Transcript: Mayor Adams Holds In-Person Media Availability

January 23, 2024

Deputy Mayor Fabien Levy, Communications: Good morning, everybody. My name is Fabien Levy, and I serve as deputy mayor for Communications for the City of New York. We appreciate everyone joining us today for our weekly in person media availability.

These forums provide a valuable opportunity for New Yorkers to learn more about the work of their city government and the ways our administration is delivering for them. But they are not the only way, so tomorrow the mayor will deliver his third State of the City Address looking back on the progress we have made over our first two years in office and laying out our administration's vision for the next two years as well.

From keeping our streets safe to growing our economy to building a more livable city, our administration is excited to deliver a future-focused vision for working class New Yorkers. So, we look forward to seeing many of you there.

Before that, however, joining us this morning are Mayor Eric Adams, First Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright, Chief Advisor to the Mayor Ingrid Lewis Martin, Deputy Mayor for Operations Meera Joshi, Deputy Mayor for Housing, Economic Development and Workforce Maria Torres-Springer, Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services Anne Williams-Isom, Deputy Mayor for Strategic Initiatives Ana Almanzar, Chief Counsel Lisa Zornberg.

So without further delay, I'm pleased to turn it over to Mayor Adams.

Mayor Eric Adams: Thank you. Thanks so much. Good to see you all. You know, we've made it clear in this administration since day one, our vision for the five boroughs we create, and we want to create a safer city, a more economically viable and more livable for our working class New Yorkers.

And the results are clear, I say this over and over again: jobs are up, crime is down, tourism is back. And any time you walk the streets, particularly in Times Square when I do one of my evening walks, you see just the excitement and the energy that's buzzing.

Since we took office, jobs have steadily climbed. Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer was giving us the new numbers on private sector jobs, and we just continue to see that those jobs are returning to the city. We made big investments in public safety, of public spaces and people as the announcement we had yesterday. That's a huge announcement, 500,000 New Yorkers, billions of dollars of medical debt with an $18 million investment in New Yorkers.

These are the types of creative ways we want to really alleviate some of the challenges of living in the city. Cities are becoming more and more expensive. Government must find ways to bring down the cost and put money back in the pockets of everyday taxpayers.

We will continue to move in that direction, but we are not stopping with our success, we're not stopping with how bond raters have looked at us. We're not stopping to continue to drive down crime, make our subway system safer, deal with the mental health crisis, outpace the state in education, our gains in reading and math, creative ways of having our children learn better.

As the governor looked at what Chancellor Banks is doing around the phonics-based reading program, we are continuing to lead from the front. And we're going to continue to grow our economy and continue to find ways to make everyday New Yorkers see a city that's more livable.

And since we took office, the success has been evident. We are concerned about public safety. You know, I don't think there's been a mayor in this history of the city that have used the term "public safety" more than I have. It is a prerequisite to our prosperity.

And I know that many people are pushing back on our conversation around two bills that are pending, I vetoed the other day. Right here in this room, we talked about it with community leaders, religious leaders and others. Intro. 549-A will put vulnerable New Yorkers at risk, including both our hardworking correction officers. And what many people miss, 80 percent of those who are assaulted in correctional facilities are the inmates. And you know, when I speak to inmate family members, when I speak to the family members of correction officers, it's a real issue.

And some are saying that this bill is about solitary confinement, that is just not true. We don't have solitary confinement in New York City. 2019, prior to becoming mayor, it was disbanded. And even the Daily News talks about that it was a sleight of hand of using that. That's an emotional term. It's a term that I am against and others are against, and it's a term that was used to push through a bill that is just really not responding to the call that many people are calling for.

Just like the City Council, our administration is against solitary confinement. And we believe that it should not be used. And the commissioner stated that, and I've stated that over and over again. And so you cannot put things in a bill and call it something different, just like you cannot put 20 inmates on a bus without tools to keep them and correction staff safe.

That is something we talk about, when you look at this simple video, we need to actualize what people are saying. When you transport inmates, you see two inmates are cuffed together. They enter the actual transportation bus that can house up to 20 inmates. And when they enter the bus, they're placed in the areas on the bus not only to protect the correction officers, but to protect other inmates. Sometimes inmates enter a bus and they already have disputes that have taken place and they use these opportune times, those who are the bad inmates, they use this opportune time to go after other inmates.

You take away the restraint, imagine these 20 something inmates on the bus not being restrained, and then there is some type of action that takes place, or when the officer opens that gate and he's rushed by 20 inmates.

We would never do this to a police officer. Never. In my 22 years of policing, I would never allow a person that's accused of a crime to sit in the back of a vehicle without being handcuffed. Because oftentimes, even when we search people on the street, they secrete weapons on themselves, and you'll come later and then go through the car to do the final inspection and you'll find sometimes a gun, sometimes a knife, sometimes a razor would be in the back of the car, even after you do a field inspection.

And many of these inmates are masters at secreting weapons on themselves, so if you have those 20 inmates unrestrained, that officer opens the door, they rush him, that is a dangerous situation. Or, if they assault another inmate while on the back of that bus and officers attempt to go in and all 20 are unrestrained. That's an unbelievable circumstance to be in. You're on the BQE, you see an inmate being assaulted, you have to go in the back and stop that assault and you have all 20 of the inmates are unrestrained.

This is why I'm going to ask the City Councilmembers not only to join us in doing the ride-alongs this weekend, but I'm going to ask them to come and ride along on one of these buses. We need lawmakers to see the impacts of the laws that they're passing.

And I'm in alignment with what the council is attempting to do. I think their heart is in the right place. But you have to actually see the operationalizing of the laws that you put in place and how it impacts every day public servants in our city.

And so we're going to open up to questions, but I want to remind everyone, some of your own papers, some of your own editorial boards have made it clear. The Daily News Editorial Board made it clear that the bill's defenders have often used a sleight of hand to suggest this bill is about solitary confinement when it is not. New York Post. As the New York Post board stated, the bill would make jails more dangerous for detainees and staff. Quite simply, we cannot put lives at risk. Detainees and staff. And so now, DM Levy will open to any questions.

Question: Good morning.

Mayor Adams: How are you?

Question: I'm going to start with this topic actually. My question is, do you have any response already from the City Councilmembers as to who specifically will participate in this ride along? I know that the Common Sense Caucus plans but what about other councilmembers?

And can you talk about the response to this invitation, and also did you speak with any councilmember directly as to really make sure that they will participate so that you can get them on this side...

Mayor Adams: Yes.

Question: ...of the discussion that you want them to be on.

Mayor Adams: Yes. Assistant Commissioner Daughtry is fielding the questions of who is going to participate in the ride along. And I communicated with the current Public Safety Chair, Salaam, Yusef Salaam. He stated he would participate. And I communicated with also Councilman Riley, who also indicated he would participate.

And I just think it's important to come out and see… To hear that radio, to hear how many jobs an officer responds to in a night and to see the actual application of legislation. I think this is a turning point for all of us. When we put in place laws and bills, we should go out and see how does it play out on the ground? How does it, you know, if we talk about things that school teachers should do, we talk about things that firefighters should do, DEP, ACS, how does that play out?

And I don't think that's done enough, and so I think the idea, again, was the right idea, the right concept. And I agree with 90 percent of the bill. I don't agree with the Level 1 aspect of it and I don't believe they fully understand that you can't alter what Level 1 stands for.

And so I'm hoping as many councilpersons as possible participate in the ride along, and I'm hoping they participate in going to see of what is like in a correctional facility to have 20 people on the bus.

Question: Mr. Mayor, I was wondering if you have any advice for an employer who's looking to hire a migrant? Is it illegal or is there an exception being made?

Mayor Adams: It is illegal. There are federal rules. We explored things that we can do on the city level and the state level. I know there are a few pieces of legislations that are being contemplated, but it is illegal for us to do so. We don't want to do anything that's going to place anyone in harm's way.

And that's a major impediment. The inability to work I think is as anti American as you could get, not being able to work. And we're hoping that we could expedite the process, allow people to work.

Now, we've also learned in our creativity that we can't even have people volunteer and get a stipend. So, if someone wants… We've had migrants that say, hey, we would like to help clean the streets, we would like to help clean around the community that we're in, and we can't give them a stipend.

So this is a real restrictive mindset. I think it's outdated and it's a real problem. Counsel Zornberg, do you want to add anything to that at all?

Lisa Zornberg, Chief Counsel to the Mayor and City Hall: Yes, this is clearly, squarely a federal issue and these are laws passed by the United States Congress which don't make any sense. Under the asylum regime that exists in federal law today, every affirmative asylum application is supposed to be resolved and decided within 180 days of the application being made.

That's clearly so broken, there are no words strong enough to express how broken it is. You have people putting in an asylum application who are waiting minimum multiple years even just to get a hearing if they ever get a hearing.

And in the meantime, federal law at the same time that it has this dysfunctional asylum system, federal law says… Makes it illegal for any asylum seeker to even apply for work authorization within the first 180 days and makes it illegal for employers of all stripes to hire people who don't have work authorization. So, this is a broken federal system, and we're seeing the manifestations of it in our communities.

Question: Is the city doing any...

[Crosstalk]

Mayor Adams: No, no. This is an important question.

Question: Does the city do any enforcement in terms of employers who are hiring folks who should not be working, or another jurisdiction?

Zornberg: This is... The answer is no. This is not a city municipal enforcement issue, this is entirely a federal issue.

Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer, Housing, Economic Development and Workforce: Can I just add one thing. For employers who would like to work with us to help connect asylum seekers and migrants who are work authorized, because that is, some of that is already happening, right?

I want to make sure that everyone knows that we are already doing that through our Workforce1 system, and employers should check out, we've developed a portal for this, nyc.gov/americandreamworks, and there we will make the connections with employers who are interested in participating and those and those asylum seekers who are work authorized or on the way to being work authorized in the city.

Question: Do you know how many employees are on that list and how many employees have signed up? How many employees are working under that program?

Deputy Mayor Torres-Springer: So, we'll follow up with the details on that, but we already have hundreds of employees, employers, and we're working collaboratively with the state as well, and are starting the really important work of connecting migrants to training and making those referrals.

Mayor Adams: We have 20, what's our number, DM Williams -Isom?

Deputy Mayor Anne Williams-Isom, Health and Human Services: 28,000.

Mayor Adams: How many?

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: 28,000.

Mayor Adams: 28,000.

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: Correct.

Deputy Mayor Levy: Just to be clear, that's for all the applications.

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: Yes.

Deputy Mayor Levy: That's TPS, Work Authorization and Asylum. Work authorization, it's just over 12,100.

Mayor Adams: The infrastructure is too labor intense and it has bottlenecked. And so we'll get people ready, but then the process is just… The federal government must meet the challenge. If not, then you're going to have just this bottlenecking that we are witnessing right now.

We get them ready, but then they're not being able to get in front of a judge in Albany. They share they don't have any of the judges to see the case, they have to send them up to Buffalo. So, the federal government must meet this challenge that we're facing right now.

Question: Sticking with migrants; more broadly, homelessness. We have the HOPE count tonight, I know you're helping kick that off...

Mayor Adams: Yep.

Question: ...about 10:30 or so. With the eviction policies and moving migrants through the shelters, but many are having successful outcomes, some are having unsuccessful outcomes, and we're seeing increased pockets of homelessness throughout the city around Tompkins Square Park where they're waiting for reticketing, Penn Station to name a couple of places.

Is there a broad expectation the street homeless count will increase after tonight? I know it takes a minute to compile the numbers. And what sort of signal might that send to the feds? And is there hope that will eventually lead to more money?

Mayor Adams: You know, and I said this, for those of you who have covered this, I've said this a couple of months ago, the visualization of this crisis is going to become aware for New Yorkers. We stated we were out of room. We were out of room and the cost of doing this was just too, it was a weight we could not continue to carry.

And I'm surprised that those who are saying we're being inhumane for the 30 days for single adults when 80 percent of the those single adults were self-sustaining.

And so the question that we should really ask, are we saying that we should have kept 168,000 that traveled through our system should we have kept them? We're under 100,000 now. Over 50, over 60 percent of the people who have arrived here were able to become self-sustaining through reticketing and using intense service for them.

And so there's like this strange mix of communications: people saying it's inhumane to tell people you have a limited amount of time you're going to be here, but we shouldn't build another shelter system. If we would have stated you could stay as long as you want, with taxpayers going to pay for your food, your clothing, your lifestyle for as long as you want, that is just not economically realistic and it's unfair to our taxpayers, it's unfair to migrants and asylum seekers.

And so our humane policy that we're telling single adults 30 days, children and family 60 days, and we are not going to allow any child or family to sleep on the street. I said that over and over again. And so I don't think political posturing is going to solve this crisis.

And what's interesting, people who are saying we should not do this, they don't have a solution. Our solution is working. So they don't have a solution, but they're saying we're being inhumane when we don't have children and families sleep on the streets.

Ingrid Lewis Martin, Chief Advisor to the Mayor: Well, mayor, their solution is for us to just keep the people and use the taxpayer dollars.

Mayor Adams: Right.

Lewis Martin: That's the solution, just being real about it.

Deputy Mayor Levy: So, I would just…

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: Can I talk about the HOPE count?

Deputy Mayor Levy: Yes, please.

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: So, it's, as you said, it's happening tonight. Traditionally, since we started this in 2005, the numbers have been about 3,500 to 4,000, so I am interested to see if we see anything different tonight. We have over 1,500 New Yorkers that are volunteering, which is fantastic.

And we will, you know, we are obligated to do this by HUD to take this point in time analysis. And so I think we will see what has happened. We know that we are reticketing many of the single adults and that we also provide a place for them to wait if some of them don't want to leave the jurisdiction. Many people are working already or are saying that they want to stay here for legal reasons.

And the only other thing I want to correct you is I don't call this an eviction policy I call it a time limit. We don't have many tools that we could use, so we have to be responsible. There is no evidence that we have done anything that has been to harm people. What we're doing is taking a situation that is a really difficult, challenging situation and using the tools that we have, which is the case management, and trying to connect people to self-sufficiency, as the mayor said.

Question: Just to clarify, deputy mayor, if a homeless migrant is on the street tonight, that's part of the count?

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: Yes.

Question: Okay.

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: Yes.

Mayor Adams: And what's interesting, what's interesting that what a lot of people are not, which DM just pointed out, we're not telling anyone they have to sleep outside on the street, we're giving them the policy, people are making the decision that this is what they want to do.

We have created rooms for people to wait in, we have done everything to accommodate to say, here's what possible. And so to give the impression that, you know, we're just evicting, as used, people out, it's just been, it's not being honest, you know? It's not being honest. And our goal is to make sure we can make people self-sustaining.

As Ingrid stated, this is not sustainable for us to just continue, 172,000 now have come through our system. Imagine if we had no policy at all. It's unbelievable that people think that New York City taxpayers can pick up this task forever without any type of policy in place. This was a smart policy of telling people, listen, you have to become self-sustaining.

Deputy Mayor Levy: And I would just give the updated numbers. So, we're at over 172,400 migrants that have come through our intake system since the spring of 2022. There's still more than 67,500 currently in our care which means almost 105,000 have moved on and taken the next steps towards self sufficiency. That's over 60 percent.

Mayor Adams: And that's the plan, you know, I don't want to harp on this, but that's the plan. We really need to ask those who are saying we should not be doing X, then tell us why. Tell us what would you do with 172,000 people? And is the position, because I think you're right, Ingrid, is the position that, hey, you're supposed to keep sustaining them for as long as people want to?

I don't know the answer to that question. When I speak to people, they say that, you know, you shouldn't have a 30 day limit. I say, okay. Then give me an option, because we're open to hear some options. They say, well, we don't have an option, you just shouldn't do it. That's not how you govern the city.

Question: Turning to the topic of policing, earlier today, an officer was arraigned in the Bronx on a manslaughter charge in the cooler throwing incident from last summer. Do you have any thoughts about that?

Mayor Adams: The AG is leading that investigation and she's going to make the final determination on how to move forward. That's not a policy that we use of throwing a cooler. But the AG is handling that, and I think it's best to, you know, I'll refer those questions over to the attorney general.

Question: Going back to the bill, the How Many Stops Act… Earlier right before this event, Council Speaker Adrienne Adams held a newser and also saying that she plans to override the veto. What are your thoughts on that? And what are your thoughts on those who say that this is basically betraying low income and minority families?

Mayor Adams: I think to the contrary. And it's unfortunate that the real betrayal is the erosion of trust that we've built up for years in the police department. And some of you have covered me for years. You know, this is what I cut my teeth in, of fighting against abusive police practices, stop and frisk. These are all of the ideas and concepts that I have fought for.

And for them to believe that now I've become mayor and I'm going to all of a sudden not continue to fight for those things is just, it just doesn't make sense. You don't spend the overwhelming amount of your adult life fighting for something.

Their hearts are in the right place, but the wording of Level 1 stops, we agree with Level 2 and Level 3s. The Level 1 stops is the area where they're misunderstanding the rule. When you misunderstand the rule, you're applying the concept.

And so listen, you can't take away as a child being abused by police officers. You know, a young man being stopped unjustly. I don't think there is an African American or Latino young man that grew up in my era that didn't go through this. I was stopped as a police officer while off duty.

Cops would sit around and say what they've gone through and now you know they got into experiences. And so I'm not going to allow our police department to be abusive, but I've always been very clear: public safety and justice goes together.

I'm not going to allow the justice to be harmed, but I'm not going to allow erosion of public safety. There have been bills in the City Council that I've disagreed with, but you've never seen this level because I know the threat of public safety if we get this wrong.

And I told the City Councilmembers, we can't get this wrong, you know? We cannot restrain police officers and hurt what we have accomplished all this time. And so I'm hoping that level heads prevail. I know when I speak to City Councilmembers, if they were able to vote with their conscience, they would not be supporting this bill.

I know that their communities don't believe this. I know that the speaker's community, South Jamaica, Queens, Southeast Queens where I grew up, I know they're pro law enforcement. I know communities in Rockaways, the South Bronx, Washington Heights, they want their police policing not doing paperwork.

And so for someone to say that this is wrong for Black and Brown communities, I say, yes, it is wrong for Black and Brown communities because we're taking that police off to the streets and we're putting them behind a desk. And that's not what we should be doing.

Question: ...the public advocate has said it's not really paperwork, it's just digital, it's two, three questions, they move on. It takes a few seconds…

Mayor Adams: And see, that's so important for anyone to say "well, it just takes a few seconds." Just go back to the stabbing, of six people being stabbed I think it was last week...

Deputy Mayor Levy: Last week.

Mayor Adams: Last week. We knocked on and we communicated with a thousand people, a thousand people. Each one of those individuals we will have to document, we have to guess their age, guess their race, guess their gender, and then write down the reason why we stopped them.

I don't care if you're using an app, I don't care if you write it on a piece of paper, I don't care how you do it, that takes some time. And if it was just, if we were saying just for the stabbing, you have to do it one time for everyone that you spoke with, okay.

No. Each one of those individuals, you are going to have to do that documentation. It's already on your body camera, but you've got to do it again. And so anyone who's dismissive of oh, it only takes a 60 seconds or a matter of seconds, let's say it takes a minute. That's a thousand minutes. I think it's going to take anywhere from one to three minutes.

And you've got to do it right; and then if that officer doesn't do it right, he's violating the patrol guide. Now that officer is subject to disciplinary proceedings. So you know what that officer said? Hey, I'm not going to do this. I'm not going to put myself in a position to be brought up on departmental charges. So, everyone is saying it takes anywhere from three minutes… You do the math, three minutes times a thousand, that's 3,000.

And you know, it was interesting, some people reported last week that this is going against what I stood for all these years. Anyone that says that hasn't been following me in all these years.

I've stood for public safety and justice. I agree with the bill. I disagree with Level 1. And that should not be distorted. And I'm hoping that level heads will prevail and that we could come to an understanding on this. That's my desire.

Zornberg: Mayor, if I just could jump in and respond to the question that was asked. To the extent anyone has said, oh, you just have to answer a couple of questions, that takes a few seconds, I would encourage you and everyone to read the bill.

It requires, for each report that has to be filed, I believe it's 11 separate things that need to be filled out, and not all of them are check the box. I mean, they require, first, there's the whole issue of, you have to guess. The police officer has to guess the age, the ethnicity, the race, the gender of the person with whom the officer spoke.

But they also have to fill in an explanation of what were the circumstances of how you came to have an encounter with this individual. How did you identify this individual? That's not a two second thing.

And the difference between a Level 1 versus — which is every kind of investigative encounter that has nothing to do with there being any criminal suspicion at all, there are millions. You're talking about Level 1 encounters on a magnitude of millions versus other types of encounters that involve criminal suspicion that are in a magnitude of thousands. So, you have thousands versus millions.

I don't understand why when the NYPD has repeatedly said we're at the table, we're agreeing with you on Level 2s and 3s, just rethink this portion of the bill. Why is it not good government to sit down and make that one modification that the administration is asking for for the sake of public safety?

Mayor Adams: And you know, when I read some of your reporting, some of y'all reporting, I don't think y'all really understand the bill. Any… An officer approaches someone for any credible reason, an officer approach someone for any credible reason. It does not have to deal with a criminal reason.

A person loses their dog. You approach them, that's a credible reason. A person's looking for their parents that's dealing with dementia, and you're asking people in the neighborhood, that's a credible reason. As Chief Maddrey said, seeing someone looking faint, walk up to them, that's a credible reason. Are you okay? That's a credible reason.

And so some of your reporting is missing that, any credible reason. And so for anyone that's supportive of this bill, they're missing that point. A credible reason does not have to be law enforcement or criminal related.

"Any credible reason," that's the key that we're trying to drive in. And I look at some of the reporting, some of the reporting don't really understand that a credible reason, because it's police, it does not mean every interaction they have is law enforcement, some of their interaction is non law enforcement.

Matter of fact, the overwhelming amount of credible reasons we interact with the public is non law enforcement. Law enforcement is a small portion of it. We're going to be taking officers that are making...  You walk into a store to speak with a store clerk, owner of a store, credible reason that you're approaching him. You have to now document that.

Question: Mr. Mayor...

Mayor Adams: Yes.

Question: ...the bills you're talking about passed with 35 votes, headcounts suggest you've lost even more despite these pleas. Why do you think that is?

Mayor Adams: Well, first of all, here's my job. My job is to look at a bill that I believe is something that should not be passed and I use my power of veto and I use my role as mayor to explain to the public. That's my job. The job of the City Council people and the speaker is to use it and determine, do we agree, do we disagree? Are we going to override Eric's veto or the mayor's veto? I don't have power in that.

I know when I have communicated with some of the City Councilmembers, some of them have shared, my constituency don't believe this. My constituency believe that this is a harmful bill. Some of them have said that, you know, if they were able to vote with their conscience, they would not vote for this bill. Some of them have indicated that they're afraid to vote with their conscience, and I said we should be more fearful of our safety in this city than any other item.

And so we're going to continue to speak with the councilmembers, tell them why this bill is extremely harmful to the foundation of our safety, and it's up to them to make the determination. I did my job, and I'm continuing to do my job of educating and trying to get the council to come to understanding that this is not a good bill for the safety of our city. But it's up to them to make that determination.

Question: Hi, Mr. Mayor.

Mayor Adams: How are you?

Question: Good. I wanted to ask you, you know, it seems now late in the stage for you to kind of change these opinions. What type of work were you doing behind the scenes while the bill was being crafted to change those opinions?

I also wanted to get… Last year's State of the City address, the theme was the Working People's Agenda. I wanted to know if you could give us a preview of what the theme would be tomorrow.

And then thoughts on Scott Stringer launching an exploratory committee to run for mayor.

Mayor Adams: I'm focused on the job, not politicizing this job. We're months away from the election in 2025. I'm focused on that. You know, anyone that knows me, stay focused, no distractions and grind. You know, all that other stuff, I don't get involved in.

We've done a lot. Mike Gerber over at the New York City Police Department, the council, the deputy commissioner over there has sat down and, you know, tried. over and over again. Chief Maddrey has communicated. We have continuously communicated on the credible reason part. That's the part that I need everyone to focus on. We tried to explain the "credible reason" part. If folks would just understand, because when I hear those who are supporting the bill, they don't believe that...

They believe that credible reason is only criminal in nature. That's the big mistake they're making. If we can get them to understand, the credible reason is part of the everyday interaction between the police and citizens. That is the sticking point for them. They think that we could redefine the definition of Level 1. We can't. Level 1 was created by a court ruling that we must adhere to. And they keep saying, this does not mean if someone is looking for a missing person, they're wrong. And they can't get over that part of it. That's the big mistake that's being made.

"Credible reason" is not only a criminal nature. Matter of fact, it says in Level 1, it does not have to be for criminal purposes.

Question: And then any preview on the State of the City tomorrow? Last year's theme was the Working People's Agenda. What's tomorrow's theme?

Mayor Adams: I wanted to give you the full scope of it, but Fabien Levy, the bully, told me I couldn't do it.

[Laughter.]

Deputy Mayor Levy: Absolutely not. Nope. We want to very clearly… We've talked about our vision for the last two years, it was to protect public safety, rebuild our economy and make our city more livable. You're going to hear a lot more of that tomorrow. But please come to the speech.

Question: Thank you. Two questions. First, you've clearly said that you made an effort behind the scenes to convince the council that it was making a mistake with how it constructed the law. Do you wish that you had made a more public push like you're doing now sort of retroactively?

And then secondly, a few minutes ago at this press conference that the council was having, your deputy chief of staff tried to take chairs away from reporters covering it. And I was curious, did he do so at your direction? And what was the purpose of that? Is there a chair shortage in City Hall?

Mayor Adams: First, let me do the first part of it. The first part of it is that when you try to negotiate these bills, at a good faith, why should you do it publicly? At a good faith, have behind the scenes conversation. Tiffany Raspberry, who's in charge of our IGA, our entire team over there had a number of meetings. The entire team communicated with relationships that they have with the leadership over there.

So, you know, you want to resolve these issues, because there's a lot of bills that come up. We have a lot of bills that we don't even hear about. They don't even get to the floor because we're able to utilize our relationships to say here's why this bill is wrong.

And so that is why we didn't do a public push because it's just not in good faith why you're sitting down negotiating with people. It just shows that we were negotiating, to do it publicly, and that was our goal.

There was… Earlier today, we want to maintain control in the Rotunda area. And we're going to sit down, as we did with the public advocate, we're going to sit down with the speaker, the team is going to sit down and really coordinate how you properly control using the space there in the rotunda area.

Historically, there were letters sent out to us requesting use of the space. That was not done this time. And so we're going to communicate so that we could be good tenants together in this building. And the team will do that.

The first deputy mayor will sit down with the team across the hall. Our leadership will do so, and my chief advisor would speak with their chief of staff, Jeremy, as well, and just make sure we can maintain order. We don't want, the steps are back open. We want to make sure we coordinate correctly because the role of the intelligence and the police that's here must maintain order. We have to have order here in the building.

Question: I want to go back to the work permits because there is big concern from parents that have contacted me and sending me pictures of their kids like 13, 7 years old and 11 years old with work permits and they haven't gotten anything yet.

I contacted the immigration office in Washington and they told me basically that they are doing that because they want to give them, the little kids, identification. But what about the work permit? This is now complicated the situation here in New York City because the parents say they can't work without the work permit and their kids got them like three months ago.

Mayor Adams: I'm not, I'm not aware of that. Any of the team is aware of that, of children, 17 you said?

Question: Seven, 10 and 13 years old.

Mayor Adams: Yes, can you give us, so we can look into it? Anne, anyone is aware of that?

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom:  No.

Mayor Adams: I'm not aware. Can you give us, can you give, yes, we'll get it before. Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that. And we'll get back to you and find out about it.

[Crosstalk.]

Mayor Adams: We're not going to forget you and your congestion pricing question.

Question: Mr. Mayor, last week you said that you need to do more of an analysis of the money the governor said she'd be giving you for the migrant crisis this coming fiscal year. Have you gotten a chance to… I know, it's Jacques that does it, but really like dig into those numbers and figure out how much is actually coming to the city. You know, how much do you need to stave off those April cuts?

Mayor Adams: Well, again, I think after we did the budget, Jacques Jiha, our budget director sat down and explained to you, we are pleased with the steps the governor made on a number of things, not only the migrant and asylum seekers, what she's doing with us around housing, cannabis, mayoral control. She clearly indicated that we should have it for another four years.

So, I think that, you know, let's get you in the room and this team and if Jacques needs to do another briefing to tell us the exact dollar amount, we need the federal government to pick up the entire cost. None of this should be at our cost.

And so we'll let my budget director sit down and tell you where we are and what the economics are. A little over $2 billion, I think she allocated, but let Jacques Jiha do that.

Question: Hi, Mayor Adams. I want to get your take on the lawsuit that was settled yesterday with community preference and affordable housing. I know as a candidate, you were against the community preference. I wanted to see if you still are and if this will change or at least alter the city's strategy on where it decides to help build certain neighborhoods. I don’t know if you and then Deputy Mayor wanted to… 

Mayor Adams: Yes. You know, and Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer and the entire team, you know, we had to decide, do we want to lose it all, or do we want to salvage as much as possible?

And the community preference is a very interesting conversation, because it could be helpful and it could be harmful because there's some communities that have not allowed people to come in and live in communities. As much as we think we live in an integrated city, we don't. We live in a hugely segregated city, and many people have prevented building in communities to keep people out, many people have used other methods to keep people out. And so, that's why, you know, allowing community preference could be a double-edged sword. And so Maria, you want to go into the court ruling and what was the outcome?

Deputy Mayor Torres-Springer: Yes, thank you, mayor. So, we were pleased that we were able through the settlement to preserve the community preference. It is at a lower amount, but what it does is it brings to closure what has been a decade-long, a near decade long litigation that has consumed a lot of time and resource.

What has been true and what will continue to be true in the months and years to come is that we have to continue to redouble our efforts, Katie, to build housing in every neighborhood of the city, and I think we're off to a really strong start.

So, if you look at a number of indicators, let's start with having launched the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity. That is the most far reaching, pro housing set of proposals to build housing in every neighborhood. Just a few days ago, we talked about the affordable housing production numbers for the calendar year, records in terms of new homes, homes for the formerly homeless, supportive homes, and the most number of units that are going through the lottery. And those, again, are located across the five boroughs.

We worked with the City Council in terms of legislation that establishes a fair housing framework. And just yesterday, we certified our first neighborhood plan, Bronx Metro North, and that's about 7,000 units with four more to go over the course of the next several months and hopefully many more working very collaboratively with the City Council.

I mentioned those things because community preference, that preference has been an important tool and we have to use all of the other tools that we have. In terms of what more there is to be done, I think we're all with the City Council and other partners, we're partners on this same mission. And the work to build more housing across all neighborhoods to ensure that we have economic diversity and all that we do in every neighborhood of the city, that has to continue not just with the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, but in terms of getting a housing package done, right, in Albany, because those are the types of tools that are needed to boost supply across the city.

And even with the federal government, the advocacy that we need to continue to use to expand the resources that have for too long been scarce. And there's actually some really great movement in terms of the expansion of the housing tax credit with bipartisan support in Washington. So it is, in our conversations with stakeholders and members of the City Council, I think it's generally understood that this has been a long road. It is historic that this settlement has happened. And now our collective work is to use every tool that we have to build housing where it's needed, and that is all across the city.

Question: Good afternoon… 

Mayor Adams: Hey, what's up J.R.? How are you?

Question: Mr. Mayor, [inaudible] team. Along the lines of public safety. The MTA has just installed some platform barriers at the subway station at 191st Street as part of the safety pilot program. Do you think it would help with, prevent slips, falls, or people being pushed on to the subway lines?

Mayor Adams: Yes. I think that… I'm a big believer in pilot projects. You try until you get it right, then you expand it. So, I believe they heard the calls from so many who are saying, let's figure out new ways to really secure the platforms. When I see like even at JFK, when you get on the tram, I think it's JFK, one of these airports, they have the glass that prevents you...

Deputy Mayor Levy: JFK.

Mayor Adams: JFK, and when I'm in other countries, you know, they do the same thing. And so I think we have to move towards, how do we separate the platform from passengers to sort of prevent people from being shoved on the track.

And this is, I think this is one of the first steps. I think eventually we're going to evolve to some form of using a glass partition one day. And you know, it's a great first step, let's see how it works and how successful it is.

So, I take my hat off to Janno and the crew over there for understanding and hearing that, you know, we need to figure out how to prevent some people from being pushed on the tracks. We're doing our part dealing with those with severe mental health illness.

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom and her team sitting down, our outreach workers, to sort of, you know, talk people to get the care they need. So, we're going to do our part. Everyone must contribute to finding safer ways to protect passengers.

Question: Sir, good afternoon.

Mayor Adams: What's up, NJ?

Question: It does sound as if there is some kind of a stops bill that you're willing to sign.

Mayor Adams: Yes.

Question: Can you be really clear, crystal clear with us about what that bill looks like. And second, do you feel there is a need to have a stops bill at all?

Mayor Adams: That's a great question, NJ. I think that when you look at what we have done in the stop and frisk, because of some of the advocacy for 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement, myself, I testified in federal court, we were able to go from almost a million people being stopped every year. That includes those that were documented and undocumented. I think it was over 80 percent were Black and brown. We were able to really change the culture of, you know, the abuse of stop and frisk.

Reverend Sharpton and others who, you know, really pushed into this. And you know, we were able to make real change. We should be happy about that. The video cameras, you know, was something that I supported as a state senator. AG James pushed it. I think she was City Council at the time. We were able to now document these cases, these stories. And so the information is there.

So, do we need a stops bill? I would say I don't believe we do, but I respect the fact that there are those that believe we should for Level 2s and 3s. And I'm willing to sign that any day, because if they believe we need to go further with more transparency, you know what? I'm fine.

It's the Level 1s. And I'm willing to sign a bill that… The entire bill, the way they have it, if you remove and modify the Level 1. Those credible stops mean any stop that an officer makes in his inquiries that is not only dealing with law enforcement, but just his basic interaction with the public.

I think the public is going to get offended. Why are you guessing my age, my race, my gender? I think there's going to be a reluctancy for people to interact. We want police and communities to interact. I think we're making a big mistake on the credible reason for stopping someone. But any other, you take that out, I would sign that any day and I would stand up and say, you know, good job City Council and let's move forward. That is the issue that's for me.

Question: Thank you. One quick for Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom and then the question on How Many Stops act. On the HOPE count. So, if migrants are going to be included in it, do you anticipate that that will result in an increase in federal funding?

For you, Mr. Mayor, on Level 1 stops, the council has said that it offered the administration an opportunity to provide exemptions to Level 1s, specific stops that you think should not be subject to reporting, but that the administration never took up the council on that offer. Why didn't you take them up on that offer? Wouldn't that address your concerns?

Mayor Adams: Okay. And Chris, a couple of things. And this is where people are making a big mistake. The term Level 1 is defined by a court ruling. We can't define Level 1s. Once you use a term "Level 1," you're now, you're now... Thank you. You're so kind.

Deputy Mayor Levy: Emotional intelligence.

Mayor Adams: The court defines Level 1s. Now, if they would have said, here are the stops that we want recorded without saying "Level 1," now we could have a conversation. But I can't go, after a judge made a decision "this is the definition of a Level 1," "this is the definition of a Level 2," "this is the definition of a Level 3."

Once you say, in their bill here, they define Level 1 encounter. The term Level 1 encounter means an investigative encounter in which the member of the department requests information from a member of the public on an objective, credible reason for such encounter and need not necessarily require any suspicion of criminal activity.

So now you've got the whole universe. So, Officer Joe, I don't suspect you of any criminal activity. You're just trying to find your lowest loved one. This is a credible reason that I'm talking to you. So, once they define what Level 1 is, we've got to go by the court ruling. If they would have left out that term "Level 1" and said, here are the stops we want recorded, now you've got a conversation.

Question: That's what it sounded like the council wanted to do, though.

Mayor Adams: I agree with you.

Question: ...offer you that opportunity to kind of offer exceptions to the Level 1s so that you have, you used the example you've used. If there's a lost dog… 

Mayor Adams: Yes.

Question: ...that, you know, officers are helping find.

Mayor Adams: Right.

Question: ...to exempt a form of stop like that from...

Mayor Adams: Um hmm. And that's what we...

Question: ...administration get back on that?

Mayor Adams: Mike Gerber and the entire team, Tiffany Raspberry, we have constantly said... Chief Maddrey. We've constantly stated that, listen, we're with you with 2 and 3s, but the level, when you use the term Level 1, that's why I think a lot of people are not understanding.

Once you start defining terms, terminologies, you're stuck with the terminology. If they would have said, these are the types of stops we want recorded, then we're not restricted by the terminologies. We can't go against what the judge has stated. This is a Level 1. That term was decided by a judge. And so they should have left out that term and say, here are the stops we want recorded.

Zornberg: Mayor, if I could just add just for real perfect clarity. What we're talking about as a Level 1 encounter is not a stop as defined by the law. That's not even a stop. For anyone in the community who has concerns about tracking or being able to follow data on stop and frisk by the New York City Police Department, and much of that data is transparently available.

I want to be crystal clear. The Level 1 issue, which is the only issue that we have with this bill, is not a stop. It's not going to provide any information about stop and frisk. Level 1s by definition by the highest court of New York State, Level 1s are not stops. They need not involve any criminal suspicion. They involve, as the mayor said, any credible, objective reason to make an inquiry of anyone in the public for any issue.

And the NYPD has been at the table for months with the City Council trying to explain this and make their point across. This should not be a point of dissension anymore. And there should be no claim that this is late. We're coming to the issue late. This has been going on for months.

First Deputy Mayor Sheena Wright: And I would also say if the council is saying that they are willing to make changes to the bill, let's just get to the table and get it done so that it makes sense, it gives them what they need and also promotes safety.

Deputy Mayor Williams-Isom: So, can I answer your question, Chris? I actually was surprised by the question because regardless of what number comes up for the HOPE count tonight, we are in the middle of a global humanitarian crisis and we need the federal government to give us resources.

I think you know that Governor Hochul wrote a letter to President Biden with nine, I guess there was nine governors all together, and I love this part: “While the Biden administration has made important progress in managing immigration at the southern and southwest border, the number of migrants arriving in states and cities seeking emergency shelter continues to increase at record pace. States and cities have spent billions to address inaction by Congress and match these challenges with solutions for states and local economies. However, it is clear our national immigration system is outdated and unprepared to respond to this unprecedented global migration. Without serious reform informed by evidence based solutions, the challenges facing states and localities will only grow.”

So, the question should not be about whether it's 3,540 or 4,000 people on that we count tonight, it should be that cities should not be bearing this and that we need the support of the federal government now to do something to help with this crisis.

Question: Mr. Mayor, your friend and ally, Tom Suozzi is running for Congress. I'm wondering if you're planning on going out there, getting involved with that election at all?

And then, speaking of other politicians, the council loves to call themselves a co-equal branch of government. They use that in writing. I don't know if that's legally true, but I'm wondering if you agree, is the council a co-equal branch of government?

Mayor Adams: Well, first of all, I love Tom. Whatever I could do to help Tom, I think he's a great public servant and whatever I could do to assist him I'm more than willing to do so.

I define every councilperson, every assembly person, every leader, every congressperson, I define them as a colleague. We're all colleagues in this. I do not see myself as a superior or an inferior. We're colleagues on how we can navigate our city to ensure that we can have a safe, healthy place to raise healthy children and families.

And so the term co or pro and all those other terminologies, they don't mean anything to me. We're all colleagues. We're elected by the people, I'm a public servant. I walk in a room and people stand up for me. I say, don't stand for me, I stand for you. I'm still that cop on the beat answering 911 calls for service, correcting conditions.

Question: Hi, Mr. Mayor.

Mayor Adams: How are you?

Question: Good. I wanted to ask you about a speech or a policy announcement that Chancellor Banks gave yesterday. There were some criticisms as to the number of outlets that were invited to hear the announcement. It was something that he had himself previewed about having, navigating difficult discussions around the war. And I guess I just wondered why weren't certain... Why wasn't it open to more outlets given its importance?

Mayor Adams: He really was focused on the Muslim and Jewish leaders, and I know he's, there was space restraints. But the beauty is, as what we do with all of our events, it’s broadcast. You guys can see this, you know, you can see it from home, you can see it from your car, you can see it from your office.

You could, you know, it wasn't like it was a secret meeting, you know? And I'm sure he has a recording of it if you want to reflect on it, but we like to have you guys as much as possible around.

We want it to be covered. And so I know he was dealing with space restraints and he wanted to make sure he could have as many people from those communities to be there and participate in what he was doing. So, he had limited space like tomorrow, you know, I don't know how many seats we have. What have we got, 150?

But no, so there was no way he wanted to keep out the press. You know, he was excited about sharing his message. And he thought long and hard about this. The chancellor has, this has been heavy on his heart. And my conversations with him trying to find the right balance, because this is a painful moment. It's a lot of passion around this issue. And I want to commend him for taking a bold step of realizing we have to face this head on.

Question: It's a neighborhood story. On the Upper West Side, there's a newsstand on 79th and Broadway. A lot of neighborhood residents rallying behind a guy because he was kicked out of his newsstand on the corner because apparently over the 23 years that he's been running it, he ran up a bunch of fines for kind of minor violations: oh, you're always supposed to sell items for $10 when we saw you selling a phone charger for 30. You had a [inaudible] thing. So, basically his fines now amount to $90,000.

Mayor Adams: Hmm.

Question: And Consumer Affairs was trying to shut him down. And he's been, you know, he's been there for 23 years, through Covid, Sandy, hurricanes. I think Gale Brewer has written to you and a lot of other Upper West Side residents who are rallying for him saying, hey, is there anything you can do to reduce his fines to a manageable level keeping with the spirit of the City of Yes?" He's now selling his newspapers on the steps of the First Baptist Church across the street because the city shut down his newsstand.

Mayor Adams: And I saw that story also. And so, team, can we look at that? You know, that's a working class person. And you know, I clipped it out and stated that I was going to, I'm glad you asked me about it, because I was going to ask the team to look at that and see, because sometimes these fines are not dealing with the underlying amount, it's dealing with the interest.

So, let us, we're going to look into that. We're going to look into that. You know, he's a working class person. It's hard being out there throughout the weather dealing with this. And if there is something within my powers to get him back in that stand, I'm going to do it. We're going to follow the law, but we're going to make the policy.

Question: Hi.

Mayor Adams: How are you?

Question: Good, how are you?

Mayor Adams: Good to see you.

Question: Thank you so much. So, my question is, as you mentioned about your vision last two years, whatever you were doing, but what is your vision about the housing crisis in New York City? And then especially the low income people, the minority people, because the city is very expensive nowadays.

And many people, they're moving from New York City to another place where they can sustain. I had an experience, there is, the children born here, three children. They're supposed to be proud of New York, but their parents moved them to, you know, Buffalo, because they cannot be here because of the expense, rent and all this stuff. The children were crying, but the parents said we cannot stay in this city because we cannot, you know, maintain the expense of this.

Mayor Adams: Yes.

Question: What's your message?

Mayor Adams: Yes, and you know, cities are becoming more and more expensive in general, and specifically a city like New York. And our goal, and what this administration has attempted to do is how do we use our powers to put money back in the pockets of New Yorkers.

The announcement yesterday is a clear example of that. One of the number one reasons for filing for bankruptcy is because of medical debt. We're going to touch a half a million people by having that $18 million investment so we don't have a trickling impact on our economy. The young man that was with us yesterday, he told the story of just simply slipping as a college student, you know, it just basically disrupted  his entire life.

So, when you look at what we did, an increase in Earned Income Tax Credit, decreasing the cost of childcare, making sure that we give NYCHA residents free broadband so they could have access to high speed broadband. You start looking and adding up what we are doing, it shows that it is focused on how do we use our powers as an administration to make life more livable for everyday New Yorkers.

And I think that when you look at the records of housing, that Deputy Mayor Maria Torres-Springer and her team commissioner, Adolfo Carrión, of how we have really leaned into this housing issue. We're going to need help from Albany. We need some form of tax incentive. We're going to need to look at how we repurpose our office spaces. You can't have 138 million square feet left vacant, we need to turn it into housing. We're going to need things like raising FAR and others.

But we're going to do our part with our City of Yes plan. Dan Garodnick over at City Planning, what he's doing around looking around the city and saying how we could build more, everything from basement apartments to allowing people to build grandparents and granddad housing in their space.

So, we need to be creative. We can't just say, let's just do things that we've always done. And that's what this administration is doing, and I think because of the success of this administration, more and more New Yorkers are going to find that this is a place they can call home.

Question: Do you have any statistic how many people moved last two years from New York City to...

Mayor Adams: I'm sorry, to what?

Question: Do you have any statistic, how many people moved from New York City to another city in the last two years?

Mayor Adams: Do we have those numbers, DM?

Deputy Mayor Torres-Springer: What I'll say is, obviously with the pandemic, there's been movement in and out, right? It's been a time of change and decision for a lot of New Yorkers. And so we'll get you the very latest from the Census Bureau, but some of it's in flux.

But to the mayor's overall point, everything that he mentioned on housing, we've talked a lot about when we think about what affordability means in the city, it's an equation, right? There's your income and your expenses.

Housing is a huge expense, everything that the mayor said about how we are trying to bring down those costs for everyday New Yorkers with a focus on affordable housing, with a focus on NYCHA.

The other part of the equation is just as important, and that's the number of jobs and the quality of jobs, which is why with the December numbers where we added 10,000 private sector jobs, bringing us to an all time high, and 270,000 jobs in this administration — that's the size of Buffalo, of Jersey City — we have to continue our work in terms of growing our economy and getting New Yorkers attached to them. And so that's, we'll follow up on specific population, but this is an issue that we obviously, it animates our every action.

I also just finally on the question about the gentleman with a stand in the Upper West Side. We're certainly going to look into his case in particular, but I just wanted to clarify that the vast majority of the penalties are actually on the licensed operator of the newsstand, who is not the gentleman that you mentioned.

Question: Yes, I think he's a subcontractor.

Deputy Mayor Torres-Springer: And it's for illegally selling e-cigarettes without a license and other flavored e-cigarettes. And so I just, I mention that because of the mayor, we have to follow the law. But these are working class individuals, and so we have to make sure that we lead with education and compliance and not penalties and violations. So, we'll look into it.