Mayor pauses anti-sweep pledge, embraces modified enforcement under homeless services leadership
Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s administration announced February 18 that it will resume clearing homeless encampmentsreversing a campaign pledge made just weeks earlier. The policy shift came after nineteen to twenty New Yorkers died during a historic cold snap in early February, putting immediate political pressure on the new administration to act. Mamdani’s decision reveals tensions between democratic socialist ideology and practical governance realities. The mayor campaigned explicitly against encampment sweeps, calling them “failures” because they rarely result in housing placement. Yet facing crisis and criticism, he implemented modified sweeps led by the homeless services department rather than policea compromise attempting to distinguish his approach from predecessors while maintaining enforcement. The decision has sparked fury from homeless advocates who view it as broken promise and strategic abandonment of the most vulnerable.
The Campaign Promise: Ending Sweeps and Prioritizing Housing
Mamdani based his critique of sweeps on evidence. Research shows that between January and September 2024, 3,500 people were removed from encampments. Of these, only 114 were placed in shelters. More than 97 percent were simply displaced without housing placement. The sweeps scattered vulnerable people into parks, subways, and other public spaces, where conditions often worsen. Mamdani argued that without housing offer accompanying sweep enforcement, the policy is morally and practically indefensible. This critique resonated with homeless advocates and voting progressives who elected him with 51.5 percent of the Bronx vote and nearly identical margins in other boroughs. Upon taking office, Mamdani immediately paused the Adams administration’s encampment sweep policy on January 5, signaling a clean break from prior practice.
The Deaths: How a Cold Snap Shifted Political Calculation
Between February 4 and 6, a historic cold snap brought temperatures to single digits and wind chills below zero. New York City recorded nineteen to twenty deaths attributed to freezing conditions during this period. Mayor Mamdani initially defended his anti-sweep stance, noting that inquiries suggested no deaths occurred in encampments, with at least five individuals having permanent housing. He argued that his policy was fundamentally sound and that the deaths did not invalidate his position. Yet external pressure mounted. Business leaders, represented by Steven Fulop of the Partnership for New York City, urged Mamdani to reconsider. Media outlets, particularly the New York Post, intensified criticism. Manhattan Borough President Brad Hoylman-Sigal called for sweep resumption. City Council Speaker Julie Menin, a moderate Democrat, urged the mayor to “take a closer look” at implementation. Within days, Mamdani announced the policy reversal.
The New Policy: Modified Sweeps with Homeless Services Leadership
Rather than returning to the Adams modelpolice-led enforcement with seven-day notice and swift removalMamdani proposed modified sweeps. The Department of Homeless Services becomes the lead agency rather than the NYPD. Outreach workers provide initial notice on day one, then conduct “relentless outreach” daily for seven days before enforcement. After seven days of continued contact, the city will remove encampments, disposing of tents and belongings if residents refuse to accept shelter or other services.
Why Department of Homeless Services Leadership Matters
The distinction between police-led and DHS-led sweeps reflects Mamdani’s larger agenda of shifting responsibilities away from the NYPD toward health and human services agencies. Police presence can escalate situations and alienate vulnerable populations. DHS workers trained in homeless services and mental health response are theoretically better positioned to connect people with services. However, the core mechanism remains unchanged: state-enforced removal of encampments and confiscation of belongings.
The Homeless Advocate Response: Betrayal and Broken Trust
Homeless advocacy groups declared the reversal a broken promise and policy failure. The Coalition for the Homeless stated that Mamdani was “blindsided” by his own announcement. David Giffen, executive director, expressed concern that sweeps would damage trust between outreach workers and unsheltered people. “When a city worker shows up and throws out all your belongings, you’re not going to trust that person the next time they show up offering you a place to sleep inside,” Giffen said. The Legal Aid Society noted that sweeps create distrust that undermines long-term engagement. Christine Quinn of Win NYC stated disappointment in what she called “backpedaling” on commitments to the homeless community. Advocates demanded that instead of sweeps, the city commit to producing 60 thousand units of supportive housing for homeless New Yorkers over five years.
The Housing Question: Where Will Swept People Go?
The fatal flaw in Mamdani’s policy revision is the absence of sufficient shelter and housing capacity. When people are swept, the city offers emergency shelter beds, heated buses, or warming centers. Yet capacity is limited. On frigid nights, shelters operate at maximum capacity. Mobile warming centers serve small numbers. The actual outcome often involves people being moved temporarily, then returning to streets when weather warms and they leave shelters. True solution requires construction of supportive housing with wraparound services. The Mamdani preliminary budget includes shelter funding increases but no breakthrough housing production targeting homeless populations.
The Ideological Surrender: What It Means for Democratic Socialism
Mamdani framed his administration as advancing democratic socialist priorities: working-class power, housing justice, collective care. The homeless encampment reversal reveals tensions within this vision. Pure ideological commitment would maintain opposition to sweeps regardless of political pressure. Yet Mamdani, facing crisis and criticism, chose pragmatic accommodation. This suggests either ideological weakness or recognition that successful governance requires compromises. The question is whether this retreat indicates broader pattern of abandoning campaign promises under external pressure.
Comparative History: How Other Cities Approach Encampments
Some cities have pursued genuine alternatives. Austin, Texas implemented “Housing First” policy prioritizing housing placement before enforcement. Salt Lake City reduced chronic homelessness by 95 percent through supportive housing investment. These approaches require sustained funding and housing production that exceeds encampment sweeps costs. Mamdani has not committed to comparable investment levels. The difference between claimed “Housing First” policy and actual practice depends on implementation details.
The Political Risk: Activist Backlash and Coalition Fragmentation
Mamdani’s base includes both working-class New Yorkers concerned about public safety and homeless advocates prioritizing rights and dignity. The encampment reversal satisfies neither constituency fully. Public safety advocates may question why sweeps are gentler than predecessors. Homeless advocates have explicitly broken with Mamdani. An ongoing pattern of such compromises could fracture his political coalition and reduce enthusiasm for reelection in 2029.
The Credibility Question: Promises and Performance
This represents second major campaign promise reversal in Mamdani’s first fifty days. He also reversed opposition to express bus fares and initially declined endorsement of housing ballot measures before implementing them. Observers are tracking whether Mamdani is governing based on campaign platform or adjusting positions opportunistically based on political pressure. Mamdani has framed reversals as course corrections based on “facts on the ground.” Whether voters accept this explanation will likely shape his reelection prospects.
The Longer-Term Test: Will Supportive Housing Follow?
Ultimately, Mamdani’s modified sweep policy will be judged by outcomes. If the city simultaneously constructs supportive housing at scale and significantly increases placement rates above prior 3 percent levels, the policy could be validated. If sweeps continue with minimal housing placement, the policy becomes morally indefensible and politically unsustainable. The first year of implementation will reveal whether the administration is serious about “relentless outreach” as transition to permanent housing, or whether sweeps become mechanism for criminalization and displacement without housing investment. Read Coalition for the Homeless analysis and advocacy priorities. See NYC Department of Homeless Services data and program information.
