A Manhattan district court has sided with New York City Mayor Eric Adams in a class action lawsuit challenging the expansion of the CityFHEPS program. Manhattan District Judge Lyle Frank ruled in favor of the City Council, Legal Aid Society (LAS), and others in a class action lawsuit challenging the city\u2019s expanded rental housing voucher program. In his ruling, Frank stated that \u201cthe Department of Social Services (DSS) has primary authority to establish and amend the program under state law,\u201d and that \u201csince the Council\u2019s ordinance ultimately conflicts with state law, the lawsuit brought by the Council and LAS is hereby dismissed.\u201d<\/p>\n
In response, the City Council and LAS, advocacy groups for the expansion of CityFHEPS, strongly opposed this and announced that they would immediately appeal. In a statement released that day, a City Council spokesperson stated, \u201cIt is deeply regrettable that the City Government (executive branch) is directly responding to the City Council (legislative branch)\u2019s efforts to resolve the issues of forced evictions and homelessness in the midst<\/p>\n
of a deepening housing crisis,\u201d and emphasized that they would \u201cfile an appeal.\u201d LAS also added, \u201cThis ruling leaves no way to rescue thousands of citizens who are at risk of forced eviction or are already homeless,\u201d and \u201cIf the CityFHEPS expansion ordinance passed by the City Council is not implemented, New York City will end up spending millions of dollars more to accommodate them.\u201d The \u2018rental apartment voucher expansion ordinance\u2019 passed the City Council last year, but Mayor Adams exercised her veto, citing budget constraints, and the City Council, in response, re-voted the ordinance (42 in favor, 9 against), automatically enacting it. However, when the market refused to implement it, it eventually escalated into a lawsuit.<\/p>\n
The rental apartment voucher expansion ordinance includes \u25b2eliminating the requirement to reside in a homeless facility such as a shelter for 90 days before CityFHEPS support \u25b2expanding the CityFHEPS support eligibility from 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) to 50% of the Area Median Income (AMI) \u25b2dramatically expanding the beneficiaries, such as allowing CityFHEPS support even if there is a letter requesting a rent increase.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"