New York City Councilwoman Julie Won never disclosed a rent-free apartment worth $5,000 a month on her annual conflict-of-interest filings, an arrangement that government watchdogs say should have appeared on the forms and that raises serious questions about her compliance with city ethics rules, the New York Post reported.
Won, a Democrat representing Queens who is now running for Congress, moved into a one-bedroom unit at Skyline Towers on Long Island City's waterfront in November 2024 with her husband, political strategist Eugene Noh, and their two children. The unit's owner, Democratic consultant Justin Chae, told the Post he waived the $5,000 monthly rent over a one-year lease as a bonus for Noh's agreement to serve as vice president of campaigns at Chae's firm, Legion Outreach Consultants.
Won's 2024 annual disclosure forms, filed with the city's Conflicts of Interest Board, contain no mention of the arrangement. The forms explicitly ask whether the filer received "any gift or gifts valued at $1,000" or more. Even if the rent-free housing covered only the last two months of 2024, Won's share would have totaled $5,000, well above the disclosure threshold.
Two prominent New York good-government organizations reviewed the situation and reached the same conclusion: Won should have reported the perk. Ben Weinberg, director of public policy at Citizens Union, told the Post the arrangement is exactly the kind that demands transparency.
"Receiving free housing from someone with political interests that could interact with your official duties is the kind of arrangement [that] raises conflict of interest concerns. Elected officials in that situation should get formal guidance from COIB and disclose it as a gift."
Rachael Fauss, senior policy advisor at Reinvent Albany, agreed. She told the Post it "could potentially be seen as a gift, so it belongs on the forms somewhere."
The Conflicts of Interest Board itself did not clear Won. Executive Director Carolyn Miller said she could not "provide a definitive answer" on whether Won broke any rules without speaking to the councilwoman and getting "all the relevant facts." But Miller's own framing of the legal standard left little room for comfort. She noted that receiving "something of value could be considered a gift under the annual disclosure law, and it also could be compensation in connection with one's employment." Miller added that for married couples, "there is often a question about who received the thing of value for reporting purposes, the filer or their spouse."
In other words, the question isn't whether the benefit existed. It's who should have reported it and under which category. Either way, it belonged somewhere on the paperwork, and it wasn't there.
Chae shared a copy of the lease agreement with the Post. It lists Won, Noh, and their two children as occupants of the Skyline Towers unit beginning November 2024. Won has insisted she and her husband never signed any lease on the apartment and claims Chae forged her name on a bogus agreement. She has threatened to sue Chae over going public with the landlord-tenant dispute.
Won has also called the entire episode a "clearly political smear job." She did not respond to the Post's requests for comment on the disclosure issue.
Whatever the truth of the lease dispute, the family lived in the unit for months. The Post previously reported that Won and her family vacated the condo on June 1, three days after being served eviction papers. Court filings show Chae dropped the eviction case on June 8 because the couple had already left his $1 million condo.
Chae told the Post he plans to sue Won and Noh for $25,000 in rent he alleges they owe for the first five months of this year. He said Noh's employment at Legion Outreach Consultants was terminated in June of last year, meaning any rent waiver tied to that job ended long ago, yet the family stayed.
The disclosure question is not the only potential problem. Fair-market-value employer-provided housing is generally considered a taxable fringe benefit. Those receiving such perks are typically required to pay both federal and state taxes on the value. Whether Won or Noh reported the arrangement on their tax filings remains unknown.
The Conflicts of Interest Board had not yet publicly released its 2025 filings at the time of the Post's reporting, so it is unclear whether Won corrected the omission for the current year. That gap matters. If the family occupied the unit through at least June 1, the value of the housing benefit continued to grow, and continued to go unreported, as far as the public record shows.
This is not an isolated pattern in New York City government. Accountability gaps among the city's elected officials and administrators have drawn repeated scrutiny, from improper no-bid contracts signed by the schools chancellor to budget promises that collapsed under basic math.
The timing makes the disclosure failure especially consequential. Won is running in the June 23 Democratic primary to replace retiring Rep. Nydia Velázquez in New York's 7th Congressional District, which covers parts of Queens and Brooklyn. She is asking voters for a promotion while leaving basic ethics paperwork incomplete.
Chae, the condo owner, is himself a top Democratic consultant, meaning this is not a partisan hit from the other side of the aisle. It is a dispute between allies that has exposed a paper trail Won apparently preferred to keep quiet.
When Democratic officials elsewhere face federal corruption probes, the standard defense is that the system works and accountability is enforced. But accountability only works when the disclosure rules are followed in the first place. Won's forms asked a direct question about gifts worth $1,000 or more. Free rent on a luxury waterfront condo worth $5,000 a month is not a close call.
Won's defense, that Chae forged the lease and that the whole affair is a smear, may or may not hold up. But the defense doesn't address the disclosure question. Even if the lease was fraudulent, Won's family lived in the apartment. The benefit was real. The forms were blank.
The Conflicts of Interest Board says it needs more facts before ruling. Government watchdogs say the answer is already clear enough. And voters in the 7th District are left to decide whether a candidate who can't manage her own disclosure forms should be trusted with a seat in Congress.
New York's political class has a long tradition of treating ethics rules as suggestions. The question for Won is whether voters, already watching Democratic promises dissolve under scrutiny, will extend her the same courtesy.
Disclosure forms exist for one reason: so the public can see what its elected officials receive and from whom. When the forms come back blank and the benefit was a luxury apartment, the system didn't fail. The official did.