Mamdani revs up his socialist property grabs — thanks to gutless Julie Menin

 As early as Wednesday, Mayor Zohran Mamdani plans to sign a bill banning Central Park’s beloved horse carriages — and he’ll probably be smiling as he makes it law.

That’s not just because Mamdani is always smiling. 

He’s got reason to be happy: He’ll be doing his latest lap of running circles around this City Council and its leader, Speaker Julie Menin.  

Mamdani is mayor in part because he’s really good at politics, something many opponents still don’t grasp; they see him as a lucky rookie who’s going to screw up soon.  

No: He’s more politically ruthless than Andrew Cuomo, and more strategically populist than Donald Trump.  

The horse idiocy is the latest example. 

As a candidate, Mamdani theoretically favored banning the horses, per his reply to a questionnaire prepared by anti-carriage advocates.  

But he never ran on it — for a canny political reason: Only a small but intensely rabid and well-funded advocacy group cares about it.

That group, NYCLASS, had only one employee and 200 volunteers as of 2024. 

But its power is leverage in low-turnout races.  

Local pols don’t forget the vicious campaign NYCLASS ran in 2013 against mayoral frontrunner Christine Quinn, then the City Council speaker.  

Quinn, to her credit, stuck up for the carriage trade’s 200 jobs in her district — because she could see, as any normal person can, that the horses are treated well. 

Sticking to her principles contributed to her loss against ardent ban supporter Bill de Blasio. 

Ever since, New York’s hapless business-as-usual pols have played a game: Every mayor and council tries to ban the carriages, but nobody actually does it.  

Menin seems not to have gotten the memo that you’re not supposed to take this seriously. 

So, after a once-in-less-than-a-century freak fatality this June, Menin backed the ban —before listening to testimony.

Her support built a veto-proof majority allowing the bill to sail through the council last month.  

The lopsided 40-to-7 vote took all pressure off Mamdani; what he does won’t matter.  

So he can sign the bill, genially keeping the anti-horse people off his back for nearly two years, until the law takes effect.  

Even then, he can keep his options open, pleasing whichever side he deems more politically useful.

If the “workforce transition” plan for the industry doesn’t work, he can just delay enforcement — after all, Gotham is a city that doesn’t enforce much of anything.  

And as a citywide official who can attract high turnout to his own re-election race, he’s not as beholden to these fanatics as council members are. 

What Mamdani does do in signing the bill is make clear that it’s the council, not he, that’s sacrificed its principles. 

Menin and other moderate Democrats are supposed to champion small businesses and middle-class jobs — not this mayor.

If they don’t care, why should he? 

Not coincidentally, Mamdani will sign another bill soon — this one weakening the property rights of landlords, by giving nonprofit groups the right to bid first or bid best when some struggling buildings go up for sale.

Unlike the horse carriages, this issue is important to Mamdani’s base, and the council delivered.  

As it’s done for this mayor time and again.

Pick an issue, almost any issue: Before this June’s budget, the mayor and the council had a deal to add 580 police officers to the streets.

At the last minute, Mamdani reneged — but Menin went through with the budget anyway. 

E-bikes: When Mamdani announced in March that he’d stop criminal enforcement of the rules of the road for e-cyclists, Menin could have put pressure on him to control these menaces under existing laws.  

Instead she caved, merely holding a day-long hearing at which most council members couldn’t be bothered to listen to the victims of e-bike crashes.  

Again, if public safety and quality of life aren’t important to the City Council’s moderates, why should Mamdani care?  

Any City Council speaker faces a built-in disadvantage against any mayor. 

NYC has room for only one attention-consuming local official (quick, what’s the city comptroller done lately?), and Mamdani will inevitably be the pol who gets the ink, the streaming views and the clicks.  

Menin can’t command broad attention — but to the extent she does, she’s just reminding people why they’re fed up with business-as-usual pols like her.

Out of all this city’s problems, your only headline first-year accomplishment is . . . banishing horses?

All she’s really doing is making Mamdani look like the adult in the room — quite a feat. 

If you’re starting to worry that you face seven more years of Zohran rather than just three, don’t blame him.

Blame the people in office who are supposed to, er, steady the reins.  

Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal and a 2026 fellow at the CCNY Moynihan Center.

https://nypost.com/2026/11/03/opinion/mamdani-revs-up-socialist-property-grabs-thanks-to-gutless-julie-menin/

Oops: Mamdani’s rent freeze is choking NYC’s affordable housing

 From the “totally predictable consequences” department comes news that Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s rent freeze is drying up financing for distressed rent-regulated properties, including nonprofit providers.

The result? Less maintenance, more foreclosures and higher market-rate rents: Socialism delivers its usual disasters, in other words.

Lenders, from local community-development nonprofits all the way up to federally chartered mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are toughening lending standards for rent-regulated buildings because the rent freeze just choked their expected income.

That is: Lenders expect to get their money back, with interest — these borrowers will now have less revenue coming to make payments.

News site The City Reporter just discovered that the rent freeze has made it impossible for landlords to get financing, unless the building has a significant number of market-rate units on top of its rent-regulated ones (in which case, market-rate renters pay extra to subsidize the cost of their rent-regulated neighbors).

With no market-rate tenants to eat the rising costs of labor, energy, taxes, insurance and materials, plus higher interest rates, owners of 100% rent-regulated buildings are out of luck.

Socialist housing advocates like Democratic Socialists of America co-chair Gustavo Gordillo laugh, smarmily encouraging struggling landlords to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” and smirking that the Constitution doesn’t guarantee them “double digit” returns on their investments.

Of course, the socialists want private landlords to give up so their buildings can be turned over to politically connected nonprofits who’ll take over city housing.

Mamdani housing guru Cea Weaver’s New York State Tenant Bloc said it explicitly in July: “If landlords can’t maintain their buildings, tenants will.

“The Mayor’s Housing Plan directs $2.2 billion to taking housing off their hands. Tenants are organizing to defend our communities and reclaim our homes.”

One big problem: The nonprofits still need financing to maintain these buildings — which don’t generate enough rent to pay for their constantly rising costs, and therefore also can’t get loans.

The socialists can’t even blame greedy capitalists, since not-for-profit lenders are tightening standards, too.

This mess was totally predictable, and was widely predicted, in these pages and elsewhere.

Mamdani and his socialist-dreamer team went ahead anyway; maybe they really believe they can rewrite the laws of economics and human psychology at will.

Or maybe they figure that, whenever socialism fails, they can just insist that the answer is more socialism.

https://nypost.com/2026/11/03/opinion/oops-mamdanis-rent-freeze-is-choking-nycs-affordable-housing/

Berkeley Voters To Decide Whether To Initiate Public Bank With New Parcel Tax

 by Lear Zhou via The Epoch Times,

Voters in Berkeley, California, will decide in the coming election whether to start a public bank using a new parcel tax as seed money in order to create long-term investments in affordable housing, green energy, and small businesses.

Public banking is on the ballot in Berkeley! Measure Z would fund Public Bank East Bay through a six-year parcel tax, projected to raise $9M+ in its first year, the largest single investment in a regional bank. https://t.co/3mpr0FiSLk

— CA Public Banking Alliance (@capublicbanking) August 26, 2026

The public bank, as a nonprofit corporation engaging in commercial or industrial banking business, would be "wholly owned by a local agency, local agencies, or a joint powers authority" of local agencies, according to the measure text.

"While big corporate banks invest our public tax dollars outside of our community, a public bank can recirculate our money in our community to fund projects and build a stronger, more resilient, local community aligned to our values," Measure Z states.

The proposed parcel tax would last six years and would be $0.06 per square foot of residential improvements and $0.09 per square foot of other properties' improvements, with potential annual increases.

"All funds received from the tax are subject to the review, allocation, and approval by the City Council," the measure states.

The Berkeley city attorney estimated the parcel tax would raise over $58 million in six years. It would start on Jan. 1, 2027.

"Unlike a private bank, Berkeley is an owner. The community holds seats on the bank's board, reviews its books, and has direct input into what it funds," Coalition to Keep Berkeley Money Local stated on its website. "And when the bank turns a profit, that money comes back to Berkeley - not to Wall Street shareholders."

A board that includes elected officials, financial professionals, and community members would set policy and lending priorities, and daily operations would be run by professional bankers, according to the coalition.

Opponents worry that the money would be lent not only to Berkeley but to the whole East Bay.

"It's not a Berkeley bank. It's Berkeley money for a regional institution," StopMeasureZ.com states.

Originally, supporters of the public bank envisioned it as a regional bank with multiple jurisdictions sharing the costs and benefits, according to a report by Within Our Means Berkeley. Measure Z is a departure from that idea and asks Berkeley alone to fund the regional bank, according to the report.

"By concentrating the initial capitalization burden on Berkeley while allowing the bank to serve the broader East Bay, the measure creates a 'free-rider incentive structure' that undermines cost sharing and proportional benefits - the historic policy objective," the report states.

A public bank must obtain a certificate from the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, and it must get Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance.

If the planned bank does not get the required authorization by June 30, 2033, the collected funds may be used to offer loans for the same purposes, such as green energy and affordable housing, according to the Measure Z text.

The city manager would submit annual progress reports, including funds collected and spent, to the city council for review; and the city auditor would independently audit the progress at least once every three years, according to the measure.

Meanwhile, StopMeasureZ.com states that, "If [the public bank] never opens, the City keeps the money and 'may' lend it out - a job the Housing Trust Fund already does."

The measure needs a majority vote to pass.

Since 2020, California has allowed local agencies to establish public banks. Only up to 2 public banks can be authorized by the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation per year, and no more than 10 can be established in total in California.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/berkeley-voters-decide-whether-initiate-public-bank-new-parcel-tax

NC homeowners fear being forced out as HOA fees skyrocket

 Homeowners in a North Carolina neighborhood say they could be forced out of their homes after their homeowners association doubled monthly fees to a staggering $2,500 — just months after residents were hit with another massive increase.

The latest hike in Magnolia Cove, a community in Sherrills Ford, means residents will now have to shell out $30,000 a year in HOA dues alone, on top of their mortgages, property taxes and other expenses.

The association voted Monday to raise monthly fees from $1,250 to $2,500, after initially proposing an eye-watering $7,500 monthly charge, according to local outlet WSOC-TV.

4

Homeowners in Magnolia Cove face soaring HOA fees that have reached $2,500 a month.trekandphoto – stock.adobe.com

For some homeowners, the increase has turned their dream of settling down into a financial nightmare.

Jill Menson and her husband bought their home believing it would be the last place they would ever live. Five years ago, their monthly HOA dues were just $158.

But those fees have since ballooned, reaching more than $1,200 this summer alongside a $10,000 special assessment, before the latest increase pushed the monthly bill to $2,500.

“We are going to be forced out with nowhere to go, because no one is going to get a dime for their houses even if we put them on the market,” Menson told the outlet.

The Post previously reported on the neighborhood’s HOA controversy in July, when residents were already reeling from fees that had jumped from $350 to $1,250 a month.

4

Residents say rising fees and ongoing legal disputes are threatening their ability to stay in their homes.spiritofamerica – stock.adobe.com

Now, the dues have doubled again, leaving some residents worried about bankruptcy, foreclosure and whether they will be able to sell their homes at all.

One homeowner told WSOC-TV that he feared he had only months left before he would be forced to leave.

“There has to be HOA reform,” the resident said. “It’s insane that they have this much power to take everything that you have worked for over fees.”

4

The North Carolina community has been embroiled in a yearslong dispute over HOA fees and promised amenities.Google Maps

The dispute has been brewing for years.

Residents have accused developer Aaron Guess, who they say owns most of the properties in Magnolia Cove and controls the HOA board, of failing to deliver promised amenities, including a swimming pool, lawn services and mailboxes.

But the association argues that the steep fees are necessary to cover mounting legal bills and unpaid assessments.

According to the HOA, more than 20 homeowners sued the association and some of its officers in early 2024. The association said those claims were either voluntarily withdrawn or dismissed by the court.

The HOA subsequently pursued counterclaims, and a jury found certain homeowners liable for defamation, awarding monetary and punitive damages, according to the association.

The board says defending the litigation has become the single largest expense in its budget, while years of unpaid dues have shifted additional costs onto homeowners who continue paying.

The association, which operates as a nonprofit, maintains that it does not profit from the assessments and that the money goes toward community expenses.

It also suggested the fees could eventually decrease once legal expenses subside and delinquent accounts are paid.

4

Some homeowners fear they will be unable to sell their properties as HOA costs continue to climb.Google Maps

Not everyone in the neighborhood opposes the board.

“They started a fight. They lost,” resident Paige Johnson told WSOC-TV, referring to the homeowners who pursued legal action. “They don’t like the outcome and now they think everyone else needs to pay their dues.”

Guess did not respond to WSOC-TV’s requests for comment.

For homeowners hoping for government intervention, there may be little immediate relief.

The North Carolina Attorney General’s Office told the station that state law does not impose a general cap on how much an HOA can increase its fees annually, although associations must comply with their governing documents.

That leaves residents facing a difficult choice: pay the soaring fees, attempt to sell homes they fear have become unattractive to buyers or risk falling behind on payments.

For Menson and her neighbors, the prospect of losing the homes they worked to afford has become an increasingly real concern.

https://nypost.com/2026/10/31/real-estate/nc-hoa-fees-double-to-2500-a-month-leaving-owners-fuming/

'I live with a ghost': Japan's haunted homes attract bargain hunters

 From the moment Ryua first walked into her rental apartment in Tokyo she believed it to be haunted.

"When I visited the place for a viewing there was a man standing there, glaring at me," she says.

"Since the estate agent couldn't see him, I realised he must be a ghost."

While someone more squeamish would probably have quickly left the flat never to return, Ryua chose to go ahead and move in.

"I'm a bit of a contrarian, so I decided I wanted to become friends with this glaring male ghost," adds Ryua, who works as an aidoru, a young entertainer, and who doesn't wish to share her surname.

Four years later, and still in the same apartment, she says she continues to experience paranormal activity on a daily basis. She says she hears endless footsteps and the ghost talking.

Although Japan has increasingly marked Halloween in recent years, many Japanese people take ghosts seriously all year round. The country has a word, "yuurei", which means a lingering, troubled spirit.

These are the ghosts of people who died in violent or tragic circumstances - those who were murdered, killed themselves, or simply were lonely and died alone. If they died at home, then the belief is that their yuurei won't go away.

For house hunters who are not superstitious or squeamish it means there are big bargains to be found. There is a whole category of dwellings called jiko bukken, which means "stigmatised" or "incident" properties.

Under guidelines issued by the government in 2021, Japanese estate agents must disclose suicide, murder, death by fire, and any death where the body was not discovered for an extended period of time.

For rental properties this information must be disclosed for three years, and it must be revealed indefinitely for any property offered for sale.

By contrast, in the UK there is no legal requirement to reveal that a person died in a property. And in the US, it differs from state to state. For example, in California you have to reveal if a person has died in the property in the past three years, while in Arizona and Oregon you do not.

Ryua was told that a man had killed himself in her apartment. It meant that she gets an almost 30% discount on her rent on her tiny, 25 sq m bedsit in the fashionable ward of Setagaya. She says she pays 45,000 yen ($285; £213) a month, instead of what should have been 62,000 yen.

While a house where there had been a murder or suicide would probably be harder to sell or rent out anywhere in the world, Tokyo estate agent Erik Oskamp says that Japanese people are particularly superstitious and averse to stigmatised properties.

"[Even] an apartment next to a cemetery will be difficult to rent out, especially if you can see the tombs from the kitchen," explains Oskamp. "The worst thing is if a suicide has happened in the apartment. Even if somebody has jumped from the roof, many renters will move out. Other issues are a serious crime or a lonely death."

The latter issue, that of a person dying alone, would not generally affect the price of a property in, say, the UK or the US.

But in rural Kagoshima, in Japan's southwest, it enabled Diane Tincher to buy a large three-bedroom house for about half of what would have otherwise been the asking price.

'If there is a ghost I'm thankful to her'

The 79-year-old American has lived in Japan for nearly 40 years, working as a tour guide. She says that the estate agent had been straight with her – there was a heavy discount as an elderly lady had died alone, thereby stigmatising the property.

Tincher paid 20m yen for the house, in a location where similar properties usually sell for up to 45m yen.

"I don't believe in ghosts. But I know that the Japanese are very superstitious," she says. "If there is a ghost I'm thankful to her every day... to live in such a splendid and affordable home."

Researching the house, Tincher had found it on a website called Oshimaland, which lists jiko bukken properties, giving details of the events that occurred. It was launched in 2005 covering Tokyo, before expanding across Japan and then internationally in 2011.

It is crowdsourced, meaning that members of the public add the homes and their details.

Teru Oshima, the founder of Oshimaland, says that in the past such properties were "not very attractive options" in Japan.

Yet as house prices have surged in the country in recent years, as well as a big increase in the wider cost of living, one 2025 survey found that more than half of Japanese people would now rent a jiko bukken if it was cheap.

Back in Setagaya, Ryua says she is happy living with her ghostly flatmate. "I believe that ghosts were once living human beings, so they deserve our respect," she says.

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/articles/live-ghost-japans-haunted-homes-000022206.html