Ciro Sollazzi, 67, is scared he might have to enter a homeless shelter for the first time in his life after losing his job as a hairdresser during the pandemic and falling ill, leaving him unable to return to work. He now owes $23,000 in back rent and faces eviction from the Kensington apartment he has lived in for 22 years. Sollazzi said seeing homeless people fills him with fear that he might become one of them, adding, “I perceive ashamed.”
Sollazzi is among New Yorkers who would be eligible for a housing subsidy under a City Council-proposed program expansion from 2023 that would build people at risk of entering shelters eligible for rental assistance — not just those already living in them. Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who pledged to expand the program during his campaign, is now negotiating a compromise that would cost less and is fighting the City Council in court over implementing the laws. His administration said broadening eligibility for the $1.2 billion CityFHEPS program would drive costs up to $4.7 billion by 2030 — about the size of the city’s entire homeless services agency.
More than 65,000 households currently receive the CityFHEPS voucher, which stands for Fighting Homelessness and Eviction Prevention Supplement, making it the nation’s largest municipal housing assistance program. Recipients pay 30% of their income toward rent, with the city covering the rest. The Mamdani administration said it is ramping up investments in tenant protections and affordable housing, committing to building 200,000 new homes over the next decade.
City Hall spokesperson Matt Rauschenbach said the mayor “has been clear that CityFHEPS is an invaluable tool to prevent homelessness and support homeless New Yorkers. That is why our team is working hard to ensure that it is fiscally sound and sustainable for the long-term.” The expansion would make many people who don’t currently qualify for vouchers eligible, including those facing eviction, people in shelters who don’t qualify, those not working enough under current rules, and those earning too much money.
To be eligible for city rental assistance under current rules, a household’s income must be at or below 200% of the federal poverty line — meaning a single person cannot earn more than $31,300 a year and a family of four cannot exceed $64,300. The expansion would boost that threshold to 50% of the area median income, or about $56,700 for a single person and $81,000 for a family of four.
Under current requirements, recipients must work at least 10 hours a week to qualify, but the expansion would eliminate this work requirement. Advocates say expanding eligibility would save the city money by helping people avoid the shelter system, with the Legal Aid Society — representing Sollazzi — stating that providing vouchers for low-cost apartments people already live in would be cheaper than covering rent at more expensive units for those already evicted.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the CityFHEPS voucher program?
The CityFHEPS voucher, which stands for Fighting Homelessness and Eviction Prevention Supplement, is New York City’s largest municipal housing assistance program, currently helping more than 65,000 households pay rent by covering the portion not paid by recipients, who contribute 30% of their income.
Who would become eligible for rental assistance under the proposed expansion?
The expansion would make eligible New Yorkers who are currently housed but facing eviction, people in shelters who don’t currently qualify, those not working enough under current rules, and individuals earning too much under today’s limits — removing the 10-hour weekly work requirement and raising income eligibility to 50% of the area median income.
Why is the mayor opposing the City Council’s expansion plan?
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s administration argues that broadening eligibility for the $1.2 billion CityFHEPS program would be too expensive, projecting costs could rise to $4.7 billion by 2030 — roughly equivalent to the entire annual budget of the city’s homeless services agency — and says it is negotiating a lower-cost compromise while defending the program’s importance in court.
As debates continue over who should receive housing aid and at what cost, what balance should cities strike between preventing homelessness before it begins and managing the long-term affordability of support programs?
