CityFHEPS and Pathway Home Rule Amendments

Online comments: 3

• Corey Mann, LMSW

  As a provider supporting families who rely on CityFHEPS to remain housed, I strongly oppose the proposed increase in tenant rent contributions from 30% to 40% of income. Even for families with employment, the CityFHEPS subsidy is essential for managing the high cost of rent in New York City. Raising the rent burden for people using this subsidy risks destabilizing households who are already living paycheck to paycheck, and will ultimately push more families toward housing insecurity and homelessness. This change undermines the very purpose of CityFHEPS—housing stability—and would likely result in higher long-term costs for the city through increased shelter use and crisis services. I urge the administration to prioritize affordable permanent housing over short-term budget relief. Please find another solution rather than weaking a program that supports the most needy among us.

  Comment added May 7, 2025 2:55pm

• Marcus Gray

  As of January I have become a SOTA voucher holder in the shelter care system. Homelessness doesn’t disregard bills to pay and still being the breadwinner for family in need. I work and I am always up to my neck in debt. The proposed rent hike would be impractical as we’re already in a rock and a hard place. Mayor, it seems unfortunate to say. You made this proposal without seeming to be in hard times. Don’t hurt the hurting to please the favored.

  Comment added May 14, 2025 5:11pm

• Jonathan Tavarez

  My name is Jonathan Tavarez, from Bronx, NY. I work as a Program Director at a low-barrier Safe Haven program which temporarily houses people experiencing street homelessness within New York City. For people experiencing street homelessness who could live independently, the CityFHEPS voucher can be a helpful resource to access permanent housing. I am submitting a public comment in opposition to the Administration’s following changes as proposed, to the CityFHEPS Rule: Increasing the tenants rental share from 30% to 40% for households with earned income who are renewing with good cause beyond their fifth year in the program.

  I am extremely concerned by the City’s proposal which would make low to extremely low-income households rent-burdened, forcing them pay 40% of their income towards rent. This will not help households transition off the rental assistance voucher. It will instead make them less able to afford their daily living expenses in one of the most unaffordable places to live in the country.

  Single-person households in shelter must walk a financial tightrope to initially qualify for the program by maintaining their income below 200% of the Federal Poverty Limit. Due to their small household size, they can easily earn too much to qualify for the program. The City’s recent income limit increase for renewals up to 80% of the Area Median Income gives households greater ability to earn more without fear of losing their housing, but this proposed change is a step backwards. Our residents who can work find jobs in retail and the service industry earning minimum wage, and a full-time job working 35 hours a week pays just over $30,000 a year. Taking 10% more of their gross income means they would be left with only $18,000 before taxes to cover all other living expenses for a year!

  I urge the City to reconsider changing the CityFHEPS rule. New York should not rent-burden formerly homeless individuals who rebuilt their lives. In doing so, it will drive them towards debt and financial instability.

  Comment added May 15, 2025 1:12pm