Ex-NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton on Sunday suggested city Public Advocate Jumaane Williams and Council Speaker Adrienne Adams are only backing the “foolish’’ cop-stops bill to try to grab City Hall for themselves.

“A lot of what’s going on here … indicates many of these people are looking at the idea that if they can weaken Mayor [Eric] Adams, that in the next mayoral election maybe they’ll get a shot at it, too,” said Bratton, who served as the city’s police chief under former Mayors Bill de Blasio and Rudy Giuliani, on “The Cats Roundtable” on WABC 770 AM.

“Mr. Williams is looking in that direction. Possibly the [speaker] of the City Council, Miss Adams, has the idea that if they can kneecap the mayor, well — who knows? — maybe they can be considered for mayor … in the city that tends to vote, unfortunately, very progressive-liberal,” Bratton told show host John Catsimatidis of the bill’s two chief advocates.

“Some of what’s going on here is an effort to undercut the mayor,” the former top cop said.

Bratton said he has “smoke coming out of my ears thinking about the foolishness and uselessness of this bill,” which would require cops to log details of even the lowest level of official encounters.

Adams, a former city police sergeant, says the hotly controversial bill is unnecessary and too time-consuming for the already strapped police department. 

The City Council on Tuesday plans a vote to override the mayor’s veto of it.

Bratton said that under the bill, police officers would be put in the unenviable position of guessing if they can’t get basic information from subjects as they fill out reports.

“You can imagine New Yorkers who are approached by a police officer … looking for a lost child … looking to investigate a crime. And before [the cops] can do anything, they say to that individual, ‘Can you tell me what your race is? Can you tell me if you’re male or female? Are you binary? Are you transsexual?’ ” Bratton said.

He noted the bill’s purpose is to curb biased policing in encounters with the public at a time when a majority of the police force, the criminals and crime victims are people of color.

“What is the purpose of the law other than [for the City Council to show] their intense dislike and lack of trust of the NYPD?” he said.

He claimed the extensive reporting on potentially millions of interactions with the public actually undermines community policing by discouraging officers from interacting with residents because of the cumbersome reporting requirement.

Bratton also scoffed when asked about ex-Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who was forced to resign over sexual harassment allegations in 2021 and may try to make a comeback bid by running for mayor. Cuomo has denied any wrongdoing in the harassment scandal.

“I don’t think that’s likely to happen,” Bratton said of a Cuomo comeback bid.

In addition to the 2021 scandal, “the former governor … is going to have to answer for his … parole board that has in the last several years has released 34 cop murderers from prison,” Bratton said. “There’s a lot of vulnerabilities in that candidacy.”

The former police commissioner also said some of the criminal justice policies enacted by Cuomo and the Democratic legislature, such as the unpopular cashless bail law in 2019, are not helpful.

Cuomo spokesman Rich Azzopardi insisted in response that the parole board “is an independent body”, though the governor appoints them.

A Council spokesperson responded, “Speaker Adams has been clear on several occasions that she has no intention of running for mayor, and the policy decisions of the Council under her leadership are based on the needs of New Yorkers.”

“Int. 586-A does not require NYPD officers to report every time they speak to someone – only when they engage in an investigative stop. While we respect the former commissioner’s service, it’s important to note that he previously fought against a number of transparency reforms passed by the Council that never materialized to have the highly exaggerated impact that he and other opponents claimed they would at the time. It would be understandable if his inaccurate description of the bill was a result of all the misinformation being spread about it, and we hope he will correct the record with the facts in that case,” the speaker’s aide added.

Adams last week accused City Hall and other opponents of the bill of scare-mongering.

“The council has no interest in prolonging a conversation that has been made unnecessarily toxic by the spreading of fear and misinformation, and we plan to override the mayor’s recent vetoes on Tuesday,” she said.