The brawl over Mayor Eric Adams’ veto of a controversial cop bill spilled into the open Tuesday as he revealed some City Council members have said they wish they could vote their “conscience” and back his crusade against the mandate.
The mayor claimed during his weekly Q&A with reporters some councilmembers have said their constituents “don’t believe this” and that they know the so-called How Many Stops Act is “a harmful bill.”
“I know when I have communicated with some of the City Council members, 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,” Adams said.
“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.”
Hizzoner has railed against the bill in recent weeks, saying the legislation — which the council passed with a veto-proof 35-9 majority in December — would bog cops down in paperwork and compromise public safety.
His opponents in the feud — namely New York City Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, who introduced the bill, and City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams — held their own City Hall press conference a half-hour earlier in which they defended their choice to move forward with a vote to override Adams’ veto.
“This legislation is a part of a multi-generational effort to increase transparency and accountability, with support from communities most harmed by historical and justices, families who have lost loved ones to violence and everyday workers,” Speaker Adams said.
“We stand united in support of this important reform — and against the mayor’s veto,” she continued. We look forward to overriding it together.”
Sources also told The Post that City Hall tried turning the lights off during Williams’ and the speaker’s press conference — which the public advocate immediately seized on.
“We already know the administration doesn’t like transparency, and they don’t want a light shone on this type of stuff. That’s probably why they tried to turn the lights off on this press conference,” he said.
“It’s been proven that [the mayor] is very often the bully that he is speaking about, particularly, when thing aren’t going his way.”
The bill would require officers to record information on even the most minor interactions with the public, so-called level one stops that could be something like speaking to a witness at a crime scene.
But there are a litany of issues with the proposal — not the least of which is that street cops would be guessing demographic information: the age, sex and race of interviewees.
That means that the data they collect would be inherently flawed, experts have said.
Beyond that, officers say it will take too much time to record the information. Adams cited a recent investigation into a serial stabber as proof.
“We … communicated with 1,000 people,” he said Tuesday. “Each one of those individuals, we would have to document, we have to guess their age, guess their race, guess their gender, and then write down a reason why we stopped them.”
“I don’t care if you use an app, if you write on a piece of paper, I don’t care how you do it, that takes some time.”Some experts agree that the process will be time-consuming — and might even alienate police from the public.
“If people’s names and dates of birth, and creeds and religions, and all of these things are being tracked and taken down, some people are going to be less likely to want to speak to police,” Jillian Snider, a former NYPD officer and adjunct lecturer at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told The Post on Tuesday.
She also agreed that it would likely slow down their response and take longer for cops to go from job to job.
“Officers are expected to go from job to job to job, and complete all the necessary paperwork while still on scene,” she said. “You are not allowed to pick up another job until you’ve completed all associated paperwork on your current job.”
“So if you average 15 radio runs in your eight hours and 35 minutes, I think you’re probably going to only be able to go to maybe 11 or 12 jobs,” she added.
Adams said his administration would continue to speak with members of the Council and “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,” he told reporters.
“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.”