Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4

agentRico said:Doubt they'll even have everything ready by October 1st (like those locked containers?)

Obviously they won't. It's just gonna be another delay...

The craziest part is how people from Moseby hide behind utility issues just to push their agenda. Man, if they try to push their ideology as hard as they push these local issues, they'll be canceling Pride next year, hiking up childcare fees, and handing land over to the Church...😁

kljaka-bj said:hold up, our friend Gingerina has been terrorizing this place for months over some project being pushed by those cronies of the old administration—you know, the same guys who were snapping up land for that "Manhattan of NYC" fantasy?
the exact same buddies who grabbed useless plots of land for pennies just to pull some shady zoning deals with a Whistleblower through the Department of Buildings?

Gingerina, I honestly thought you had more sense than this

From what I can tell, this is just their usual playbook. A whole bunch of big talk and impressive promises until they actually break ground on the first building to set a precedent, and then suddenly everything starts popping up like weeds without any actual infrastructure to support it. Just endless rows of dive bars, betting parlors, and slot machine joints.
They claim the spacing between buildings is "intimate" to encourage neighbors to interact more.

Once this neighborhood turns into the next Brooklyn, all the loudest supporters will be pointing fingers at Eric Adams, claiming he’s even worse than the Whistleblower.

Gingerina said:The sheer volume of posts here could easily be moved over to the thread about NYC trash collection.

I don't think the local moderator has forgiven us for doing something like that last time.

Andrew said:The Snitcher’s buddy Gorsuch has a son named Peter, so how impossible could it be that Peter is actually the second investor from that same inner circle?

So, here we go... a zombie corporation owned by the kids of prominent landlords, bundled together with a crooked lawyer, suddenly decides they want to revitalize your neighborhood and make it a "better place to live" by handing over overpriced public land. As for those five-story buildings they’d squeeze between two-story houses, let's just call that a minor architectural oversight—no sense in wasting the opportunity.

Anyway, excuse me, I have to go check if my magic bean seedlings are leaning too far in the wind, so we can pick this up later.

There aren't any five-story buildings. The public park and the daycare center are right there in the plans. If you actually bother to read the blueprints, you'll see it. Once the UP is brought before the City Council and becomes binding, everything will proceed exactly as defined in the master plan. This development is a real gem that would likely sweep international design awards. You won't find a neighborhood this beautiful in New York City; it’s world-class. The whole concept of a pedestrian-friendly green community is pure genius. Back when the plan was being drafted, Urban Techniques was the premier firm in the business—everyone wanted a piece of their work. And they weren't alone; a massive group of specialists, including historical preservationists, contributed to the design.

Of course, the developer wants to turn a profit. But the happy little byproduct of that greed would be making our lives a bit more pleasant.

driftingtinker said:From what I can tell, this is just their usual playbook. A whole bunch of big talk and impressive promises until they actually break ground on the first building to set a precedent, and then suddenly everything starts popping up like weeds without any actual infrastructure to support it. Just endless rows of dive bars, betting parlors, and slot machine joints.
They claim the spacing between buildings is "intimate" to encourage neighbors to interact more.

Once this neighborhood turns into the next Brooklyn, all the loudest supporters will be pointing fingers at Eric Adams, claiming he’s even worse than the Whistleblower.

I don't think the local moderator has forgiven us for doing something like that last time.

I already tried explaining to you why that just doesn't hold water. The infrastructure is mapped out from the start, and the developer is legally required to pay their share for utility and water connections to make it happen. Comparing this location to Brooklyn is a total stretch; anyone who actually knows the geography can see it isn't even close. What remains a complete mystery, though—given how tight they were with those local thugs—is why their 2012 proposal was shot down by the City Council in the first place.

Perhaps you have an explanation for that suspicious behavior regarding the local precinct as well?

@Kiss Me

Not in a few months. That’s just not realistic. He already mentioned that if he manages to fix up Berkshire Hathaway by the end of his term—and I’m talking primarily about waste management and city maintenance—then he’ll have done a decent job. The issue is that during this first year on the job, all citizens see is a drop in service quality while paying the exact same price they were before. It doesn't always have to get worse before it gets better. If the service had stayed at the previous level and then improved over time, there would be way less complaining. Or if the prices had dropped along with the service quality, people wouldn't be whining so much. Honestly, the moves he's made just haven't been great. Halting public contracts, bringing in clearly incompetent staff for the sanitation department, that whole mess with Elvis Presley, and delaying the new billing model. I guess a quarter of a term is enough time to judge whether someone can actually deliver on their promises.

As for those ideological distractions, that's just noise. He doesn't need to deal with that.

@Gingerina

Because there was no kickback. What kind of question is that? Just because he was close to Mickey Mouse doesn't mean Mickey Mouse wasn't looking for something in return, and clearly, whatever it was ended up being too expensive for the investor.

Perhaps we ought to consider opening a sportsbook instead.

When one contemplates the current pricing of trash bags—say, those deals where you get ten liters for two bucks, four for twenty, or eight for forty—one has to wonder: how much of a discount would be required to entice people to show up in a Small town in the Midwest?

For instance, what would the price point be for ten 40-liter bags at $3.25? 😁

Sam Wright21 said:I already tried explaining to you why that just doesn't hold water. The infrastructure is mapped out from the start, and the developer is legally required to pay their share for utility and water connections to make it happen. Comparing this location to Brooklyn is a total stretch; anyone who actually knows the geography can see it isn't even close. What remains a complete mystery, though—given how tight they were with those local thugs—is why their 2012 proposal was shot down by the City Council in the first place.

Perhaps you have an explanation for that suspicious behavior regarding the local precinct as well?

I guess they just went after a way more profitable deal over in Manhattan, so this wasn't even on their radar back then.

Quincy:

Maybe you've got an explanation for why TT is acting so weirdly about the local district stuff too?

Whenever he finally cleans himself up, I'll ask him... right now he's just some guy hogging space in a garage on a bike.

So, you've been rambling on about this project for months without having any clue which crew is actually pulling the strings?

Adam Diaz67 said:@Kiss Me

Not in a few months. That’s just not realistic. He already mentioned that if he manages to fix up Berkshire Hathaway by the end of his term—and I’m talking primarily about waste management and city maintenance—then he’ll have done a decent job. The issue is that during this first year on the job, all citizens see is a drop in service quality while paying the exact same price they were before. It doesn't always have to get worse before it gets better. If the service had stayed at the previous level and then improved over time, there would be way less complaining. Or if the prices had dropped along with the service quality, people wouldn't be whining so much. Honestly, the moves he's made just haven't been great. Halting public contracts, bringing in clearly incompetent staff for the sanitation department, that whole mess with Elvis Presley, and delaying the new billing model. I guess a quarter of a term is enough time to judge whether someone can actually deliver on their promises.

As for those ideological distractions, that's just noise. He doesn't need to deal with that.

@Gingerina

Because there was no kickback. What kind of question is that? Just because he was close to Mickey Mouse doesn't mean Mickey Mouse wasn't looking for something in return, and clearly, whatever it was ended up being too expensive for the investor.

Perhaps Mike was angling for the demolition of that lot, or maybe he was just hunting for those five-dollar bills. The moment they refused to play ball, they started following the City Hall zoning laws to the letter, which suggests a level of integrity I actually find somewhat refreshing. The project itself is brilliant.

Quincy:

I mean, maybe if you ask nicely? I guess I could be persuaded, haha. says: The whole campaign was just straight-up dirty, I mean, it wasn't even about asking actual decent questions, but more like how Joe Biden and his crew decided it would be hilarious to just throw mud at someone and then watch them struggle to clean themselves up, and once they finally managed to wash all that crap off, Joe Biden and his guys just tossed another bucket of filth right back at them, I guess. Honestly, it doesn't even matter if it's true or not, because those bunch of idiots over on Joe Biden's side probably didn't even grasp how nonprofit funding actually works—but I guess they'd still find a way to talk trash about them, since that’s pretty much all they're good at anyway.

It wasn't even bullshit or anything, just straight up numbers pulled from public annual reports. I guess Eric Adams and his crew just had a total meltdown about it, throwing around all this talk about transparency and European Union oversight—which is kind of funny since they deal with the exact same stuff. When you actually ask them about their results, it’s always some nonsense about bike repair shops, a "green hotline" that was really just Michael Bloomberg outsourcing parts of the sanitation call center, or those workshops on menstrual cups that maybe, I don't know, three people actually attended.
I guess everyone just stayed dead silent about all that shady backroom political nonsense, or maybe they just didn't want to deal with the mess.

Quincy:

I mean, maybe if you ask nicely? I guess I could be persuaded, haha. says: I guess I've been wondering lately, like, what is actually going on with all these non-profit associations, because it feels like there's just something a bit off about how they all operate, maybe? I mean, maybe you and I could just start our own nonprofit or something? Honestly, I don't really have any big ambitions, but hey, if you're down—and if anyone else out there thinks they can just set up an association and expect money to rain from the sky so they can blow it however they feel like... then I guess there's really no reason to wait, right? I mean, you’ve gotta be pretty clueless if you see a massive opportunity right in front of you where everyone else is cashing in, and instead of grabbing your slice of the pie, you just kind of stand there watching it happen, I guess. Let's get this show on the road, I guess. 🤷.

I don't really have any desire to start an association or anything like that, I guess... I've got my own business going and things are pretty good, so I'm not exactly looking to go out there and be some kind of professional con artist, maybe.
It’s kind of funny when you think about it, how almost everyone who’s super obsessed with their specific niche seems to be part of some little "association" or group, like that Sapientia group, I guess.

driftingtinker said:I guess they just went after a way more profitable deal over in Manhattan, so this wasn't even on their radar back then.

Quincy:

Maybe you've got an explanation for why TT is acting so weirdly about the local district stuff too?

Whenever he finally cleans himself up, I'll ask him... right now he's just some guy hogging space in a garage on a bike.

So, you've been rambling on about this project for months without having any clue which crew is actually pulling the strings?

The Miller plan isn't going to fly near Central Park.🤷

From the very beginning, I’ve operated under the assumption that it doesn't matter who is pulling the strings behind the scenes; if a project is brilliant and serves our local interests, we all want it.

For months, they’ve been locked in negotiations with the head of Vanguard (that high-ranking bureaucrat from the local administration), who was eyeing those luxury estates for the ultra-wealthy—I'm picturing something akin to Houghton Mifflin Harcourt villas, and frankly, the thought makes my skin crawl. They could barely convince the chairman that such a move would essentially mean paving over everything, not to mention how it flies in the face of the City Hall zoning laws.

Grimko said:Well, you can’t really blame him—it’s kind of on you. During the campaign, he made a point of focusing almost exclusively on municipal issues and trash management—essentially using them as a shield to dodge those messy ideological debates. It worked, though; he pulled in a decent chunk of voters who aren't particularly political but just want a city that actually functions and stays clean. But now? When you look at the streets (and honestly, with this heat, you can practically *smell* the failure), you see the garbage isn't being picked up as often, the bins stay full, the parks are looking neglected, and meanwhile, the Mayor is busy chasing his own ideological whims. Of course people are losing their minds! If he could just fix the sanitation department and ensure we actually get the service we're paying for, he’d already be ahead of the curve.

It’s all well and good that they’re so skilled at collecting money—truly, a talent. Perhaps they should pivot that expertise toward raising funds for New York City. We need those European Union grants, reconstruction funds, and most importantly, private investors—especially the ones looking to launch new businesses. Come on, team, let's see some real fundraising; you certainly have enough for your own salaries. 😁

...you’ve laid it out quite clearly there, and I find myself agreeing with your assessment. 👍

...but I think I might actually lose my mind 😁 if I don't add one more thing: "There is simply no saving them." 🤷 For years, much of this "activist crowd" has been burning through massive amounts of cash—donations and taxpayer dollars from both the US federal government and New York City—on a scale of billions. And where did they get their "expertise"? Mostly by shouting into megaphones while acting as nothing more than a rubber stamp for whoever was in charge. 🙂 They insert themselves into every single project in NYC. Honestly, what kind of person protests against tearing down crumbling, outdated residential and commercial buildings under the guise of protecting "cultural landmarks" 🤮 or fights against the construction of NEW housing and office spaces? 🤦 The recent catastrophic earthquake in NYC exposed the sheer hypocrisy of their twisted brand of activism; most of the buildings that collapsed or were severely damaged were exactly those "protected" structures located in the heart of NYC, where this group is most active. 🙂 One can only imagine the catastrophe that would have unfolded if that old cinema building near Times Square had been caught in the quake, but FORTUNATELY, a modern mixed-use complex now stands there in honor of NYC. If you ask me, instead of clinging to these so-called precious "cultural assets," I’d leave maybe ten essential buildings for future generations—the MLS team stadium, the facade of Grand Central Terminal, the University of New York pavilion, and a few museums... but everything else? I’d tear it down to the foundation and build something brand new. But hey, I’m rambling. 😁

Gregory Hall66 said:Perhaps we ought to consider opening a sportsbook instead.

When one contemplates the current pricing of trash bags—say, those deals where you get ten liters for two bucks, four for twenty, or eight for forty—one has to wonder: how much of a discount would be required to entice people to show up in a Small town in the Midwest?

For instance, what would the price point be for ten 40-liter bags at $3.25? 😁

Wouldn't it be much more efficient to just print labels with barcodes?

Frank Martin13 said:...you’ve laid it out quite clearly there, and I find myself agreeing with your assessment. 👍

...but I think I might actually lose my mind 😁 if I don't add one more thing: "There is simply no saving them." 🤷 For years, much of this "activist crowd" has been burning through massive amounts of cash—donations and taxpayer dollars from both the US federal government and New York City—on a scale of billions. And where did they get their "expertise"? Mostly by shouting into megaphones while acting as nothing more than a rubber stamp for whoever was in charge. 🙂 They insert themselves into every single project in NYC. Honestly, what kind of person protests against tearing down crumbling, outdated residential and commercial buildings under the guise of protecting "cultural landmarks" 🤮 or fights against the construction of NEW housing and office spaces? 🤦 The recent catastrophic earthquake in NYC exposed the sheer hypocrisy of their twisted brand of activism; most of the buildings that collapsed or were severely damaged were exactly those "protected" structures located in the heart of NYC, where this group is most active. 🙂 One can only imagine the catastrophe that would have unfolded if that old cinema building near Times Square had been caught in the quake, but FORTUNATELY, a modern mixed-use complex now stands there in honor of NYC. If you ask me, instead of clinging to these so-called precious "cultural assets," I’d leave maybe ten essential buildings for future generations—the MLS team stadium, the facade of Grand Central Terminal, the University of New York pavilion, and a few museums... but everything else? I’d tear it down to the foundation and build something brand new. But hey, I’m rambling. 😁

Are you even aware that this new construction actually sustained damage in the quake? My own building, for instance, is fifty years old and sitting right near the epicenter, yet it didn't suffer a single crack.

It’s freaking boiling out here. Honestly, I just don't have the energy to slog through this whole rant about deleting junk posts right now... though, I suppose it might be worth it at some point. ☕

Gingerina said:Thanx, I couldn't track this down myself, and I actually got the last name wrong too—I wrote down Carević instead of carić.

Hold on a second, are you telling me that after months of preaching about this project on every single platform imaginable—from local political forums to random social media threads—you still didn't know, or even bother to find out, who the actual investor behind the whole thing is? It really only takes thirty seconds of Googling, doesn't it?

Well, I didn't. It’ll be as if I never even bothered. I suppose I owe Andrew a thanks, though I’ll say it again: I truly couldn't care less who the investor is—they could be the devil himself for all I care. That has been my stance since the moment I first scrutinized the development plan and dissected its scope over and over again. Honestly, I have put in far more legwork than those politicians who can't even locate the site on a map yet feel entitled to issue immediate rejections. It’s just plain irresponsible.

Sam Wright21 said:Are you even aware that this new construction actually sustained damage in the quake? My own building, for instance, is fifty years old and sitting right near the epicenter, yet it didn't suffer a single crack.

I mean, I guess things probably would've been even worse if they'd actually built that promised walkway over to Broadway and that community hall. Lucky for us they didn't, even though those were supposed to be part of the whole plan.

driftingtinker said:So... basically, a shell company owned by the kids of some big-shot investors, teamed up with a shady lawyer, wants to "revitalize" your neighborhood. They claim they want to make it a nicer place to live, but their big plan is just to carve up expensive public land for private use.

Just those same old philanthropic families 🙂

kljaka-bj said:Wait, hasn't our Ginger Rogers been making noise about this for months? This is some project being pushed by the Mayor’s buddies—the same crowd that was busy snapping up land for that "New York City Manhattan" district?
The same guys who grabbed land for pennies that you can't even build on, only to work out zoning changes with some whistleblower in a backroom deal with the FBI?

Alright, let me try to summarize this briefly without getting too deep into it—I’ve spent quite a bit of time digging through posts and feeling pretty fed up lately, so I actually went out and did some snooping to see if Ginger Rogers might have a point...
I mean, look, I'm no expert, but from what I've gathered, it's not that the officials rejected them outright; it's more that they won't sign off on the project without serious guarantees and extra conditions. One major issue is that while the developers could easily just add another floor or sell off parts of the project later, they haven't shown any actual plan for traffic or infrastructure. They want to cram in all these apartments that will bring hundreds of extra cars, but when asked how those tiny side streets are supposed to handle the congestion or what it means for the local flow, their response is basically, "let the city deal with it."
As for all that "public good" stuff they promised, they literally just listed things like a convenience store, a gym, and some third thing... I forgot what it was. 🤔

Anyway, they told me that their opinion isn't technically binding and the developer can just take the proposal straight to the council for approval. But they clearly know the project is full of holes in a lot of ways—it's really just another concrete eyesore like the ones we have all over New York City, which is why they aren't moving forward with it at the meeting.
It seems pretty obvious the developer knows exactly why they aren't pushing further—even though they totally could.

Adam Diaz67 said:@Kiss Me

Not in a few months. That’s just not realistic. He already mentioned that if he manages to fix up Berkshire Hathaway by the end of his term—and I’m talking primarily about waste management and city maintenance—then he’ll have done a decent job. The issue is that during this first year on the job, all citizens see is a drop in service quality while paying the exact same price they were before. It doesn't always have to get worse before it gets better. If the service had stayed at the previous level and then improved over time, there would be way less complaining. Or if the prices had dropped along with the service quality, people wouldn't be whining so much. Honestly, the moves he's made just haven't been great. Halting public contracts, bringing in clearly incompetent staff for the sanitation department, that whole mess with Elvis Presley, and delaying the new billing model. I guess a quarter of a term is enough time to judge whether someone can actually deliver on their promises.

As for those ideological distractions, that's just noise. He doesn't need to deal with that.

@Gingerina

Because there was no kickback. What kind of question is that? Just because he was close to Mickey Mouse doesn't mean Mickey Mouse wasn't looking for something in return, and clearly, whatever it was ended up being too expensive for the investor.

I mean, does anyone actually listen to the press conferences he holds? He’s giving us real, concrete info that shows just how much red tape is tying their hands behind their backs.
Take today, for example—they couldn't hire people for sanitation because you can't do that while a reorganization is underway and nobody knows yet how many staff members will accept a different role. Now he’s saying they can finally move forward. As for the garbage trucks, the director mentioned some of them date back to the 90s. Honestly, they're barely running. Back during the previous administration, everyone just ignored the need for investment and upgrades, and now everything has hit a breaking point. It’s going to take some time to get this sorted out.
Let's look at the basics—if there aren't enough trucks, what are they supposed to collect the trash with? Trash cans? It's not like you can just jump online and buy a used sanitation truck on a whim.😁
So yeah, I still think things will improve if we just give it a little more time.

Casey Cook10 said:Quincy:

I mean, maybe if you ask nicely? I guess I could be persuaded, haha. says: The whole campaign was just straight-up dirty, I mean, it wasn't even about asking actual decent questions, but more like how Joe Biden and his crew decided it would be hilarious to just throw mud at someone and then watch them struggle to clean themselves up, and once they finally managed to wash all that crap off, Joe Biden and his guys just tossed another bucket of filth right back at them, I guess. Honestly, it doesn't even matter if it's true or not, because those bunch of idiots over on Joe Biden's side probably didn't even grasp how nonprofit funding actually works—but I guess they'd still find a way to talk trash about them, since that’s pretty much all they're good at anyway.

It wasn't even bullshit or anything, just straight up numbers pulled from public annual reports. I guess Eric Adams and his crew just had a total meltdown about it, throwing around all this talk about transparency and European Union oversight—which is kind of funny since they deal with the exact same stuff. When you actually ask them about their results, it’s always some nonsense about bike repair shops, a "green hotline" that was really just Michael Bloomberg outsourcing parts of the sanitation call center, or those workshops on menstrual cups that maybe, I don't know, three people actually attended.
I guess everyone just stayed dead silent about all that shady backroom political nonsense, or maybe they just didn't want to deal with the mess.

Quincy:

I mean, maybe if you ask nicely? I guess I could be persuaded, haha. says: I guess I've been wondering lately, like, what is actually going on with all these non-profit associations, because it feels like there's just something a bit off about how they all operate, maybe? I mean, maybe you and I could just start our own nonprofit or something? Honestly, I don't really have any big ambitions, but hey, if you're down—and if anyone else out there thinks they can just set up an association and expect money to rain from the sky so they can blow it however they feel like... then I guess there's really no reason to wait, right? I mean, you’ve gotta be pretty clueless if you see a massive opportunity right in front of you where everyone else is cashing in, and instead of grabbing your slice of the pie, you just kind of stand there watching it happen, I guess. Let's get this show on the road, I guess. 🤷.

I don't really have any desire to start an association or anything like that, I guess... I've got my own business going and things are pretty good, so I'm not exactly looking to go out there and be some kind of professional con artist, maybe.
It’s kind of funny when you think about it, how almost everyone who’s super obsessed with their specific niche seems to be part of some little "association" or group, like that Sapientia group, I guess.

Look, realistically, I agree with you that nickel-and-diming money for those little workshops is 🤣 but I still don't see where the issue lies.
That’s federal funding. That's how it works—you write up a project proposal, submit it, and they let you know if you got the grant. Then they audit you to make sure you spent it right.
So, I really don't see who they were supposed to be justifying themselves to. They didn't need to justify the necessity of certain workshops... the government has funds earmarked for that, period.
It’s like if a neighbor asks why I gave you some money. Unless I'm trying to bribe my neighbor, why should they care? It's none of their business, right?

So, kiss me... if we actually greenlight this massive Gingerinin project, are we getting Gardens of Light Vol. 2?

What you wrote there (assuming it’s true) sounds a lot like "our ideas, your gas"... basically, we have this incredible vision where we build the concrete core, while you guys handle all the supporting infrastructure (on our land, or better yet, just buy out the property where the road is going to run).

So I heard someone saying yesterday that they’ve been skimping on vehicle maintenance since back in 2019, which I guess means these rigs are basically just unfixable junk heaps at this point.

Like, I’ve got this recycling truck—you know, the one picking up all the plastic and paper—and honestly, the second it rolls into town, I can hear something nasty grinding away in the engine. It sounds terrible.