Earlier this year, Theresa Kimm was living in an old building in a fast-gentrifying section of the Lower East Side that had been sold to a landlord called Frontier Fourth Development. By March, there were intensive renovations of common areas and vacant apartments. Kimm, who had lived in the building for eight years and had a two-year-old daughter, grew concerned about the debris. She researched online and read news articles on lead exposure in older buildings. After seeing open, dusty bags lying around, she called 311.
An inspection by the Department of Health found elevated levels of lead in the dust. But aside from instructing the landlord to clean up the debris and dust, the city took no other immediate actions, she said.
In the absence of city oversight, she took every precaution, having herself and her baby wear face masks when they stepped outside her apartment, planting a wet towel underneath her door, buying a special air filter, as well as constantly vacuuming.
"It was hard not just on myself but on my little baby," she told Gothamist. "It's an indescribable feeling."
She added: "I was doing everything I can but nothing was being addressed."
Finally, in May 2019, city inspectors issued a stop-work order for unsafe work practices related to lead. A $1,300 fine was imposed. But in what turned out to be a common pattern for such violations, the penalty was never paid.
Fifteen years following the passage of landmark legislation that was intended to put an end to lead paint poisoning in children living in private residences, New York City has barely collected any of the $2 million in fines racked up by landlords who have violated rules governing safe work practices, according to a new report by tenant and environmental justice advocates.
On Tuesday, a group of five advocacy organizations, including the New York Lawyers for Public Interest and Cooper Square Committee, issued an analysis of city fines assessed in the wake of Local Law 1, a 2004 statute which mandated the use of safe work practices to protect tenants and workers in buildings built before 1960. Using data both publicly available as well as obtained through Freedom of Information Law requests, the report claims that although the city imposed nearly $2 million in violations since the law was passed, only $10,190—or 0.5 percent—of the amount owed has been paid.
In contrast, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH), which enforces Local Law 1, has collected $5 million related to infractions by street vendors.
Citing one category of street vendor violations in particular—allowing a cart to touch or lean against a building—the report found that the department has taken in $90,779, nearly nine times the amount collected from landlords who were cited for dangerous lead conditions inside residential buildings.
"The salient question is which offense really has a more significant impact long term on the health and safety of New Yorkers," said Matthew Chachere, a staff attorney at Northern Manhattan Improvement Corporation, one of the organizations which put out the report.
"Why is it that working people are fined while landlords who engage in reckless conduct that exposes children to permanent irreparable brain injury are rarely fined at all?" he added.
A spokesperson for Mayor Bill de Blasio called the report incomplete, saying that the Law Department had in fact received $194,315.99 in fines. Based on the other data provided in the report, that would increase the city's collection rate to 10 percent.
“We vigorously dispute the results of this report, which seems based on incomplete information," said the statement. "Over the past five fiscal years, hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of these fines have been paid to the Law Department and the City – more than half of all claims during that period. The City is now collecting nine times as much in these fines as it was six years ago, and enhancing its legal efforts through tenant protection lawsuits that will allow it to collect even more from faulty landlords.”
The study comes amid increased scrutiny on how the city handles lead enforcement. On Wednesday, spurred by several disturbing reports this year, the City Council is set to hold a public hearing that will inform future legislation. In June, Gothamist/WNYC discovered substantial levels of lead contamination from deteriorating paint inside four public elementary schools, which prompted city-wide inspections of school classrooms serving students under six years of age. Several months later, the city's comptroller, Scott Stringer, issued an analysis that revealed that the city failed to perform lead paint inspections at 9,099 private residential buildings where 11,168 children had tested positive for high levels of lead between 2013 and late 2018.
With the passage of Local Law 1 (which was vetoed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg for fear of "increased demands on landlords"), the city had hoped to eradicate lead poisoning in children by 2010. Exposure to lead among children has been blamed for a range of serious and permanent health effects, including stunted brain development. Although the number of cases of lead poisoning for those under age 6 dropped nearly 90 percent, since 2010 more than 54,000 children have been tested with blood lead levels above the Center for Disease Control’s level of concern. While a lead scandal within the New York Housing Authority has lead to court-ordered inspections, the data shows that children in the city's private housing test at higher rates than those in public housing.
All told, there are nearly two million housing units in New York City that were built before 1960, when lead-based paint was common.
This year, the City Council began passing a slate of bills that would address lead poisoning across a range of spectrums, from city parks and community gardens to public schools and private buildings. Of the roughly 25 bills introduced, 15 are still facing a vote. According to a source, Council Speaker Corey Johnson said he intends to pass the remaining legislation by the end of the year. Historically, property owners have opposed increased regulation, citing costs. Among the bills to be considered are requiring building owners to provide tenants with water filtration pitchers or treatment systems to reduce lead concentrations in water or perform annual test of cooking and drinking water, and making landlords certify that any newly vacated apartments in buildings built before 1960 are completely lead-free within five years.
Last week, de Blasio announced that the city would perform targeted outreach to buildings constructed prior to 1978 to reach families with children. As part of that effort, city officials will call and send letters to approximately 100,000 households in 8,120 buildings.
But advocates for reform have argued that such measures would amount to little difference on the ground and that the issue boils down to greater enforcement and penalties for noncompliance by landlords. A report last year by the same coalition found that landlords who do not conduct regular inspections or perform lead paint abatements prior to renting apartments have rarely faced any kind of punishment from the city.
For housing activists, the issue of lead contamination speaks directly to the need for tenant rights amid a climate of gentrification and soaring rents.
"This is a toxic extension of the construction harassment problem," said Brandon Kielbasa, a director of organizing and policy at Cooper Square Committee.
The report includes a set of recommendations to the city, which includes ramping up the collection of fines, establish escalating fines for repeat offenders, and introducing the possibility of criminal penalties for the most serious violations. It also urged the city to address the silos around the multiple city agencies who work on lead issues, which is often a source of confusion for citizens reporting problems.
"You need to have some sort of repercussion," Kielbasa said, adding, "We need the agencies and de Blasio to really start to own this issue."
For Kimm, the lack of enforcement created too much of a health risk. In July, she and her family moved out. But it came at a price. Their rent rose to $3,000 a month from $1,800.
She said that she and her daughter were both tested for high levels of lead and the results were fortunately negative.
"I guess all that hand washing worked," she said.
