This conversation is about justice, reform, healing, and truth — and the work that still remains. Join Damon K. Jones, AJ Woodson, and Larnez Kinsey tonight as we bring you not just news, but context, accountability, and community-centered analysis you can’t get anywhere else.
LIVE from 6 PM to 8 PM on YouTube, Facebook, LinkedIn, and X, powered by Black Westchester Magazine.
There are interviews that feel like a performance.
And then there are interviews where the truth lands quietly and sits there.
That’s what happened when Marc Fishman and James Christopher joined People Before Politics Radio, Sunday, December 21st.
No shouting. No grandstanding. Just a father and an advocate explaining, step by step, how New York’s justice system officially recognized misconduct in a police officer’s record, yet never required prosecutors to revisit the damage that misconduct may have caused.
“This Isn’t About One Officer”
Marc Fishman is a disabled father with hearing and neurological impairments. During the interview, he spoke carefully and deliberately, not to dramatize his story, but because disabled people learn early that rushing their words often means being ignored or misunderstood by institutions.
What Marc described was not chaos. It was a process.
He explained that police video exists in his case, a video in which the arresting officer states plainly that Marc had no intent to commit a crime. That footage was never shown to a judge or jury. It surfaced years later.
As Marc explained on the show, the system did not grind to a halt when that evidence emerged. Court dates continued. Motions were denied. The case moved forward as if nothing new had been learned.
“This isn’t about one bad cop,” Marc said. “It’s about what happens after misconduct is known.”
The Officer Was Flagged. The Case Was Not.
James Christopher provided the broader context listeners needed to understand why Marc’s case didn’t automatically trigger review.
The officer involved in Marc’s arrest later accumulated 25 civilian misconduct complaints and was ultimately fired. The officer was flagged by the state’s oversight body, the Law Enforcement Misconduct Investigative Office (LEMIO), an office within the Attorney General’s authority tasked with identifying and reporting patterns of law enforcement misconduct.
But as James explained during the interview, LEMIO’s power stops short of enforcement.
LEMIO can investigate.
LEMIO can designate officers as engaging in pattern misconduct.
LEMIO can publish findings and make recommendations.
What it cannot do under current law is require District Attorneys to reopen or review cases tied to those officers.
So even after an officer is formally identified as having a pattern of misconduct, people arrested, charged, or convicted based on that officer’s actions may never receive a mandatory review of their case.
Marc’s case did not.
The Quiet Harm of Procedure
One of the most striking moments in the interview wasn’t about legal doctrine, it was about time.
Marc spoke about years passing without seeing his children. About continuing court proceedings even after new evidence surfaced. About being denied even a brief stay to bring that evidence before federal court.
No one interrupted him.
Because what Marc was describing wasn’t a spectacle. It was the slow, procedural erosion that happens when accountability depends on discretion instead of obligation.
James framed it clearly: when misconduct findings don’t trigger required legal review, accountability becomes optional. And optional accountability depends on bandwidth, politics, and priorities, none of which defendants control.
Why They’re Pushing for a Law Change
Marc and James didn’t come on People Before Politics just to tell a personal story. They came to explain why they are advocating for a targeted amendment to New York State law known as the Pattern Misconduct Conviction Review Act.
As James explained, the proposal does not presume innocence or guilt. It does not mandate outcomes. It mandates review.
The amendment would require District Attorneys to:
Review cases involving officers officially designated for pattern misconduct
Make determinations within defined timeframes
Provide transparency when deciding whether convictions were materially affected
It would also ensure access to legal counsel and timely bail hearings for impacted defendants.
In short, it closes the gap between identifying misconduct and addressing its consequences.
Marc said something during the interview that stayed with listeners:
“If this can happen when the evidence is on tape, imagine how often it happens when it isn’t.”
Why This Matters Beyond One Case
New York ranks third in the nation for wrongful convictions. New York City alone also ranks third. Those rankings are not driven by isolated incidents, they reflect systemic failures to reassess cases once misconduct is formally acknowledged.
The interview made clear that Marc’s case is not an exception. It is an example of how the system currently functions.
The law allows the state to say, “Yes, misconduct occurred,” without ever asking, “Who was affected and should their case be reviewed?”
Where Listeners Can Learn More
For listeners who want to review the evidence discussed on People Before Politics Radio, follow the proposed reform effort, or support the push to close this accountability gap in New York law, more information is available at Protect New Yorkers and NewRochellePoliceAbuse.com
The site provides case documentation, video evidence, and details about the proposed legislative fix being advanced by Marc Fishman and his supporters.
A Question the Law Hasn’t Answered Yet
Marc Fishman didn’t ask for sympathy on People Before Politics.
James Christopher didn’t ask for blind allegiance.
They asked a narrower, harder question:
If the state confirms misconduct, doesn’t it also owe the public a review of the harm that misconduct may have caused?
Right now, New York law says: not necessarily.
This amendment says otherwise.
And after hearing Marc and James explain the reality, calmly, carefully, without theatrics, it’s a question lawmakers can no longer claim they haven’t heard.
Before we go any further, let me ask you something quietly, honestly.
Have you ever sat in a folding chair at a community meeting, waited your turn at the microphone, chosen your words carefully, and walked back to your seat knowing nothing would change?
Not because you didn’t speak clearly.
Not because your concern wasn’t valid.
But because you’ve been here before.
If that feeling is familiar, you’re not being cynical.
You’re remembering.
In Westchester, we are very good at listening sessions. We are good at sign-in sheets, two-minute time limits, and thank-you statements that sound sincere in the moment. We are good at naming concerns publicly and resolving them privately, if at all.
And here’s the part that doesn’t get said out loud: when the same issues resurface year after year, that repetition is data.
Consider this. Across Westchester County, disparities in housing stability, school funding, environmental exposure, and policing outcomes have been documented repeatedly over the last decade. Reports are issued. Task forces are formed. Community feedback is collected. Yet many of the same neighborhoods, often Black, Brown, immigrant, and working-class, continue to experience higher rates of housing insecurity, lower per-pupil school investment, and more frequent police contact than their wealthier counterparts just miles away.
That’s not because no one spoke up.
It’s because speaking up wasn’t enough.
We’re often told to be patient. To trust the process. To understand that systems move slowly. But patience becomes something else when it’s consistently requested from the same communities, while relief arrives quickly elsewhere.
In some Westchester municipalities, infrastructure complaints are addressed within weeks. In others, residents wait years for basic repairs, traffic calming, or environmental remediation. That difference isn’t accidental. It reflects prioritization.
And prioritization always tells the truth.
When you leave a meeting, and nothing shifts, no timeline, no follow-up, no visible change, that non-movement is not neutral. It is information. It tells you what the system is willing to tolerate. It tells you whose discomfort is urgent and whose is manageable.
There’s a specific kind of exhaustion that comes from realizing you’re being asked to keep explaining harm instead of witnessing its correction. That exhaustion shows up in the body first: shallow breathing, tight shoulders, the decision not to attend the next meeting.
That’s not apathy.
That’s discernment developing in real time.
People begin to adjust. Not loudly. Not dramatically. They start watching more closely. They notice which issues get resolved quickly and which ones get “taken under advisement.” They remember who follows up after the meeting and who disappears once the room empties.
This is how trust erodes quietly.
Because trust doesn’t require perfection.
It requires movement.
When nothing changes after something is clearly named, the message received isn’t neutrality, it’s acceptability. And what remains uncorrected becomes part of the culture, whether anyone intends it to or not.
This is why attention matters. Not the viral kind. The steady kind.
Pay attention to what actually shifts after feedback is offered.
Pay attention to how long it takes for correction to occur.
Pay attention to which voices prompt action and which are thanked for their patience.
Those patterns will tell you more than any year-end report ever could.
This column isn’t here to shame people for showing up. Showing up matters. But it’s also here to name the moment when showing up stops being enough and when noticing becomes the next form of power.
If you walked out of a room knowing you did your part and the system didn’t do its own, you’re not being negative.
You’re paying attention.
And attention, when sustained, shared, and trusted, is how accountability eventually finds its way into spaces that once resisted it.
Union Baptist Church recognized and honored County Legislator Ben Boykin at the UBC Senior Luncheon after service, Sunday, December 21st, at Garibaldi Restaurant, located at 1 N Broadway in White Plains.
“It has been a labor of love for me to work at the church and also to work on behalf of the church as a member of the County Legislature…” Leg. Boykin expressed to Black Westchester at the luncheon.
Union Baptist Church Pastor Reverend Dr. Verlin D. Williams, who has pastored UBC for the past 30 years, celebrated Boykins’ “unwavering dedication” to both the church and the community.
“Today, we celebrated Ben Boykin at our annual senior Christmas party to honor his unwavering dedication and service to our church and community. Ben has been a faithful member of the Union Baptist Church for over 36 years. During that time, he has played a critical role in securing Grant money for our food service ministry, which provides essential food and meals to those in the White Plains Greenburgh community. His commitment to both our church and the broader community exemplifies true service and leadership, and we are deeply grateful for his continued contributions,” Union Baptist Church Pastor Reverend Dr. Verlin D. Williams shared with Black Westchester.
Hon. Ben Boykin, who has been a member of UBC since 1989, was re-elected to his sixth term to the Westchester County Board of Legislators in November 2023 for District 5 (representing most of White Plains, all of Scarsdale, and West Harrison). He is currently Chair of the Economic Development Committee and serves on both the Legislation and Public Safety Committees.
In September 2024, Ben was named President of the New York State Association of Counties (NYSAC) for a one-year term. As NYSAC President, Boykin will lead the association during its centennial anniversary, which will include celebrations at the 2025 Legislative Conference in Albany and the Fall Seminar in Niagara Falls. NYSAC is the only association representing the interests of New York’s 62 counties at the state and federal levels.
Ben was honored in January 2018 and 2020 to be elected Chairman of the Board of Legislators (BOL) by his peers. By every measure, his four years as Board Chairman were historic and consequential for this Board, the most diverse in Westchester County history, with more people of color among Legislators than ever before and with a female majority for the first time. During his tenure as Board Chairman, Boykin led the Board through transformative years, passing more progressive legislation than ever before. He oversaw the Board’s 50th anniversary celebrations and successfully navigated the BOL through the COVID-19 pandemic, one of the most severe health crises in over a century. His leadership also included significant investments in technology, helping to enhance the accessibility and transparency of Westchester County government. He is currently serving as Chairman of the Economic Development where he works to assist constituents with various issues as well as to provide a better quality of life for all Westchester County residents.
Collaborating with the Latimer Administration, under Ben’s leadership, the Board stabilized the County’s finances, rebuilt reserve funds, cut property taxes, and made crucial investments in infrastructure and affordable housing. The Board also advanced public health protections, supported working families, and enacted legislation to safeguard reproductive rights and enhance public safety.
Mr. Boykin was a member of the White Plains Common Council for fourteen years, from 2000 – 2013, and elected Council President three times. Prior to the Common Council, he served seven years as a member of the White Plains School Board.
In addition to his governmental service, Boykin has had a distinguished career in financial executive roles with Fortune 500 companies and has been a prominent figure in education and not-for-profit organizations. His extensive contributions have earned him numerous awards, including leadership awards from the AFL-CIO Labor Council and Northeast STEM Academy, the Ted Benjamin Award for community service from the White Plains Democratic Party, the Harvey E. Beech Outstanding Alumni Award from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Omega Citizen of the Year Award from Beta Alpha Alpha Chapter of the Omega Psi Phi Fraternity, the Harold Fitzpatrick Community Service Award, Visionary Award from the African American Men of Westchester (AAMW), the Trailblazer Award from the White Plains YWCA and the Civic Champion Award from League of Women Voters of White Plains.
Ben is a Phi Beta Kappa accounting graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and received his MBA with honors from the Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Northwestern University. Ben has been a CPA for 51 years and is currently President of Ben Boykin & Associates, a financial consulting firm.
On Monday, December 8th, the Board of Legislators honored Legislator Ben Boykin, District 5 (representing most of White Plains, all of Scarsdale, and West Harrison), and Legislator Catherine F. Parker, District 7 (representing Larchmont, Mamaroneck, Rye, and part of Harrison), with the Westchester County Distinguished Service Award, the highest level of recognition the Board can bestow.
Outgoing County Legislators Ben Boykin and Catherine Parker receive the Distinguished Service Award, the highest level of recognition the Board can bestow [Facebook]
The medals are awarded to individuals who have significantly benefited the general welfare and common good of the County through dedicated public service. Both Legislators will leave office at the end of the month, having reached term limits.
He is married to Carsandra Boykin, and they have two daughters, LaSandra Boykin and Dr. Nicole Boykin. We celebrate County Legislator Ben Boykin, a true Black Westchester Legend!
According to reports from the Westchester Children’s Association, poverty and economic insecurity among children and families in Westchester County are more widespread than traditional statistics suggest. The organization’s research shows that a majority of children in the county live in households that are either low-income or struggling to meet basic needs, particularly in high-cost cities and communities of color. Using real-time data collected from frontline service providers, the Association reports rising demand for food assistance, housing support, and emergency services, even as employment levels remain relatively high. The findings highlight a structural gap between wages and the true cost of living in Westchester, indicating that many working families are financially fragile despite being officially classified as above the poverty line
Westchester County is routinely ranked among the wealthiest counties in America. Median income figures, property values, and corporate presence reinforce that narrative. But averages conceal reality. Beneath the statistics is a growing and undeniable truth: poverty in Westchester is rising, persistent, and increasingly institutionalized — particularly in Black and Brown communities.
This crisis is no longer anecdotal. It is measurable, visible, and sustained. And its causes are not mysterious.
When Work Is Not Enough
A growing share of Westchester residents experiencing hardship is not unemployed. They are working — often full-time, sometimes multiple jobs — yet still unable to meet basic needs. Housing, food, utilities, childcare, transportation, and healthcare costs have far outpaced wage growth.
Federal poverty thresholds fail to capture this reality in a high-cost county like Westchester. Families earning “above poverty” are still one emergency away from eviction, food insecurity, or homelessness. This is not a moral failure on the part of individuals. It is a structural failure of policy and priorities.
The Skills Gap No One Wants to Confront
One of the most overlooked contributors to poverty is the failure to train young people for real, available jobs.
Westchester continues to push college as the primary pathway to success while neglecting skills-based workforce development. Trades, infrastructure, logistics, advanced manufacturing, technology, cybersecurity, utilities, and construction offer stable, middle-income careers — yet these pathways are underfunded, undervalued, and inconsistently promoted.
An economy does not reward intentions or credentials alone. It rewards usefulness.
When young people are not equipped with marketable skills aligned with labor demand, poverty becomes predictable. Workforce development in Westchester has too often been treated as branding instead of strategy.
Affordable Housing That Weakens Cities
Affordable housing is frequently presented as the solution to poverty. In theory, it should stabilize families and reduce cost burdens. In practice, the way it has been implemented in Westchester often produces the opposite result.
Developer-driven projects routinely rely on long-term tax abatements, PILOT agreements, and public subsidies that erode municipal tax bases. Cities are left with increased service demands — schools, sanitation, policing, infrastructure — but fewer resources to fund them.
The result is higher taxes on existing residents, declining services, and deeper poverty concentration.
Affordable housing does not work when it destabilizes the municipalities expected to absorb it. Housing policy that ignores fiscal reality does not solve poverty — it institutionalizes it.
The Nonprofit Industry Problem
Westchester has one of the largest nonprofit ecosystems in New York State. Over the decades, billions of dollars have flowed through nonprofit organizations to address poverty, food insecurity, housing instability, and inequity.
Yet the problem remains — and in many areas, worsens.
This is not an indictment of individual nonprofit workers. Many are dedicated and overwhelmed. It is a critique of incentives. When poverty persists indefinitely despite massive funding, outcomes must be questioned.
If poverty were being meaningfully reduced, emergency programs would shrink. Funding would decline. Organizations would sunset.
Instead, poverty has become a permanent operating model.
The uncomfortable truth is this: poverty is now a billion-dollar business.
Entire careers, budgets, grant cycles, conferences, and political narratives depend on managing the problem rather than eliminating it. Success is measured by program growth, not by the number of people exiting poverty.
Children and the Cost of Inaction
Children bear the highest cost. A majority of children in Westchester live in households struggling to meet basic needs. Food insecurity, housing instability, and chronic financial stress undermine educational outcomes, mental health, and long-term economic mobility.
For Black families, these effects are compounded by existing disparities in wealth, homeownership, and access to capital. The consequences of ignoring this crisis will not be abstract. They will surface in classrooms, emergency rooms, and future incarceration rates.
Poverty Is Not Inevitable — It Is a Choice
Westchester does not lack money, data, or expertise. What it lacks is alignment between incentives and outcomes.
Real solutions would require:
Skills-based workforce training aligned with actual labor demand
Career pipelines tied to infrastructure, trades, technology, and local industry
Housing policy that strengthens municipal tax bases instead of eroding them
Honest audits of nonprofit effectiveness based on outcomes, not activity
A shift from poverty management to economic mobility
None of this is radical. It is practical.
Poverty in Westchester persists not because the problem is too complex, but because too many institutions benefit from managing it rather than solving it.
Until incentives change, outcomes will not.
And until we are willing to say that plainly, poverty will remain precisely where it is: well funded, well studied, and unresolved.
The case of Officer Derek Williams exposes a truth that many prefer to avoid: institutions often fail not because of bad intentions, but because responsibility is diffused until no one is accountable.
Williams is a 19-year veteran of the Mount Vernon Police Department. During the COVID pandemic—when policy decisions were made from home offices and Zoom screens—policing did not stop. He continued working, often overtime, entering homes and responding to emergencies in a period when exposure was not a hypothetical risk, but a certainty.
He contracted COVID. Years later, he is suffering from kidney failure and survives on dialysis.
At that point, the relevant question should have been whether the systems designed to protect workers in precisely this situation functioned as intended, underscoring the need for systemic accountability in protecting frontline workers like Williams.
They did not.
There is now substantial medical evidence that COVID can cause long-term organ damage, including kidney injury and kidney failure. Studies have shown that even patients without prior kidney disease can experience lasting renal impairment following COVID infection, particularly those exposed repeatedly or who suffered more severe illness. In other words, Williams’ condition is not a medical anomaly—it is a documented risk associated with COVID.
This matters because it undermines the convenient fiction that his illness is unrelated to his service during the pandemic.
Federal protections were in place for workers harmed by COVID. New York State enacted presumptive protections for frontline workers, recognizing that exposure was inherent in the job. This should make the audience feel a responsibility to uphold fairness for workers like Williams.
Yet those protections were never effectively applied, exposing a critical gap between policy and enforcement that leaves workers unprotected despite existing laws.
The union did not enforce them. The Police Benevolent Association exists to represent officers when they are least able to represent themselves. That is its comparative advantage. If those protections had been invoked and enforced, Williams would not now be facing termination.
But unions are not the only institutions with obligations.
The City’s Human Resources department failed predictably: by treating responsibility as someone else’s problem. Once a serious medical condition was known, HR had an independent duty to ensure that basic protections—such as FMLA—were put into effect. That duty does not vanish because a collective bargaining agreement covers an employee. Systems that depend on “someone else” acting first usually result in no one acting at all.
The outcome was predictable. Because protections were never activated, the City later classified Williams’ absence as “undocumented.” That classification then justified termination. The system worked exactly as designed—to protect the institution from obligation, not the worker from harm.
Then there is the matter of resources.
Mount Vernon received roughly $40 million in federal ARPA funds—money explicitly intended to address the long-term impacts of COVID, including harm to frontline workers, highlighting the need for proper resource allocation and accountability.
If a police officer who worked through COVID, contracted COVID, and now suffers organ failure does not qualify as a COVID-related impact, then the definition has been rendered meaningless.
The City now points to an “extension” as evidence of compassion. But extending a termination date is not a solution. It changes no incentives, corrects no failures, and secures no long-term protection. Williams remains on track to lose his job and his health insurance. For a man dependent on dialysis, that is not an administrative inconvenience. It is a life-threatening consequence.
This is the predictable result of a system in which laws exist but are not enforced, money exists but is not prioritized, and responsibility exists but is never owned.
In such systems, outcomes matter more than intentions. And the result here is unmistakable.
Officer Derek Williams is not the victim of bad luck. He is the product of institutional design—where accountability is fragmented, incentives reward inaction, and consequences are borne by individuals least able to absorb them.
Delaying the outcome does not change it.
Soft language does not alter hard facts.
If Mount Vernon wants this case to represent more than damage control, it must correct the underlying incentives—by securing Williams’ healthcare, enforcing existing protections, and ensuring that no public servant’s survival depends on public outrage.
Because when systems fail, they do not fail abstractly.
They fail specific people.
And Derek Williams is one of them.
These sources collectively establish that COVID relief laws, funding mechanisms, and medical evidence existed to protect frontline workers harmed by the pandemic—and that the failure in this case was not one of law or resources, but of execution and accountability.
References
American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARPA) Public Law 117-2, March 11, 2021. Established the State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds to address the public health and economic impacts of COVID-19, including impacts on essential workers and public sector services.
U.S. Department of the Treasury — State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds Guidance U.S. Treasury Final Rule and Interim Final Rule (2021–2023). Clarifies that ARPA funds may be used to address long-term public health impacts of COVID-19, support essential workers, maintain payroll and benefits, and correct COVID-related administrative disruptions.
Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) Public Law 116-127, March 18, 2020. Expanded job-protected medical leave and COVID-related leave protections for workers affected by COVID-19 during the pandemic period.
Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. Provides eligible employees with job-protected leave for serious health conditions and places responsibility on employers to notify employees of FMLA rights.
New York State COVID-19 Presumption for First Responders New York Workers’ Compensation Law § 21(14) (as amended during COVID). Establishes a presumption that frontline workers who contracted COVID did so in the course of employment, unless proven otherwise.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Post-COVID Conditions guidance. Documents that COVID-19 can cause long-term organ damage, including kidney injury, even in patients without pre-existing kidney disease.
National Institutes of Health (NIH) Research on COVID-19 and kidney disease. Multiple NIH-supported studies show increased risk of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease following COVID-19 infection.
Xie, Y., Xu, E., & Al-Aly, Z. (2021) Long-term kidney outcomes among survivors of COVID-19. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. Peer-reviewed study demonstrating a significant association between COVID-19 infection and long-term kidney dysfunction.
Al-Aly, Z., et al. (2022) High-dimensional characterization of post-acute sequelae of COVID-19. Nature Medicine. Documents long-term systemic and organ-specific effects of COVID-19, including renal outcomes.
U.S. Department of Labor — FMLA Employer Guidance Clarifies employer obligations to provide notice and designate FMLA leave when a qualifying serious medical condition is known.
Let’s ground this in reality before we talk about vibes.
Nearly half of New York renters are rent-burdened, meaning more than 30% of their income goes straight to housing.
In Westchester County, housing costs have grown faster than wages for years, squeezing not just low-income renters, but teachers, nurses, municipal workers, artists, the people who make the county function.
The private market has not produced permanently affordable housing at scale, because permanence and affordability are not profitable goals.
That’s not ideology. That’s math.
Now let me tell you what happened Thursday evening at the White Plains Public Library, because if you weren’t there, you need to understand why people who were won’t forget it.
I walked in halfway through, and that made it clearer
I didn’t arrive for the opening remarks. I walked in midstream.
And instead of feeling like I missed context, it felt like I walked into momentum.
No rows of chairs facing a stage.
No microphones waiting to be passed.
No polite silence.
There were tables. Markers. Large sheets of paper already filled with ideas in different handwriting, evidence that people weren’t being talked at, they were already working.
Phones were face down. Jackets half-off. That specific Westchester posture: tired, alert, and unwilling to waste time.
That’s when it clicked:
You didn’t miss a meeting.
You missed a moment.
Let’s be clear about whose room this was
This wasn’t an informal gathering or a one-off conversation. This was a state-led convening, and the host list reveals how seriously it was taken.
The Social Housing information and visioning session was hosted by:
Shelley Mayer
Nathalia Fernandez
Jamaal Bailey
Alongside Assembly Members:
Emily Gallagher
Steve Otis
Chris Burdick
Dana Levenberg
These weren’t just names on a flyer. These were elected officials showing up to listen, learn, and participate, not just speak.
The presentation that aligned the room
Before the breakout work began, there was a grounding presentation by Iziah Thompson.
No scare tactics.
No abstract theory.
Just a clear explanation of:
What social housing actually is
Why New York’s current system reproduces scarcity
How removing housing from speculative market pressure changes outcomes, not just rent, but stability, health, and long-term community cohesion
That presentation mattered. It gave everyone a shared language before anyone picked up a marker.
When power pulls up a chair, the energy shifts
Here’s the part people don’t forget.
Shelley Mayer wasn’t observing from the edge of the room.
She was in the huddles.
Marker in hand.
Walking through the housing solutions exercise.
Listening. Asking questions. Adjusting in real time.
Right alongside her was Evelyn Santiago, also seated at the tables, not facilitating from above, not collecting sound bites, but engaging residents as collaborators.
That matters in Westchester, where too often the distance between lived experience and policy feels intentional.
This wasn’t proximity for optics.
This was shared labor.
Emily Gallagher’s lens didn’t sugarcoat the truth
The session centered on New York’s Social Housing bill A6265 / S5674, championed by Emily Gallagher.
Her framing was direct:
Housing should be treated like infrastructure, not a speculative asset.
The bill would establish a Social Housing Development Authority tasked with building:
High-quality, union-built, sustainable housing
Permanently affordable units (not time-limited deals)
Rent is capped at approximately 25% of income, regardless of how much you earn
Mixed-income communities by design, not by loophole
Vienna and Singapore weren’t offered as dreams; they were offered as proof.
For anyone who wants to go deeper into the bill and the movement behind it, the living resource is here:
What people asked for says everything about the system
When residents were asked what kind of housing they would design for real life, not for investor decks, nobody said “luxury.”
They said:
Stability
Dignity
Predictability
Housing that doesn’t disappear after a compliance period.
Housing that doesn’t punish you for earning more.
Housing that doesn’t require you to re-prove your humanity every lease cycle.
If that sounds radical, that’s not on the people in the room.
That’s on what we’ve been conditioned to accept.
Yonkers was in the room, and that was intentional
Also present were George Kevgas, Housing Chair of the Yonkers NAACP, and Kisha Skipper, President of the Yonkers NAACP.
That presence wasn’t symbolic.
Yonkers understands how displacement unfolds quietly, first as rising rents, then as longer commutes, then as families being told it’s “just the market.”
Housing isn’t just an affordability issue.
It’s a civil rights issue.
And the ending is why this will stay with people
Before anyone packed up.
Before coats went back on.
Before the room dissolved.
Every table reflected out loud.
Not summaries.
Realizations.
People said things like:
“This feels doable.”
“I’ve never been asked to think this way before.”
“This is the first time housing didn’t feel like a fight.”
That’s not policy language.
That’s a shift in consciousness.
That’s the village remembering itself.
Why you really don’t want to miss the next one
Once you sit in a room where your ideas are treated like data, not complaints, you don’t go back.
Once elected officials stop performing and start building with you, the old meetings stop working.
I walked in halfway through on a Thursday evening and still felt it.
In honor of Human Rights Day and its 25th anniversary of combating discrimination and empowering the community, the Human Rights Commission hosted a program, Thursday, December 18th, at the Westchester County Center’s Little Theater that highlighted the Commission’s history and legacy. Titled, AI Discrimination in Housing and Places of Public Accommodations, the event provided a timely presentation on AI discrimination. The presentation focused on “AI and Algorithmic Discrimination,” focusing on how AI impacts hiring, housing, and access to public accommodations.
Attendees included members of the public, community leaders, human rights advocates, and state, county, and local elected officials. Westchester County Executive Ken Jenkins gave the Opening remarks.
“While we are in the holiday season, it’s so important to take a moment from the hustle and bustle to focus on something as meaningful as the celebration of human rights. I am so proud to recognize Westchester County’s Human Rights Commission, which has been combating discrimination and empowering the community for 25 years. The story of how the Commission was born and evolved is a compelling one, shared by some of those storytellers here with us tonight. We celebrate their legacy and the outstanding leadership of Executive Director Tejash Sanchala, under whom the Commission has been a model and highly successful enforcer of human rights protections throughout Westchester County,” CE Jenkins said.
The first half of the event focused on the inception of the Commission and its evolution with testimonials from the leaders who brought it to life, including New York State Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and former Human Rights Commission Executive Director, the Honorable Delores Scott Brathwaite, as well as a video message from Congressman George Latimer. The Westchester County Human Rights Commission enforces the County’s Human Rights Law and Fair Housing Law.
“The Westchester County Human Rights Commission was born from a hard-fought effort to ensure that civil rights in our county were protected by law. I was proud to lead that fight as a County Legislator, and to sponsor the legislation that created the Commission. Twenty-five years later, under Executive Director Tejash Sanchala, the Commission remains a vital force in protecting fairness and equal treatment for every resident of Westchester County. This anniversary is a moment to celebrate their exceptional work and the progress we have made,” Senator Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins shared.
Westchester County Human Rights Commission Executive Director Tejash Sanchala received accolades and several proclamations in commemoration of the anniversary, while explaining the substance of their mission — to investigate and prosecute individual and systemic violations of County’s Human Rights and Fair Housing Laws to provide relief for residents who have faced discrimination. Enforcement of these pioneering laws has resulted in landmark settlements, bringing substantial and life-changing relief for multiple complainants and communities across the County.
“The Westchester County Human Rights Commission proudly celebrated its 25th anniversary and Human Rights Day last night with community members – every chair was filled. The event was an opportunity to look back at the Commission’s history and its pioneering law, and reflect on how vital the Commission’s work safeguarding human rights remains today. I am deeply grateful to everyone who joined us, and especially to County Executive Ken Jenkins, NYS Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Congressman George Latimer, and the Honorable Delores Scott Brathwaite, who gave inspiring remarks on their integral roles in the Commission’s history and their commitment to preventing and addressing discrimination in the County. It is our mission to be a beacon of justice for victims of discrimination,” said Sanchala.
The program then pivoted to an in-depth panel discussion on AI algorithmic discrimination in housing, employment, and places of accommodation presented by two experts in the field — Director of the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights Yolanda N. Melville, and Curriculum Specialist for the New Jersey Division on Civil Rights’ Education and Training Unit Noaa Stoler, concluding with a Q& A session.
The Honorable Delores Scott Brathwaite said, “I am pleased and proud to have been an integral part of the growth and development of the Westchester County Human Rights Commission for over 11 years. In addition to the significant number of cases we investigated, adjudicated, or settled, I am also proud of having created, developed, and established the County’s first Fair Housing Law as an addendum to the Human Rights Law and establishing a working relationship with HUD. While the first 25 years were challenging for the Commission, the next 25 will be even more challenging given the nature of today’s environment and fast-moving technology. But I think the Commission is up to the challenge.”
Westchester Human Rights Commission Advisory Board Chair Rev. Doris K. Dalton said: “As Chair of the Advisory Board, I and my fellow Board members are proud of the work the Human Rights Commission has been able to achieve over the past 25 years. The Commission offers compassion and hope for those who feel unheard and unseen, engages vulnerable communities through education and outreach, and, when necessary, will tirelessly defend the vulnerable and hold accountable those who would abuse the rights and dignity of others in our County.
The Westchester County Human Rights Commission combats discrimination by implementing and enforcing the County’s Human Rights Law and Fair Housing Law and by empowering the community through its education and outreach efforts regarding discrimination and hate-related issues.
First, the Commission accepts, investigates, and adjudicates complaints of discrimination in Westchester County in the areas of employment, housing, places of public accommodations, credit lending, and – as of Dec. 7, 2021 – discriminatory harassment.
Second, the Commission also works to build bridges and foster unity through a robust education and outreach campaign to the public on combating discrimination in all of its forms. The Commission’s Education and Empowerment Series has included programs on solidarity building, interactive bystander intervention training workshops, dismantling racism, recognizing and mitigating implicit bias, and how to talk to your friends and family about race and discrimination. One of the Commission’s Human Rights Day programs included a conversation with award-winning author and PBS host Celeste Headlee.
Mount Vernon Mayor Shawyn Patterson-Howard has approved a six-month extension allowing police officer Derek Williams, a 19-year veteran battling kidney failure, to return to payroll status while continuing medical treatment and completing the retirement process.
The decision follows widespread public concern over Williams’ impending termination while undergoing dialysis. Under the Mayor’s directive, his separation date has been extended, and his health benefits will continue. City Hall will work with other municipal offices to formalize the arrangement.
In a statement released Thursday, Mayor Patterson-Howard said her decision was rooted in compassion and an understanding of the realities surrounding serious illness.
“When it comes to serious illness, it requires a softer touch of government that goes beyond bureaucracy,” the Mayor said. “Having a mother who is currently dealing with dialysis, I understand the difficult period he is going through.”
The Mayor also acknowledged that during a recent conversation, Williams indicated he lacked adequate representation from the Police Benevolent Association during earlier stages of the process. As a result, she directed her staff to support him and urged the union to continue donating sick days to cover his time.
According to the City, Williams has been out of work since April 2023 without formal documentation, and state law would have permitted termination. However, the Mayor emphasized that the extension was granted in recognition of his serious health challenges and nearly two decades of service to the City of Mount Vernon.
City officials confirmed that the Mayor’s Office has reached out to the City Council and Comptroller to introduce legislation to formalize the extension. The City will also continue contributing to a portion of Williams’ health benefits for the duration of the six months, ensuring he can access the benefits earned through years of public service.
Systemic failures, such as denial of COVID protections and delayed union support, highlight the need for systemic reform to protect public servants.
The Mayor’s intervention confirms that there is discretion within City Hall to act in extraordinary circumstances. But it also raises an important question: should a critically ill public servant ever need public pressure or last-minute executive action to receive basic protections?
To ensure this situation is never repeated, the City must now move beyond case-by-case solutions and implement clear safeguards. Mount Vernon should establish an automatic medical bridge policy so that employees diagnosed with catastrophic illnesses, such as kidney failure requiring dialysis, are protected from termination and maintain health coverage. At the same time, leave, disability, or retirement options are reviewed.
The City should also mandate automatic FMLA notification and designation whenever ongoing medical treatment is documented, ensuring federal protections are applied proactively rather than after the fact.
Finally, there must be formal executive and City Council oversight whenever a critically ill public safety employee faces termination, so that no such decision proceeds quietly or without accountability.
Had these protections been in place, Officer Derek Williams’ case would not have required emergency intervention, media attention, or public advocacy. It would have been handled correctly from the outset.
The Mayor’s decision allows Williams to move forward with dignity. Now City Hall has an opportunity—and a responsibility—to ensure that dignity is not extended by exception, but guaranteed by policy. Honoring public service should not depend on controversy. It should be built into the system itself.
The situation involving Mount Vernon police officer Derek Williams has sparked outrage, confusion, and now an official response from City Hall. A 19-year veteran of the Mount Vernon Police Department, Officer Williams is suffering from kidney failure, dependent on dialysis, and facing termination. That reality alone should trouble anyone who believes public service still carries meaning. But after reviewing the Mayor’s statement, one thing becomes clear: this crisis is not the result of a lack of authority — it is the result of how authority is being used.
During the COVID shutdown, while elected officials, administrators, and city leaders governed safely from home on Zoom, police officers were on the front lines. Officers like Derek Williams did not have the option to log off. They entered people’s homes, responded to emergencies, transported residents, and worked relentlessly overtime because public safety could not pause. Exposure to COVID under those conditions was not hypothetical — it was inevitable. Every first responder understood that risk and carried it so the rest of society could remain protected.
When Officer Williams contracted COVID during the pandemic, COVID-related worker protections were in place. This is not an attempt to apply rules retroactively. The protections were in place at the time of exposure. The fact that the long-term consequences of that illness emerged later does not erase the reality of when and how the exposure occurred.
Medical science now recognizes that COVID can cause lasting organ damage, including kidney failure. Given Officer Williams’ health, it’s vital that the audience feel compassion and understand the human toll of this illness, not just the legal details.
After public attention intensified, the Mayor’s office issued a statement asserting that the City followed state law, local law, the City Charter, and the collective bargaining agreement at every step. The statement notes that donated sick leave was provided, that Civil Service Law §73 permits separation after one year of inability to perform essential duties, that light duty requires an approved §207-c application, and that no applications for FMLA, accommodation, retirement, or workers’ compensation were filed that would change the officer’s legal status.
But following the narrowest possible interpretation of the law is not the same as exercising leadership. The audience should feel inspired to see leadership as an opportunity for compassion and moral clarity, not just rule-following.
Civil Service Law §73 permits separation — it does not mandate it. The City itself acknowledges that it previously delayed action, proving that discretion exists. Donated sick leave, while appreciated, is temporary. It does not provide job protection, and it does not preserve health insurance once exhausted. It is not a substitute for federal protections like the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Most notably, the City’s statement confirms that no FMLA was filed. That is not a defense — it is the heart of the problem. Dialysis is a textbook qualifying condition under federal law. FMLA does not require “magic words.” Once an employer knows an employee has a serious, ongoing medical condition, notice and designation are required. FMLA protections only work when they are activated before termination. Once employment ends, the protection disappears entirely.
The Mayor’s response emphasizes paperwork. But systems that remain silent while a critically ill employee misses critical protections are not neutral — they fail the very purpose those protections were designed to serve.
The statement also emphasizes that retirement and disability determinations are controlled by the State of New York, not the City. That may be true. But the City does control payroll status and health insurance today. This has never been about pension calculations. It is about whether a critically ill officer retains the health coverage required to survive.
What the Mayor’s response does not address is the central question: why discretion was not exercised when the consequences were so severe. Officers have reportedly stepped forward, willing to donate time so Officer Williams could remain on payroll. That option exists. The authority exists. The refusal to act is a choice.
At this point, City Hall’s sudden insistence on rigid adherence to “rules and regulations” invites an unavoidable question about consistency.
Mount Vernon residents are well aware that rules and procedures have not always been treated as immutable. Serious concerns have been raised publicly in other matters involving City leadership, including allegations reported elsewhere regarding the Mayor’s judgment and associations with sex offenders — issues that generated public controversy without the same level of procedural paralysis now being claimed. Whether or not proven, those situations did not appear to halt City action in the name of strict regulatory caution.
The same pattern exists within the Police Department itself. A U.S. Department of Justice report found that Mount Vernon police officers conducted unconstitutional strip searches despite explicit rules requiring probable cause, supervisory approval, and detailed documentation. Those rules were not ambiguous—they were unequivocal. Yet they were ignored. The consequences were severe: a detainee was able to bring a firearm onto a jail transport van and discharge it. Despite this failure of policy enforcement and supervision, not a single supervisor was suspended or held accountable.
So the question must be asked: why are rules suddenly inviolable now?
Why is discretion impossible when a man’s life is on the line, but flexibility seems to exist when political inconvenience or institutional failure is at stake? Why are collective bargaining agreements and the City Charter treated as ironclad only when the outcome is stripping a critically ill officer of his health insurance?
Rules were not sacred when constitutional rights were violated. Regulations were not untouchable when federal intervention became necessary. But now, when a man who served this City for nearly two decades is fighting to survive, procedure is elevated above humanity.
The Mayor of Mount Vernon has the authority — and the final say — to reverse this decision. She can allow Officer Williams back on payroll, even temporarily, so he can complete the final six months of service he earned. Officers have reportedly stepped forward, willing to donate time to make that possible. The solution exists. The will, so far, does not.
This is no longer about policy interpretation or administrative distance. At this stage, it is about choice.
To allow a critically ill man, who dedicated nearly two decades of his life to public safety, to be fired without health insurance while dependent on dialysis is not neutral. It is action through inaction. It is the conscious decision to let procedure outweigh humanity.
Let us be clear: terminating Officer Williams under these circumstances is not just ending a career — it threatens his ability to live. Dialysis is not optional. Health insurance is not a luxury. Removing it from a man in kidney failure is not abstract governance; it carries real and immediate consequences.
Public officials love to praise first responders in moments of crisis. The real test of leadership comes after the applause fades. Officer Williams showed up when the City needed him most. Now the City must decide whether it will show up for him.
This moment should not be reduced to a single employment dispute. It demands a reckoning — about how COVID exposure is treated, how worker protections are activated, and whether dignity still matters when a public servant’s body gives out before the system’s patience does.
Because if this City can watch a man who spent his life protecting others be discarded at his most vulnerable moment, then the issue is no longer policy alone.
