NYC Council Files Appeal Seeking to Compel the Administration to Comply with CityFHEPS Reform Laws & Launches Website Highlighting Rise in Evictions and Homelessness under[...]

Council seeks to reverse lower court decision and compel implementation of laws to prevent evictions of low-income New Yorkers and reduce bureaucratic obstacles to rental assistance amidst housing crisis

City Hall, NY - Today, the New York City Council filed its appeal with the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division - First Department seeking to overturn a lower court's recent decision in Marie Vincent et. al. v. Adams and the City of New York, which denied the Council's Article 78 petition to compel the Adams Administration to implement the City Fighting Homelessness and Eviction Prevention Supplement (CityFHEPS) Reform Laws. The Council filing argues that the prior decision misunderstands field preemption and misreads the State Social Services Law (SSL), and in turn, threatens decades of government precedent. The Adams Administration's refusal to implement the duly enacted laws has left low-income New Yorkers without the necessary support to avoid evictions and homelessness during the city's housing crisis.

The Council also launched a new website that illustrates and tracks the significant rise in evictions and homelessness within New York City. It provides an ongoing count of the number of eviction cases filed and increases in the Department of Homeless Services' (DHS) shelter population since the beginning of Mayor Adams' Administration. As of today, 27,555 eviction cases have been filed and the DHS shelter population has increased by 42,267 people since 2022. The website also notes the number of days that have passed since the CityFHEPS Reform Laws were duly enacted into law - 447 days - to demonstrate the time wasted by the Adams Administration without taking steps to implement the laws. New Yorkers with experiences utilizing, seeking, or being denied a CityFHEPS voucher are encouraged to reach out and share their stories through the website.

"As New Yorkers face a housing and affordability crisis that leaves many without homes or at risk of losing them, it is our city government's responsibility to support them," said Speaker Adrienne Adams. "The Council used its clearly established lawmaking powers to enact CityFHEPS Reform Laws that remove barriers to accessing housing vouchers for low-income residents at risk of eviction and experiencing homelessness. The Administration's refusal to fulfill its duty to implement the laws has inflicted harmful consequences at a time when New Yorkers need housing security and stability. The Council's appeal makes clear the role of the City's legislative body in shouldering responsibility for supporting New Yorkers in need and why the Administration must implement the laws."

The Council's legal filing can be found here:

Appellate Brief

Excerpt from the Appellate Brief:

"The Trial Court's conclusion that the CityFHEPS Reform Laws are 'field preempted' by the SSL is erroneous as a matter of law and must be reversed.

"First, the Trial Court misapplied well-settled principles of preemption and ignored governing case law, all of which preclude the argument that the SSL preempts the field of rental assistance. In the Decision, the Trial Court failed to offer any meaningful analysis of these issues at all; instead, it simply stated that '[t]he SSL does not provide a role for local legislation in the administration of social services programs.' As a result, the Decision leaves the impression that the SSL preempts the entire field of 'social services'-a vast array of services and benefits for people in need, including programs funded by City dollars alone-disempowering the Council in one of the most important areas of municipal policymaking. Such a conclusion is not only wrong as a matter of law; it portends a radical reorientation of City government that is inconsistent with long-standing practice."

Excerpt from the Appellate Brief:

"Notably, in Hernandez v. Barrios-Paoli, the Court of Appeals rejected a City DSS (Department of Social Services) argument that Council legislation directing City DSS to take action in a specific way was inconsistent with the SSL. The local law at issue in Hernandez directed that a sub-agency of City DSS take certain specific steps to determine whether individuals with HIV or AIDS were eligible for certain public benefits and services. In response, City DSS had argued that, as an "agent" of the state, only it (City DSS) could make City policy in a particular area of social services-the Council could not. However, in ruling against City DSS and concluding that the Council could lawfully pass legislation consistent with the State's aims, the Court of Appeals implicitly rejected this argument. Instead, the Court of Appeals emphasized that the Council is permitted to pass this legislation that was consistent with the State's goals and 'effectuate[d] the intent of the State statutes.' Because the Trial Court's analysis of field preemption is deeply flawed, reversal is required."

"CityFHEPS is a lifeline for New Yorkers, who are relying on it to help them remain in their homes and avoid slipping into homelessness," said Deputy Speaker Diana Ayala. "As a government, we owe it to New Yorkers to fully implement these laws so that eligible residents have a chance to secure stable and safe housing. Especially during the ongoing housing crisis, it is cruel and reckless for the Administration to deny access to this critical housing assistance provided by duly enacted laws. We cannot afford any further delay, and the Mayor and his Administration must prioritize the needs of New Yorkers and implement the CityFHEPS Reform Laws."

"As the Council Member for District 14, I know how many of my constituents struggle and work hard to afford their homes and make ends meet," said Council Member Pierina Ana Sanchez. "The Council enacted the CityFHEPS Reform Laws over the Mayor's veto because we believe government can do more to make a difference for New Yorkers experiencing homelessness and those who need help to maintain stability. Today's appeal reaffirms our pursuit to maintain our responsibility as the city's lawmaking body to advance policies that support New Yorkers in need."

The local laws are the following:

Local Law 99prohibits the Department of Social Services from deducting a utility allowance from the maximum amount of a CityFHEPS voucher, except in limited circumstances.

Local Law 100 removes shelter stay as a precondition to CityFHEPS eligibility. This eliminates previous eligibility barriers, reduces lengths of stay in the shelter system and prevents new shelter entrants.

Local Law 101 removes certain eligibility restrictions for CityFHEPS to allow applicants at risk of eviction or experiencing homelessness access to vouchers.

Local Law 102 changes the eligibility for a CityFHEPS voucher from 200 percent of the federal poverty level to 50 percent of the area median income and removes work and source of income requirements that make it difficult for individuals to pursue employment and housing concurrently.

###

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.