In a poignant display of interfaith solidarity amid rising global antisemitism, New York City Mayor-Elect Zohran Mamdani made a private visit to the Ohel, the sacred gravesite of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, in Queens’ Old Montefiore Cemetery. The trip, which occurred on the evening of December 15, came just one day after a devastating terror attack at a Hanukkah celebration in Sydney’s Bondi Beach, where 16 people—many affiliated with Chabad-Lubavitch—lost their lives to what Australian authorities described as Islamist extremism. Chabad officials confirmed the visit, noting it as a moment of reflection and prayer for the victims, including two prominent Chabad rabbis with deep ties to New York’s Jewish community.
The Ohel, a serene marble structure housing the remains of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson—the revered seventh leader of the Chabad-Lubavitch movement—and his predecessor, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak Schneerson, has long served as a beacon of spiritual solace. Attracting over a million visitors annually from diverse backgrounds, it has evolved into a pilgrimage site for politicians seeking guidance during turbulent times. Mamdani, a 33-year-old Democratic Socialist and Ugandan-born Muslim who won a stunning upset victory in November’s mayoral race, donned a black velvet kippah as he entered the site. Accompanied by Crown Heights activist Yaacov Behrman, a Chabad liaison, he offered a private prayer at the gravesite before departing quietly. This marked Mamdani’s first known visit to the Ohel, a gesture that Chabad spokespeople described as “reassuring” for New York’s Jewish residents grappling with heightened fears.jta.org
The Sydney Horror: A Hanukkah Nightmar
The attack unfolded on December 14, the first night of Hanukkah, at a joyous public menorah lighting organized by Chabad emissaries on Sydney’s iconic Bondi Beach. Hundreds had gathered to celebrate the Festival of Lights when two gunmen—later identified as a father-son duo with suspected Islamist ties—opened fire with assault rifles, killing 16 and wounding dozens more. Among the dead were Rabbi Eli Schlanger, 40, an assistant rabbi at Chabad of Bondi Beach who had trained at Brooklyn’s Lubavitch yeshiva, and Rabbi Yaakov Levitan, both leaving behind young families. Schlanger, a vocal advocate against Australian antisemitism, was remembered for his upbeat spirit; just a year prior, he had shared a video of himself dancing with a car-top menorah as a defiant stand against hate.jfeed.com
Chabad, known for its outreach to Jews in remote areas, has faced increasing threats at public events. Yet, in defiance, the movement urged its chapters to proceed with Hanukkah celebrations, bolstering security and attendance in places like New York, where menorah lightings drew record crowds. Rabbi Ben Tzion Krasnianski of Chabad of the Upper East Side echoed this resolve at a Manhattan lighting: “We light brighter in the face of darkness.”jta.orgforward.com
Mamdani’s Response: Condemnation and Controversy
Hours after the Sydney shooting, Mamdani issued a statement from his transition team: “The attack at a Hanukkah celebration in Sydney today was a vile act of antisemitic terror. I mourn those who were murdered and will be keeping their families, the Jewish community, and the Chabad movement in my prayers.” He specifically honored Rabbi Schlanger’s “deep ties to Crown Heights,” the Brooklyn hub of Chabad, and warned that the violence mirrored fears haunting Jewish New Yorkers: “What happened at Bondi is what many Jewish people fear will happen in their communities too.” Mamdani pledged to “confront hatred with the urgency and action it demands,” vowing daily protection for Jews in subways, streets, and synagogues.lavocedinewyork.comjta.org
Yet, the mayor-elect’s words drew immediate backlash. Critics seized on his description of the attackers as “men with long guns,” accusing him of sidestepping the Islamist motivations cited by officials. This echoed ongoing scrutiny of Mamdani’s record, including his reluctance to denounce the slogan “globalize the intifada”—a phrase chanted at pro-Palestinian protests and interpreted by many Jews as a call for violence against them. During his campaign, Mamdani defended the term as “aspiration for equality,” alienating pro-Israel voters and prompting Israeli President Isaac Herzog to publicly decry his “contempt for the Jewish and democratic State of Israel.” In Crown Heights, where Chabad is headquartered, turnout favored Mamdani’s rival, former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, by wide margins.theyeshivaworld.com
Social media amplified the divide. Conservative voices like Laura Loomer tweeted, “You got your wish of ‘globalize the intifada,’” directly at Mamdani. Progressive Jewish allies, however, praised his outreach, with one X user noting, “Zohran is one of the biggest friends and supporters of the Jewish community, his words are constantly being taken out of context.” Mamdani’s visit to the Ohel—shared widely by Chabad chapters on Instagram—has been hailed by some as a bridge-building step, though skeptics question its sincerity given his ties to anti-Israel groups like Satmar Hasidim.newsweek.com
A Tradition of Political Pilgrimage
Eyewitness accounts described chaos as families fled the beachfront, with one attendee—later hailed a hero—rushing toward the gunfire to disarm a shooter, sustaining two wounds in the process. Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese condemned the massacre as a “cowardly act of terror,” prompting swift calls for stricter gun laws in a nation unaccustomed to such violence. The incident, the deadliest antisemitic attack since the 2018 Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, sent shockwaves through Jewish communities worldwide, amplifying concerns over a 400% surge in antisemitic incidents globally since October 2023.lavocedinewyork.com
Mamdani is far from the first leader to seek the Rebbe’s wisdom at the Ohel. Outgoing Mayor Eric Adams, a frequent visitor (at least seven times), has called it a refuge during “the most difficult days” of his tenure. Former President Donald Trump stopped by in October 2024, and figures like Hillary Clinton and Michael Bloomberg have made the trek, underscoring its role as a nonpartisan spiritual nexus. For Mamdani, whose campaign courted progressive and Muslim voters while navigating NYC’s diverse Jewish electorate, the visit signals an effort to mend fences ahead of his January inauguration.
As Hanukkah’s flames flicker against a backdrop of grief, Jewish leaders in New York—from UJA-Federation events at Gracie Mansion to street-corner lightings—emphasize resilience. “We will not hide our light,” declared one rabbi at a Midtown vigil honoring Sydney’s fallen. Mamdani’s gesture at the Ohel, whatever its motivations, adds a layer to this story of defiance: a Muslim leader at a Jewish holy site, praying for shared safety in a city that prides itself on pluralism.
Whether this marks a turning point in Mamdani’s relationship with New York’s Jews remains to be seen. For now, in the quiet of Queens’ cemetery, it stands as a reminder that even in division, moments of quiet reverence can illuminate the path forward.
NY1 Interview: Schools Chancellor Melissa Avilés-Ramos on Staying Under Mayor-Elect Mamdani, Universal Child Care, and Closing NYC’s “Opportunity Gap”
In this NY1 segment, the host frames the looming transition at City Hall: Mayor-elect Alex Zoron Mamdani is expected to announce early appointments while also weighing whether to retain senior officials from the Adams administration. The focus then turns to NYC Schools Chancellor Melissa Avilés-Ramos, who signals she wants to remain in the role and says she has already met with the mayor-elect for what she describes as a wide-ranging conversation on education priorities.
Avilés-Ramos highlights a mix of safety, academic performance, and student support initiatives. She points to efforts aimed at boosting math and reading proficiency and emphasizes an initiative launched earlier in the year—“Every Child and Family is Known”—designed to better support students in temporary housing by strengthening connections to families and city resources. On universal child care, she draws a clear line between “daycare” and early childhood education and argues that community-based providers and caregivers should be supported and treated as educators who help prepare children for academic success from the earliest years.
On outcomes, she reframes the traditional “achievement gap” discussion as an “opportunity gap,” arguing that improved resources and consistent instructional supports drive score gains—citing noted growth among Black and Latino students even as proficiency rates remain under 50%. She credits standardized curriculum work under “NYC Reads” and “NYC Solves,” including a K-5 push to concentrate schools into one of three curricula to enable targeted, job-embedded coaching. The conversation also touches on compliance with the state class-size law, a proposal for paid apprenticeship-style pathways for new teachers, the impact of federal immigration enforcement on students and families (including “Project Open Arms”), and the rollout of cell-phone restrictions with flexible, school-by-school approaches. Avilés-Ramos closes by underscoring that she is “first and foremost a parent” in the system and wants to be an advocate for families.
NYC Weekly City Hall Recap: Citywide Translation Tech, $1B Coney Island Shoreline Plan, and 100 Gold Street Housing Conversion
This short City Hall–style recap frames the week as part of New York City’s “next chapter,” highlighting recent actions the administration says are aimed at improving day-to-day life for working-class New Yorkers. The narration positions the updates as proof the administration is “getting stuff done,” emphasizing operational changes and big capital commitments.
One major focus is language access: the city says it is rolling out language applications on all city-owned smart mobile devices and directing agencies to leverage translation technology. The stated goal is to improve communication with residents whose first language is one of the many languages spoken across the five boroughs.
The video also spotlights two large development and resiliency initiatives. First, it cites a $1 billion investment to renovate the Coney Island shoreline—reimagining the boardwalk, building flood-resilient infrastructure, upgrading public spaces, and adding 1,500 new homes. Second, it describes next steps in a housing initiative to convert the city-owned building at 100 Gold Street into a mixed-income residential project with 3,700 housing units (with at least 25% “permanently affordable”), plus 40,000 square feet of public space and new facilities for public use.
New York State is putting more than $300 million into hospital upgrades aimed at making care safer and more connected, Governor Kathy Hochul announced. The funding will support 22 projects statewide to improve health information technology, expand electronic medical records, strengthen cybersecurity to protect patient data, and grow telehealth services. State officials say the goal is to help hospitals—especially financially strained providers—modernize critical systems, reduce cyber risk, and make it easier for New Yorkers to access care remotely. The awards are part of New York’s broader push to improve hospital infrastructure and resilience across the state.
Governor Hochul Announces More Than $300 Million to Advance Health Information Technology and Cybersecurity in Hospitals Across New York State
Governor Kathy Hochul today announced more than $300 million in new state funding to support health care transformation projects across New York. The awards, made through the Statewide Health Care Facility Transformation Program IV and V, will support 22 projects aimed at improving health information technology by expanding patient electronic medical records, strengthening cybersecurity and patient information security, and expanding telehealth services.
“By modernizing our hospitals’ IT infrastructure and protecting patients’ information, we’re strengthening the foundation of health care in New York State,” Governor Hochul said. “These investments will help ensure that hospitals have the tools they need to safeguard patient data, expand telehealth services and deliver a healthier future for all New Yorkers.”
New York State Department of Health Commissioner Dr. James McDonald said, “With these investments, we are focused on developing safe, reliable and connected patient-centered care. By expanding data capabilities and improving cybersecurity defenses, we’re enhancing clinical decision making across the state’s health care network.”
This funding prioritizes projects that:
Support financially distressed providers;
Modernize critical health information technology infrastructure;
Strengthen cybersecurity and patient information security; and
Expand telehealth services.
Awardees include hospitals in every region of the State.
This investment builds on Governor Hochul’s continued efforts to strengthen New York’s health care delivery system. The Statewide Health Care Facility Transformation Program has awarded more than $1.75 billion to providers working to improve access, equity, and quality of care across New York. These awards are part of a broader, long-term commitment that has directed more than $4.7 billion in health care capital funding statewide since 2016.
Under Governor Hochul’s leadership, New York State enacted nation-leading cybersecurity regulations for hospitals, establishing a robust blueprint to protect critical systems and enhance the resilience of the state’s health care network against cyber threats.
In Coney Island, Mayor Eric Adams announced a historic $1 billion investment to revitalize the iconic waterfront community, marking a major commitment in the final weeks of his administration. Reflecting on his early career as a transit police officer in the area, Adams highlighted Coney Island’s legacy as “America’s playground” while acknowledging past underinvestment. The plan includes constructing 1,500 new mixed-income homes (with 25% affordable), fully reconstructing the century-old Riegelmann Boardwalk, upgrading infrastructure such as streets and sewers, and renovating the Abe Stark Sports Center with a $42 million project to modernize its ice rink and facilities. Adams emphasized stabilizing life for residents, preventing displacement, and transforming the area into a year-round livable community rather than just a seasonal attraction.
Speakers, including Parks Commissioner Sue Donoghue and EDC President Andrew Kimball, underscored the investment’s focus on climate resiliency amid rising sea levels and extreme weather. Detailed technical surveys have informed plans to rebuild the boardwalk from the ground up with storm-protective measures inspired by Superstorm Sandy, incorporating sustainable materials and elevated design for future flood protection. The project will proceed with extensive community engagement, with a request for proposals for design and construction expected in early 2026, followed by phased work to minimize disruption to beachgoers and businesses. Additional efforts include recent selections for nearby mixed-income housing and retail developments to support economic growth.
Community leaders and local officials praised the announcement as transformative, crediting Adams’ long-standing advocacy for Coney Island. Assemblyman Alec Brook-Krasny and others expressed gratitude, noting the mayor’s personal connection to the neighborhood and his administration’s record on affordable housing. During the Q&A, officials clarified that while no final decisions have been made on materials or exact timelines, the project will continue through the transition to the incoming administration, with potential adjustments at the new mayor’s discretion. The event concluded on a note of optimism for a more resilient, vibrant, and equitable Coney Island for generations to come.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams is marking the first anniversary of his “City of Yes for Housing Opportunity” zoning overhaul by touting a 22.8% rise in permitted housing units in 2025 compared with the year before the policy was approved, as well as a growing pipeline of affordable units and office-to-residential conversions. The package, billed as the most pro-housing legislation in city history, relaxes parking mandates, legalizes accessory dwelling units, creates new high-density districts and offers an affordability bonus that has attracted more than 100 projects expected to yield some 5,400 homes, including roughly 900 income-restricted units. New R11 and R12 zones in Midtown South and other locations could add nearly 11,000 homes, while conversions of underused office buildings are projected to produce more than 12,000 apartments, 3,000 of them permanently affordable. Combined with five neighborhood rezonings slated to deliver about 50,000 homes and what City Hall describes as record production of nearly 86,000 affordable units since Adams took office, the administration is seeking to cement its legacy as aggressively pro-development amid a long-running housing shortage.
“One year ago today, our city said ‘yes’ to more housing and a more affordable future for working-class New Yorkers. We turned the page on decades of half-measures and proved that government can still meet the challenges of our time with energy, ambition, and resolve,” said Mayor Adams. “One year later, we are already seeing the results, with thousands of new affordable homes in the pipeline across our city. Whether it’s passing the first citywide rezoning in six decades, investing historic amounts of money into new homes, or creating record amounts of affordable housing, we are proud to be the most pro-housing administration in city history.
“With the adoption of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, we have begun to turn the tide on the housing crisis in New York City. The full impact of these changes will take time to be felt, but twelve months in, we’re already seeing success delivering a little more housing in every neighborhood,” said DCP Director Garodnick. “New York City’s housing crisis has been growing for so long that it is easy to take it for granted. But with City of Yes and other policy changes, we are changing course and creating a more affordable city for generations to come.”
The initiative — which was approved by the New York City Council on December 5, 2024 — aims to deliver “a little more housing in every neighborhood” through carefully-crafted zoning changes, including creating a new affordable housing bonus; legalizing accessory dwelling units (ADU) for homeowners; re-legalizing three-, four-, or five-story apartment buildings near transit and along commercial corridors; reducing costly parking mandates for new construction; and allowing underused office buildings to become housing; among other reforms.
Already, many of these new tools are being used to create new housing across the city:
Universal Affordability Preference: Over 100 housing developments across the five boroughs have already applied to use the Universal Affordability Preference, which allows buildings in medium- and high-density parts of the city to add at least 20 percent more housing if the additional homes are permanently affordable. These projects are expected to deliver 5,400 new homes, of which approximately 900 would be affordable to households at an average 60 percent Area Median Income.
High-density zoning districts: New, higher-density R11 and R12 zoning districts created through City of Yes have been mapped in Mayor Adams’ Midtown South Mixed-Use Plan that the City Council approved in August, where they will deliver 9,500 new homes, including 2,800 permanently income-restricted affordable homes. These new zoning districts are also being proposed at the site of the future 125th Street Second Avenue Subway station and at 395 Flatbush Avenue Extension in Downtown Brooklyn, which are currently in public review, where they could deliver another 1,800 new homes.
Reduced parking mandates: Rolled-back requirements for off-street parking are also helping to deliver more housing near transit. For example:
At 2060 Walton Avenue in the Bronx, an underused lot close to the 4, B, and D trains is being transformed into 94 new homes — without the 25 parking spots that had previously been required, a change that meaningfully lowers building costs.
At 21 Freeman Street in Brooklyn, a vacant lot close to the G train is set to become over 500 new homes without the 140 parking spaces that would have been required prior to City of Yes.
Meanwhile, as envisioned, new housing in less transit-accessible areas continues to include parking.
Office-to-residential conversions: Together with the 467-M tax incentive — which the Adams administration successfully advocated for in Albany — City of Yes has supported a boom of office-to-residential conversion projects. There are more than 12,000 homes in the pipeline from office conversions, including more than 3,000 permanently affordable units.
Landmark Transferable Development Rights: In the last year, five landmarked buildings have begun seeking approval to transfer their development rights to nearby housing projects through a process that was streamlined and expanded by City of Yes. These transfers will enable over 400,000 square feet of new development, while bringing in additional revenue to support maintenance of landmarked buildings. Those five applications in less than one year compare to a total of 15 applications over more than 50 years before City of Yes.
Accessory Dwelling Units: So far this year, the New York City Department of Buildings has received 98 filings from homeowners in Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens and Staten Island, seeking to construct ADUs on their properties. Half of these filings have come in just the past two months, since the city finalized rules for safe, code-compliant ADUs and launched the “ADU for You” homeowner assistance program. ADUs like backyard cottages, garage conversions, and basement apartments are a proven tool to support homeowners and expand housing choice in lower-density areas without a changing neighborhood’s look-and-feel.
As these City of Yes tools are deployed, new data shows that New York City permitted 22.8 percent more new homes in 2025 than the same time period in 2024 (through October 23), when the Adams administration was already shattering several housing records for the second year in a row. This permitting increase includes a boom in homes from alterations — more than double the number of permitted units from 2024, many of which are from office conversions — and an increase in units from new construction over the previous year.
The Adams administration has continued working to deliver the full benefits of City of Yes, including successfully defending the policy in court, where a judge recently dismissed a challenge. HPD also recently released the Shared Housing Roadmap, which — building on the City of Yes zoning reforms and in concert with new legislation — clears the way for reintroducing shared homes as a safe, affordable housing option for single New Yorkers.
Since entering office, Mayor Adams has made historic investments to create more affordable housing and ensure more New Yorkers have a place to call home. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, the Adams administration created the most affordable rental units in city history and celebrated back-to-back-to-back record-breaking years for producing permanently-affordable homes for formerly-homeless New Yorkers, placing homeless New Yorkers into housing, and connecting New Yorkers to housing through the city’s housing lottery. HPD has now produced nearly 86,000 affordable homes since the start of the Adams administration, with the last three fiscal years representing the most new affordable homes ever created in a three fiscal-year stretch (FY 2023 to FY 2025).
Building on the success of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, Mayor Adams unveiled his “City of Yes for Families” strategy in his State of the City address earlier this year to build more homes and create more family-friendly neighborhoods across New York City. Under City of Yes for Families, the Adams administration is advancing more housing on city-owned sites, creating new tools to support homeownership, and building more housing alongside schools, playgrounds, grocery stores, accessible transit stations, and libraries.
Further, the Adams administration is actively working to strengthen tenant protections and support homeowners. The “Partners in Preservation” program was expanded citywide in 2024 through a $24-million investment in local organizations to support tenant organizing and combat harassment in rent-regulated housing. The Homeowner Help Desk, a trusted one-stop shop for low-income homeowners to receive financial and legal counseling from local organizations, was also expanded citywide in 2024 with a $13 million funding commitment.
“A mayoral administration rarely advances a policy that can fundamentally change the future health of a city for generations to come. The City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, coupled with the City Council led “City For All” initiative, is such a policy,” said Marc Greenberg, executive director, Interfaith Assembly on Homelessness and Housing. “With City of Yes, the Adams administration has changed the momentum of a city that has been losing ground on affordable housing for decades and has begun again to lift Lady Liberty’s Lamp beside New York City’s golden door.”
“One year after the passage of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, the results speak for themselves. Across all five boroughs, thousands of new homes are being constructed thanks to modernized zoning that promotes transit-oriented development, the elimination of outdated parking mandates, new tools like the Universal Affordability Preference, expanded opportunities for office-to-residential conversions, and more,” said Carlo A. Scissura, Esq., president and CEO, New York Building Congress. “Among the most significant wins are more than 12,000 homes, including 3,000 permanently affordable units, already in the pipeline from office-to-residential conversions, breathing new life into underused buildings and neighborhoods. This is the smart, forward-thinking development New York has needed for decades, and it’s exactly why the Building Congress worked so closely with the Adams administration to get it across the finish line.”
“City of Yes is already proving to be a major step toward achievement of our housing goals,” said Kathryn Wylde, president and CEO, Partnership for New York City. “This carefully crafted initiative is encouraging development that is consistent with neighborhood standards by lowering costs and accelerating or eliminating the need for multiple public approvals.”
“As we mark one year since the launch of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, we’re already seeing real progress on housing growth in New York City,” said Rachel Fee, executive director, New York Housing Conference. “Housing continues to be one of New Yorkers’ most urgent needs, and City of Yes shows what a common-sense approach can deliver. By modernizing outdated rules and unlocking new housing in every community, City of Yes is giving New Yorkers the tools to spur affordable housing production. This initiative is clearing the path for meaningful housing victories, including the passage of ballot Proposals 2 – 5, and laying the groundwork for even more progress in the year ahead. We commend the administration for advancing these critical reforms to reduce delays and promote a fairer, more equitable distribution of housing across the city.”
“One year after the passage of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, we’re seeing what happens when New York City chooses vision over fear,” said Emma Pfohman, CEO, Association for a Better New York (ABNY). “ABNY applauds the herculean work of the Adams administration, in partnership with Governor Hochul and the City Council, to pass the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity and approve the creation of thousands of units through the successful rezonings championed by the Department of City Planning over the last year. Together, these efforts ensure New York remains a city where every resident has the chance to live, thrive, and build their future.”
“In just its first year, City of Yes has opened the door to more homes in every borough,” said Andrew Fine, chief of staff and policy director, Open New York. “In the Bronx, longtime proposals are finally moving forward with deeper levels of affordability. Homeowners from Staten Island to Queens are excited to add ADUs, and in Brooklyn, new apartment buildings near the subway are being built without costly parking requirements. In Manhattan, the Midtown South rezoning was the first to use new higher-density districts, creating room for more homes through office conversions and new construction. All of this shows what is possible when City leaders work together to break down barriers to housing. And since then, the need for homes and the public’s support for building them have only grown. With November’s historic pro-housing ballot proposals behind us, we are ready to keep working toward a more affordable future for New York.”
“A year on from the most expansive citywide zoning changes for housing that New York City has seen, it’s a great moment to reflect on this achievement, and redouble our commitment to its implementation,” said Howard Slatkin, executive director, Citizens Housing and Planning Council. “City of Yes has opened the door for a generation of new housing achievements, which with sustained effort can stand as a legacy to what we can do when we agree that no challenge is too large for New Yorkers to tackle.”
“One year ago marked a turning point in the fight against New York City’s housing crisis with the enactment of the City of Yes zoning text amendments,” said Baaba Halm, senior vice president for programs, Enterprise Community Partners. “By allowing more housing types, increased density, and more flexible zoning options in a wider swath of New York, we collectively took a major step toward significantly increasing needed housing supply and reducing development barriers which add costs. Importantly, the amendments also specifically increased affordable housing, and came alongside robust new capital and programmatic resources. The results are already evident through more projects in the pipeline, and we look forward to seeing them come to fruition.”
“Habitat for Humanity NYC and Westchester is driven by a simple goal, to create permanent, affordable homeownership opportunities for New Yorkers who need them most,” said Sabrina Lippman, CEO, Habitat for Humanity NYC and Westchester. “One year after the approval of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity, we’re already expanding our pipeline by nearly 50 percent as a direct result of zoning reforms that remove barriers and make it easier to build. City of Yes is perfectly aligned with Habitat’s work to build stable, inclusive communities and ensure more families can call New York City home.”
“One year in and we are already seeing the tremendous impact of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity. This landmark rezoning has already begun to unlock meaningful opportunities to deliver high quality, affordable homes in neighborhoods across the city. By removing outdated barriers and enabling smarter, more flexible design, we are creating the conditions for a more equitable and resilient city,” said Jesse Lazar, executive director, American Institute of Architects New York Chapter. “Building on the momentum generated by City of Yes, we must continue to explore how we capture the future value of our city today, creating thriving communities and building housing that serves all New Yorkers.”
“The rising cost of housing is chipping away at hard-earned wages and pushing too many New Yorkers out of the city. Last year’s passage of the landmark City of Yes legislation represented a monumental step forward toward addressing the urgent housing affordability crisis,” said Manny Pastreich, President of 32BJ SEIU. “We’re seeing progress and look forward to continuing this momentum alongside stakeholders, to deliver the housing essential workers and their communities need, while creating thousands of good jobs.”
“City of Yes is a landmark achievement and a testament to the hard work of everyone who helped make these vital zoning reforms a reality,” said Basha Gerhards, executive vice president of public policy, Real Estate Board of New York. “With growing momentum behind adaptive reuse, New York City has the best conversion rules in the country, positioning us to unlock much needed homes across all five boroughs.”
“After one year, City of Yes is delivering on the promise of more affordable housing and giving hope to the over 2 million New Yorkers struggling to keep a roof over their head,” said Rich Buery, CEO, Robin Hood. “By taking an all-of-the-above approach, the city is unleashing the pent-up potential we knew existed. When paired with the recent pro-housing City Charter amendments, overwhelmingly approved by voters, our city is making progress toward being a place where people of all incomes can live, raise children, and flourish.”
“City of Yes set a new bar for what pro-housing policy can look like in New York, and the first year has already shown that the old excuses for doing nothing don’t hold up,” said Aaron Carr, founder and executive director, Housing Rights Initiative. “It’s given us a real foundation to build upon and proven that smarter zoning and bolder reforms can actually make a dent in our housing crisis. This is just the beginning.”
In this segment, President Trump reaffirms his support for U.S. strikes on alleged drug trafficking boats and pointedly leaves the door open for potential land operations in Venezuela. He highlights that, in his view, more than 90% of narcotics arriving by sea have been stopped and frames the maritime campaign as a series of “pinpoint attacks” that are “saving hundreds of thousands of lives.” The messaging clearly positions these actions as part of a broader strategy to increase pressure on Nicolás Maduro’s regime and to treat the narcotics flow as a direct national security threat.
The report then focuses on the controversy surrounding a two-strike incident on a suspected drug vessel in September. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth states he watched only the first strike live before leaving the room, after which operational control rested with Admiral Frank Bradley. According to U.S. officials cited by Fox News, Bradley authorized the second strike to fully sink the vessel, arguing it could have posed a threat to other ships or allowed survivors to call for armed backup. Hegseth references the “fog of war,” noting that fire, explosions, and smoke made it impossible to clearly see survivors in real time.
Finally, the piece highlights the growing political and legal scrutiny in Washington. Both Democrats and some Republicans are questioning whether the second strike could qualify as a war crime under international law and U.S. rules of engagement. Lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are expected to press Admiral Bradley for detailed explanations in upcoming briefings. As a result, the Venezuela pressure campaign and anti-drug operations in the Caribbean are becoming not only a foreign and security policy issue, but also a test case for how far U.S. military force can be used in counter-narcotics missions without crossing legal and ethical red lines.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams and the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) announced a $38.9 million settlement with Starbucks resolving more than 500,000 alleged violations of the city’s Fair Workweek Law at over 300 locations between 2021 and 2024. Under the agreement, Starbucks will provide more than $35.5 million in restitution to over 15,000 current and former hourly employees in New York City—generally $50 for each week worked from July 4, 2021 through July 7, 2024—and pay $3.4 million in civil penalties and costs. DCWP’s investigation found that the company failed to provide consistent and predictable schedules, reduced hours by more than 15 percent in many cases, and did not adequately offer additional shifts to existing staff, resulting in involuntary part-time work. The settlement requires Starbucks to comply with Fair Workweek requirements going forward and allows workers who experienced violations after July 7, 2024, or who were affected by recent store closures, to seek additional relief through DCWP’s complaint process.
Mayor Adams, DCWP Announce $38 Million Settlement With Starbucks in Largest Worker Protection Settlement in City History
What you should know
Historic Settlement Follows Multi-Year Investigation by Adams Administration
All Hourly Starbucks Workers From July 2021 to July 2024 in New York City toReceive Restitution Payments, Agreement Expected to Benefit Over 15,000 Workers
Over 300 Starbucks Locations Across City Arbitrarily Cut Workers’ Hours,Involuntarily Kept Them in Part-Time Work, and Failed to Provide Predictable Schedules, Resulting in Over 500,00 Violations of the Fair Workweek Law
– New York City Mayor Eric Adams and New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP) Commissioner Vilda Vera Mayuga today announced a landmark $38.9 million settlement with Starbucks for widespread violation of the city’s Fair Workweek Law — the largest worker protection settlement in New York City history. A multi-year investigation by DCWP found that Starbucks committed more than half a million violations of the law since 2021, illegally denying thousands of workers across more than 300 locations the right to stable and predictable schedules, as well as the right to pick up additional hours and earn more; instead, Starbucks arbitrarily cut schedules and illegally prioritized their own profits over their workers’ rights.
The settlement announced today requires Starbucks to pay more than $35.5 million in restitution to over 15,000 workers harmed by Starbucks’ unlawful practices, as well as any additional workers who come forward. The settlement also requires Starbucks to pay $3.4 million in civil penalties and costs and requires the company to comply with the law going forward. With today’s settlement, the Adams administration has now secured nearly $90 million in worker relief from different companies as it ensures New York workers get every dollar they have earned.
“It does not matter how big your business is or how much money your company makes, if you violate our workers’ rights, you will pay the price,” said Mayor Adams. “With this landmark settlement, we’ll put tens of millions of dollars back into the pockets of hard-working New Yorkers and reinforce every New Yorker’s right to a reliable schedule, full hours, and basic dignity. We’ll make sure that New York City remains a place where employees are treated fairly and working-class people can still get ahead.”
“The city’s Fair Workweek Law provides workers with vital protections, like the right to a predictable schedule so workers can plan their lives and earn stable incomes, but Starbucks chose to ignore these rights and prioritize their own bottom line,” said DCWP Commissioner Mayuga. “All workers deserve to be treated with dignity, and we are proud to stand up for our neighbors when a multibillion-dollar company like Starbucks chooses to systematically violate their employees’ rights.”
DCWP launched an investigation into Starbucks in 2022 after receiving dozens of worker complaints about several Starbucks locations. Based on the evidence gathered — including reports from hundreds of employees and data from Starbucks — DCWP uncovered a pattern of systemic violations beyond the initial locations. DCWP then expanded the investigation to all Starbucks locations citywide.
DCWP’s investigation found that most Starbucks employees in New York City never received regular schedules, making it difficult for workers to plan other commitments, such as child care, education, or second jobs. Starbucks also routinely and unlawfully reduced employees’ hours by more than 15 percent, making it difficult for employees to know how much money they would make week to week or whether they would earn enough to get by. Further, Starbucks denied workers the opportunity to pick up additional shifts, keeping them involuntarily in part-time work while continuing to hire new workers.
Under today’s agreement, most employees who worked for Starbucks in an hourly position in New York City will receive $50 for each week worked from July 4, 2021 through July 7, 2024. For example, an employee who worked for Starbucks continuously for a year and a half (78 weeks) will receive $3,900. Employees will receive a check in the mail this winter. Any employee who experienced a violation after July 7, 2024 may be eligible for compensation under the settlement by filing a complaint with DCWP.
The settlement also carves out claims related to layoffs following Starbucks’ recent closures of New York City stores. Under the law, laid-off employees have a right to reinstatement at other open locations. DCWP is monitoring Starbucks’ compliance with this obligation and assisting workers who want reinstatement. Workers who want to file a complaint to claim restitution or experience violations of their right to reinstatement should contact DCWP online or call 311.
Under the Fair Workweek Law, fast food employers in New York City must give workers regular schedules, work schedules 14 days in advance that are consistent with the regular schedule, premium pay for schedule changes, the opportunity to decline to work additional time, and the opportunity to work newly available shifts before hiring new workers. Fast food employers also cannot schedule a “clopening” shift (a closing shift one night, followed by an opening shift the very next morning) unless the worker consents in writing and receives a $100 premium to work the shift. Additionally, these fast food employers cannot fire or reduce the hours of a worker by more than 15 percent without just cause and must reinstate laid-off workers at their other locations.
The Workers’ Bill of Rights — a multilingual and comprehensive guide to rights in the workplace in New York City — summarizes the laws that protect workers, including employees, freelancers, workers classified as independent contractors, and job applicants in New York City, regardless of immigration status. The Workers’ Bill of Rights includes information on rights enforced by DCWP, like Paid Safe and Sick Leave, the Fair Workweek Law, the Temporary Schedule Change Law, and the city’s Delivery Worker Laws, as well as rights enforced by other state and federal agencies, like minimum wage and the right to organize. It also includes information about who to contact for more information or with questions, as well as how to file a complaint. Workers and employers can visit DCWP’s workers’ rights site or call 311 (212-NEW-YORK outside New York City) for more information about the laws that DCWP enforces or to file a complaint. Complaints can be filed anonymously. It is illegal to retaliate against workers for filing complaints.
“This historic settlement marks a major victory for thousands of Starbucks baristas across New York City. For too long, Starbucks has acted with impunity: manipulating schedules, disrespecting workers, and ignoring legal protections put into place by New Yorkers to protect working people from unfair business practices,” said Lynne Fox, international president, Workers United. “The settlement money awarded to Starbucks baristas will help them make ends meet this winter. Thousands of Starbucks baristas in New York City and across the country remain on an Unfair Labor Practices strike and are demanding a fair union contract that memorializes job protections, better staffing, and higher pay. We are grateful to DCWP for holding Starbucks accountable for the baristas who keep their stores running.”
“Starbucks workers deserved predictable hours and a fair shot at full-time work, and this settlement delivers real accountability,” said Brendan Griffith,president, New York City Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO. “We applaud DCWP for enforcing the Fair Workweek Law and making sure thousands of working people get money they were denied. At a moment when Starbucks workers across the country, including here in New York City, are on a unfair labor practice strike for living wages, fair schedules, and respect on the job, this action sends a clear signal that workers’ rights matter and must be upheld.”
“Far too often companies that abuse their workers, for reasons of pure corporate greed, do so without any repercussions,” said Theodore A. Moore, executive director, The Alliance for a Greater New York. “Thankfully, this is not one of those occasions. We applaud the work of Commissioner Mayuga and the amazing team at DCWP for their extraordinary enforcement of our city’s Fair Workweek Law. We hope this settlement will embolden workers to speak up and fight, while letting corporations know that their evil deeds will not go unpunished!”
“Baristas are what keep Starbucks running. From Astoria to South Slope, we are the ones who create the warm, welcoming environment Starbucks advertises. When this company cuts our hours, understaffs our stores, and busts our union, it makes it harder for us to do our job and create that great experience for customers,” said Kai Fritz, barista, Starbucks. “This settlement is a step in the right direction. It shows the power baristas have when we stand together and demand change. We are continuing to fight back against Starbucks’ greed and will not stop until we have a fair contract that ensures the support and protections we need to thrive.”
New York City is debating a housing bill that sounds technical but could seriously change how multifamily buildings are bought and sold.
It’s called the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act, or COPA, and it’s City Council bill Intro 902. New York City Council+1
Supporters say it’s a crucial tool to save affordable housing. Critics say it’s a slow-motion takeover of the housing market by City Hall and politically connected nonprofits. Let’s walk through what the bill actually does, how it would work in practice, and what we can realistically expect if it passes.
1. What COPA Would Do in One Sentence
COPA would give qualified nonprofits and community land trusts the first chance to buy most multifamily buildings (3+ units) when an owner decides to sell, plus extra time to match any private buyer’s offer — with fines up to $30,000 if owners don’t follow the rules. New York City Council+1
That’s it in plain English. The entire fight is really about who gets first shot at buying a building, and how much red tape comes with that.
Owner decides to sell a building with 3 or more apartments. This can be a small walk-up, a mid-size rental, or a larger property — as long as it has at least three residential units (with some technical exceptions).
Mandatory notice to the city and nonprofits. Before accepting offers, the owner must send a “notice of sale” to:
the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), and
a city-maintained list of “qualified entities” (nonprofits, community land trusts, etc.).
Nonprofits get the “first opportunity to purchase.”
They have 60 days to say they’re interested.
Then up to 120 days to submit an offer.
During this window, the owner is not allowed to accept other offers.New York City Council
If a private buyer appears, nonprofits can still match. Suppose a private investor makes a “bona fide” offer later in the process. The owner has to notify HPD and the nonprofits again. Under COPA, the nonprofits get another window (up to 120 days) to come in and match the same price and terms. New York City Council+1
Penalties for skipping the process. If an owner just tries to sell quietly and ignore COPA, the city can seek:
So in practice, COPA doesn’t let nonprofits buy buildings at a discount — they still have to pay market prices — but it reorders the line so they get:
first look,
first offer,
and a last-minute right to match.
3. Where the Idea Comes From: D.C. and San Francisco
Supporters are very open about the fact COPA is modeled on similar laws elsewhere:
Washington, D.C. – TOPA (Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act) TOPA gives tenants (or developers they partner with) the chance to buy their building or assign that right when the landlord sells. Studies funded by D.C. and advocacy groups estimate over 16,000 affordable units were preserved or created between 2006 and 2020 under TOPA. Housing Alliance of Pennsylvania+1
San Francisco – COPA Since 2019, San Francisco has given nonprofits a first right of offer and first refusal to buy most multifamily buildings (3+ units). The goal is to prevent displacement and keep buildings permanently affordable. City and County of San Francisco+2SFMOHCD+2
New York’s bill is explicitly pitched as doing the same thing: letting mission-driven nonprofits buy at-risk buildings before “speculators swoop in.” City & State New York+1
4. Who’s Pushing COPA, and What They Say It Will Do
The main political sponsor is Council Member Sandy Nurse, who introduced Intro 902 in May 2024. New York City Council+1
Key advocacy groups backing COPA include New Economy Project, the NYC Community Land Initiative, and a broader “Community Land Act” coalition:
They argue that as soon as buildings go on the market, private equity funds and large investors often outbid everyone else, then:
By November 2025, New Economy Project said COPA had reached supermajority support in the Council, enough to potentially override a mayoral veto if everyone stayed on board. New Economy NYC
5. Why Critics Are Alarmed
Opposition is coming from small landlord groups, real-estate trade associations, and several law firms that advise owners and lenders. Their concerns fall into a few buckets.
a) Time and uncertainty
Legal memos from firms like Belkin Burden Goldman and Holland & Knight highlight how COPA could stretch a normal sale into a 6–12-month saga of notices, waiting periods, and possible nonprofit match offers. Belkin · Burden · Goldman, LLP+1
Their arguments:
Financing windows can close. Lenders don’t like deals that might sit for half a year without clarity.
1031 exchanges become risky. Owners relying on time-sensitive tax-deferred exchanges may not be able to meet federal deadlines if they’re stuck waiting out COPA timelines. Holland & Knight
Buyers may just give up on NYC. If investors fear their offer will be used as free price discovery for nonprofits that can later match it, they may look to other markets.
b) Impact on values and tax revenue
Some analyses warn that if buildings are harder to sell, their market value will fall — not necessarily because nonprofits pay less, but because:
fewer buyers are willing to deal with the red tape, and
Holland & Knight, for example, argues Intro 902 could “dramatically decrease sales of multifamily buildings” and reduce the billions NYC collects in property and mortgage recording taxes, with little evidence it will create new units. Holland & Knight
c) Tilt toward politically connected nonprofits
Critics also point out that COPA doesn’t give tenants themselves the first right — it gives it to “qualified entities” certified by the city, mostly nonprofits and land trusts. New York City Council+1
That raises questions:
Who gets on the list and who doesn’t?
Will the organizations with better political connections see more deals?
Do these entities have the capacity and funding to close purchases at scale, or will many buildings just sit in limbo?
The New York Post, in a highly charged editorial, goes much further — calling COPA a step toward “communist dystopia” and “Stalinesque” control over private sales. New York Post+1
That’s clearly rhetorical overkill, but it reflects a real anxiety in parts of the landlord and business community: that City Hall is inserting itself directly into who gets to buy what, and when.
6. What We Can Learn from D.C. and San Francisco
The honest answer is that both sides can point to evidence.
Evidence that these laws do preserve housing
In Washington, D.C., research funded by the city and summarized by PolicyLink and others estimates that 16,000+ affordable units were created or preserved through TOPA between 2006 and 2020, plus thousands more units where tenants used TOPA negotiations to secure repairs and affordability guarantees even if they didn’t buy. PolicyLink+2LISC+2
In San Francisco, COPA has helped nonprofits acquire and preserve hundreds of units since 2019, using a similar first-right-of-offer structure for 3+ unit buildings. Shelterforce+2Housing Alliance of Pennsylvania+2
So, if your only question is “Can these laws preserve some buildings as permanently affordable?” the answer is yes — they can.
Evidence that these laws create friction and backlash
At the same time:
D.C. is now scaling back TOPA rights for small properties (2–4 units), after years of complaints from small landlords that the process was too complicated and open to abuse. The Washington Post+2The Washington Post+2
Legal and industry commentary in both cities is full of examples where deals fell apart, financing was delayed, or owners avoided selling because they didn’t want to navigate the process. K&L Gates+2Hanson Bridgett LLP+2
So, the track record suggests something like this:
These laws do help preserve some affordable housing stock — but they also slow and complicate transactions, and over time, politicians feel pressure to tweak or partially roll them back.
NYC is essentially jumping into a policy experiment that has already shown both benefits and costs elsewhere.
7. Likely Real-World Effects in New York
Putting it all together, what’s most likely to happen if COPA passes in roughly its current form?
More power for City Hall–approved nonprofits. They will get a pipeline of potential acquisitions, often with public subsidy behind them. That’s by design.
Slower, more complex deals for multifamily buildings. Sellers and buyers will need lawyers who understand COPA, and timelines will stretch. Some deals that would have happened simply won’t.
Upward pressure on prices for “clean” assets, and discounting on COPA-constrained assets.
Buildings not covered by COPA (or where obligations are waived) could become more attractive, bidding prices up.
Buildings squarely under COPA may trade at a discount to compensate for extra risk and time — or not trade at all.
Uneven impact by size and sophistication of owner.
Large institutional players may treat COPA as just another compliance cost.
Small landlords and families who own one or two buildings are the most likely to feel overwhelmed or pushed out.
Real, but limited, gains in nonprofit-owned affordable housing. If D.C. and San Francisco are any guide, COPA will help nonprofits save some buildings — but not remotely enough to “solve” the housing crisis on its own. Shelterforce+2PolicyLink+2
8. The Bottom Line
COPA is not literally a ban on private property, and it doesn’t let nonprofits seize buildings at cut-rate prices. It’s a procedural power shift:
away from fast, bilateral deals between owner and buyer,
toward a system where city-approved nonprofits get the first and last word on many sales.
Whether you see that as necessary protection in an overheated market or a dangerous politicization of transactions depends on your starting values:
Do you think the housing crisis is mainly a failure of markets, or a failure of public policy and supply?
Do you trust nonprofits, backed by City Hall, to manage a growing chunk of the housing stock better than private owners?
And how much extra bureaucracy are you willing to tolerate in exchange for preserving some buildings as permanently affordable?
What’s clear from the evidence is that COPA-type laws are not cost-free. They can preserve units and empower community buyers — but they also bring delay, compliance costs, and the risk that only those nonprofits and intermediaries with the best political connections will really benefit.
New York City is now deciding if that trade-off is worth it.
When then–Governor Andrew Cuomo pushed through the 2017 renaming of the new Hudson River crossing to the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge, it looked less like the work of a modern democracy and more like a scene borrowed from a handbook on soft authoritarianism.
A bridge generations had known as Tappan Zee abruptly became a family monument — not a tribute to the region’s history, but to a political dynasty.
Cuomo bridge NY news Tappan Zee 2025
How the “New Tappan Zee Bridge” Became a Family Trophy
The story started out mundanely enough. By the early 2000s, the original Tappan Zee Bridge, opened in 1955, was a chronic headache: overcapacity, constant repairs, aging infrastructure that had outlived its intended design life. New York didn’t just want a facelift; it needed a new bridge.
Andrew Cuomo made that project the showpiece of his infrastructure agenda:
a multi-billion-dollar megaproject,
design-build contracting,
the longest bridge in New York State,
a sleek new profile across one of the Hudson’s widest points.
For years, the project went by pragmatic working names: New NY Bridge, sometimes New Tappan Zee Bridge. The implication was obvious: a new bridge replacing the old Tappan Zee while keeping the historic name.
Then came the plot twist — in the final hours of the legislative session in Albany. Buried in a thick end-of-session bundle of bills was a neat little provision: the new bridge would be officially named the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge, after the sitting governor’s late father and former governor of New York.
What followed was textbook politics:
minimal debate,
maximum party discipline,
and no visible appetite to question whether turning a vital crossing into a family monument was appropriate.
New York’s legislative machinery performed flawlessly — if the goal was to display loyalty upward rather than fidelity to local identity.
When Albany Decides How People Are Supposed to Speak
There was one problem: people already had a name for the bridge, and had used it for more than half a century.
Tappan Zee isn’t just a random phrase; it refers both to the Indigenous Tappan people and the Dutch word zee (“sea”), a compact nod to the layered history of the Hudson Valley — from Native nations to Dutch colonists to postwar suburbia.
In 2017, state government effectively declared that the living language of the region was a detail to be corrected from Albany.
On paper, the new name became Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge. On road signs, too. But in the mouths of drivers and residents on both sides of the river, it largely remained the Tappan Zee.
The result is a political paradox: officially, a tribute verging on personality cult; unofficially, a quiet, everyday refusal to go along.
A Cult of Leadership, American-Style
In countries Washington likes to label “developing democracies,” the pattern is familiar:
airports named for sitting leaders,
universities named for presidents,
bridges and stadiums named for their relatives.
Change the ruling faction, change the signage. Infrastructure doubles as a map of who’s in favor.
The Cuomo Bridge episode looks uncomfortably similar.
Yes, formally the bridge honors Mario Cuomo, the three-term governor from the 1980s and ’90s, a gifted orator and progressive icon of his era. But the timing and the method gave the move a different flavor:
not a broad, deliberative decision,
but a gesture of loyalty to the sitting governor and the family name.
In that moment, state legislators didn’t behave like representatives of their districts. They looked more like a chorus standing at attention, signaling due reverence to the executive and his lineage.
The Politics Change — and Tappan Zee Returns
The political weather has shifted sharply since then. Andrew Cuomo left office under the shadow of a scathing report from the state attorney general detailing multiple allegations of sexual harassment. His attempted comeback in New York City’s mayoral politics fizzled at the ballot box.
Against that backdrop, the bridge’s name no longer feels “above politics” or timeless. It increasingly looks like a relic of the high-Cuomo era — and an awkward one at that.
In November 2025, a new online petition appeared, calling for the bridge to be restored to Tappan Zee. The authors more or less spell out what many had whispered for years:
the renaming was a political vanity project,
the historic name was erased to flatter the governor and his clan,
it’s time to “correct the mistake” and honor the region, not the dynasty.
For Andrew Cuomo, the story plays like a harsh epilogue to his time in power: first the bridge becomes a soaring symbol of the Cuomo family; now that same bridge is the stage for a public reconsideration of his legacy.
A Bureaucracy That Loves the Boss More Than the History
The underlying issue isn’t just the Cuomos. It’s the logic of the system around them.
When officials so readily agree to strip away a living, historical name in favor of a recent or current leader’s surname, they reveal who they think the real audience is. Spoiler: it isn’t the voter stuck in traffic on the span.
The old name Tappan Zee didn’t require a massive branding budget or a governor’s press conference. It required only one thing: admitting that symbols in public space do not belong to whoever currently occupies the corner office in Albany.
But it is far easier — and safer — to demonstrate loyalty upward:
vote yes on the right bill,
smile at the ribbon-cutting,
and pretend that of course a strategic highway crossing should double as a 3-mile-long commemorative plaque for the boss’s family.
Why the New Petition Is More Than a Fight Over a Sign
The current petition to restore the name Tappan Zee isn’t just about highway markers. It’s a modest but revealing referendum on a bigger set of questions:
Who controls the symbols of shared space — residents or political dynasties?
Is it acceptable to turn critical infrastructure into a gallery of last names of the powerful?
And can a bureaucracy admit it went too far in its eagerness to show deference?
The bridge may or may not officially revert to Tappan Zee; there are egos and reputations at stake, and bureaucracies are skilled at defending both.
But it’s already clear that, in everyday speech, the name never really left.
On official letterhead and state websites, it’s the Governor Mario M. Cuomo Bridge. In conversation — “Take the Tappan Zee.”
And in that quiet, stubborn choice of words, you can glimpse a version of democracy that outlives any one governor: the kind that refuses to let a highway span become just another monument to whoever happened to be in charge when the ribbon was cut.
