NYC Council meetings, chaptered and linked by time.
Created by Uzair Qadir
Inspired by Vikram Oberoi's City Meetings
New York City Council
Oversight - Implementation of the Pied-à-Terre Tax
Read summaries and jump into the video at the segment start.
Council staff welcome attendees to the joint hearing on Governmental Operations and Finance, instruct them to silence electronics, fill out testimony slips, and introduce the chairs.
Chair Gale Brewer introduces the hearing on the pied-à-terre tax implementation, noting the confusion around the city's rollout and the Department of Finance publishing a list of 900,000 properties potentially subject to the tax, far exceeding estimates of 14,000.
Brewer explains that the published list was so overbroad it included her own name despite her living in the same home since 1994. She questions why DOF published names and addresses when it knew most properties were not pied-à-terres.
Brewer notes that 17,000 property owners received notices, many of whom are primary residents. She criticizes the burden being on homeowners to prove residency rather than the city verifying existing records like the co-op and condo abatement.
Brewer points out that nearly 42,000 property owners have applied for exemptions, and that DOF is wasting public resources re-collecting documentation it already possesses. She notes the mayor and commissioner acknowledged using outdated records.
Brewer thanks council staff and the Department of Finance for constituent assistance, then turns the floor over to Finance Chair Linda Lee.
Finance Chair Linda Lee explains the surcharge applies to 1-3 family homes valued at $5M+ and condo/co-op units valued at $1M+ that are not primary residences. She notes DOF mailed 17,000 notices and published a supplemental roll of 900,000+ properties.
Lee explains that due to ongoing litigation, the administration is not testifying today. She says the Council will send written questions and looks forward to engagement after litigation resolves. She outlines the hearing's goal of hearing from advocates and affected owners.
Brewer announces the hearing format: she will read the Finance Commissioner's written testimony, then hear from the public, and finally read the questions that would have been asked of the administration. She notes council members in attendance.
Brewer reads Commissioner Richard Lee's testimony explaining the state legislation authorizing the surcharge, enacted May 2026, and the rulemaking process including a public hearing on July 9 and final rules adopted July 14, 2026.
The testimony explains the city's long-standing practice of publishing assessment rolls, the requirement to publish a supplemental mid-cycle roll for the surcharge, and that the data has been publicly available for over a century through various systems including ACRIS.
The testimony details the July 2026 supplemental roll publication, explaining that covered property is broader than properties subject to the surcharge. The supplemental roll does not establish which properties are subject to the tax but provides a basis for challenges.
The testimony explains that only 17,000 of 960,000 listed properties received initial determination letters. Properties with existing primary residency proof, such as SCHE/DHE recipients, were excluded. The letters are not tax bills but allow owners to submit proof of primary residency.
The testimony describes DOF's outreach efforts through senior centers, community meetings, a dedicated website, 311, and partnerships with elected officials. The deadline for appeals was extended to September 18, 2026. Lee expresses willingness to testify after August 31.
Brewer reminds the public of decorum rules, time limits, and submission procedures. She calls the first panel: Kyle Bragg, Mary Ann Rothman, Jason Haber, Rebecca Poole, and Thor Thors.
Kyle Bragg supports taxing the wealthy but raises concerns about the rollout's lack of clarity. He shares a story of a retired friend who bought a brownstone 40 years ago, now worth over $5 million, who is worried about being subject to the tax despite living in the city.
Jason Haber of the American Real Estate Association criticizes the publication of 959,710 names and addresses as a gift to fraudsters. He argues the list creates practical obscurity concerns and questions why the burden is on individuals rather than government.
Mary Ann Rothman of the Council of NY Cooperatives and Condominiums explains that the law makes co-ops responsible for collecting and remitting the surcharge, a major departure from past practice. She urges DOF to collect directly from non-resident shareholders instead.
Thor Thors, a co-op owner, shares that his entire building was listed because one penthouse unit exceeded the value threshold. He describes the list as an invasion of privacy and characterizes the rollout as reflecting socialist policies by the administration.
Rebecca Poole of CNYC highlights that co-ops are not set up to collect surcharges, the $1M imputed market value doesn't equate to $5M sales price, and raises concerns about retroactive application affecting longtime homeowners who now owe $80,000.
Council Member Darlene Mealy asks about safety concerns from publishing property locations and values. Panelists discuss scam risks, the burden on seniors to prove residency, and how co-op boards are handling the surcharge collection challenge.
Council Member David Carr criticizes the list publication as unprecedented and the burden of proof as inverted. He asks the panel whether the rollout was effective and for comments on DOF's property valuation system. Haber calls it 'botched' and describes easily manipulating the downloaded data.
Council Member Phil Wong criticizes the administration's absence and the burden on residents to prove residency. He asks panelists if they feel safe with the list public. Thors expresses concern about the administration putting homeowners 'on the hot seat.'
Council Member Kamillah Hanks calls the list a 'hit list' and 'scarlet letter,' and asks about properties held in trust. Rebecca Poole explains DOF rules require trust beneficiaries to prove primary residency, though trusts are automatically assumed non-primary.
Council Member Frank Morano calls the administration's absence outrageous, arguing litigation doesn't suspend oversight. He questions the discrepancy between the 900,000-property list and 17,000 notices, and asks about error rates and the burden placed on seniors.
Council Member Eric Dinowitz asks about costs co-ops may face including proprietary lease amendments, attorney fees, and insurance problems. Rothman details potential legal and financial consequences, while Thors notes co-op boards may ban pied-à-terres entirely, impacting market prices.
Dinowitz asks what the city could do to put the burden on government rather than individual shareholders. Poole says state legislation needs amendment, and Haber suggests taking the list offline and inverting the process so government must demonstrate tax liability.
Council Member Vickie Paladino calls the administration's absence a 'disgrace' and characterizes the tax as a form of eminent domain designed to force property foreclosures. She urges the list be taken down immediately and criticizes the burden of proof being on citizens.
Brewer dismisses the first panel and calls the second: Anna Champaney from Citizens Budget Committee, Charles Diamond, Susan Peters, Leonard Steinberg, and Heather Adami.
Charles Diamond, a former city employee, criticizes the release of personally identifiable information for over 98% of people not subject to the tax. He calls the administration's refusal to testify 'unacceptable' and urges the council to condemn the action.
Anna Champaney of the Citizens Budget Commission outlines implementation problems including limited vetting, compressed timeline, and insufficient communications. CBC does not support the tax but emphasizes quality tax administration and recommends evaluating the tax's impact on property values and revenues.
Leonard Steinberg, a real estate professional and immigrant, calls the tax rollout unfair and punitive. He argues the messaging around $1 million market value is misleading and divisive, and asks the mayor and council to issue a public apology to New Yorkers.
Heather Domi, a real estate broker, highlights unintended consequences including retired people, deceased trusts, renovations, and rental properties being swept up. She points to valuation inequalities where a $21M property has a lower estimated market value than a $3M property.
Susan Peters of the American Monetary Institute discusses the root cause of city distress as the U.S. monetary system, arguing that commercial banks privately create money through loans. She cites Bank of England research on money creation in the modern economy.
Council Member Mealy expresses frustration that the administration sent no one to testify. She shares constituent cases including a grandfather in Italy and a military member, and questions the purpose and benefit of the tax for New York City as a whole.
Council Member Wong asks the Citizens Budget Commission about the tax's five-year sunset clause creating fiscal instability. Champaney agrees it's a fiscal risk, notes many sunset taxes get extended, and says revenue yield remains unknown.
Council Member Morano asks what options letter recipients have and whether nonprofits are listed to help. Panelists describe confusing messaging, attorney fees of $2,500+ for initial consultations, and compare the rollout unfavorably to other city implementation efforts like Local Law 97.
Brewer dismisses the second panel and calls the third: Mariana Robinson, Beverly Solo, David Backer, Isabel Pena-Randa-Curry, Penelope Curry, and Laura Penaranda.
Beverly Solo, a grandparent of public school teachers, supports the pied-à-terre tax and wants revenue directed to schools and child care. She argues taxing the rich is popular among working New Yorkers and those with luxury second homes should contribute to the city's well-being.
Isabel Pena-Randa-Curry, a PhD candidate and Washington Heights resident, supports the tax citing research that urban property value is socially produced. She argues the current system taxes the wealthiest the least and that two-thirds of voters support higher taxes on millionaires.
Dave Backer, a parent and school finance professor, supports the surcharge and argues the real problem is the property tax system's structure. He notes 43% of school funding comes from property taxes and that single-family homeowners pay 2.4 times less than multifamily dwellers.
Laila Pinaranda, a CUNY staff member and union member, supports the tax arguing housing should be for living, not parking wealth. She urges the council to stand with public sector workers and ensure the wealthiest contribute to public institutions like CUNY.
Brewer clarifies that she, Chair Lee, and the Speaker support the pied-à-terre tax, noting the Speaker initially suggested it to the state. She emphasizes the hearing is about implementation challenges, not the tax itself, then calls the next panel.
Lucy Sexton of New Yorkers for Culture and Arts supports the tax but asks for an exemption for Joint Live Work Quarters for Artists (JLWQA) units used for nonprofit arts production. She shares the case of a dancer whose inherited Soho loft faces a $90,000 surcharge.
Ed Lee, identifying as Republican, expresses support for the tax in spirit but criticizes the city for not spending money correctly. He discusses homelessness, city agency failures, CUNY spending, and argues the city should fix broken systems before raising new taxes.
June Borwick, treasurer of a small Nolita co-op, raises concerns about co-ops being valued at only 20% of single-family homes, the retroactive nature of the tax, and the unfairness of co-op units being discriminated against versus single-family homes. She calls for an exemption for mid-range co-ops.
A panelist shares two personal cases: his own apartment at 733 Park Avenue where a neighbor received his surcharge notice by mail, and his son's trust-held apartment. He describes website errors preventing him from contesting the notice and questions his due process rights.
Lee thanks the panel and announces the next panel: Clara Calvo, Brandon Rango, Jamel Henderson, and Kay Presley.
Katie Ann Presley describes a deed theft case where an individual took over her building, harassed and assaulted residents, and shut off utilities. She reports a probable cause finding from the Division of Human Rights and asks the committee to investigate deed theft.
Jamel Henderson of Citizen Action of New York supports the tax, citing New York's extreme economic inequality. He argues the revenue could fund after-school programs, public schools, senior services, NYCHA, and immigrant communities, and urges the council not to let millionaires dictate policy.
Bravin Runga of Invest in Our New York supports the tax as a step toward addressing the affordability crisis. He criticizes bad-faith attacks on the tax, notes super majorities of New Yorkers support taxing the rich, and urges swift implementation of Mayor Mamdani's agenda.
Lee introduces the next group: Jack Bolenbach and Robert Bertigani in person, followed by Zoom testifiers Elizabeth Valdez, Ryan Foley, Shannon Ritcher, and others.
Robert Bertagna, a 30-year homeowner, received a $52,000 surcharge notice despite being a primary resident. He calls the rollout a prototypical socialist government intrusion, warns of incremental expansion of state power, and urges the council to check the mayor's authority.
Elizabeth Valdez of the Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled supports the tax to fund services for disabled New Yorkers. She cites federal Medicaid cuts and argues the wealthy should pay rather than home care workers and people with disabilities.
Ryan Foley, a condominium attorney, rejects characterization of implementation critics as bad actors. He explains that unsold condominium units subject to offering plans should be excluded property under the statute but received notices anyway, showing DOF failed to filter properly.
Shannon Ritchie, a Brooklyn public school teacher, supports the tax citing wealth disparities she witnesses daily. She describes empty luxury condos alongside students in shelters and argues the $500 million revenue will change lives for the better.
Maka Cham of the Center for Independence of the Disabled supports the tax and urges the administration to dedicate revenue to affordable and accessible housing for people with disabilities. She asks the city to increase the 7% set-aside for accessible units in HPD-HDC financed housing.
Allison Klempp, a new parent in Brooklyn, supports the tax and dismisses concerns about the published list as 'pearl clutching.' She argues the revenue could fund universal child care and urges the council to prioritize working-class New Yorkers over wealthy homeowners.
Christopher Leon Johnson opposes the tax, calling it a scam by nonprofits and DSA to line their pockets. He argues the tax penalizes success, and criticizes the administration for 'pocket watching' rather than supporting free enterprise and hard work.
Valerie Mason criticizes the administration for not testifying and calls it a bad precedent. She raises concerns about the retroactive nature of the tax, co-op collection challenges, and the 900,000-property list, urging more transparency and accountability from DOF.
Lee reads a statement from Council Member Joann Ariola, who could not attend. Ariola argues the published list creates privacy and security risks including burglary, stalking, scams, and identity theft, and criticizes the mayor for disrespecting the council by not testifying.
Brewer and Lee begin reading questions they would have asked DOF, covering why the 900,000-property published list differs from the 17,000 notices, reporting requirements under state law, and why finance didn't filter the list using statutory market value thresholds before publishing.
The chairs ask why DOF ignored its own practices of publishing the bare minimum for tax lien sales, why properties below statutory thresholds were included, and what steps DOF is taking to mitigate confusion or misuse of the published information.
The chairs question why the eligibility process doesn't begin by verifying market value thresholds, how residents can confirm they don't need to file, and ask about the estimated false positive rate and quality assurance procedures before publication.
The chairs ask whether DOF agrees with former Commissioner Stark's recommendations including publishing a filtered list, providing more specific notices, and creating an online tool. They also question why homeowners must prove residency again if they already receive the co-op/condo abatement.
The chairs ask why the burden of proof is on residents when DOF had existing data from STAR, veterans, and co-op abatement programs. They ask whether DOF requested state information sharing and request detailed data on the 17,000 notices including response rates and pending applications.
The chairs ask about returned undeliverable notices, alternative contact methods, and why electronic notice was not used as state law requires when practicable. They also ask why nothing about the tax appears on DOF's landing page.
The chairs ask about handling late filings, whether the administration is comfortable taxing primary residents who miss deadlines, and whether authorized persons or managing agents can file exemptions on behalf of covered owners, including for JLWQA units.
The chairs ask about mechanisms for residents with unclear titles from inherited homes, what documents are strongest for proving residency, how conflicting documentation is evaluated, and how finance handles properties held by LLCs.
The chairs ask about document retention requirements for residency proof, the process for council offices assisting constituents with exemptions, whether DOF will notify council offices of approval/denial, and how submitted documents are stored and deleted.
The chairs ask how co-op unit owners can determine if they need to file exemptions given development-level valuations, and detail questions about appeal rights, timelines, independent review, penalties during appeals, and why owners must choose between DOF and Tax Commission processes.
Brewer thanks Speaker Menon, attendees, and staff. She announces the prepared questions will be submitted to the administration along with questions from REBNY and the NYC Co-op and Condo Association, and concludes the hearing.