The finding that petitioner violated the 1988 stipulation of permanent exclusion is supported by substantial evidence that she knowingly permitted her son to visit her in the apartment on at least one occasion (see Matter of Romero v. Martinez, 280 A.D.2d 58, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 721). The penalty of termination does not shock our sense of fairness (see Matter of Featherstone v. Franco, 95 N.Y.2d 550, 554-555), given additional substantial evidence that she knowingly permitted an unauthorized person to take up residence in the apartment, and that her son and the unauthorized resident used the apartment to commit drug-related crimes. Petitioner's other arguments are improperly raised for the first time on appeal, and, in any event, are unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.