Eric Adams - Mayor of New York City, Part 4

I have never actually claimed that things had started going downhill regarding waste management under TT. To be perfectly honest, I haven't noticed any significant shift myself. However, when I see those poor sanitation workers out there grinding away under this merciless heat, I certainly attribute the stability to them—even if we all know they’re working for peanuts.

Sam Wright21 said:Exactly what I was getting at. People on Facebook were all over the place regarding the location—like Vera being totally clueless about that little house plot on Sunset Blvd / Hollywood Blvd. There’s zero space there. But hey, building permits last, right? Just another legacy left behind by those crooks.

Yeah, they should probably start revoking permits the day they're issued. Can you imagine the circus? The media meltdown would be endless.🙄

Regarding "my project!" (😍), they've clearly shown they don't recognize any investment that actually benefits anyone.

I'd say they recognize a wolf in sheep's clothing the second they see who's footing the bill.

Rachel Barrett8 said:That's how construction outside of downtown LA should look—projects like yours.

Now I'm looking at yet another new building on Bužanov. It looks sleek and modern, sure, but not a single tree in sight.
Just sterile and pointless, just like the others... way too oversized.
Honestly, I don't see how anyone plans to stop this total destruction of our urban spaces.

It isn't really an issue with New York City; it's about the inspectors and agencies like them. You get your permit based on the actual design.
There's been this pattern for years now: build a place showing green space or just planning for it, then once they get the occupancy permit, they pave it over for more parking.
At that point, it's not City Hall's problem anymore—it's on the inspectors (who we all know who they work for) to show up and force them to restore it to the original plan.

Take that same Brooklyn area you guys mentioned. You have streets where front yards are mandatory, yet everyone just pours concrete over them.
Which means someone needs to step up (since these officials won't check themselves) and report it so they can force people to fix it.

No one can simply abolish building permits; attempting such a move would be regressive and legally indefensible.

Are we actually going to see a superior, updated zoning plan? It remains to be seen. Just three days ago, Nikša Božić stepped into his role, bringing a wealth of expertise in urban planning to the table.

An investor who plays by the rules, respects every requirement, and voluntarily sets aside portions of their land for public parks or community spaces is what I would call a quality developer. A competent local government recognizes that value and rewards it accordingly.

But right now, we are stuck with an incompetent clique that can't even count floors or grasp the fundamentals of a city's master plan. If this continues, the era of predatory development will only intensify.

That’s certainly not why I cast my vote.

Sam Wright21 said:No one can simply abolish building permits; attempting such a move would be regressive and legally indefensible.

Are we actually going to see a superior, updated zoning plan? It remains to be seen. Just three days ago, Nikša Božić stepped into his role, bringing a wealth of expertise in urban planning to the table.

An investor who plays by the rules, respects every requirement, and voluntarily sets aside portions of their land for public parks or community spaces is what I would call a quality developer. A competent local government recognizes that value and rewards it accordingly.

But right now, we are stuck with an incompetent clique that can't even count floors or grasp the fundamentals of a city's master plan. If this continues, the era of predatory development will only intensify.

That’s certainly not why I cast my vote.

And will the city even check if these developers actually paid taxes on the money they're using for construction? Or are they just pulling untraceable cash out of a suitcase? Ensuring only clean, legal money enters the market is huge—it's what would actually bring down apartment prices in New York City.

I find myself asking the exact same question. It’s a stroke of absolute genius, isn't it? No destruction, just pure progress—as if the investor is simply trading commodities or something equally abstract. I haven't the slightest clue 🤷

For the last two decades, I've watched nothing but the steady erosion of our public spaces. It has become, quite frankly, the singular focus of my life.

A certain Republican asked about the balance in the account. Honestly, I don't know, and even Eric Adams doesn't have an answer.

northernhawk33 said:And will the city even check if these developers actually paid taxes on the money they're using for construction? Or are they just pulling untraceable cash out of a suitcase? Ensuring only clean, legal money enters the market is huge—it's what would actually bring down apartment prices in New York City.

I mean, in what universe does business with the city involve someone just "shaking money out of a suitcase"?

On the other hand, I guess the city doesn't really have the legal authority to go digging into where someone keeps their private funds anyway.

northernhawk33 said:And will the city even check if these developers actually paid taxes on the money they're using for construction? Or are they just pulling untraceable cash out of a suitcase? Ensuring only clean, legal money enters the market is huge—it's what would actually bring down apartment prices in New York City.

So now the city is responsible for auditing tax compliance?

And I suppose the IRS is going to start mowing the lawns too?

Robin Jones2 said:So now the city is responsible for auditing tax compliance?

And I suppose the IRS is going to start mowing the lawns too?

Not long ago, Mil Mil was trying to hand New York City over to some developers who pulled the exact same stunt in Mexico City—just leaving a massive mess behind. If he’d actually managed to hand the keys to his buddies from the Gulf, we would’ve seen money flooding in from everywhere with zero oversight. Just like always. And you can bet that would have sent NYC housing prices through the roof.

Truth be told, it’s accurate.

brightpuma said:Yeah, they should probably start revoking permits the day they're issued. Can you imagine the circus? The media meltdown would be endless.🙄

Regarding "my project!" (😍), they've clearly shown they don't recognize any investment that actually benefits anyone.

I'd say they recognize a wolf in sheep's clothing the second they see who's footing the bill.

It isn't really an issue with New York City; it's about the inspectors and agencies like them. You get your permit based on the actual design.
There's been this pattern for years now: build a place showing green space or just planning for it, then once they get the occupancy permit, they pave it over for more parking.
At that point, it's not City Hall's problem anymore—it's on the inspectors (who we all know who they work for) to show up and force them to restore it to the original plan.

Take that same Brooklyn area you guys mentioned. You have streets where front yards are mandatory, yet everyone just pours concrete over them.
Which means someone needs to step up (since these officials won't check themselves) and report it so they can force people to fix it.

Look, I know talking sense to them is useless, but arguing about logic isn't getting us anywhere.
We don't have any greenery around our buildings, and we certainly don't have green roofs.

Just more and more concrete.
How long is this going to last?

Sam Wright21 said:I have never actually claimed that things had started going downhill regarding waste management under TT. To be perfectly honest, I haven't noticed any significant shift myself. However, when I see those poor sanitation workers out there grinding away under this merciless heat, I certainly attribute the stability to them—even if we all know they’re working for peanuts.

So, you're telling me the trash situation is perpetually a disaster, yet somehow it's suddenly improved just because of the sanitation crew?

Robin Jones2 said:So now the city is responsible for auditing tax compliance?

And I suppose the IRS is going to start mowing the lawns too?

Living here, you really get the sense that the IRS is basically just a landscaping crew. 🙂
And God forbid someone actually complains about how the grass looks.

"The City of Chicago has decided to bump the thermostat up from 22 to 25 degrees Celsius in four of its administrative buildings..."

I don't know. Maybe it’s just me, but I fail to see why anyone needs an indoor temperature of 22 degrees during the summer—whether it's an office, an apartment, or a workspace.
At 22, I’m already reaching for more than just light summer clothes. Honestly, what's the point of running the AC if I have to pull on long sleeves just to stay comfortable? I run cold naturally.
Or maybe I'm just being overly sensitive because I pay for my own AC out of pocket. It makes me look at things differently—questioning what’s actually rational and what’s just wasteful. 😕

darkhawk30 said:"The City of Chicago has decided to bump the thermostat up from 22 to 25 degrees Celsius in four of its administrative buildings..."

I don't know. Maybe it’s just me, but I fail to see why anyone needs an indoor temperature of 22 degrees during the summer—whether it's an office, an apartment, or a workspace.
At 22, I’m already reaching for more than just light summer clothes. Honestly, what's the point of running the AC if I have to pull on long sleeves just to stay comfortable? I run cold naturally.
Or maybe I'm just being overly sensitive because I pay for my own AC out of pocket. It makes me look at things differently—questioning what’s actually rational and what’s just wasteful. 😕

If it's sweltering outside and the building doesn't have great insulation, setting the AC to 72 won't actually keep it at 72—it'll probably feel like 74 or 75. Plus, if the units aren't perfectly maintained or low on refrigerant, they struggle even more... and then you have to consider room size, how many AC units there are, and how many people and computers are running, which all drive the heat up. So, I guess it feels a bit dictatorial for the top brass to set one temperature for everyone regardless of the specific conditions in each individual room.

As for how it feels personally, I'm definitely one of those people who prefers it cooler. I usually set my office to 72 or 75 because I can't stand the heat, and I seriously admire anyone working outdoors or in bakeries and kitchens during this weather.

Also, that night mode mentioned in the article—where the AC only kicks on if it's over 95 outside—doesn't make much sense to me. Inverter AC units actually use way less energy to maintain a temperature than they do to drop it. If it's 86 degrees at night, the temperature inside will spike so fast that the AC will end up using tons of energy in the morning to bring it back down, rather than just staying at 78 overnight. Of course, it depends on the equipment, but with old-school tech, it's pretty hard to save money while still keeping the offices at a comfortable working temperature.

Assuming we're talking about City Hall, the whole building runs on a centralized HVAC system that handles both heating and cooling. That means you don't really have any control over the temperature in your own office. Up until now, the experience has been pretty much the same: freezing in the summer and sweltering in the winter... 🤦

Bryan Edwards83 said:If it's sweltering outside and the building doesn't have great insulation, setting the AC to 72 won't actually keep it at 72—it'll probably feel like 74 or 75. Plus, if the units aren't perfectly maintained or low on refrigerant, they struggle even more... and then you have to consider room size, how many AC units there are, and how many people and computers are running, which all drive the heat up. So, I guess it feels a bit dictatorial for the top brass to set one temperature for everyone regardless of the specific conditions in each individual room.

As for how it feels personally, I'm definitely one of those people who prefers it cooler. I usually set my office to 72 or 75 because I can't stand the heat, and I seriously admire anyone working outdoors or in bakeries and kitchens during this weather.

Also, that night mode mentioned in the article—where the AC only kicks on if it's over 95 outside—doesn't make much sense to me. Inverter AC units actually use way less energy to maintain a temperature than they do to drop it. If it's 86 degrees at night, the temperature inside will spike so fast that the AC will end up using tons of energy in the morning to bring it back down, rather than just staying at 78 overnight. Of course, it depends on the equipment, but with old-school tech, it's pretty hard to save money while still keeping the offices at a comfortable working temperature.

If the AC isn't powerful enough to actually hit 72, you might as well just set it to 75. It doesn't really matter if you pick 65 or 72; if the room is sitting at 80 and the fan is on max, the unit is just going to run at full blast regardless.

Two days ago, Korlaet posted photos showing they "cleaned up" that illegal dump site over on stream III. 40. But honestly, Jbno... it looks like they just shifted the whole mess a few yards down the road.

https://www.chicago.info/aktualno/zg-...otpada/439247/

Fast forward to today—that same illegal dump site on stream III. 40 is burning. Funny how that works, right?

https://www.chicago.info/crna-kronika...ogasci/439687/

I wonder if the industrial shredder broke down again or something?

They’ll probably just start closing the windows now—and that'll be the end of it.

Roger James2 said:Two days ago, Korlaet posted photos showing they "cleaned up" that illegal dump site over on stream III. 40. But honestly, Jbno... it looks like they just shifted the whole mess a few yards down the road.

https://www.chicago.info/aktualno/zg-...otpada/439247/

Fast forward to today—that same illegal dump site on stream III. 40 is burning. Funny how that works, right?

https://www.chicago.info/crna-kronika...ogasci/439687/

I wonder if the industrial shredder broke down again or something?

It’s honestly wild how this theatrical little stunt—just moving trash a few yards away in a packed neighborhood—happens without any actual residents even noticing or making a scene.

https://www.nyc.gov/news/...waste/439247/

Today— the exact same illegal dump site is on fire over on stream III. 40. Funny coincidence...

https://www.nyc.com/crime/fire...gas/439687/

A quick search suggests fires at this specific spot are basically a regular thing:
https://www.nytimes.com/news/crime...-665932.html
VIDEO Fire in New York City: Black smoke rising over the skyline from a spot where fires break out all the time

On Wednesday afternoon in New York City, a fire broke out. It happened at stream III. 40, a location where, word on the street is, there have been more than 25 fires recorded in just the last three years.

Just a few blocks away from where they supposedly cleared the landfill.

Scott Perez57 said:They’ll probably just start closing the windows now—and that'll be the end of it.

Man, you really put some effort into this, but clearly you’ve got a much better handle on how to actually solve things than they do.

In this video clip, they’re talking about the AC issues over at AKZ and how an employee even passed out because of it.

This video might be worth a look for anyone following the mess happening with NYC sanitation. We're talking less trash pickup, zero truck drivers, no sanitation workers, missing garbage trucks... the whole nine yards.

They supposedly "addressed" the hiring issues for sanitation workers and drivers.
Public job openings have been posted for sanitation workers and drivers.

Luka k is promising that sanitation will improve and claims everything is going to be just fine.