On September 25, a historic five-count federal indictment of Mayor Eric Adams thrust New York City into turmoil and speculation. The corruption-related charges, which involve bribery, wire fraud, and improper solicitation of campaign funds, have eroded public trust in the chief executive and will cloud the rest of his time in office. In addition, New Yorkers are suddenly confronted with a host of questions about their city’s future: Will Adams resign, be removed by Governor Kathy Hochul, or remain for the rest of his term? Will he continue his 2025 reelection campaign, bow out, or be barred from running?
Since the indictment, Adams has clung to office, while at least ten leading members of his administration—many of them close confidants facing their own federal scrutiny—have resigned. Governor Hochul’s recent comments about the need to bring “new blood” to the Adams administration signal that Albany is taking a direct interest in city leadership. The new appointees bring more experience and have fewer personal ties with the embattled mayor. Though she appears content with the recent turnover, Hochul retains authority under the New York City Charter and state statute to remove Adams.
One of two possibilities will materialize in the year ahead. Adams may persist in office. But if he resigns or is removed, Public Advocate Jumaane Williams would assume the role of active mayor until voters select a new leader. Should that occur on or before March 26, 2025, Williams would, within approximately 80 days, call a special, ranked-choice mayoral election, open to all qualifying candidates and registered voters, regardless of party affiliation. If Adams persists in office beyond that March date, no special election will be called. In either case, New Yorkers will go to the polls in the June primaries to elect party nominees for November’s general election.
Regardless, New Yorkers will feel the reverberations of the Adams administration’s turnover on public services. Some of its plans, especially its ambitious citywide housing-supply proposal, are now in doubt. The city’s roughly 300,000 public workers, including those in its nearly $40 billion public school system and nation-leading police force, will face morale and staffing challenges for months.
Many of the allegations against Adams also indirectly indict the city’s bureaucracy. Slow, uncertain, and expensive processes to obtain public approvals unintentionally encourage the sort of corruption of which the mayor is accused. This isn’t new in New York. Government processes ordinarily change at a glacial pace. But the present situation presents a new group of leaders with possibilities to reform urban governance. Streamlining approvals and increasing transparency and accountability would improve government responsiveness and lessen the incentive to seek favors from high-ranking public officials.
In this City Journal series (see “The Adams Indictment and New York’s Future,” adjoining) Manhattan Institute scholars and other authors will offer timely analysis on the challenges New York faces as it contends with the policy and political consequences of the first-ever indictment of a sitting mayor.
Photo by Alex Kent/Getty Images