Today, the Mamdani administration will hold its first “Rental Ripoff” hearing. It has been promoted as a forum for renters to confront their landlords. The participating tenants have been carefully selected so their stories align with the administration’s ideology. Expect a well-orchestrated e vent, complete with social media clips designed to boost the mayor. This will not be an open town hall where anyone concerned about the city’s housing crisis can speak freely. Overtaxed housing providers will not be invited to explain how current policies make it nearly impossible to operate buildings. Homeless advocates will not be given the microphone to ask why voucher programs remain underfunded. So nobody should be surprised by what they hear: “My building is falling apart.” “My apartment has rodents.” “The paint is peeling.” “There is no heat.” “I pay my rent but my landlord doesn’t fix things.” Many of the tenants attending have legitimate concerns. Some live in distressed buildings, and some property owners should be doing better. But what will not be discussed at these hearings is the government’s role in creating the very conditions now being labeled a “ripoff.” Housing experts all agree. The NYU Furman Center warns that the city could lose hundreds of thousands of units. The Citizens Budget Commission says rent-stabilized housing is in a death spiral. The head of the Community Preservation Corp. called the crisis a challenge for the mayor. Even nonprofits are struggling. The city’s own Alternative Enforcement Program list tells a similar story. Buildings on list have accumulated high violation counts or caused the Department of Housing Preservation and Development to perform emergency repairs. The administration would like the public to believe these buildings are deteriorating because greedy landlords refuse to reinvest rent revenue. Publicly available data suggests something more complicated. Some buildings on the AEP list operate under regulatory agreements with the government and have received millions in public investment, yet they still struggle financially and carry high violation counts. Other properties show extremely low average rents — in some cases under $1,000 per month — while 30% or more of that rent goes directly to property taxes. Buildings that lack sufficient income to cover basic operating costs inevitably decline. If the city truly cared about tenants, it would examine the burden imposed by its property tax system. When a significant portion of rent revenue is diverted to taxes, that money is unavailable for heat, hot water, maintenance, repairs, insurance and utilities. If there is a “ripoff,” it may be structural. No alternative perspective will be presented at these hearings. No one will introduce data showing how government policy contributes to building distress. The narrative will be simple: landlords as villains, City Hall as hero. Most members of the New York Apartment Association will not be directly affected by these hearings. Many have owned their properties for decades and maintain violation rates below the citywide average, including compared with some nonprofit operators. But even long-term owners face mounting pressure. Operating costs have risen, revenues are constrained, and many rent-stabilized buildings are functionally insolvent. There is a real crisis unfolding in New York’s housing stock. Renters deserve an honest conversation about its causes. What they will likely receive instead is a performance. Burgos is CEO of the New York Apartment Association. ...read more read less