How to hold a hearing and ask probing, detailed questions to a row of empty chairs?
That’s the challenge facing New York City councilmembers as the Mamdani administration says it does not plan to attend Tuesday’s hearing on how the city’s Department of Finance is implementing the so-called pied-a-terre tax, citing an ongoing lawsuit challenging their handling of the surcharge.
Councilmember Gale Brewer, chair of the Committee on Governmental Operations, said she found the decision to no-show “disturbing” amid complaints from homeowners confused about the tax plan.
“I think they should show up,” Brewer said. “I want answers for our constituents and I am going to get them.”
Brewer argued that officials could answer questions that are not directly related to the litigation rather than skip out.
Brewer said she has 11 pages of questions about the way the city rolled out a new tax on luxury homes. She said she and Finance Committee Chair Linda Lee would read each of their questions into the public record and send them in writing to City Hall. But they’ll have to wait for answers.
City Hall spokesperson Matt Rauschenbach said officials would submit written testimony to the Council. And he defended the tax, which New York lawmakers created in the most recent state budget.
“From the beginning, we have been clear that the pied-à-terre surcharge is an important source of revenue for our city,” Rauschenbach said in a written statement. “This revenue is essential to funding safer streets, cleaner parks and other critical investments that New Yorkers across all five boroughs deserve.”
Councilmember Gale Brewer
The new surcharge applies to owners of empty second stand-alone homes valued at $5 million or more, and empty condos and co-ops worth at least $1 million. State lawmakers approved the new surcharge in their most recent budget as a way to generate potentially hundreds of millions of dollars for city services. Gov. Kathy Hochul estimated it would apply to about 13,000 properties.
The Department of Finance last month sent tax notices to about 17,000 addresses and has given owners until Sept. 18 to apply for exemptions. The agency has already approved roughly 2,000 of those exemptions, according to court documents, leaving a tiny fraction of New York City property owners at risk of the surcharge.
But some homeowners say they are confused about the way the city handled the rollout and why it publicized an initial list of nearly 1 million addresses and owners potentially subject to the tax. Similar data is published each year under state law, but rarely receives much attention.
Three property owners, including two related to Councilmember Frank Morano, have sued to slow implementation and remove the list of properties from the city website. The owners are represented by former Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro, an attorney who has emerged as a Mamdani archenemy in various high-profile disputes over city policy.
Past administrations have also blown off Council hearings, igniting anger among councilmembers and members of the public. The NYPD and officials from then-Mayor Bill de Blasio’s administration declined to attend a hearing on the city’s aggressive response to protests in the wake of the murder of George Floyd in 2020. The NYPD again skipped a hearing in 2023, under Mayor Eric Adams, when councilmembers sought answers about the department’s controversial Strategic Response Group.
In a written statement, Lee, the chair of the Council’s Finance committee, called the Mamdani administration’s decision Tuesday “disappointing.”
“This is a hearing that New Yorkers have asked for in response to the confusion around the rollout,” she said. “We hope they will follow up on our questions.”
