By John Q. Hosedrinker 
FDNY Commissioner Robert Tucker will resign his post on December 19, shortly after the mayoral election. Tucker, who was appointed in 2024, did not give a reason for his departure but thanked Mayor Adams. His successor will be appointed by Zohran Mamdani, who will assume office on January 1, 2026. An interim acting fire commissioner is expected to be named.
Read the original article here
FDNY chief Robert Tucker announces resignation day after Mamdani election, and it immediately sets off a wave of reactions, to say the least. It seems like the speed of events is remarkable, as the departure closely follows the election of Zohran Mamdani, suggesting a possible shift in the city’s power dynamics and perhaps a prelude to wider changes. One thing that comes up repeatedly is the idea that Tucker’s appointment was tied to political donations, specifically to Eric Adams. It’s noted that several employees from Tucker’s security company donated to Adams around the time of his appointment, and that the city’s campaign finance board took notice. This raises serious questions about the nature of the selection process and whether it prioritized qualifications over political connections.
The core of the issue with Tucker seems to stem from the fact that he was never a firefighter. His background was in security and investigative services, running a company in that field. Many express the sentiment that the head of the FDNY should, ideally, possess firefighting experience. It’s perceived by some as a fundamental lack of understanding or empathy for the department’s core mission, and a detachment from the very people he was meant to lead.
The speed of his resignation, coupled with the political context, makes many jump to conclusions. The suggestion is that this departure may not be entirely voluntary, but a strategic move to avoid potential investigations or accountability under the new administration. The phrase “dodging indictment” keeps coming up, implying that there are serious concerns about his conduct and decisions during his tenure.
There’s a lot of focus on the idea of “draining the swamp,” which suggests an attempt to root out corruption and self-serving behavior. People see this as a positive sign of change, and they hope it will lead to more transparency and accountability within city government. The focus on “corruption” and “the corrupt” emphasizes a belief that the system has been rife with questionable practices and the implication that many involved have been prioritizing personal gain over public service.
Furthermore, Tucker’s planned work trip to Israel before the resignation raises eyebrows, with questions of propriety and use of taxpayer funds. It’s noted that this trip seems suspect given the timing of his departure. It creates an impression of a leader not fully committed to the department’s mission, and also a hint of the questionable priorities of the Adams administration.
The reactions are a mix of satisfaction and hope. Many are delighted that Tucker is leaving, viewing it as a cleansing of the “good ole boy network” and a victory for transparency. There’s a clear expectation that Mamdani will bring about significant changes, including investigations and a purge of those involved in corruption. Some even make jokes, suggesting the city find someone with actual firefighting experience to replace him.
One notable thread throughout the comments is the assumption that Tucker’s departure is just the beginning. The feeling is that his resignation might be followed by more individuals linked to the prior administration leaving their positions. It’s seen as a signal of a larger power shift and a potential reshuffling of personnel to reflect the new political landscape.
Overall, the resignation of FDNY chief Robert Tucker is perceived as an event that symbolizes the potential for change and accountability. While the specifics of the situation remain unclear, the strong reactions from many New Yorkers express dissatisfaction with the status quo and a desire for a more transparent and just government. The situation also demonstrates how quickly political events can unfold and how they can affect those in positions of power. It makes one wonder what other changes this election might bring.