Can Mamdani Pay For It? A Numbers-First Reality Check on the Mayoral Candidate’s Agenda

Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral platform rests on a compact set of major commitments: a rent freeze; a 200,000-unit public housing build; universal childcare; free buses; the creation of a Department of Community Safety to expand non-policing responses; and higher taxes on the city’s wealthiest households and corporations to fund the entire package. Each promise sounds simple in campaign language. The arithmetic of city budgets, construction markets, and transit operations makes them far more complex.The president of the Citizens Budget Commission in New York, Andrew Rein, tells the New York Sun that any serious discussion of the candidate’s program must begin with its scope.“We’re talking about billions of dollars before any expansion. New York City and New York State don’t actually control all of that structure,” he said. “If you want to make progress on affordability — whether housing, rent, childcare, and related issues — you need a meaningful long-term strategy.”Housing: The Cost Uncertainty of “$100 Billion”Mr. Mamdani has pledged to deliver 200,000 permanently affordable, union-built homes over a 10-year period, alongside a rent freeze. The campaign estimates the cost of the housing program at approximately $100 billion. To determine whether that is realistic requires looking at per-unit costs.Recent projects demonstrate the cost of building affordable housing in New York. A 2023 East New York development backed by Goldman Sachs delivered 385 apartments at a total cost of $270 million, or approximately $700,000 per unit, once land and commercial space were factored in. Broader data shows a range: Some lower-density or outer-borough projects run closer to $180,000 per unit, while dense, centrally located projects can exceed $700,000.Based on those figures, constructing Mr. Mamdani’s 200,000 units would cost between nearly $40 billion at the low end and $140 billion at the high end. To remain within the candidate’s $100 billion budget, the city would have to hold the per-unit cost to an average of $500,000 over a decade.Achieving that would require consistent land acquisition strategies, procurement reform, effective union negotiations, and state or federal subsidies to supplement city dollars. Otherwise, the program could substantially overshoot the $100 billion mark.One source with close ties to New York politics, who requested their name not be used for professional reasons, points to regulatory hurdles as the “single biggest thing that went wrong” with housing in New York.“Our regulatory system is one of the most intensive in the country. We need to reform that if we’re serious about affordability,” the insider tells the Sun.A Manhattan Institute senior fellow, Allison Schrager, is skeptical that Mr. Mamdani could overcome those entrenched costs and processes.“No other blue city has been effective at building housing cheaply,” she tells the Sun. “And he doesn’t have executive experience that would suggest he could cut through red tape and special interests.”Universal Childcare: Scale and Fiscal BurdenMr. Mamdani’s platform also calls for universal childcare. The New York City Comptroller reports the average annual cost of center-based infant care in the city is $26,000 while family-based care averages $18,200. Those sums reflect increases of 43 percent and 79 percent respectively, since 2019. By affordability standards, a family would need to earn more than $330,000 per year on average to afford such care without exceeding 7 percent of their income.The city has already expanded subsidies in recent budgets. The Fiscal Year 2026 plan includes $423.4 million for childcare vouchers, supplemented by $350 million in state funds, with an additional $10 million to expand infant-toddler slots. These, however, are partial measures. To achieve universal coverage, New York would need to provide care for more than 100,000 children under the age of 3. At subsidy rates of about $7,500 per year per child, the annual cost could exceed $800 million, and potentially run much higher if extended to older children or full-day services.Mr. Rein warned that universal childcare at the city level is “really a federal-level challenge” requiring “enormous resources.”“Delivering it fully is very difficult without state and federal partnership,” he said. Recurring Operating Pressures: Free Buses and Community SafetyOther planks of Mr. Mamdani’s agenda also carry significant annual operating costs. Eliminating bus fares would remove a primary revenue source for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. In 2024, fare and toll evasion alone cost the MTA approximately $1 billion, with $568 million attributed to unpaid bus fares. Scrapping fares entirely would convert that revenue hole into a policy issue, requiring new subsidies or city transfers to maintain service.“If the argument for free buses is that currently people ride without buying a ticket, that is the wrong solution,” an economist and CEO of the Empire Center for Public Policy, Zilvinas Silenas, tells the Sun. “It is tantamount to saying that a solution for shoplifting is making goods free. Fare avoidance can and should be solved with enforcement and technology, not capitulating to those who don’t feel like paying.” He added that if affordability is the concern, targeted subsidies to welfare recipients could provide limited free rides without destabilizing the system.Ms. Schrager also expressed doubts.“I don’t see how he pulls that off. A lot of people don’t pay for the bus now anyway. The MTA is always on the verge of running out of money,” she said. “I can’t imagine this helps.”Ms. Schrager also warned that free buses could “attract more homeless or mentally disturbed people, which would drive away the few riders who are willing to pay.”Some of Mr. Mamdani’s other proposals tap into a broader debate over whether New York should continue pouring resources into traditional policing or experiment with shifting some of those responsibilities to social services.Mr. Mamdani has expressed plans to overhaul security mechanisms across the five boroughs by creating a new Department of Community Safety. The agency would deploy social workers, crisis responders, and “Transit Ambassadors” to respond in place of police to non-violent calls; expand gun-violence prevention; and boost funding for hate-violence programs by 800 percent. While his campaign frames this as a public health approach to safety, analysts warn that building a new city agency of this scope would incur recurring annual costs in the billions, far exceeding the pilot-level programs New York has funded to date. Ms. Schrager cautioned that Mr. Mamdani’s ambivalence toward policing could “make the city less safe,” discouraging tourism and hurting the economy.The political insider, however, said there may be opportunities to reassign roles within the NYPD to save costs while broadening the definition of safety.“Police presence definitely helps reduce crime, but we as New Yorkers also need to think broadly about what public safety means, across different departments,” said the source. Government Grocery StoresMr. Mamdani has also proposed a network of city-owned grocery stores to combat so-called “food deserts.” His campaign argues these would make sure that “healthy food is available and affordable in every neighborhood,” subsidized through public funding.Critics say the math doesn’t add up. In August, the American Enterprise Institute described Mr. Mamdani’s plan as resting on “an accounting error,” warning that government-run grocery operations would require constant subsidies to cover labor, rent, and spoilage. Mr. Silenas was even more blunt, stressing that the “entire idea is driven by the ideology of government taking over business, not solving any real problem.”“There are two ways in which the NYC government-run grocery could provide goods at lower prices. First, recall that even with government-owned stores, you must pay suppliers and workers, so the only way the stores could offer lower prices is by being better at retail business than the current grocery stores, which I find hard to believe,” he continued. “Second, if the entire plan rests on the assumption that these stores will operate out of government buildings, will not have to pay rent or property taxes, then this is a blatant case of government giving preferential treatment to their companies.”“If anything,” Mr. Silenas surmised, “it will make life for small businesses in NYC even more difficult.”“This is not economic justice, it is a government takeover,” he added. “If Mamdani wanted to lease out empty government buildings or lower property taxes to all stores, that would be a step in the right direction.”Financing via a Millionaire Surcharge: Potential and RisksTo pay for housing and other priorities, Mr. Mamdani proposes a 2 percent surcharge on income above $1 million. Proponents argue such a levy could yield $5 to $15 billion annually, with $10 billion as the common midpoint. Over a decade, that scale of revenue could match the $100 billion housing bill.But the revenue is far from guaranteed.“New York is very dependent on a small number of large taxpayers — maybe 200 or so. The odds that even a couple of them leave could undermine the plan,” Ms. Schrager said.He pointed out that New York City cannot unilaterally impose such a surcharge without approval from the state legislature. Albany’s approval is far from certain, he added, noting that Governor Kathy Hochul has expressed reluctance to embrace new surcharges.Mr. Rein also raises concerns.“New York City already has very high taxes. We collect more per capita in personal income tax than any other state,” he explained. “We have the highest marginal personal income tax in the country. There’s concern about the impact.”Higher rates have already prompted investment to slow and some wealthy residents to leave.IRS migration data show New York lost roughly 100,000 residents and $13.8 billion in adjusted gross income from 2018 to 2022, shrinking the tax base that Mr. Mamdani’s plan depends on. “If you add revenue, you need to make sure schools, housing, and services actually see improvements,” Mr. Rein emphasized. If new collections reach only $5 billion annually, the city would raise just half of the housing plan’s cost, forcing tough choices: borrow more; cut services; or seek federal aid.Borrowing would increase the city’s $95 billion debt, while cuts could affect schools, sanitation, policing, or housing, and federal support is neither predictable nor guaranteed. Without full funding, painful trade-offs could undermine the very services the plan promises to deliver.Debt Constraints and Fiscal RealityMr. Mamdani’s proposals must also be considered in light of New York City’s existing debt load. As of Fiscal Year 2025, the city’s outstanding debt was projected to be $94.9 billion, with annual debt service costs of $8.8 billion, accounting for nearly 11 percent of total spending. Debt service is projected to grow as borrowing for capital projects continues. Credit rating agencies, while currently rating New York strongly, have consistently flagged rising debt service as a vulnerability.“Suppose we have a financial crisis — not caused by him, just a normal recession. We’re very dependent on the financial sector, whether he likes it or not,” Ms. Schrager said. “If revenues go down and he raises taxes, that drives people out. At the same time, pension funds would be hit. That could create a real fiscal crisis.”New large-scale capital commitments — such as a $100 billion housing program — would almost certainly require additional borrowing unless fully funded by new revenues. That, in turn, could significantly increase debt service costs, potentially crowding out other priorities in future budgets. Universal childcare and fare-free buses, meanwhile, add recurring operating expenses that cannot be financed with bonds and must be supported by ongoing revenue streams.The Gaps in the NumbersMr. Mamdani’s platform would commit tens of billions to housing, billions more for childcare, fare-free buses, and community safety programs. While a millionaire surcharge could generate revenue, Albany’s approval cannot be relied upon, and the existing debt limits borrowing flexibility. Mr. Mamdani’s agenda will depend on political negotiations, construction efficiencies, and the city’s tolerance for debt. The scale of his program is clear, but whether it can be sustained within New York’s fiscal reality is uncertain. “There must be accountability and cost-benefit analysis, because it is taxpayers who are paying for all that,” Mr. Silenas added.

Can Mamdani Pay For It? A Numbers-First Reality Check on the Mayoral Candidate’s Agenda

More from the New York Sun

Hamas, Defying Trump, Eyes Keeping Control of Gaza

New York GOP Seeks To Flip Suozzi’s Seat With Same Candidate They Fielded In 2024

Would-Be Trump Assassin Sentenced to Life in Prison

More from the New York Sun

Hamas, Defying Trump, Eyes Keeping Control of Gaza

New York GOP Seeks To Flip Suozzi’s Seat With Same Candidate They Fielded In 2024

Would-Be Trump Assassin Sentenced to Life in Prison

Supreme Court Allows California To Use New Congressional Maps Likely Netting Democrats Five Seats in Coming Midterms

Starmer Says He ‘Regrets’ Appointing Peter Mandelson After Latest Epstein Files Disclosures

Defense Minister Warns Israel Will ‘Dismantle’ Hamas After Gaza Attack Severely Wounds IDF Soldier

‘You Are Standing With Our Jailers’: Iranian Dissident Blasts Mamdani’s Hijab Day Post

Georgia Lawmakers Advance Bill That Would Jail Librarians Who Allow LGBTQ-Themed Books in Children’s Sections