A Manhattan judge handed the Adams administration a major win on Thursday in its bitter feud with the City Council over controversial changes to a housing voucher program.
Mayor Eric Adams had vetoed the council’s expansion of the city’s rental-assistance program called CityFHEPS that would’ve fast tracked vouchers for tenants facing eviction — but lawmakers overrode the veto, then took him to court in an effort to force him to comply with the expansion.
But Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Lyle E. Frank ruled only the state government has the authority to expand the voucher program in a ruling that Adams celebrated.
“While we are glad that the court agrees with our administration that these laws went beyond the City Council’s legislative authority, we are hopeful that our partners in the Council will join us in remaining committed to working to connect New Yorkers in need with safe, affordable, permanent housing,” Adams said in a written statement.
The City Council members disagree with the ruling and are planning an immediate appeal, a spokesperson said in a statement.
“It’s unfortunate that Mayor Adams’ administration has fought to delay help to New Yorkers that can prevent them from evictions and homelessness amidst a housing crisis,” the spokesperson said.
Lawmakers joined a class action lawsuit filed by the Legal Aid Society and four other plaintiffs back in February that would have forced Adams to comply with the expanded CityFHEPS.
The new law would have made housing vouchers available for people facing eviction without having to enter the shelter system for at least 90 days, and it would have increased the income-level cutoffs to qualify for aid while barring landlords from deducting the cost of utility bills from a voucher.
When Adams vetoed the bill in June 2023 he argued the city could not afford the law’s $17 billion price tag because of the ongoing migrant crisis.
Council members disputed the mayor’s estimated cost of the bill, saying it would cost $10 billion, and overrode the mayor’s veto later that summer.
Members argued the city’s dire housing vacancy rates justified the cost of the expanded program.
