NEW YORK — City Council members fumed at the Mamdani administration’s absence from a hearing on the city’s rollout of the pied-à-terre tax on Tuesday, where City Hall was accused of putting a “scarlet letter” on homeowners facing the extra surcharge.

Kamillah Hanks, who represents the North Shore of Staten Island, called the Mamdani administration’s implementation of the tax “botched” and “completely unacceptable” as she pointed to the city’s publication of a massive tax roll related to the new fees.

The surcharge slaps an extra tax on 1-, 2- and 3-family non-owner-occupied homes assessed at $5 million or more and co-ops and condos valued at $1 million or more.

“How the administration published more than 900,000 names and addresses showed me that this is how the administration feels about homeowners in this great city. That this is something that we need to be ashamed of — a hit list of the haves and the have-nots, a scarlet letter,” Hanks said.

Finance Commissioner Richard Lee submitted a five-page written testimony instead of fielding questions, saying he “would have welcomed the opportunity to appear in person,” but couldn’t because of a lawsuit filed against the city over its handling of the tax.

The suit is expected to be resolved in an Aug. 31 hearing. Lee said the administration requested the hearing be put off until after that date, but the Council declined.

It’s common practice for the city to testify at Council hearings despite ongoing litigation.

“Whenever government implements a new law affecting thousands of property owners, questions inevitably arise,” Lee wrote. “Government should communicate clearly and effectively about new policies, and (the Department of Finance) is committed to doing that, not just with respect to this law, but across all aspects of DOF’s work.”

The pied-à-terre tax is expected to raise about $500 million for the city’s coffers, officials said.

Three homeowners filed the lawsuit against the city earlier this month, taking issue with its publication of a huge tax roll that listed nearly 1 million properties and noted that all of the properties on the list could be subject to the tax.

The city sent letters to around 17,000 individuals who’d been identified as second-homeowners subject to the surcharge. Homeowners have until Sept. 18 to apply for an exemption from the tax by claiming they, a family member, or a tenant lives in the home.

Staten Island Councilmember Frank Morano’s wife and father-in-law were two of the original three plaintiffs in that lawsuit. Also on Tuesday, four new plaintiffs joined: Ken Fishel, a real estate executive, Sandra Jacobus Shore, a real estate attorney, her husband, Stephen Shore, and Carla Stearns, a real estate agent,

“Litigation is not a hall pass from legislative oversight,” Morano said about Lee’s absence at the hearing. “The more New Yorkers and the more this council learned about this whole process, the more clear it was how rotten it was, how bungled it was, and the more questions we had.”

Just over 5,000 people have filed exemption applications so far, according to City Hall. About 2,300 of those have been approved.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani, a democratic socialist, campaigned on a “tax the rich” platform of raising income and corporate tax rates. Those proposals have met resistance from more moderate lawmakers like Gov. Kathy Hochul and Council Speaker Julie Menin. But this property tax surcharge on second homes, which was intended to be a more targeted measure for those who don’t claim the city as their home but own expensive property here, was largely celebrated by local lawmakers, including Menin, when Hochul passed it in this year’s state budget.

Despite that, wealthy opponents of the tax have been vociferous, and the Mamdani administration’s rollout of it has been highly scrutinized.

Charles Diamond, a former special counsel for the mayor’s office, called the Mamdani administration’s absence at the hearing “utterly, utterly bizarre,” adding that he himself has testified before the Council on behalf of the Adams administration while facing litigation on the topic at hand.

“I don’t even own a home, but I’m so disturbed by this process that I felt the need to kind of point out what I saw and to really thank the council for refusing to abridge its responsibilities during a time like this,” Diamond said.

Ana Champeny, vice president of the Citizens Budget Commission, called the city’s implementation of the tax “rocky” and voiced concern about the tax’s abbreviated timeline in which it was passed into law by the state and then rolled out.

“Insufficient vetting of the legislation, a compressed rollout timeline, and inadequate communication all contributed to confusion about who is liable and how much information would be public. Both the City and State can learn from the program’s early stumbles,” she said before the Council.

Ahead of the hearing, two modest rallies played out in front of City Hall: One a smattering of brokers holding signs that read “Dox You Very Much” on the steps, organized by the New York Residential Agent Continuum, and another by members of the Democratic Socialists of America and the New York Working Families Party who chanted “Tax the rich!”

Matt Rauschenbach, a spokesperson for the mayor, said in a statement that because the hearing was “explicitly focused” on the topic of the lawsuit and that the action was brought by Morano’s family, “the Administration did not believe that it would be prudent and in the legal interest of the City to appear in person.”

_____

©2026 New York Daily News. Visit nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.