte.City Council races typically generate little civic interest or remarkable dispersions of cash, one of the reasons that the race, which could be seen as a referendum on development, wound up on the radar of people who might have ignored it. Over the past 25 years, only one other campaign, to elect a Stanford-educated lawyer named Kevin Kim, spent more money on a Council bid. Running for a seat in Queens in 2009, he won the primary and then lost to a Republican in the general election.But the scale of Ms. Lewinsohn’s self-financing seems unprecedented in a contest of this kind. She opted out of the city’s matching funds program, which would have limited her spending. The prospect of a political novice beating an incumbent seemed daunting to the point of impossible, she told me, had she kept within the constraints of public financing, which cap spending for primary campaigns to $228,000.To put her gambit in perspective, the former hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson donated just under $15,000 toward his own failed bid to become mayor. Out of four candidates in the Democratic primary for the First District, Ms. Lewinsohn ranked second, despite outspending Mr. Marte, the son of a bodega owner, by nearly $400,000 — roughly the tab she would have run up had she taken the 7,905 people who cast ballots for her to the Odeon for a plate of steak tartare and a glass of Bordeaux.While the paperwork she filed with the city’s Campaign Finance Board identifies her as a “homemaker” (she is married to Jonathan Lewinsohn, an investment manager), Ms. Lewinsohn is, in fact, a quietly accomplished public servant, a graduate of Yale Law School, a former director of policy for the Police Department’s Counterterrorism Bureau, a member of her local community board for 12 years now and a co-founder of Gotham Park, a revived public space under the Brooklyn Bridge.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in Elections

      NYC Panel Approves Rent Increases, a Key Issue for Mamdani and Adams

      by

      Mayor Eric Adams, who appointed the Rent Guidelines Board, has attacked Zohran Mamdani’s pledge to freeze the rent if he becomes mayor.The Rent Guidelines Board approved increases of at least 3 percent for New York City’s one million rent-stabilized apartments, rejecting the call for a rent freeze that helped Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani surge to the lead in the Democratic mayoral primary last week.Mayor Eric Adams, who appointed the members of the board, has supported rent increases for rent-stabilized apartments every year since he took office. Mr. Mamdani, likely to be the Democratic nominee facing him in the general election in November, has promised not to do the same if he becomes mayor.As the city faces linked affordability and housing crises, the contrast between Mr. Mamdani and Mr. Adams added a new layer of tension to the board’s decision.On Monday night, the board, in a 5-to-4 vote, approved 3 percent increases for one-year leases and 4.5 percent increases for two-year leases. The votes against the increases came from the two members on the board representing landlords, who had wanted higher increases, and the two members representing tenants, who wanted a rent freeze.Any increases would apply to leases beginning in or after October.As in past years, the discourse around the vote reflects the rift between pro-renter and pro-landlord political interests in New York City. At the meeting on Monday, held in a theater at El Museo del Barrio in East Harlem, renters and tenant advocates chanted “Freeze the rent” and waved colorful signs that read “Stop real estate greed” and “Tenants vote.”But the board’s decision is also providing an opportunity for Mr. Mamdani and Mr. Adams to distinguish themselves from each other at a time when making the city a more affordable place to live is a key issue driving the election.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares72 Views

      in Elections

      Free Buses and Child Care. A Rent Freeze. Can Zohran Mamdani Achieve His Plans?

      by

      The Democratic mayoral hopeful promises free child care, a $30 minimum wage and a massive tax hike on the city’s corporations. But much is not within a mayor’s control.Zohran Mamdani’s rapid rise from upstart mayoral hopeful to likely winner of the Democratic primary for mayor of New York City was propelled by the simple message that the city was too expensive — and that he had plans that would fix it.Mr. Mamdani’s singular focus on the city’s affordability crisis resonated, especially with young voters. They embraced his populist promises to make bus service free, freeze rents on stabilized apartments, build city-owned grocery stores and offer free early child care.But whether his campaign promises can become reality is an open question — and important parts of Mr. Mamdani’s platform are not solely in a mayor’s control.While some of his left-leaning policy ideas are not entirely new — rents have been frozen before, for example — others would represent a dramatic reimagining of city government.And much of Mr. Mamdani’s agenda relies in large measure on increasing revenue through taxes on businesses and the wealthy — part of an overarching vision to rethink how the city funds expanded social programs. Along with raising income taxes, he has pledged to shift the property tax burden “from the outer boroughs to more expensive homes in richer and whiter neighborhoods,” according to his campaign website.Already, Mr. Mamdani’s plans, in line with his democratic socialist political affiliation, have prompted intense backlash from business leaders who say he poses a danger to New York’s economy. In private meetings, power brokers are discussing how to mount a strong challenge to Mr. Mamdani in the November general election.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares95 Views

      in Elections

      A Look at Zohran Mamdani’s Stances on Key Issues

      by

      The state assemblyman ran a campaign tightly focused on issues related to affordability. Here is a look at where he stands on those issues and others.In a crowded Democratic primary for mayor of New York City that featured a former governor, seasoned candidates from past mayoral elections and an alumnus of the Obama White House, Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani set himself apart early despite his lack of name recognition.He did it largely by connecting with younger voters, producing sleek, engaging campaign ads on social media and beating the drum about the need to make life in New York more affordable. This narrow focus on a single, salient issue drove Mr. Mamdani’s campaign, which his main rival, former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, described as “highly impactful” as he conceded the race on Tuesday night.In his victory speech, Mr. Mamdani hammered home his message one last time, attributing his success to New Yorkers who had voted for “a city where they can do more than just struggle.”As Mr. Mamdani looks poised to secure the Democratic nomination and attention turns to the general election, here’s what to know about where he stands on key issues.Affordability“Every politician says New York is the greatest city on the globe,” Mr. Mamdani said in his first campaign ad, released eight months ago. “But what good is that if no one can afford to live here?”So began a campaign tightly focused on the cost-of-living crisis plaguing the city. His platform, detailed on his campaign website, was simple: “New York is too expensive. Zohran will lower costs and make life easier.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares156 Views

      in Elections

      As Black New Yorkers Move Out, N.Y.C. Politics May Be Reshaped

      by

      Housing affordability and quality-of-life concerns are pushing longtime Black New Yorkers out of the city, underscoring Democrats’ challenges with their base ahead of the mayoral election.For the better part of the 35 years that she lived in Brooklyn’s East New York neighborhood, Dorinda Pannell made affordable housing her top — if not only — mission.A lifelong Democrat, tenant leader with East Brooklyn Congregations and avid voter, Ms. Pannell, 75, known to her neighbors in the Linden Houses as “Miss P,” spent years organizing her fellow residents to push for better housing conditions. She even took her fight to City Hall to give a speech about it.Now she is following New York’s mayoral primary closely, hopeful that the city’s next leader will do more for the millions of New Yorkers experiencing housing insecurity, particularly longtime Black and Latino residents who say that good-quality, affordable places to live are more and more elusive.But she will not be voting in the primary or be able to see for herself how the next mayoral administration affects her community. For the last five years, Ms. Pannell has lived in Hampton, Va., where she can be closer to her son, obtain better health care and enjoy what she believes is a higher quality of life and lower cost of living.“I’m still sad that I had to leave, you know?” she said, pointing to the organizing work she felt she had to put on hold. When it came time to move, she added, “I never cried so hard.”Ms. Pannell is one of the hundreds of thousands of Black New Yorkers who over the last decade have made the excruciating choice to leave the city they’ve called home for generations.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares98 Views

      in Elections

      Big Names, Bigger Money and Global Themes Color the N.Y.C. Council Races

      by

      All 51 seats are up for election this year, and the Democratic primary battles feature crowded fields, moneyed interests and some recognizable figures.The ballots feature political figures who resigned in disgrace. Global story lines related to Israel and President Trump have defined contests. And millions of dollars from corporate interests have been injected to sway outcomes.Even as most of New York City’s political attention is focused on Tuesday’s Democratic mayoral primary, this year’s races for City Council have also drawn widespread interest and money.Two names well known in New York congressional circles will grace the ballots in Manhattan: Anthony Weiner, the former congressman who spent about a year and a half in prison and much longer in public exile; and Virginia Maloney, whose mother, Carolyn Maloney, was a longtime congresswoman. Each is running to fill an open seat.All 51 Council seats will be up for election in November, and eight have no incumbent. But with most districts heavily Democratic, the primary on Tuesday has become the real race.Super PACs backed by companies, unions and housing advocacy groups, many with interests before the Council, have spent about $13.4 million to influence the contests, $6.8 million more than in 2021.Some of the races have been defined by local issues. In Lower Manhattan, for example, candidates have sparred over the fate of the Elizabeth Street Garden, where a long-gestating plan to build affordable housing for older New Yorkers has been put on hold.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares134 Views

      in Elections

      A Way for People With Low Credit Scores to Raise Them

      by

      A new study finds that tenants who pay their rent on time can see “significant increases” if the payments are reported to credit bureaus.People who pay their rent on time can establish credit scores or significantly raise low scores if the payments are reported to credit bureaus, new research found.A study published this month by the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C., looked at two groups of tenants recruited in 2021 and 2022. The members of one group began having their rent payments reported to credit bureaus immediately after signing up to participate in a program offered by their properties. The members of the other group had their rent reporting delayed by four months.The study found that rent reporting leads to “large, statistically significant increases” in the likelihood of having a score and of having at least a “near prime” score — a minimum of 601 on a scale of 300 to 850.The research was the first rigorous, randomized study of “positive” rent reporting, said Brett Theodos, a senior fellow at the institute and an author of the study, which enrolled 269 participants in affordable housing programs in five states and Washington. In positive rent reporting, only payments made on time are supplied to credit bureaus.The study used VantageScore, a competitor to the widely used FICO score. VantageScore, which uses a scale similar to FICO’s but assigns different weights to certain factors, was founded by the three big credit bureaus: TransUnion, Equifax and Experian.Still, some consumer advocates remain wary of rent reporting, saying it may pose risks to vulnerable renters.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      The Abundance Agenda Has Its Own Theory of Power

      by

      I have had a fascinating few months. “Abundance,” the book I wrote with Derek Thompson, is either going to save the Democratic Party or destroy it. You think I’m kidding. Here’s The Wall Street Journal’s headline: “Can the ‘Abundance Agenda’ Save the Democrats?” Here’s The Nation: “Why the ‘Abundance Agenda’ Could Sink the Democratic Party.” The Atlantic placed the book at the center of “the coming Democratic civil war.”Before “Abundance” came out, I worried that its argument would be too agreeable to generate much debate. I didn’t foresee Ragnarok.But I was wrong about who would perceive it as a threat. The book is largely a critique of how Democrats have governed in the places where they’ve held power. But the obvious targets of that critique — blue-state governors like Gavin Newsom and Kathy Hochul and top Obama and Biden administration officials — have largely embraced it. Maura Healy, the governor of Massachusetts, laid out a plan for “housing abundance.” More than one top Democrat I expected to react defensively to the argument told me that they felt that they could have written it.This is, for Democrats, a liquid moment. The party is reimagining itself after its crushing loss in 2024, and a lot is riding on which critiques are woven into its renewal. And so the backlash to the book has come from a faction of the party that saw itself rising within the wreckage and worries that “Abundance” will derail its ascendance: the anti-corporate populists.“Abundance” is an effort to focus more of American politics on a surprisingly neglected question: What do we need more of, and what is stopping us from getting it? It is that focus that some of my friends on the populist left object to. Zephyr Teachout, a Fordham law professor who’s a central figure on the anti-monopolist left, told me that her problem with “Abundance” wasn’t the policies but the central question: “We should be focusing Democratic politics and politics in general on the problem of concentrated power and the way in which concentrated power is making it impossible to do things.”Demand Progress, a leftist advocacy group, went so far as to commission a poll to see which message appealed to more voters. Voters were asked to choose between the two framings of “the big problem” in American life: Was it “‘bottlenecks’ that make it harder to produce housing, expand energy production or build new roads and bridges” or rather that “big corporations have way too much power over our economy and our government.” Unsurprisingly, the latter won.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Officials Unveil Budget Cuts to Aid for Health, Housing and Research

      by

      The new blueprint shows that a vast array of education, health, housing and labor programs would be hit, including aid for college and cancer research.The Trump administration on Friday unveiled fuller details of its proposal to slash about $163 billion in federal spending next fiscal year, offering a more intricate glimpse into the vast array of education, health, housing and labor programs that would be hit by the deepest cuts.The many spending reductions throughout the roughly 1,220-page document and agency blueprints underscored President Trump’s desire to foster a vast transformation in Washington. His budget seeks to reduce the size of government and its reach into Americans lives, including services to the poor.The new proposal reaffirmed the president’s recommendation to set federal spending levels at their lowest in modern history, as the White House first sketched out in its initial submission to Congress transmitted in early May. But it offered new details about the ways in which Mr. Trump hoped to achieve the savings, and the many functions of government that could be affected as a result.The White House budget is not a matter of law. Ultimately, it is up to Congress to determine the budget, and in recent years it has routinely discarded many of the president’s proposals. Lawmakers are only starting to embark on the annual process, with government funding set to expire at the end of September.The updated budget reiterated the president’s pursuit of deep reductions for nearly every major federal agency, reserving its steepest cuts for foreign aid, medical research, tax enforcement and a slew of anti-poverty programs, including rental assistance. The White House restated its plan to seek a $33 billion cut at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, for example, and another $33 billion reduction at the Department of Health and Human Services.Targeting the Education Department, the president again put forward a roughly $12 billion cut, seeking to eliminate dozens of programs while unveiling new changes to Pell grants, which help low-income students pay for college.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More