Mamdani's tax office says the data was always public, and sent a memo instead of a witness

Mayor Zohran Mamdani's office declined to appear in person at a City Council hearing on the rollout of the pied-a-terre surcharge, submitting written testimony from Department of Finance Commissioner Richard Lee instead ^[1]. Homeowners did show up to testify ^[16], which is the shape of the problem: the administration's defense is a document, and the grievance is a room full of people.

The substance of that defense is narrow and probably correct. Lee wrote that the property information the city released is "highly accessible to the public, and it has been for many years. Any suggestion to the contrary is incorrect" ^[2]. He also wrote that the supplemental roll "does not establish which properties are subject to the surcharge" and exists to give owners "a basis for property owners to challenge the value of their properties" ^[7]. Both statements can be true while the rollout still lands badly.

What happened is that in late July the Department of Finance mailed letters to 17,000 addresses it identified as potential pied-a-terres using property values and internal records, and published a list of more than 900,000 properties and their valuations ^[5][6]. That means the letters went to roughly 1.9 percent of the published file ^[1], so the overwhelming majority of people who found their home in a citywide valuation dump had no notice explaining why. Some New Yorkers said on social media that they received a letter for their primary residence; others said their privacy was violated ^[9]. Council Member Gale Brewer, who represents the Upper West Side, said her office has been "bombarded" by constituents, and that she and colleagues compiled "pages and pages" of questions for the Mayor's Office ^[10].

The deadline is what converts confusion into money. Owners have until September 18, already extended, to demonstrate their property does not qualify before the surcharge appears on bills in 2027 ^[8]. The levy, passed in May, applies a progressive rate to non-primary homes the department values at $5 million or more, and to condos and co-ops at $1 million or more ^[14]. Deputy Press Secretary Matt Rauschenbach put the expected revenue at $500 million a year and said the Law Department "is prepared to vigorously defend the city" against the pending suit ^[15]. The city says it hired two dozen staffers to field questions and help with appeals ^[13], which works out to about 708 letter recipients per staffer before counting anyone else who called ^[2].

Three residents in Manhattan and Staten Island are suing, seeking emergency relief and alleging in court filings that the records release "caused mass confusion" and "facilitated, invited, and amplified unwanted scrutiny of homeowners' personal information," with a court date set for August 31 ^[11]. Their attorney, Randy Mastro, said hundreds of thousands of homeowners were "subjected to a process they never should have been a part of in the first place" ^[12]. Lee said the active litigation is why he submitted only written material, and that he will testify once the suit is resolved ^[3]. He also said the administration asked the Council to postpone the hearing and the Council declined ^[4].

Watch the August 31 hearing, which falls 18 days before the appeal deadline ^[3], and watch whether September 18 slips again. A second extension would concede that the notice process, not the data, was the failure.