A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 31 TO ADD SECTION 31-30a, TITLED “DYNAMIC PRICING PROHIBITED” OF ARTICLE III OF CHAPTER 31 OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF YONKERS.
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Yonkers has adopted the abovementioned legislation that amends the charter to prohibit Retail Entities in the City of Yonkers from setting prices using dynamic pricing, which is the practice of causing a price for a good or a product to fluctuate based upon demand, the weather, consumer data or other similar factors including an artificial intelligence-enabled pricing adjustment. It provides that a violation of this provision is a violation of the Yonkers Consumer Protection Code. Dynamic pricing does not include:
(1) A discount;
(2) A special price set for a limited period of time, such as a lunch menu, early bird or happy hour price; or
(3) A market price for a good or product that traditionally has been priced based upon market conditions, such as seafood, except that a market price may only be set once in a business day.
Prohibition on dynamic pricing. A Retail Entity, as defined in this Code, may not use Dynamic pricing, as defined herein, in setting the price for a good or product sold by the Retail Entity. The price for a good or product must remain fixed for at least one business day and must be posted or displayed in a manner visible to the public, such as on a menu, menu board, price tag, or label.
The penalties for violation of this ordinance are as follows:
A violation of this section is a violation of the Yonkers Consumer Protection Code and a Class II Offense.
The complete text of the ordinance is on file and may be examined at the Office of the City Clerk, City Hall, 40 S. Broadway, Yonkers, NY 10701.
A LOCAL LAW AMENDING ARTICLE IX OF THE CHARTER OF THE CITY OF YONKERS IN RELATION TO PRIVATE CONNECTION WITH WATER SUPPLY
Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Yonkers has adopted the above-referenced legislation amending the charter to ensure that property owners have installed the new meters.
The penalties for violation of this ordinance are as follows:
Any person, firm, or corporation who/which shall violate any of the provisions hereof, or who/which shall omit or refuse to do any act by the terms of this chapter required to be performed by him, her, or it, or who/which shall obstruct, hinder, or prevent any officer or employee of the Yonkers Bureau of Water Works of the Department of Public Works, duly authorized, from the discharge of any duty required of him under any of the provisions of this chapter, shall be deemed to be a disorderly person and shall be prosecuted as such, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be subject to a penalty of not more than $1000 or by imprisonment for a term not to exceed 15 days, or both. Each day such violation shall continue shall be deemed and shall constitute a separate offense. In addition, the City may also, at any time, maintain an action or proceeding in the name of the City, in a court of competent jurisdiction, to compel compliance with or to restrain by injunction the violation of this provision, rule, regulation, part, or portion thereof.
The complete text of the ordinance is on file and may be examined at the Office of the City Clerk, City Hall, 40 S. Broadway, Yonkers, NY 10701.
“…the pairing of Usher and Brown signals a major moment for contemporary R&B.” – Black Enterprise
“…anticipation building for what could be one of the year’s biggest live music events.” – TheGrio
“R&B enthusiasts will love this“ – USA Today
Two of R&B’s biggest global icons are set to light up the stage this summer as Chris Brown and Usher bring their highly anticipated The R&B Tour to MetLife Stadium.
The powerhouse pairing marks a rare moment in modern R&B, bringing together two generations of hitmakers whose catalogs have defined the sound of the last two decades. With chart-topping singles, electrifying choreography, and a reputation for high-energy performances, the show is expected to draw thousands of fans from across the Tri-State area.
GRAMMY Award-winning iconsChris Brown and USHER today officially announce dates for The R&B Tour, a 2026 co-headlining stadium run across North America. Uniting two of the genre’s defining hitmakers, the tour will deliver a must-see run of performances across the U.S. and Canada. The artists surprised fans last week with a joint teaser commercial on Instagram, sparking widespread excitement and anticipation for the upcoming trek.
Produced by Live Nation, the 33-date outing kicks off on Friday, June 26th, at Empower Field at Mile High in Denver, making stops in major cities including Detroit, Chicago, Toronto, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Houston, and Miami before wrapping up on Friday, December 11th, at Raymond James Stadium in Tampa.
The tour will be in the Tri-State area for two dates at the MetLife Stadium, Friday, August 7th, and Saturday, August 8th. The tour will also partner with Global Citizen to provide access to quality education for children around the world by donating $1 for every ticket sold to the FIFA Global Citizen Education Fund.
For Usher—fresh off a career resurgence that included a critically acclaimed Las Vegas residency and a Super Bowl halftime performance—the tour represents another victory lap for a legendary career. Meanwhile, Chris Brown continues to prove his staying power, consistently delivering hits and maintaining one of the most loyal fan bases in music.
This enormous live event comes after both performers achieved record-breaking feats. The North American leg of USHER: Past, Present, Future sold over 1.1 million tickets at the end of 2024, with 62 sold-out performances spread over several nights in each location. This was followed by a similarly remarkable European leg.
Chris Brown’s sold-out Brezzy Bowl XX World Tour concluded in October of last year, marking the conclusion of a huge international tour commemorating his career’s 20th anniversary. With approximately $300 million in revenue and 2 million people attending stadiums across North America, Europe, and the UK, the tour was Brown’s highest-grossing tour to date and now the highest-grossing tour ever by a solo Black American male artist.
Tickets will go on sale on Tuesday, April 21st, for the Citi presale (details below), and on Thursday, April 23rd, for The R&B Tour presale. Before the general on-sale, which starts on Monday, April 27th, at 12 p.m. local time on RaymondAndBrownTour.com, additional presales will take place throughout the week.
THE CHRIS BROWN & USHER R&B TOUR 2026 DATES:
Fri, Jun 26 | Denver, CO | Empower Field at Mile High
Tue, Jun 30 | Minneapolis, MN | U.S. Bank Stadium
Thu, Jul 2 | Detroit, MI | Ford Field
Fri, Jul 3 | Detroit, MI | Ford Field
Tue, Jul 7 | Cleveland, OH | Huntington Bank Field
Fri, Jul 10 | Washington, DC | Northwest Stadium
Sat, Jul 11 | Washington, DC | Northwest Stadium
Fri, Jul 17 | Charlotte, NC | Bank of America Stadium
Tue, Jul 21 | St. Louis, MO | The Dome at America’s Center
Sat, Jul 25 | Nashville, TN | Nissan Stadium
Tue, Jul 28 | Birmingham, AL | Protective Stadium
Sat, Aug 1 | Syracuse, NY | JMA Wireless Dome
Fri, Aug 7 | East Rutherford, NJ | MetLife Stadium
Sat, Aug 8 | East Rutherford, NJ | MetLife Stadium
Tue, Aug 11 | Toronto, ON | Rogers Stadium
Wed, Aug 12 | Toronto, ON | Rogers Stadium
Mon, Aug 17 | Boston, MA | Gillette Stadium
Fri, Aug 21 | Chicago, IL | Soldier Field
Fri, Aug 28 | San Francisco, CA | Levi’s Stadium
Sat, Sep 5 | Las Vegas, NV | Allegiant Stadium
Sun, Sep 6 | Las Vegas, NV | Allegiant Stadium
Thu, Sep 10 | Dallas, TX | AT&T Stadium
Fri, Sep 25 | Los Angeles, CA | SoFi Stadium
Sat, Sep 26 | Los Angeles, CA | SoFi Stadium
Tue, Sep 29 | Glendale, AZ | State Farm Stadium
Sat, Oct 3 | El Paso, TX | Sun Bowl Stadium
Mon, Oct 5 | San Antonio, TX | Alamodome
Fri, Oct 9 | Houston, TX | NRG Stadium
Sat, Nov 7 | Atlanta, GA | Mercedes-Benz Stadium
Sun, Nov 8 | Atlanta, GA | Mercedes-Benz Stadium
Fri, Nov 20 | New Orleans, LA | Caesars Superdome
Thu, Dec 3 | Miami, FL | Hard Rock Stadium
Fri, Dec 11 | Tampa, FL | Raymond James Stadium
As Chris Brown and Usher prepare to take the stage, this tour feels bigger than just another stop on the concert circuit—it’s a defining moment for R&B. Two artists who helped shape the genre in different eras are now sharing one stage, bridging generations of fans and reminding the world that R&B is not only alive, but still evolving. When the lights hit at MetLife Stadium, it won’t just be a show—it will be a statement that the culture, the sound, and the legacy of R&B continue to move forward, louder than ever.
New York lawmakers continue to behave as though wealth is an immovable object. Every fiscal shortfall seems to produce the same political instinct: find another way to tax those with the greatest means and assume they will remain exactly where they are, paying whatever bill Albany presents. The latest proposal to increase taxes on luxury second homes in New York City is merely the newest chapter in a long-running policy mistake: confusing taxable capacity with economic captivity.
The logic behind these measures is politically attractive but economically shallow. If a person owns a $5 million second home, lawmakers assume that person can absorb another tax without consequence. But taxation does not occur in a vacuum. Every added levy changes incentives. Every surcharge alters calculations. Wealthy individuals, unlike fixed infrastructure, can move. Their investments can move faster still.
This is where New York policymakers repeatedly fail to understand causation. A tax on luxury second homes may appear targeted and narrow, but markets do not interpret taxes in isolation. Investors read signals. Affluent buyers read patterns. When state leaders repeatedly create new taxes aimed at high earners and high-value property owners, the broader message is unmistakable: New York sees wealth not as something to attract, but as something to extract. That message has consequences.
High-income taxpayers already carry a disproportionate share of New York’s tax burden. A relatively small percentage of residents generate an outsized percentage of state income tax revenue. This creates a fragile dependency. If even a modest number of top earners leave, the fiscal damage can outweigh the revenue gained from new taxes. This is not ideology. It is arithmetic. But there is a deeper flaw in the political philosophy driving these policies. Too often, the modern political talking point is built around taxing the wealthy to provide more free benefits to those in need, as though redistribution alone is an economic strategy. It is not. A society cannot tax its way into widespread prosperity. Giving people temporary relief without creating pathways to ownership, investment, entrepreneurship, and upward mobility only institutionalizes dependency.
The real moral failure is not that some people have wealth. The real failure is when the government abandons the harder work of equipping people to build their own wealth.
Instead of making it easier to start businesses, reducing regulatory barriers, expanding vocational training, improving financial literacy, and creating ownership incentives in underserved communities, lawmakers default to the easier politics of redistribution. It is far simpler to promise voters benefits funded by “someone else” than to build systems that help citizens become economically self-sustaining.
Thomas Sowell has often pointed out that when politicians focus on equalizing outcomes rather than expanding opportunities, they reward rhetoric over results. Taxing productive citizens to finance permanent dependency may sound compassionate in speeches. Still, in practice, it weakens the very economic engine that creates jobs, investment, and upward mobility in the first place. The defenders of these tax policies often argue that the wealthy will stay because New York is New York. That argument mistakes prestige for permanence. Cities do not retain capital solely through reputation. They retain it by remaining economically rational places to live, invest, and own property. States like Florida and Texas have already demonstrated that affluent individuals are willing to relocate when policy environments become hostile.
What makes this especially troubling is that lawmakers often ignore the cumulative effect of policy layering. It is never just one tax. It is property tax on top of income tax, on top of mansion tax, on top of transfer taxes, on top of regulatory costs, on top of rising insurance and maintenance burdens. Each new measure may seem modest on paper. Together, they create a climate of diminishing returns.
The intention behind taxing luxury second homes may be framed as fairness. The result may be declining investment, weakened property markets, slower development, and shrinking tax receipts over time. When lawmakers punish the very tax base they depend upon, they are not redistributing wealth. They are redistributing the incentive, pushing it elsewhere.
New York’s problem is not merely that it taxes too much. Its deeper problem is that it increasingly signals to productive capital that success is a liability. No economy can remain strong when its governing philosophy treats economic contributors as targets rather than partners. The question lawmakers should ask is not whether the wealthy can afford another tax.
The better question is why New York keeps making it harder for wealth to stay, and harder for ordinary people to build it.
What happened in the FTC case involving Coach Stormy signals a broader shift in the influencer industry, indicating that accountability is becoming essential for survival in the evolving influencer economy.
For years, influencer entrepreneurship has operated on a simple formula. Build trust through personality, create aspiration through lifestyle, and convert that aspiration into sales. Whether through coaching programs, mentorship memberships, online courses, affiliate networks, or MLM recruitment, the model has relied heavily on emotional persuasion. The audience buys in because they believe the person in front of them represents success.
That formula is now under pressure.
The FTC’s action sends a message that regulators are beginning to examine influencer-driven business models the same way they examine traditional advertising. That changes everything.
The FTC’s action highlights that regulators now scrutinize influencer-driven marketing the same way they do traditional advertising, fundamentally altering how influencers must operate.
But under this new regulatory environment, implication may no longer be enough protection.
If an influencer presents extraordinary wealth as a typical outcome, regulators are now signaling that those claims must be supported by actual evidence. That means disclaimers, audited averages, substantiated earnings data, and a clear separation between exceptional cases and ordinary results.
This changes the psychology of the influencer economy.
The old influencer economy was built on aspirational trust. Emphasizing trust now is crucial to help the audience feel confident that the industry can adapt and remain reliable in the future.
That is a major shift.
What does that mean moving forward? First, influencers in coaching, wealth mentorship, and MLM spaces will likely have to become more legally cautious. Social media posts that once relied on bold income promises may now require legal review. Phrases like “anyone can make six figures” or “I’m creating 100 millionaires this year” may expose influencers to regulatory risk unless backed by documented proof. Second, affiliate companies and MLM organizations will tighten their contracts. Brands will no longer want the liability that comes with unregulated earnings claims made by their top promoters. Expect stricter compliance clauses, more monitoring of livestream content, and mandatory disclosure language in promotional videos.
Third, audiences themselves may become harder to persuade. This lawsuit is teaching consumers an important lesson: a glamorous lifestyle shown online is not evidence of a typical business outcome. Just because someone appears wealthy on Instagram does not mean their opportunity produces ordinary success for ordinary people. That may create a healthier market, inspiring confidence that the industry can grow responsibly and sustainably.
Why?
Because legitimate entrepreneurs with real products, real services, and honest disclosures will actually benefit from this change, those who are transparent will stand out. Those who depend on exaggeration will struggle.
This is how markets mature.
Every emerging industry goes through this stage. At first, innovation moves faster than regulation. Then regulators catch up. Then the industry either adapts or collapses.
The influencer economy is now reaching that crossroads.
We may soon see a divide between two types of influencers. On one side will be entertainment influencers, whose business is brand personality and content engagement. On the other side will be financial and business influencers, who increasingly may be treated more like regulated advertisers than motivational personalities.
That distinction matters.
Because once money claims are involved, the law changes the rules. In the next five years, influencers promoting business opportunities will likely need compliance officers, legal advisors, earnings verification tools, and clear consumer disclosures, similar to formal companies. In the next five years, influencers selling business opportunities may need compliance officers, legal consultants, earnings verification systems, and documented consumer disclosures, just as formal corporations do.
That may sound restrictive, but it may also bring legitimacy.
For too long, digital entrepreneurship has had low barriers to entry and almost no guardrails. Anyone with a ring light, a luxury backdrop, and persuasive language could market themselves as a wealth mentor. That environment created opportunity, but it also created abuse.
The FTC settlement in this case may be remembered as one of the first major moments where government oversight forced the influencer economy to grow up.
And that is the real story here.
This is not about attacking Coach Stormy. This is about recognizing that one legal case can become the catalyst for an entire industry transformation.
The question now is not whether influencer capitalism will survive. It will.
The question is what kind of influencer capitalism will survive. Will it remain driven by illusion, aspiration, and image?
Or will it evolve into a more transparent economy where proof matters more than performance, empowering the audience to expect honesty and accountability?
That answer will shape the next generation of digital entrepreneurship. Because after this settlement, the influencer economy may never operate the same way again.
Every day in New York State, tens of thousands of direct support professionals (DSPs) perform indispensable work that makes community life possible for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD). They promote independence, dignity, and full inclusion — supporting people at jobs, coaching communication, implementing complex clinical plans, assisting with daily living, and providing a steady, compassionate partnership. Their work is skilled, essential, and life-changing.
Yet DSPs remain invisible in one of the nation’s most fundamental workforce systems: the federal Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system. Because “direct support professional” is not recognized as its own occupational category, DSP data is buried within broad classifications such as home health aides or personal care aides — roles with very different responsibilities and training requirements. This lack of recognition has prevented states and the nation from gathering accurate workforce data, obscuring shortages, wage stagnation, and dangerously high turnover rates.
Congress must act — and New Yorkers should rally behind H.R. 6137/S. 3211, the Recognizing the Role of Direct Support Professionals Act.
Introduced with bipartisan and bicameral support in November 2025, this legislation directs the Office of Management and Budget to consider creating a distinct SOC code for DSPs. The bill’s sponsors point to alarming national instability: turnover rates around 39%-40%, repeatedly documented by National Core Indicators and highlighted in both chambers of Congress.
This crisis is deeply felt in New York. Nonprofit providers across the state struggle to fill vacancies, maintain services, and retain experienced staff. Without clear federal data, policymakers cannot accurately assess shortages, wages, or employment trends — making it nearly impossible to design effective, long-term solutions. As Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania noted when introducing the bill: “We cannot solve a workforce crisis we cannot accurately measure.”
A distinct SOC code would allow New York and other states to:
Accurately Track Workforce Data: Clear federal labor statistics would finally separate DSPs from unrelated roles, giving policymakers reliable information on wages, turnover, job availability, and long-term trends.
Strengthen Recruitment and Retention: With better data, states could develop smarter training pipelines, improve Medicaid rate setting, and create career pathways that reflect the true skills and responsibilities of DSP work.
Ensure Stability for Individuals with Disabilities: Consistent staffing is essential for people with I/DD to live safely and participate fully in their communities. A national DSP shortage is not simply a workforce issue — it is a civil rights issue.
The bill has earned strong bipartisan support, including from New York’s congressional delegation, and companion legislation has been introduced in the Senate. Supporting DSPs is not a partisan matter — it is a moral one.
As a nonprofit leader in New York’s disability services sector, I see every day how DSPs transform lives — and how the lack of structural recognition harms the entire system. Our workforce crisis will not resolve itself. It requires action.
The bill is now before the House of Representatives. I urge all New Yorkers to contact their representatives and support this critical legislation.
Jeffery Fox, Ph.D. is President & CEO of Abilities First, Inc., which serves people with intellectual and developmental disabilities across the Hudson Valley. Visit AbilitiesFirstNY.org.
Joveair Brice is accused of beating his girlfriend, a paraprofessional in the New York City school system, to death with a hammer
Joveair Brice, 28, of Mount Vernon, was arraigned on Tuesday, April 7th, on one count of Murder in the Second Degree, a class A felony, for allegedly killing his girlfriend, Lisa Grier, a 33-year-old paraprofessional in the New York City school system, according to a statement released today by Westchester County District Attorney Susan Cacace.
“The horrific murder of Lisa Grier must serve as a wake-up call to all of us in New York, a stark reminder of the everyday perils of domestic violence. My office will spare no effort to hold the defendant accountable for killing Ms. Grier, as we have alleged in court, and to provide her loved ones with a modicum of justice. Her memory deserves no less,” DA Cacace said in the statement.
Brice was remanded to the Norwood E. Jackson Correctional Center, located in Valhalla, by Mount Vernon City Court Judge Nichelle Johnson while more proceedings were conducted. His next court date is Monday, April 20th.
According to a felony complaint filed in the case, between March 20th and March 21st, the defendant struck Lisa Grier, of Mount Vernon, in the head with a hammer multiple times, killing her. Ms. Grier was the defendant’s girlfriend and was employed by the New York City school system as a paraprofessional working with special needs students at Spruce Street School in Chelsea.
After Grier did not meet up with friends as planned, police were asked on March 21 to check her apartment at 324 East Fourth St. Shortly after 4 p.m., they found her body, and the criminal complaint against Brice said the killing likely occurred between 6 pm. the previous night and 12:15 pm. that day, according to Lohud.
This case was investigated by the Mount Vernon Police Department.
Major Case Bureau Deputy Chief Elizabeth Shumejda and Assistant District Attorney Marissa Morra-Wynn are prosecuting the case. Mount Vernon Bureau Chief Christine Cervasio handled the arraignment.
The charges against the defendant are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
A GENERAL ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 65 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF YONKERS, ENTITLED “ANIMALS AND DOGS” WITH REGARD TO AMENDING PENALTIES FOR FAILURE TO KEEP SIDEWALKS CLEAR
The City of Yonkers, in City Council convened, does hereby ordain and enact:
Section 1. Chapter 65 of the Code of the City of Yonkers, entitled “Animals and Dogs,” is hereby amended in part by amending Article VII, §65-26 (c) entitled “Penalties for offenses” to read as follows:
§ 65-26 Penalties for offenses.
A. Failure to properly license any animal or dog pursuant to§ 65-3 and Article 7 of the Agriculture and Markets Law within five days of owning or acquiring an animal which is required to be licensed shall be a Class II offense.
B. A violation of §§ 65-8, 65-9, 65-10 B, C, D, F, G, H, and I or 65-13 of this chapter shall be a Class II offense. A violation of § 65-10 A and E of this chapter shall be a Class I offense.
C. A violation of § 65-12 of this chapter shall be a Class II offense.
D. Possession and control of a dangerous animal or dog, as defined herein, in the City of Yonkers, is the equivalent of the possession of a dangerous instrument as defined. Failure to control such instrument in the City of Yonkers shall subject the owner of said animal or dog to penalties provided under the Penal Law in addition to any and all penalties established in this chapter.
E. A person who willfully or recklessly violates any provision of this chapter, which violation causes physical injury to any person, shall be punishable as a Class I offense.
F. Any other violation of this chapter shall be a Class II offense.
Section 2. This General Ordinance shall take effect upon compliance with §C4-6 (c) of the Charter of the City of Yonkers and the provisions of the Municipal Home Rule Law of the State of New York.
The complete text of the ordinance is on file and may be examined at the Office of the City Clerk, City Hall, 40 S. Broadway, Yonkers, NY 10701.
Notice is hereby given, pursuant to law, that the City Council of the City of Yonkers,
New York will hold a Public Hearing on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, at 6:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 40 South Broadway, Yonkers, New York on the following Local Law, to wit:
PROPOSED LOCAL LAW
A PROPOSED LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 43 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF YONKERS TITLED “ZONING” BY AMENDING ARTICLE XV IN RELATION TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Said hearing may be adjourned from time to time as necessary. Further information,
including access to a copy of said Local Law, may be obtained at the Yonkers City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall — Room 102, 40 S. Broadway, Yonkers, NY 10701
I arrived on March 30 at 5:30 p.m., just as registration opened, and before anything was even said from a microphone, the room was already speaking.
Not loudly. Not performatively. But clearly.
You could feel intention in the way people moved. Coats coming off, name tags pressed on, quiet greetings exchanged, but underneath all of that was something else. A kind of awareness. Like everyone understood, on some level, that this wasn’t going to be a surface conversation.
And I remember pausing before fully stepping in, just taking it in. Because you don’t get rooms like this often. Rooms where people aren’t there to be entertained or impressed, but to understand something that has been intentionally left unclear.
By the time the program began at 6:00, that energy had shifted into focus. The room settled. Not in a passive way, but in a present way. Like we had all agreed, without saying it out loud: we’re here for the truth.
And when Janet Rolon Fry,Tiffany S. Hamilton, and Cheryl Brannan, welcomed us, it wasn’t just an introduction, it was a grounding.
Because let’s be honest and I mean actually honest, not polite-conversation honest, menopause has been treated like a side note in women’s lives. Something to whisper about. Something to “get through.” Something to make smaller so it doesn’t make anybody else uncomfortable.
And that framing? That’s not accidental.
So when they stood there, holding space with intention, with care, with clarity, it mattered. Not just what they said, but how they made it clear that this conversation deserved to exist in full.
Jennifer Lewis, serving as host for the evening, understood that assignment. She guided the room with a presence that didn’t try to control the energy, it respected it. And that’s a difference people can feel, even if they don’t have the language for it.
Because this event wasn’t about packaging menopause into something digestible.
It was about telling the truth.
And when the speakers began, that truth showed up in layers.
Melissa Ferrara came with the kind of clarity that only comes from witnessing the same pattern over and over again, women being dismissed, misdiagnosed, or told their experiences don’t align with what’s “supposed” to happen. And she named it. Directly.
Honorable Judge Janet Malone didn’t just speak from a title, she spoke from a life of navigating systems that were never designed with her in mind and still finding ways to shift them. And in a moment that grounded the conversation even further, she acknowledged her husband in the room, recognizing his support and, in many ways, his quiet co-sign of the resilience it takes to move through these transitions. It was a reminder that while this is a women-centered conversation, support systems matter, and they show up in real ways.
Dr. Sharon Parish brought in the clinical lens, but without losing the humanity. And that’s important, because too often medicine removes the person from the experience. She didn’t. She made it clear that menopause isn’t something to “fix”, it’s something to understand.
Paulina Portero shared her story in a way that didn’t ask for sympathy, it offered perspective. When someone reframes what could have been a breaking point into a moment of return, that changes how people see what’s possible.
And Lauren Tetenbaum filled in the part of the conversation that gets ignored most often, the emotional and psychological reality. Identity shifts. Relationship shifts. Internal negotiations that women are expected to manage quietly. She gave language to that silence.
And let’s not overlook who was in the room.
Westchester County Legislator Jewel Williams Johnson of District 9 showed up, not symbolically, but intentionally. Because when leadership is present for conversations like this, it signals that this isn’t just personal, it’s structural.
But here’s the part that doesn’t always get named clearly enough: none of this happens without people deciding it should.
Screenshot
Jennifer Lewis, Tania Weiss, Beryl Weaver, Valya Dessaure, Lora Nelson, Kate Permut, Tanya Briendel, and Alisa Kesten, they didn’t just attend. They contributed to building a space where this conversation could exist the way it needed to.
Not perfectly. Not effortlessly. But intentionally.
And I’m especially grateful to WWA, the YWCA, and STSI for bringing this topic and this level of informed, necessary dialogue to the forefront. Because creating space for truth, especially around something that has been systemically minimized, is not light work.
It’s necessary work.
And sitting there, listening, I kept coming back to something simple: silence has never protected women. It has only made it easier to ignore them.
What happened in that room disrupted that pattern.
Not in a loud, attention-seeking way, but in a grounded, undeniable way.
The kind of truth that stays with you after the room empties. After the chairs are folded. After the conversations end, but the awareness doesn’t.
Because this was never just about menopause.
It was about agency.
It was about language.
It was about refusing to let something so universal remain so misunderstood.
And once truth is spoken clearly, consistently, and collectively, silence doesn’t get to take the lead anymore.
