Home Blog Page 13

Dr. Fauci, the Fifth Amendment, and the Questions America Still Deserves Answered

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Dr. Fauci, the Fifth Amendment, and the Questions America Still Deserves Answered

Dr. Anthony Fauci’s recent appearance before Congress did not bring the answers many Americans were hoping to hear. Instead, it raised new questions.

The longtime director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the public face of America’s COVID-19 response invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination rather than answer questions before the Senate. Let us be clear from the beginning: the Fifth Amendment is a constitutional protection. Every American has the right to invoke it, and exercising that right is not, by itself, proof of guilt.

But constitutional rights do not eliminate public accountability.

For years, Dr. Fauci stood at the center of decisions that affected virtually every American. Businesses closed. Schools shut down. Churches suspended services. Millions of workers faced vaccine mandates. Families were divided over public health policies. The federal government, public health officials, technology companies, employers, and media organizations all played significant roles in shaping what Americans could say, question, and do during one of the most extraordinary periods in modern history.

Many Americans who questioned aspects of the government’s COVID-19 response paid a price. Some doctors and scientists who challenged prevailing public health guidance said they faced professional consequences. Countless individuals reported being criticized, deplatformed, or labeled as spreading misinformation for raising questions about lockdowns, mandates, vaccine policies, or the origins of the virus. Whether every criticism was valid is a separate question. The point is that public debate often became narrower than many Americans believed it should have been.

That is why many people see an irony today.

Citizens who questioned government policy often found themselves publicly condemned for asking questions. Now, one of the government’s most prominent officials has chosen not to answer questions under oath by invoking a constitutional protection. The Constitution protects that choice, but Americans are equally justified in asking why the questions remain unanswered.

The discussion becomes even more complicated when considering President Joe Biden’s pardon of Dr. Fauci. A presidential pardon is a lawful constitutional power. At the same time, it has fueled public debate. Critics ask why a pardon was necessary and why, after receiving one, Fauci would still decline to answer questions before Congress. Legal experts point out that a pardon does not necessarily eliminate every potential legal concern, including possible state matters or issues that could arise from future testimony. Even so, the combination of a pardon and the invocation of the Fifth Amendment has understandably become part of the national conversation.

The COVID-19 vaccines remain another area where Americans continue to seek transparency. Billions of doses have been administered worldwide, and years of research have identified known risks, including rare cases of myocarditis, certain clotting disorders associated with specific vaccine platforms, and severe allergic reactions. At the same time, no one can honestly claim to know every possible long-term effect decades into the future because the vaccines have not existed for that length of time. Continued monitoring and research are both appropriate and necessary.

Science is strengthened by transparency, not weakened by it. Asking questions is not anti-science. In fact, questioning, testing, challenging, and verifying are foundational to the scientific process itself.

The public debate surrounding the vaccines also became a debate about individual liberty, government authority, and social pressure. If there was one public figure who became the face of the vaccine mandate era, it was Kyrie Irving. His decision not to receive the COVID-19 vaccine cost him the ability to play home games in New York City, millions of dollars in salary, and subjected him to relentless public criticism. He was portrayed by many as reckless, selfish, and anti-science, despite maintaining that his decision was a personal medical choice.

Whether one agreed with Irving’s decision is beside the point. His experience demonstrated how government mandates, league policies, corporate decisions, media narratives, and public opinion could converge to pressure individuals into making a medical decision. For many Americans, Kyrie Irving became the most recognizable symbol of the vaccine mandate era—an example of how compliance was often rewarded. At the same time, dissent carried significant personal, professional, and financial consequences.

The larger issue extends far beyond Dr. Fauci or one athlete. It is about trust.

Public trust cannot be sustained if citizens are expected to accept extraordinary government authority while public officials decline to explain the decisions that shaped those extraordinary measures. During the pandemic, Americans sacrificed businesses, careers, education, family gatherings, religious worship, and personal freedoms in ways unseen in generations. Many accepted those sacrifices because they believed they were acting on the best available information.

Now those same Americans deserve answers.

Accountability is not vengeance. Transparency is not persecution. Congressional oversight is not political theater when it seeks to understand decisions that affected hundreds of millions of lives. In a constitutional republic, public officials are entrusted with enormous authority, but that authority carries a responsibility to explain their actions to the people they serve.

Regardless of where one stands on COVID-19 policy, one principle should unite us all: Americans deserve honest answers, open debate, and institutions willing to earn—not demand—the public’s trust. That trust is built through transparency, accountability, and the willingness to answer difficult questions, especially when the stakes have been as high as they were during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BW News Brief: Vacant Mount Vernon Building Collapses, Damaging Parked Cars

AJ Woodson
-
0
BW News Brief: Vacant Mount Vernon Building Collapses, Damaging Parked Cars

MOUNT VERNON — A vacant three-story building at 16 North Bond Street suffered a total structural collapse Thursday morning, crushing several parked vehicles and prompting the evacuation of two neighboring apartment buildings.

The collapse occurred between Mount Vernon Avenue and Oak Street while construction workers were shoring up the fire-damaged building as part of an approved stabilization project. Three workers who had been inside were taking a break near the rear of the property and escaped without injury.

“They were taking a break, luckily for them, they were in the rear of the building when the collapse happened,” Mount Vernon Fire Department Chief Rodney Samson said. “It was a pancaked collapse, so that means each floor just basically dropped straight down on each other.”

The building had been heavily damaged by a fire in 2023, and the property owner received permits late last year to perform structural work.

As a precaution, residents of the adjoining buildings at 14 and 18 North Bond Street were evacuated while city officials conducted interior and exterior structural assessments, including evaluations of the neighboring buildings and roofing systems. Residents have since been allowed to return.

Electric service, which was temporarily disconnected as a safety measure, has been restored, and the surrounding streets have reopened.

The Mount Vernon Department of Public Works will continue debris-removal operations. North Bond Street between Oak Street and Mount Vernon Avenue will be closed from 6:30 a.m. until 5 p.m. during the cleanup. Motorists are encouraged to use alternate routes and expect delays.

The cause of the collapse remains under investigation. City officials said additional updates will be provided as more information becomes available.

The Root Failed Black America: This Interview Asked the Questions—But Never Demanded the Answers

DAMON K JONES
-
0
The Root Failed Black America: This Interview Asked the Questions—But Never Demanded the Answers

There is a unique responsibility that comes with being a Black-owned publication. It is not simply to interview elected officials or provide them another platform to repeat campaign promises. It is to ask the questions that millions of Black Americans would ask if they were sitting across the table themselves. That responsibility becomes even greater when the subject is the Mayor of New York City, whose policies will affect one of the largest urban Black populations in America. For that reason, I found Charles M. Blow’s recent interview with Mayor Zohran Mamdani to be a missed opportunity.

The interview covered many of the issues that dominate today’s political conversations. Affordability, universal child care, free bus service, housing, and public safety were all discussed at length. These are legitimate public policy issues, and no reasonable person would argue that they are unimportant. The problem is not that these subjects were discussed. The problem is that they were discussed almost entirely as universal policy goals rather than through the lens of what they specifically mean for Black Americans.

This distinction matters because every politician speaks about affordability. Every administration promises to make life easier for working families. Those are campaign themes, not a Black agenda. The question Black America has been asking for generations is much narrower and much more specific: How will your policies increase Black wealth, expand Black homeownership, grow Black-owned businesses, improve educational outcomes, and create safer communities where Black families can thrive? Those are not ideological questions. They are measurements of success.

Throughout the interview, Mayor Mamdani returned repeatedly to affordability as the answer to many of New York City’s problems. Charles M. Blow accepted that premise without demanding a more detailed explanation of how those policies would produce measurable gains for Black New Yorkers. Affordability may be part of the solution, but it is not, by itself, an economic strategy. It does not explain how wealth will be created. It does not explain how ownership will increase. It does not explain how Black businesses will gain greater access to capital or government contracts. Most importantly, it does not explain how the next generation of Black families will accumulate assets instead of simply reducing expenses.

That distinction is not academic. It goes to the heart of why Black Americans continue to trail the nation in household wealth despite decades of political promises. A family may receive temporary financial relief through government programs while never increasing its net worth. A renter may benefit from lower monthly housing costs while never acquiring the equity that transforms housing into generational wealth. A business owner, however, creates jobs. A homeowner builds equity. An investor builds assets. These are fundamentally different outcomes, and they require fundamentally different policies. Those questions should have driven the interview from beginning to end.

To Charles M. Blow’s credit, he asked Mayor Mamdani whether he would support cash reparations if New York City’s reparations commission ultimately recommended them. That was an important question. However, it also raises a larger one that was never explored. Mayor Mamdani is one of the Democratic Socialists of America’s highest-profile elected officials, and the DSA’s national politics have largely emphasized universal social and economic programs rather than a sustained, Black-specific reparations agenda in the way the interview framed it. While the organization has expressed support for reparations in various resolutions and statements, its broader platform is not centered on a comprehensive Black economic agenda built around homeownership, Black business development, or generational wealth. 

That makes the exchange even more significant. If reparations warranted a direct question, then Charles M. Blow should also have pressed for equally direct answers on Black homeownership, access to capital, Black-owned businesses, educational outcomes, and measurable wealth creation. Those are the issues that will determine whether Black New Yorkers are better off four years from now. It is also worth acknowledging the political context. The DSA’s membership has been reported to be overwhelmingly white, with internal surveys and analyses indicating Black members make up only a small share of the organization. That reality makes it even more important to ask how a movement with relatively limited Black membership intends to address the specific needs and priorities of Black Americans

Charles M. Blow did ask whether there should be a Black agenda. In many respects, that was the strongest question of the interview. Yet when the mayor answered by returning to universal affordability policies, the obvious follow-up questions never came. If affordability is the Black agenda, what measurable improvements should Black New Yorkers expect to see four years from now? How many additional Black homeowners? How many new Black-owned businesses? How much growth in Black household wealth? Without measurable objectives, broad political themes remain exactly that—broad political themes.

Black Americans deserve more than reassurance that general government programs will eventually benefit everyone. We deserve to know whether our communities will own more, earn more, save more, invest more, and pass more wealth to the next generation. That is the standard by which every elected official should be judged, regardless of party or ideology. It is also the standard by which Black journalism should hold those elected officials accountable

Democrats Face Growing Financial Crisis as DNC Leadership Comes Under Fire Ahead of 2026 Midterms

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Democrats Face Growing Financial Crisis as DNC Leadership Comes Under Fire Ahead of 2026 Midterms

With the 2026 midterm elections approaching, Democrats should be preparing to capitalize on what many political analysts consider a favorable political environment. President Donald Trump’s approval ratings continue to face challenges over inflation, gas prices, and criticism surrounding his administration’s handling of the conflict with Iran. Yet instead of presenting a unified strategy, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) finds itself battling financial instability, internal conflict, and growing questions about its leadership.

According to reports discussed in the transcript, the DNC is reportedly carrying approximately $2 million in debt, while Republicans enter the election cycle with a significant financial advantage. President Trump reportedly controls a $400 million super PAC, and the Republican National Committee (RNC) has roughly $130 million in cash reserves.

The financial concerns extend beyond fundraising.

Reports indicate the DNC used its Washington, D.C., headquarters as collateral to secure a $15 million line of credit, a move that has raised eyebrows because it comes well before a presidential election year, when such borrowing would traditionally be expected. Party officials have also reportedly discussed delaying payments to vendors until after the midterms in an effort to relieve immediate financial pressure.

Leadership Under Scrutiny

Much of the criticism has centered on DNC Chairman Ken Martin, who has faced increasing pressure from party donors and insiders.

According to reports referenced in the discussion, Martin has been criticized over his handling of the long-awaited 2024 election “autopsy” report, which many Democrats hoped would provide a roadmap for rebuilding after Vice President Kamala Harris’ election defeat. Instead, critics argue the report failed to offer meaningful direction for the party moving forward.

The controversy doesn’t end there.

Reports also describe Martin as increasingly isolated within the organization, with allegations that he became involved in a workplace confrontation that resulted in an HR complaint. Critics argue the combination of leadership turmoil and financial uncertainty is undermining donor confidence at the very time Democrats need to be aggressively organizing for the next election cycle.

Spending Priorities Raise New Questions

One of the most debated issues involves how the DNC has allocated limited resources.

During a public appearance, Martin defended the decision to provide equal financial support to Democratic organizations in U.S. territories—including Guam, Puerto Rico, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa—as it does to state parties.

Federal spending records cited in the discussion indicate approximately $840,000 has been directed to those territorial organizations since the beginning of last year. Critics argue that while these areas deserve representation, they do not directly determine control of Congress and question whether those funds would have been better spent strengthening battleground states such as Pennsylvania and North Carolina.

Martin defended the strategy by arguing that “when we organize everywhere, we can win anywhere.” Critics, however, say the party simply cannot afford that philosophy while carrying debt and discussing layoffs.

A Party Without a Strategy?

Political commentators featured in the discussion argued that Democrats appear to be missing what should have been a prime opportunity to reconnect with voters.

Rather than focusing on a clear economic message or presenting a unified alternative to the Trump administration, the party has found itself consumed by internal disagreements, fundraising problems, and ideological battles between progressive activists and more centrist Democrats.

Several commentators questioned why, nearly two years after the 2024 election, Democrats still appear to lack a comprehensive strategy for rebuilding their national coalition.

Instead of projecting confidence, they argued, the party is projecting uncertainty.

Money Still Wins Elections

While favorable polling can help shape political narratives, campaigns ultimately require money, organization, volunteers, advertising, and voter outreach.

Commentators noted that Republicans currently possess a significant fundraising advantage while Democrats reportedly struggle to pay vendors and maintain financial stability. They argued that if the party cannot rebuild donor confidence soon, it risks entering the 2026 midterms at a severe organizational disadvantage despite national dissatisfaction with several Republican policies.

What This Means for Black Voters

For Black voters, these developments should be viewed beyond simple party politics.

For decades, Democrats have relied heavily on overwhelming support from Black communities. Yet many Black voters continue asking a fundamental question:

What is the long-term strategy?

Internal dysfunction, fundraising struggles, and leadership disputes do little to address issues that consistently rank among the top concerns for Black Americans—including public safety, economic mobility, homeownership, education, entrepreneurship, and wealth creation.

Political parties cannot simply expect loyalty because of historical voting patterns. They must demonstrate competence, fiscal responsibility, and a clear vision that benefits the communities they seek to represent.

As the 2026 midterms draw closer, Democrats still have time to reorganize and present a unified message. But time alone will not solve financial problems, restore donor confidence, or rebuild trust with voters.

The question now is whether party leadership can change course before those challenges become political liabilities at the ballot box.

Con Edison Natural Resources Scientist Shows ELOC Summer Students What a Career in the Environmental Field Looks Like

Black Westchester
-
0
Con Edison Natural Resources Scientist Shows ELOC Summer Students What a Career in the Environmental Field Looks Like

By  Marvin V Church, Associate Executive Director of Environmental Leaders of Color

NEW ROCHELLE, N.Y.—July 27, 2026 — Students in Environmental Leaders of Color’s (ELOC) summer program got a firsthand look at what it means to build a career protecting and revitalizing local ecosystems when John Pavacic, a natural resources scientist with Con Edison, visited the organization’s New Rochelle site at the Booker T. Washington program on Wednesday, July 22nd.

The visit was part of ELOC’s summer program curriculum, which this year centers on the theme of “Ecosystems”. Students will spend the summer exploring how plants, animals, water, and humans interact with and depend on one another in the communities where students live.

As a subject matter expert in Con Edison’s Environmental, Health & Safety department, Pavacic guides the utility’s projects through environmental regulatory processes, negotiating permits and terms with agencies such as NYC Parks, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. He also leads Con Edison’s sustainability programs, including its Rewilding Initiative, living shoreline projects, and efforts to incorporate green infrastructure into the company’s work. He is also one of the authors of Con Edison’s Biodiversity Plan.

Pavacic walked students through the wide range of projects he leads and supports at Con Edison, from eradicating invasive species that crowd out native plants to designing rain gardens that capture stormwater before it overwhelms local sewers and waterways to rewilding initiatives that reintroduce native species and pollinators to areas where they had previously disappeared. He also shared projects the utility is planning, giving students a look at how green infrastructure is shaping the region’s future.

As valuable as the science was, the key message was that a career in environmental studies is possible. Pavacic’s visit showed students that the environmental concepts they study each week translate into real careers where scientists dedicate their time to restoring habitats, managing stormwater, and bringing pollinators back to their neighborhoods. For many students, it was their first time meeting a working natural resources scientist and hearing how someone turns a passion for the environment into a profession.

“Our students see environmental science in textbooks every week, but moments like this show them it’s also a real career, one where you can spend your days restoring wetlands, protecting shorelines, and bringing pollinators back to neighborhoods like theirs. When they meet someone like John, who’s doing that work at a company as large as Con Edison, it becomes tangible. They start to see themselves in that role, not just as students learning about ecosystems, but as future scientists and stewards of their own communities,” said Marvin V. Church, Associate Executive Director of Environmental Leaders of Color.

The guest speaker engagement reflects ELOC’s ongoing commitment to connecting Westchester youth with environmental professionals and demonstrating pathways into the green workforce. ELOC thanks the Booker T. Washington program for its partnership and Con Edison for supporting environmental education in the community.

About Environmental Leaders of Color (ELOC)

Environmental Leaders of Color (ELOC) is a Westchester County-based nonprofit organization dedicated to engaging, educating, and empowering young people to become leaders in environmental justice. Through hands-on environmental programming, civic partnerships, leadership development, and academic support, ELOC equips the next generation with the knowledge and skills to create healthier, more sustainable communities.

For more information, visit www.eloc.earth.

A City-Owned Grocery Store Sounds Good—But Economics Doesn’t Care About Good Intentions

DAMON K JONES
-
0
A City-Owned Grocery Store Sounds Good—But Economics Doesn’t Care About Good Intentions

Let’s start with something we can all agree on. Every New Yorker wants lower grocery prices.

Food costs have climbed dramatically over the past several years, squeezing working families, seniors on fixed incomes, and many Black households already struggling with the rising cost of living. Any proposal that promises to make groceries more affordable deserves serious consideration.

That is why Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s plan to open city-owned grocery stores selling food 30 percent below retail prices has captured so much attention. On its face, it sounds like an innovative solution to a real problem.

But public policy should be judged not only by its intentions, but by whether the economics actually work.

Good intentions alone do not pay wholesalers. They do not cover payroll, refrigeration, transportation, utilities, insurance, inventory losses, or the countless operating costs of running a grocery business.

The question isn’t whether New Yorkers deserve lower grocery prices—they do.

The question is whether a city can sustainably sell groceries 30 percent below market prices without creating an ongoing financial burden for taxpayers or putting neighborhood grocery stores at a competitive disadvantage.

Before we celebrate the promise, we should understand the price.

Unlike many industries, grocery stores operate on razor-thin margins. Most supermarkets earn only 1 to 3 percent in net profit after paying for inventory, labor, utilities, transportation, refrigeration, insurance, maintenance, spoilage, and theft.

That raises a simple question:

If private grocery stores can barely make money selling food at today’s prices, how can a city-owned grocery store sell the same products 30 percent cheaper without someone absorbing the loss?

Government doesn’t receive groceries at a magical discount.

The city will still purchase food from wholesalers. It will still pay employees, maintain buildings, cover utility costs, replace spoiled inventory, and manage one of the most logistically demanding businesses in the country.

If the city has discovered a business model that allows groceries to be sold at 30 percent below market prices while remaining financially sustainable, it should publish it. Economists, retailers, taxpayers, and small business owners deserve to see how the numbers work.

Supporters often point to municipally owned grocery stores in other parts of the country as proof that government can successfully operate grocery stores.

But the comparison is misleading.

The most successful examples are found in small rural towns like St. Paul, Kansas, where the community had lost its only grocery store. The city’s goal was not to beat private businesses on price. It was simply to make sure residents had access to groceries at all. In a town of only a few hundred people, residents supported the store because the alternative was driving many miles for necessities.

Other municipal grocery stores have struggled or failed. Communities such as Baldwin, Florida, and Erie, Kansas, experienced years of operating losses, management challenges, or eventually turned operations over to private management after the economics proved difficult. These examples demonstrate just how challenging the grocery business can be—even on a much smaller scale.

New York City is an entirely different situation.

This isn’t a rural food desert with no grocery options. New York already has thousands of supermarkets, neighborhood grocery stores, bodegas, warehouse clubs, and specialty food markets competing for customers every day.

The proposal is not simply to provide access to food where none exists.

It is to have government compete in an existing marketplace while selling groceries at prices 30 percent below retail.

Running a business by selling products 30 percent below market prices may sound like a win for consumers, but the economics raise an unavoidable question: Who pays the overhead? Every grocery store—whether privately owned or government-run—must pay for inventory, employee wages, utilities, refrigeration, insurance, transportation, maintenance, technology, spoilage, and theft. Those costs do not disappear simply because the city owns the business. If the revenue from selling groceries at significantly reduced prices is not enough to cover those expenses, the shortfall must be made up elsewhere. In a government-owned operation, that burden typically falls on taxpayers through subsidies or public funding. In other words, while shoppers may save money at the checkout counter, taxpayers could ultimately be paying the operating costs behind the scenes. The question is not whether lower grocery prices are desirable—they certainly are. The question is whether a business can sustainably sell products 30 percent below market prices without shifting the true cost from the customer to the taxpayer.

That raises another important question.

What happens to the neighborhood grocery stores and family-owned supermarkets that cannot rely on taxpayer funding to offset losses?

Many of these businesses already operate on extremely thin margins while paying some of the highest commercial rents, labor costs, insurance premiums, and taxes in the country. If government becomes a subsidized competitor, some private stores may lose customers, reduce staff, or eventually close.

Every business has overhead, regardless of who owns it. A grocery store must pay for inventory, employee wages, refrigeration, utilities, transportation, insurance, maintenance, security, and food spoilage before it can ever make a profit. Those costs do not disappear because the government operates the store. If groceries are sold 30 percent below retail prices and the revenue generated is not enough to cover these operating expenses, the difference must be paid from another source. In the private sector, the business owner absorbs the loss. In a government-owned grocery store, that burden typically falls on taxpayers through public subsidies. Lower prices at the checkout counter may provide immediate relief for shoppers, but they do not eliminate the true cost of running the business—they simply shift who ultimately pays the overhead.

That would hardly strengthen neighborhood economies.

None of this means government should ignore food affordability.

Far from it.

The city should absolutely look for ways to reduce grocery costs. It could reduce unnecessary regulations, improve public safety along commercial corridors, lower the cost of doing business, encourage more competition, expand targeted nutrition assistance, or partner with existing neighborhood grocery stores rather than compete against them.

Those are conversations worth having.

But promising groceries at 30 percent below retail without fully explaining the long-term financial model risks creating expectations that may be unsustainable.

Economics is not partisan.

Whether you’re a Democrat, Republican, Socialist, or Independent, every business must eventually answer the same question: Will revenues cover expenses?

If they don’t, someone else pays the difference.

Government cannot suspend the laws of economics.

Good intentions are admirable.

Sound economics are essential.

Before New Yorkers embrace this proposal, they deserve more than a slogan. They deserve a transparent business plan that explains exactly how these stores will operate, who pays if they lose money, and whether this model can truly succeed in the most expensive city in America.

Because in the end, good intentions don’t balance budgets.

Economics does.

A Heartfelt Thank You from the Mount Vernon Youth Bureau: Sowing Seeds of Opportunity for Mount Vernon’s Youth

AJ Woodson
-
0
A Heartfelt Thank You from the Mount Vernon Youth Bureau: Sowing Seeds of Opportunity for Mount Vernon’s Youth

With profound gratitude and a humble heart, I, Debbie Burrell-Butler, Executive Director, extend my sincerest thanks to everyone who attended and supported the Mount Vernon Youth Bureau’s 2nd Biennial “Planting the Seeds” Gala, held on July 23, 2026, at the beautiful Greentree Country Club located in New Rochelle, NY. 

Your presence and generosity were nothing short of inspiring. In a world where the needs of our young people continue to grow, your unwavering commitment to our mission reminds us that community is not just a word; it is a living, breathing promise we make to one another. Seeing so many faces united in purpose, lifting the next generation, was a powerful testament to the strength and spirit of Mount Vernon.

Because of you, the Mount Vernon Youth Bureau is proud to announce that our mission will be honored in full. Thanks to your support, we will give away $20,000 to 20 fortunate recipients at our Biennial Scholarship Event in 2027. These scholarships are designed specifically for youth pursuing professions within the blue-collar workforce field of limitless dignity, skill, and opportunity. The Bureau is committed to supporting careers not only in HVAC, mechanical technology, and nursing, but also in the vast array of trades and essential professions that build, heal, and sustain our world. From electrical work and plumbing to carpentry, automotive technology, medical assisting, and beyond, the Bureau believes that every honest trade is a pathway to a prosperous future.

This letter is our way of saying THANK YOU, not just for a single evening, but for the lasting impact you are making. To our sponsors and donors, your financial investment is the soil in which these dreams will grow. To our colleagues, friends, and family, your encouragement and belief in this work keep us moving forward. To the Mount Vernon Youth Bureau Board Members and staff, your dedication, late nights, and passion turned a vision into a reality.

Lastly, to our amazing awardees, you made the night one to remember. Your passion and resilience inspire us. You prove there are many paths to success, and the road less traveled often leads to the most beautiful destinations. You are not just recipients; you are trailblazers and the hope for the next generation.

We remain humbled by your trust and inspired by your generosity. As we look toward 2027, we invite you to continue walking with us as we plant, nurture, and harvest the potential within every young person we serve.

With deepest appreciation and sincere gratitude,

Debbie Burrell-Butler,
Executive Director, MBA
Mount Vernon Youth Bureau

“Planting the Seeds Today, Harvesting the Leaders of Tomorrow.”

The Jack and Jill National Convention Through a Grandfather’s Eyes

DAMON K JONES
-
0
The Jack and Jill National Convention Through a Grandfather’s Eyes

This week, thousands of Black families from across the nation are gathering in Baltimore for the 47th National Convention of Jack and Jill of America. For many, it’s a celebration of leadership, education, service, and fellowship.

For me, it’s something even more personal.

As a father and grandfather, I have the privilege of watching my daughter and my granddaughter participate in an organization dedicated to preparing young people for leadership and service. Seeing three generations represented reminds me that our greatest investment has never been buildings, politics, or programs—it’s our children.

My daughter Miesha, is a proud member of the Jack and Jill Westchester County, NY Chapter, under the leadership of Chapter President Janelle Bradshaw. 

Watching them represent the Westchester County Chapter was a source of tremendous pride. It was inspiring to see families from our community join thousands of others from across the country, united by a shared commitment to developing the next generation of Black leaders. As a father and grandfather, seeing my daughter invest in my granddaughter through an organization that emphasizes leadership, service, education, and cultural enrichment is a reminder that legacy is built one generation at a time.

Too often, headlines about Black America focus on our challenges. We read about crime, failing schools, political division, and economic disparities. Those stories deserve attention, but they are not the whole story.

Across this country, thousands of Black parents are quietly making sacrifices every day to expose their children to opportunities that build confidence, leadership, discipline, and a sense of purpose. Jack and Jill of America is one example of that commitment.

As a father, there is something special about watching your child become a leader. As a grandfather, there is an even greater joy in watching that same legacy continue through the next generation.

When I look at my daughter and granddaughter participating in this convention, I don’t just see matching outfits or memorable photos. I see the passing of values. I see the importance of family. I see a community of parents intentionally creating spaces where young Black children are encouraged to dream bigger, serve others, and believe they can make a difference.

Leadership doesn’t begin when someone becomes a CEO, an elected official, or a business owner. It begins in the home. It is reinforced by parents, mentors, teachers, churches, and organizations willing to invest time in young people long before the world notices them.

That is what makes gatherings like this important.

As someone who has spent much of my life advocating for Black communities through law enforcement, publishing, and civic engagement, I have learned that sustainable change doesn’t happen only in city halls or state capitols. It also happens around dinner tables, at youth meetings, during community service projects, and through organizations that help shape the character of our children.

Watching families from across the nation come together reminds us that there is still tremendous strength within our community. There are mothers, fathers, grandparents, mentors, and volunteers working every day to prepare the next generation—not simply for success, but for significance.

This convention is about much more than a week in Baltimore.

It is about legacy.

It is about parents choosing to invest in their children.

It is about grandparents watching seeds they helped plant begin to bear fruit.

And for this father, seeing his daughter, granddaughter, and the Westchester County Chapter proudly represent their community on the national stage is a blessing that words can hardly capture.

As Black families, we often talk about building generational wealth. We should. But generational wealth begins with generational investment—investing in character, education, leadership, faith, and family.

Watching my daughter and granddaughter together reminds me that the greatest inheritance we can leave our children is not simply money. It is values, opportunity, and the confidence to become the leaders God created them to be.

To the members of the Westchester County Chapter, the national leadership of Jack and Jill of America, and the thousands of parents and volunteers who dedicate countless hours to nurturing our youth, thank you for continuing the important work of building leaders, strengthening families, and inspiring generations to come.

Melat Kiros Proves the Erasure of the Historical Black Struggle with Her “Global South” Narrative

DAMON K JONES
-
0
Melat Kiros Proves the Erasure of the Historical Black Struggle with Her “Global South” Narrative

Melat Kiros, the Democratic Socialists of America-backed nominee for Colorado’s 1st Congressional District, recently told a Tigrayan diaspora audience:

“The responsibility that we have as Americans… is only going to be challenged if we are getting represented by people who understand that on a fundamental level. And that means getting more immigrants into office. That means getting more people who have heritage in the global south into office because that’s where those decisions are made specifically.”

She was not talking about housing, jobs, schools, or safety in Denver’s Black neighborhoods. She was talking about reshaping America’s role in the “global world order” by placing more people from other countries—people not born in America, and not even Black Americans—into elected office. Her call for more immigrants and more people with “heritage in the global south” in leadership treats native-born Black Americans as secondary. That framing is not neutral. It systematically erases the Black American struggle that produced the very rights immigrants exercise the moment they arrive.

Notice the language itself. Kiros frames this as “the responsibility that we have as Americans.” According to her, the duty of Americans is to vote more immigrants into office. That does not even sound right. A nation’s political responsibility is first to its own citizens and the communities that built and sustained it—not to prioritize people born elsewhere as the solution to its problems.

The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were not abstract gifts from the international community. They were the hard-won constitutional results of the Civil War and Reconstruction, secured by Black freedmen and women in the South who organized, voted under threat, and paid in blood. The long fight against Jim Crow—court cases, boycotts, marches, and federal legislation—expanded and enforced those rights against determined resistance. Later immigrants, including those from Africa, Latin America, and Asia, stepped into a rights architecture that Black Americans had already forced into existence. They did not have to invent equal protection, due process, or the franchise. Those tools were already there because earlier generations of Black people refused to accept less.

Kiros’s “global south” lens treats that history as background noise. Her solution is demographic: more immigrants and people with heritage from the developing world in office so America can be challenged for its “exploitative and extractive nature” on the global stage. The specific American Black experience—slavery, Reconstruction, Jim Crow, and the unfinished work of ownership, family stability, and economic circulation—disappears inside a broader international category. The people who built the rights regime are reduced to one more group of “people of color” rather than a people with a distinct history and a distinct set of unfinished business inside the United States.

The same worldview shows up in her call to abolish ICE. When the central political project is challenging America’s “exploitative” global role and elevating people with heritage from the global south, the domestic enforcement agency that controls borders and removals becomes an obvious target. Abolishing ICE is presented as solidarity with migrants rather than as a policy that must be weighed against its effects on wages, neighborhood safety, and the social fabric of the communities already living in places like Denver. Once again, the particular interests and hard-won institutional achievements of Black Americans are not the measure. The global framing is.

This is not an argument against immigration or against any individual’s right to run for office. It is a refusal to pretend that all histories are interchangeable. Many of the countries grouped under “global south” still lack the enforceable protections for speech, assembly, property, and political participation that Black Americans forced into American law. People leave those places, in part, because the rights environment is weaker. When political leaders treat “heritage in the global south” as the primary credential for challenging America, they skip past the reality that the strongest rights framework on the continent was built by Black Americans under far harsher conditions than most of those origin countries have ever imposed on their own citizens.

We see versions of this pattern repeatedly in progressive and DSA-aligned discourse. The particular Black American struggle is folded into “BIPOC,” “global majority,” or “global south” solidarity. International grievances take priority over domestic outcomes. Representation by recent arrivals or diaspora identity is presented as progress, while the metrics that actually determine whether Black communities advance—business ownership, family structure, neighborhood safety, education that produces skills instead of debt—receive less attention. The result is a politics that can sound radical while remaining silent on the concrete conditions inside Black America.

Black communities do not need their history subordinated to a global narrative that treats the United States primarily as an extractive force and treats Black Americans as interchangeable with recent immigrants from the developing world. The rights that make political participation possible were not free. They were extracted through sacrifice by people whose descendants still live with the consequences of that history. Any serious politics that claims to speak for justice should begin by recognizing that fact rather than erasing it.

Kiros is free to pursue her internationalist vision. Black America is free to insist that its particular struggle, its particular achievements, and its particular unfinished work will not be dissolved into someone else’s global category. The two are not the same project. Pretending they are is not solidarity. It is erasure.

The Wheels Have Fallen Off the Go-Kart: Mount Vernon Has Lost Confidence in Its Police Department By Samuel L. Rivers

Black Westchester
-
0
The Wheels Have Fallen Off the Go-Kart: Mount Vernon Has Lost Confidence in Its Police Department By Samuel L. Rivers

The arrest of an off-duty Mount Vernon police officer for Driving While Intoxicated is, by itself, not proof that the entire Mount Vernon Police Department lacks integrity. Every police agency in America has officers who make serious mistakes and are held accountable for them. In this case, the officer has been suspended without pay, and the criminal prosecution will proceed through the courts where the facts will be determined. Due process must be respected.

But this incident does not exist in a vacuum.

For many residents of Mount Vernon, it is simply the latest chapter in a long series of events that has steadily eroded public confidence in the department. Confidence is not lost overnight. It disappears when controversy becomes routine, when accountability appears inconsistent, and when the public begins to wonder whether leadership is steering the ship or simply reacting to the next crisis.

The United States Department of Justice reached one of the most serious conclusions that can be made about a municipal police department when it found reasonable cause to believe the Mount Vernon Police Department engaged in a pattern or practice of unconstitutional policing, including excessive force, unlawful arrests, and illegal strip and body cavity searches. Those findings were not the product of rumor or political rhetoric. They followed a multi-year federal civil rights investigation. 

Even after the DOJ findings, additional reporting has documented officers with repeated misconduct histories and decertifications, leaving many residents asking whether meaningful reform has truly taken hold or whether the city is simply moving from one controversy to another. 

Now comes another damaging headline.

An officer entrusted with enforcing New York’s drunk-driving laws has himself been arrested on an alleged DWI charge. Again, every person deserves the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Yet public perception matters. Police officers are held to a higher standard because they exercise extraordinary authority over the lives and liberties of others. When that standard appears to be slipping, public trust slips with it.

The question facing Mount Vernon is no longer whether there have been isolated incidents. The question is whether City Hall has established the kind of leadership, culture, supervision, and accountability necessary to restore confidence in one of the city’s most important institutions.

As someone who has spent years advocating for accountability in local government, I believe residents are exhausted. They are tired of reading about investigations. They are tired of hearing explanations after the fact. They are tired of watching one controversy replace another before meaningful answers are provided.

At some point, leadership must stop managing headlines and begin changing culture.

A police department does not lose credibility because of one officer. It loses credibility when the public begins believing misconduct is part of a larger pattern rather than an isolated exception. Whether that perception is entirely fair is almost beside the point. Public confidence is the foundation upon which effective policing rests. Without it, every arrest is questioned, every investigation is scrutinized, and every officer—especially the overwhelming majority who serve honorably—carries the burden created by the failures of a few.

The Mayor and the City’s leadership must recognize that restoring trust requires more than issuing press releases. It requires transparent discipline, independent oversight, modern training, strong supervision, measurable reform, and a willingness to acknowledge when the public has legitimate concerns. Trust cannot be demanded. It must be earned repeatedly through consistent actions.

The residents of Mount Vernon deserve a police department that commands respect because of its professionalism rather than continually defending itself against another damaging headline. They deserve leadership that confronts problems directly instead of waiting for another federal investigation, another lawsuit, another arrest, or another public controversy.

As I have said before, and I repeat today:

“It appears that the wheels have fallen off the go-kart. There is no clear direction within the Mount Vernon Police Department, and the community has lost faith that meaningful accountability is being restored. The overwhelming majority of officers come to work every day to serve honorably, but leadership must understand that public trust is earned through consistent action, not public relations. Enough is enough. The people of Mount Vernon deserve a police department that inspires confidence instead of continually testing it.” — Samuel L. Rivers

This is not a call to condemn every police officer. It is a call to demand better leadership. It is a call to rebuild public confidence before that confidence is lost entirely. And it is a reminder that integrity is not measured by how an organization responds when everything is going well. Integrity is measured by how leaders respond when everything appears to be going wrong.

Mount Vernon deserves better. The honest men and women of the Police Department deserve better. Most importantly, the residents who place their safety in the hands of the department every single day deserve bette

1...121314...199Page 13 of 199