Opinion: The Problem Isn’t CityFHEPS

“Let’s not forget that the cost of vouchers represents people—people who can’t afford rent despite working full-time, people who without the voucher will become or remain homeless.”

As people who currently have and used to have CityFHEPS vouchers, we were troubled by the Citizens Budget Commission’s recent report on CityFHEPS. The report’s hyperfocus on the cost of CityFHEPS without meaningfully addressing the underlying reasons for that increase in cost is an incomplete framing that misses the point. The increased spending on CityFHEPS is a symptom of the housing crisis. It is one of many needed tools to help end homelessness.

It is easy to look at data and numbers and overlook the “why” or the “who.” Of course voucher spending has gone up: the cost of rent has gone up, inflation is high, and before the Good Cause Eviction Law was enacted in April of last year, 11,252 eviction filings were filed, which was the highest number since the pandemic began.

For decades, the city has prioritized building housing that working class and low income families can’t afford, while allowing the private market to inflate the prices of rent unchecked. The “who” is staggering: 85,000 people living in NYC Department of Homeless Services shelter, 32,000 of whom are children. These numbers don’t include the thousands of homeless youth and families staying in shelters for survivors of domestic violence.

Let’s not forget that the cost of vouchers represents people—people who can’t afford rent despite working full-time, people who without the voucher will become or remain homeless. People who are someone’s mother, sister, brother, aunt, cousin, son. They deserve the same level of care as a beloved family member, because they are someone’s family.

Yes, the City Council passed legislation in 2021 that “made each voucher more costly,” as the CBC report points out. However, that increase brought the voucher payment standard up to fair market rent, prior to which, families were languishing in shelters because their voucher was hundreds of dollars below market rate rent. Raising CityFHEPS to fair market rent helped thousands of New Yorkers exit shelter.

When administered correctly, and when voucher holders are able to locate apartments with reasonable rents and overcome source of income discrimination, CityFHEPS works like it is supposed to; it helps families move out of shelter and into permanent housing. That stability gives people the opportunity to pursue their goals of career advancement or furthering their education, and providing a safe home for their children. 

CityFHEPS allows recipients to increase their income until they make enough money to pay rent on their own (80 percent of the area median income), unlike many vouchers which have a built-in income cliff, forcing voucher holders to choose between a roof over their heads or a job that pays decently.  

The CBC report also discusses the lack of cost savings by continuing use of CityFHEPS vouchers. Some costs aren’t quantifiable; protecting children and adults from the trauma of homelessness, opening pathways for career and education advancement, providing stability that helps reunify families, protecting people from the dangers of living unsheltered on the street, to name a few.

No one wants to be homeless. It’s not a life choice someone aspires for. It happens as a direct result of circumstance, some of which are problems that a person did not create and are unavoidable, like the cost of getting an apartment, and the challenge of finding a landlord and/or property manager who will rent to you.

Being homeless is a stressful, depressing, humiliating and painful experience. Only a person who has never been in the shelter system and doesn’t know anyone who has been in the shelter system would suggest cost savings by keeping people in shelter instead of giving them a voucher. The human factor has to be considered when looking at these numbers.  

The report zeros in on CityFHEPS as if it is the end all be all of the city budget. Framing CityFHEPS costs as unsustainable ignores the fact that the city’s budget is over $112 billion, making CityFHEPS 1 percent of the city’s budget. It ignores the fact that significantly more of the budget is being spent on things other than vouchers; the NYPD Fiscal Year 2025 budget was over $5.7 billion. Budgets are moral documents—they highlight values through the services in which dollars are invested. 

If the administration wants to truly address the housing crisis, then it must do more and invest more in both long term and more immediate solutions. It must invest in permanently affordable housing that is removed from market speculation. It must put its weight behind advocating for the Housing Access Voucher to be included in this year’s New York State budget, and it must make deeper investments in eviction prevention, to name a few.

It is past time for Gov. Kathy Hochul to come to the table and fund the Housing Access Voucher Program, a state level voucher program, similar to Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers. But, putting a lifesaving program like CityFHEPS in the crosshairs, without fighting for these other solutions with the same passion used to criticize the voucher, is both disingenuous and dangerous. 

Jasmine Smith is a leader with Neighbors Together and a CityFHEPS voucher holder. Michael Bell is a leader with Neighbors Together leader and a former CityFHEPS voucher holder.