New York City officials have a new way of talking about landlords. New York’s “Rental Ripoff” report, released by the Mamdani administration, divides property owners into two categories: “high road” landlords and “low road” landlords. The classification system appears on page 43 of the report, tucked inside a box explaining how officials plan to discuss the issue going forward.
Before the report, officials had referred to “bad” or “negligent” landlords and “preservation purchasers.” The new terminology replaces that language with a simpler split, though it remains to be seen how consistently the labels will be applied across municipal housing agencies.
High-road landlords, according to municipal officials, meet regularly with their tenants. They work with officials and lenders to make sure buildings are maintained and that “modest returns are stable.” Officials present this group as cooperative and focused on long-term stability.
Low-road landlords are described differently. They “speculate on critical housing infrastructure using high risk, high reward practices that rely on evictions, disinvestment, or political games to make a profit from housing rather than ensuring long-term stability,” the document states.
Mayor Zohran Mamdani offered his own former Queens landlord as an example of a high-road landlord. That landlord gave him a preferential rent of $2,300 for a one-bedroom apartment. The landlord later renovated and raised the rent to a new legal limit with the next tenant, according to the outlet.
Related: David Zaslav bids $68M for Camp Mohawk
Nonprofit landlords and community land trusts, including those the municipal government is working with on a new East Village development, are also expected to fit the high-road category.
The administration has publicly targeted several landlords that it considers low-road. Those include Pinnacle Group, Fordham Fulton Realty and A&E Real Estate. The administration plans to intensify “organizing, enforcement, and litigation strategies” aimed at these owners.
At least 10 portfolios will be targeted for transfer to high-road landlords, through roof-to-cellar inspections, tenant organizing and court action. The administration’s approach leans heavily on enforcement rather than incentives. Officials have not said how additional targets will be identified beyond the initial list of named landlords.
The distinction between high-road and low-road landlords gives tenants a clearer framework for understanding who owns their building.
But it also puts pressure on property owners to prove they belong in the first category, or risk becoming a target. The definitions are broad enough that many landlords may not know which side of the line they fall on until municipal authorities decide for them.
Most landlords and lobbyists acknowledge there are bad actors in real estate. But concern from landlord groups centers on how wide a net the administration will cast around so-called low-road landlords. Property owners who haven’t acted poorly but aren’t part of the mayor’s circle could still face consequences, some worry.
Related: NY sues Southampton mansion owner over construction accident
The Real Estate Board of New York pointed to data showing that only 10 percent of multifamily buildings are responsible for 80 percent of evictions. That suggests a smaller group of problem properties rather than a widespread issue.
Another worry from real estate is that landlords who can’t afford to maintain their buildings will get fines instead of help. The New York Apartment Association issued a statement addressing this concern. “The report documents real distress in the housing stock,” the group said. “That distress has a cause. Buildings cannot be maintained on frozen revenue.”
The group echoed that phrase, and the association’s point about frozen revenue highlights a tension at the core of the administration’s approach: how to hold landlords accountable without pushing those who are already struggling further into financial trouble.
The same report also proposes “legally recognizing” tenant unions.
It is not clear how that would work or what it would look like in practice. Officials have not yet released details on that proposal, and the question of how tenant unions would interact with the new landlord categories remains unanswered.