dickblack12
34109
942
17
https://gothamist.com/news/landlord-targeted-by-mamdani-agrees-to-forgive-back-rent-in-5100-apartments
Jun 10, 2026 6:20 PM
dickblack12
34109
942
17
https://gothamist.com/news/landlord-targeted-by-mamdani-agrees-to-forgive-back-rent-in-5100-apartments
Bringer0fJoy
I hope he's getting some good bj's. He deserves it.
Tobecontinued1992
Just remembered this rant i went on about Kamala harris just fucking up her entire presidency for like one of two reasons: she was dense as all living hell and got talked into running as a moderate republican or she cared more about money and donors. And in the second one its like "youre going to be president, you stupid bitch, they cant afford to not pay and ask you pretty please to give them a break. Where the fuck else are they going to go to?"
idiotsonfire
Then they should be forced to become rent controlled.
RetainedRecovery
I like this man .
igetit41
A person is a landlord. A corporate owner is an overlord. Get your terminology right.
[deleted]
[deleted]
dontrike
Imagine being so stupid you think it's one guy.
harbengerprime
its a company you twit
Dracon27
Bro has never heard of landlord corporations...
phoenix0path
Stupidity on the level you are operating should be physically painful.
It's a major design flaw in our species.
SandyTentaclez
Weird what stuff is all suddenly possible when the politician isnt bought.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Tarmaccian
TFA is quite thorough, but the short version is: Everybody got something, complications were swept away, and this is kinda just a part of it.
New owners bought out a bankrupt company, old rent was owed to old company. Banks took a $275M loss to make it happen, tenants get a new more-responsible landlord, and NYC is “paying” by essentially blessing the whole thing.
Knowing you, you’ll get uppity about the $13M in forfeited back taxes… but those were wiped in the bankruptcy, thus unrelated.
ToobyBoody
oh they're gonna respond, they are a bot
WholeWheatBunnyHugger
So, a win, win, win scenario?
https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1NzlobjRjcjF2cDRzNTVlbHh5aGd1YmE2b3B3NTNkbnVlOWs4M2Z5bCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/9W6X9HzEX73VbjR2WV/200w.webp
Tarmaccian
A few more, even… but yes.
Frankly it reminds me of old Chicago… a lot of back-scratching to remove the need for a lot of costs, and ultimately everyone involved shows everyone else “hey, I’m a team player!”
Maybe the bank gets preference on a city contract later, or maybe Mamdani buys them a round next Saturday… either way, there’s a lot of New Yorkers now in a better situation.
This is what politics should be.
rossonerinho
how bad are things in this country? one landlord had 5100 tenants who owed back rent.
wuapinmon
Many of them withheld their rents because of housing-code violations.
BenjyX55
Not as bad now that at least one politician is doing something.
OtisTDrunk
So 5100 Apartments X $700 Rent = $3,570,000 Per Month......
KingORedLions
that's a lotta chicken nuggets
LinemanMatt
Only $700/mo rent in NYC?!?!
JackBurtonOnThePorkChopExpress
Right? Triple that number and we'll start talking.
backrideup9
Starting to be too good to be true. What is he giving up in return?
KingMagenta
His mental health
BeaverOnFire
Guarantee that there's something going on in the background. My guess is that the city agreed not to prosecute for unsafe living conditions or something to that effect.
coolbeth
Source, dude. What is your guarantee based on? Don't be a pessimistic shill
BeaverOnFire
Did you not read what I wrote? I said "My guess". I base my speculation upon the fact that we live in a capitalistic society. A landlord is not going to give up that much rent, without some kind of motivation. The source of the motivation is the unknown. What is known is that the mayor is going after landlords who are slumlords. It is not an unreasonable hypothesis that a slumlord may want to avoid prosecution. A back room deal granting amnesty and exchange for waved back rent is reasonable.
coolbeth
Oh, so no source. You also said 'i guarantee' 🤷🏻
BeaverOnFire
Do you understand what politics are? If so, you know that there are conversations going on. Practically the definition. I can guarantee that something is going on. I can only speculate on what is however. I can also guarantee that I am now done feeding the troll.
SomeDetroitGuy
Agreeing not to put them out of business.
inboxmefoxes
Well, the landlords get to keep being landlords and not thrown into the ocean, so I think it's fair.
Sensiblyinteresting
Not taking all their buildings and giving them to the tenants.
maday1br
Which is a bigger sacrifice than it looks at first blush, all the more to your point. He's working within a system many regard as hopelessly broken. He's doing real good for people in real need, but he's not tearing the system down to start over. I'd argue that is beyond his power, but then again, I used to be one of the people who thought the system could be fixed.
TyrCarter
Misleading title. The old landlord went out of business and was known for providing shitty conditions and no maintenance (some people were even witholding rent for that reason), the new one agreed to ignore the debt as long as people keep up with rent.
Not a messiah moment, just good negotiation between a private business and the city office. If it will stick we will see cause as far as I know nothing's really in writing. Baffling that the conditions can be that bad, in the EU it's illegal
FlippedOut
I'm pretty sure it is illegal which is why they stop paying rent. From my understanding is that they are rent controlled so they try to get them to move out by making the living situation really bad, so they can put the price up. Also they don't want to invest money in them unless they can earn more money.
kaoticgirl
Honestly at this point, good negotiations between business & city counts as messiah moments. My city just hands the wins to the businesses at every opportunity, and I'm pretty sure that's not unique. Every day I thank all the little gods that the people fought back to defeat "Libertyland".
TyrCarter
Yeah I get it. The US is a stupid place
huffnpuff72
Why would any new owner be able to claim back rent in any situation?
Mimibuick
When you buy a company you buy its debts and assets. So the back rent would be an asset if its legally owed.
huffnpuff72
Fair enough, but residential property should not be included in the same category. If a previous landlord couldn't get the rent, it should be gone (perhaps with the tenants)
wuapinmon
I appreciate the sentiment, but it would lead to chaotic rental property markets.
TheDoctorCrankenstein
Then let it be chaotic. Fuck the economy if it requires the exploitation of the people to make it functional.
huffnpuff72
The rent arrears should be a burden on the tennant, not the property. However, there needs to be decent protection for tenants who have been withholding rent for valid reasons.
RevRagnarok
How about nobody should own 5000+ housing units?
YouRadicalizedMe
This
2Soon4Baboon
Federal housing.... just gonna leave this here
stryhf
From the article it's a company that slurped up 93 properties from at least 84 separate companies that went bankrupt. And one of the listed reasons for failed rent payments was due to the tenants being forced to lie in unsafe condition since their landlord was likely out of money.
ostensiblystupid
Which is pretty sad when you think about it. Private landlords have been all but relegated to the cryptic corners of Craigslist and Facebook marketplace wearing property management hats, and each one that goes belly up gets absorbed into another conglomerate that’s “too big to fail”.
Good that they forgave tenants for something that wasn’t on them to begin with. That should honestly be the bare minimum.
CallMeCourierSix
Incorrect. They were all owned by a single umbrella corporation, through dozens of subsidiaries. That umbrella corporation went bankrupt. They owe NYC millions in taxes. They also had over twelve THOUSAND housing violations they never correct, such as holes in walls, lack of hot water, collapsing ceilings, etc.
The deal Mamdani made is that the city forgives the taxes, and the new owner forgives back rent and fixes the broken stuff.
RyanSilver612
Seems like a bad deal on the fiscal side. Forgiving millions in exchange for thousands
CallMeCourierSix
Forgiving a few million in taxes, in exchange for the corp spending THIRTY million on repairs and renovations so people don't have to live in shitholes. AND the corp agreed not to force the collection of delinquent rent.
HOW THE FUCK IS THIS A BAD IDEA!? Thousands of people get homes that are actually livable, and the corp pays for it!
Camelspotting
I'm glad he's thinking of the tenants first but damn, still sounds like the company got off easy.
CallMeCourierSix
Not really. The repairs are about double what the previous owner owed in taxes, and they forgave several million in rent.
blisfulloblivion
Could argue still a good deal as those repairs still needed to happen, the forgiven rent itself is less than the taxes owed, and it could be used for PR/ build more favorable relations with current admin.
BishlamekGurpgork
Then they create 5000 holding companies and each one has one housing unit.
Don't ignore the good in the world just because it doesn't instantly enable luxury space communism.
BishlamekGurpgork
I'll close up by saying, though this is causing some confusion, I'll leave it up. I fucked up, and I'll take my internet lumps.
TheDoctorCrankenstein
Or we strip them of their ownership and distribute the housing to the people in need who will actually use the housing for its intended purpose: to be lived in.
The hoarding of community resources that are necessities to people's ability to live their life is not in any way shape or form "good".
Companies shouldn't own housing. Period.
BishlamekGurpgork
And you're absolutely correct that companies shouldn't own housing. I have zero disagreement with that. But when we get around to suggestions like "strip all property owners in the country of their property," it just feels like we're getting a little into fairy tale territory.
Like, there's a path there, but there are so many incremental steps on that path.
TheDoctorCrankenstein
Because that statement is a fairy tale simplification of what I actually said.
I never said "strip all property owners of their property". That removes all nuance of the point. I said strip the owners of *private property*, i.e. not *personal property*, in order to distribute those collective necessities in a manner that does not allow one single individual/entity to horde them and restrict access to those that need it.
BishlamekGurpgork
Look, I understand I haven't taken the care in my wording to place the bulls-eye accurately. Your earlier comment probably didn't deserve the pushback I gave it, either.
My only thought was that advancing America to the stage at which real estate can be taken from abusive landlords will be (speaking conservatively) a struggle, and it felt like the offhand comment was minimizing that.
So in a throwaway comment, I treated it too seriously. I suspect we agree about more than we disagree about.
figuringeights
What part of this beyond the fact that mamdani is effective is at all good? Where is there luxury space communism? Are we meant to believe this landlord is somehow good for doing what they should have legally done in the first place? How about let's not enable slumlords.
BishlamekGurpgork
One: An end to evil is a good thing. It doesn't cease to be positive just because it's a return to baseline, instead of enacting a new good.
Two: None of it is luxury space communism. You're replying to a post that says you can cheer for it, even if it's NOT luxury space communism. I'm not making that claim.
Three: Where did "the landlord is the good guy" come from? What the fuck? No.
BishlamekGurpgork
This was a throwaway comment that was only meant to say that there is a really long path to get to that point, that what's being described is going to take a lot of institutional change, and that we can still cheer for the little wins in the meantime.
I know, I should have taken more care. It doesn't read well.
BishlamekGurpgork
This is being read in a lot of ways, so, let me counter a few things that are cropping up. A) The landlord is not 'the good' I'm talking about, B) I like Zodami and what he's done here, C) I AM in favor of forbidding corporations from owning unoccupied housing
CardboardStomach
Other countries have solved this problem already and it's really as simple as requiring proof that the owner of the house actively lives at the property. It's not an overly complex loophole to correct, the US just doesn't see housing as a human right.
BishlamekGurpgork
I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying it needs more than "this is bad, it shouldn't happen."
CardboardStomach
And I pointed out that the "more" that you're referring to is basically just common sense, as indicated by the fact that several other countries all came to similar conclusions. So "this is bad, it shouldn't happen, and both the reason why and the means of fixing it are obvious"
BishlamekGurpgork
Okay. Then I understand that we agree and I am okay with that.
raitchison
And yet almost every day on Bluesky you see people on the far left attacking him for not going hard enough.
And they're not going "good work but you can do better" they are going "you've sold out and are a traitor to those who voted for you because you haven't yet solved this specific issue that's important to me"
TyrCarter
you will never satisfy the commies. They haven't dealt with the fact that their dreamed up system died 10 times over (with every country that had it). Mamdani is doing a good job for all I can see published, including the crying of the 'murica crowd. You have to strike a balance between private and public interest and he's doing quite well
justasuggesture
Yeah, that's how modern right wing propaganda works, they know they can't get leftists to vote for them so they try to split the vote as much as possible.
Poppypoppoppop
Trolls. Pos trolls.
werrywerry
For each "far-left" detractor you see 1000 supporters.
I guess some people really are never happy.
awkungen42
All this does is prove that bots are all over Bluesky, nowhere is safe from the rage baiting pieces of shit who want to keep us fighting eachother.
CallMeCourierSix
Those are bots being paid for by the Republikkkans and Putin. Block them.
colderfish
They're mostly bots that are literally designed to make liberals and progressives fight.
stryhf
Incrementalism works, but it requires consistent effort over time, and relentless attention. For some reason people have grown accustomed to thinking that winning an election means everything magically changes over night. Winning is only the start. It's a milestone, but it only means that NOW the work can start in earnest.
ostensiblystupid
Honestly that sounds about right. I would wager that the memory of Kamala Harris being criticized and losing millions of votes for not being hard enough on Israel is still painfully fresh in people’s minds.
What you’re talking about is tantamount to purism, which is a genuine issue that has yet to be adequately addressed.
Eldis
It's bots.
NinjablazerZero
Listen brother either you are lying or you need to get off the internet and unplug because you are getting fooled by bots.
Most people on Bluesky are not leftists, they are Blue Maga Liberals, and the vast majority of hate Mamdani is getting is from Liberals who are trying to defend establishment Dems, and psychos who do not even live in America.
Go outside, touch grass and talk to actual real human beings and you'll find that they aren't attacking Mamdani.
BJWTech
What's a bluesky?
raitchison
Like Twitter but with basically no Nazis.
slopwizard
It's an election year, check to see if the "far left" are holding their red hats behind their backs
zylokun
That's called retards. We don't care about those. They aren't part of the solution they're just virtue signaling.
Mamandi is doing an amazing job and real left leaning folks really like him. Frankly the only "liberals" we ever see attacking him are the liars or radical feminist craps
DarthVaderDidNothingWrong
The left has a tendency to fracture when in power. Because getting stuff done in power often means compromise, and people on the left enter politics because they care about issues and how to solve those. Ideologies drive the left.
The right wants power to be in power. Authority is the name of their game. That's why they unite to get, and keep, power.
No one on the right would have not voted for a right-wing Kamala just because of a policy position she held.
HotSauceNCereal
Im on Bluesky. I follow him. I don't follow many people. But I haven't seen these attacks from the far left. I assume bots.
TapiocaMartini
And...? Fuck'em if they can't see the good work he's doing and the progress he's made already there will be no pleasing them. So far Mamdani has done more good for that city than the last 3 mayors combined.
werrywerry
not to mention the supporters outnumber the detractors by about 1000:1
InfocalypseRising
I'd bet money that anyone accusing mamdani of "not being lefty enough" is a bot trying to make actual left-leaning folks look ridiculous
Ozimbah
Two different people on this post said he threw trans kids under the bus because *checks notes* he opened a hormone therapy clinic that serves trans adults - /gallery/uA7ir9e/comment/2502878395 They both linked the same blog post which declares Mamdani has abandoned everyone he hasn't managed to help yet in the 5 months he's been mayor.
khora
The only thing the left and the right can agree on is hating on the left.
Salticido
They agree on a lot more than that, but the pundits would have you think otherwise.
Magjee
I think you mean the right and far-left can agree on his hating libs?
MyGreatestFearBoner
Single voter issues are the fucking worst.
EstoyPoopis
Lol. The far left.
pareidoliaperson
There are of those for Bernie on imgur. "He's a good guy and all, but can't say I agree with all his policies".
Daliena06
Eh. I feel like Sanders doesn't go far enough sometimes, but those occasions are relatively rare. And he has had past stances that he's since thankfully changed that I disliked.
But THAT BEING SAID, he's still an OG and one of the few people in American politics I have respect for. Is he 100% perfect for my specific personal tastes, no, is he still absolutely amazing and I wish there were hundreds more like him, yes!
pareidoliaperson
This is not exactly about policies, really. It is about the troll-easque replies that diminish his character. But if it was about his policies it would still not make sense. You choose lesser evil, but not someone with whom you agree mostly but some of his policies clash with your expectations?
Daliena06
I mean.. I literally said that I think Sanders is amazing overall even if I don't absolutely 1000% agree with him on every single thing? /shrug
pareidoliaperson
/Rhetorical question*
MemeMaster42
The amount of red tape he has to cut through is Staggering
Fiacre54
The left should really stop being cunts to each other. That is why the republicans keep winning.
raitchison
I think many of the people I'm talking about actually want the MAGA republicans to keep winning, because they think that having the worst possible people in charge will lead to the collapse of Western civilization (it might) and that they will be able to build their communist utopia from the ashes (they won't)
Megadestructo
Personally I think reaching for the center / trying to make a bridge with the "reasonable Republicans" is what kills Democrats. The establishment says the "good thing" but still that's to get cash from their corporate owners.
DemSoc and Progressive policies are hugely popular because they benefit anyone not rich! If they truly embraced this, I think we'd be seeing a lot more success. Dinosaurs like Schumer are what make everyone lose.
Mohareb
It's how americans are brought up. Everything is about themself. If it doesn't help them specifically then it's unacceptable. American dream is all about what YOU can get
Athol
America's motto really should be "Fuck you, got mine!"
Leaps
Lol making some sweeping generalization about a nation of 350 million people like we are all the same. "how americans are brought up" seriously got a chuckle
Salticido
Someone's never heard of "culture" before
TheDoctorCrankenstein
Way too many Americans don't want to admit that "American culture" is fucking rotten.
Mirrormancer
Oh so likely just bots (and morons).
duhqueenmoki
I'm inclined to agree, but I'm also wary of dismissing people who don't align with my expectations. Since I'm a progressive democrat, and consider myself a reasonable person, I expect other left-leaning ppl to be the same. But there are A LOT who aren't. A lot. I see leftists leaning farther and farther to the left to the point where a lot of them will just never be happy and turn to hate instead. Sounds familiar. Starting to feel like the political spectrum is a circle. Not just bots and morons
FlipTheBirdBeforeTheBirdFlipsYou
The common clay of the New West
BenderRodriguz1010
Exactly that
ananfro
I read that as mormons, and eh. Still works
eppykaze
The overly vocal minority that have lost perspective after watching regressionist policies take weeks to tear things apart, forgetting that it can take months if not years to build up the progressive policies.
Eldis
They're bots, not real people. :3
Daliena06
Mamdani is speedrunning doing a lot of good in ways that make a lot of the old "these things take time.." calls to give them years and years to maybe get something done perhaps possibly look like they were just dragging their feet, but at the same time, ultimately, breaking things will always be faster than building them, sadly.
FlippedOut
The main issue is transparency, even if things do take ages, make a promise and document/advertise where that process is at and what blockers are in place stopping it. If all we see are promises and nothing happening we blame them for failing, if there is details about why it's taking so long then people will be less angry.
MisterFluffi
Yeah, even on a simplest level like an existing role firing someone to take away a services capabilities takes no time. Advertising, interviews, hiring, training and inducting takes months at least. If it's something that never existed before even more so. Especially when the left likes to do things properly more often, even though abusing the same loopholes would at least give incentive for the other side to close them and not make new ones.
Gobjin
Also local government makes the biggest impact and moves the fastest for visible changes for us peons
WholeWheatBunnyHugger
DONT BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU READ ON THE INTERNET.
If a far-left person is -attacking- a liberal, it's bearing false colors, not friendly fire.
TheDoctorCrankenstein
Mamdani is not a neoliberal. He is a democratic socialist. Completely different things.
Lefty's should be attacking liberals. They are not the left and only serve to co-opt and hinder the advancement of leftist policies in service of maintaining the capitalist economy.
raitchison
Bull fucking shit. "liberals" AKA classcal liberals are the center left.
There's no such thing as a "neoliberal" modern politics, aside from a handful of trolls who have adopted the label in recent years every single person who meets that archaic definition today calls themselves a conservative.
TheDoctorCrankenstein
"center-right". You don't know what you're talking about.
Modern neoliberals do exist. We call them "Democrats".
Lynkfox
In years passed I would have said it could be but I think everyone who is actually liberal is generally more intelligent than your average conservative... And we understand that even if it's not enough, it's better than fucking nothing and backwards progress that would happen otherwise... So bots yes
Magjee
It happens sometimes, but I think you are correct. It's bot activity or posters trying to stir division
GeneralAnubis
Neoliberals, on the other hand (corporatist democrats), are just conservatives, and will choose to side with the fascists before ever giving ground to Progressives, unfortunately.
raitchison
There's no such thing as a "neoliberal" in modern politics, other than a handful of trolls who have adopted the label in the past several years every single person who fits that archaic definition identifies as a conservative.
I'm sure that the polisci student who found that term in a dusty old text thought they were being clever when they started using it to attack the moderate left (classical liberals AKA "shitlibs")
GeneralAnubis
Yes, they're conservatives, but they're mostly in the Democrat party. The ones still left on the R side can be counted on one hand and are actively being attacked by every other R for not being loyal enough to the orange shitgibbon
raitchison
FYI There's no such thing as the "Democrat Party", borrowing (bullshit) terminology from conservatives doesn't sell your point.
Do be clear, NOBODY who meets the archaic definiton of a "neoliberal" is a Democrat, they are all either Republicans or Libertarians and call themselves a conservative.
A classical liberal, commonly known as a "liberal" is center-left. It's complete bullshit to conflate the two.
GeneralAnubis
To be clear, I'm a """far left""" progressive and I think Mamdani is showing everyone exactly how huge of an embarrassment the Democrat party at large has been since... at least 50 years... by constantly just getting shit done that actually has a real impact on real people. Imagine if that was the whole party nationwide.
Kodan00
He's been doing what others have been promising.