City Council passes several controversial housing bills, setting up potential veto battle

Thursday marked the last stated meeting of this City Council – the last for eight outgoing members, including Speaker Adrienne Adams – but much of the action at City Hall centered on issues that will fall into the lap of the next City Council, and its speaker-designate, Julie Menin.

Mayor Eric Adams may veto several hotly contested housing bills passed Thursday, setting up an override battle that Menin will be tasked with leading in January should she choose to take action. Each pertains to city-funded affordable housing: One would require at least 4% of newly constructed units to be set aside for homeowners instead of renters. Another would require at least 25% of new rental units to be two-bedrooms and 15% to be three-bedrooms. Another would mandate 80% of new units to be affordable for low income households. The Construction Justice Act, which has the biggest estimated price tag, would establish a $40 minimum wage and benefits package for construction workers on certain affordable housing projects.

While the mayor had yet to say whether he’ll veto the bills as of Thursday night, the Adams administration has made its opposition clear. The city’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development has estimated that together, the bills would cost the city over $600 million annually – and that their passage would result in thousands fewer apartments if the agency’s budget isn’t increased. In short, the department would have less money and less flexibility to determine how to spend its money. The City Council meanwhile has argued that the bills will make things more affordable for New Yorkers while also taking back some of the power members lost through the recent passage of several housing-related ballot measures. 

Negotiations have been lengthy. A bill capping the number of studio apartments set aside for seniors was dropped from the package. Two of the other bills were amended slightly – though not enough to appease the Adams administration.

All four bills passed with veto-proof majorities. 

“Irresponsible actions like these demonstrate the importance of Mayor Adams’ efforts to modernize the housing approval process through the ballot measures that passed this November,” Deputy Mayor for Communications Fabien Levy said in a statement. “Fortunately, Mayor Adams is in office until Dec. 31 and we will be reviewing our next steps regarding the bills passed today.”

Earlier, the City Council signaled it would tackle any potential vetoes when it happens.

“I’m not sure why a mayor would veto a pro-family housing bill,” said Council Member Eric Dinowitz, sponsor of the bill that would boost the number of two- and three-bedroom apartments. Should that happen, he added, “we’re willing to fight that battle if we get to it.”

A housing official in the Adams administration who agreed to speak on condition of anonymity said that the legislation’s passage will ultimately have an adverse impact on incoming Mayor Zohran Mamdani and Menin, who will soon contend with “extreme uncertainty around federal funding” – especially when it comes to housing and social services. 

“We need every ounce of flexibility to ensure that the next admin and next speaker can create affordable housing in the way that they think the resources should be directed,” they said. “These bills essentially put their staff and themselves into handcuffs from being able to execute on their housing vision. Day one they’ll be trying to figure out how to pay for these bills, rather than figuring out where the resources should go.”

While Mamdani has not publicly taken a position on the measures, his team and allies have called council members to voice opposition, hoping to stop their passage, according to The New York Times. Cea Weaver, Mamdani’s housing adviser and leader of tenant group Housing Justice for All, has also come out and said she’s against them, citing concerns that they would slow down housing production. 

2026 priorities come into view

And while this City Council tried to wrap up its business in its last jam-packed stated meeting, Thursday also provided a preview of a major legislative push to come next year. Council Member Lincoln Restler introduced a new bill on Thursday that would create a Department of Community Safety, along the lines of Mamdani’s campaign proposal to shift mental health response away from the police. The legislation carried 27 other co-sponsors as of Thursday, though that count doesn’t include any incoming members who might sign once they officially join the council. Menin is not currently listed as a co-sponsor.

The legislation would task a brand new department with opening at least one office in each borough and providing emergency response services to “support the preservation of public health, safety and welfare.” The department would also be tasked with managing city contracts related to alternatives to incarceration programs, reentry services and violence prevention programs.

The next council will have its own internal issues to address come January. The union of council staffers, called the Association of Legislative Employees, rallied on Thursday to urge council members not to lay off or fire staffers during an upcoming “reorganization period” in January that technically allows them to do so. That provision is baked into the council staff union’s contract (though the union fought against it) and means that for 60 days, staff in returning members’ offices will be classified as at-will employees to allow for restructuring of staff if members have new needs.

The union – along with labor allies and a handful of council members – is urging members to not take advantage of that period in order to layoff staffers for other purposes, like retaliating over union activity. A letter from the ALE to that effect has so far been signed by Council Members Alexa Avilés, Shahana Hanif, Tiffany Cabán, Sandy Nurse, Chris Marte and Shekar Krishnan, as well as outgoing Comptroller Brad Lander.

Menin did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday on whether she would sign onto the letter or support the union’s call.