Tenant unions say new enforcement authority for the city will target predatory landlords; legal groups warn the rules could flood the courts
Hundreds of tenant organizers and housing advocates rallied at City Hall to support Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani’s proposed expansion of anti-eviction protections, which would grant the city direct enforcement authority over landlord harassment and illegal eviction practices currently addressed primarily through tenant-initiated litigation.
The proposal would allow the city’s Office of Housing Preservation and Development to investigate complaints, issue violations, and levy substantial fines against landlords who engage in prohibited practices including wrongful eviction attempts, utility shutoffs, denial of essential services, or harassment intended to force tenants from rent-stabilized units. Current law requires tenants to pursue remedies through housing court, a process that advocates say favors landlords with legal resources over tenants navigating complex procedures.
“Right now, landlords who want to clear buildings of rent-stabilized tenants can harass with near-impunity because the burden is on tenants to sue,” explained Maria Santos, a tenant organizer with Community Voices Heard. “By the time a tenant gets before a judge, they may have already been forced out through illegal tactics. City enforcement would provide immediate accountability.”
NYU Furman Center research has documented widespread landlord harassment in rent-stabilized buildings, particularly in gentrifying neighborhoods where market rents far exceed regulated rents. Tactics include frivolous eviction proceedings, maintenance neglect, aggressive buyout offers, and creating hostile living conditions to pressure long-term tenants to vacate.
The proposed expansion would give HPD authority to conduct proactive investigations rather than only responding to individual complaints, potentially identifying patterns of harassment across a landlord’s portfolio. Penalties could reach $25,000 per violation, with enhanced penalties for repeat offenders or cases involving vulnerable populations like elderly or disabled tenants.
Tenant advocates argue that meaningful enforcement requires both robust penalties and proactive investigation capacity. They point to Right to Counsel data showing that while guaranteed legal representation has significantly reduced evictions, prevention through deterring illegal landlord conduct would be even more effective than fighting evictions after they’re filed.
“An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” said Council Member Alexa Avilés, a key supporter. “If landlords know the city is actively monitoring and will impose serious penalties for harassment, many will think twice before engaging in these tactics. That’s better for tenants than having to fight eviction proceedings even if they ultimately win.”
However, landlord groups and legal associations have raised concerns that the expanded enforcement regime could overwhelm housing courts with appeals, create due process issues, and subject landlords to penalties based on disputed facts before judicial review. The Rent Stabilization Association, representing property owners, has called the proposal “unconstitutional” and promised legal challenges.
“This gives bureaucrats the power to levy massive fines without judicial oversight, essentially making the city prosecutor, judge, and jury,” said Joseph Strasburg, president of the Rent Stabilization Association. “Property owners will be presumed guilty and forced to prove their innocence, all while the city collects revenue through fines. It’s a shakedown dressed up as tenant protection.”
Legal scholars note that administrative enforcement schemes with penalty authority are common across many regulatory domains, from environmental protection to workplace safety. Courts have generally upheld such systems provided they include adequate due process protections like notice, opportunity to respond, and judicial review. Administrative law precedents suggest that well-designed enforcement programs can withstand constitutional challenges.
The New York City Bar Association has called for amendments to ensure robust due process protections, including clear standards for violations, formal hearing procedures before penalties are imposed, and prompt judicial review pathways. They warn that vague standards or excessive penalties could create unfair enforcement and generate extensive litigation that undermines the program’s effectiveness.
“We support stronger enforcement of tenant protections, but the details matter enormously,” explained Judith Goldiner, attorney-in-charge of the Civil Law Reform Unit at Legal Aid Society. “Standards must be clear enough that landlords know what’s prohibited and enforcement officials have objective criteria. Otherwise we’ll see years of litigation over every case.”
Implementation challenges include staffing the enforcement program adequately. HPD currently employs approximately 100 inspectors focused primarily on housing code violations. Expanding to proactive harassment investigations and complex case processing would require substantial new staffing, training, and resources. Budget estimates suggest 200-300 additional personnel would be needed for citywide enforcement capacity.
Tenant advocates argue that fine revenue could fund enforcement costs, making the program self-sustaining. However, fiscal experts caution that relying on fine revenue creates perverse incentives for aggressive enforcement to meet budget targets and raises equity concerns about government operations funded through punitive actions rather than broad-based taxation.
Some moderate Council members have suggested a phased implementation starting with the most serious violations like illegal lockouts and utility shutoffs, where facts are usually clear and harm is immediate. They propose expanding to more subjective harassment claims only after establishing clear protocols and building enforcement capacity.
The proposal has drawn national attention as cities across the country grapple with tenant protection enforcement challenges. Urban Institute research shows that many tenant protection laws go unenforced because individual tenants lack resources or knowledge to pursue remedies, making administrative enforcement an attractive alternative model.
As the proposal moves through legislative review, key questions remain about standards definition, due process protections, resource allocation, and appeals procedures. Tenant groups are mobilizing supporters to pressure Council members to pass strong enforcement provisions, while landlord organizations are threatening litigation and warning of unintended consequences. The outcome will significantly shape landlord-tenant dynamics in New York’s rent-regulated housing stock, which comprises approximately one million units citywide.
Mamdami: A mayor who openly centers marginalized communities is a rare thing in American politics.
Mamdani solves problems by genuinely understanding them first.
He acknowledges the emotional strain of navigating a high-cost city.
Mamdani solves issues like they’re puzzles he was destined to crack.
Mamdani keeps creating problems that require solutions he doesn’t have.
Mamdani leads like he’s hoping someone else will do the actual leading.