We just lived through one of the most emotional mayoral elections I have ever seen in all my years in New York—and it ended with a historic first. A 34-year-old democratic socialist has been elected the 111th Mayor of New York City. The impact, at least judging from the news cycle, stretched far beyond our city. I experienced this firsthand through the two dozen or so texts, calls, and emails I received from real estate colleagues across the nation asking everything from “Are you ok?” to the more rational “What do you think this means for New York?” To which I answer: I don’t know—yet.
Why did this race feel so intense? Because it bundled several big debates at once: post-pandemic recovery, public safety, the stubborn housing shortage, wage pressure, and the future of NYC real estate. A platform promising rent freezes, universal childcare, free buses, and higher taxes on the wealthy resonated with many voters. One of his signature tax proposals is a 2% increase on those earning more than $1 million per year, along with higher corporate tax rates.
So, what can Mamdani actually do? The mayor runs the city and its agencies, while the City Council legislates locally (laws, budgets, and land-use proposals). Independent boards and commissions—such as the Rent Guidelines Board—handle regulatory work under state and local law. Albany controls the big guardrails: rent laws, taxes, and many real estate incentives. The most successful outcomes require all three to be pulling in the same direction.
Make no mistake, the NYC mayor has tremendous power—supervising a staff of over 300,000 people and a budget exceeding $120 billion, with a GDP of $1.3 trillion (larger than some countries). Mamdani will be responsible for preparing, proposing, and implementing New York City’s various budgets and financial plans, but those cannot include tax increases without approval from the state legislature in Albany. In other words, the mayor cannot unilaterally raise taxes without Governor Hochul’s support (and she’s up for reelection next year… hmm).
If Mamdani gets his way with tax increases—and that’s a big “if,” since it cannot be done unilaterally—the fear is that people and companies will flee New York. That might be true for the most mobile New Yorkers, but for those required to be here for work, it seems unlikely to me. Chances are that someone relocating for similar employment elsewhere wouldn’t be earning over $1 million annually anyway. Most people won’t be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. And for corporations that want to attract the best talent, New York will remain the center of the universe—where young, smart, creative, and ambitious people want to be. Incidentally, nonresidents of New York City are generally not liable for NYC personal income tax. Many wealthy “New Yorkers” and billionaires maintain multiple residences, facilitating their nonresident tax status (a topic for another day!).
Free buses? The mayor supports this because he believes it will help low-income New Yorkers (hard to disagree with that) and speed up service by eliminating the need to stop and scan to pay—though some studies have refuted that claim. The mayor will need MTA support, since the agency controls fare policy and operates at the state level. Eliminating fare revenue means that money must come from elsewhere, and the MTA is hardly flush with cash. More riders also mean more buses, drivers, and maintenance—all of which require more funding.
Now to my favorite topic: real estate. Mamdani has promised to freeze rents on rent-stabilized apartments during his term (and only those, since he cannot impose the same on free-market rentals). He does, in fact, have the sole power to appoint all nine members of the Rent Guidelines Board, which sets adjustments for rent-stabilized apartments. However, those board members are legally obligated to review the law and the economic realities that landlords currently face—which should influence their votes. We shall see.
There is one thing I think (and hope) we can all agree on, regardless of who we voted for: we have a housing shortage in New York (and elsewhere). Mamdani is proposing 200,000 new permanently affordable units over the next 10 years. These would be union-built, publicly subsidized, and rent-stabilized. Projects would be fast-tracked for approvals and funded by $70 billion in municipal bond debt—along with tax increases. The upside, if achieved, would address NYC’s housing crisis for many low- and moderate-income households. However, borrowing $70 billion (on top of existing debt) represents a massive increase in city obligations. State approval may be required if this exceeds statutory limits—and there are many other practical challenges as well.
Regardless of what Mamdani can achieve, the election is now behind us, and it’s worth remembering that New Yorkers have always been strong-minded, opinionated, and incredibly resilient. Although Mamdani’s agenda has sparked passionate debate, I don’t believe it will cause the mass exodus the press warns about. New Yorkers are far too rooted, resourceful, and diverse for that. Unlike the pandemic, which affected every single one of us, roughly half of voting New Yorkers supported Mamdani. What unites us is our collective investment in the future of this city we call home. The strength of true New Yorkers has always been—and will always be—our ability to argue, adapt, and ultimately move forward, together.