FY 2027 Executive Budget Hearing

(00:00:00)

We really appreciate the fact you guys printed so many copies for us, and that goes a long way. Welcome, Commissioner

(00:00:07)

Aaron Dalton and your team, and thank you all for joining us today to answer questions. On May 12, 2026, the administration released the Executive Financial Plan for FY 2026-2030 with a proposed FY 2027 budget of $124.7 billion. HRA's proposed Fiscal Year 2027 budget represents 11.7% of the administration's proposed FY 2027 budget in the Executive Plan, and this is a decrease of 0.2% from what was originally budgeted in the FY 2027 Preliminary Plan. This decrease results from several actions, mostly City-effects cost containment plans and cash assistance re-estimate savings. As of April 26, HRA's actual headcount is 10,810 and budget headcount is 12,445, with a vacancy rate of 13.1%.

DHS's proposed FY 2027 budget represents 3.4% of the administration's proposed FY 2027 budget, and this is a decrease of 8.9% from what was originally budgeted in the FY 2027 Preliminary Plan. This decrease results from several actions, including the shelter cost containment plan, a re-estimate to project costs for the asylum seeker response and the elimination of 183 positions. As of April 26, DHS's actual headcount is 1,616 and the budget headcount is 2,021, a vacancy rate of 20%.

In the Council's Preliminary Budget response we called on the Mayor to add $821 million to HRA's budget to invest in Fair Fares, to more accurately budget for DHS emergency shelters and to baseline one-time funding added in Fiscal Year 2026 only for housing stability micro grants for impacted individuals, the anti-harassment tenant protection legal services program and to continue funding the legal services pilot for survivors in divorce proceedings. We were pleased to see that this request was partially included in the plan, with more than half of our total funding request for FY being included and baselined in the out years.

However, we continue to hear the same contracting issues from human service providers. As a former community-based organization, I am all too familiar with the struggles providers face when reimbursements are not made in a timely manner. Delayed reimbursements put those organizations in difficult positions where they end up scrambling to make payroll and ensure that services do not get disrupted. In addition to delays in reimbursements, providers have experienced stagnant reimbursement rates, frequent changes in contracting steps and approvals and few opportunities to expand services and funding. These issues, on top of the losses of federal dollars, pose further challenges to organizations that serve the most vulnerable residents of our City. I look forward to hearing from you, Commissioner, on how DSS will help Human Resources Administration providers and our most vulnerable residents through these challenges now and in the years to come. I now want to turn to my co-chair of this hearing, Chair and CM Hudson, for her opening statement. Thank you.

(00:03:24)

Thank you so much, Chair Lee, and good morning. I am Crystal Hudson of the General Welfare Committee, and my pronouns are she/her. Thank you for joining us for the Fiscal Year 2027 Executive Budget hearing for the General Welfare Committee. We will hear from two agencies: the Human Resources Administration, or HRA, and the Department of Homeless Services, testifying under the umbrella of the Department of Social Services. I am pleased to be here with my colleague, Chair of the Committee on Finance, CM Linda Lee.

The City's proposed Fiscal Year 2027 Executive Budget totals $124.7 billion, of which DSS represents 15.1% of funds, making it the second largest agency budget after the Department of Education. This encompasses $14.6 billion for HRA and $4.2 billion for DHS.

There were notable changes made in the Executive Plan. Both agencies saw new needs totaling $235.4 million in Fiscal Year 2027, growing to approximately $263 million in the out years, for several programs including domestic violence shelters, legal services, Fair Fares and agency staffing. Due to the savings mandates and vacancy reductions required by the Mayor's Executive Order, HRA saw $275.2 million in savings in Fiscal Year 2027 and $274.1 million in savings baselined starting in Fiscal Year 2028. The largest savings will be achieved in the City FHEPS program through a cost containment plan. DHS only saw new needs in Fiscal Year 2026, with $72.7 million added for operational costs at contract and shelter providers and maintenance of IT programs.

The Executive Plan includes savings of $356.7 million in Fiscal Year 2027, largely from a shelter cost containment plan, with the level of savings decreasing in the out years. The Council's budget response called on the administration to restore baseline one-year funding included in Fiscal Year 2026 only for joint priorities, and I was glad to see that the administration baselined $25 million starting in Fiscal Year 2027 to support Fair Fares as well as baseline funding for legal services, housing stability micro grants for domestic violence impacted individuals and to continue the legal services pilot for survivors in divorce proceedings.

While I know all agencies were under a mayoral mandate to generate savings, I am concerned about how the vacancy reductions, which eliminated 183 positions at DHS and 79 positions at HRA, impact the agencies' ability to maintain their current level of services at a time when they are more needed than ever. I am also concerned about the areas where the budget does not adequately support the essential programs administered by HRA and the necessary level of staffing required to provide clients with services in a timely manner. While HRA has been able to improve the timeliness rates for SNAP and cash assistance applications, denial rates have increased, which is especially troubling given the recently implemented federal work requirements.

We have still been hearing that it is very difficult to get through to HRA by phone and that clients are experiencing very long wait times at centers. While DHS's shelter census has decreased slightly in the past few months, it remains above 80,000. Placements into subsidized housing must be accelerated in order to significantly decrease the number of people living in our City's shelter system. Programs such as City FHEPS are more important than ever and are the best way to move long-term shelter residents into stable, permanent housing.

However, this program is still challenging for many to access, on top of the difficulty of finding affordable housing in a very expensive city. I am concerned the City FHEPS cost containment savings will impact and further delay an already time-sensitive application process for clients. In today's hearing we look forward to discussing adjustments made in the Executive Plan, including new needs and the vacancy reductions and savings.

It is the Council's job to carefully review the budgets and operations of City agencies to ensure that we are good stewards of public dollars and that we are providing our City's most vulnerable residents with the services they need, and this is a job I take very seriously. Finally, I would like to thank General Welfare Committee staff for their work on preparing this hearing: Maria Roman, Senior Financial Analyst; Elizabeth Shoulders Garcia, Senior Financial Analyst; Julia Paramus, Assistant Director; Amanda Killian Owen, Senior Counsel; Pierina Rosenberg, Senior Policy Analyst; Justin Campos, Policy Analyst; Brian Scarfo, Finance Committee Counsel; my Chief of Staff Andrew Wright; Aleka Ruintan, Senior Manager of Policy and Communications; and Demi Brown, my Deputy Chief of Staff. And now Commissioner Dalton, our Finance Council will swear you in. Thank you. So a quick housekeeping announcement that I have been making at every hearing, which is that as a reminder, I see a lot of our awesome nonprofit provider staff who are here today, so I wanted to remind

(00:08:28)

everyone that we are having all of the agency public testimony on Wednesday, June 10, beginning at 9:30. So all the City agencies' public testimony, we are doing it all in one day, so it is going to be a long day, but we will try to make it as interesting as possible and on time as possible. So please make sure to sign up for public testimony on Wednesday, June 10. I will now turn it over to our committee counsel to swear in the

(00:09:11)

Administrator Fellini, First Deputy Commissioner... okay. Chief Johns: I do. And Officer Gonzalez?

(00:09:28)

Good morning. I want to thank Speaker Menin, Chair Hudson, and all members of the Committee on General Welfare and members of the Committee on Finance for holding today's hearing and for the opportunity to testify about the Department of Social Services Fiscal Year 2027 Executive Budget. My name is Aaron Dalton, Commissioner for the New York City Department of Social Services. I am joined by Human Resources Administration Administrator Scott French, Department of Homeless Services Interim Administrator Christine Fellini, First Deputy Commissioner Sarah Togard, Chief Program Performance and Financial Officer Richard Johns and Chief Strategy Officer Chris Gonzalez. Collectively we represent approximately 12,500 hardworking staff who dedicate their lives to supporting New Yorkers living at or below the poverty line.

As I approach my first three months as Commissioner, I want to express my gratitude to the dedicated staff as well as our nonprofit providers, advocates, community partners and clients who have helped me to better understand the extraordinary scope and complexity of New York City's social safety net. Since stepping into this role I have visited dozens of shelters and HRA benefits access centers across the five boroughs, shadowed outreach teams working with New Yorkers experiencing street homelessness and joined staff in door-to-door outreach efforts to help SNAP recipients understand new federal work requirements and avoid losing critical benefits. These experiences have deepened my appreciation for both the challenges our clients face and the commitment of the people who serve them every day.

I have spent these first months listening and learning. While I have gained valuable insight, I recognize there is much more to learn, and I look forward to continuing that work in partnership with all of you. I would like to take this opportunity to express my appreciation for the conscientious leadership of the New York City Council as we engage in the challenging issues DSS addresses. I have had a chance to meet with a number of Council Members during my time here and hear about the successes, ideas and concerns that impact your constituents. For those of you I have not engaged with directly yet, I look forward to that future collaboration. Supporting vulnerable populations, troubleshooting on-the-ground challenges in neighborhoods as they arise and delivering social services to New Yorkers that meet the high standards Mayor Mamdani set out is consistently on my mind and in our work and in our budget, the topic at hand today.

DSS is pleased to play a major part in pursuing the whole-of-government vision presented by Mayor Mamdani's housing plan published last week, "Block by Block: The Housing Plan for a New Era." Alongside our sister agencies, including the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, the New York City Housing Authority, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene and New York City Health and Hospitals, DSS serves as a partner in tackling the housing crisis and uplifting the mission of making our City more affordable for working people. DSS's contributions to that comprehensive housing strategy include investments in technology and systems that connect New Yorkers experiencing homelessness to housing, streamlining the supportive housing application process, pursuing reforms to minimize the amount of time people spend in shelter and breaking down bottlenecks and barriers crucial to housing stability to better serve clients.

As you know, DSS serves approximately 3 million New Yorkers on any given day. The consolidated management structure and the shared mission of the two agencies provides an integrated continuum of client services that helps create a path to sustainability for low-income New Yorkers. Our work is grounded in three priorities: streamlining access to benefits and services, addressing homelessness and housing instability and promoting economic stability.

I will begin by providing an overview of the Executive Budgets. The FY 2027 budget for HRA, including City funds, is... the majority, over 70% of the budget, is earmarked for benefits that the City administers on behalf of the State of New York. Almost 98% of the HRA budget provides benefits and support to New Yorkers, including cash assistance benefits for which benefit levels and eligibility rules are set by State law and regulations. Medicaid, also regulated by the State, which includes home care, managed care, mental health, substance use services and hospice care. The City pays a portion of the Medicaid costs out of City funds, representing 57% of the HRA City-funded budget. HRA sends these funds directly to the State to be used along with State and federal funds to pay medical providers and managed care plans.

The remainder of the City funds are allocated as follows: 16% for public assistance, 18% for rental assistance and homeless prevention, 8% for administration costs, 2% for legal services and 1% each for AIDS services administration, employment services, the community food connection and domestic violence services. HRA also administers SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. These benefits are federally funded at about $5 billion a year and do not flow through our budget but represent another critical benefit that HRA provides.

Now I will provide an overview of the DHS budget. DHS is committed to providing safe, temporary shelter, connecting New Yorkers experiencing homelessness to permanent housing and addressing unsheltered homelessness. DHS has an FY 2027 budget of... of which... is City funds. The agency has a headcount of approximately 1,900 and with its not-for-profit provider partners it is the largest municipal organization dedicated to addressing homelessness in the United States.

Almost 99% of the DHS budget supports shelter for families and individuals and services for the unsheltered, including outreach and low-barrier beds: $1.4 billion for adult shelter at 45%, $1.25 billion for family shelter at 40%, $450 million for outreach services at 14% and the remaining 1% for general administration.

In the FY 2027 Financial Plan, this administration is continuing to make investments in our critical programs with over... added in baseline funding, including for City FHEPS rental assistance program, cash assistance, food assistance programs, affordable housing services, additional services to support New Yorkers experiencing street homelessness and support for nonprofit providers.

As I have highlighted in my testimony, DSS budgets are significantly reliant on federal funds, but more importantly, the 3 million people we serve receive much benefit from the federal government. Enacted in 2025, the federal budget reconciliation bill known as HR 1 significantly changed both SNAP and Medicaid in ways that will directly affect New York City residents.

(00:16:23)

Rely on these programs to meet basic needs. The law expands work requirements for SNAP and Medicaid, increases administrative reporting requirements and reduces federal funding while shifting more cost to states. As a result, many eligible individuals risk losing their access to food assistance or health coverage due to stricter eligibility rules or paperwork burdens rather than changes in income or need. For a city like New York, where hundreds of thousands of families rely on SNAP to afford groceries and millions depend on Medicaid for health care, these changes will increase food insecurity, lead to loss of health coverage and place additional strain on local safety net providers such as hospitals, community health centers and food banks.

As you know, under HR One, SNAP work requirements were significantly expanded by a new definition of able-bodied adults without dependents, which expanded the age range from 18 to 54 to 18 to 64, while also lowering the age of dependence from under 18 to under 14. The law also removed several important categorical exemptions for veterans, people experiencing homelessness, qualified non-US citizens and young adults who aged out of foster care.

SNAP recipients who need to comply with these expanded work requirements must complete at least 80 hours per month of work or job training, or volunteer for a set number of hours based on their monthly grant, starting in 2026, just earlier this year. Individuals are allowed three months of non-compliance before their benefits would be reduced or closed. June 26, 2026, this week, is the first month and first week where an individual's SNAP benefits could be impacted. Approximately 342,000 New Yorkers receive SNAP and we estimate 342,000 individuals on SNAP were impacted by the new work requirement — that is, they are aged 18 to 64, have no children under the age of 14 in the household and are not otherwise disabled.

Since the passage of HR One we have pursued a two-part strategy: an all-of-government effort to exempt eligible New Yorkers and an all-of-community effort to engage people still at risk of losing their benefits. Our efforts have helped more than 220,000 SNAP recipients potentially impacted by work requirements obtain exemptions. Thanks to direct outreach to the remaining 126,000 identified SNAP recipients, we have helped more than 80,000 New Yorkers comply with work requirements through engagement in employment, volunteer and vocational opportunities. We have conducted dozens of information seminars and trainings with community organizations and partners, including elected officials. We have conducted targeted door-knocking campaigns in partnership with the Mayor's Public Engagement Unit and amplified awareness through a variety of public media outlets to ensure that clients had and continue to have ample opportunity to connect with us to mitigate any impacts of the new eligibility criteria.

While this is encouraging and a testament to the dedicated work of HRA staff and government partners as well as the support of partners, advocates and elected officials, approximately 42,500 SNAP recipients are potentially impacted by benefit reductions or closures. We strongly encourage anyone who has experienced a reduction or a closure to their benefits due to these work requirements to contact us at 718-SNAP-NOW. It is not too late to save your benefits and we can help you understand how to do that.

(00:19:41)

Keeping New Yorkers in their homes, moving families and individuals out of shelter and helping these households remain stably housed are all primary goals for the agency. I now want to talk about our progress in these areas.

(00:19:53)

First, I would like to provide a quick update on our shelter population.

(00:19:56)

As of May 28, the overall census was 82,640. Of the 82,600, approximately 52,400 or 65% are families made up of children and their adult parents and caregivers. Children make up 34%, or more than a third, of all people in shelter.

(00:20:16)

The remaining population is made up of single adult men, 18,167; single adult women, 7,268; and adult families, 4,838.

(00:20:26)

As you know, the City evaluates New York's shelter census continuously to ensure we are meeting our legal mandate to provide temporary housing services for all who need them. While we have seen a decline in families with children populations at intake, we have also seen increases in the numbers of single adults entering the system, including asylum seekers who will be exiting the last remaining hotel at Belnord site by the end of the calendar year.

(00:20:50)

In New York City, 97% of people experiencing homelessness are sheltered, but that 3% is a particular area of focus.

(00:20:57)

DHS continues to aggressively expand low-barrier capacity, which are shelter types targeted to those experiencing unsheltered homelessness — things like safe havens and stabilization beds. As of June 2026, DHS has a total of 4,290 low-barrier beds online, 30 of which Mayor Mamdani accelerated to be available during this past winter. We expect an additional 350 safe haven beds to come online before the end of the year.

In conjunction with the low-barrier bed contributions, on February 18, Mayor Mamdani announced a revised unhoused response policy that shifted primary responsibility for encampment engagements for those experiencing unsheltered homelessness from NYPD to DHS. Under this protocol, DHS is the lead for issuing notices, conducting outreach, offering placements, conducting cleanings after a seven-day notice period, with NYPD present only as needed for safety support.

(00:21:54)

The policy emphasizes daily outreach during the notice period, with teams returning consistently to offer shelter placements, safe haven beds and connections to services. The administration has committed 30 million dollars as baseline funding for outreach expansion and 11.9 million dollars for Health and Hospitals to support increased street medicine and behavioral health engagement.

(00:22:15)

This includes additional HOURS units and H+H, and an additional Bridge to Home site for individuals with serious mental illness.

(00:22:29)

DHS remains committed to connecting New Yorkers to permanent housing and keeping them stably housed. We have seen record-breaking increases in the number of permanent housing placements. As of April 26, through nearly 13,000 households comprised of nearly 27,900 New Yorkers were able to obtain permanent housing or stay in their homes using City-funded vouchers, reflecting a 24% increase year over year.

Furthermore, DHS was honored to be part of Mayor Mamdani's 100-day accomplishments announcement, celebrating another 10,000 subsidized exits from shelter through our Home Base homelessness prevention programs. In fiscal year 2026, more than 30,900 households have been enrolled, exceeding the contractual goal with months still remaining in the fiscal year. This represents 18,100 households that received services to remain in their homes and 12,800 households who received aftercare services from Home Base to keep them stably housed.

(00:23:27)

Economic stability remains a key focus of our work at HRA. We recognize that more and more New Yorkers rely on City resources to make ends meet. In addition to the public benefits, rental assistance and other essential resources we offer to help people get back on their feet, HRA career services and supports enable New Yorkers to secure steady income and live sustainable lives. Career services continues to expand the scale and reach of its workforce development efforts through community hiring and other employment initiatives. To date, nearly 8,500 public benefits recipients have been connected to employment through programs helping New Yorkers access quality jobs that support long-term economic stability and self-sufficiency.

(00:24:10)

The Pathways to Industrial and Construction Careers program — that is the PICC program — continues to advance training, education and job placement opportunities. To date, the program has enrolled 2,810 in construction and industrial training programs, achieved 1,556 training completions and placed 1,345 participants into employment, including more than 1,100 union positions. Jobs Plus, HRA's place-based employment initiative serving NYCHA developments, continues to connect public housing residents to the workforce, financial empowerment and supportive services. Through May 31, 2026, Jobs Plus providers reported 926 placements, enrolled 2,345 individuals and served 8,532 participants across 10 sites. The City plans to release the next Jobs Plus RFP in the summer of 2026 with an anticipated program start date of July 1.

In closing, I want to recognize our partners across government, including the New York City Council, the provider community, advocates and community-based organizations who deliver these essential services every day. Together, we remain committed to improving access, strengthening stability and supporting vulnerable New Yorkers with dignity and compassion.

(00:25:27)

We appreciate the opportunity to testify today and welcome any questions you have. Thank you. Thank you so much, Commissioner. Also, we have been joined by CM Wilson, CM Wong, Deputy Speaker Williams, CM Restler and CM Brewer. So I am just going to actually ask a few questions before my prepared ones, just based on the testimony. So is that timeline correct? By the way, I am starting with the Jobs Plus. So the next RFP is coming out in the summer of 2026, but then it starts in... it is...

(00:25:59)

It is 2027. It is a typo in...

(00:26:02)

Okay. Sounds like... wow, that is a really fast turnaround time. Okay, that makes a lot more sense. Sorry. Yeah, okay. And I am just really glad to see that you have highlighted that the SNAP work reauthorization and the new requirements around that are an issue, because that is one thing that when Chair Hudson and I conducted a roundtable, some of the providers — this was one of the main things that they were discussing — was that it is a challenge with the new work requirements. So I just wanted to know, I mean, I know that you said that you are in the process of helping some of those transitions and also giving waivers, which is great to hear, but what are some other things in the next months and out years that you are planning on doing around this?

(00:26:54)

Yeah, I can start and then I am happy to turn it over to Administrator French as well. Yes, as you note, this is a systemic attack on the social safety net, not intended to help people get access to work, but intended to shift cost to the states and increase the paperwork burden for people. You know, the vast majority of folks on SNAP are already working. And so, yes, I think we have approached this — as you will hear it — as a theme: an all-of-government effort and an all-of-community effort. So we started the process with 342,500 people at risk. Through partnerships with Health and Hospitals and looking at other data matches, we were able to exempt 65% of those folks. That means that they are exempt at least for the time being and they do not have to month over month recertify that they are working. So that takes all of those folks essentially off the table for having to comply with the work requirements. This is actually not nothing. This is, you know, government excellence at its best, using all of the resources we have to come alongside people and combat a systemic attack on the social safety net.

That approach was complemented importantly, as you sort of get down the funnel, for people who still have to comply, with a really concerted community effort. You are probably hearing from community-based organizations — us reaching out to them, their constituents, their clients reaching out to them, wanting to make sure that they comply. Administrator French and his team and the whole staff have done just a tremendous amount of work to educate folks and we rely on our benefits partners to do that as well, doing everything from phone banking, reaching out multiple times — which is not actually required by the regulations — and door knocking. I had the opportunity to door knock myself in the Bronx a couple of weeks ago. So I think we keep this up. We will not get tired. We will continue to look at creative ways to make sure that everyone who is eligible for an exemption receives one. Those data matches continue month over month and we will continue to do the work to reach out to people who are impacted.

I will say, on one positive note, while the number of people receiving strike notices was really at first over 40,000, when we look at people receiving new strike notices that is down to 15,000. So we are starting from a much smaller base as we continue to go forward. So what you will see from us is a sort of relentless thinking and creativity on the government side to make sure we do everything we can to offer people the exemptions they are eligible for, and then a really strong ground game to get everybody else.

(00:29:49)

Okay, perfect. And I know we have a lot of great groups in the room who are helping with that effort as well. So look forward to hearing from them on June 10 — I had to plug that in again, sorry. Okay. Just really quickly before you go into more budget-related questions: the folks that you are seeing with serious mental illness — how has the process been for folks who are moving in and out of the shelter system? Has that been smooth? I know that there are obviously outreach teams and there is a bunch going on. So just wanting to hear how that has been happening in terms of the handoffs between the different City agencies and if it has been smooth, and what you think could be improved. Just curious to...

(00:30:33)

...hear your perspective. Sure. Thank you. And if Administrator Fellini wants to jump in as well, I am happy to have that. I have been here just a couple of months, but what I see in my colleagues across HRA and H+H is really strong cooperation and collaboration. I think we know that we are all serving the same clients. I think we know we can do better to make sure that we are sending the right teams at the right times and making sure those handoffs are really tight so that people do not fall through the cracks. In a number of different ways we are practicing that collaboration. City Hall has a...

(00:31:18)

...like a task force or working group. There is a task force — that is what City Hall has empowered HRA and DHS to hold — a task force around people with serious mental illness who are the hardest to serve. Our colleagues participate in the work that I am helping to lead on the ground, which often includes people with serious mental illness and other substance use disorders. We are working hand in hand again to make sure that we are sending the right resources and offering the right placements. So I think we see the collaboration playing out early and effectively. Is there more we can do? I am sure there is. I think, you know, we have important work we can do at the front door of shelter to make sure that we are identifying people with those needs and sending them — even within the shelter system — to the shelters that would be most appropriate for them, and then making sure they are connected to the broader Medicaid-funded behavioral health system. We cannot do it all within the shelter system. The health care system has a complementary role. And as we know, because we want to prevent this revolving door and the cycling that we constantly see, obviously if we can get people into housing, out of shelters and into prevention...

(00:32:34)

...services, that is obviously the goal. So it is good to know that there is coordination, but oftentimes I have to say in the past, as a service provider, it has been frustrating because there are so many silos and different regulations and different processes, both at the state and City level and then within the City. So it is good and hopefully that will keep happening where conversations between agencies are constantly happening. So thank...

(00:32:58)

...you. Okay. Going into really quickly the savings exercise — of course, obviously the Mayor released Executive Order 12 on the Chief Savings Officers and the plans for each agency. How did you decide which savings to include in the executive plan and what was the process and what metrics were used to make the...

(00:33:21)

...assessment. Thank you. That is a great question. So Executive Order 12 sought to identify both the Chief Savings Officer to review the operations and to find opportunities to streamline our processes. Our Chief Savings Officer is Carrie Chung, our Deputy Commissioner for Budget and Operations. We took a very collaborative and extensive approach to our savings initiative. We looked across the agency to engage more of our offices to help us find savings, and particularly find savings that protect the services that New Yorkers who rely on our services require, and to take meaningful steps to make the City more affordable. So we did find a number of efficiencies that range from contracts — by either eliminating or renegotiating contracts or insourcing — we optimized our claiming, we re-estimated our future costs for programs to more properly align our budget, all with no reduction to services for New Yorkers.

(00:34:25)

Okay, perfect. So you just answered my next question. So there are no direct services or programs that will see a decrease in funding related to the programs? Correct. Correct. Okay. And were any programs or aspects of this budget exempt from this exercise and its requirements? Again, we would not say a program was exempt, but we did take a meaningful approach to not impact services. Okay. And I know that funding for many social service programs comes from a mix of revenue sources. How much state and federal funding will be lost due to the savings included in the executive plan, if any, and can any of it be retained and diverted to other programs?

(00:35:09)

That is a great question. Generally speaking, we were targeting our City tax levy funded portions of our contracts. Our federal funds are, you could sort of think of them as fairly fluid, so funds that are not claimed as a result of the efficiencies that we took would likely just be claimed in other areas of the agency.

(00:35:33)

But not to sort of compliment, but I know you cannot mix the line items per se, but hopefully it can be used to help any areas that did not have any...

(00:35:46)

Yeah, maybe the more appropriate way to say it is that we took efficiencies in things where we thought we were either not going to spend funds or where we could spend funds or leverage federal sources more efficiently, so I would not think of it as a loss of federal funds because of spending three months.

(00:36:04)

Okay. The Mayor released an update on the savings mandate, stating that contracts — and I think you had alluded to this in your testimony — are beginning to be insourced. The press release stated that the agency will end services provided in shelters, partnering to renegotiate the contracts, and that the contract with McKinsey would be terminated. Which services will be insourced? Please walk us through.

(00:36:36)

How will you transition such services from contracted to insourced, and will you need to hire additional staff to support the insourced services? So the insourcing as a part of this was largely related to what you noted — largely related to our IT services. We will be hiring City employees and having less of a reliance on contracted vendors for just normal, general IT operations.

(00:37:09)

Okay. Can you tell me more about what kind of work you used external consultants for and how many contracts you currently have with external consultants such as...

(00:37:20)

McKinsey? Sure. So we had two consultants that were like McKinsey — that was McKinsey and Guide House. Those contracts ended earlier in this fiscal year and we are not continuing those services.

(00:37:34)

Okay. What was the actual spending on the consultants for FY25, going back to the last fiscal year, and can you provide the Committee with a breakdown of the contract amounts, services and descriptions?

(00:37:54)

I will have to get back to you on those. Okay, if you could follow up that would be great.

(00:38:07)

And then would you be able to provide any more details about the contract — I know I am going to stand on this a little bit — with McKinsey?

(00:38:14)

That was terminated, and what kind of services was the contract for, and how much would have been spent had it not been terminated? I can talk about what the contract was utilized for. We were working with McKinsey to develop a tool to support the SNAP payment error interventions that we are doing in the agency. As part of HR One, one of the very significant measures is that the federal government will shift a portion of actual SNAP benefit costs, which have been covered by the federal government, to the states and likely to the localities based upon your payment error rate.

So we were working with McKinsey to develop a quality assurance tool that utilized AI to be sort of a last check on the work that the worker had done up to that point. It is really a sort of cross-reference looking at what did the worker enter into the system and how does that compare to the information the worker had access to in the system. So say a paycheck said a person is paid every two weeks and the worker mistakenly put in that the pay was every week — this tool would basically flag for a worker to go back and check this because it seems like there is a disconnect, and then the worker would take action to resolve any issues. So that is the tool we were working with McKinsey on.

(00:39:42)

It does not replace anybody's work or a worker, right? It is really meant to be a supportive system to help. Okay. And then internally, how many IT employees will you be hiring and when is it included in the...

(00:39:57)

Budget also? Yes. So the budget includes... I am sorry, just to go back one moment. We will — I have the amounts. I found them in the book. The amounts for the contracts: for McKinsey for FY26 it was $9 million. For Guide House, that was also mentioned, it was $300,000.

(00:40:27)

And I think you had asked about FY25, so that was about $450,000. How much? I am sorry — $450,000. Okay. Can...

(00:40:34)

In FY25 for Guide House. Okay, great. The one thing to keep in mind for these contracts: these were on-demand contracts, so the spending levels would be kind of variable each fiscal year.

(00:40:47)

So for the upcoming fiscal year we will look at insourcing, or really conduct the services we would have used them for in-house, with either some employees or relying on other City agencies to support us. So we would not have an estimate for FY27. Okay. Because for example, the employees — you are not going to be using the outside consultants for support. Is that going to be in-house with you all or is that going to be in a partnership? How would that work?

(00:41:18)

So we received 13 additional headcount — 13. Okay — in the Executive Budget, and those will be on our payroll. Okay, perfect.

(00:41:32)

And in the Executive Plan we saw savings reflected...

(00:41:35)

For Wi-Fi in shelters, which I know is a big thing as well, but did not see any IT insourcing savings reflected. Was the IT insourcing included in the Executive Plan for either, and if so, how much?

(00:41:53)

I will start with the savings. So the agency had, as you know, substantial fiscal cliffs, so the savings that would have been included would have been offset by the increase that was provided for the departments. We can get you what the savings estimates were for that. I will take the Wi-Fi. So for the Wi-Fi, there are two components to it. First, the Wi-Fi had initially been included in the budget for OTI. By moving it into our budget we are able to claim based on the claiming rates through the individual shelters, so that will generate federal resources. In addition, OTI has been a really great partner in this Wi-Fi initiative and they were successful in negotiating lower rates for our Wi-Fi providers.

(00:42:46)

Thank you. And then my last question on this line of questioning about the consultants: between FY2014 and FY2027, the City paid McKinsey $275 million to reduce prison assaults on Rikers Island. However, multiple flaws were found in the firm's methodologies, including allegedly changing some of the results of a pilot, and so the City ultimately abandoned all of McKinsey's recommendations after they proved to be ineffective. Was the agency aware of that incident when you hired them?

(00:43:22)

When we procured both the McKinsey and the Guide House contracts, that was through a competitive process. It went through that particular process, and then as the Chief said, the contract itself was based upon a per-project basis that we were utilizing them for. So in the case of what we were doing with them, that was really working together to build a tool — not for them to be doing analysis. It was based upon our own understanding and knowledge of where we needed to focus around the payment error rate and what we knew to be the issues. So on a project-by-project basis that they were utilized for, it was very specific and focused on a very particular project.

(00:44:20)

Okay. So throughout the process — because obviously if there are very clear guidelines around what the expectation is — my assumption, and correct me if I am wrong, is that once you felt that they were no longer meeting those needs, that is sort of partially the reason for the termination. Correct?

(00:44:37)

Yeah, the occasion for the termination is that we believe that we do not need to have kept either one of them on to continue the work that we have been doing. As the Chief said, we can do that work and support it internally or in partnership with other agencies.

(00:44:52)

Okay, and then in terms of the sort of incorrect guidance — maybe, perhaps, if that is a correct way to phrase it — that they would give you based on this report...

(00:45:06)

Is that also another reason why it was abandoned? So not just that you could do it in-house, but that the results were not in alignment with what you were all seeing? I cannot speak to that prior report. I do not think any of us worked here at that time. I think the decision to not continue the contract with them was based upon our internal determination that the work that we have been doing is something we could do internally or across agencies within the administration.

(00:45:35)

Okay, perfect. And so, as I mentioned in my statement, the Council hears from a lot of the contracted human service providers about issues with contracting delays, lack of increase in reimbursement rates and frequent changes in the contracting steps. So what is the average number of days it takes HRA to provide reimbursements to providers when they submit...

(00:46:03)

Invoices? Thank you. It is a really important issue and something we take very seriously, and we acknowledge the challenges for nonprofits when...

(00:46:09)

Those payments are not coming. So as of March 2026, the average cycle time from invoice submission through payment is an average of 31 days. 31 days. Okay. And...

(00:46:23)

Does that include the potential back and forth if there are questions or issues with certain invoices, or is that outside of that?

(00:46:31)

That is assuming there are no issues with the invoice — that includes the back and forth.

(00:46:35)

Inclusive of back and forth. Okay. And have there been any major delays due to the change in the agency's data management or the contracting system, and if so, what has been done to address the issue? Anyone want to take that?

(00:46:50)

Thank you for the question. When the agency transitioned to the new citywide Passport system, there were some snags as we all learned the new system and the nuances of submissions and invoicing processes. Since then, the agency has taken a very proactive approach to monitor what we see in the system, to proactively outreach to providers, to listen to the concerns that they have raised, to make sure that we are resolving any payment issues as quickly as possible.

(00:47:22)

Okay. Because I believe Passport has been around for a while now. I know that there have been hiccups between Passport and just the transition between the two, but I know that it was originally started when Mayor de Blasio was here. So if there are still delays and issues — I know you are saying most of it has been resolved — but have you been in regular contact with MOCS? Absolutely.

(00:47:43)

We meet with MOCS regularly. Okay.

(00:47:47)

Does the agency have an accounting of all nonprofit contracting and payment delays, and if so, can you share this with the Committee? Please include the number of contracts experiencing delays with the reason for the delay.

(00:47:59)

I can offer some numbers there, and if there is additional information you need, please do let us know. Sure. So across our contracts, we have an on-time payment rate of 68%, so that is pretty good. Within the delays, about 14% of them are within 30 days and none go beyond 365 days, so we are processing timely. When there are delays, they are mostly within the first month.

For the DHS numbers, it is a little bit lower — it is about 41%. There, where there are delays, many of them are in the first 30 days — that is 14% as well — but we do have a group that is between 181 days and 365 days, that is about 26%, so that is something we are watching very carefully and taking a look at. We work very closely with both MOCS and MANZ to track items across the contract registration and invoicing process, and talk with our providers very regularly to make sure that we are addressing the pain points they have.

(00:49:15)

Okay. And the cited 68% on time — how many contracts or providers is that, and the same with DHS? Yeah, we probably have to get you that number. I do not have it noted here, unless somebody...

(00:49:29)

Knows it off the top of their head. Okay. We will get you that number on that. Okay,

(00:49:35)

perfect. When the contracting process changes, what steps do you take to inform your providers of where the changes are and that they do not cause delays?

(00:49:48)

So we do a couple of things on contract changes, or just contracts and payments in general. We do meet regularly with the providers. We do both meet with the executive directors and meet regularly with their CFOs. We also have smaller working groups that we have with groups like Human Services United. So we are trying to stay in constant contact with our providers. We also like to get feedback before we issue guidance to ensure that the changes we make will not have unintended consequences in the contracts.

(00:50:24)

Okay. And do you usually ask about changes? Because if there was like a small sample of providers that you could go to and say, hey, what would...

(00:50:34)

Happen to you and how would this impact your implementation or daily activities if these changes were made? Sure.

(00:50:41)

It sort of depends on what the change is. Again, we have a larger group that functions with all of our providers, but we also have a smaller working group of CFOs that are sort of self-selected on who wanted to participate, and we will bounce ideas off of them on changes. Because again, we have a good understanding of what happens on our end, but on their end, they understand their operations better than we would.

(00:51:08)

Okay, and hopefully it is a good range of larger groups versus smaller groups because those challenges also look very different. Yes. Okay. On legal services contract delays — we have also heard specific concerns from civil legal services providers about extensive contracting and payment delays with HRA contracts, and obviously they are doing a ton of work for the City as best they can given the limitations. So what is the typical contracting and payment timeline for legal services nonprofit groups?

(00:51:47)

So we have recently put in place more streamlined processes with the legal services providers. We will acknowledge that over the last year we have had some turnover in the unit itself, but that has all very much stabilized. In close partnership with the providers, we identified some areas that were unnecessary pain points that we have been able to streamline — being much clearer around budget templates and other aspects of the process that we have developed recently over the past period of time to address those issues that the providers had raised to us.

(00:52:26)

And you basically answered my next question, which is whether you are checking in with the legal services providers, which you are regularly doing, so that is good to hear. And then I am going to, before I hand it over to my co-chair, just really quickly touch on the federal HR One SNAP cost shifts, which obviously is on everybody's mind.

So at the preliminary budget hearing, Chair Hudson flagged that due to HR One there would be a reduction of federal support for the state's SNAP costs, which will go from 50% to 25% starting in October 2026. I think you all had testified that you were having conversations with the State on how this would impact the City. Given that a good portion of your budget comes from the State, the State budget was just recently enacted, and we would like to get an update on what was included. Earlier this year, OMB had indicated that the State would cover $36 million of the costs and shift the burden for the remaining $168 million to localities, with $111 million shifted to the City. Then in the FY27 Executive Plan, we could not identify the $111 million needed in HRA's budget. So did HRA have the funding included in the FY27...

(00:53:42)

So the State budget came out too late for us to add it into the Executive Budget. Got it. Okay, we will have to add it in a future plan.

(00:53:47)

Okay, and will some of that be reflected in FY27 as well, hopefully before adoption?

(00:53:54)

I am not certain, and I do not know when, but the money will be reflected in the budget. Okay. OMB is coming up on Tuesday,

(00:54:00)

so we will ask them. Okay. And then from conversations with State partners and review of the final budget documents, do you have any update on whether the enacted State budget includes State funding to fully cover the federal cost shift? It does not.

(00:54:18)

It does not. Okay. And at the preliminary hearing, Chair Hudson also flagged that starting October 2027 under HR One, there will be an additional new cost shift to states that could be up to 15% of benefit costs. The rate will depend on the state's error processing rate, and the agency had testified that they had spoken to the State and noted that the cost shift would likely impact rates. So do you have an update on that conversation with State partners?

Sure. So I think there are ongoing conversations around that. The federal fiscal year on which the final determination of what percentage will be shifted has not completed yet, but in conversations, the amount of money to the State itself could be upwards of $12 billion. That is not something that the State is capable of covering on their own. It is also something the City would be greatly impacted by, so we continue to encourage everyone here and elsewhere to continue to advocate at the federal level around this, as that is something that will not only impact New York State — it will impact other states — and that level of shift is supremely impactful.

(00:55:33)

Okay, I am going to pause and ask more questions later, but I want to recognize that up in the balcony we have been joined by the Elliott School of International Affairs at George Washington University. So just wanted to recognize you all and say hello. Thank you for joining us and observing what goes on in municipal City government work, so thank you so much.

And then before I pass it to Chair Hudson, just want to say during our roundtables — and I am sure other people will bring this up and you will hear more about this — but one of the things that a lot of the groups had said would be extremely helpful, just in terms of their own staff timing, which would save costs for them, is simply if there is a way to do a unified application for both housing as well as SNAP benefits. I think just having something — I do not know if it is something that you could look at with OTI in your conversations with them — but that is something that I think would be extremely helpful just in their day to day function. So she wants to put a plug in for that. We will definitely take that into account. I will say in conversations we have had about this before as well, some of those — and in particular SNAP — is extremely regulated by the federal government in regards to what we are and are not able to ask. But we will take that into account.

(00:56:48)

Back? Yes, thank you. Okay.

(00:56:52)

Thank you so much. I wanted to ask — oh, and we have been joined by CM Brooks-Powers, CM Wong and CM Joseph on Zoom.

I just wanted to ask a couple of clarifying questions from your testimony, so bear with me a second. On page three, you go through the numbers and I just wanted to clarify them and make sure we are understanding them accurately. So you said you estimate 342,000 individuals on SNAP were impacted by the new work requirements, and then you mentioned a direct outreach to...

(00:57:50)

...the remaining 126,000 identified SNAP recipients, and you helped more than 80,000 New Yorkers comply with the work requirements. Are the 126,000 in addition to or separate from the 342,000, or inclusive? Inclusive.

(00:58:11)

That is inclusive, right? So 342,000 at risk, about 220,000 were exempted, with the remaining 126,000 — of which 80,000 have complied — giving us the information we need to ensure that they are complying with the work requirements. Okay, perfect. Thank you for that. And then you mentioned another 42,500 SNAP recipients are potentially impacted by benefit reductions, right? So that is the balance who have not...

(00:58:48)

...yet tried. And from the outset we want to acknowledge that it is not too late, so people can call us now and still regain access to...

(00:58:57)

...their benefits. Okay, great. Thank you so much for clarifying. And then do you have a specific number for the 3% that are unsheltered?

(00:59:13)

Yes. So the latest HOPE Count that was published — I think the number is 4,500, it might be 4,500 and a few — but it is around 4,500 people. Okay, thank you.

(00:59:30)

And on page five you referenced a contractual goal for Home Base that you have...

(00:59:41)

...exceeded. What was the actual contractual goal? 30,000. Okay, thank you.

(00:59:59)

Okay, all right, great. Thank you. That is all. Oh, sorry, one other question. On page two you mentioned benefits are currently federally funded at about $5 billion a year and do not flow through the budget but represent another critical... actually, I think I have questions on that specifically, so I will follow up in just a second. Okay, thank you.

(01:00:33)

Okay. Vacancy reduction savings: as part of the administration savings mandate, agencies were required to eliminate half of their vacant positions in the Executive Plan. Presently both agencies have a high vacancy rate at 13.1% and 20% respectively, and there is still a need for increased staffing for direct client services, especially related to the administration of benefit programs. I am concerned that the savings mandate will impact the agency's ability to maintain its current level of services at a time when they are more needed than ever. How did the agency determine which positions to eliminate in the Executive Plan? Sure.

(01:01:14)

Thank you for the question, and then others can add on.

So as you likely know, probably better than I do, the agency and across City government has been in a hiring freeze essentially since COVID, with the 2-for-1 hiring requirements that have significantly hampered operations for a long time and have essentially led us to not be able to fill any vacancies. So we appreciate being able to participate in this alignment exercise, which then removes the constraints to hire and will allow us flexibility to fill those vacancies.

And while those numbers are large, and I do not take lightly any headcount reduction across an agency this size, it is not that significant of a percentage. My goal here and my job is to fill the other half of those vacancies and fill them with speed and get up to the line where we have filled them all. So this will be an effort across all of the people sitting here at the table as well as others across the City. My job and my goal is to fill all of those vacancies starting last week, when that exercise was complete. And if we reach that goal and we need additional headcount to do our work, I will of course communicate that with the administration. But I am pleased to have the opportunity to fill vacancies again.

And when it comes to how we thought about those vacancies across the agency, I think certainly two things dominate our thinking. One is reductions of any impact on client-serving, people-serving functions. And then the other — and I have not had enough time yet to take full advantage of this — I still think even after a number of years these agencies are still coming together and there can still be administrative efficiencies as we further integrate these two departments that in my mind really belong together. We can think about how to do that as well as possible to reduce any impact on the front line. Okay, thank you.

(01:03:12)

That sort of answers my next question, which was what was the process and what metrics were used to make the assessment. So you talked a bit about the process. Are there any specific metrics that you are using in these assessments?

(01:03:23)

No. I think — and unless others want to weigh in on the real nitty-gritty of how we thought about this — I mean, I think we again want to make sure that we reduce impact on any front-facing, people-facing operations, looking at opportunities where we do not need those staff on the administrative side, and can again use those vacancies to support functions that are needed. In Homeless Services, for example, great.

(01:03:50)

And how many positions were eliminated from each agency and in which program areas?

(01:03:59)

Patrick? Yeah. So the Executive Budget included a reduction of 67 vacant positions for HRA and 183 for DHS. I am sorry — 67 and then 183. Correct. Thank you.

(01:04:15)

Yeah, and those are targets for us. So we are still assessing which positions that will impact and what specific areas that will impact. Okay.

(01:04:26)

And did the agency hit its vacancy reduction target, or did it meet the targets? I mean...

(01:04:34)

...we did not have a position target per se. So it was a really very collaborative effort with the Office of Management and Budget to ensure that, as the Commissioner noted, we were eliminating vacancies where we thought we could ensure that we could maintain the high quality service that we currently provide. Okay.

(01:04:57)

Which sort of alludes to my next question, which is: were any of the eliminated positions for frontline workers, benefits specialists or housing assistance? Or I guess a more specific question would be: has it impacted — or do you anticipate any of the vacancies impacting — that work?

(01:05:20)

We do not. We took into account when looking at the vacancies that the first thing we did not want to do is impact operations of those benefits.

(01:05:28)

Okay, so it could mean that some of the eliminated positions were frontline workers, benefits specialists or housing assistance, but without a direct impact on the quality of service provided?

(01:05:43)

Potentially, but it would be extremely minimal. Okay.

(01:05:48)

That is an honest answer. Thank you. Were any positions or program areas exempt from this requirement, such as frontline workers, and if so, which ones?

(01:06:01)

No, there were no exemptions. However, again, we prioritized administrative functions over client-serving benefits functions. Okay, great.

(01:06:12)

As of fiscal year 2026, the actual headcount for the agency was 10,810 with 1,519 positions vacant, or a 13.1% vacancy rate. At the preliminary budget hearing, the agency testified they have been taking innovative approaches to hiring and expanding recruitment. Are there any updates you can provide since we last spoke about this at the preliminary budget...

(01:06:46)

...hearing? Yeah. Thank you for that question. I mean, as part of the vacancy realignment exercise the administration eliminated the 2-for-1 hiring freeze, and that was making our hiring process cumbersome and also lengthy. So removing that constraint should give us the operational flexibility to fill these critical roles, and it allows us to fast-track the hiring process for the remaining budgeted positions and allow for more effective service delivery.

(01:07:15)

Do you have any success metrics that you might be able to provide to highlight the effectiveness of your new hiring strategies? I mean, the...

(01:07:27)

...2-for-1 was just lifted recently. But we could say that since the preliminary budget we have successfully onboarded 74 new employees: 36 caseworkers, 23 eligibility specialists and 15 benefit opportunity specialists.

(01:07:43)

Sorry, again: 74 total, 36 caseworkers...

(01:07:46)

...23 eligibility specialists and 15 benefit opportunity specialists.

(01:07:50)

Thank you. And I would just add that we will be setting up those metrics. I think internally we are interested in, of course, what we can do to move the process as quickly as possible, and then with our partners — who also have to approve various positions now that we are in a position to hire again — to make sure we are holding our partners accountable to moving those processes quickly. And of course we are always committed to working across our agency and with labor partners to do as much as we can to get the word out about the various job opportunities, to be as thoughtful as we can about different audiences who might be interested in our positions, and to retain the staff that we have. I have seen a lot of really strong work on retention while I have been here, and so while we would like to see it even higher, retention would be one of the metrics we would be looking at.

You know, Charlie mentioned our roundtable earlier, and I do want to just bring...

(01:08:49)

...up the fact that as you are talking about recruitment and identifying folks to fill the positions, I think a lot of your employees come from social service providers, and contractually those providers are not allowed to pay as much as City employees might be paid. So I think there is a sentiment among providers that they sort of train the talent and then those workers are pulled from their agencies and pulled into yours. So I think any effort that we can take to implement pay parity across the board and ensure that folks who are doing this really important work are being paid similarly wherever they are doing the work would help retain more people in the full system, not just at your agency. Thank you.

(01:09:38)

And then for DHS, the July 2025 actual headcount was 1,733 and it has been steadily declining every month since then. The vacancy rate did improve even after the vacancy reduction included in the Executive Plan, but it is still extremely high at 20%. At the preliminary budget hearing you testified that the high vacancy rate was because of the transfer of the housing administration program from street outreach and shelter maintenance. Then the Executive Plan eliminated 183 positions from the headcount, but still the vacancy rate continues to be high.

(01:10:17)

Why is the vacancy rate still so high? I will go ahead and take that, and I think I may have caused some confusion there, so I do apologize for the confusion at the preliminary budget hearing. My intention was to emphasize that comparing the actual number of headcounts for that period could be misleading, because while we transferred the budgeted headcount for housing services in the Executive Budget of that year, the actual positions did not move until the fall of 2025. So the 1,733 was about 103 heads higher than it should have been. So when you take that into account and look at the headcount as of the fiscal year 2027 preliminary budget, we had noted that it was 1,614 staff on board. And at that time the vacancy count was 427 positions, but some of that was driven by the addition of new heads in the preliminary budget. You are right that as of March 31, the agency had an active headcount of 1,611, which gave us a vacancy rate of roughly 20%. And the reduction that we have had — organic as part of that alignment exercise — and the elimination of the 2-for-1 hiring freeze, we think, is going to be really meaningful in helping us fast-track the hiring and to complement the recruitment strategies that we had, like I had noted: doing civil service list hiring pools, holding hiring halls and conducting job fairs in coordination with the hiring programs and our career services departments.

(01:12:10)

Thank you. And can you provide the committee with a breakdown of the 405 positions and where they live? You will have to get back to us on that — I do not have the list of the vacant positions with me. Okay. And what is DHS doing to fill vacant positions and to reduce the rate of attrition among staff?

(01:12:38)

I will start. I mean, I think the answer is very similar to what we gave for HRA. I think we are again committed to moving the process as quickly as possible, and when people are looking for a position they are not willing to wait forever. So I think looking at those kinds of improvements really will help us to bring on additional staff faster, and that will also help with retention as more people come on and there are more people to do the work. So I think we are just really pleased to be able to start that hiring process. But Pauline, if you have anything to add about our strategies? Okay, thank you.

(01:13:16)

Thank you. And just for reference for my colleagues, I have several more questions specific to City FHEPS, and then we are going to go to member questions.

The Executive Plan included savings of $543.5 million in fiscal year 2027, $280.6 million in fiscal year 2028 and $336.2 million in fiscal year 2030, across City, State and federal sources. These savings will be generated by a cost containment plan for the City FHEPS program and were aimed at more effectively maximizing the use of non-City-funded housing subsidy programs, ensuring long-term shelter residents obtain subsidized exits, improving shelter diversion at intake and more closely reviewing rent levels for new and renewed City FHEPS voucher holders. Can you tell us in more detail how the savings will be achieved for...

(01:14:21)

...each area? Yes, and I will start at a high level and then we will make sure we get to all of your specific questions.

So at the highest level, there was a time when City FHEPS was not the only way that people exited shelter. There was a time when the federal government was investing in public housing and Section 8. And I hope we all do just continue to advocate for federal and State investment in our communities. It should not be — from my perspective — that New York City has to cover all of these costs on its own. That said, that is where we are, and the administration is clear and I am very clear that City FHEPS is a critical, crucial program and really a lifeline to people exiting shelter. It is in fact the tool that we have and a really critical piece.

Some data to illustrate that point, which you all are probably very well familiar with: 69,000 households and 150,000 people are on the voucher today, and it has become the primary way people are exiting homelessness. There are over 13,000 people with shopping letters — a term of art, of course, here for people who are looking for an apartment who are ready to be subsidized — and through this March, 28,000 New Yorkers were able to obtain permanent housing using City FHEPS. That is a 24% increase.

So if we all care — and I know we do — we care tremendously about the sustainability of this program. We do have to look at that sustainability and make sure that it is fiscally sound. As you know, the program has more than tripled over the last three fiscal years, and so we have got to look at how we can contain costs. Cost containment, as you started to allude to, will be reached through smart policy and operational efficiency, with no curtailing of the program, not cutting vouchers or creating wait lists. Yes, as you mentioned: ensuring reasonable rent levels for new and renewed vouchers, ensuring the City is not paying above the legal rent for rent-stabilized units, reducing the use of broker's fees considering the Council's Fair Act, the net-to-owner payments standard being adjusted to 203% of FMR, increased subsidized exits other than City FHEPS — which are about 10% right now — and then for the people who we can work with — and that is not everyone, as there are a number of people on vouchers who are older adults or who have disabilities — but for the people we can work with, we do owe it to them to work with them on jobs and training opportunities that allow them to not need that voucher in the first place. And so...

(01:16:52)

Just to reiterate, and we can go into more details about the specific approaches: this is an incredibly critical program and we are looking to make sure that it is sustainable for the future through operational efficiency and other cost containment, but not actual cuts to the voucher program. No waitlists, no curtailment of the program.

(01:17:15)

That is great to hear. Thank you.

(01:17:15)

Are there any specific agencies at the local or state level to support these cost containment efforts? Just to make sure I understand the question... I mean, yes, we are working across all of City government, thinking about, with our partners at NYCHA and how we execute on both the Mayor's plan for housing as well as ensure that...

(01:17:41)

...people exiting shelter have access to all of those other vouchers as well. Okay.

(01:17:48)

How will engagement with long-term shelter residents change?

So in terms of long-term...

(01:17:56)

...shelter residents, we always have, I think, or have for a number of years, been prioritizing long-stayers for exits. I think we want to continue to do that. We want to make sure that for people that are often probably the hardest to serve in the housing market, with a shopping letter, that we are offering the kind of housing navigation and support to help them get into those units. Does that answer your question? Are you thinking about something else?

(01:18:22)

No, I think that is fine. It sounds like you are just going to continue to do the work that you have already been doing and there is not necessarily any change in approach in terms of long-stayers. I think it is important to make sure that we are prioritizing that group, but it has been a group we have been looking at for some time. Certainly when you get those folks housed it has a disproportionate impact. And then, did or will the cost containment measures begin?

(01:18:54)

Yeah, a number of them have already begun and a number we are still rolling out. If you would like additional details we could probably, amongst this table, we could...

(01:19:04)

Probably. Yeah, I would love to know how the efforts have been rolled out and if there are any metrics you can share on effectiveness. Sure. So...

(01:19:11)

I can speak to a few of them. They have all started relatively recently, so I think measures of success are still to come. We rolled out the rent reasonableness and legal rents in late winter, early spring, and that is done through a combination, through a partnership with HCR at the state level, to be able to check on legal rent levels as well as, more recently, we have just started also review processes specifically for market rate apartments to make sure that the rent being charged is appropriate to that area. So that is recent. Happy to report back as we have more data on that in the future.

The broker's fees referred to here is something that will be coming. It has not started yet. But happy to report on that. We anticipate that those savings will come through a combination of fewer broker's fees by the change in what is happening, but for individuals who do need to retain a broker because they are not able to find an apartment on their own, we will be able to offer a broker's fee, but it will be significantly less than in the past. It will be one month rather than a percentage of the yearly rent. So through both of those measures we anticipate the broker fee savings to come, and that will roll out in the coming months.

(01:20:39)

I just want to clarify, given our passage of the Fair Act, you are saying that you all would be paying a broker's...

(01:20:47)

...fee. Under state tenancy regulations, an individual who is receiving public assistance who cannot locate an apartment on their own, we are required to provide a broker's fee. We have adjusted that percentage and the amount of that broker's fee to one month. We will implement this when we roll this out, but there is a requirement under state social services law that we do provide that opportunity for a specific group of individuals. Copy.

(01:21:23)

Thank you. It sounds like we need to do some work with our state partners.

(01:21:29)

The administration... sorry, hold on. Can you share a little bit more about how you will divert individuals at intake from entering shelter? Yeah.

(01:21:40)

Let me touch on the shelter cost savings a little bit just from a higher level, and then yes, we can talk about prevention and diversion efforts as well. So as you know, the costs have increased significantly over the past couple of years. There have been a number of years, really, there has been a confluence of issues. There certainly were New York City's efforts to support the migrant population, which I am grateful for — New York taking more than their share of that population here. Additionally, the last administration really let the shelter pipeline stagnate. We were not opening new shelters and so we did not have those to use, and that led to a proliferation of hotels. As folks are probably well aware, hotels are not what we want to be investing in and they are more expensive than our typical purpose-built shelters. So moving out of hotels is a really key part of our strategy.

Chair Hudson, just to touch on some of the other parts of our strategy that you have actually touched on in your testimony and comments and questions: I will note that the shelter population is actually down — not a tremendous decline, but it is a decline, and that has been long in coming. We see reductions in the families with children population of about 15%, and reductions of course in the asylum seeker populations. Across all groups, not just families with children, across single adults and adult families, we do see length of stay in shelter down across all groups. So we are continuing to monitor those trends, and if those trends continue that will also have an impact on the cost of our shelter population. As you know, we are of course always pursuing other...

(01:23:33)

...interventions that are aligned to our values to better manage the shelter system. We have talked a little bit about targeting long-stayers for subsidized exits and then increasing prevention and diversion. We were pleased to get some additional funding from the Emergency Shelter Grant that will allow us to enhance our diversion efforts at the front door of the shelter system as well. We can talk about efforts to of course keep people stably housed through right to counsel programs, our home-based efforts and so on. I will also just say, while it does not take effect overnight, the Mayor's housing plan, which promises to work towards 200,000 units of new housing as well as 200,000 units of preserved affordable housing — those investments, coupled with investments in NYCHA, I think really do give us hope that there will be additional units for people to exit to in the future. At the end of the day it is really units we need in order to reduce the shelter population.

(01:24:40)

You asked about diversion specifically. I know to Sarah a bit more of the plan. I appreciate the details, that is helpful.

(01:24:47)

And I am just wondering if you are concerned about increasing the number of families with conditional status. It is something we look at really carefully. I do not know, Administrator, if you wanted to add anything there. As I am sure everyone is aware, people are of course still in shelter while they are in that conditional status, and I know we have done a number of things to make it easier for people, including not having to present in person, not having to bring children and so on. So I think we have made efforts to continue to look at and improve those numbers. But if there is anything additional you would want to add, we will continue to watch those numbers for sure.

(01:25:30)

Okay. And then with all of that assessment, do you project the number of people exiting shelter will increase, and if so, by how many? And do you have any specific targets in that...

(01:25:54)

...regard? I do not. We continuously monitor the shelter census, both the overall shelter dynamics — the ins and the outs, functions of admissions, exits and length of stay. While we have not set specific targets, we are certainly watching closely the reduction on the families with children side, the asylum seeker side, and of course also watching the increases on the single adult side. We are really thrilled, of course, at the dramatic increase in the number of people exiting over the past few years, including being able to announce 10,000 people exiting...

(01:26:34)

...through subsidized placements by the Mayor's first 100 days. We are going to continue to push to make that happen. That requires both units, which the Mayor's plan for housing initiates, and also the...

(01:26:47)

...speed at which we process applications. So I know there is a lot of focus on the CityFEPS application process and that is something that we are also, of course, very focused on, making sure that we do everything we can to process quickly.

(01:27:03)

Thank you. With regard to all of that, it is our understanding that part of the process of determining client eligibility is first ensuring that clients are ineligible for other rental assistance programs, especially ones that are supported by state and federal revenue. How does the agency plan to change this process to...

(01:27:23)

...achieve savings? Sure, I can take that one. So we currently do also look to see if someone is eligible for another subsidy — in particular, if someone is eligible for State STEPS rather than City CityFEPS. We work closely with providers in particular to enhance processes within the shelter to ensure that families we believe would be eligible for State STEPS, where those costs are shared, are active on cash assistance, which is required, and so they actively have access to the State STEPS voucher when they have identified a permanent residence to go to, so that that can be utilized rather than City CityFEPS. We believe that savings are really going to come through that process that we have worked very hard on with the shelter providers, to make sure that when families come into shelter, those who are eligible are connected to cash assistance and that that is active and available and ready to use at the moment of move-out.

(01:28:22)

Thank you. And how many clients who applied for CityFEPS were referred to a non-CityFEPS housing program and successfully enrolled in that program in fiscal year 2025 and in fiscal year 2026 to date?

(01:28:34)

So we do not track the data in that way, so I do not have that at this moment. Is...

(01:28:39)

...there another way you track the...

(01:28:41)

...data? Not in a way that cross-references in that particular way. Multiple eligibilities exist, as people could be, and many are, eligible for multiple different pathways to exit shelter. So we do not have a way in which that is tracked across eligibility and then ultimately what is used. Okay.

And I just want to clarify one thing on the broker's fees to make sure it was clear: where we will pay that fee, the individual client and resident needs to engage a broker, and if they are on cash assistance, we would then cover that fee. We will not be paying any broker's fees for landlords. That is not something landlords can access. It is just for individuals receiving cash assistance. Okay. Thank you.

(01:29:27)

And then I just wanted to give some feedback that since you are now requiring every rent amount for CityFEPS to be reviewed for rent reasonableness, it is causing delays of more than four weeks on average, as I am told. Because if you all say that the rent is too high, then the landlord can appeal the process, and that takes many more weeks. So I do not know if there is a way that you are addressing this unintended delay.

(01:30:09)

Sure. So that process rolled out very recently. We will acknowledge that at rollout there was a technical issue with a system that has been rectified, that impacted timeliness, and so that has been addressed and we have a fix. There is the possibility that this process can take several weeks. It is not something that has to happen in a silo. We have told providers as well that there are concurrent aspects of the move-out process that can happen while rent review is also occurring. If we need to get additional data from HCR and there needs to be back and forth with the landlord, we did base this on the process that is utilized by others as well. But it is something we are looking at closely as we just rolled it out. We wanted to be as efficient as possible. We do not want it to add unintended delay. We also want to balance that with ensuring that we are paying appropriate rents for places where people are going. So of course it is something we are tracking very, very closely to see if there are additional changes we need to make to the process so that it impacts the timeline as minimally as possible.

(01:31:19)

Okay. Thank you for that. And then we would like to better understand how the agency is going to implement the verification of legal rents for rent-stabilized CityFEPS clients. Can you walk us through the verification process from beginning to end and what aspects will be changed under the new policy?

(01:31:35)

Sure. So the process in general is: for rent-regulated apartments, we have a data feed with HCR that we get updated biweekly, and we will carry forward in regards to approved rents — the legal rents for those apartments that fall under rent regulation. For market rate, we utilize a tool called Rent Watch, which is sort of the standard tool individuals use to assess the rents in that particular community as it pertains to the particular unit that person is going to be renting, to ensure that the rents fall within those ranges. So those are the two things that have been added to the process. The data match is the one that potentially could add some time to the process, and we are talking with our HCR colleagues to see if there is something down the road that could shorten the interval between updates on that. Thank you. And before I continue, I just want to acknowledge that we have been joined on Zoom by Council Member...

(01:32:44)

How many people will be dedicated to that task? And are these new employees or will additional tasks be assigned to existing...

(01:32:52)

...employees? These are tasks that are part of existing staff's work, as they are processes that have been added to already existing workflows. Okay. And you already mentioned that you are doing everything you can to not create a more lengthy process.

(01:33:13)

Correct. Okay. Thank you. And then with regards to the new rent reasonableness reviews within the CityFEPS program, can you walk us through that process for verifying rent reasonableness? What specific parameters will be used to determine the definition of reasonable? How will this process change under this new...

(01:33:41)

...plan? Basically, that is the same process as the process I described before. Okay, it sort of flows into the other or it is just interconnected depending on that particular unit.

(01:33:55)

Okay. And do you feel there is sufficient budgeted staff to conduct all of these assessments?

(01:34:01)

We do. We believe that the tools... yes, we do. Given the tools we are using are the standard tools out there, in most cases there should not really be a delay in the process — it is just doing the check. So right now we believe that we have adequate staffing. Obviously it is something we will be tracking as well. If we are seeing that the timeframe is longer than we would like it to be, we will obviously cross-reference that to our staffing levels as well, just to determine if that is the issue or if it is another part of the process that needs to be addressed.

(01:34:38)

Okay. And has the Transition Support Program changed since our last discussion, and if not, have there been discussions internally to implement a program in the future? Yes, I...

(01:34:56)

...am. As I mentioned at kind of the top of all the strategies around CityFEPS, I think we just have not had probably the opportunity in the City to think about a dedicated program to work with folks who would be eligible for job training and education opportunities. As I mentioned, there is of course a number of people who are older adults and who have disabilities, but for others we should do our best work to make sure they have access to the employment training and education opportunities we have. So we have started thinking about that. Nothing...

(01:35:34)

...has rolled out, except to say that of course, for people who are on cash assistance — and a number of people who receive CityFEPS vouchers are on cash assistance — we have a program that already works with people around employment training and other opportunities. So I think it is an area of opportunity and one we need to take seriously as we look at the financial sustainability of a program like CityFEPS, which is just so critical to people exiting shelter and people staying housed.

(01:36:03)

Absolutely. And I agree that it is an area of opportunity. At the preliminary budget hearing I asked a question because I specifically raised the concern that the number of CityFEPS recipients using vouchers for more than five years is growing and that they are not receiving the support they need to reach self-sufficiency and exit the program. So I think there is great opportunity in that space to address those folks specifically.

And then with regards to the ABAD requirements: on March 1 of this year, the first notice of noncompliance for SNAP ABAD was delivered. We would like to get a better understanding of the current landscape since the start of this year. So to date, how much has been spent on sending out notices and outreach to SNAP ABAD...

(01:36:53)

Benefits clients. We do not track costs in that way that would directly be connected to ABAD. Some of the communications also are split between us and the state, but we have also — though I will say — done more communication than is required by federal regulation, both in the mail, but also many people receive these notices through their Access HRA accounts and do not have costs that are associated with mail.

(01:37:22)

Okay. And you have reached out to every single one of those, right? And certainly any cost to communicate would be worth the benefits in people's pockets. I mean, we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in benefits that go into the community and to people. So any additional mailing or

(01:37:39)

door knocking, or work with community-based organizations feels really critical at this time. It feels really critical in that you are investing in those ways.

(01:37:50)

Correct? Yes, absolutely. Okay. And we also just want to make sure that you have enough funding to do that work. And how many first, second and third notices have been sent, and of those notices, how many ABAD clients have responded? If that goes back to the numbers in the testimony, I think we have that on record unless they are separated. Yeah, those are the numbers. Okay. Thank you.

(01:38:14)

The only thing I do want to just underscore, because again it is a positive thing and hopefully it continues — when that number was sort of at the bottom of my head, this is a funnel. So that is why you see me — you know, the 40,000 — as we start the new set of people who would get one strike, it is much lower. It is 15,000. So we are just pleased to see that that is again just a smaller number of people we can do boots on the ground with, working with community-based organizations and door knocking. So hopefully that continues. This is still obviously a catastrophic loss to our community and not to be understated, but I think through a lot of really good work, hopefully making a dent in the number of people who are really at risk. And I think I

(01:38:59)

just want to add to that, as illustrative is — you know, we are talking about the 42,000 who are imminently at risk. That number initially was about 45,000, and within a week, based on these outreach efforts and consistently sending the message to folks — also, please contact us, we were doing outbound calls as well — we were able to remove people from that list. So I think I just want to reiterate that it is never too late for individuals to contact us, for us to see if there is a way that we can help you maintain your benefits. So even if you did receive a notice that said your benefits are going to close, it is supremely in your interest to connect with us to see if there is something we can do to make you

(01:39:50)

not have this negative impact. And that is a perfect segue into my next question, which is that there was a New York State Focus article that noted many SNAP ABAD clients who received first strike notices were unable to connect with staff in a timely manner, and some were directed to an automated phone number that said that cases had been closed. Is HRA aware of these issues and what is being done

(01:40:17)

to address them? We definitely want to clarify, and we want to reiterate for individuals when they are reaching out to us, to use the SNAP Now number and not other numbers, which have longer wait times.

(01:40:35)

How are they receiving the SNAP Now number?

(01:40:38)

We are including the SNAP Now number on the strike notices. It indicates to reach out to the SNAP Now number.

(01:40:45)

Sorry. Let me just ask — are you including the SNAP Now number in addition to... is that the only number that is being provided on the notice?

(01:40:55)

On a strike notice, it is just the 708 SNAP Now number. Okay. I will indicate, though, through transparency, that the initial closure notice is a state notice that does include the general HRA number. It is something that is hard-wired into the system as part of all of their notices. So there is, unfortunately, a dissonance between those two, which is why wherever we can, we are really emphasizing that 708 SNAP Now is the number to contact us.

(01:41:29)

What type of communication outreach have you done with social service providers and your advocacy partners, nonprofit partners and contracted partners, to ensure that people have that information and understand that that first initial notice is from the state, but that they should still call the SNAP Now number?

(01:41:47)

We continue to do the outreach we have been doing basically since last year, in partnership with CBOs and others. So we continue to hold our community meetings and updates in partnership with us, whether it is philanthropy or other organizations like Homeless Services United, United Neighborhood Houses, HSC and among others.

(01:42:11)

We also push out our information to them. I am very proud and thankful for the close partnerships we have had with the community on this issue from the very beginning. Everyone understood how important it was, and I believe that it has been an extremely collaborative process between us all. So we are constantly sharing updates with them as well to push out through their

(01:42:34)

networks. Thank you. And I think the media has been helpful here in really helping to publicize this issue and publicize this number. So there has been, in addition to purchased media, a lot of other media coverage with this phone number very, very present. Thank you. And is this the

(01:42:52)

first month in which SNAP benefits will be terminated for non-compliant ABAD clients? Since Monday, how many SNAP ABAD clients have lost benefits due to noncompliance?

(01:43:03)

So we are not actually going to know how many of the 42,000 lose benefits until the end of the month, for a variety of reasons. One is the way the state processes everything — it does not all happen on the first, right? Benefits are rolled out over the first twelve days of the month. So there are people we anticipate are on this list, but something can still happen between that period of time. So there is sort of rollover processing in that way. So we are tracking that, but we will not really have the final number of how many people truly had their benefits reduced or closed until we can do sort of that reconciling at the end of the month.

(01:43:44)

Thank you. I am going to

(01:43:45)

pause here. I have dozens more questions that I look forward to asking you in just a bit, but I am going to turn it over to Chair Lee for questions. Thank you.

(01:43:54)

Great. Thank you. Okay, so first up we have the Deputy Speaker, followed by CM Avilés.

(01:44:09)

Hello. Just to ask some related questions first. So in my office, we are increasingly seeing cases involving disabled tenants — individuals struggling with anxiety, grief or other mental health challenges — who are at immediate risk of eviction despite actively seeking assistance through programs. In many of these cases they are already living in stable, permanently affordable housing, yet the process for obtaining additional support or exceptions can take months while eviction proceedings continue. How is HRA addressing these issues? I mean, I

(01:44:45)

think I am happy to follow up on the individual specific cases, just understanding what those situations may be, and we will connect with our intergovernmental affairs team to understand what is happening in those particular situations. Are these households that currently are receiving a subsidy, or is accessing the subsidy part of one of the issues that is being addressed in the

(01:45:12)

situation? I think it is the latter.

(01:45:14)

Accessing the subsidy. Okay, so I would be happy to speak specifically about specific cases so that we can talk about whatever might be the issues in those particular instances.

(01:45:27)

Okay, so just using another constituent as an example, which I am sure this is a problem across the City — someone who lost both parents, fell into arrears after losing household income, secured a rent-stabilized apartment and still faces eviction despite pursuing every available form of assistance. In situations where preserving tenancy would cost the City far less than shelter placement, how does HRA allow for greater discretion or case-by-case flexibility in decision making?

(01:46:01)

So we do have the ability to look at things on a case-by-case basis. We also, though, really try to utilize all resources prior to that, such as one-shot deals and other things that can help clear out what have been an accumulation of arrears that could be very difficult to get through, and really look at that as sort of the first order of where we can work from. But I am happy to get more specific details on that particular instance to understand what the issues were and where we do or do not have discretion.

(01:46:39)

So I am going to ask a very loaded question, but the theme ultimately is staffing — appropriate staffing levels to address the many issues that tenants are facing in New York City. So we also hear concerns from the special population — folks with disabilities — and we know that the special population oftentimes requires a commissioner-level exception request, and they are very difficult to navigate and often move very slowly for households facing imminent displacement. The average processing time for a special population exception request can take a very long time. So I just want to understand what staffing levels are in place to ensure tenants are not being displaced while waiting for a determination.

Same thing with one-shot deals — essentially we see a situation where the City can save money by helping people to stay in their homes, but the time frame to get assistance or get adequate assistance is just not on par, and the entrance into the shelter system costs the City even more money. So given the ongoing affordability crisis and increasing caseloads, do you believe you have the appropriate current staffing? And is there anything that you have done to fast-track these requests, specifically for individuals who are part of the special population — disabled tenants and

(01:48:23)

vulnerable households? So we do have several pathways, especially for individuals who have disabilities or barriers. We do have a Special Benefit Access Center that is meant to specifically help those individuals. So I would want to make sure that we are connected in a way that your office and individuals can access that, right?

(01:48:43)

Now, we do work with that office, but I think what — my person who does constituency services specifically wanted me to ask this question. She is very focused on this because she is very familiar with this office, but it takes so long for them to respond. And to your point, you have this unique office, but it feels like there is not an adequate staffing level to be able to address these issues and many other ones outside of the Special Population office.

(01:49:16)

Got it. So I will take that back to really understand the delays that are being talked about here, and whether it is something that is specifically happening within that office that is not being seen within the overall time frames that we are seeing. So that I can understand what specifically might be happening there — just because within the overall time frames we are not seeing extensive delays as it relates to one-shot deals, but I want to make sure that if there is an area where something is unnecessarily impacting people, we rectify that, especially for those populations.

(01:49:52)

Absolutely. Thank you. Perfect.

(01:50:04)

CM Avilés, followed by CM Epstein. Thank you so much.

(01:50:08)

Good afternoon, I think it is. Right? I wanted to ask you a couple of different things. We continue to see very alarming rates of theft of SNAP benefits with no remedy at hand. At a time where obviously people are going to lose even more benefits, as we are fighting the Trump administration, I am deeply concerned about the New York City benefits program. We have many providers, hundreds of my residents deeply depend on it. Our office depends on nonprofit providers to fill that gap and make sure people can get access to these benefits that we work so hard to build and fund. I would love to hear some commitment to ensuring that that program will remain full and intact and that we will not be losing any of those services in addition to what we are seeing federally. Thank you.

(01:51:09)

Thank you for raising those two very important points. The first point about people stealing SNAP benefits is obviously well known, and we are pleased — it is our understanding that the state has finally put the funding in for chip technology that will reduce the ability for that to happen at scale. That does create additional work for us to work with particularly mom-and-pop shops who are accepting SNAP benefits, to make sure everybody is ready across the board across the City for what we understand to be a January 2027 rollout. So a long-standing issue with some kind of solution on the horizon — pleased to be able to report that, and really going to work hard across the system to make sure people know how to use those cards and that people are able to accept them when they roll out.

(01:51:59)

And has the City figured out — you know, for people who are losing all their benefits — like, telling someone good luck with no food for the next two months is so...

(01:52:14)

Unfortunately, the federal government took away our ability to continue to replace those SNAP benefits. We have focused on the areas in which we can protect their cards, so ensuring they understand how to lock their card, which I know does not replace benefits if they have been stolen. But it is

(01:52:34)

particularly problematic for older

(01:52:35)

members who have to lock after every transaction. Understood — very hard. And we work with our state colleagues, as all of the chips and the technology and operations of the cards are under state oversight, not our

(01:52:53)

oversight. We do have — if someone has had their benefits stolen — individuals can apply to us. There is the possibility they might be eligible for an emergency grant. We would have to look at that on a case-by-case basis. But the biggest thing is the rolling out of the chip cards, which the state is leading, and we hope to see roll out in early 2027 to hopefully start to minimize the impacts this is having on people in communities.

(01:53:25)

Thank you. I will follow up on the emergency grant situation because we need an interim solution for people who need food. Can I ask — HRA testified it began using artificial intelligence for the first time to help reduce SNAP payment error rates. Could you give us an understanding of the overall use of AI within both HRA and DSS? Is it being used in any other specific programs, and if so, please detail. Thank you for that

(01:54:11)

question. I will have Administrator French talk about the specific use case where we are using AI. I started to talk about that earlier this morning, but no, there are no other use cases in play or in planning across the

(01:54:27)

agency. And what is the specific AI that is currently being used, and can you talk about the procurement of that

(01:54:35)

particular program? Sure, I will let Administrator French take that one. So the particular tool that we are still in the development and rollout phase on is the tool that is meant to support the SNAP program around state payment error rates. So it is sort of a last check before someone officially submits the budget that compares what was entered into the system with the information that was available to the worker at that time — whether that is through documents that an individual submitted to us or data matches that we had also received. It really is just looking across and doing math checks, as it were. It is really meant to be quality assurance and to just flag to the worker that something looks like it might not be aligning, so that the worker can go back and look at it and actually determine if something is not aligning or if it is. And if they do need to make changes, they can make those changes before they officially submit that budget, which helps us avoid an error rate and ensures that the individual is receiving the appropriate amount of SNAP benefits.

So we developed that tool with McKinsey through a contract we had at the time that will be ending at the end of this fiscal year. That tool itself has not been rolled out to all staff. We started with a very small pilot. At this point there are approximately 70 staff who are testing it, so that we can really see if there are unintended consequences we did not anticipate by rolling this out. It is meant to help and be a very strong support to staff. We also want to make sure that we are testing it appropriately so that if there are unintended consequences we did not realize or anticipate, we can fix those before it actually rolls out any further. So in terms of... it sounds like it is a proprietary tool that you are developing, or is it utilizing technology through...

(01:56:41)

And is there... what are the particular data privacy guardrails that are being put in place? And we know there are many errors with AI and there are many breaches, including

(01:56:57)

There is significance, privacy and data protections. As I had sort of mentioned before, anything that includes SNAP must be approved at the federal level, so even for us to do this we needed to be approved to move forward. The data protections that are put in place around SNAP in those ways has been carried over to ensure that it does not have accessibility to, you know, those kinds of concerns. We also work very closely with OTI and City Cyber, who have also assessed this tool and are assessing it ongoing with us to make sure that we meet all necessary parameters.

(01:57:41)

I think one of the greatest breaches that we are concerned about is the federal government itself and how we protect ourselves from the current federal government. Is there any consideration around environmental impacts in the use of AI and workforce

(01:58:04)

impacts? So a couple of things on workforce. I want to stress again that in no way is this AI replacing or meant to replace any work a worker does. It is solely a useful tool to help and support them. They take all of the actions and they make all of the determinations. This does not replace any of that work in any way whatsoever. In regards to the overall larger sort of climate considerations and such, we take our guidance from the overall City oversight and approach to utilization of this technology.

(01:58:44)

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being generous with time. Thank you. Thank you, CM Epstein, followed by...

(01:58:49)

Restler. Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner, for being here. For the street homeless count, do you have it broken down by borough or Council district, where you find street homeless

(01:58:57)

people to be? I do not have that with me, but I am happy to get back to you on that.

(01:59:03)

Yeah, it would be great if you could share that data so we can know where we see street homeless people and then how you concentrate your resources in response to those. Absolutely. I will say I have been looking hard at where 311 calls are for persons in need, where we know encampments are, and where we know street homeless from the HOPE count exists.

(01:59:25)

Thinking about resource allocation. Yeah, that would be great.

(01:59:28)

Because, you know, we have talked to your team a lot about this issue. We see a lot of that happening near us and are really looking for longer-term solutions. I know you have talked about the accomplishments of getting people into housing, and a big issue for street homeless individuals is just supportive housing units. What we hear from unhoused people is they would love to go into supportive housing, but those are not available, and so they are kind of in this place where they do not want to go to a shelter but they are still street homeless. I am wondering what the timeline is to kind of move that process forward, because it really would resolve a lot of our issues.

(02:00:04)

Yeah. No, I think you raise a really important point. In my experience here and elsewhere, and looking around the country at what is working in terms of really supporting people who are on the street, we have to be making offers that people can accept. Today only about 10% of people are accepting those offers, and that is not a place where we are going to make the kind of progress that I want us to make.

We are working hard to think about what those offers can be when it comes to the very small percentage of people who are on the street. To me, these are not... yes, we need to worry about systemic changes, but for this very small group for which systems have failed in the past, what we need to do is really listen to the folks that are there and what they need and want. For one person it could be that kind of bridge to supportive housing. For another person it could be that as long as they are with their best friend they are willing to go. But I think that is the work ahead of us and I am optimistic, given the resources of this City and the collaboration I see across City

(02:01:17)

government, that we can make more offers that people will accept. I want to turn your attention to the intake center. I know you have moved it to Third Street. There is some litigation around it. I am wondering what is in the capital budget this year for

(02:01:28)

that. And I know in CM Maloney's district right next to mine was the Thirtieth Street intake. I am wondering if there are capital dollars to rehab that building in this year's budget to kind of move that project forward for good. We have talked about Third Street being only a temporary location. That is right. Give us a moment to make sure we know what is in the capital budget. I do not think there are capital investments this year, but I think these are conversations we are starting to have about what the future of the locations

(02:01:55)

will be. No capital dollars for Third Street and not for Thirtieth Street, just

(02:02:02)

not for Thirtieth Street. We are — and folks can correct me if I am wrong — we are making capital improvements to 80 Starling...

(02:02:10)

But the decision is that it is only temporary, where this is not a long-term commitment for Third Street. It is my understanding from our conversations that it is only temporary. That is right.

(02:02:19)

That is right. We needed — obviously as you are well aware and as others are aware — we needed to get out of Thirtieth Street and Bellevue for safety considerations, and so the Mayor made that announcement. We are working to move single men intake and adult family intake there. In the long run, I think we would envision a different intake facility.

(02:02:43)

Overall. And just one more question. We have talked a lot about affordability and part of what we talk about is people being able to keep their pets. In the past we talked about pet food pantries and there was a pilot program introduced through HRA to establish purchasing and stockpiling of pet food. I am wondering if that is available, how it is available, where that pet food is being distributed and how people can be made aware of this.

(02:03:12)

I might actually lean on Deputy Commissioner Sarah for that one. The CFC program does not currently have any funding for pet food, so we would refer people to the Office of Animal Welfare, which has an online resource with a range of information on where to get pet food at no cost. We understand this is a need and we continue to look for how we might be able to meet

(02:03:48)

it. Commissioner, I would encourage you to look for funding this year in the budget for this. We have seen and heard from across the board that a consideration for people giving up their pets is the affordability issue. I know the Mayor has talked a lot about this and we would love to see the administration put some resources into this budget to help with this affordability crisis. It puts burdens on other parts of our City and other resources when people turn over their pets to shelters, and those are burdens that we are paying for. So this could really be a good preventative method where a little bit of money could go a long way.

(02:04:25)

Yeah, we continue to look into that.

(02:04:26)

Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Restler, followed by

(02:04:31)

Wilson. Brilliant. Thank you so much to our distinguished co-chairs, to people who I think are deeply committed to improving social services across the City. Commissioner, nice to see you. I think we are connecting later today.

I will just say for a moment, you know, during the Bloomberg years I disagreed with almost all of his policies but found that there was a very committed and able group of professionals across the agency. Over the last four years, too many folks and too much of the agency has been hollowed out. Senior leaders are gone with rich experience and the staffing vacancies, the attrition that we have seen in the agency, has been deeply, deeply problematic and has impacted its ability to do its job. So I just want to say plainly: I think you have an important turnaround job ahead of you. I think you have some strong people at the table to your left and right who I have worked with over the years and think very highly of, but I do not want to understate the challenge that you have to restore competency at the agency.

There are a few areas I would like to dig into today. So first, on mandated vouchers — I imagine Administrator French will want to jump in on this one as we talk about it all the time and might be my interlocutor of choice today. There are 32,000 children who have mandated child care vouchers today. Is that correct?

(02:05:59)

Correct, approximately yes. So that is

(02:06:00)

an increase of about 4,000 from where we were a year ago. But you are still expecting that number to more than double over the course of the next 18 months. Yes,

(02:06:14)

we have, since our last conversation, gone back to the model — and I know I have said this to you before, but I also want to update it based on trends we are seeing. We adjusted the model and we anticipate we will hit the 63,000 number by September 2026. One of the things we are seeing that I am trying to dig into a little bit more is we are actually seeing very good month-to-month increases of new people coming onto the vouchers. That is being offset somewhat by people going off the vouchers, and so that is what I am trying to understand — what might be happening there, where they are going. That is what we are digging into right now. Some people maybe decide they do not need to utilize this anymore, okay, but we are trying to make sure there are not any unanticipated or unintended things happening. I think that has impacted us staying on the trajectory I have been talking to you about for quite some time. I still do not totally believe in the trajectory that you are promising exists, but we have started to see some more notable increases in the last couple of months, which I do recognize.

(02:07:27)

It is still a big leap in a relatively short period of time. I do understand that all families are required to be offered a voucher, but are we doing everything we can to make sure that we are also offering full-day 3-K and other after-school programs and other resources that might just meet the needs of families just as effectively? Absolutely. When we determine that someone has mandatory engagement requirements under cash assistance, we will let them know about the full range of services that are available to them in New York City. At the end of the day, if they say they want to use the voucher 100%, I do need to... Could I do one more topic and then come back for round two? Just wait for round two. Oh, okay,

(02:08:09)

great. Okay. Thank you, Chair.

(02:08:13)

My other favorite topic — I am sure to shock you, Administrator French — is the vacant supportive housing units. As you know, the progressive caucus launched a campaign with Speaker Menin for Rentals Within Reach to try to help fill the 590 vacant supportive housing units that are offline with no referral in process. Please correct me if that number is updated. What is the biggest obstacle to getting these units back online? Would you support additional flexible funding to get these units repaired and activated?

(02:08:45)

I think, as you know, you reached out and we are getting back to you on discussing your proposal further. But I think the Mayor has also shown that he is very focused on this vacancy issue and is very much focusing on the available units right now. What can we do to get that vacancy rate down as much as possible? We are working closely with — I believe they announced the Speed Task Force that

(02:09:12)

they have created a supportive housing vacancy task force

(02:09:14)

that we actively participated in. Has that task force convened? Yes, it has. It has had one session also. I believe, since the report has been announced, there were conversations that have been ongoing around that that led into the report. So, as you have

(02:09:31)

looked at your 590 vacancies — again, if that number is the most up to date — could you just help us understand what percent of those units we can just fix with repairs, what percent of those units are scattered-site units that we just actually have not found space for, what are the barriers, have you done that breakdown? Can you speak to

(02:09:47)

that? We do have it. I do not have it with me exactly right here, but we are going to meet in the next few days to go through in more detail. I prepared myself, also expecting this to be a line of inquiry that we are going to talk about more around the available vacant units, which is about 5,400. We are addressing those. A unit with a referral in process that is just moving too slowly — that is where the bureaucracy is not working well and we need to do a much better job of getting people into those units more quickly. It is a problem. Yes,

(02:10:21)

the offline units though — as we have discussed before, a large portion of these units are driven by the state and are not under our control. But I am only asking you about the ones in the City's control. I recognize that there are more units from HRA combined and that the state needs to get their act together — no argument here — but the stuff that is in the City's control, we should be maximizing every single one of those apartments. The Commissioner was just speaking eloquently a moment ago that there are 2,500 or so people on the street, if you trust the HOPE count — which we can have a different conversation about — but if you do, those 2,500 people, we could be getting a lot of them directly into supportive housing if we were fixing up these units and doing it more quickly and efficiently. The fact that there are 590 offline units with no timeline and no referral plan for how we are activating them is, I think, a serious problem. So I am talking too much, but thank you to the chairs. I will be back for round two.

(02:11:13)

Awesome. I signed you up already. Council Member

(02:11:15)

Brewer. Thank you, Chairs. I wanted to follow up on some of CM Epstein's line of questioning about outreach, specifically about encampment sweeps. DHS was given the lead on these engagements, not the police, and I am wondering how the department handles that responsibility differently than the police and how that specific new duty is reflected in this budget.

(02:11:48)

Yes. Thank you for those questions. I will make sure amongst the team here that we do tell you how it is reflected in the budget. Yes, it is an important switch that I think the Mayor made to put the Department of Homeless Services in the lead seat, if you will, in charge of the work around this. It makes good sense to me in terms of this being a challenge around people and not the physical spaces of the encampments. We are pleased to take that role. It means that we take the lead on outreach. It means we take the lead on making those offers of assistance. Our partners at Sanitation and NYPD are there to play their roles — NYPD just for safety.

We are — as much as I would love to report that the number was much higher in terms of percentage of people taking our offers — actually up quite a bit since we took that responsibility. We are also seeing fewer encampments when we go to actually do the cleaning. People are not there anymore, and so we are starting to see some success there.

This is an area I am particularly interested in and have a focused planning effort with my partners across City agencies. Making sure we are sending the right outreach folks is critical. Our Department of Homeless Services folks are incredible, but across the City you have people who are experts in substance use disorder and clinicians that can assist with psychiatric disorders, so that piece is critical. As I talked about, making the right offer to people — what is it that people can accept that will work for them and how do we flexibly meet those needs — I am again optimistic that with the resources of the City and the intentionality and partnership that we can continue to make progress on this important work.

(02:13:56)

And you asked

(02:13:56)

about money committed. I know there was a specific question in there. I think the administration committed 30 million dollars in baseline funding for outreach expansion and 11.9 million dollars for New York City Health and Hospitals to support their behavioral health engagement and show units as well as their Bridge to Home site for individuals with serious mental illness. Those are important investments that will help us here.

(02:14:26)

Anchoring on that one, yeah. Just wanted to pivot from that to some caseload questions. Local Law 49 mandates a casework ratio of 34 to 1 and 25 to 1 for families, but in previous testimonies we have heard that HRA

(02:14:47)

has testified that the average caseload for HRA staff currently is 1 to 251. But we are actively hiring caseworkers to bring that back down. We have a good number of vacancies that we now have the ability to freely move forward on and we are aggressively doing that. Does the executive plan provide any additional funding to meet the caseload ratio mandates? And if not, how much funding is needed? It does not include

(02:15:24)

that, but that is an ongoing conversation we are having with the Office of Management and Budget. And what is the current average wait time from

(02:15:33)

When a hostile applicant receives issuance of a housing benefit to obtaining permanent housing, we have a goal of 30 days to do that. Within the way it operates, it does not operate the exact same way as the City vouchers does in regards to a shopping letter. We actually process the person's housing benefits when they have identified a unit that they want to move into, and we do that within 30 days.

(02:16:11)

Okay, CM Brewer, followed by Wong. Thank you.

(02:16:17)

First of all, Commissioner, you are a miracle worker on 76th Street. I do not know what you did with those two guys, but they are gone. Freckles is still on 75th, okay. I want to congratulate... everybody is in shock. Just as a policy issue, you know, when outside of safe havens and shelters, people have to learn who runs them to clean up — to do a sweep. I do not want to have to make a stupid Bill that says that, but I just wish we could help. I spend so much time literally getting the broom myself sometimes, but they will not go outside the building. We only take care of inside, and that makes the neighbors nuts. They get tickets for sanitation and so on. I am just saying if you could help us with that, I would appreciate it.

Another small issue: 126 West 83rd Street. I am working on it, but what, 510% has to go to homeless? I suggest that we do more screening. With all due respect to staff doing screening, I want to do the screening or somebody else to do the screening, because you are moving into a low income rental building and if you bring in troubled families, then you bring trouble to everybody. So I would love to see some different kind of screening for those that are in a... it is not a full homeless shelter. There are no services there. It is just the families who are there already. So I would love to see that.

The other thing is Main Chance. Why are we closing Main Chance? That is my favorite drop-in. I guess someone went there and there were some issues, I do not know. I saved it last time and I want to save it again. Scott knows that.

(02:17:58)

I would like to know why we cannot keep it open beyond June. I do not know where those folks are going to go. They are not going to go to Ninth Avenue and 51st Street. So what are we doing about Main Chance?

Thank you, CM. We cannot speak to this contract as there is current litigation, but I can speak to the other drop-in centers throughout the City and the others that are in Manhattan. Staff have been at the site that you reference to make sure that clients have the information and we can offer alternative resources.

Let me just say, when I was at 509 Ninth Avenue, I was in the room — not your administration, a previous one — it was packed. There was not one inch available. And I did not know how smart I am, but I said something like, "Are you going to have women here?" They had no idea what I was talking about and they said, "No, we have no room."

I do not think you have enough room for those folks from Main Chance, and they do hang out in Midtown. This is where they can go as opposed to going over to 509 Ninth Avenue. They are going to hang out in Midtown. I am still going to fight to help. If the litigation is successful, I feel very strongly about Main...

(02:19:15)

...Chance. Just another quick question, on the low barrier beds. I know there is a cut, I understand, in the Executive Budget. Can you tell me, are you going to have fewer low barrier beds? And if so, which ones are not going to open? Are you going to have delays or is it all going to be fine?

(02:19:32)

The low barrier beds. Okay, I am happy to turn it over to Chief Gonzalez. I do not think there are cuts. So yeah, I am happy to chime in. You know, this is certainly a priority for the agency and for the administration to invest in our low barrier bed capacity. We have, I believe, another 200-plus beds coming on before the end of the year, and I am not aware of a cut.

(02:20:08)

I will jump in and just add a little bit more specificity to the numbers Gonzalez gave. So as of June 2026 we have a total of 4,290 low barrier beds. As you know, during the height of the cold snap, Mayor Mamdani accelerated those available units and made 300 additional available. My notes suggest we have an additional 350 safe haven beds to come online before the end of the year. I will let the financial folks weigh in here as well.

(02:20:46)

I think you are referring to the $40 million. Yes, of course. So that is not a cut to the budget per se. We are just aligning the budget to match the anticipated openings for sites. When we set the budget prior to the Executive Budget, we had used, I guess you could say, an older assessment of when we thought sites would open. So we are just reflecting the current timing of sites. I think it is a delay of one site that will open in the next fiscal year.

(02:21:17)

Okay. And then I just... I wrote a letter, I know you are also working together, but the Imperial Court on 79th Street and the Windsor on 57th Street — they are both available, sitting there and ready to go. Nobody wants to, I guess it is too much to purchase. But they are sitting there, they are empty. At least the Windsor is empty and has some families in it. Why are we not buying them and making them available to families who are homeless? We will take a look at that for sure. I was not aware of those properties. Everybody else was aware of them, but okay. I mean, they are sitting there, they are empty, et cetera. All right, I have more questions, maybe in a second round. Thank you.

(02:22:02)

Okay, perfect. CM Wong, followed by CM Sanchez.

(02:22:05)

Thank you. Thank you for coming. I hear this constantly from my office, and I know my colleagues here are working with HRA on behalf of constituents. It is long and burdensome and often ends in frustration before it ends in any resolution. Caseworkers do not call back. Council offices leave messages that go unanswered for days. My staff spends enormous time chasing information that should take one call to resolve. Is HRA doing anything in fiscal year 2027 to actually improve the speed and quality of communication between Council offices and HRA caseworkers? And I do not mean a new 311 category. I mean a real, accountable liaison structure. Please reply.

(02:23:03)

I would say on the HRA side, we definitely want to be responsive. I will defer to Chief Gonzalez, who oversees the area, to understand what is happening and to make sure that we are getting resolutions quickly.

(02:23:18)

Yeah, sure, absolutely. I think there is a process for incoming correspondence. We work through our correspondence unit and anything that comes from an elected official is flagged and given a certain level of priority. If there are outstanding cases that it sounds like there might be, feel free to reach out to me or my staff and we will look into them and make sure we get back to you in short order. I would do that.

(02:23:48)

My next question is about IDNYC. It started in 2015 and I have been looking at the annual budgets, which is about $13 million a year, plus or minus. Now, as of February 2026, in this report, there are over one million unique cardholders, but only 466,300 New Yorkers renewed their cards to date after reaching the five-year renewal date. That is 25%. Do you have a theory as to why the other people did not renew their cards? Because we spend so much every year — it was more than $1...

(02:24:40)

...50 million since 2015. Please reply. I will need to dig into that data a little bit more on the renewal rate and the drop-off, but there could be a variety of reasons why, after five years, someone decides they do not necessarily need or utilize the card — whether they have gotten another ID that they are utilizing as their main ID, or if they have moved. But I will look more into that renewal rate because we definitely want people to keep the cards and keep using them. We are also looking at the moment at the length of how long the card is good for. Currently it is five years. We are looking at whether there might be something around an extension, because the IDNYC card centers are overwhelmed. I do not see people renewing, so please look into it. Thank you.

(02:25:40)

I have saved some for round two, please.

(02:25:43)

If I can make just one clarification point — this was a point that was made by CM Epstein earlier about the 83rd Street site. The preparation for intake is actually expense, it is not capital. I just wanted to make sure that was clarified. Thank you.

(02:26:01)

CM Sanchez. Thank you. Thank you, Chairs.

(02:26:03)

Good afternoon, Commissioner. The New York Post published that Mayor Mamdani signed a $1.9 billion contract — a three-year, no-bid contract — to house homeless households in New York City hotels. Can you tell us more about this contract?

(02:26:20)

Who is going to be housed? Just to make sure I am answering your question correctly — are you talking about the hotels in Brooklyn? We have two hotels that we are working on right now. That would be my thought on what you were referring to, but let me make sure. This is a $1.9 billion contract with Hanac to house homeless families across the City. Got it. So I will let others jump in here as well, but I think this is, of course, the vehicle that we use to partner with hotels when we are in emergency situations. As I stated earlier, this is not a situation we want to be in. We want to put forward a thoughtful planning process on where we do shelter sightings. The last administration had a number of shelters that did not move forward, and so we are in a position that we do not want to be in, having to use...

(02:27:12)

...hotels. I think that is the vehicle we use when we need emergency capacity. I do want to get to the other questions, but are these shelters — is this contract exclusively for DHS use, or are other agencies going to use it?

(02:27:30)

The contract is with...

(02:27:30)

Okay. Thank you. Commissioner, is it correct that New York City shelters currently house about 82,000 people at roughly $3.2 billion in contracts and staffing costs? I will defer to others, but that sounds right to me on the number of people, and that sounds right on the financials as well.

(02:27:52)

And is it correct that City FHEPS vouchers house roughly 153,000 people at $1.8 billion? Again, I will let my colleagues confirm on the numbers, but feel free to go ahead.

(02:28:08)

Okay, so my understanding — and I want to get from the agency whether it is a fair characterization — is to say that today, looking at a snapshot in time, City FHEPS vouchers are housing roughly double the number of people at half the cost. Is that a fair...

(02:28:29)

...characterization? I think it is a really important question. You deserve a real analysis and answer from us, so let us go back to you with that answer.

(02:28:39)

It is an important point that you are making. I would love to just make sure we look at the numbers ourselves and can validate or raise any questions about them. Thank you, Commissioner. Please get back to me. You have an army behind you, so I really hope that we can just make sure we are talking about...

(02:28:57)

...numbers apples to apples. With respect to the Chairs, just continuing the Chairs' line of questioning around cost containment with the program — Chair Jimmy, the City must absolutely operate this program, the City FHEPS program, as leanly as possible so that we can maximize the number of families served. I am glad to hear about cost containment measures. But just to understand the ballooning costs — the media loves to talk about how the City FHEPS voucher program has tripled in cost, and I think you actually repeated that yourself earlier in today's hearing. Were those ballooning costs largely driven by the number of families served since fiscal year 2023, or are you telling us that there are inefficiencies in the program in connection with those...

(02:29:42)

...changes? The changes that you announced in the housing plan — changes looking at rent levels and rent reasonableness — had been a source of costs. What are the drivers of the tripling in costs since fiscal year 2023? Yes, I am happy to let my colleagues jump in as well, but I think it is what you said — we are serving more people. There are always efficiencies to the program that we want to work on, but that is not where we will generate very, very significant cost savings.

(02:30:08)

Okay. I just want to make this statement and then my last question. If we are serving more people and that is the reason that the City FHEPS voucher program is costing more, that is good. That is a good thing for New York City. That is a good thing for New Yorkers. It is a good thing for low income people. So I think it is disconnected when I hear members of the administration — the Mayor, the members of the Mayor's team — talking about the ballooning of the City FHEPS program, which is housing more people, in a negative sense, when it is achieving what we want, which is to stabilize New Yorkers. Because City FHEPS keeps people from being homeless, which destabilizes New Yorkers, as you know more than I do. I know I am preaching to the choir, but I have to say that out loud.

My last question is just in terms of forecasting forward and the savings that you have identified: is the agency forecasting that the growth rate of City FHEPS today — not considering conversations around expansion, but today — will increase, stay flat or decrease compared to the growth seen in previous years?

(02:31:12)

Yeah. I think the short answer is we would expect it to continue to increase, but at a decreasing rate. Great. Thank you.

(02:31:21)

Thank you, Chairs. Thank you, CM Nurse. We have also been joined by CM Mealy.

(02:31:27)

Thank you. I do not know if this came up, but I wanted to ask about the Housing First, Home First, Street to Home program. I ask every time. I am curious to know if there is anything in the budget for that this cycle, and if you could detail a little bit...

(02:31:46)

...about that. I am happy to say that since the last time we talked, in the housing plan the administration did announce that we will be expanding the Street to Home program. It will be expanding to approximately 150 units in partnership with the nonprofit provider who oversees those units. We are in the planning phase to begin a rollout, but we will be expanding that program.

(02:32:09)

Is it one provider, or how many providers are you...

(02:32:13)

...I only know of one. That is the one provider who oversees a specific set of buildings that also have specific aspects to them that make it possible for us to do this type of approach with those units.

(02:32:29)

So the 150 folks that you will be able to place — is that an expansion or is that in total?

(02:32:36)

It is an expansion. We are approximately almost doubling the program from where it is now. It will be 150 total units that we could...

(02:32:45)

...access. That is exciting and really great. Thank you for that. And then, before, we have had conversations about the 2010 form. Is there going to be any effort to try to look at that form or cut down the process of all the stuff that people need to fill out to qualify?

(02:33:05)

That is something we are looking at in partnership with our colleagues, given that it impacts multiple agencies. We are looking at where we can try to streamline and simplify that form as it aligns with the large number of different supportive housing programs that are funded in different ways. So it is something ongoing that we are looking at, but we do not have any sort of...

(02:33:34)

...determinations yet. Okay. I would love to stay following along on that. For the expansion that you are doing, as well as for the existing set of units — I think last time we spoke, we were hearing from folks that the referrals were a little bit smaller than, or not quite at the capacity they could have been. Have we made any progress on beefing up those numbers?

(02:33:59)

Yeah, we have worked closely with the provider to make sure that we are leveraging all of the different pathways through which referrals come into the Street to Home program, and I think we have been able to redouble the reach of where those are coming from, which will increase the referral rates.

(02:34:17)

Do you have any data to show about that in terms of the increase in rates?

(02:34:22)

I do not have that right now. It is something that we have just recently coordinated with them on, so I am happy to report on it more as there have been more months for it to really settle in.

(02:34:33)

Okay. Thank you so much, Chairs.

(02:34:37)

Thank you. Okay, CM Mealy.

(02:34:40)

Hi, Commissioner. I was just wondering which HRA facilities have a lot in the Executive Capital Commitment Plan for improvement. HRA facilities comprised about 17.7% of HRA's total Executive Capital Commitment Plan and is about 11.1% less than the budget amount in the Preliminary Commitment Plan. The largest of these projects is for the design and construction at the Brownsville Community Center. In last year's Commitment Plan, a total commitment was allowed for it. What was the difference? Was it all spent over the past year on this project, and if so, what was the completion of this, or is it...

(02:35:43)

...complete? I can take that one.

(02:35:44)

The Brownsville Community Center project has...

(02:35:49)

...been allocated in the capital as you mentioned. It remains in the Executive Budget with $8.3 million in fiscal year 2026 and another $2 million in fiscal year 2027.

(02:36:08)

Another $2 million. Yes. Okay. What is the scope of the Brownsville project? What is the current status?

(02:36:18)

And when do you think the completion date is? So we have broken ground on that project and it is going to be a new community center, which will be next to the multi-service center. The construction is expected to be completed later this...

(02:36:35)

Summer. This summer.

(02:36:36)

Yeah, and we have an anticipated opening in the latter part of this calendar year. Okay. I notice that in last year's commitment plan there was $35 million provided for construction at the East New York office. It is not in my district. This year is there no more remaining funding for this project? Is that right?

(02:37:02)

Because it is open. I know it is open, but if we cannot... it is open as the...

(02:37:13)

It is 24 years old. Yeah. Quite well. Fulton, open down... 2440, 24, 40. Yeah. Okay, 2040. How was that sent? Is there any remaining funding or anything extra that we could use?

(02:37:29)

Your business as well. It is looking great and clients are flowing through. I am happy as... it is a building I think we are really happy with, as it has been able to bring primarily almost, I think all, if not all, of the client-serving programs together, which is really, I think, amazing and great for the community and constituents, just given that many people do not come to us for just one thing — they come to us for many things. Thank you.

(02:38:00)

Looking forward to this year or next year... late this year. No, not that. I am talking about wrap-around services though. Great. Thank you. Wrap-around services is hugely, highly important. So yes.

(02:38:15)

Okay, so really quickly, a few questions and I am going to pass it back to Chair Hudson. So are you keeping track, actually, of how many refugees and asylum seekers are losing, or potentially losing, their SNAP benefits due to the new HR One

(02:38:33)

restrictions? We concur. Unfortunately, the number is about 15,000 over the year, so it went into effect. I believe that, unfortunately, that recertification will impact individuals who will no longer be eligible for benefits. Okay, so got it. Okay. Thank you for that number. And then just to...

(02:38:59)

go back to the question around the benefits. So it is not — I do not think it is in the executive budget — but is there, and I believe there is another year left on the contracts, right, for New York City Benefits? So what is the plan to fund it and baseline it, if at all, because it would be awesome if you could get it baselined. And can you share any data about the program's success? Yes. Yeah, just give

(02:39:30)

me one second. Yeah, thank you. Yes, especially following the questions around HR One and you hearing me talk about both an all-of-government and an all-of-community approach — we do need these benefits providers. There are 38 contracted providers. The data that I have, and I am sure they have more: 37,000 applications per year, and so far 27,000 applications for this year. We know that they are successful in submitting those applications to us. For cash assistance, they are 26% more effective than if people do it on their own, and for SNAP, 45% more likely to be accepted. So there is efficiency in those folks helping residents. They have been able to bring on an additional $20.3 million of annualized SNAP benefits to households in New York City. So clearly they are doing their part throughout the community and are an important part of our community-based infrastructure to help people keep their SNAP benefits.

So yes, we are committed to funding those programs in fiscal year 2027, and after this budget is done we will work quickly in short order to look at the out years and make sure that there is...

(02:40:47)

transparency about the future. Okay. Yeah, because I think, as we have heard, with the challenges around the procurement process it is really difficult to move forward if there is no understanding or commitment to make sure that it gets funded. So let me... okay. And then also, hopefully it will be in the adopted budget as well for fiscal year 2027 — fingers crossed, right? Yes.

(02:41:11)

Obviously those conversations are ongoing. Okay. And

(02:41:13)

then finally, I just have one question on behalf of CM Joseph because she was not able to stay. It is really talking about the children in the homeless shelters, and she is really focusing her questions around the...

(02:41:29)

youth. So how do we improve the school attendance rate among children in the shelter system? I think it is a really important question and something that I hear from the Deputy Mayor and from the administration — a real focus and interest in making sure we do well across government there. So there is a group that is being convened by City Hall across education and the Department of Homeless Services. My own analysis of education data and other jurisdictions suggests that actual school moves are a huge indicator of chronic absenteeism and other challenges. So we have a really important part to play in making sure those kids do not have to move within the school year and without planning. So clearly we have a critical role to play in ensuring educational attainment, and I look forward to starting that work and really partnering with our colleagues at the Department of Education.

I will say the Department of Homeless Services staff and our provider staff work really hard to make sure there is continuity whenever families are moving, but I do think a broader effort can bring additional focus on those metrics.

(02:42:47)

So it is a critical issue, you know, and this is especially true when we saw under the previous administration a lot of the families getting moved around in the mass asylum seeker system. Whatever we can do to improve that would be great. And I think slightly above 60% of families are initially placed in shelter in the borough of their youngest children's school. How are you ensuring our shelter system has capacity where it is needed, not just where it is

(02:43:22)

available? Yeah, I think that is a really important broader question, so I will take the opportunity to think about it more broadly. You might have noticed — I certainly did — that in the Mayor's housing plan there is a sentence about the development of a homelessness plan over the next year, and I see that as a really nice opportunity for us to take a step back as an administration and be thoughtful about where shelters are and how that meets our values. You have heard a lot about us wanting to move out of hotels for lots of reasons, not just cost, but also... and then making sure we take a fresh look at where shelters are and where they need to be and where there may be too many at this point. So I see that plan as an opportunity to really take a look there.

(02:44:09)

Yeah, definitely. And I will say that especially in boroughs like Brooklyn and Queens — like I am all the way in eastern Queens, and for me to get to western Queens during rush hour it can take sometimes more than an hour — so just thinking through how that impacts families' attendance, all of those things, is important. So thank you. And her last question was: we have 20,000 families in shelter. What is the administration's plan specifically for reducing the number of families in

(02:44:35)

shelter? Happy to defer to my colleagues, but we have seen a reduction in families and children in shelter. I do not have the numbers right in front of me at this second, but I think 15% over the last couple of years and 11% in the last year, and length-of-stay reductions as well. So I think we are starting to see exits more than entries, which is what we want to see — making sure families can get into housing quickly. So we want to continue those efforts and

(02:45:08)

are happy to partner with the Council member and others to be thoughtful about that.

(02:45:13)

Great. And then this is just my little add-on question from myself, but are you also keeping track of where they are going? For example, are they staying in New York City or are they moving out of state or to other parts of the state? Yes, we have that. Yes. We track where placements were. Okay. And how many — what percentage of the folks that are in New York City shelters end up staying or getting housed within New York City? The majority, but we will certainly get back to you with specifics. Okay.

(02:45:37)

Perfect. Okay, Chair Hudson. Thank you so much. I wanted to follow up on CM Pierina Sanchez's questions at prelim. You testified that the cost for shelter stays was more expensive than the cost for City Steps on a monthly basis. Do you have an updated figure for monthly cost for shelter versus City Steps? Looking around the table, I do not think we have that with us here, but we are happy to produce that.

(02:46:12)

Okay. And in the long term, will City Steps save funding on the shelter budget? That is certainly the hope, for sure. Okay. Thank you. And I also

(02:46:25)

wanted to ask two questions on behalf of CM Brooks-Powers, who could not stay. Historically, shelters have disproportionately been placed in communities like the one she represents. Can this administration articulate how you are planning for future shelter placements, how you plan to engage with community stakeholders, and how you intend to rectify the disproportionate burden often placed on outer-borough Black and Brown communities?

(02:46:56)

I would just repeat what I mentioned just a few minutes ago. I think with the new administration, with the mention of a homelessness plan and the Mayor's overall housing plan, I see that as an opportunity for us to take a step back and take a look at where we have been placing shelters — from an equity perspective, from a fair share perspective, of course — and also how that meets our other values around purpose-built shelters versus hotels and so on. So I see that as a great opportunity to engage with the Council and with others in the community to take a hard look at that.

(02:47:34)

Great. Thank you. And then her second question was: less than a third of eligible New Yorkers are currently enrolled in the Fair Fares program. What effort is being made to enroll more New Yorkers in Fair Fares, and what new strategy does this administration have to ensure more eligible New Yorkers can benefit from this critical

(02:47:55)

program? I will start and then I will let Administrator French jump in as well. I mean, of course, transportation is a key part of any affordability agenda, and we know for low-income households it takes a disproportionate share of income. So this program is really important and Fair Fares plays a critical piece. We know we are not — it is not to say we are not reaching people, but only 40% of people eligible are enrolling. We have done a lot, I think, on awareness. I think we have also done a lot to make it easier, particularly for people who have other benefits — cash or SNAP — to enroll through a fast-track program, which I think takes something like five clicks in order to enroll.

I do think one place where we want to take a closer look and see if we can do better is on the renewals. People are falling off of this program even though they have expressed interest in it in the past. What can we do? Can we improve that process? Can we make the renewal process longer? So that is a place where I think we can take a good look and help to make sure people are staying on those benefits.

(02:49:05)

Great. Glad to hear that. I think you covered everything I was going to say.

(02:49:08)

Okay, thank you. All right. I want to move into Pathways for Access to Careers and Employment, or PACE. As part of the fiscal year 2027 executive plan, $3.2 million was added in fiscal year 2026 and $1.5 million was baselined starting in fiscal year 2027 for PACE. We would like to get an update on the PACE program and how it is helping to address the new work requirements.

(02:49:38)

How is the additional funding for the PACE program helping to address the increased need for employment services? Sure. So that funding was meant to support an expansion of PACE sites so that we would have more sites and open satellite sites, which we realized was necessary to have more locations for individuals and PACE providers to support the population. So that is what that is actually going to be supporting — connecting individuals who do have to comply with the work requirements, who are not doing so in another way either through working or who indicate they would like assistance, to connect meaningfully to education, training or employment. We are connecting everyone to a PACE provider. So that is where the additional funding came from. Thank you.

(02:50:32)

And then, do you have statistics on how many individuals with new requirements attended their initial PACE appointment for career services support, and how many did not?

(02:50:43)

Yes. So the percentage of people who did attend the appointment was 13%, but I can say since March 1, which was the first month that we started tracking, that percentage went up to 24%. We are also seeing that a large number of people are complying in their own way, which I think was indicated by the numbers the commissioner cited. Approximately 66% of individuals have complied with work requirements, and so they are doing it through — sometimes with the PACE providers, other times they are working, or through other connections to education or training that they are reporting to us or that we are able to identify through data matching.

(02:51:26)

Thank you. And I do not believe you mentioned specific numbers, but do correct me if I am wrong. Of the total SNAP clients deemed to have work requirements due to federal law, how many were able to meet the work requirements as a result of HR One?

(02:51:43)

I do not have it broken down to that level. Of the 126,000 we have been talking about, over 80,000 did comply and have not seen an impact on their benefits for the month. That compliance is done through a variety of these different activities — some of it through PACE, some of it through self-directed work by individuals.

(02:52:07)

Okay, so do you have a breakdown for employment versus...

(02:52:15)

volunteer? I do not have that at the moment. We are looking at our systems and our reporting so that we can add that sophistication moving forward. We definitely spent the bulk of our time just making sure we had a system up in place and could connect people to activities, but going forward we definitely want to understand how people comply, what they are interested in, and what they might not be interested in, so we can address or change approaches.

(02:52:42)

Thank you. And how many new community-based partners or providers has the agency partnered with to help clients meet work requirements, and how many of them are providing volunteer opportunities? Over a hundred

(02:52:55)

have stepped forward through the process I described the last time I was here. We have ongoing relationships with many more community-based organizations. The PACE providers have those relationships as well, but I think all of the ones who stepped forward are providing some version of community service or volunteering opportunities. Great.

(02:53:17)

I know you all have been doing as much as possible around those new requirements and working with partners, so thank you for your efforts.

(02:53:27)

Hotel shelters have historically been a response to unforeseen events such as a pandemic or the large influx

(02:53:34)

of asylum seekers that began in 2022. What is the plan for reducing reliance on hotel shelters? I will just stay at the top and then turn it over to Deputy Commissioner Gonzalez, but I think just to reiterate the point about having a broader plan so that we are not, in fact, reliant on making emergency decisions where we would have to rely on something like hotels. But we can provide some more information here, I think.

(02:54:02)

Yeah. You know, as the commissioner said, obviously we will be looking kind of long term to see exactly what opportunities there are to move away from hotels. Part of this process is really investing in our purpose-built shelters to be able to take the capacity that is currently at hotels. But you know, again, as you all know, we are a right-to-shelter city. So once we are at capacity we do rely on hotels to be able to meet our legal mandate. But that is a consistent goal for the agency — to be able to move away from hotels as soon as possible.

(02:54:44)

Okay. And then how many of the approximately 500 shelters are hotels, and how many of the hotel shelters serve families with children?

(02:54:58)

Of the approximately 500, 173 sites are commercial hotels, and of those, around 95 are for families with children. Thank

(02:55:15)

you. And according to the asylum seeker response terms and conditions report, the agency operates 154 asylum seeker shelter sites, two thirds of which are for families with children. How many of these sites are hotels?

(02:55:29)

So DHS no longer operates asylum seeker hotels. Those were absorbed into our system. Exactly.

(02:55:40)

Are any of the asylum sites reported in the terms and conditions included in the shelter count we just discussed, or are these additional locations? I do not think they are reported in the terms and conditions, but we can double check on that. Okay. And what was the actual spending on hotel shelters in fiscal year 2025 and so far in fiscal year 2026, and what is the budget for hotel shelters in fiscal year 2027, please?

(02:56:13)

So as we mentioned before, DHS has a contract with the Hotel Association of New York. The spending for fiscal year 2025 was $581 million. For fiscal year 2026, the budget is $622 million, with spending as of June 2 of $441 million. Sorry — $441 million is what number? So the fiscal year 2026 budget is $622 million, with spending as of June 2 of $440... excuse me, $441 million. Yeah. For fiscal year 2027 it is $622 million. Okay.

(02:57:18)

Shelters are an important part of serving vulnerable New York City residents confronting homelessness. However, they do not address the City's lack of affordable housing, which is a key driver of homelessness. Additionally, the development of new shelters often faces community resistance. One possible method of addressing both these issues is to ensure that new shelters are constructed to be easily convertible to permanent housing. Is this an approach that has been explored as a more long-term strategy?

(02:57:46)

I am happy to start. I think the purpose-built shelters that I have seen are places that, without further configurations, can be turned into housing. It could be turned into housing at the person level, at the building level, and so I think it is a way for us to continue to move towards housing for people.

(02:58:09)

Can 100% of the purpose-built shelters be converted to housing? I do not know the answer to that.

(02:58:15)

I do not know if it is 100%. We would have to get back to you on that. But I think, going forward, the way we want to think about purpose-built shelters would be so that they are easily converted to housing, and the ones that I have seen do have that in common.

(02:58:38)

Same. It would be great to get to 100% — all of them being built in that manner. How many shelters in the pipeline could easily be converted, whether purpose-built or otherwise?

(02:58:51)

We will have to get back to you on that. Okay.

(02:58:56)

I wanted to just share details about a case that my office has been handling with a constituent of mine who entered shelter in 2025. She was told a voucher application was submitted by shelter staff in 2025. She was incorrectly declared to have left the shelter in March 2026 after a hospital stay due to complications with her pregnancy. She was contacted by her caseworker and told to return to PATH placement after being discharged from the hospital. This was also confirmed with her shelter's site manager. Shelter staff bagged her belongings and she was sent to PATH immediately. PATH then informed her that she was still registered with the shelter, so she returned and packed up her belongings there. Her housing specialist informed her that she had to restart the voucher application process and confirmed to her that a new application was submitted in 2026. They reached out to her after our office contacted them, and she was told that there was no voucher application associated with her case. Through continuous follow-up from my office, the issues were resolved, and a shopping letter was issued just this past Tuesday on June 2.

The questions that I have are: one, does the agency have access to client files and the ability to submit applications on behalf of clients when there has been either gross incompetence with a provider or miscommunication with a client? Are there ways in which we can prioritize and fast-track that?

(03:00:32)

I would have to look at each individual instance just to submit something on someone's behalf, but yes, if we identify that there has been some issue or a series of issues, we can see how we can get that on track quickly and move it forward as quickly as we can.

(03:01:01)

I personally do not believe that anybody should be giving birth in a shelter, or returning from a hospital after giving birth and going back to a shelter. So I am wondering if there is a specific or concerted effort to expedite the exit of expectant women, parents or families from the shelter system. I am sure, as you can tell from just a few details that I have shared, this woman, who has by a doctor's note been determined to have a complicated pregnancy, has been having to deal with these issues while also managing her complicated pregnancy, going back and forth to PATH and the shelter, and then turning out to have not actually been discharged from the shelter. I can only imagine the stress that that would put onto an expectant mother, especially one with a complicated pregnancy. So I am just curious to know what efforts are being taken to keep expectant families like this one out of the shelter system.

(03:02:08)

There is a pilot effort that has been ongoing for a bit. We have a pilot program at PATH which we refer to by the acronym CRIB. We are assessing pregnant individuals or those with very young children and assessing for diversion efforts, and we have seen some success in helping these individuals find housing instead of coming into shelter.

(03:02:40)

I want to thank your team, who has been responsive to my office's outreach. But the circumstances that we find this woman in are just really frustrating, even that we have had to be involved as much as we have been. I actually did a visit to the shelter the other day to just follow up on all of the engagement that we have had. But it really does break my heart to know that this woman, who has a complicated pregnancy, is struggling to find housing and doing everything right, following all of the processes and procedures that she is being told to follow, and still seems to be falling through the cracks. So it would be great to put a real, concerted effort into expanding the support for

(03:03:32)

families like hers.

(03:03:32)

If I could just comment, I would also be interested to know the details of this case so that we can find out how that shelter exit and then having to go back to PATH is

(03:03:44)

I am happy to share the details. I also want to just note that she is due, I believe, in two weeks, and we are working with Anthony Hassan, I think, to expedite a housing placement. Given the medical urgency, any further assistance you all can provide in getting her secured housing would be great, and we can follow up with that information. Thank you.

In May 2026, Mayor Mamdani's Block by Block report announced a plan to explore ways to improve HRA's affordable housing services program, including the development of new terms for the program. I know you referenced this a bit, Commissioner. Can you describe the new terms for the program and how this impacts the rate at which voucher holders enter affordable housing units?

So we are in the process right now of creating the new term sheet that will publicly define the financial parameters of the program, similar to term sheets that are currently in process. It is not done yet, but it will be informed by all that we have learned over the last three years of the program — things that were successful, things that maybe we needed to change a little bit — and that will be reflected in the term sheet itself. The process for selecting and placing voucher holders in these units will remain the same. That will not change. The terms are really about financing parameters as affordable housing that will be covered there. Okay. Thank you.

(03:05:31)

How many units in the affordable housing services program are currently inhabited by voucher holders?

(03:05:36)

835 units have been created under the program. I will have to check if there are any vacancies there, but I will say these units in these buildings rent up and become fully occupied extremely quickly. There are 226 still in the pipeline.

226 additional.

(03:06:00)

Thank you. And what are the primary barriers the agency has encountered in implementing this program?

(03:06:07)

What we have explored over time, and what we are reflecting in the term sheet, is understanding what is the best structure for the program to move forward so that there is sustainability to it. I think we have been able to pull those things together, and in working with a consultant on this, we will be able to have a term sheet that really proposes a strong financial path forward for the program. So I think that is probably what we have learned the most about. The program itself, I think, has been extremely successful in the buildings that have opened. I will say again that the ways in which we have been able to rent up those buildings, especially for these buildings — these are some of the buildings where we have targeted long-term stayers in particular — have happened very, very quickly.

And I assume it is a consultant other than McKinsey?

(03:06:58)

Correct. Thank you. How often do the agencies coordinate to ensure that voucher holders are being placed in affordable units, and what does that coordination look like?

(03:07:07)

Every day we work together with our colleagues around a variety of issues. We work with them very closely, in particular around the homeless set-aside aspects of their affordable housing, and making sure that we are moving through that process as quickly as possible. I think within the SPEED task force as well, there is a commitment that collectively we are going to look to make sure that we can improve that process even more. But I will say we are in daily contact and work extremely closely to move people out of shelters into units.

(03:07:41)

That is great to hear. Thank you. As part of the same report, the administration proposes connecting tenants to financial assistance more efficiently. We would like to better understand HRA's role in this effort. What specific preventive measures is the agency adopting to ensure tenants in arrears enter a payment plan or apply for a one-shot deal early in the process?

(03:08:03)

There are a variety of diversion programs that we are looking at. Some of them we have been doing within our own area. I think the last time I was here, I talked about right to counsel and how we were about to start piloting some diversion that is a little bit more upstream, to connect with people receiving City Steps and landlords who have just entered into housing court, to try to understand what is going on and whether we can resolve that issue with one-shot deals or other aspects of it. We are in conversations around what might be something we could pilot that looks at affordable housing writ large, on a larger scale, or something that is not necessarily connected to eviction court but is happening out in the affordable housing landscape, which we know has been experiencing some challenges. So those are ongoing conversations right now.

(03:08:57)

And what kind of interagency system between the agencies will be set up to track early access to one-shot deals specifically?

(03:09:07)

That will be informed by whatever the collaboration between us looks like, but it will definitely include some type of data sharing, cross-walking of our systems and what we are tracking with housing databases and systems. Okay.

(03:09:26)

Thank you. Moving on to Fair Fares eligibility expansion: as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 adopted budget deal, the eligibility for Fair Fares was expanded to include those making up to 150% of the federal poverty level, up from 145% of the federal poverty level. This became effective on October 30 of 2025, and we are pleased to see the executive plan increased the baseline amount for Fair Fares by $25 million to continue one-year funding that had been added to Fiscal Year 2026 only. The baseline budget for Fair Fares was increased to $120.6 million. How much has been spent to date in Fiscal Year 2026 for the Fair Fares

(03:10:10)

program? I can provide that. So through the current period, spending for the program was about... Thank you.

(03:10:21)

Do you anticipate the program will fully exhaust the budgeted funding in Fiscal Year 2026? I think we are tracking that, and as we get to the very end, we will be able to get back to you with the exact amount spent. Okay, we are almost at the very end, so I am wondering if you can say whether we are on track.

(03:10:42)

We are on track. There is the possibility there will be a small amount of unspent funds, but we still have three months to rectify here. We still have a whole quarter to go through. We are tracking it closely, but we want to also ensure that we utilize the full amount of the funds that we can and that people maximize the benefit.

(03:11:05)

Okay, so I am going to guess there will be unspent

(03:11:11)

funds? At this time, no. It would be okay.

(03:11:13)

What uptake rate — the percentage of those eligible applying for and using the benefit — has been seen since the new federal poverty level threshold was implemented this past fall?

(03:11:29)

It has been hovering around 40%. Going up and down a little bit with percentage points — 39.7, 38 — but it has been around 39 to 40%. Okay.

(03:11:40)

There has been much discussion about further expansion of eligibility for the Fair Fares program. In May 2026, several reports were released calling on the City to expand the program, with cost estimates for various Fair Fares expansion scenarios. What does the agency estimate

(03:11:55)

it would cost to expand Fair Fares eligibility to 275%, 200% or 250% of the federal poverty level? I mean, it is a reasonably complicated analysis to think through the cost estimates, and so I do not think we are prepared to share those, but we are

(03:12:18)

willing to work with our partners across the administration to do that kind of analysis. Okay. Do you have an estimate of the increase in the number of clients enrolled in the program that would be associated with each of those scenarios? I do not think we have that either, but we could get back to you on that. Okay. And

(03:12:45)

has the agency reassessed the potential impact on benefits usage — as in the average number of rides per week — if the program is extended to clients at higher income levels who would be working more hours and taking public transit more frequently? I think that is what is included in part of the complicated analysis to run, sort of a variety of models to understand what we think it might potentially look like from that perspective.

(03:13:11)

So that is work that is happening. Okay. And would you be able to say

(03:13:16)

whether an increase to the program would require increased overhead and staffing costs associated with operating the Fair Fares program? Most likely there might be some, depending on the expansion and what the anticipated volume would be. We would have to look at the current staffing levels to determine if we believe that would be acceptable and support the program as it

(03:13:42)

needed to be. Okay. I am going to ask a couple of questions about the closing of Bellevue Men's Shelter and the intake center, and then I think we can go back to round two, or if the Chair has any other questions. This is not to say that I am exhausting all of my questions just yet, but we will get there.

Earlier this year, the administration announced that it will be temporarily shutting down the Bellevue Men's Shelter and intake center, and that intake would be relocated to two sites in Lower Manhattan. Additionally, Bellevue's 250 single male residents were expected to be relocated beginning May 1 at shelters that were to be determined. The agency recently announced plans to open two additional hotel shelters in Brooklyn to house clients displaced by the closure of Bellevue Men's Shelter. Can you tell me how these contracts were procured, were they emergency contracts, and when will the sites open?

(03:14:49)

I think the simple answer to that is that the hotels come through the Hotels Association of New York contract, which was procured, and we are moving forward to open them later this month.

(03:15:08)

Thank you. And so were they emergency contracts?

(03:15:10)

These were not emergency contracts. They were part of the overall... And as you

(03:15:16)

know, when something as significant and sizable as Thirtieth Street closes, there is a whole ripple effect of ramifications for the system. So Thirtieth Street itself had to be decanted, and then as we worked at 83rd and Kenton, that also had to be decanted, creating additional needs across the system. Given that emergent situation, the hotels were a tool that we had, but as I have stated earlier, not the way we want to be siting shelters in the future.

(03:15:52)

Understood. Does the agency expect to open any additional hotel or purpose-built shelters to house Bellevue's residents?

(03:16:04)

Certainly not a hotel, but we do have a pipeline of shelters that are going to come online before the end of the year. As the Commissioner was saying, there is kind of a ripple effect of the impact of the folks that were moved from the assessment beds over to other shelters. So yes, there will be, in those newer sites, folks — maybe not directly those who were at assessment, but folks that were impacted by that move.

(03:16:33)

Okay. And do you know how many of the new beds will offer mental health and substance use treatment services?

(03:16:44)

While the team is looking at that specific answer, one thing to note is that at the Project Renewal site at 83rd, we knew we were essentially losing a site that had integrated mental health and behavioral health care. So for the new Barbara Climb site, we switched that use from an employment-focused shelter to a behavioral health-focused shelter, and so we brought beds in that way. There may be additional answers to that question, but I wanted to point that part out.

(03:17:20)

Okay. If I could just add to Chief Gonzalez's comments: as he stated, Bellevue offered assessments, so they were not necessarily mental health beds. There was mental health screening, but it was not serving as a mental health shelter. As he and the Commissioner have mentioned, we are constantly assessing the needs of clients and making sure we have the right services at the shelters that we do.

(03:17:43)

Behavioral health services are always top on the list. Thank you. A resident of the behavioral health shelter site, Kenton Hall — Rosa was his name — was transferred to a hotel shelter site in Brownsville as part of the administration's effort to convert the site into an intake center due to a Bellevue closure. Rosa was receiving mental health services at the East Village shelter and was moved. While DHS can transfer shelter residents at its discretion, it must provide the resident with 48-hour notice, which Rosa's family says was not provided to him.

Rosa's family has also said that the isolation of the Brownsville hotel site likely exacerbated his mental health difficulties. How many shelter residents that were in mental health beds have been transferred as part of the effort to close Bellevue?

(03:18:38)

Give us one second while we look up the details there. So obviously we cannot comment on the case of Rosa, and it is a very sad story and deeply regrettable when there is any kind of incident. When we were working with the partners at Project Renewal at 83rd and Kenton, we partnered with them to think about next placements and to my understanding we did follow all of the requirements around notification. Not only that, I am working with Project Renewal on prioritization for the appropriate placement. As I mentioned, the new Barbara Kleiman site that Project Renewal now runs does offer behavioral health services, and we prioritize clients with those needs for that site. A number of other people at 83rd and Kenton were transferred to other facilities, including the location that you mentioned. At that particular location there are not additional behavioral health services on site and the provider should be referring to community-based services for the clients who need those services. But let me see if my colleagues have anything they would like to add.

(03:19:55)

Yes, so to your question about how many residents were transferred: 197. I just want to clarify that specifically those were not in mental health beds. They were in substance use beds, so those two sites were substance abuse.

(03:20:12)

Thank you. And did they consult Rosa's case manager or mental health provider?

(03:20:24)

As the Commissioner mentioned, part of the transfer process was sitting with staff and the provider, reviewing each person's needs to determine an appropriate assignment.

(03:20:36)

Do you know if there was a specific reason why he was transferred to a hotel site rather than one that offered services comparable to where he had been?

(03:20:43)

Again, we cannot speak specifically about Rosa, but in general we work with providers to understand what is going on with each client to determine if a hotel setting is appropriate for the needs that they have, and if not, making sure that we get them to a behavioral health site.

(03:21:02)

Okay, thank you. I am going to pass it back to Charlie to conduct the second round of questioning.

(03:21:08)

Sorry, my back is hurting me so I am standing up. Just really quickly...

(03:21:14)

Picking back off what Chair Hudson just said — how many formal contracts or subcontracts do you have with providers that have the Article 31 clinics, the outpatient clinics? Is that something that is mandated by the shelter? I know a lot of the shelters have social workers there, but I was just curious about that,

(03:21:35)

more specifically with the mental illness needs.

(03:21:38)

I can speak to the numbers, so we have...

(03:21:49)

11 single adult sites that have Article 31 mental health clinics. It is not required as part of shelter contracting. There are many requirements that go into standing up a clinic like that. Some sites may not be able to be licensed in that way, but we do have 11. All of our other shelters, whether they are...

(03:22:13)

purposely designated as behavioral health sites or not, are required in their assessment of each client's independent living plans to make sure that service needs are getting met, which might mean clinical staff on site, not in a licensed...

(03:22:26)

clinic, or referrals out to the community. Okay. And that is 11 sites out of how many total? Just under 500 — 493. 493. Okay.

(03:22:36)

I started an Article 31, so I know how painful that process is, so I get it.

(03:22:41)

Okay, we are going to go to Deputy Speaker, followed by CM Epstein.

(03:22:53)

Hi again. I am going to ask a series of questions on the racial equity plans, which was a guide to agencies in addressing systemic inequities across race, income and other factors. We would like to discuss some of the report's findings and how they inform the work of both agencies. Could you tell me how you plan to address the goals laid out in this report, and what, if any, budgetary actions would need to be taken for each? Thank you.

(03:23:28)

I will start. So my understanding — we received a 38 on the racial equity report, and that is an area that we see as an opportunity to continue to improve. I think while we have strong initiatives, one of the areas of opportunity for us is really embedding these values in our more systemic processes, and that is of course the harder work. Having initiatives can be somewhat easier than thinking about the procurement process, the contracting process, the hiring process and how we are embedding equity principles throughout that work. So I think that is a place where I want to learn more and do additional work across the agency.

Any budgetary actions, though, for FY27 to address what you all put forward in your racial equity plan? I do not think there is anything in FY27. But as we continue to think about this going forward, we will work with the administration on any budgetary implications. Okay.

(03:24:41)

At the preliminary budget hearing, Chair Hudson inquired on the status of the DSS workforce as part of the racial equity plan. The Mayor's Office of Equity and Racial Justice identified addressing secondary traumatic stress symptoms for frontline staff working directly with clients who have experienced trauma or crisis as a goal, and advised agencies to partner with public and private partners to reduce traumatic stress that all staff face in our client-facing and non-client-facing offices. Is this a strategy that is being implemented, and if not, how does the agency plan to reach that goal?

(03:25:33)

Thank you again. I will allow my colleagues to comment if they have more specific information. In the three months that I have been here, I have seen a lot of focus and energy on employee wellness and engagement. I will defer to my colleagues, or get back to you, to identify if there are specific clinical, trauma-informed care approaches that are being integrated into those models. But I see really robust employee resource groups. I see focus on succession planning. I see focus on employee wellness. I see a lot of important, critical and well-done recognition events. So I do think the agency is taking the issue of employee wellness and care seriously and I have been impressed by it. I will defer to see if anyone has anything more specific on clinical or at least semi-clinical trauma-informed care approaches in that work. But if not, it is something I would be happy to look at.

(03:26:37)

It does not actually seem... I hear what you are saying, that you do take employee wellness very seriously, but it does not seem like you are taking the racial equity plan seriously, because I have not heard any specific tangible thing that you are actively doing to implement the plan that you put forward. I know this is a preliminary plan, but the final plan is going to come soon. So this is something that you all put in your plan that you would do. It is a little unfortunate to kind of hear that it does not seem like there are any current practices or any anticipated practices to implement the program to reach the goal that

(03:27:19)

you stated. It may just be that I am not yet aware of it and others may be able to offer more. If not, I will get back to you. We would have every intention of implementing the plan that we set out.

(03:27:30)

I will just say that I think there are many of the short-term goals that were outlined in the plan that are actively in process. Those goals were centered around expanding access to benefits and employment, reducing food insecurity in underserved neighborhoods and improving housing access from shelter to permanent housing. I think we have many things related to that. In regards to access to benefits and employment, much of the work we have done around expanding and supporting around the work requirements really connects here, because the numbers of people who receive our benefits predominantly come from communities of color. So we want to make sure that they are staying connected and where we need to, expanding services and supports to make sure folks remain connected to those, as well as some of the things that have just been put out in the housing plan and the speed plan to more efficiently and effectively move people out of shelter into permanent housing, which is primarily serving communities of color.

Then I think some of the longer-term goals are really part of advocacy strategies. I can say from the benefits perspective, many of the things that would be long-term changes actually are going to require changes at the state level. If you look at cash assistance especially, many of the benefits that folks receive are very antiquated and have not been updated in decades, in regards to things like moving expenses or other types of expenses, or estimates of what living costs are. So those are longer-term aspects that are part of a developing agenda and will be developed in partnership with the new administration. Okay.

(03:29:22)

CM Epstein, followed by Restler. Thank you. I just want to...

(03:29:25)

...ask a follow-up to questions I was asking before, because we talked about the intake center on Third Street not opening after 33rd closed. Now I know you are closing Main Chance in my district as well. Obviously that place serves a lot of people who are going there. Where do you expect those people to go if the Main Chance center is closed, and what are your expectations to provide services to people who are going there if that facility is no longer operational?

(03:29:58)

Yes. One thing I wanted to point out — Chief Gonzales, do you mind? I know we corrected the record on something that I said in response to a question you had, so I wanted to just make sure you heard that. Sure.

(03:30:09)

Yeah, it was just correcting the record on the repairs that are going on at Third Street. They are actually expense, not...

(03:30:20)

capital repairs. Okay, that is helpful. Thank you. Sorry,

(03:30:23)

I just wanted to make sure you heard that. I unintentionally referred to them as capital expenses. But yes, we have been planning for the transition of that facility and I have been looking at weekly reports of how we are engaging with the people that are frequenting that space. I think we have worked on a strong plan to transition folks to other locations in the community. If you have any additional information you want to provide — well, we obviously cannot comment on...

(03:30:58)

a specific case. But like, where? What transition to where? Because we have heard from the community board who is like, hey, this is a place that is central, referring from beds in the neighborhood. They say this place is necessary because there is no other place to go. With 30th Street closed and this place closing, we are going to have a proliferation of street homelessness issues that are just going to get further exacerbated with this location closing.

(03:31:22)

Yeah, we have additional drop-ins in Manhattan. I understand the concerns. Community Board 4 or 5 — wait a minute...

(03:31:30)

I can get you specifically the community boards. I do not have that at my fingertips.

(03:31:33)

In that vicinity, are there places close by where people who are traditionally going there would be able to walk to another place?

(03:31:43)

I think we have that information. Whether we have it at our fingertips is another story, but given the amount of planning we have been doing there, I would be happy to get back to you with the specifics.

(03:31:55)

Yeah, I think that would be helpful. You know, we already talked a lot about trying to get people stability, and people who are homeless — the way they build relationships is the way they then get to a place where they can take services. If you are disrupting those relationships, you are causing a lack of trust toward a future provider and making it more difficult for that person to get the services. I would really like to hear this plan. Maybe what we could be hearing is what the plan will look like and presenting it to us and to people in the community so we can understand it. Because I think we are getting a lot of pushback and we have not heard what this plan looks like. We do not even know where these people are going and what the plan will be. Thank you, Chair.

(03:32:48)

CM Restler, followed by Brewer. Thank you so much. I would just make a suggestion on that topic that Thirtieth Street and Bellevue intake for adult single men and for families impacts every Council district in the City. Setting up a briefing for all Council members on what you all are doing and what the impacts are would be a really helpful thing to have done, and to still do, because we direct all of our constituents there. These are locations that are known to everyone and have been known for generations as the place to go when you need help, and they are not anymore. We could use some information.

So with that, I would like to switch to the topic of street homelessness. Generally, I would say the one thing that unifies everybody who is on the streets and in the subways of New York City is that they have all been through the shelter system and decided not to go back in.

(03:33:47)

And so I think to solve for street homelessness issues long term, beyond the handful of thousand people that are on the streets and subways today, it actually fundamentally comes back to shelter conditions and improving the experience of people in shelter and connecting them to longer-term solutions.

That being said, we have chronic... I think we have the highest concentration of street homeless folks in Brooklyn in our district. When we reach out to providers, they show up days later, we get no real updates, they never show up at the times that we ask, when we tell them these are the times and locations to find people and to engage. So I am just interested generally — how does DHS evaluate the performance of street outreach teams? Do you have comprehensive data on every engagement that is happening and the housing placements that you are making? I am profoundly empathetic of how difficult this work is, but I am just concerned we do not do enough to hold these outreach teams accountable and the outcomes are, frankly, totally unacceptable.

(03:34:54)

Thank you, and I will see if we have specifics on how we are monitoring. It is at least my understanding from the time I have been here that there has been increased scrutiny and a look at outcomes amongst the providers in the last couple of years, but also I think more consistent rebidding of those contracts. So I think there is a focus on holding providers accountable. I am disappointed to hear that folks are not showing up when you are giving them information about where people they might be able to engage with are. We can certainly follow up on the specific...

(03:35:32)

situation. Then they send us an email like every month of like, these were the outreach efforts we made, but with no information on outcomes or any tangible information whatsoever. It is totally useless. I just am shocked that we... I mean, you could probably give me a number — maybe Chief, can you give us a number on how much we spend annually on homeless engagement and services, including safe havens? Do you have a ballpark figure for us?

(03:36:01)

Yeah, our streets program for FY27 is $450 million. That includes all outreach, stabilization beds and safe havens, as well as the intake centers and drop-in centers.

(03:36:11)

Okay, so we are spending half a billion dollars and I just think our outcomes are embarrassing. We have so much we should be doing and such a better job in connecting people to the help they need. I have been really encouraged by recent conversations I have had with Housing Works about new models for safe havens that are more flexible, even to try to bring people in. We are proud to have opened one of the largest safe havens in Brooklyn in our district in Greenpoint, and the largest supportive housing development in all of Brooklyn in our district in downtown Brooklyn on the edge of DUMBO. We want to open facilities that make a difference and that actually connect people to the care that they need. But I just think that currently our outreach is not working

(03:36:49)

and I really hope that this is a priority for you in the days, weeks and months to come. Because if we continue with the status quo, it is one of the number one complaints we get in the office — just people who are struggling with severe mental illness on their corners, on their subway entrances, on their platforms. We call it in, but it never changes.

(03:37:09)

Yeah, no...

(03:37:12)

I am a point taken and it is an area of focus for me. I think one of the things systems can get trapped in is an over-focus on process over outcomes, right? How many things are happening, with how many hours, and how many people are out in these places, and not focusing on what matters most, which in fact is placements and connections to care, reduction of encampments and, honestly, this is harder to measure, but on public perception around how we are doing on those fronts. Those are the things that I am focused on. It is not so much that process is an unimportant piece to be taking a look at, but in fact, what are the outcomes we are driving at.

(03:37:50)

And how do we reach those outcomes? It is totally anecdotal, but in 2025, this is my fifth year in the Council, we got more incoming from constituents on street homeless conditions than we had any year that I have been serving. So things are not getting better and, considering how much we spend, the lack of outcomes and accountability... I am glad to

(03:38:11)

hear it is going to be a priority for you. I think we have a very long way to go. Thank you.

(03:38:18)

CM Brewer, followed by CM Wong.

(03:38:19)

Thank you. I very much agree with CM Restler in the sense that what I do is I just call you. I mean, when we have a problem, or whomever, or Scott or Chris or someone, because I think the local street homelessness efforts, they are only asking, "Do you want to go in?" and nobody wants to go in, so they all say no, and so that does not get us very far. So maybe that system needs to be looked at. And then, of course, my folks, when you tell them that they have a date when they have to go in by, they just go around the corner and then they come back. So they are pretty smart, the street homeless folks. So I guess the question is looking at the process for addressing street homelessness. But anyway,

(03:39:04)

I know what to do and I have no problems getting in touch with that. I want to be clear on that, none at all. So in terms of how our food...

(03:39:13)

From the community food counts, each organization is counted around a single fixed emergency feeding routing number. This is a data question and that is tied to a brick-and-mortar site. But we understand that a growing share of food reaches New Yorkers through mobile markets, pop-up distributions, home delivery — a lot of home delivery is what my folks are doing — and it does not capture what needs to be captured, to the extent that provider counts

(03:39:42)

pounds distributed totals and supply gap analysis are undercounting both the reach of these models and the true scale of the need. So the question is: will you modernize how providers are registered, funded and measured so that non-site-based distribution is recognized, so the data reflects how food is really distributed?

(03:40:11)

First Deputy Commissioner, do you want to speak on asking, beyond our own program, how we can include other sites? Yes,

(03:40:20)

because what happens now is a brick-and-mortar site is the only place that is counted. It is not counted if you distribute to

(03:40:28)

a home delivery, et cetera. So it looks like all the folks in one neighborhood are getting food when in fact it is all over the borough or the City.

(03:40:39)

Because of the way that you are counting it. So I think you have to rethink how you measure and count the distribution of food for those who are

(03:40:45)

hungry. This is something we can look into.

(03:40:47)

Okay, to try to understand how we are maybe miscounting. All right, thank you very much. The other question I have is: a while ago — I do not know where we are with the faith-based sleeping in the churches and synagogues. Where are we with that program? Because Main Chance used to use that. I know you are sticking here about Main Chance, but I am not giving up on Main Chance, you all, you know.

(03:41:08)

So what is with the faith-based sleepover? Yeah, my understanding is through our street outreach providers there is a consortium of faith-based overnight sites that are still being used and can be used. I have visited one myself and I know there are more than that. I do not know the overall numbers, but those exist and are an important part of the continuing... Do we want to expand them? Is there funding to do that? There is not additional funding in this budget to do that. It is something we can consider as we move into the out years and see if that model has great repercussions for those who are there, because they get a lot of support that you would not get in an alternative situation. I assume you know that.

(03:41:51)

Yeah, the site that I saw was really excellent and I could see why it played an important part in the community and for the people they were serving. One other question has come up: how many, as we say, from upstate — meaning prison — end up in your shelters? My understanding from Fortune Society is about 5,000 people come to New York City every year and 2,500 of them end up in your shelters. Of course we would rather have them at Fortune and, you know, Exodus, et cetera. But how many end up in your shelters? Because it is really hard to give them the support that they need

(03:42:26)

if it is not tied to their experience. Yeah. Apologies that we do not have that handy. We will get back to you.

(03:42:33)

Okay. And then can you talk about other ways of supporting them? That is what I am looking for.

(03:42:40)

About individuals being released so that they should go to a shelter or home that is run by, I guess as an example, someone connected with Fortune, et cetera,

(03:42:51)

programs that work with people who are formerly incarcerated. It is really hard to get the support that they need and it could lead to recidivism if they are not given this support. I do not hear people talking about that enough. I will be Stanley Britches — they will talk about it endlessly, but it would be good if you did also. Yeah,

(03:43:07)

I am going to see Commissioner Richardson tomorrow and it can be a good start of a conversation. We also do need to count on our state partners who are releasing folks to also be providing both supervision and support. Not just... I do not think you are going to

(03:43:21)

get much support there, but you can ask for it. I think it is going to be on our dime that we have to figure it out, and just that they, you know, would be having alternative choices, not going to yourself, just like I said, go to theirs. Yeah.

(03:43:36)

All right, thank you. Do not forget, I want to screen people going to 226 West and anyplace else to be screened. Thank you.

(03:43:45)

Great. CM Wong, followed by CM Nurse. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner, I represent Glendale and the Cooper Avenue Housing Center is in my backyard.

(03:43:56)

My predecessor CM Robert Holden spent years fighting it. That shelter has generated 2,251 calls to 911, 677 other emergency calls and 278 arrests since West HAP took over in 2020. In January 2025 there were public calls to close it. The City's response was to give West HAP a brand new three-year contract running into June 2028. My question is: what specific performance benchmarks is West HAP required to meet under that renewal contract, and what remedies, including early termination, are available if those benchmarks are not met? Please answer — I am going to ask for some help

(03:44:52)

from my colleagues on this one. I do not know the details of the contract specs, except of course to provide a safe, secure setting for people. I will say I am used to, in my previous position, getting 911 data every 15 minutes and being able to look at it and monitor so that I know before you tell me what the calls are, and we can monitor that upfront and then reach out not only to our shelter partners but also to other community safety partners. So it is an important piece to me to look at not only the 911 data but our incident reporting across our shelter system, and use that information to monitor progress and challenges across our shelter system. That is certainly something this team has heard from me. But in terms of specific contract details,

(03:45:42)

if we have the answer... Apologies, could you repeat the question? It was about the contract.

(03:45:48)

Yeah, the question was: what specific performance benchmarks is West HAP required to meet under the renewal contract, given all these 911 calls and emergency calls and the 278 arrests? Okay, because it seemed to me

(03:46:04)

that they failed on every scale in running a safe shelter and they should not be renewed — another vendor should be chosen. Understood, and I appreciate the concern about the area and we will certainly go back and look at the incident rate. It is something that we address often. We need to understand what is going on: is it a particular client or group of clients? Are there protocols that are not being followed by staff? We really need to look into that

(03:46:35)

specific to this case. But for a contract renewal at contract end, the question is: is this provider meeting the standards of the contract? And after looking at all these numbers, it seemed to me that they are not. So there is a bigger question at a higher level: is there a formal competitive procurement process on contract renewals or is this a sole-source continuation? Just renewed?

(03:47:05)

We will get into the specifics, but we do have a responsibility determination every time we renew a contract and our actual structure takes care of that, so we can look into

(03:47:14)

this specific case. Yeah. So I will give you my contact and let us work on this because clearly they are not doing a good job in running the shelter. Thank you. Thank you.

(03:47:24)

Thank you. CM Nurse, and then I will hand it back to the Chair. Thank you. A question — a follow-up from the Deputy Speaker's question on some of the racial equity work. One of the goals of the racial equity plan, one of the goals that the Mayor's Office is to ensure, is that its workforce development programs connect clients to career pathways that help reduce income inequality for underserved populations. Given the newly implemented HR 1 SNAP work requirements, this goal is crucial to providing services to the most vulnerable New Yorkers. As part of this goal, along with the Mayor's Office of Equity and Racial Justice, two strategies were identified: the need to conduct a needs assessment to identify specific workforce development needs in underserved populations, and to launch pilot programs in select underserved communities. What is the timeline for conducting a needs assessment and starting a pilot?

(03:48:36)

I will have to get back to you on the exact timeline because I think there is another area of the agency that would be part of that process that we do not have here. So I do not want to misspeak on that. But I can say that there are things we do already have in process as well. We are collaborating with some other agencies focusing on workforce development, specifically targeting specific populations and specific sectors. It is not finalized and ready for prime time at the moment, but I will say there are two things in process already right now that speak to that particular goal. But we can get back to you on the needs assessment,

(03:49:13)

the broader needs assessment. Do you

(03:49:15)

think you would be able to start a pilot in this calendar year or is this something that would be in next calendar year? The two programs I am talking about would start this year, maybe later this year.

(03:49:27)

Okay. My second question: one of the long-term goals laid out in the plan is creating predictive tools to anticipate housing instability and systematically prevent homelessness. Can you tell me what such a tool would look like, or share any information you want to share here?

(03:49:44)

There were some earlier conversations around technology. I need to learn more. This is an area that I have not had a chance to dig into deeply with the team, clearly, and it is a really important area. So I will take this opportunity to go deeper into that work and make sure that we can answer all of those questions. That is important.

(03:50:08)

Okay. Yeah, I think, given that the last administration really dragged their feet on the racial equity plans, there was a lot of work done and the way this has rolled out has been a little bit shaky. I think it would be really important for us in the next couple of months to be prepared for this. I think the final version of the plan is coming out in like a month, maybe, or more. So being really up to date on that is going to be key and we are going to be expecting all of the agencies to be able to say what their plan is on this going into next year's budgeting, because next year there will be no excuse for racial equity to not be fully woven into that budgeting process. So I hear you on that. Would love to get this line of questioning included in the follow-up. Absolutely. Thank you so much. Okay.

(03:51:07)

Okay, thank you. I did want to just ask a question about Main Chance because I know CM Brewer said she will not relent. So I just wanted to ask: can you provide a reason for the pending closure of that site? There is ongoing litigation here, so I do not think there is anything we can say. Okay.

(03:51:40)

Is it scheduled to close though at the end of this month? It is. Okay. I guess the litigation will tell. Yes, barring any action from the court, we will close it.

(03:51:57)

Moving into cash assistance and SNAP timeliness rates: according to the dynamic MMR as of March 2026, the cash assistance processing timeliness rate was 77.8%, which is a 10% jump from when we discussed this at the preliminary budget hearing, and the SNAP processing timeliness rate was 88%. While these are improvements from the prior year, they are still below your target of having 95% of benefit applications processed within the state-required 30-day time frame.

(03:52:28)

What is the current timeliness rate for cash and SNAP processing? Those rates are the consistent current rates. There is always a lag in regards to reporting it out, but it is something that we are continuously focusing on. I think when I was here last I did indicate, especially on the cash side, that there were a couple of things that we were going to be putting into place. Those have recently gone into place so they will not reflect for a few months when we catch up to those months around those pieces. But we consistently are looking at those ways, and I think improving the cash rate will improve the SNAP rate because sometimes they are connected.

(03:53:13)

So the 10% increase that we have seen since — is that attributed to the changes? Because you would not

(03:53:24)

attribute it to the automation? There were other changes and other ways in which we have been managing this work and, you know, tracking things and using other interim reports to make sure that we are addressing actions within the timeliness range, and I think that you are definitely seeing reflected here. The automation that I am talking about is really just a way in which cases get closed and the timeliness gets calculated, especially as it relates to one-shot deals that individuals get. So we are automating the closing process after the benefit is granted. Right now it is a two-step process and we have seen instances where staff will give the person the benefit but then do not necessarily take that second step because they move on to the next case trying to get a benefit out. So we are automating that last step, which will be a better reflection of what is really happening.

(03:54:23)

Okay, and could that also contribute to even better results? Yes, yes.

(03:54:27)

And I expect our rate is better than what is reflected here, but I cannot say that to you officially. But I believe this automation is going to help reflect that work as well.

(03:54:37)

Okay, that is great. Are you currently using overtime to meet the demand?

(03:54:46)

We utilize voluntary overtime to meet the demand as needed, so it is elective. We really try to minimize mandatory overtime. I do want to say, just for transparency, we did have to mandate overtime yesterday for the cash program. It was due to a tech issue that we experienced the day before, so we needed to catch up on things. But that is really an anomaly and it is not something we need to utilize as we did back in the time when we had a significant backlog. So it is overwhelmingly just voluntary overtime.

(03:55:25)

Okay. Do you know how many hours and what the cost

(03:55:27)

is? Yeah. For fiscal year 2026 to date, staff have worked 1,008,465 hours of overtime. 1,008,465. Sorry.

(03:55:48)

Okay. With a total cost of $45.6 million. That is a lot of overtime. Can you provide a breakdown of the hours and cost of overtime by benefit program — so for SNAP, cash assistance, rental assistance and Medicaid, for example? We would have to get back to you on those specifics. Okay, that would be great. And according to the dynamic MMR as of March 2026, there has been a slight decrease in participation rates in cash assistance and SNAP, with 583,000 individuals receiving cash assistance, which is a 3.5% decrease, and individuals receiving SNAP showing a 3% decrease. The executive plan re-estimated the cash assistance caseload and reduced the budget by $1.7 million in fiscal 2026 and $31.9 million baseline starting in fiscal 2027. Do you know what is driving these decreases?

(03:56:51)

So in the decreases regarding benefits access, I think on the cash side, some of that is related to we anticipated seeing as we continue to roll out the cash assistance mandatory engagement requirements, which we had not done for about five years during COVID, where people self-select to make the decision that they are going to move on from this based on the requirements. I would say on the SNAP side, I think there is a nationwide... they are seeing a decrease in people accessing SNAP. I think nationwide the rate is about 9%, so I would say ours shows that many of the efforts we are doing are working to make people stay connected, but obviously we track that closely too. If we see trends starting to increase as well, we try to understand what is happening and ensure we are getting the word out there that if you believe you are eligible, apply. Just apply to us.

(03:57:48)

Right. Do you expect a further decrease in both SNAP and cash assistance in the out years? And I will comment on SNAP.

(03:57:57)

I mean, I think regardless of all of the incredible work I think that we are trying to do across government and community, this is an intentional effort to keep people from their benefits and make it harder, and they are good at what they do. So I do think nationally we will see that. We are tracking that as our major outcome — reducing the amount of people who are falling off. That is something we are going to take a careful look at, and it will not do us any justice to feel that we are doing better than others across the country. But we are going to do our best to lead and keep as many people on these benefits as possible in the face of efforts that are outright designed to keep them from them. We appreciate that.

(03:58:44)

Well, I will say I appreciate that, and I do not want to speak for others.

(03:58:49)

The projected cost for cash assistance in the out years — like all programs, we are constantly evaluating our expenditures and also the caseloads. The estimate that we have in the budget, part of the savings, it is just part of our normal review of the program and our expectation for its trajectory in the future years.

(03:59:22)

Thank you. I would like to ask a question just to revisit the hotel shelters. Hotels have been granted billion-dollar contracts to provide emergency shelters to fulfill right to shelter requirements. These contracts have created an incentive for these industries to construct hotels, generally under areas, only for these hotels to within just a few years be converted to shelters. How is the administration moving to discourage this pipeline from becoming normalized?

(03:59:57)

As I mentioned earlier, I think the job to do is to work on a homelessness plan that includes a shelter plan that includes intentional siting for the shelter services we need and want and value across the community, of course acknowledging that we are a right to shelter community. So I do not think a plan to build hotels... I think we want to be investing in purpose-built shelters that can be converted to housing quickly and do so in a planned, full manner and in an equitable manner across the five boroughs.

(04:00:34)

Thank you. And just in the same vein — and this is a question from CM Restler — there are 93 hotels housing families with children today. You testified to a 15% decline in the families with children population. Do you have a goal for how many hotels you can close to housing children this fiscal year? I do not know if I can state a firm goal, but I do think what I can state is a goal around reducing the number of families with children in hotel shelters by the end of the calendar year.

(04:01:16)

Is there a goal to move more? Is there a specific number? I do not think we have a specific number in mind, but we have done some of that work already. And to earlier questions, we want to be careful about how we do those moves to reduce disruptions for school. But I also think — even though I have not spent nearly enough time with these families to be able to speak for them — that these are also improvements. So moving from a hotel for a family into a tiered shelter provides amenities and services and supports, like a kitchen and so on, that are desirable. So I think we want to move on that plan but do not have a specific number in mind.

(04:02:01)

Okay. And you know, I know that we have been through a lot over the last several years, but he does want to note that a few years ago we had families with children in commercial hotels. Get that. Thank you.

(04:02:20)

At the preliminary budget hearing I raised concerns over staff retention and lack of institutional knowledge within the program. While Eric testified that they provide additional training to workers, I fear the continual increase of referrals is outweighing efforts to retain caseworkers. As the data shows, across fiscal years 2021 to 2025, there was an 81.4% increase in referrals and a 91.5% increase in wait times for a case to receive services. In fiscal 25, the number of referrals surpassed pre-pandemic levels at 33,875 and there was a ten-year high in wait times at 45 days. Has there been an improvement in retention as a result of the additional training? Yes, we have. 90% of active caseworkers have been in their title for over a year. Thank you. And a report from last year listed case rejections in 2025 — being unable to locate the individual was listed as the second highest reason. Could high staff turnover influence the challenge in locating individuals with referrals? How do we ensure they do not fall through the cracks due to staff turnover?

(04:03:38)

So no, we do not believe that the staffing is directly connected to that reason. As for not being able to locate an individual, you know, it is a voluntary program. People have to agree to participate in that, and many people who have been given a referral are also actively living in the community, so us going there, there is a possibility that someone is not going to be present. But we have a level of checks in place to ensure that all referrals are being followed through appropriately and that all the required actions are taken. These include but are not limited to supervisory review and approval and consultation with program leadership.

(04:04:27)

Can you walk us through how you track information on clients who also receive other benefits? And just as an example, do you know how many clients have a CityFHEPS voucher?

(04:04:39)

1,066 clients have a CityFHEPS voucher, which we record in our case management system. We record what services the individual needs assistance with and is receiving, including recertification of benefits such as the housing subsidy. So it is through our systems that we track those things.

(04:05:02)

Okay, great. And I saw a group

(04:05:05)

come and join us in the chamber here from Berkeley Carroll, which is where I went to school.

(04:05:10)

So welcome to City Hall and to the chambers. Funding community food connection is a vital resource providing much-needed food to the City's vast network of food pantries and soup kitchens. This program is especially important given the current changes to SNAP as a result of the federal HR One Bill, as we have discussed at the preliminary budget hearing. I am glad to see that the executive plan increases the baseline funding by $53.6 million to approximately $75 million starting in fiscal 2027. According to a recent report from City Harvest, visits by families with kids to food pantries in fiscal 25 were up 97% compared to six years earlier. Pantries had an average of one million visits by families with children every month. While the increase in baseline funding is welcome across the City, I am concerned that it is still not enough to meet the growing demand.

(04:06:08)

What is the actual spending thus far in fiscal 2026? The total spending through March 2026 is — the community food connection under its food contract is on track to fully spend the budget across more than 700 providers. The total is... and we expect to spend it across all of our 700 participating community kitchens.

(04:06:43)

Okay, but $47.5 million to date. Yes. Thank you. How does the agency plan to allocate the increased funding across the network in fiscal 27 and the out years?

(04:06:57)

As you mentioned, we are also pleased that the executive budget has dramatically increased the baseline food contract budget. The CFC funding is allocated by a methodology that takes into account neighborhood by neighborhood in New York City the need and the supply, and then there is a weighted scoring that allows us to equitably distribute the resources. Food insecurity in the City has continued to increase and the increase in cost of food due to inflation puts a burden on the City's food pantries. We will consider making annual adjustments to the CFC budget to account for inflation and the increased cost of food procurement. Of course, we are continually reviewing our program and we will work in close partnership to identify additional resources should they be needed.

(04:07:51)

Thank you. Has HRA explored any other innovative ways to address food insecurity outside of its centralized food ordering system?

(04:08:02)

We have a $2 million capacity grant that we give out to our providers to help them increase their ability to serve the communities. We are also undertaking a pilot with a provider called Mercado, and we will be able to give out credits or like cards for our participants to be able to just purchase on their own rather than picking up physical goods. So we are excited about that pilot, which is quite exciting and will really allow families to purchase what they need.

(04:08:37)

Right. Yes, this came up in a previous hearing. I think that you mentioned how much was going towards this pilot. I will look into that for the number. Okay. HRA administers tenant protection legal service programs, including the City's universal access to counsel program. Since the end of the eviction moratoria and the post-pandemic resumption of proceedings in housing court, the legal service providers have been experiencing considerable capacity issues. Providers have seen a spike in caseloads but they do not have the capacity to fully handle it, which means not all eligible individuals are able to receive legal services. We were pleased to see that the executive plan includes $15.6 million baseline starting in fiscal 2027 for the anti-harassment tenant protection program, as well as $14.3 million in fiscal 2027 and $40 million baseline starting in fiscal 2028 to expand right to counsel. How will the right to counsel expansion be implemented and how will the additional funding be allocated across providers?

So our intention for the additional funding is for that to enable an increase in attorneys and an increase in the number of cases provided. We will be doing a process with the providers to equitably distribute these funds, and there will be a process that we are still developing where providers will come forward and tell us how many lawyers and new service capacity they think they would be able to handle. Through that process we believe we will ultimately determine how the $40 million is being allocated, but it has not been determined at this point. There will be a process. Okay. Thank you. Given the increase in caseload and provider capacity issues, does the increased funding in the executive plan fully match the level of need?

(04:10:35)

I think we are going to see how this increase addresses need and what we think still remains. We think this is an important step, but we also want to assess through the implementation of this, especially on the staffing side, if there is within the community a sufficient number of lawyers that we are looking for who would want to be doing this type of work. That is something that we are assessing, and we will continue to look at that year over year to determine if we think additional resources might be needed.

(04:11:16)

And I will just add, in addition to what Administrator French said, we referred earlier to additional diversion efforts. If there are fewer people coming into the court, then we will need fewer attorneys obviously to represent them. So I think those parts are also important. Yes, I am very excited about the upstream approaches to helping folks and keeping them in their homes and out of court.

(04:11:44)

Have any providers, as far as you are aware, stopped taking new cases this year due to capacity issues?

(04:11:51)

All providers are currently taking new cases. Okay.

(04:11:59)

How many eligible tenants facing eviction this fiscal year had cases proceed in housing court without representation because they were unable to get a lawyer due to the right to counsel program's capacity constraints?

(04:12:11)

So we do not currently have a concrete way to estimate the total number of individuals who would have been eligible for right to counsel either through income or the other avenues and populations who are served. That is something that we are working on internally to better be able to calculate, so that we can more appropriately identify how many are being represented by the right to counsel citywide. The representation rate in the court was 44%, but that is something we are actively working on being able to calculate appropriately, working with the courts to access data we would need to make more informed estimates there.

(04:12:56)

Totally. And they seem to be just for...

(04:12:58)

Whatever it is worth, I sat on a panel with one of the judges from housing court, and I think — I do not recall the specific position, but whoever the person is who has overall oversight of the judges in housing court was also there — and they are certainly willing partners in trying to work with the City to address this, and even mentioned specifically a willingness to open an affordable housing court part. So I think whatever we can do to work with them and partner with them on keeping people out of housing court and helping them address the housing issues before they get there would be great.

(04:13:41)

What challenges, if any, have providers expressed with hiring, retention, pay parity or other things, and what is HRA doing to

(04:13:48)

address these issues? Providers have shared that the difficulty — one of the prime difficulties they have is being able to hire up the number of lawyers that are in their contracts. We have addressed that in ways in which we have been able to add funds to contracts, though I will say

(04:14:10)

pay parity and pay on the provider side is something that is determined... many of them are unionized, so there are other factors in there. But it is something we track closely and we speak with them closely about to assist. And I think the addition of $40 million in FY28 and out is a key indicator of our commitment there. Thank you.

(04:14:38)

And then I wanted to ask a few questions about the Hillary Street Women's Shelter concerns.

(04:14:46)

About safety are serious issues that dissuade many individuals from entering shelter. The Tillery Street Hillary Street Women's Shelter, which is located in my district, has had a number of serious incidents which include assaults, arrests, medical crises and deaths. The rate of incidents at this location was more than double the City average for single adult shelters in fiscal 2025. According to a recent report by Gothamist, advocates and residents have argued that Tillery's troubles stem from mixing residents with different health issues in close quarters, staff's failure to de-escalate and intervene when conflicts arise, and a lack of oversight. Can you tell me how the agency is working to address the situation at Tillery? Sure.

(04:15:28)

Our primary responsibility in our oversight of our providers is to ensure the safety of clients and service delivery. And like CM Wong's concern, right, when incidents are on the rise it is our job to make sure we know what is going on and that we are working with providers to support resolution. Incidents normally are a symptom of something, right — where there is a client issue, there is a staff issue, there is a protocol issue. So we need to dig into it to understand what is going on. I think for this site in particular, at the start of the calendar year there was a change in providers, so that is also specific to the Hillary site.

(04:16:11)

Okay. How many beds does the Tillery Street shelter have?

(04:16:16)

1. And what is the average occupancy rate?

(04:16:19)

I know today it is 182 filled beds.

(04:16:23)

I would have to get back to you on an average. Okay, but that is almost 100%.

(04:16:29)

Do you think the density of the shelter contributes to its rate of serious incidents?

(04:16:36)

We would have to look into density. We have other mental health shelters with 200 beds. It could be the layout of the facility, it could be where the entrances and exits are, it could be proximity to transportation hubs or areas where people use or purchase drugs. There is a lot that goes into our assessment of what is going on at the site.

(04:17:00)

And does the Tillery Street shelter offer mental health support services on site? Yes.

(04:17:05)

Do you know what kind of services they can provide now? I would have to get back to you. Okay.

(04:17:10)

And in general, are there best practice guidelines that DHS follows regarding the size of facilities that serve particularly vulnerable populations such as those with serious mental health issues? I would be curious to know how many shelters — you said there are other shelters that serve the same population with 200 beds. How many of those shelters of that size do we have and how many are larger than that? Or I guess, on average, how large are those?

(04:17:34)

Types of facilities. That is a great question. So we max at 200 beds. Okay, so we can do another — it would not be any larger than that for mental health. Yeah, they will not... we can do an analysis of our mental health shelters to get a sense of what we see the trend is based on capacity, but I think, like I said, there are other mitigating factors.

(04:17:58)

And I will just add, that is another opportunity as we think about a longer term shelter plan. To think about, ideally, how do we move towards a vision of — if it turns out that smaller shelters for people with serious mental illness are clinically more appropriate, how do we start to move in those directions? That would all be long term planning efforts, right? It is an opportunity to...

(04:18:21)

Rethink. Absolutely. And how does one monitor shelter...

(04:18:26)

...providers' performance, including their ability to keep residents safe and their ability to effectively provide services? There are...

(04:18:35)

Multiple touch points that look at various aspects of shelter operations. So the State visits shelters every year, the program team visits shelters every year, there is a facilities inspection, there is a security assessment, we do annual contract evaluations. That is just at the administrative level. Day to day, the program team is in touch with shelter providers, monitoring incidents, monitoring service delivery, placements, people connected to housing. Those are the ways that we monitor. We are constantly pulling data to identify trends. We meet with providers regularly, both at the staff level and at the executive level, to share experiences and share best practices.

(04:19:23)

Thank you. And how does one monitor shelter provider... sorry. What training is provided to contracted shelter staff and security on escalating conflicts? We are...

(04:19:33)

Subject to local laws, so Local Law 124 requires that contracted shelter operators offer 40 hours of training beyond what the State requires, and this includes things like trauma-informed approach, sexual harassment, de-escalation, conflict resolution and the basics of crisis intervention. Additionally, Local Law 49 requires that all of our client-facing shelter staff receive customer service training, which touches on equity, accountability, crisis intervention, understanding violence, using a trauma-informed approach and cultural sensitivity. Great. And can...

(04:20:17)

You tell me what the protocol is for responding to a priority one...

(04:20:20)

Incident. Yeah. So providers have to report into our 24/7 incident hotline within an hour of notification of an incident. They have to submit a formal incident report in our system of record. It gets reviewed, it often gets updated, and those critical incidents go for review before they are shared with the State.

(04:20:45)

Thank you. Let me just run through and make sure I have not forgotten any questions. I believe, and I know we are over our scheduled time, I believe that is everything from us. Okay.

(04:21:03)

Great. Well, thank you all for your time and your honesty and transparency. We do greatly appreciate it and that is what we are here for, so enjoy the rest of your day and I am sure we will be seeing you very soon.

(04:21:20)

Thank you. Thank you. And we look forward to all the follow-up questions. Indeed, we have answers to dozens more to send as follow-up. Thank you.

(04:21:30)

Okay, we are just going to take a couple of minutes to transition. Okay, if you all are ready, I think we can start. Sorry, I know we are running a little late. Okay. So we are continuing — good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the second Fiscal Year 2027 Executive Budget hearing for the day, focusing on the New York City Department of Sanitation. I am Council Member Lee and I am pleased to be joined by my colleague and Chair of the Committee on Sanitation and Solid Waste Management, CM Justin Sanchez. Today we have been joined by Council Members Epstein, Wong, Brewer, Sanchez, Maloney and Williams. Am I missing anyone? I think that is it. Okay.

(04:30:10)

So welcome, Commissioner Gregory Anderson. First, before I begin, I just really wanted to say thank you to Chief Frank... as well as your entire team and everyone, because I know that a few weeks ago we had those crazy floods and you all have been so amazing just helping our neighborhoods and constituents with the cleanup efforts. I just really wanted to say a very heartfelt thank you, and for being available 24/7. You really meant it. So okay, without further ado, on May 12, 2026, the administration released the Executive Financial Plan for Fiscal Years 2026 to 2030, with a proposed Fiscal Year 2027 budget. The Department of Sanitation is...

(04:31:01)

Proposed at a level that represents 2.1% of the administration's proposed Fiscal Year 2027 budget in the Executive Plan. This is an increase of 1.7% from what was originally budgeted in the Fiscal Year 2027 Preliminary Plan. The increased results from the baseline funding for the expansion of containerized waste collection across the five boroughs, adjustments made to the snow budget covering costs incurred by increased amounts of snow this past season, as well as increased headcount due to the expansion of vendor licensing and much more. As of April 26, Sanitation's headcount was 294 more than their Fiscal Year 2026 budgeted headcount. Today we look forward to discussing the Department's budget and headcount needs to perform its responsibilities in maintaining a clean, safe and healthy New York City. I will now turn it over to my co-chair for this hearing, Chair Justin Sanchez.

(04:32:02)

Thank you, Chair. Good afternoon and welcome to the Fiscal Year 2027 Executive Budget hearing for the Department of Sanitation of New York. My name is Justin Sanchez and I am Chair of the Committee on Sanitation and Solid Waste Management. Today we will review the Sanitation Department's Fiscal Year 2027 budget to understand how it addresses the needs of all New Yorkers. Today we are here to discuss the Sanitation Executive Budget, which is $2.1 billion, with 9,774 positions. The Fiscal Year 2027 Executive Budget has undergone some large changes increasing since its adoption. The Department has six new needs in Fiscal Years 2026 and 2027. The Sanitation Department Fiscal Years 2026 to 2030 Capital Commitment Plan supports 127 distinct projects.

Following a productive conversation, which I am truly appreciative of, during our Preliminary Budget hearing, and some significant budgetary changes for the Department in the past two plans, I am looking forward to discussing the Sanitation Department's priorities, needs and recent actions. The Department has added funding for the future of citywide containerization as well as additional funding for the derelict vehicle program and vendor enforcement. The Committee and myself would like to understand some of these changes. I would also like to discuss garage funding in the capital budget, street sweeper cameras and more. I am excited for what we will accomplish over the term and I look to build on previous hearings we have had in the past.

I would also like to give a massive, massive, huge thank you and shout out to our committee staff for all of their hard work: our financial analyst Tanbir Singh, our assistant director Jack Story, our amazing committee counsel — you should all be jealous, to the other committee counsels, we love you too — Morgan Barrett, policy analyst Ricky Challah and your Spencer, as well as all of my staff and my legislative director River Alexander. I would like to welcome and thank Commissioner Gregory Anderson and our sanitation workers, of course, Chief of Chiefs Frank Tieria and the Department civilian staff for all the work that you do.

As a point of personal privilege, I cannot tell you the thank you that I have from my constituents. Instead of angry emails, I have been receiving lovely emails talking about the trash cans and the lack of trash on the streets. You really have helped to subtly transform our community and I really, really appreciate that from the bottom of my heart. I would also like to recognize all my colleagues that are here with us today. Now I will turn it back over to my co-chair to continue. Thank you. I am sorry, Chief, I mispronounced your last name.

(04:35:06)

Okay, so before we begin, I just wanted to make a logistical announcement, which I have been saying before every hearing, which is that we are having all the public testimony on one day with every single agency because of the short timeline this year with our budget hearings. So June 10, Wednesday, 9:30 a.m. — make sure that all your folks who want to testify in person sign up. It starts at 9:30, again June 10, Wednesday. It will be loads of fun, we will be here all day.

(04:36:14)

Before we start, I just want to note that we have been welcomed by Council Members and Deputy Speaker Dr. Nantasha Williams. Good afternoon, Chairs Lee and Sanchez and members of the Committees on Finance and Sanitation and Solid Waste Management. I am Gregory Anderson, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Sanitation, and I am joined today by Joe Antonelli, our Deputy Commissioner for Management and Budget, and Rebecca Kriegman, our Assistant Commissioner for Policy and Planning.

Before I get into my testimony, I just want to say that tonight our hockey team has the honor of playing in the finals of the First Responders Hockey Association down in Coney Island. So as soon as we wrap up here, I am going to head down to Coney Island to cheer them on as they try to take on a team from up in Rockland County to take home the championship. So we are very excited about that.

What we are actually here today to talk about is the Executive Budget that makes historic investments in cleanliness and waste containerization. This is a budget that reflects a commitment to revolutionary change in our relationship with waste and with our public spaces. In my decade of service to this Department, I have seen cleaning programs mired in bureaucratic patchworks and initiatives that were announced with great fanfare but with no ongoing funding. As with so many issues, the Mamdani administration is rejecting the status quo, and as part of a new era for New York City, the Department of Sanitation is taking an expansive view of what it means to keep our City clean.

It is often said that budgets are a statement of values. Well, this administration's Executive Budget is a statement that it strongly supports a cleaner, safer and healthier New York City more than ever before — a City where cleanliness is measured not just by the absence of litter and trash, but by vitality and well-maintained public spaces. The Sanitation Department works tirelessly to deliver to all New Yorkers the promise of a truly clean City, one where every New Yorker leaves their home to a block they take pride in, a neighborhood they cherish and a City that helps them thrive. This budget is an investment in that work.

So first I want to talk about containerization. I worked on this project for many years previously as Deputy Commissioner and I am thrilled to be back as part of an administration that is committed to meaningful progress on waste containerization and actually getting this program across the finish line. By the end of 2031, 100% of New York City trash will be in sealed containers — 100%. This is not just a pie-in-the-sky hope, this is not a dream. Today we have a budget that puts us on track and fully funds our progress toward meeting this plan. We already require more than 70% of trash to be in containers: all commercial trash, all trash from low-density residences, all trash collected by BIDs and cleanup partners and all food waste set out for composting. Residents in low-density buildings are now required to use the official bin, and as we announced a couple of weeks ago, we are issuing only warnings throughout the summer as we give folks more time to go to Home Depot and get their bins. We will begin full enforcement of this rule after Labor Day. The heavier lift in the containerization space...

(04:39:37)

Especially in terms of the capital investment necessary, is trash from higher-density residential buildings. Larger Empire bins have now been serving West Harlem for nearly a year, performing well even in our cold, snowy winter, and we are preparing right now to install them this fall in Brooklyn community districts, including Gowanus and downtown Brooklyn.

(04:40:02)

Until this executive budget, there were no plans and there was no funding to grow this program beyond the two-district pilot. But now, thanks to Mayor Mamdani's incredible commitment to City trash containerization, we have dedicated funding to make a historic investment in cleanliness and quality of life that will change the way our streets look and feel. Imagine New York City with no trash bags on our sidewalks — that is what we are doing, neighborhood by neighborhood, and we will not stop until it is done.

Next year, Empire Bins will arrive in Brooklyn Community District 8, Bronx Districts 2 through 5, Manhattan District 2, Staten Island District 1 and my home district of Queens District 2. This budget adds 32 civilian positions and 83 uniform positions next fiscal year, growing to 80 civilian positions and 607 uniform positions in FY30 and the out years. It also adds expense funding next year, growing in the out years as the program expands citywide.

The Department of Sanitation has been the lead agency enforcing street vending rules since 2023. We focus on what matters to New Yorkers: dirty conditions, safety issues, items being left out overnight, setups that block public access to sidewalks and curbs, mass transit and store entrances. While we often issue warnings and give advance notice to vendors about planned enforcement activities, we also take seriously our obligations to ensure cleanliness and to protect quality of life in our neighborhoods.

Following the passage of a package of Bills by the City Council earlier this year and last year, the budget provides additional funding to increase our ranks of sanitation police officers in our vending enforcement unit. These officers conduct inspections and ensure that vendors are licensed and abiding by the basic rules that ensure public safety and cleanliness. The budget adds 32 uniform positions in FY27 and out years at a cost of 2.15 million in FY27.

Shifting to our curbside composting program and other sustainability efforts: as many of you know, we resumed full enforcement of our mandatory curbside program this year after it was suspended — in my opinion, erroneously — by the prior administration. We have had a particular focus on those residents and property owners who make no effort whatsoever: do not have a brown bin, do not use a brown bin, do not even try to do the right thing. We do not want to issue summonses, but we know that this, coupled with our outreach and education programs, is often the best way to boost participation and achieve compliance.

We are not just collecting food scraps and yard waste. We are also giving compost back to New Yorkers. To date, we have given away roughly 6 million pounds of compost at give sites across all five boroughs as well as to community gardens, schools and other nonprofits. Any resident of New York City can sign up for these give sites at dot com slash get compost.

While I am on the topic of sustainability, the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act, which would reduce single-use packaging by 30% and save New York City taxpayers a hundred million dollars or more annually, is currently before our legislators in Albany. With just hours left in the legislative session, I continue to call on our lawmakers to take action on this important Bill before the session ends.

Our commitment to cleanliness has historically focused on emptying litter baskets, clearing dump-outs and enforcing our cleanliness laws. These commitments remain. But under this administration, we are approaching this work with an understanding that every part of this City is impacted by sanitation issues and services. You will see, feel and even smell this change as we are bringing equitable cleaning resources to every part of the five boroughs.

We need New Yorkers to be part of this effort — to keep their property clean, to throw their trash away properly — and largely they do. However, as I have said before and as we discussed at the last hearing, there is one area where many New Yorkers often do not do their part, and that is adherence to alternate side parking rules. An estimated 500,000 illegally parked cars prevent our street sweepers from cleaning more than 3,000 miles of streets every week. Because it is impossible for us to write summonses to every one of those cars, we are asking legislators in Albany to give us a street sweeping camera enforcement Bill. So once again, I ask Albany: please let us clean. Passage of this Bill would increase compliance and, with better compliance and cleaner streets, we will be able to re-evaluate our current street cleaning regulations, potentially reducing the frequency and even duration of those regulations — making it easier for those drivers who today are doing the right thing and following the law.

Again, as the legislative session wraps up today, I ask every City Council member who wants cleaner streets to put their strong vocal support behind this Bill with our state legislators.

This past winter we faced very significant snowstorms as well as days — weeks, even — of sub-freezing temperatures unlike anything we have seen in at least a decade. Our snow response was the culmination of years of planning coupled with a new commitment to clearing more areas of the City. Thanks to a recent commitment to something we call snow equity, all streets are on a route. No more waiting days for so-called tertiary streets to be plowed. We now service vehicle travel lanes and bike lanes at the same time. This past winter, we deployed snow melters and activated emergency contracts to haul snow from hard-to-reach areas across the City. We also activated thousands of emergency snow shovelers to clear pedestrian infrastructure such as crosswalks and bus stops.

As we prepare for the coming winter, know that we plan all year for the possibilities — revising routes, evaluating performance and overhauling equipment — so that we have a playbook for every possibility. We are actively developing internal dashboards for bus stops and other pedestrian infrastructure so that we can better report out on our progress in clearing those areas. Much of this work is outlined in the Department's snow plans submitted annually to the City Council pursuant to Local Law 28 of 2011. In keeping with the requirements of the City Charter, the snow budget has been adjusted to reflect actual spending during last year's historic storms. I do hope that the Sanitation Committee takes the opportunity to hold a hearing on our snow preparedness in advance of next season. I just ask that that hearing take place before the season starts rather than after the first snowfall.

Moving on to facilities: before this year, it had been a decade since the Department of Sanitation opened a brand new, built-from-the-ground-up district garage. This year we opened a new garage in Brooklyn to serve District 3, and soon we will open new facilities in Staten Island to serve Districts 1 and 3 of that borough. With new initiatives, our garages need to evolve, adapt and grow, and some are well suited for that. Others, like the garages we recently replaced, are not.

The capital budget includes funding for several major facilities projects, including 488 million dollars in funding for the construction of a new garage for Bronx Districts 9, 10 and 11; 204 million dollars for the construction of a district garage for Queens District 1, which is slated to begin design later this year...

(04:48:16)

...upgrades to the facility that serves as the home for Bronx District 12, which has an overall budget and began construction earlier this year; 9 million dollars for finishing touches on the $223 million brand new Staten Island Districts 1 and 3 garage, which is slated to be completed — it is actually already basically done, just doing punch list work on that project. Along with the new facility, it means that we will be opening three new districts at two buildings in one calendar year, a rare milestone for this Department and a sign of this administration's serious investment in the safety and well-being of sanitation workers and the neighborhoods they serve.

The expense budget also includes nearly 4 million dollars in annual funding for a new leased facility in Hunts Point to replace an outdated and structurally deficient garage serving Bronx District 2. This facility will also serve as the new home of the Department's supply warehouse, which will move from Greenpoint to facilitate the construction of a combined sewer overflow control project.

I will now turn to the additional specifics of the executive budget. The executive budget includes 2.36 billion dollars in expense funds for the current year and 2.11 billion dollars for next year, respectively, from the budget adopted by the Council last year. The FY26 budget has 1.42 billion dollars for personal services to support a total headcount of 9,625 full-time positions, which includes 7,957 uniform positions and 1,668 civilian positions, as well as 942.5 million dollars for OTPS. Our capital budget includes capital funding for the 10-year plan, of which the majority is for garages and facilities: 1.14 billion dollars for equipment, 59.28 million dollars for IT and 70.22 million dollars for solid waste management infrastructure. I am happy to go into the details of all of these investments — there is a lot to talk about there — but thank you. I look forward to taking your questions.

(04:50:31)

Thank you. Okay, I am going to hurry this along because I know we have a lot of members that want to ask questions. So instead of going into a detailed breakdown of my questions around cleaning, I will just generally ask, and if you could provide as much detail as possible — because I think we are seeing a lot of discrepancy in the budget when it comes to cleaning, the budgeted amount versus what in reality is getting spent. If you could go through some of those numbers, because for example, there was approximately 9.6 million dollars for staff annually from FY21 through FY26 and the actual expenditures totaled far less in FY25 and year-to-date FY26. So in terms of the budget, as well as headcount and service impact, can you just sort of paint a picture? I know that a lot of our Council members would like to understand, and I know their requests are high. So if you could sort of explain some of those discrepancies, because a lot of Council members do want to see a lot of cleaning happening, and just wondering if you could provide...

(04:51:45)

...an accurate account of what is happening. Absolutely. So I will start with this, which is: first and foremost, property owners have an obligation to maintain their properties. Our lot cleaning unit steps in, as is our Charter mandate, when property owners fail to maintain their properties. So the first thing I would like to look at in greater detail with the City Council is penalties for property owners who are not doing the right thing. I think we have to be more aggressive with that and we have to hold these property owners accountable, especially because these properties are contributing zero value whatsoever to our social life, to housing, to communities. They are just...

(04:52:26)

You know, this is a space where in the last administration the Department took very, very steep cuts. Prior to any cuts, we had 94 uniform positions in our lot cleaning unit. That included 76 sanitation workers and a corresponding number of supervisors, superintendents and chiefs. That was a fully built-out unit that had teams across the five boroughs. Today we have 15. So that is a steep reduction. We are lucky to have those 15 because there was a time a little over a year ago where we had zero dedicated staff for the lot cleaning unit. So this is certainly a place where the prior administration's very steep cuts to sanitation have had a lasting impact. We do have currently a backlog of around 1,100 lots that are ready to clean and, with 15 staff assigned, I think we have probably no hope of getting to them all as the growing season continues this summer. So what would be the proper...

(04:53:39)

...number of staff that you would need? Is it that 94 that you previously had, or would you say more than that? I would think more, but for the 1,100 backlogged lots — let alone, I forget what the number was, but there is quite a large number of lot cleanup requests that have gone into the system for FY26. So if you could speak to the headcount...

Yeah, I cannot say a specific number that we would need. Obviously any increase helps us work down that backlog. I know last summer the prior administration did work with the City Council to sort of surge staffing into the lot cleaning unit over the summer, because that is the period of time where you have weeds growing, you have plants growing — all of that sort of traps litter. You also have more illegal dumping activity. So I think that is where we would really like to focus: a surge in resources in the summer months so that we can take on those lots when they are the biggest. Right, and so...

(04:54:41)

...the budget has remained, I think for full-time uniform personnel, fixed at about the same level since roughly FY23, while the uniform headcount dropped from 106 in FY23 to 21 in FY26. But you said 15 is the actual current number?

(04:54:54)

Right, yeah, that is the number that is actually assigned to the unit based on the funding that we have. I do not know — our numbers do not exactly line up with the numbers that you have, but those 15 are around 820,000 dollars in annual cost.

(04:55:10)

Okay, and so what is the current — just want to make sure we have the right number — what is the current budget for the lot cleaning portion? 820,000? Yes. Okay, so not 8.1 million.

(04:55:24)

Certainly not. Okay, there are an extra couple of zeros there. Okay, 820,000 — you said 15 is the number? I am sorry. Interesting. Why such a big...

(04:55:34)

...discrepancy?

(04:55:34)

You know, we will have to dig into that. Yeah, it may be that some numbers are being carried in the lot cleaning unit when really in practicality they are not assigned there on a daily basis. So we are happy to dig into that with you.

(04:55:49)

Okay. And then did that have to do with — I do not know if it is related at all — but in terms of the savings plan, because I know that you all have the chief savings officers and had to look at headcount reductions, all that stuff, vacancies, not currently filled positions. But if you could speak to that: were some of the positions that are in this budget part of that savings plan?

(04:56:09)

No, we did not take any reductions in headcount as part of the chief savings officer exercise, and all of the cuts that happened to lot cleaning happened in the prior administration.

(04:56:22)

Okay. And then just moving over really quickly to medians — I think Queens East, which is quite a number of us here in the room — we actually find it interesting. So the resource allocation baseline for median cleaning does not appear as a discrete budget line in the executive budget. So can you confirm that median cleaning falls under the targeted neighborhood task force, and if you could go into more detail about that?

(04:56:57)

Yes. So median cleaning, I would say, falls into the category of spaces...

(04:57:04)

...previously considered to be a no-man's land, right, where no agency really stepped up to take responsibility for them. The Department of Sanitation has now stepped up to take responsibility. So what we are going to be doing this summer — because the weeds are already growing and the litter is already accumulating — is pulling resources from the teams as well as some additional resources out of our highway cleaning to really focus on the medians.

(04:57:31)

Especially this time of year during the peak growing season. As we get further into the summer, the growing sort of slows down a bit. So this is really the time of year where it is most important to get in there and then do...

(04:57:41)

...you track and report the spending on median cleaning specifically, and is that work captured separately from the broader program budget or is it folded into a single appropriation?

(04:57:54)

We have not historically done that, but what we are going to be doing this year — and we just had a meeting yesterday on it — is tracking, for each crew that is assigned, how many linear feet of medians they clean on a daily basis, making sure they remain productive and that we are actually getting to all the medians that are out there. We have a new map that we are looking at internally that shows us our progress, shows us where we have been recently and where we still have to go. So all of those tools help us keep track of that work.

(04:58:22)

Okay, perfect. And then in terms of the medians, do you outsource any of those contracts for management or weed suppression, or is that all done internally?

(04:58:30)

We do outsource the contract for the pesticide application.

(04:58:34)

How much are those contracts, and I am assuming it is through an RFP process? Yes, okay. And do you know how much it is?

(04:58:43)

We do not have that number in front of us. Okay, if you could let us know that would be great. And then how many crew hours per week are dedicated to median cleaning citywide, and how is that work scheduled and tracked within the program?

(04:58:56)

So I think the amount that is allocated to median cleaning varies over the course of the year, because this is the time of year where we focus the most on medians when the weeds really start to grow — because we want to get in there and sort of cut them down before they start to get unruly. So we do keep track of the total amount of work that is being done and which locations they are cleaning on a regular basis. We could provide your office with a breakdown of how much of their time is spent on medians versus on other areas.

(04:59:29)

I think that we agreed to. No, only because even in my district, I know there is a ton of medians that need upkeep. And so it would help us to advocate for specific budget line items if we could parse that out, because if it is such a large portion of certain boroughs, it would be great to see if we can add more. And that sort of goes to my next question about equity and geographic distribution. So I mean, how many miles in total does the department maintain across each borough, and does resource deployment reflect the distribution of median mileage proportionally, particularly in the underserved communities that are prioritized? You do not...

(05:00:14)

Yes. So we have not measured everything in mileage because some of these are individual locations and others are linear. So we have around 700 total sites that the department is visiting on a regular basis. Those are on some of them on a monthly schedule, some of them on a more frequent schedule, some of them on a less frequent schedule, or visited as needed as we observe conditions. So it varies widely. Last year we did, I think, a pretty concerted effort to try to get the medians cleaned and assigned a pretty high number of sanitation workers to that work. I think it was 2,800 individual sanitation worker shifts were assigned to median cleaning last summer. We have the number now on the outsourced herbicide contract. It is $350,000 per year. Sorry, $350,000 per year.

(05:01:22)

Okay, perfect. And where can we find data on the median cleaning outputs that you mentioned, including the lane miles cleaned, frequency and crew deployment? There was a website you said that tracks that.

(05:01:31)

So we have an internal map — actually here for the first time ever — that we are using, and we are happy to... I think we need to sort of get our hands around how we are going to track that internally first, but we are happy to do some public reporting on that as soon as we understand the data better.

(05:01:50)

And I am going to wait... before I pass it off to the Chair, we have been joined by Council Members Restler, Hudson, Thomas-Henry and Banks, and I will reserve my questions because I am sure other members will probably ask the same. So...

(05:02:08)

Thank you so much. Let us start off with a fun topic: the World Cup and summer events. Has the department determined whether additional funding will be allocated for sanitation services during the World Cup and the other major summer events? At the preliminary budget hearing, the department indicated it would evaluate whether further resources were necessary. Yet the executive budget does not appear to include any dedicated funding for these events. What is the current plan for staffing and operational coverage, and will the department absorb these costs within existing appropriations?

(05:02:48)

Yes. So there is no specific line item for the summer events in our budget. Those costs would be sort of absorbed into the larger overtime budget that the department has. We have never had a situation where we declined to provide service for a public event, either on the cleaning side or the security side, because our trucks do increasingly perform blockade duty for major public events. We have never had a situation where we said no because we did not have resources available, and that will be our approach for the summer.

We had a great event this morning with the Mayor and the Governor talking about both transportation and security preparations, and I was happy to stand with both of them and with my fellow commissioners to say that New York City is ready for everything that comes our way, including potentially celebrations around the New York Knicks. We certainly will use whatever resources...

(05:03:51)

are necessary. So moving on to capital. The executive budget increases equipment replacement funding to approximately... that is nearly a $200 million increase, $179.4 million, while simultaneously reducing the fiscal year 2027 equipment funding by $66 million. Given that new collection trucks are a prerequisite for containerization operations, how does the department ensure that front-loading capital investment in truck procurement does not outpace the infrastructure capacity of the existing garages to house and service these vehicles?

(05:04:33)

Yeah. So first I will speak to moving some of that money and then adding additional money. There are two things going on there. One is we have added additional funding for the automated side-loading collection trucks. The second is we are advancing funding from fiscal year 2027 to fiscal year 2026 for our core rear-loader and dual-bin collection trucks, to try to get some orders placed now before a price increase takes effect in the future that is associated with a change in how the engine is constructed. So we wanted to sort of buy those trucks now, get ahead of that change and lock in the current pricing. There are certainly going to be constraints on the facility side as we add additional trucks to our fleet. Some facilities are already bursting at the seams — I am sure all of you know which ones those are in your districts. I think we will have to look...

(05:05:26)

long and hard at new investments in larger facilities in the future. But right now our focus is on getting the trucks in. I think in the short term we will have space to be able to store them, and in the long term we will need to make new investments in facilities.

Speaking of garages, I am curious to know if there has been any further looking into Manhattan District 9 and the placing of those trucks, because I found that in the New York City Citywide Statement of Needs for fiscal years 2027-2028 that the department has requested an expansion of Manhattan District 9 in the Bronx, seeking an additional 25,000 square feet. DCAS has identified that there have been numerous sites submitted but that nothing has yet met their needs. So I am curious to know what is happening there, and if the locations that are being looked at for Manhattan District 9 are actually in Manhattan or are they still in the Bronx.

(05:06:30)

So the item in the Statement of Needs that you are referring to is actually to address on-street parking of sanitation vehicles, which is something that is a problem in many districts but particularly at that facility. There is a new school going up right down the block that is going to have several thousand kids on a daily basis. I am actually going up there next Friday to meet with — it is a Success Academy school — I am going to meet with their leadership to just talk through their concerns around the location of that garage and making sure that the kids are safe as they are going to and from school. So that is to park more equipment off-street rather than rely on on-street parking. I think our goal everywhere in the City would be for each district to house the operations that serve that district. It is something that we have really struggled with over the course of many, many years, either not getting approval for certain sites or not having funding for certain sites when they become available. I would love to have a Manhattan home for Manhattan District 9 trucks.

(05:07:39)

I would also love to have a Bronx home for Bronx Districts 7 and 8 trucks, which are currently in Manhattan. We do not currently have those at this time, but that is something that I would love to work on.

(05:07:49)

The capital plan also includes major garage projects that are heavily backloaded into the out years, including the Bronx 9, 10 and 11 replacement, the Queens garage at $283.6 million and the Queens 11-13 garage rehab, none of which have meaningful funding before fiscal year 2031. How does the department plan to stage new truck deployments and containerization expansion if the garage facilities that anchor these operations are not scheduled for rehab until the later half of the financial plan?

(05:08:31)

Work is happening on those projects starting now. For example, the Bronx 9, 10 and 11 garage — what has to happen first is the construction of some swing space in order to actually relocate the current operations out of the facility that will be demolished and replaced. So it is sort of a step-by-step process. The construction of the new garage, which will happen in the future, is certainly in the out years, but there is work happening in the immediate future that will facilitate that.

Look, I think the thing that I have been frustrated by coming back as Commissioner is that I remember sitting in this room 11 years ago at the fiscal year 2015 budget, celebrating the de Blasio administration putting funding into some of the projects that we are still talking about today. Projects like Bronx 6 and 6A, which we did push out further in the plan to construction in fiscal year 2031, and I think that just reflects the reality that trying to build garages while you are also operating in those garages is very difficult. The thing that is easiest for us to do — and it certainly is not easy — is to find new sites where we can operate a new garage, sites like the Brooklyn garage and the Staten Island garage, where we can build something from the ground up, move the operations and then decommission the old property and use it for things like affordable housing, which is what we are doing in Staten Island.

In the case where we have an existing facility that has significant structural deficits, or has a roof that needs to be replaced or repaired, it takes a very long time, especially because it usually comes with asbestos remediation, lead remediation and other types of environmental remediation. We have to do that while we are still operating, while we have sanitation workers showing up to work every day. So these things take a very long time. I have had projects keep slipping into the out years and that is something that I expect we will continue talking about in the months and years to come.

It is a big challenge for the Department of Sanitation to build these facilities and rebuild them while we continue to operate. We have to rebuild and build these facilities now within less than three or four years. By fiscal year 2031, 2032 and 2033, all of these trucks that are already on the roads that we cannot currently house will be joined by more trucks on the roads that we cannot currently house. So what is the basis for deprioritizing facility rehab relative to equipment procurement in the near term, and does the department have an assessment of whether the current garage conditions can even support the maintenance demands for the new automated side-loading truck fleet for containerization?

I think the justification for moving the facility funding is just that that is the reality of where those projects currently are on the construction schedule. I have challenged my team to move as many of them up as they can, and I have confidence that if I go to the Mayor's Office and say I can move this project 12 months faster or 24 months faster, they will say great, we will put the funding back for that project. But they are currently scheduled based on the realities of the construction schedules and the way that the department has built facilities in the past. So that is...

(05:12:14)

just a simple fact. I think we will have a lot of work ahead of us to make sure that we have space to house the new trucks. I certainly hear your concern and agree with it. It is something that we have to figure out over the course of the next few years as we get to citywide containerization in 2031, and I do not have a perfect answer for you at this time.

But is there a criteria that you keep in mind as you are deprioritizing the facilities? Like, we have several garage projects that have shown... you mentioned it yourself, like Bronx 6 and 6A, and Manhattan District 128 West 17th Street rehab, which was reduced. Is there a criteria that the department applies when deciding which garage rehab projects, outside of just the current stage of construction, to push into the out years? Is the department confident that deferring these repairs will not result in our garages getting worse as we are trying to... like, are we putting the cart before...

(05:13:27)

the horse? I do not think we are putting the cart before the horse, but we are being realistic about what we can actually deliver. The Bronx 6 and 8 garage, for example, is currently housing trucks from Bronx 8 while we conduct a major slab replacement at that facility. We actually ripped out the entire slab and are rebuilding it from scratch. So we cannot do a major rehabilitation of that facility until we move the extra trucks out of there. This is all a lot of moving pieces and we do not have enough space overall. We have not had enough space...

(05:14:04)

overall for many, many years, going back to the 1990s. I think we are dealing with those challenges now, we are doing the best we can, and certainly I am pushing the team to do more. I hope when we come back to you next year we have more to show for it.

While you are moving the trucks around, do you have an understanding of where you move certain trucks and how things are placed? For example, Manhattan District 9 — as communities have changed, the community surrounding District 9 is drastically different today than it was five years ago. So what update processes, community visioning processes or any kind of functions like that do you use to determine when our trucks should be parked on the road, or if you are moving them to a different place to have them on the...

(05:14:56)

roads? Yes, our goal is to not park trucks on the streets, which is why we are looking for that additional 25,000 square feet of parking space for the Manhattan District 9 garage, because our goal is to park everything off-street. That is not the case today. But certainly, as neighborhoods are changing, particularly as neighborhoods are going through area-wide rezoning, I think that sanitation facilities should be part of that conversation to make sure that we are adequately planning for the needs of communities in the long term.

(05:15:30)

And just for clarity, the Bronx 7 trucks and the Bronx 8 trucks that are currently not at Bronx 7 and Bronx 8 — are they there because they are permanently housed in Manhattan, or are they there because of the temporary construction that is happening in those garages? So the Bronx 7 and 8 garages are on 215th Street in Manhattan, and that facility is undergoing a major rehabilitation including a total slab replacement. So they are currently relocated to other locations, including the current Bronx 6 garage, which is now housing two districts, 6 and 8. When the Bronx 7 and 8 rehab is completed, they will move back there into Manhattan on 215th...

(05:16:12)

Street. Thank you. I will pass it off to my colleagues to add more and I will come back.

(05:16:23)

Awesome. Okay. We have also been joined by CM Vernikov, and we first have up Deputy Speaker Williams and then CM Epstein. Thank you so much.

(05:16:33)

Chairs, just some questions on the racial equity plans. We have been asking all of the agencies coming for budget hearings how they are incorporating the racial equity plans into the fiscal year 2027 budget. So the department's short-term goal calls for collecting and analyzing neighborhood-level data across 100% of neighborhoods by 2026, with a strategy of reducing dependency on 311 reporting by organizing performance and cleanliness data at the neighborhood level. Given this deadline falls within the current fiscal year, does the executive budget include a dedicated appropriation for this initiative, or is the department absorbing these costs within existing resources?

I just want to segue and get on like a TED Talk for two seconds. I had an opportunity to talk to the folks in Chicago, and one of the things that they touted as a success with their racial equity plans was that they had realized they relied solely on 311 data to trim trees, and because certain communities used that data more than others, most of the Black and Brown communities in Chicago were not having their trees trimmed. So this is a very important question and I would love to know how you are addressing it.

(05:17:50)

There is no dedicated budget line item for this work, but we have largely completed it. We did a big data modernization project that wrapped up very recently where we now have data from all of our different systems coming into the same platform. I do not know the technical specifics — that is not really my subject matter — but it allows us to compare all sorts of data on our enforcement activity and operational activity through complaints and other sources of information from other City agencies, and to compare all of that across different geographies, whether that is Council district, sanitation district, sanitation sections, BIDs or individual blocks.

So I think that gives us a much better view of what is actually happening on City streets than just relying on 311 data alone. We are also working very closely with the Mayor's Office of Operations to hopefully in the very near future roll out a new version of the scorecard program that I think will give us much more granular data. Previously the scorecard program, before it was sort of paused in 2023, only had data at the sanitation district and section level, which really was not actionable. Now they are doing individual block level assessments and they are sharing with us the outcomes of those block level assessments. That is something that we would like to be able to share publicly as well, as an accountability tool so that New Yorkers can see what we are seeing and can sort of know how the City is rating each individual block citywide. That is something that I think we need to contextualize properly when we do release it because it is not perfect, but it is something that we are looking forward to rolling out soon.

(05:19:43)

Okay. And so I do hope that how you allocate resources and prioritize neighborhoods across the City is reflected in more granular data versus what is often times real-time data.

(05:19:57)

Absolutely. Okay, a midterm...

(05:19:57)

A goal that you had was to pilot innovative diversion methods in equity neighborhoods starting in 2028, or strategies including brown bin giveaways and targeted marketing campaigns for compost and recycling separation, contingent on available budget. Is there any funding in the current financial plan that lays the groundwork for these initiatives, or are these goals unfunded beyond the out years?

(05:20:22)

We do not have specific line items for those goals. We do have outreach staff and outreach funds as well as staff in our Resource Recovery Division who work on those programs, and so they would be the ones delivering on that work. We are also currently in the process of finalizing our Solid Waste Management Plan, which is a ten-year plan, and many of the strategies in that Solid Waste Management Plan align with these strategies in the Racial Equity Plan. So when that is finalized, we expect that we will begin the work of implementing those initiatives in alignment with the implementation of the Racial Equity Plan.

(05:21:03)

Okay, one last thing. I know the chair has a whole bunch of questions on lot cleaning and I would love to know what your suggestion is around enforcing property owners, because clearly that is easier said than done, which is why we have a lot cleaning program. It has just been like a misalignment between the lot cleaning budget and actual expenditures, although the last couple of years that is still existing now. The department, you know, wanting to understand if you will formally right-size, as the chair had mentioned. You know, there is like...

(05:21:39)

...a backlog of outstanding lot cleaning requests. So I just want to push again on the lot cleaning program and also I would love to work with you to understand what suggestions you have to get property owners to clean up their properties.

We do not have any suggestions sort of ready for this hearing, but it is something that we are certainly going to dig into and we are happy to come back to you all with our thoughts on how to improve that. You know, I personally think that in a City like New York, where we all live so close to each other and spend so much of our time in public space, we have an even greater obligation than in other parts of our society to care for our spaces and to care for each other. And people...

(05:22:32)

...who own lots that they are not using, not developing, and allowing to become overgrown and filled with trash are flagrantly disrespecting their fellow New Yorkers, and we need to find a way to hold them accountable.

(05:22:49)

Thank you. I just really do hope that the staffing level matches the demand and that there are not phantom positions carrying over without actual staff in those positions. Okay, CM... followed by...

(05:23:10)

Sanchez. Thank you. Thank you, chairs, and thank you, Commissioner, for being here. I really appreciate your commitment to waste reduction and waste diversion. I am wondering about dedicated funding for community composting. You know, it is a big part of our district. We have a lot of community composters, the Ecology Center among them. Is there any way the department will do baseline funding for them so that we do not...

(05:23:34)

...have baseline funding for the community composters in this budget. That is something that we did have in the past and under several rounds of budget cuts going back to the de Blasio administration and then the Adams administration, that funding was eliminated. We are very thankful that the City Council stepped up last year to provide, I think, over $7 million in funding to community composting organizations. We are administering that funding on behalf of the City Council. But at this time we were not in a position to baseline that funding based on the City's current fiscal position, and I think we are hopeful that the City Council will step in...

(05:24:16)

...again. Yeah, I appreciate that, and I think I will encourage my colleagues to do that, but I would love to see the administration put some baseline funding in because it is a really important part of this network, the community composters, especially on the education side. I want to talk about composting generally. We have seen these orange compost bins around some neighborhoods and by me, if asked for additional orange compost bins, they have been told they cannot get them. I am wondering about expanding that to parts of the City that are composting. So I think...

(05:24:48)

...we are probably unlikely to expand that program any further than where we are at right now. We have around 330 of those — what we call smart compost bins. They are only smart because they talk to your phone, and they are spread across the five boroughs. We see those as an opportunity for people, especially if they live in apartments and their building just refuses to get a brown bin and refuses to participate in the program — and is probably getting tickets anyway — to give them an opportunity to still do the right thing. So that is really what those bins are intended for.

We do routinely look at the numbers on which bins are getting used and which bins are getting full most quickly. When the program first started, before we had mandatory curbside composting, many of the bins would get full in just a few hours after they were serviced. Right now we do not have that problem because we come to every single house in New York City and will pick up your compost once a week for free. So I think we have not seen quite as much demand. If there is...

(05:25:56)

...a specific location you are hearing about over and over, we will take a look at it for you. Especially some of the larger commercial corridors, like in my district, Flatiron, where we have seen a lot of interest but not having the capacity — we will take a look at that.

Yeah, I appreciate that. And then composting in parks — we have heard a lot from parks about wanting to, you know, they are doing composting. Just a couple of... not a minute. Thank you. We would love to see similar expanding opportunities in parks to have more access to composting. I did want to mention something that I continue to talk to you about, maybe outside of this, on street recycling. You know, we have not gone there yet around trying to get more recycling on street corners. Obviously that is a good way to do waste diversion by getting more recycling, getting more waste out of the waste stream. Where are we on moving forward on that, especially in large commercial corridors where there is an opportunity to do that?

(05:26:49)

Yeah. So outside of the BIDs, we actually do not do any on-street recycling, and that was a decision that the department made a few years ago, in part because the recycling bins looked exactly the same as...

(05:27:00)

...the litter baskets, right? Could we look inside and do something for them, like we do for the compost bin, so that people who want to recycle have the access and the opportunity to recycle?

(05:27:10)

I think there is a question about whether the juice is worth the squeeze there, just because that would be a relatively sizable investment and litter baskets make up such a small share of our overall waste stream. So I would really rather focus on recycling in the home, in the kitchen, where we are only diverting 50% of what we could be diverting.

(05:27:30)

Right. There is a lot of work to do there before we get to public space, which is even... our parks, like we see a thousand pizza boxes in a park on a weekend. There are a lot of ways to get that stuff out of the waste stream that would not be as resource-intensive as, you know, like you are saying, at every corner. But there are big commercial corridors and locations where that could help, and I would love to see if we could look into at least piloting in those locations. Yeah, we can take a look at specific locations.

(05:27:59)

All right.

(05:28:00)

Thank you, I appreciate it. Great. CM Wong, followed by Hudson.

(05:28:05)

Thank you so much, Chair, and good afternoon. Nice to see you. Congratulations, Commissioner — I do not think I have been at a hearing at the same time as you, so congratulations on your appointment. I was ecstatic to see $22.8 million in the executive budget for fiscal year 2027 for implementation of the street vending reform legislative package that this Council passed over the previous mayor's veto. The reforms were designed to expand access to licenses, to bring existing vendors into the legal system, expand education efforts by the agency so everyone can know their rights and responsibilities, and strengthen enforcement of existing rules so that enforcement could be consistent, fair, not random and uneven as it can often times feel today.

Because of the $22.8 million, our understanding is that $14 million is for enforcement, and there is a significant imbalance. To the layperson, 32 new DSNY enforcement positions at roughly $2 million, compared with nearly $12 million at the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene for sanitary inspectors. Can you explain how DSNY and Health coordinate on vending enforcement? In my district I am very used to seeing agents on the ground, but I cannot say I have ever noticed a Department of Health inspector. So I am just wanting to understand how Health and Sanitation work together and whether DSNY has enough support and funding to staff...

(05:29:33)

...the expansion. So the additional funding that Sanitation has received, which is increasing the 37 or 30 sanitation police officers in our vending enforcement unit — that is nearly doubling the current 40 officers and supervisors that we have in that unit — and we think that will help us really improve the amount of coverage that we are able to have. Because our goal is, as you said, to have consistent, expected enforcement across the entire City. With a much larger team of 72 on that task, I think we can get closer to it.

As far as our coordination with the Department of Health, we share a lot of data with them. They share data with us on their licenses and what they are seeing. We share data with them on our enforcement activity and if we are seeing any trends, particularly as it relates to...

(05:30:36)

...sanitation and food safety. Our enforcement is focused on the area around the vending: is the setup clean, are they obstructing the sidewalk, are they licensed? The Department of Health is doing a much more intensive inspection that looks sort of like a restaurant inspection. They are also, I think, dedicating a lot of their resources to inspecting the commissaries themselves. So I would have to defer to the Department of Health on what their inspectors are doing, but we are very coordinated with them and certainly as they roll out 10,000 additional licenses, or 11,000 or so additional licenses, we will be working with them...

(05:31:20)

...very closely. So you do not do joint inspections?

(05:31:23)

We do, we do do joint inspections occasionally, but most of our work is done independently.

(05:31:29)

Got it. Thank you so much. Thank you. Okay, and just really quickly, we have the CUNY School of Professional Studies up in the balcony, so I just wanted to give you guys a shout out — hello, thanks for joining us today. We have the Department of Sanitation here and this is our budget hearing, so hopefully you guys will... Next, CM Wong, followed by Hudson.

(05:31:51)

Okay. Thank you, Chair. Commissioner, before my questions I want to say something on the record. I want to thank Chief Frank Ladera and Chief Alex Bartolo and everyone at the Queens West garages serving District 30 in Queens West. They do not ask questions, they just get it done for my constituency, and I see it, and I am proud to work with them. Thank you, Councilmember. Yes, okay. My question is about this budget. The 32 new uniformed positions for street vendor enforcement — along commercial corridors in my district, like Rico Park, unlicensed vendors generating waste and blocking sidewalks are a persistent problem and they are getting worse. So how are these 32 positions being distributed geographically and will the Queens West district be served, with Districts 5 and 6 receiving a meaningful share, or...

(05:32:51)

...is this effectively only for Manhattan? It certainly is not effectively only for Manhattan, and the majority of the new licenses, as I understand it, are actually for outer borough vending. So we will likely assign most of our resources to the outer boroughs. That is what we do today. Most of our vending — or not most, but I would say the places that we assign the most vending resources to — are places like Fordham Road in the Bronx, Main Street in Flushing in Queens, Roosevelt Avenue in Queens. So we have vending resources out all over the City on a daily basis and with the additional 32 officers, we will continue that practice. Okay, thank you.

(05:33:38)

I have time for another question. I ordered compost bins for my house and I remember they took like four months, like three and a half months. I do not know what is taking them so long, but can you — what can you do to make that process faster? Because bins do disappear, they get stolen or end up in another part of the street. And then I know I will have to order replacements. My constituents are complaining. If they want to buy locally and go to Home Depot, the costs can be twice as much. But if they go to that bins website, it takes three to four months. Can you...

(05:34:17)

...address that? Absolutely. So we have actually moved away from the online ordering approach for the New York City bins, and those same New York City bins can be purchased at Home Depots or can be ordered through Instacart, DoorDash or Uber Eats at the prices that we have negotiated with the contractor. So it is about 50% the cost of a comparable commercial grade trash can or organics bin. We have worked a lot on that program over the course of the last few months, particularly because there were some supply issues earlier this spring, but we have largely resolved those. So they should be in stock at Home Depots across the City and if you are finding places where they are not available, please let us know so we can address that. Okay.

(05:35:04)

Thank you. Thank you.

(05:35:05)

Thank you, CM Hudson, followed by Brewer.

(05:35:12)

Thank you so much, Chair, and hello, Commissioner. First, I also just want to thank you and the entire department for everything that you all do. I think we are now in a place where you are not as overlooked as you have been in the past. But I also want to give a shout out to Chief Ladera, who has been incredibly responsive at all hours, so thank you for that.

In your testimony you mentioned state legislation to allow you to use street sweeping camera enforcement, which I fully support, and that passage of this legislation could potentially reduce the frequency and duration of alternate side parking regulations. I do think, however, that it is worth mentioning that the historical scoring system has disproportionately and negatively impacted communities of color. For example, in Crown Heights and Prospect Heights in my district, alternate side parking rules require working families to move their cars four times a week, compared to other neighborhoods where alternate side parking requirements only require residents to move their cars one day per week. Is there a timeline or prioritization of community districts you might be able to commit to reassessing for alternate side...

(05:36:19)

...parking regulations? So step one: the State Legislature passes the street sweeping camera enforcement bill. Step two: compliance meaningfully increases. Step three: we reduce the alternate side parking frequency. So it has to happen in that order. You know, I think that given the low levels of compliance — less than 50% citywide — as well as the number of times where we are not able to sweep the streets because of holidays or because of snowstorms, I do not think at this time that we can reduce street sweeping frequency. If we get...

(05:36:55)

Automated enforcement will meaningfully improve compliance. It is what we have seen with red light cameras. That is what we have seen with speed cameras. Then I can commit to no more than once a week citywide.

(05:37:07)

Okay, but I guess my question is, are you — given those steps, and I totally get it — are you prioritizing an assessment of certain areas over others? For example, community districts with four times a week of alternate side parking over once a week alternate side parking, in terms of determining where you might be willing to change the regulations.

When the State Bill passes, yes, we will certainly prioritize those places that have the most sweeping right now. They can get the cameras first and then we can reduce their frequency.

(05:37:42)

First. Okay, great. And then just really quickly, are the City bins available only at Home Depot retail locations or are there other stores that carry them?

(05:37:51)

They are currently only available at Home Depot. We have the ability to make them available to other stores but have not had interest from smaller stores, I think because they are pretty big and take up a lot of space. Even like a Lowe's — that is something we have done outreach to. Lowe's has not quite bit yet, but we are happy to have a conversation about that.

(05:38:12)

Thank you. Thank you.

(05:38:17)

CM Virginia Maloney. Thank you. It is nice to see you. The Sloan Award — a very nice letter on that, that was very...

(05:38:24)

Special. I do not think it is going to pass in Albany. I just called the cameras, so then what with alternate side of the street parking? We have also, I think, had a conversation with the Governor's office on whether we could get this into the Governor's budget next year. I think that is something that we would certainly be open to. If not, I think we dramatically increase the number of actual people we have assigned to alternate side parking enforcement and do ticketing that way.

(05:38:59)

It is much less effective and much more expensive to do that kind of ticketing, but I think we need to hold people accountable and we need to get them to move.

(05:39:07)

Do not forget about my stickers. What about my stickers? We would very much encourage the City Council to pass CM Brewer's Bill allowing us to use them. Thank you.

(05:39:18)

Thank you. The thing is, just how much is allocated to graffiti? I do not think you mentioned that in your testimony, because you do a great job at Sanitation on graffiti. So I did not know if there is an allocation of funding or how...

(05:39:31)

...is that distributed? So the graffiti program currently is an interagency initiative. Sanitation had run the entire program for many, many years. We took over the actual management of the program a couple of years ago, but the funding for that program — $2.7 million annually — is in the budget. They hold the contract with the DOE Fund, which is our contractor. Okay. Thank you.

(05:39:58)

The other thing is, in terms of vendors, is there an allocation for training? Because in addition to all the work that you are going to be doing, it is very complicated enforcement. Having spent hours with the police department over the years going out and measuring and so on — so how much is actually allocated budget-wise for the training, not to mention there is a whole other discussion about going out...

(05:40:21)

...into the field. There is not a specific line item for training in there, but sanitation police officers, when they join that unit, go through a very intensive training period that includes illegal dumping enforcement. It includes...

(05:40:35)

Vending. I do not care about illegal dumping. I do not care about vending. Go ahead.

(05:40:42)

The sanitation police officers that do vending enforcement are also trained to do illegal dumping enforcement if they need to. So all of that is part of their training schedule. It is several months long, and when they graduate from that program they are ready to go out on the streets and do enforcement.

(05:40:56)

Okay. The other issue is just trash on the street. That is what the complaint is. That is not an easy allocation of funding for — as you said in your testimony — getting people to do the right thing. It is hard to do. So I am just wondering, is this more of a policy issue than a budget issue? Do you have any suggestion for that? That is a complaint. They love Sanitation, they love the pickup, and it is not the workers. It is the people of the City of New York who are not picking up. So any suggestions for that?

(05:41:28)

You know, I think this is a place where in the past the City Council has called for education for New Yorkers. I do not think anyone needs to be educated on the fact that it is wrong to throw trash on the ground...

(05:41:40)

...whether it is a sidewalk or a park or any other public space. I think enforcement is key here, and I think there is a part of this where we as the City are changing our approach — changing from just sort of keeping our head down and saying we are going to pick up that trash, we are going to pick up that litter, and pivoting to: we are going to care for neighborhoods, we are going to make neighborhoods feel cleaner, not just have less litter. I think that will hopefully make New Yorkers more proud of the neighborhoods they live in and less likely to trash their homes. But that is a big challenge. So I think it is an ongoing discussion, but that is a number one complaint on 311 in my office — just general trash on the street. So I would love for those discussions to continue, and thank you very much.

(05:42:32)

I just want to pop in real quick. I have been a big supporter of the street sweeper legislation and the Packaging Reduction Act, and while I admire the conversations with Albany, I am very concerned that the conversations are with the Governor rather than the actual legislators. Legislation needs to be passed through the Legislature. It does not need to be passed through an executive budget. Budgets are for budgets and policy is meant to be passed through the Legislature.

So I encourage these conversations to use us here and our allies to encourage our State Legislature partners, and not the Governor. It will be very upsetting to see this pass through the budget rather than having it come through the actual Legislature that needs to be coming together to push this. So on that point, I highly encourage that future conversations about this and other legislation go through the Legislature, and I have talked to dozens of your colleagues in the Assembly and I encourage all of you to do the same.

(05:43:37)

Great. Thank you, Counselor.

(05:43:37)

CM Maloney, followed by CM Wilson. Thank you so much, Chair. I want to echo Council members' comments around the importance of vending enforcement and sanitation, along with expansion — those two need to go hand in hand, particularly for communities where we are going to see an increase in vendors with that new legislation. But I wanted to actually talk about containerization. The FY27 budget has set aside funding for expansion of containerization. I was wondering if you can provide an update on the implementation timeline for the citywide rollout and what the next milestones are.

(05:44:19)

Absolutely. So this fall we will be in Brooklyn North, which is Downtown Brooklyn, Fort Greene and a couple of other neighborhoods — Boerum Hill, et cetera. In calendar year 2027 we are going to be expanding to six districts: that is Manhattan Community District, Bronx Districts 2 and 5, and Queens District 1. After that, we will be increasing the pace of that expansion going forward to get citywide by 2031.

(05:44:54)

Does the current funding support the ability to meet that timeline? Do you feel it is a hundred percent?

(05:45:01)

Okay. One thing I wanted to...

(05:45:02)

...bring up is the financial challenges for Business Improvement Districts, particularly in my district. My district has 10, so I feel like I am in a position to ask about this. That must be the most — pardon — that must be the most of any Council district. We are tied. Okay, along with CM Restler. But what financial assistance, if any, is going to be provided to BIDs or other nonprofit organizations that have historically supported sanitation? If you can speak to the financial...

(05:45:35)

...assistance. Yeah. So we have, in partnership with the City Council, allocated funding specifically for Business Improvement Districts and our community cleanup partners like ACE to support their efforts. As of today we have 38 BIDs that are fully there — that have their containers installed on the street. We have another 21 where they are ordered but are just in the process, and we are working with them to make sure that if that funding needs to roll to the next fiscal year we can make that happen. We have another nine that are earlier in the pipeline — they have an application pending with DOT for their specific locations. So everyone is sort of in the process and we are working to get that fully spent.

(05:46:27)

Do you expect containerization to have an impact on BIDs or other community groups' ability to continue providing supplemental sanitation services?

(05:46:36)

We have heard from BIDs — even BIDs that I think were very skeptical of the containerization push. The BID that I live in partnership with was incredibly skeptical of containerization. They put their containers out a few months ago and they actually love them. It keeps their district cleaner and it makes their operations more organized. So I think you will actually see that BIDs love the containers and really embrace them. If there are any issues going forward, we are happy to work...

(05:47:03)

...with the BIDs to try to resolve this.

(05:47:05)

Thank you. And we have many containers already on the east side of Manhattan as well. Fantastic, Chair. Thank you.

(05:47:12)

CM Wilson, followed by CM Doing. Thank you.

(05:47:15)

Chair, hi Commissioner. Good to see you again. Good to see you. I will say I was just in Meatpacking last night and they are very excited about their BID containers. Their containers are the nicest so far. Today I wanted to ask a bit more about the Empire Bins rollout. I am excited for them to come to my community district eventually, but I am just curious about the selection process for those community districts that are going to be next. Community District 2 has, you know, there is some big coverage there, as opposed to like Community Board 4 or areas like Chelsea in my district that, you know, have wider streets and needed a little bit more. So I am just curious about the selection process for where the rollout happens.

(05:48:02)

So the thought process for the six districts next year — we had a couple of criteria that we were trying to select for. Number one, we wanted to be in all five boroughs, which we have districts in each of the boroughs that are rolling out next year. Number two, we wanted to test the Empire Bins in a variety of different contexts — historical contexts. Obviously the West Village has a lot of historical streets and kind of wonky streets that are not just the straightforward grid that we are dealing with up in Community District 9. We also wanted to test them in a variety of different building typologies. So you have neighborhoods like Bronx Community District 5, which is in CM Pierina Sanchez's district, that are very, very dense but sort of uniform. You have a district like Manhattan where you have single family homes and large apartment buildings on the same block. We need to make these bins work in each of those contexts, and so by trying them all out early on in the program we can then find replicable strategies for rolling it out citywide.

(05:49:12)

And when the bins do come out as they are rolled out into the new districts, how will organic collection be integrated? Will the Empire Bins include a dedicated organics compartment, or will separate collection continue?

(05:49:29)

At this time the organics collection will stay as it currently is, in separate standalone containers. I think there is an opportunity in the future to look at the automated side loader containers for organics, particularly for very large buildings. But at this time, we are focused on what is the thing that is not in containers, and that is black bags on the curb. So we are rolling out for trash first. Okay. Thank you.

(05:50:01)

CM Wong, followed by CM Restler. Thank you.

(05:50:05)

Actually, I saw Commissioner, the video on my Facebook last night — the sweeping car. I actually have some issues in my district. We have seen cars sometimes, when the bottom is rolling, some water sweeping and then the garbage just flies around.

(05:50:28)

So they are supposed to have...

(05:50:30)

...water. So if you are seeing...

(05:50:31)

...cases where the mechanical brooms are not tanking up properly and are not filling up, we want to know about that.

(05:50:38)

Right in front of my office we see the car pass by the garbage. Instead of getting to the garbage, it just flies around in the...

(05:50:46)

...neighborhood. Okay, let us know when that is happening and we will correct it. Okay.

(05:50:50)

And also, I have constituents reaching out to my office saying their garbage bin order is being canceled. They showed us the information — the order got canceled and the individual went to the Cropsey Avenue Home Depot. There are no black bins there. So all of the orders that had been placed under the delivery program were fulfilled by the end of this year and we are no longer taking orders. So if there are outstanding issues with individuals, they can personal order from the website. Okay, so that would be a case. And like I said prior, we did have supply chain issues earlier this spring. We have largely worked to resolve those and the vendor is currently manufacturing. I got a complaint last week. Okay, last week. And also I went to Home Depot myself because I knew the bin for my home — there are no more black bins. I have one, but sometimes I have a party and too much garbage and it is not able to fit outside...

(05:51:57)

...anymore. So I need an additional bin. I went to Home Depot and there are no bins there. Our partner is currently making between 20 and 30,000 bins a week. So we will make sure that Home Depot has them in stock so that that does not happen in the future.

(05:52:13)

And also, how much revenue has been generated from the sale of bins to date?

(05:52:20)

To date, $0.

(05:52:21)

Yes. In order to keep the cost of the bins as low as possible, the City receives zero revenue from the sale of bins. Do you know how many bins have been...

(05:52:29)

...sold? It is around... bins total.

(05:52:34)

Okay. And also, for the required bins, will nonprofit organizations be exempt?

(05:52:46)

ACE and the BIDs are not exempt, but we are working with the BIDs and with the cleaning partners to make sure. Last year, in partnership with the Council, we allocated funding to purchase containers specifically for use by BIDs and the cleanup partners.

(05:53:04)

If they have to keep all the bin stuff in the bank, I do not think they have enough bins in my street to just clean up the garbage on all the streets. We will make sure...

(05:53:16)

...they do. Okay. Thank you.

(05:53:20)

I just wanted to touch base on something you said earlier. So the trash cans — did we get an actual breakdown of their actual cost? I wanted to say, on both CM Brewer's and CM Restler's accounts, one of the things is it is not education. Yes, people know that they need to throw away their trash, but we are really trying to transform communities. There was a study done at Baruch University — it should be a university, though, it has a nice ring to it — that showed that the problem in many communities like mine is not the fact that they do not have the education, but the actual infrastructure within their actual homes to participate in this programming. At the same time, now we know that we are not making any revenue off of these bins, but $51 for a bin seems a little outrageous. Do we have any breakdown of what that actually costs the business to make, so that we understand how much revenue the business is making off of the City and why we are not making any off of that as well?

(05:54:35)

Yeah, we absolutely do. We receive information from them on a regular basis on what their actual costs are, down to specific parts like wheels, handles, latches, et cetera. So we can certainly get into that with you offline. But as far as why we wanted to have these bins available at the lowest cost possible — it is so that it was as easy as possible for New Yorkers to get the bins. Comparable bins made by big names like Toter, et cetera, cost twice as much — over a hundred dollars for the exact same bin, exact same size, without the New York City logo on it. So this program is actually giving New Yorkers the opportunity to buy these bins at a much lower cost than the standard retail cost at a Home Depot, a Lowe's or any other hardware store. We also, to date, have issued over 150,000 reimbursements to individuals who qualify under the Bill that was passed last year in the City Council. So there are...

(05:55:49)

...reimbursements available for people who qualify. We just announced this morning that, along with the warning period, we are extending the reimbursement period through September 7 of this year. So for individuals who have either bought their bin but have not yet submitted the reimbursement application, or have not yet bought their bin and qualify for reimbursement, they can continue to do so throughout the summer. Thank you.

(05:56:11)

Sorry, can I just ask, out of 150 reimbursements that have been given out, how many are still pending?

(05:56:19)

Through the application process, 150,000 is the number processed as of May 15. We get regular updates from the Department of Finance on how they are processing them. I think the turnaround is pretty quick. But if there are individuals who have submitted reimbursement applications and have not received a check or have not received any notification, we want to know about them.

(05:56:40)

Please. Perfect. Sorry, CM Restler, followed by Banks.

(05:56:44)

Thank you so much to the chairs. I want to again recognize Shirley for her remarkable endurance on our seventeenth executive budget hearing of the day. I am just kidding, but it is 17 of the week, I think. Commissioner, great to see you. I am thrilled that you are in this role. I want to congratulate you on your appointment — very well deserved — and congratulate your team. Chief, let us err on the recent Distinguished Sloane in Public Service Award, which was very well deserved. And Rebecca, nominated by CM Brewer — she did take note that she nominated the majority of the people who were receiving the award.

(05:57:18)

I think that is every year, and it is one of many reasons to love Gale Brewer. Congratulations.

(05:57:26)

Rebecca, excited for you. I do not do this publicly, so I will put it on the record today. I know that it is because of my friend and colleague CM Hudson that containerization is coming to her district in Brooklyn, and she deserves the credit for that. My constituents benefit and we share. So thank you to her and thank you to my Borough President Tony Reyno. The commercial waste zones are coming to Adrienne in Brooklyn later this year. Those are two things that I am enormously excited about and looking forward to working with your team on. On containerization, your team has indicated a willingness, and your predecessor has indicated a willingness, to work with us on a pilot for 1 to 10 unit buildings. Any update on that?

(05:58:04)

Not just a willingness — we are actively planning a pilot for 1 to 10 unit buildings as well as for shared containers for 10 to 30 unit buildings. So we are... she comes back in after we said nice things about her, and it is not, you know...

(05:58:20)

We are sort of scoping out what that will look like. When we have the opt-in period open for the 10 to 30 unit buildings, we expect to have the full details of that rolled out publicly. So you will have that ready. I am just trying... it will take us some time to find exactly the contours of who will be able to participate in the 1 to 10 in particular. I think that will take a little work, so I just want to be able to plan that as early as possible.

(05:58:47)

When do you think we will be able to start the process of reaching out to folks?

(05:58:50)

Probably in the next week or two we can have that. Great. We will sit down with you

(05:58:54)

and your team in the next couple of days. Okay. Because I am short on time and Shirley has more hearings after this. I will shift to one of the things that I know your staff cares most about, which is vending outside of Goodwill and Salvation Army. For about six or seven years we have, as I think you know from your previous tours of service, had...

(05:59:17)

A group of guys who intercept donations quite aggressively at Goodwill and Salvation Army and then sell those goods on the street. Thanks to Rebecca, we had a team out there on Saturday that did clear and confiscate the folks that were there.

(05:59:32)

Unfortunately, later that day they were back out there, and then they were back out there every day since. It is whack-a-mole and it is very challenging for people to get by. There has been a couch on the street on Schermerhorn and Bond for about three weeks that is still there. It is a very troubling situation. Our constituents are not happy. There was a commitment that there was going to be much more significant enforcement when there was illegal activity like this. So firstly, what additional commitments do we have for broadly more vending enforcement? But secondly, for a situation like this that is a chronic issue that has been going on for six or seven years, can we get a commitment for daily sanitation enforcement — daily joint sanitation enforcement — for a period of time until the issue gets resolved?

(06:00:26)

Yeah. As far as the general commitment for increased enforcement, that is the 32 heads that are in the executive budget, and we plan to start training those in. By the time that rolls out, the additional licenses starting later in the year, you will see a much more expansive and sustained sanitation police presence on illegal street vending generally. For that specific location, yes, we were just out on Saturday. I remember talking to your predecessor about that, and if you had been in sanitation long enough, you could have talked to my predecessor's predecessor. But certainly, you...

(06:01:07)

know I cannot speak for the police department and their ability to do it, and I will deal with them. But could we get a commitment from you that you do daily enforcement with us until the situation is under control for a period of weeks?

(06:01:17)

We can have a presence there on a daily basis. Yes.

(06:01:19)

Make sure that couch is gone today. Wow. Thank you. That was a yes commitment. That is why we love Commissioner Anderson. Thank you very much and thank you, Rebecca, for your help on this as well.

(06:01:28)

Thanks. Followed by Thomas Henry.

(06:01:36)

Thank you, chairs. Welcome news on the extension for the reimbursements. I also want to thank the Commissioner for the quick response to the letter we had sent, and I want to thank my colleagues that signed on about the snow removal program. The administration has repeatedly emphasized the need for cost-saving measures across the City at a time where my office continues to receive complaints from residents who participated in the emergency snow removal program during this winter's two major snowstorms and who have yet to receive full payment, and some have not been paid at all. We want to find out what the status is of those workers who have not gotten paid as yet, and if you can walk us through what the current status of the outstanding payments are owed to the emergency snow shovelers and explain the factors that contributed to these delays so that the snow shoveler program...

(06:02:45)

This year was orders of magnitude larger than it has ever been before. What is the total number? 6,200 total individuals who participated in the snow shoveler program. By and large, the majority of those individuals were paid within 4 to 6 weeks. That timeline in previous years would have been as long as 12 weeks. So we did cut the timeline down dramatically. We understand that 4 to 6 weeks is a long time to wait for a paycheck, and so going forward we are putting in place new systems and new procedures to try to make that much, much faster — as short as a week, maybe two. We get paid on a biweekly basis. We should expect snow laborers to get paid on a biweekly basis as well. As of today, there are still a handful of emergency snow shovelers who have not been paid. Can you give us an...

(06:03:42)

exact number of the amount of folks who have not been paid?

(06:03:47)

There are cases where there is a partial payment. No one... we have not issued partial payments. If there are people — we have a constituent that has pay stubs showing that there was a partial payment made and there is an outstanding payment still owed to them — we would love to see what that looks like. With our documentation, we plan to give that to you as well. I believe currently we have about 12 constituents who claim they did not get paid, and they also said there are another close to 40 or 50 folks who have not gotten paid or where a partial payment was made.

(06:04:24)

We just want to get to the bottom of it because a lot of these residents — some of them are formerly incarcerated — and for some of these folks this is the only source of income they have had for the year. So to have such a delay, to me, it makes no sense. Especially when, if we have a payroll system for the City of New York for regular City workers or part-time workers who work on a seasonal basis, we should have that system together so that this type of delay does not take place and have an adverse impact on some of the folks that needed it the most, especially in the 42nd Council District. So if we can get this rectified and get these folks paid, I would greatly appreciate it, and we look forward to giving you the information on the residents who have been impacted, the constituents who have been impacted by this.

(06:05:16)

Yeah. We have around 100 individuals out of the 6,200 total that worked for us that have not yet been paid. In every case we have been trying to reach them by phone, by mail, by email to try to get the documentation that we need from them to actually get them paid. When they had an issue when they initially registered or signed on to the program, that information in some cases was not properly provided. This is the challenge with — we had 1,500 people signed up before the season started, which is great. We had another 6,500 sign up during a snowstorm in one of our garages when we had hundreds of sanitation workers coming in and out of the garage. We had a supervisor who was trying to take documentation and fill out time sheets while also managing all of the plows that were out on the street. It is not a great way to manage a system like that. We do not plan to do day-of sign-ups at the garages in the future because of that. So there are some cases where we did not receive proper documentation or forms were filled out improperly. It is not the fault of the sanitation worker in the garage, but we do need to get additional information from those individuals in order to process the payment. So my message to you and to all colleagues would be to tell them to reach out to us. We want to pay everyone. We want to close this out. Reach out to us and we need some basic info and we will get you paid.

(06:06:45)

Well, hopefully in the next budget — this budget that we hopefully will adopt by the end of June — there is enough to address this type of delay. We are looking forward to working with the administration to first of all get you the information on those folks who have not gotten paid, and to continue to highlight this to make sure that gets paid. We share the commitment there.

(06:07:14)

Thank you, chairs. Okay. Shanel Thomas-Henry. Thank you, chairs. A couple of questions. Currently, what is the proper way for street vendors to dispose of their trash?

(06:07:28)

For mobile food vendors, they are required to take their trash back to their commissary, where they are also required to go at the end of every day. The commissary is required to have a contract with a private carter who hauls that trash away. For general vendors, I think there is not actually a great process right now. The new Local Law 54 that authorized the additional street vending licenses also requires that Sanitation promulgate regulations around proper disposal of waste by street vendors, and we are planning to do so this...

(06:08:04)

summer. Okay. Now, in my district of the 21st in Queens, we do have certain areas that are predominantly single or two-family homes. But over the past years we have been seeing that more and more people are occupying these homes, and with that influx of individuals, a lot are taking trash out to the bins on the corner, or in some instances, since containerization, they are actually putting trash bags at the apartment buildings. The apartment buildings can literally be seen on camera pushing shopping carts to a commercial strip, and it is causing dumping. So it is like a spiral effect. My question is, as the population growth in the City is happening, have you started to look at increasing pickup days? In my district in particular, I think we have had the same pickup days forever.

(06:09:03)

I do not think that is something that we have looked at that closely. If there are specific parts of your district where that is an issue, we would love to dig into what is happening and how to potentially resolve that. But I think there would be a substantial cost associated with increasing frequency, so we would have to take that into account.

(06:09:21)

Okay. I am going to go into commercial waste zones. How have waste...

(06:09:26)

collection costs for businesses in operational commercial waste zones changed compared to the previous open market model? The number one challenge with the previous open market model is that we had really, really, really bad data, so we do not have a great point of comparison. What we do have is the BIC rate cap, which they continue to regulate. What we know is that in every zone there is at least one carter, and in many zones multiple carters, that are offering prices substantially below the BIC rate cap, which means they are at or below the prices that were offered previously. We have heard from many carters themselves that they are achieving operational efficiencies and are able to pass on the cost savings from those operational efficiencies to their customers.

(06:10:31)

Okay. What feedback have you received from the businesses? Well, you did just mention that. But a follow-up was: are the businesses aware that they have multiple options?

(06:10:41)

When is this? They...

(06:10:43)

absolutely are. We just actually completed the implementation of this zone right here in lower Manhattan on June 1. Not only did our team visit every single business and go back to businesses who had not yet signed contracts, but I know that every single carter visited every single business to try to win over their business and make the best case for a contract. Certainly the businesses that I have talked to, and their team has talked to, all said yes, we know we have three options and we went with the option that we thought was best for us. Thank you. Great.

(06:11:22)

I just have one question on behalf of CM Sandra Ung, because she was not able to stay. Your testimony states that this budget funds 32 new uniform positions for fiscal year 2027 to address street vending. Combined with existing staff, what will be the total number of uniform positions dedicated to vending enforcement? 72. 72. Okay. 40 existing plus 32. 40 existing plus 32. Okay, perfect. Thank you.

(06:11:56)

Thank you.

(06:11:57)

I want to touch base quickly on the new proposed supply warehouse in Hunts Point. Yes. I wanted to know what was the impetus for changing it from Greenpoint to Hunts Point, where we are in that process and why it would be moving, and what will happen to...

(06:12:18)

what is happening at Greenpoint now. Currently it is on a property that a long time ago was occupied by the old Greenpoint incinerator. It is a property that the Department of Environmental Protection will be using to build a control facility as part of their long-term control plans. I do not have a specific timeline for when that construction is happening, but I know that they have funding for it and are in the planning process right now. They are required by federal and state regulators to reduce their combined sewer overflow and make Newtown Creek cleaner. We are supportive of that. They are asking to use that property for construction purposes. We were looking at relocating the Bronx 2 garage anyway. It is currently on Casanova Street and it is — I would say it is probably among our five worst facilities as far as the conditions, the structure and the spaces for sanitation workers. So we have been looking to vacate that facility for quite some time. It is also undersized and much more proximate to residents than the proposed facility, which we are in the process of planning right now. So as we were moving the Bronx 2 garage, we said, this is another thing that we have to move — could we co-locate these two things? The location would be both a new Bronx 2 garage and supply storage. Correct. That would be right next to the... the sugar plant? No. The new facility for the Bronx 2 garage is in Hunts...

(06:14:16)

Point. Yes. And that would be next to the... it is...

(06:14:20)

It is a bit away. I do not have the exact address on me. It is 1110 Hunts Point Avenue.

(06:14:28)

So yeah, it will be right next door to theirs, which is our only park in the entire neighborhood, Beretta Point Park. So I would definitely love to make sure that we are going through these plans and understanding how this is going to enhance... We are trying in the middle of connecting the residential area as much as possible with Beretta Point Park and with the new addition of the grocery store that is down the block from zero point, and we just want to make sure that we are not adding new infrastructure there that would detract from the creation of the neighborhood that we are trying to do, of course.

And I want to touch base briefly on everyone's favorite topic: derelict vehicles. So the Executive Budget includes $68,000 for equipment and vehicles, growing and stabilizing at approximately a little over a million every year afterwards. What specifically prompted the expansion of this program at this time? Was it driven by increased complaint volume, policy directive or operational need? This was actually driven by some litigation that was filed challenging the department's prior practices for derelict vehicles. Previously our practice was, and we believed consistent with State law, we would tag a vehicle as derelict and as long as the vehicle remained tagged and remained on location for at least six hours, we would then remove it. We would have our contractor come in and remove the vehicle and it would be immediately scrapped. There was litigation filed and as part of a settlement, in an effort to settle that litigation, we have actually moved to a tow and storage operation where the contractor tows the car, it is stored for about two weeks to give the owner of the vehicle an opportunity to pay the fine, pay the storage fee and pick up the vehicle before it is scrapped. So the additional cost is associated with the towing and storage of the derelict. Great. In terms of spending, the spending is limited to equipment but there is no new head count. When are the three new positions expected to be onboarded and what is the plan for the interim?

Also, what are the titles for the three new positions? There is a million manager at $130,000 and two uniform sanitation workers. So can you also talk to us about what the specific functions of each of the roles are and how that would work within the workflow?

(06:17:12)

Yes, the funding covers three head count. It is two uniform supervisors and one, which we think is going to be an attorney, and that is to manage the additional paperwork associated with the storage and towing portion because we have to do notifications to the owner. We have to search all of the databases across the country to see if we can figure out who owns this car and try to

(06:17:38)

do the notification. So that is what the additional head count is. We expect to bring them on as soon as the fiscal year starts, so this

(06:17:48)

does seem to be kind of a State issue that is now us trying to fix it on a budget end. Has there been any conversation with any of the State partners about doing any

(06:18:00)

fixes to this? Yeah, I think that the litigation that was filed actually claimed a constitutional concern here and a lack of due process for the vehicle owners, so that is sort of what is driving this. I do not know that there would necessarily be a State legislative fix in order to address this problem, but you know, I think it is a relatively small investment and really has no operational impact otherwise on our program, and our numbers remain really high so far this year.

(06:18:38)

How is the program currently staffed, and is the existing team meeting demand or operating with a backlog?

(06:18:44)

Yeah, the existing team is meeting demand for sure, and in the last two years we have done a lot more coordination with the NYPD. The breakdown of responsibility here is that the Department of Sanitation handles derelict vehicles, which are vehicles that do not have license plates and are generally low in value. The NYPD handles any vehicles that have license plates or that do not have plates but are higher value vehicles. The difference is we just scrap them. They store them and have a different process for relinquishing them. As far as the total head count, we have 17 citywide and that is sufficient right now. We also have our field officers in each district trained to be able to tag vehicles and call them into our vendors, so they are also doing so on a regular basis.

(06:19:38)

Where is the current bottleneck occurring in terms of the operations? I am talking about getting derelict

(06:19:45)

vehicles off of our streets. Yeah, I would not necessarily say there is a bottleneck. I think that the resource constraint, if there is one, is just on our ability to schedule joint operations with NYPD, but we are doing so on a regular basis as they are available. We have, I think, five or six scheduled next week all across the City and we continue to schedule those as they have resources available. On the derelict vehicles specifically, which is a relatively small part of the overall abandoned and ghost car problem, I think we are keeping up with it. There are a tremendous number of abandoned and ghost cars out there and I think this is yet another place where people who own cars are not respecting their neighbors and we really need to hold them accountable. I say that as a car owner myself.

(06:20:32)

With that...

(06:20:36)

What is the current number of outstanding derelict vehicle complaints citywide and what is the average time from complaint to removal?

(06:20:48)

We do not have the average time here in front of us, but the total number of derelict vehicle complaints is actually down 20% year over year compared to last year, so we are keeping up. In large part our removals are down commensurately. Just to

(06:21:07)

clarify, do you believe that the complaints are down because there are fewer derelict vehicles, or are complaints down because New Yorkers are seeing that complaints about derelict vehicles

(06:21:17)

just do not get attended to? I think they are down because there actually are fewer derelict vehicles.

(06:21:23)

We have made significant progress in this area. Does the department track repeat locations where derelict vehicles are constantly abandoned and is there a specific targeted enforcement strategy for that?

(06:21:37)

We absolutely do, and that is what we call roto operations. That is where we do the joint operations with NYPD, in the places where we see recurring derelict vehicles. Particularly this happens around auto body shops and scrap dealers where people are leaving their cars, getting them chopped up for parts and then just leaving the shell on the street. We hate to see that. So we spend a lot of time in those neighborhoods in particular, making sure that we are getting the derelict vehicles off the street.

(06:22:07)

So the majority, or the priority, of the derelict vehicles are in these hotspot neighborhoods. Do you have those identified already?

(06:22:19)

Yeah, I do not have a specific list in front of me, but we could certainly provide that. That would be great — the areas where we do those activities.

(06:22:25)

That would be really great. Last but not least, community composting. Yes, I wanted to know where the administration was on community composting. So this budget has, as I said earlier, no dedicated funds for community composting. In the fiscal year 2026 budget the City Council did step in with funding and, you know, I think given the financial constraints of this budget, we would have loved to be able to put that in as an administration fund but we were not able to.

(06:23:02)

Okay. FY26.2... sorry, not 7, 26.2. Rebecca is here to keep me honest. Okay, we should have one round two of questions. Council Member Banks.

(06:23:23)

Thank you. This particularly has to do with the Aqueduct. You know, initially the old Aqueduct was in Queens and it moved to Brooklyn and the more southern part of my district. They were originally on a piece of land or a lot and they were evicted off of that lot, so now they are taking up — we are talking about close to hundreds and hundreds of vendors who have taken up close to 20 blocks in a manufacturing and industrial part of my district. I want to know what the administration is going to finally do to address this issue. We have had multiple conversations with Sanitation and the Department of Health. Can there be a task force put together to address this lawlessness? This is something that is plaguing that part of my district. The manufacturers are complaining. What are we going to do together? We are looking forward to working with you to address that issue. Yeah, I know we do enforcement operations out there very frequently on a regular basis. You know, it is not working. I hear what you are saying. It is not working. There needs to be a joint task force. We will talk to our agency partners about getting a joint task force. We need that because if it is just one agency going out there, it is not doing what it is supposed to be doing. We are constantly getting complaints about the unsanitary situations and the current... you know, them dumping cooking oil into the drains, homelessness, sleeping in their cars to hold a space. Something has to be done and we are frustrated.

We would want to work with you all to hopefully get this resolved.

(06:25:14)

One of the things that we are exploring doing with greater frequency is actually working with the code specifically on that issue of improper disposal of grease and other materials into the sewer, because the tickets that we can issue for vending are relatively low — they are, you know, a slap on the wrist for a lot of folks — but the tickets that can be issued under the code actually come with much more substantial penalties. So we are exploring how we can do that more effectively.

(06:25:51)

Very okay. Just kidding. One more from Council Member Maloney. Thank you.

(06:25:54)

Commissioner, before the trash bins I saw rats in my district right after. Depends... I still see the rats. I think I saw the same rats. Well, what is your take? Did the bins reduce the rat problem in the City or has very little changed? The bins absolutely reduced the rat problem. Rat sightings are down close to 30% year over year and that is after they were already down substantially from 2024, and 2024 was down substantially from 2023. So we are seeing year over year declines in rat sighting complaints. So you know, I

(06:26:30)

encourage everyone who sees rats in their neighborhood to call 311 because we need the data on where the rats are. Where we have seen complaints down citywide, we have seen complaints particularly down in Manhattan Community District 9, where we have the Empire bins, and so we are excited to continue rolling those out. As we have less trash on the street we expect to see fewer rats. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you.

Okay, and before I close, sorry, I did not recognize Council Member Feliz on Zoom. So I just want to recognize him, and I believe with that we are done with this portion of the hearing. So thank you so much, Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, Assistant Commissioner for your time today. Thank you. We will send follow-up questions. Thank you. Okay, so we are going to transition. Take a couple of minutes to transition. Thank you so much to our friends at COIB for your patience, and in a few minutes because we are

(06:32:14)

scheduled. Oh, okay. I think we are ready, right. Okay.

Good afternoon. Welcome to our final fiscal year 2027 Executive Budget hearing for the day, focusing on the Conflicts of Interest Board. I am CM Linda Lee. I am pleased to be joined by my colleague and Chair of the Committee on Governmental Operations, State and Federal Legislation, Council Member Brewer. We have been joined by Council Members Williams and Phil Wong on Zoom. Welcome, Director Caroline Lisa Miller and your team, and thank you so much for being here today to answer our questions.

On May 12, 2026 — sorry, my words are escaping me, it is so late in the day — the administration released the Executive Financial Plan for fiscal years 2026 to 2030 with a proposed fiscal year 2027 budget. The New York City Conflicts of Interest Board's proposed fiscal year 2027 budget of $3 million represents less than 1% of 1% of the administration's proposed fiscal year 2027 budget in the Executive Plan. This is an increase of $149,000 or 5.2% from what was originally budgeted in the fiscal year 2027 Preliminary Plan. This increase results from a new need for two positions starting in fiscal year 2027. As of April 2026, COIB's head count was 21 out of 22 budgeted positions. And now I will turn it over to my co-chair for this hearing for her opening statement.

(06:33:48)

Okay, thank you very much. Good afternoon. I am the Chair of the Committee on Governmental Operations and we are here for the fiscal year 2027 Executive Budget on COIB. I would like to acknowledge our fellow members, but I think we did that already. So we are pleased that you are here. This came about, as you know, because I complained to the Speaker that between the Department of Investigation and you, we needed more oversight agencies to be fully funded. So I really appreciate the fact that you are here, but I do want you to know that there is a lot of — bless you — a lot of support for oversight. I believe strongly in it and I know that you do. Awesome.

(06:34:31)

You have a $3 million budget. It is an increase of $150,000 compared to the fiscal year 2026 adopted budget.

(06:34:42)

You are a mighty force in City government. I must admit when I hear COIB I panic because I have to fill out that form. Maybe I think I have been filling it out for about 25 years and I always try to do it right, but I always call you at the last

(06:34:55)

minute saying what the hell am I supposed to do here. So you have, like I said, about a $3 million budget, maybe 24 or 25 employees, but you improve all of our lives by rooting out corruption and theft from the inside. Just like the Department of Investigation, you deserve much more funding, I believe, and you should definitely... so we should be very supportive and there should be political will to make sure that you have what you need. There is $149,000 in new needs in the Executive for fiscal year 2027, but no other adjustments or savings. We would like to hear more about that and I think that those two positions, which I believe are for paralegals, we can talk about the important work that they are going to do, are incredibly important. But I do not know if you do not need more. So our finance team — I would like to thank Jack Story, Owen Kowalski and Michael Sherman — and the committee staff for Governmental Operations, Frazier and Erica Cohen, and on my staff, Shula Pooter, Cynthia Hornig and Caleb Gutwork. Now we would like to have the committee counsel go over procedural items and swear you in. Thank you very much. Great.

(06:37:04)

Director Miller, you may begin. Good afternoon, Charlie and members of the Committee on Finance and Chair Brewer and Committee on Governmental Operations, State and Federal Legislation. I am Caroline Miller. I am the Executive Director of the New York City Conflicts of Interest Board. With me are Ethan Carrier and Nina Karim, Director of Administration. We are here today to offer testimony about the budgetary challenges facing the Board as the Council considers the City budget for Fiscal Year 2027. This is the first time in 10 years that the Board has been invited to offer testimony about its budget and we appreciate the recognition by Chair Brewer and the committee members of the centrality of the Board to advancing ethics in City government, as well as the spotlight put on budgetary issues by the good government groups Citizens Union, Reinvent Albany, Common Cause, and the League of Women Voters.

The City's budget reflects its priorities and over the past four years the Board has experienced a series of budget cuts that have reduced its staff and limited its work, and we hope that this hearing is part of reversing that trajectory.

Since its creation in 1989 by the voters of the City of New York, the Board has strived within its limited budget and staff to provide the best possible services to the current and former public servants who are the agency's constituency.

Each year the Board answers thousands of questions through its attorney of the day service, helps almost 10,000 filers complete their annual disclosure reports, educates hundreds of thousands of public servants with creative and entertaining content, and when necessary, prosecutes violations of the City's conflicts of interest law. The Board is able to provide all those services and more with a tiny staff. In 1991, its first full year of operation, the Board had a staff of 21. Today the Board has a staff of 22. In the intervening 36 years the Board has only increased by one.

Without the resources to match, the Board has been entrusted with a series of additional responsibilities, most recently the regulatory and reporting requirements of the Legal Defense Trust Law. The Board also serves an expanded City workforce, from around 240,000 in 1992 to over 300,000 today, plus all former public servants.

Today I will address three key budgetary challenges facing the Board: staffing levels, pay parity and IT infrastructure.

First, staffing levels. In January 2022, the Board had a staff of 26. During the prior administration, when an employee left, the Board was denied authority to fill the vacancy. The vacant position was removed from the agency head count and the Board had to advocate for that same position as a quote new need, a process that placed the Board in the position of trying to convince OMB that our work was important. The current administration has already taken a different approach and the Executive Budget, as the chairs have noted, includes funding for the Board to hire two new paralegals.

These two paralegals will be incredibly valuable to our agency's work, as the Board has been functioning with one paralegal supporting three separate legal units since March 2022. The remaining staffing need that we have identified is the vacancy since January 2025 in our legal advice unit. Being able to hire another advice attorney would help the Board fulfill its critical mission of providing guidance to public servants to prevent conflicts of interest before they occur.

The second critical issue is pay equity. The Board's budget, which is approximately 90% allocated to current staff salaries, is the same budget as last year. The only change is the paralegals. This means that the agency has no funding to provide any salary adjustments or increases. The funding deficit has caused three problems.

First, long-serving and essential senior staff are undercompensated, stuck at salary levels from years ago that are substantially less than their counterparts at other City agencies. For example, a recent job posting for Deputy Chief in the Ethics Compliance Division at the City's Law Department offered an incoming salary of $215,000. The very experienced and well-regarded Deputy General Counsel currently earns 30% less than that, just $150,000, after almost 10 years at this agency. Second, the Board cannot address longstanding pay disparities among managers with comparable roles. An agency veteran who alone manages the agency's IT infrastructure and often travels into the office on the weekend to troubleshoot issues with our servers earns 20 to 25% less than the highest-paid unit director.

Third, the Board has been unable to adequately compensate the junior staff who successfully manage increased workloads resulting from those decreased staffing levels. For example, the Board sought funding to provide our sole paralegal, the one who is doing the work for three units, with a $4,000 salary increase to bring her salary up to $54,000. That request was denied, as were repeated requests for funding to achieve pay equity across the agency. These budgetary deficits put the agency in acute jeopardy of losing the key staff who we rely on to perform our Charter-mandated work.

The Board seeks $230,000 to address senior staff salary issues and $70,000 to address junior staff salary issues, for a total of $300,000 in pay equity.

The third issue is IT infrastructure, one that impacts the Board directly and substantially, but over which the Board has almost no control. The Board's IT budget for Fiscal Years 2026 and 2027 has been the same: $143,000 and change, enough to rent a server and buy paper, but not much else. As a result, the Board relies on OTI for its major IT projects but lacks the ability to direct those projects' prioritization or completion. Currently there are two such mission-critical projects: the development of a new annual disclosure filing application and the deployment of a new case management system. The current filing application was built in the early 2000s and, as filers such as Chair Brewer have quickly realized, it has many functional limitations. No kidding. There have been discussions with OTI over the years about developing a new filing application, but

(06:44:23)

the project has been stalled since 2023 when OMB did not approve funding. Second, the current case management system was rolled out to multiple City agencies in 2013 but quickly became outdated. Since 2019, a group of agencies has been seeking approval from OMB every year for funding for a new case management system.

That approval seems finally to be in place, but until a date is actually set for migration of our essential confidential data, the Board must seek approval from OMB on an ad hoc basis for funding for new servers and related IT equipment to keep our out-of-date hardware functioning and secure. Being forced to rely on outdated software takes up significant time at OTI, at filers at City agencies, and limits the capacity of the Board to do its best work in fulfilling its Charter mandates to gather and review annual disclosure reports.

The City of New York has long been a national leader in municipal ethics, with a robust conflicts of interest law that applies to all City public servants and an independent board appointed by the five citywide elected officials with the advice and consent of the City Council. The Board needs sufficient and secure funding to continue and expand its work, ensuring that public service is and continues to be a public trust. We welcome questions on these and any other subjects of the Council's concern. Thank you.

(06:45:50)

Great. Thank you. And having come from the nonprofit sector, I am all about pay parity and making sure that people are getting paid what they deserve. So thank you so much for highlighting some of these issues. We have also been joined by CM Morano on Zoom as well.

Okay, so really, really quickly, I am going to slip through my questions just based on your testimony. When was the last cost of living adjustment or salary adjustment for your agency?

(06:46:18)

The only salary adjustments our agency has benefited from have essentially been the ones that have been citywide, the ones for union employees or for managers that have been rolled out citywide. No additional funding has been given to the Board in my memory. Occasionally we have availed ourselves, when an employee of a senior level leaves who has a higher salary and we hire a more junior person, of having a few extra dollars that we can give to the current staff, but that is it.

(06:46:48)

And then what would be the total cost in your estimation to adjust the salaries appropriately? About $300,000.

(06:46:58)

Okay, perfect. Thank you for that. And then...

(06:47:02)

For the record, for the savings plan, which I know most City agencies were required to go under, I know that you were not included, you were exempted. I almost feel like you should be exempted because the budget is pretty minimal to begin with, but just for the record...

(06:47:19)

What was the reason for the exemption? Good afternoon. That is exactly the point actually. We were exempted because we have had very little funding to cut elsewhere.

(06:47:32)

Okay. And in terms of revenue, when people pay penalties to the Board after being found in violation, how is that revenue accounted for? Is it in the miscellaneous revenue budget? And if so, is the agency credited? The Board is a different agency. I will have any additional information, but we are not added to our budget. The funds go to the City Treasury.

(06:48:00)

I think an appropriate way to think about it is that the penalties the Board collects should be appropriate to the violations and not serve to enrich our own salaries or to provide additional resources for our staff. They should be separate, so I think that structurally makes sense. In prior administrations, we would be able to make applications to reduce funding cuts or get additional positions based on being quote a revenue-generating agency, but those arguments have not been persuasive. Okay, good to know.

(06:48:32)

And how much did the Board collect in penalties in fiscal year 2025, and then also how much so far in 2026?

(06:48:39)

Those numbers are a little difficult for me because we do not think of it as fiscal year, we just think of it in calendar year. Got it. Okay, I can at least answer the question for what we have for last year.

(06:49:01)

Oh, $310,000 and some...

(06:49:04)

Change. Okay. There are two types of penalties that the Board collects. The first are for late filers of annual disclosure reports, and the Board rules provide for a structured number starting at $250 and increasing based on how many days the filer is late and whether the filer was a late filer in the prior six filing periods. On the enforcement side, the penalties are determined by how serious the violation is, how high-level the public servant is, whether the public servant elected to settle or went to a hearing. There is some accounting for the respondent's, the violator's, ability to pay, and so financial hardship is considered when the fines are collected,

(06:49:57)

and a number of other factors. Okay. Thank you for that. And then there are agency penalties and then Board penalties. Where is the revenue listed for both penalties and how is it accounted for? If there is a joint resolution with an agency and the Conflicts of Interest Board, am I understanding your question correctly? I think there is a way to separate that out and then show where we can find both.

(06:50:25)

We could get you the information. When some of the resolutions that the Conflicts of Interest Board enters into involve an agency, and then there is either a suspension, a pay fine that is paid to the employing agency, or some other demotion or things like that, the agency accounts for it on its own. We could create a record of that information if the Council wanted it. Okay.

(06:50:51)

Yes. We could follow up with that.

(06:50:53)

Sure. Okay. And just...

(06:50:53)

Really quickly, I know you noted in your testimony that there were certain requests that were made for salary increases and budget increases that were denied. So just wondering how conversations have been going with the new administration for additional funding for your Board, which obviously does incredible work to investigate a lot of the corruption happening in the City. Have you had conversations with OMB and how have they been going?

(06:51:20)

We have had... the issues that we have identified for these committees we have identified both in prior administrations and with the current administration. It is the current administration that considered and agreed with our request for the two paralegals, but our request for the advice attorney and for the pay parity issues were not...

(06:51:40)

Were denied. Okay. And I think actually I am going to pause right there and then pass it on to Chair Brewer.

(06:51:50)

So in your testimony, I know the Board well. In your testimony you mentioned about case management having the same problem in the sense that it is an old system. I thought they were doing it just themselves. Are you aware that you are both focused on and waiting on this case management system, or are they separate? You know, I think that because the Board of Correction is a larger agency, they have been prioritized in this sort of citywide request for getting this case management system. As a smaller agency, we are sort of at the bottom of the pile for that. But what would a new case management system do for you? I know what it does for others, but what would it do to help you?

(06:52:38)

I would say the most critical thing is that the system that we have right now is no longer capable of being updated. It is a legacy system that is essentially being held together with dental floss and duct tape by our IT person. It is running on our servers that cannot be replaced because if we did, we could not keep running this old case management system. So I think the functionality will

(06:53:06)

be comparable if not better. I will turn it over to Ethan to say a bit more on it.

(06:53:12)

Right. What the new system will actually allow us to do that is different... I would be happy to keep our current system more or less forever. I mean, it is kind of a junky old piece of software, but it is fine. The problem is that it is now a cybersecurity risk and OTI wants us to replace it because of the cybersecurity problem, but then another part of OTI cannot get the funding to make that happen. So we are sort of stuck in this loop of what to do. And as Caroline said, for confidentiality reasons, for this old system the servers that it is running on are in our office. Our IT person runs those. Those are not run by OTI. They are not cloud-based. The new system would be a cloud system. So we cannot update these servers because the software cannot run on the new servers. So we are trapped in this sort of weird loop with the cybersecurity.

(06:54:08)

Okay, so the reason I asked is we have got the new annual disclosure, that is one IT issue, and we have got the case management system as well. So is there a number that goes with it? I assume it is partly capital and partly expense, or would it just be expense? Is there a number that would address those two issues that is not part of the $300,000 for the salaries? The annual disclosure filing system, that would be a capital expense that would be in OTI's budget. Okay. The project managers for OTI would be in there.

(06:54:43)

In OTI's budget? Yes. I think the last number that was considered back in 2023 was around... but

(06:54:51)

that is capital, that is capital, and that would be for the annual disclosure filing application. Correct. Okay.

(06:54:57)

And how about the case management? That is something separate. That is something separate that has already gotten funding for. I do not know the number off hand. It is just an issue of how long... we are again in this weird cycle because it takes so long to implement. Every year it has to be reauthorized, so then all the numbers have to be gotten from the vendor again. We have to make another... it is hard. We need to talk to Maloney. Is that what you are

(06:55:20)

saying? Right. I am just saying, that is Lisa's thought, to Lisa, who might know since she is involved. We would be glad to do that.

(06:55:27)

That is what I need to understand. Yes. The other question I have is how do you work with other agencies, like with the Department of Investigation? How are your cases different? Obviously they are quite different. How do you select who you are going to be overseeing and finding out about in terms of corruption? How do you determine which

(06:55:51)

cases you are taking? Well, we receive complaints in writing. We have an attorney review every single complaint that we get. If the complaint on its face states a violation of the conflicts of interest law, we refer it to the Department of Investigation. For every cognizable, meaningful complaint that we receive, whether small or large, we try... we also work... we have no investigators on our staff. Everything has to be referred to the Department of Investigation. We do try very hard, though, given the internet, to do sort of our own sleuthing, and sometimes there are violations that can be substantiated just from information that is available online. When we can do it sort of cheaply and quickly, we try to do that. Okay. We also work with agencies and their disciplinary counsels, which I think was maybe what Charlie was referring to, to try to resolve cases globally. The result of working with agencies means that those resolutions are public dispositions, which have their own educational value and impact, which is always what we are trying to do: keep educating, keep having impact with our

(06:57:04)

work. And those are the ones that you send us, and you do a wonderful job of letting people know that this was not the right thing to do, whoever it was, and hopefully others will pay attention. Yeah, that would be the idea. The other question is, how many people... I should know

(06:57:19)

Tell us about your board and what is their role. There are five people on our board. Three are appointed by the Mayor, one by the Public Advocate and one by the Comptroller. They meet once a month by law and decide steps in every enforcement case. There is no enforcement case that is pursued without the board making a determination that there is sufficient evidence of a violation to pursue that case. They handle significant advice matters, complicated questions and waivers involving certain high level people. The board is largely a part time board. They are not consulted other than at those monthly in person board meetings on the sort of day to day workings. Much of the work of the Conflicts of Interest Board is drawn done by this tiny staff on a daily basis.

(06:58:11)

But I know that Wayne is on it. Holly, that is yes. Love more than that. That is a real government geek, shall we say. Yes. And so others... I know the City Council does the advice and consent. That is the person I have known for many, many years and yes, he knows your agency very well. He does. The other question I have...

(06:58:32)

Is the pool of two paralegals that hopefully will replace those folks, because I guess I read all the material... one person retired. You really do need to have these two people follow up. What will they be doing? How will they enhance the agency, et cetera?

So the goal... some of the work of that... the goal is to support all the legal units. The primary work they will be doing first is in the annual disclosure unit, where people report positions and other conflicts of interest in their annual disclosure reports. We want to make sure to do a thorough review to help those people, the filers, those 10,000, identify the violations and either resolve them or, if they need a waiver, in other words special permission to engage in a position or conduct that would otherwise violate the conflicts of interest law, to then work with the legal advice unit to get the necessary waivers and permissions.

So the goal is for these two junior people to really be supporting all the legal work of the office as a value add in every possible way. The current paralegal that we have is a dynamo doing an incredible amount supporting us and with that model we hope to be able to, you know, sort of maximise and get a lot of bang for the buck from those two staff members.

(06:59:53)

That is a vision there. So 300,000 or so employees, approximately 10,000 filers, is that correct? I know it is elected officials, certain policymakers, et cetera. Yeah. How is that determined? Is that something that we passed and I should be paying more attention to? Did it come with the Conflicts of Interest Board in 1989?

(07:00:17)

How does that get determined? I was there in 1989. I should remember this. No, it is not going to be that. There is a state law that requires public officials of certain categories to file financial disclosure reports. Then the City Council passed a section of the City's Administrative Code which parallels the state law. In other words, the state law required the City to pass an Administrative Code that requires certain categories of filers: elected officials, persons with substantial policy discretion, individuals involved in contracts, tax assessors, members of policymaking boards and commissions, et cetera. So there is a city law, is the short answer, but the city law exists because of state law. How do you determine policy, because every mayor has new policy people? Some have, you know, ten deputy mayors, some have six, some have this... you know, they get...

(07:01:08)

In my opinion, too many agencies in the Mayor's Office. They do not know what the hell they are doing. But okay, how do you decide who a...

(07:01:14)

...policymaker is? Yeah, I mean, a little bit imperfectly, certainly, because the 22 people who work at the Conflicts of Interest Board do not know every single person out there in all of city government. So the board is obliged to rely on decisions being made at other city agencies to decide who their policymakers are. Every city agency decides... they decide, but they decide pursuant to a rule that the board promulgated that sets out some criteria for that. So it involves certain high level people and people who are in charge of sort of large offices and make independent judgments, but there is a set of criteria and rule, and the agency sends us a list. We recently amended that rule for the agencies to provide us with organizational charts so that we could do exactly what you are asking about, which is go back and say, hey, what about this person or this person, we do not understand why they are a policymaker, you know. So we are doing a little bit of that poking around. Some of our staffing limitations have really limited that kind of work at the board, which is time consuming. Yeah. So we are not doing as much of that as I feel like we should. I think that there are some agencies that are way over-designating policymakers and it is not fair to those employees. I think there are some agencies that are under-doing it and there are people who really should be subject to the additional requirements, including filing annual disclosure reports, who are not.

So I would like to get a better handle on that. It is something we are working on.

(07:02:44)

And that could be, would be, part of the work that those two paralegals would participate in.

(07:02:47)

So they would be looking at the org charts. Yes. And do most agencies send you an org chart or do we need to pass a law telling them to do so? We have been, in part because of this dynamo paralegal that we have right now, we have really nagged every city agency into getting us these org charts as they are supposed to. So so far, so good on that.

(07:03:09)

Okay. And then the other question I have is... the Mayor's Office does have a budget hearing. I was not able to do it for the last 25 years. Okay. But that also... you have an org chart from the Mayor's Office as far as you know? We must. Yeah. So they must have one available. Okay, because they do have a lot of people there. The other question I have is with the form. So what would be some examples of how you think it could be improved? Obviously you just said the whatever $1.5 million to do the hardware, so to speak. Well, how would you want to improve it? Right now there are sort of two main problems.

(07:03:54)

The first is how difficult it is to change the form. So we get a ton of feedback from filers. We are answering nearly 5,000 calls from filers during that period, probably 2,500 of them, and then 2,500 others. So we find out someone says, hey, does this question mean this or that. If we had a more robust modern filing system, we could fix the questions quickly. Right now it is very difficult to fix a question. It goes through a whole process. We can only do so many per filing period, so it is very hard to even describe certain financial assets or holdings or things. To make any changes, even just to the text, is very difficult. So that would be the first thing, and to learn from filers even like what kinds of boxes are filled in or things like that.

And the other challenge is that it has no real back end. There is no reporting, so we cannot run a search to say, let us find out all the people who work at a university, or all the people who have this kind of... there is no reporting functionality at all. Which does not affect the filer as much. The first half affects the interface with the filer. The second affects our capacity to help filers identify conflicts of interest. Okay.

(07:05:13)

I think he will remember. Why do you not have a question, sir? Thank you, Chair.

(07:05:22)

Commissioner, the Conflicts of Interest Board has 24 budgeted staff, the only new pool to oversee ethics compliance over 300,000 City employees across a $127 billion government. How many open complaints is the Conflicts of Interest Board currently investigating and how many complaints were closed in the last two years without investigation because there simply was not enough staff to pursue them? You talked about it so... when we did... the board has no investigators. All the investigations are done by the Department of Investigation.

(07:06:00)

The investigations... the challenge of that structure was set up when the Conflicts of Interest Board was set up in 1989 to separate the prosecutorial and investigative functions. We have about 120 cases that are waiting on reports from the Department of Investigation, but those are not cases that are impacted by the staffing limitations of the Conflicts of Interest Board. If we get a substantiated investigation we pursue that case. The challenge is just how long it takes because we only have four people in the enforcement unit.

(07:06:32)

So basically, if you decide to close a case, that is because the Department of Investigation makes the recommendation, not that you made the determination? Well, there are a number of reasons why a case would be closed. There was no evidence of a violation, or there is insufficient evidence, not compelling evidence, and the board or the board and staff make the decision to close the case. One more question, I hope. Yeah, really quick. I learned that the Conflicts of Interest Board currently notifies public officials when someone requests their financial disclosure statement, which means if a journalist, a constituent or a Council member is checking someone's filing, that person gets tipped off. Now that undermines the entire purpose of public disclosure. Would the Conflicts of Interest Board support eliminating that notification requirement and what would it take, legislation or a rule change, to make that happen? Please talk about it.

(07:07:35)

It is an interesting question. Why that notification exists is not the Conflicts of Interest Board's decision. It is in the City Administrative Code, so we are required to do it. Why that is required... plus we have to notify not just that someone's report was requested, but the identity of the person who is requesting the report, so we need to have from that person confirmation that they are the person who they say they are. It is a... you know, I would not be... if someone said this seems to limit the capacity of someone to request a report, I think that is a compelling argument. The elected officials, of course, have their reports posted on the website, so making that change to the Administrative Code would not benefit anyone here, but it would...

(07:08:23)

...benefit other filers like the folks at the agency level.

(07:08:26)

That is good. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you. Thank you. How many staff are dedicated to implement the legal defense trust law? I know you spoke about that in your testimony. Did you really allocate staffing given the law came in in 2019 and you have lost staff since then?

(07:08:45)

Yeah, the legal defense trust law has been a sort of a difficult journey for us. Because we received no allocated funds to implement that law, the board self-funded some software to facilitate the reporting requirements, which are actually fairly complicated. That reporting system has not been a plus and we have spent a lot of time trying to build workarounds and so forth to get that to operate. It is burdensome both on us and on the legal defense trusts. There is a lot of stuff on sort of both sides of these things when trying to get the reporting in there correctly and have it work. I would say in terms of how much staff time has been dedicated... not, you know, in terms of the workarounds for the IT stuff, quite a bit. In terms of...

(07:09:40)

...the review of it, not as much as it certainly should be, which actually raises another issue, which is that that law mandates that an audit be conducted biennially under generally accepted government auditing standards, which requires a professional auditor. We certainly do not have a professional auditor among the 22 people who work at the Conflicts of Interest Board and we do not have... that has not happened. We do not... I do not know how it would happen. So...

(07:10:20)

You need to add that. You have got 300,000... there will need to be another staff allocation.

(07:10:27)

It probably would not... I do not... because it is all outside, right? Probably we would want to hire an outside...

(07:10:33)

Outside. You need to add that. Make sure that you get that to us so it is clear. Okay. I know that... my understanding is your current filing system for financial disclosures, again when I hear that word I have a heart attack, does not allow this information to be on open data. As the author of that law, I like everything to go on to open data.

(07:10:54)

So again, back to the technology issues, and maybe this is back to... what software upgrades would help make the financial disclosure information more accessible, both to you, which is important, and to the public?

(07:11:09)

Well, the question that you are asking, Chair, is comparable to the question that CM Wong asked, because there is a requirement in the law of notification for someone before a report is provided. So we could not under the law put anything in an annual disclosure report on open data because we would not be following the requirements of the law before releasing a public servant's annual disclosure report. The second challenge is that the reports just exist in this PDF form. There is nothing...

(07:11:41)

Right. And then there is so much... there is in fact confidential information on every annual disclosure. You have to pull it out. We would have to pull it out, right? So there is... which is just doing redacting in Adobe. You know, nothing... it is the low tech of it all. So right. But you can only do that if you have, I think, the new technology that we talked about earlier.

(07:12:01)

Yes, yes. And then so right now you are not putting anything on open data because it is hard to do right? Is that correct? Well, on the annual disclosure report front it is the two challenges: one, the issue that was identified about having to notify filers before their report is released, and the fact that the data is not in any form that could be...

(07:12:23)

...shared. Okay. Do you have... you gave us a cost estimate, and then we should talk to... for the technology upgrades we should talk to... to get the one on the case management. That is what you indicated? Yes.

(07:12:38)

From what formula do you support to provide independent budgeting? What is the ideal funding you need to sustain your staff? And that is back to the $300,000, is that basically correct in terms of what you would want?

(07:12:52)

For... I mean, for our current staff, yes. Obviously with an additional legal advice attorney, which is one of our priorities, that would have to be funding for that.

(07:13:05)

In terms of... but if you are asking about... I do not hear this as an independent budget. If you are asking about that sort of a formula, I think that the proposal from what I will call the City Council's Charter Revision Commission, a recent Charter Revision Commission, their proposal was an excellent proposal. It is, you know, enough more money and indexed in a way that I think makes the board able to perform all the things that it should be doing and keeping it as, I think, the best municipal government ethics program in the country, while simultaneously not requiring the board to go hat in hand to people who it regulates, which is an awkward thing, right? So I thought the proposal was...

(07:13:56)

...it was a fair proposal for solving those problems. Okay.

(07:14:01)

So I think in summary, from my perspective, the funding needs are: capital projects for technology that we have to get from an outside agency, you need the $300,000 for the salary adjustments et cetera, and then we need an outside consultant because we really want to follow up on the audit that you talked about, and then the other would be the attorney, which would be an additional staff line. Those are the topics. I think that in terms of a budget that I come away with... is that correct from what you can...

(07:14:36)

You have got it all correct.

(07:14:37)

And so we will work on all those. I think it is incredibly important to have oversight and not have all these agencies without somebody paying attention, because unfortunately with 300,000 people, people are going to do things they should not do. One last process question...

(07:14:54)

So I do know this extremely well. So my question is, you get a complaint, you know, somebody is taking money or doing whatever they...

(07:15:03)

So then you send that for an investigation to see... you can do a little in-house on the internet, but you send it to deal with the individuals that you are able to do in-house. Obviously you have got all the interest forms as an in-house issue. But what other aspects do you do in-house? And when the information or the cases are resolved, meaning Jones is paying a fine or whatever his punishment is, is that announced by you? How does that work?

The process... so all our settlements are announced by us. We both release the summaries, which the Council receives, and the actual settlement agreement, which is negotiated with the person who is the subject of the case, is part of the release. So that is all public and it is available on our website.

The first part of your question is, for example, let us say a city employee sends from their city email account a message: "Vote for Bob" or "Vote for Jane," or they say, "Please buy services from my private business," from their city email account. The email itself is evidence of the violation on its own. You are not permitted to use your city email for political activities or private businesses. Often, we have that email forwarded to us from the recipient saying this does not look right to me, and then that is the case. That is not a case that needs to be investigated. Is it possible that that public servant committed more similar violations? Sure. But we generally have a preference to try to do things quickly and not wait a year for a more robust or complete investigation. Let us try to stop this violation, this conduct, and even if the fine is less, the goal is not the money. The goal is stopping the violation and correcting the conduct. So that would be what I would call an in-house case.

(07:17:05)

Very helpful, and now I understand the process. Yes. Thank you very much. We are glad you are here after 10 years and we look forward to working with you. And I think with that, we are done for today's hearing, so thank you so much again for being with us and thank you, Gale, for your leadership. Great.