Last week, Democratic mayoral nominee Eric Adams made what has become a well-worn campaign stop—a union rally. Near a dusty construction site below the Major Deegan Expressway, members of Laborers Local 79 had convened an event to promote the mixed-use development known as Bronx Point, where the first-ever hip-hop museum will be located. The developer, L+M Development Partners, had agreed to employ Local 79 workers, with at least half coming from nearby neighborhoods, 20% formerly incarcerated, and 10% women.

"There's nothing fancy about me," Adams said, atop a podium next to deafening speakers. "I was a dishwasher. I went to school at night. I got arrested."

He later added, "I have fought on behalf of Local 79 laborers and everyday union people my entire life. That is who I am."

The crowd, comprised mostly of Black and Latino men, roared in support.

Days earlier, Adams, the same self-avowed working class champion, appeared to play just as well to a very different crowd consisting of the city's moneyed elite at Martha's Vineyard. According to the New York Times, he attended two fundraisers on the island, one of which was attended by Caroline Kennedy. The prior weekend, Adams was a fixture in the Hamptons, where he was snapped in a photo wearing a bright red blazer at a fundraiser thrown by John Catsimatidis, the Republican billionaire he was seen dining out with earlier this summer.

In the months leading up to the general election, Adams is proving to be the candidate who appears comfortable on construction sites and waterfront mansions alike, someone who can speak persuasively about the plight of the working poor while also glad-handing with socialites and private sector leaders. Whether that proves to be problematic or not could depend on how Adams navigates his first term, in which he will face pressure to deliver on an array of demands, from unions to the business industry to the everyday New Yorkers that he has pledged to represent.

A New York Times story reported that real estate and other donors had lobbied Adams, the current Brooklyn borough president, and received favorable zoning changes or grants. Adams responded by saying Black candidates are "often held to a higher, unfair standard."

During the primary, Adams amassed a total of $15.5 million, of which he still has $4 million left. He recently announced that he raised an additional $2.2 million since July 12th, which will balloon after public funds are distributed. By comparison, his Republican opponent Curtis Sliwa collected a mere $200,000 during that same period; he has raised a total of about $1 million so far.

Including matching public funds, Adams expects to have $5 million by the November election.

A strong show of fundraising by mayoral candidates in the lead-up to the general election is considered key to generating high voter turnout and building a broad base of support. These two factors will enable a new mayor to have a strong bargaining position with the City Council and state lawmakers, according to Mitchell Moss, a professor of urban policy and planning at NYU.

"I think New Yorkers want to learn who he is—and fundraising is part of that process," Moss said.

Under the city's campaign finance rules, those who gave Adams the maximum individual contribution of $2,000 during the primary cannot donate again to his general election campaign. Combined with the relatively short fundraising period, a mayoral candidate is incentivized to seek a new circle of bigger donors.

But Adams's effort to build a large war chest has not gone without criticism, especially since he is heavily favored to win the general election.

His rival Sliwa, for one, tweeted, "Do you really think a lobbyist/billionaire-backed career politician will change anything in NYC?"

The optics of hobnobbing with New York's affluent class can sometimes be thorny for Democratic candidates, especially those like Adams that call themselves progressive. But his latest presence at fancy fundraising events with titans of industry risks making him seem further out of touch during a moment when hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers are facing economic hardship, including an eviction crisis.

"He’s spending his time meeting with wealthy real estate investors. That's a problematic message that's being sent," said Gabe Tobias, who spearheaded a super PAC for progressives.

Adams, he argued, shouldn't accept donations from the real estate industry, which includes residential landlords who have fought the federal and state eviction moratoriums, while at the same time claiming to represent the interests of working class New Yorkers.

"He can't have it both ways," Tobias said.

Kimberely Johnson, a political science professor at New York University, argued that the fundraising scrutiny is partly misdirected because Adams, despite his working class background, never positioned himself as an anti-corporate candidate. During the primary, Adams made a point of not rejecting any donations from real estate developers as some of the other candidates did. "What oil is to Texas, real estate is to New York," he often said.

Johnson argued that had Adams failed to raise significant sums following the primary, he would have been perceived as a weak candidate. "It's sort of damned if he does, damned if he doesn't," she said.

Susan Lerner, the executive director of Common Cause New York, a good government group, said she saw no reason for concern. "As far as we can tell, Eric Adams fundraising is well within the confines of the requirements of the New York City campaign finance system," she said.

Evan Thies, his campaign spokesman said, "Eric’s campaign has the support of nearly 10,000 contributors from every corner of the city and every background, allowing him to set an historic precedent for future candidates of color who traditionally do not have ready access to the significant resources needed to run competitively in citywide elections. Eric’s campaign will now be able to ensure his message gets through on behalf of the working people of this city who he is seeking to represent at City Hall.”

Still, some say recent history may serve as a cautionary tale for Adams. Following his primary victory in 2013, Mayor Bill de Blasio proved to be a prodigious fundraiser, aided by an array of fundraising hosts that also included business interests. All told, his campaign raised $5.7 million between the September 10th primary and November election—a much shorter fundraising window than Adams now has with the primary having been moved up to June. The city's public matching funds program was also less generous at the time, granting a 6-to-1 as opposed to the current 8-to-1 match.

De Blasio wound up beating his Republican opponent Joe Lhota in a landslide, giving him a clear mandate to pursue his progressive agenda.

But soon afterward, questions swirled over whether his campaign donors had received favors from the city. Multiple investigations ensued. Although no charges were ever brought, the scrutiny and headlines produced a cloud over de Blasio's first term.

Johnson, the political science professor, said, "We want our politicians to be clean," but given the nature of politics and fundraising, there are bound to be problematic donors tied to policy decisions. "I guess the question for Adams is, how 'cleanish' is he going to be?"

Additional reporting from David Cruz.

A previous version of this story said that L+M agreed to hire only unionized workers, but the developer says that while there is an agreement with Local 79, the project is in fact an open shop.