Mayor Zohran Mamdani embodies both a strong ideological stance and the Machiavellian wisdom of being “a sensible man” who roots his authority in tangible control. This strategic foundation has allowed him to wield significant influence.
During his administration, Mamdani has strategically expanded his influence over vital city institutions. At times, he pushes the envelope of legal boundaries, all with the goal of establishing a lasting political machine that endures beyond his mayoralty.
Recent congressional primaries have highlighted the mayor’s firm grasp on the city’s Democratic Socialists of America chapter. This control empowers him to challenge and potentially unseat longstanding incumbents.
Despite the internal diversity among various caucuses—including those with Marxist revolutionary leanings—the DSA unites in support of Mamdani. They mobilize vast numbers of volunteers to champion his endorsed candidates and drive his political agenda forward.
Beyond public canvassing, Mamdani has integrated this grassroots energy into government operations, primarily through the establishment of the Office of Mass Engagement.
Its commissioner, Tascha Van Auken, and Mamdani’s housing czar, Cea Weaver — both DSA leaders — are actually entering buildings to organize tenants into “unions.”
And the office is using taxpayer funds to film documentaries about tenant organizing.
It’s far from apparent that tenant organizing passes muster under the Conflicts of Interest Board rules, which prohibit public servants from using city “letterhead, title, personnel, equipment, resources, supplies, or technology assets” for any “non-City purpose.”
If withholding rent becomes a common tenant-union tactic, that will only accelerate building disinvestment and deterioration.
For the mayor and the DSA, however, forcing rent-stabilized property owners into foreclosure or bankruptcy is the point.
His housing plan calls for seizing buildings from “bad actors’ hands” and transferring them to “responsible stewards” like nonprofits.
Never mind that there’s no reason to think housing controlled by nonprofits or government would produce better conditions. NYCHA’s chronic corruption and mismanagement provide ample evidence to the contrary.
For DSA lefties, the important thing is that tenant unions and the nonprofit sector can muster reliable votes.
The mayor’s appointments to various governmental bodies likewise represent power plays to exert greater direct control — even at the expense of good government.
Most glaringly, Mamdani’s appointees to the Rent Guidelines Board voted for the rent freeze he campaigned on, despite the board’s own research showing landlord costs spiked 5.3% between April 2025 and March 2026.
The city’s administrative code requires members to consider these costs and other factors in determining a rent increase that balances multiple interests; instead, Mamdani appointed his board to deliver his signature campaign promise.
A vigorous lawsuit by former Deputy Mayor Randy Mastro is challenging the RGB’s decision as arbitrary, capricious and unlawfully predetermined.
If the mayor isn’t stopped in the courts, he will obtain the de facto power to set stabilized rent increases, rendering the statutory text toothless.
Unlike with his RGB picks, Mamdani didn’t immediately bother to appoint members to the Advisory Committee on the Judiciary, the body responsible for recommending qualified picks for criminal and family court judgeships.
On his second day in office, however, he appointed his election lawyer, Ali Najmi, as head of the memberless body.
Then in April, Mamdani and Najmi rejected the nomination of Appellate Division Justice John Leventhal to the committee, raising questions about whether his Jewish identity played a role in their decision. Mamdani has denied these claims.
But Leventhal’s unprecedented rejection was even more striking because his nomination came from the state’s highest judge, Rowan Wilson, a staunch progressive but not a DSA member.
Najmi and his firm, by the way, actively practice law before the city’s various criminal courts, even though simultaneously chairing the body that screens judges creates a conflict of interest and the appearance of impropriety.
Najmi is representing the family of the victim killed in June’s Central Park horse-carriage tragedy in a suit against the city.
His influence with the mayor again creates the appearance, if not the reality, that city officials will feel pressure to offer a generous settlement. If they do, Najmi and his firm will pocket a handsome contingency fee.
More still: Last week, Mamdani abruptly disbanded the advisory board of the Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City, the nonprofit that raises private donations to further the mayor’s top causes.
To be sure, the fund has atrophied since Mayor Michael Bloomberg left office, likely driven by a lack of faith in the city government’s ability to execute programs effectively.
But Mamdani’s axing the advisory body was needlessly antagonistic toward the city’s business leaders.
The move fits with his broader scheme: Reshaping who has power in the city means controlling who sits on such boards.
Mamdani has heeded Machiavelli’s advice well: The prince who controls everything answers to no one.
John Ketcham is director of cities and a legal policy fellow at Manhattan Institute.