Okay. Welcome back, everybody. This is Charlie Stern. You are watching 914 Wired, which is a community affairs video podcast all about politics, education and culture. We talk about all kinds of things on here, but primarily focused on Westchester County. My partners in this initiative are Ardina Seward and Peter Moses. Good afternoon, Ardina and Peter. I keep track of where I'm at. So this is another follow up on this matter in the village of Mamaroneck. So there is a story in the village of Mamaroneck that has to do with affordable housing and a desire to bring a possibly 77 units of affordable housing to the village of Mamaroneck. There has been tremendous vocal opposition in the community. If you've been watching 911 for Wired, you got to hear some from some of the folks a couple of weeks ago who are opposed to this proposal. But then we've also had some folks on who are supportive of it because there are a lot of people in America that are supportive of affordable housing before long. Quick housekeeping item. If you're watching on YouTube and you haven't already subscribed, please click subscribe so that you find out when there's updates and new episodes. Likewise, if you're listening to the podcast, click follow. And that way you find out when 914 Wired comes on again. So I want to thank Manny Rawlings and Damon Marr for being our guest today. Manny is a village trustee in the village of Mamaroneck. There is some question about whether or not Manny should recuse himself from this vote. Now, before we get into all that detail, we want to understand where your orientation is on this subject, Manny and Damon. Why don't you go ahead and start us off and explain the various roles that you play and your interest in this matter. Yeah. Thank you, Charles. Good talking with you again. And yeah, why am I here is, I guess, question number one. And I kind of wear two hats here. First of all, as you know, I was six years as a county legislator here in Westchester County representing New Rochelle, Eastchester and Tuckahoe. For those years, I was the chair of the housing committee and we did a lot of work and support at the county in support of affordable housing incentives to not building directly, but incentives to private developers, both for profit and nonprofit, to do a lot of stuff all over the county, including a couple of really good projects by West Ham. And I'd heard and I continue to be a housing advocate, and I had heard there was some problem with what looked like to me to be a terrific proposal. Actually, two proposals are very good and one of them is West Tab, you know, right location, right, right. Size for the location, a win win for the community. Very, very broad spectrum of affordability and different types of apartments, even up to three bedroom in a good place and that sort of thing. So I went to attend what I thought was going to be the proposal presentation by one or two, at least one, at least West Ham was going to be on the meeting of January 29th. You know, it was an overflow crowd. I was with. The people who were very obedient, went to the overflow room across the street. But then basically it was mob rule. Mob rule determined that that meeting was going to be postponed. And it still hasn't hasn't happened yet. And that's kind of outrageous when when things like that happen. Okay. So that's that's one aspect of it. Then I learned that trustee Manny Rawlings, who I didn't know before, was being pressured to recuse himself from from voting on this or deliberating in any way, shape or form on this. On what kind of same kind of shaky grounds. I got a copy of the advisory opinion. And just to start with, the technical lawyers stuff at this. Point, time out, come out before the course of the advisory opinion you're referring to was an advisory opinion of the ethics board of the village of Mamaroneck, Correct. Who advised that there was a conflict of interest? Well, first of all, that's interesting. That's an advisory opinion. The the own ethics code makes it pretty clear that an advisory opinion is something that someone asks for with regard to their own perspective, deliberations or vote in something. You know, I'm not I'm not sure do I have a problem. I in confidence can get an advisory opinion in advance or during the the the the debate, you know, ongoing debate regarding particular matter that was not done here. That wasn't that was not properly done. It's not supposed to be a third party person who comes in and informally asked for this advice as to, you know, somebody else who's on the board. This was the mayor asking about somebody else on the board. The proper way of doing this is to swear under oath a formal complaint. If you think someone else and you can be anybody, I guess, in the community and swear out an oath with specific details as to what shenanigans you think are going on, you know, you have to base it in some reality, some facts that, you know, there's a formal hearing process, hearings. The full due process should be under oath. Yes. Should be. Yeah. Okay. You're raising you're raising these sort of process issues. Let's frame this a little bit. It's my understanding that and Manny Rawlings, you're here. You can tell us in your own words you are broadly in support of affordable housing. And one of the proposals, your your you're in favor of one or more of the proposals that the village has seen. Is that. Accurate? Yeah, I think that's definitely accurate. I'm definitely an advocate for affordable housing. There are two proposals and one is from one side and one is from from Luna. So I don't have a pick of which one is better or the other. I'm my job is for me as a trustees to hear and listen to both proposals and kind of then make it then come to decision with the board of which we would like to move forward with. I don't favor one or the other. I think you have to me as a as a board member, you see them both equally. You have to see them as two people put in the time, put in the work to send a proposal to the board to be able to listen to what they have to say. We were going to begin that kick off and have a meeting which was in January, which was have that meeting was disrupted and eventually postponed. And we are looking for dates to hopefully have this need, this next meeting where both proposers can come in and speak to the public and kind of give an update on their an update to the to the proposals. Excuse me. What is that. Supposed. Major conflict of interest? What is it all about? Yeah. So if you look at the ethic, I mean, I can speak to this a little more as well. As you look at the ethics piece, they didn't say there is a conflict of interest. They said there could be an an appearance of one which completely contradicts what also the other documentation, what they have when they were doing their research and kind of finding the documents and etc., all the other components of their advisory opinion, see that I was not listed on a judgment. I was not listed as a petitioner. I was never served any papers. I don't have anything outstanding against me. But for some reason there they came to the conclusion that there could be an appearance. Why can I just argue? I'm sorry. I just want to get to the. Bottom of what this. You know. But but so process is important. And when you're going to say, first of all, you know, I'm doing this pro-bono, so it's already out there, who's paying? You know, who were the nefarious forces paying the lawyer? Nobody. At this point, if it goes much, much further, there could be substantial attorney's fees that would have to be paid by by any disparity that's either here or there. Okay. The standard is clear and convincing evidence of something very specific, not conjecture, you know, not surmise. And the reason for that, especially in a situation like this, is Manny is not just Manny. Manny is a representative of people who have voted for him. You take him, he's one of five trustees. You take away one fifth of the of the of the people, you know, in effect, of the electorate. It's a it's a it's a form of a voter suppression. But but, Damien, let me interrupt you for a second before we get lost in this. We're not going to litigate the case here. I mean, let's just get down to to the specifics. Manny is is is taking more hits than the pinata at this point. So let's just deal with the crux of what he's being accused of doing, being one that he was on the lease, which was also on which was also registered to his mom. He also allegedly has conflict of interest with West Ham. So, Manny, I will throw it to you because, you know, it's your fight. You tell us where that conflict is. Yeah, I'm happy to answer it. So there is no conflict. I think the narrative that's kind of coming out there is that there is a conflict of interest with me because I was an occupant in an apartment building that I grew up in and eventually moved out of, and because my name was was was not even listed, you know, and these court filings, it is appears that we know Manny was there and he filed petitions there and all this other nonsense that kind of made it spiral into like, oh, he has a conflict and he's, you know, wants to go ahead, he wants to push this through. And it couldn't be further from the truth. I have there is zero conflict. I'm an advocate for affordable housing. And the narrative is that he's pushing for whatever he wants was I've never once stated what project I want any conversation about. I have to look at them both equally. That's my job as an elected official. Let me interrupt you for saying a but but but let let let's detail a little bit the the apartment complex in which you live is owned by a company called Washington Built Washington Ville is also part of the affordable housing sponsors. So the argument is, well, you know something, if Manny lived in a complex that was administered by Washington, built in Washington ville, is also part of the entity that wants to build these affordable houses. Therefore, Manny must have a bias either it would seem you have a bias against Washington as opposed to being for Washington, Bill. And you would vote in favor of Washington bill to build this affordable housing. You go, Manny. Yeah, I mean, I just think that's what is being is being discussed. I think it's this discussion that, oh, because he grew up there and he knows the work that they do, that he has this bias towards them. But to me, it's you have to I have to look at it the other way of this, of who? The other the person who's most affected by this, which is my mother, whose name has been put out there into the public back payment of rent over, you know, thousands and thousands of dollars. That has nothing to do with me. I'm I'm just a kid growing up and knowing mom, you know, Mom's going to take care of the home. I she asked for help. You know, I became an adult. I was going to help. I was going to college. So it's very confusing to think that he has this bias. You want to support what's happened when they essentially have, you know, what's happened. The community with all this coming out has put my mother through an immense amount of stress and distress of having her public information out there, because I'm a I'm a public figure and she is not. So I just think it's you know, I want to jump on and and have that, you know, that that discussion of what is you know, I have this visor is no bias. When you get into this position, you can't be biased with one or the other. Nobody's lobbying me. Nobody's, you know, forcing you to make a decision. I'm up there representing the community and and I want people to listen to both proposals equally to make the best decision. Because to me, like I said, I'm an advocate for affordable housing. So can I make a point? First of all, under the logic of the people that you had on last night on the last time, Daniela and B, no one who lives in, in any of the affordable housing that exists in Mamaroneck, that is which is quite substantial. It's administered by by Washington. Housing would have the right to be on the council and make a decision over more affordable housing, that that's the community that needs it. That's number one. Number two, we attorneys say to correct the record of of what the folks of what be and Daniela said he was not on the lease. You don't have automatic responsibility when you become an adult to pay the rent. He was named as and as an occupant. You have to name everybody and you have a list of John Doe's, you know, I've done these, I've I've litigated both sides of these things, right? You have to name people that you want to get out. And by the way, that's the main thing you want to do when you're a landlord. You want to get people can't pay the rent. You just want to get them out. You're not thinking, I'm going to try and go and collect from them or from the son who's not on the lease. That's usually the furthest thing from their mind. The other misstatement was that Manny is employed. They just threw that out there as well. Employed by home. By West. AB Right. Or let's say. The landlord or something. Know that his job, it was man is employed. But the implication is that Manny's job has some affiliation with USF. Let's talk about that. Sure. Yeah, I'm happy to talk about that. So that's the other narrative out there that is being spun that my job is or I got my job, and my job now is some connection to website, which is also not there. Not true. I think people and people understand. I work in the nonprofit sector in Westchester County. We have a very large, thriving nonprofit sector. Many organized nations collaborate with each other to get work done. My, my, my role it my job to do operations is not related to any partnership with WhatsApp or I get this job because of WhatsApp that that narrative is false. And I think we have to really put state that out there that I got hired and I'm able to opportunity because the American because of the work that I do, that I have done in my in my, you know, very early career. So it this narrative that I had my job because of WhatsApp and that my job is connected, it couldn't be further from the truth. There is no, you know, basis to that. So you've enlightened us as to some of the facts surrounding this matter. But now I have to also say that we can't lose sight that the reason why I think this is creating so much, why there's so much energy around this matter of Manny Rawlings viability of a vote. There's only five votes on that village board. Two other board members support affordable housing to vocally do not, and that leaves many wrong. So is this whole thing just an attempt by the people opposed to affordable housing to knock out a vote and crush a proposal? Is that all this? Is this you know, so this is where we're a lawyer hat and say, you know, you're leading the witness and you're asking him to speculate on other people's motives. Let me do that. Let me do that. Okay. So the two people you had on are part of the movement to change registrations. You know, we picked up at least 120 people. Changing your vote by changing, changing. Parties, changing voter registrations. Both of them and their spouses changed their voter registrations in January, in February, which I find particularly abhorrent. This is real voter disenfranchisement and dilution. It's also diluted, but it's dilution of the true Democratic voters. You know, these folks and they brag about it on you know, we have screenshots where they're just doing this temporarily. They're not really Democrats. They're not really in line with any of the Democratic principles. But how does. This kind of. How does that intersect with what does that how does it intersect with this matter. Exactly? Oh, it does because they're doing this. They're doing this so that they can get in candidates. They know they can't win a Republican primary and certainly in a not in a presidential election year. Right. So this is a page from another playbook, you know, the Latimer versus Bowman playbook, Right? That's what I'm. Asking. So they're flooding the flooding unabashedly. They're saying this you can do this temporarily. Got people saying it feels very funny for me to be doing this, but I'm doing this. And, you know, you got two more here and it's all just to vote against if many were to run, which now he's not. But when they're doing this, the three those three three people you mentioned were still going to be in the race, but now they can still control who's. Going to hold on them. But my head's starting to spin here because I'm losing the logic, I think. Tell me if I'm wrong. I think what you're saying is that that the opposition is trying to skew the Republican versus Democratic vote in anticipation of the next set of Village of Mamaroneck trustees that are coming in which will be against the affordable housing. Is that is that what we're talking. About, trying to trying to control Democratic primary because they know most people just vote across the line, especially in a presidential year. Right. Right. They don't have it. They don't have or I want to be careful about my words, but, you know, they don't have the guts and they don't have the numbers to put up. A Republican slate on their, you know, among their own Republican people. Okay. So so. Yeah. Okay. So, so so this entire frame of reference is now moved into the political realm. And and I would suggest there might be more than one story here. One is there using legal means to participate in a Democratic primary election. That's one. And the second is. I don't know, maybe it's not. Maybe. Okay, why is it not legal? All right. Here's what a party is, is it is entitled to protect itself. In the past, it's been third parties. So you can't judge people, you can't change. But what's more. So Democrats are changing you. I will ask you. I will ask you. I'll ask you all to look now or later at New York State election law 16 dash 110, Subsection two Upon the complaint of a any registered Democrat to the county chair, you can question whether a particular person or a particular bunch of persons are truly in in the language. Is exactly this in sympathy with the principles of the party. Okay. And Damien, you can change your right party registration if you want to. It's it's America. It's the United States of NY. If you're you know when I when I registered lottery quick story. When I registered to vote in high school I chose the Conservative Party because I didn't know better. And I so I'm conservative. I checked the box. A couple of years later, I learn a little bit more about how the world works and why these primaries would come and go, and I could never vote. And I realize I need to be registered as a Democrat. So I filled out a new form and I sent it in. Okay, She's not 18 years old. The party is entitled to defend itself and have fair elections. In other words, people who truly are Democrats and people who register just to knock out those who really do sympathize with the Democratic Party's principles need to be protected. That goes in and that goes to. Ensure this congressional action as well. I'm listen, I'm sure there's case law and I'm sure that that will get litigated for years. But if you want to change your party registration, there's a means by which you can do so. But let me raise another let me raise another political issue. The other political issue is maybe it's not a great idea to have a two year terms on the Mamaroneck Village board. Maybe it's not a great idea to have everybody running every two years where every single issue is thrown into this political sphere. And this is sort of crucible of of politics that is out of proportion to what it should be. Maybe that needs to be addressed. You know, I always thought three years might be good for all offices, because if it's two years, it's like you're running all the time for years. People get a little complacent. Okay, But you however. You however, in the state legislature. Yes, the state legislature just this year moved all the town elections to even years with the all the big elections. You know, and as a former Democrat myself, I can tell you there's a bit of gamesmanship in that because, again. So are you telling Democrats to wait? Are you telling 914 and Wired that you changed your party register. You did back in December? Oh. You got a real article. I saw the. Whole the whole the guys hold us because we get away off to another agenda. It did anybody challenge you change party registration Our dinner? Yeah, our data. This is essential when. Our sense of what we got. Nancy over here. Who's close? Close, Who's being maligned about refusing to recuse on the issue of affordable housing. And we need to be able to focus on that. And of course. He's not running for reelection because he's been browbeaten by, dare I say it, MAGA Republicans who then reregistered in his party, the party he's been in. And these are not 20 year olds. These as many officially known as many officially said he's not going to run. I, i it's kind of late now. The petitions, by the way. Yes. Charlie has a question whether anybody challenged me in the Working Families Party. They wouldn't I've collected like half of the signatures for all candidates. Okay. So I'm a hard worker. You chose that. You changed your party. That's it. Manny, let me ask you a question. All things being equal, would you have wanted to run again? Oh, absolutely. I, I have a young political career, and I really do enjoy being on the board. I love being able to know that I'm serving my community. I believe in public service. I believe in impacting people and doing things that impact people. So I was very interested. I went through that. I did the same thing I did last year. We're going to go through the process of seeking endorsement and, you know, meeting with people and having conversations because I respect it. I respect the process. I respect that those things, you know why? The question is, even with the pushback, why give up? So I give. So that's I gave up on going for the Democratic endorsement. They went their way and they picked three candidates. I would there was not enough time for me to gather petitions, so I won't be seeking that line or be on that line. But I would like to talk about your the push to for you to recuse why or how why would you not recuse yourself? Yeah, I would not recuse myself based on the basis that they're one that the the the process of which it was filed is incorrect. I didn't ask for an advisory opinion. Somebody can't ask for an advisory opinion for me. Part number. Part number two, they're they're written up. You know, it's not a determination. Their conclusion that they gave their advisory opinion stated that there could be an appearance of. But when you look if you read through the advisory opinion, every other thing that's sitting there shows that this has nothing to do with Manny Rawlings and that he was a person that was listed somewhere when he was in real reality, something against my mother. She's not a public figure. She's not does not sit on the board of trustees. She doesn't have a vote on the board of trustees. I do so because of because I have a parent who struggled there. I want to and I want to ask you, Manny, about because, you know, you grew up in an area known as the flats. Yep. I mean, that's how it was when I was a kid. That's how it was when you were a kid. What was it like growing up in a low income neighborhood? No, I think it was I think it was for me, you know, I was someone who watched struggle their entire life. It was very challenging to see. So that that kind of propelled me maybe the person I am today, to know that in order for us to make those changes and to better society, someone's got to step up and do it. That just happened to be me. That happened to be the person, the right person who I believe I'm the right person, kind of step up and and have those tough conversations. I'm a you're not you don't get elected because you want the people to love you and to people please. And you got to make everybody happy. Right. That that's not the case. That's not the reality. But Manny. Yeah. That's all the more reason why you need to stay in the arena, because you are making the case for you. Look, I'm not here to pass judgment on this particular proposal, but there is a social problem with affordable housing in Mamaroneck, in Westchester County, in the whole country. There is well documented, well understood. And you're making the case for it. If you're not there, someone else has to make the case for it. If you recuse yourself, then someone else, eventually it's going to come around to them. If you don't recuse yourself, somebody needs to be there and vote in some way, shape or form to make a case for this thing. So it has this thing turn you off. The politics permanent? No, I think this I think this added even more fire for me in the political arena because when I want and. Why not want to run again. I, I, I guess I cannot run on the Democratic line. That is not me. I am not running. I can that can run on an independent line. I can run as a on the note, I can run on any party line. I will I just can't I will not be listed on the Democratic line. Charlie. Okay. So this is one I agree with you more than my client. I want to run it. Well, you know, it's. Something think you run on the Democrats. Just because it has to do with petitions. And I didn't have an I didn't I didn't get enough petition signatures because I would do this. We could do this. We got it. Got it. And, you know, Charlie, it's a small town. And the pressure, you know, when when especially now with social media, it's it's horrendous. And by the way, just to throw one more technical aspect, okay, So the Board of Ethics is is out of compliance with their own code at this point. Two of the members just and it shows you a little bit of the hostility to the issue of the affordable housing as well. So they have a rule that no more than two of the five members can be in one particular party. Well, guess what? Two of the members did. They're on this list also, Lauren. Right. And who who is the other one, Maria? What do they all join? DeRose and Lauren Todaro, Bierman and her husband are people who were Republicans and change to Democrat in early February. Okay. So there's no so the board is no longer validly constituted at this point or its own. And, you know, Manny can tell you who who was and who wasn't participating in the process at the time, which also sounds like a violation of their rules. So, so many you may still run again, but not on the Democratic ticket, correct? Correct. So, okay. So run for something else someday. Right? So. So you're. Yeah. Guy. So you so you're not exactly down and out at this point. You're still a contender. So we said. Absolutely. I like to think of myself as one. All right, folks, we're going to wrap it up there. There's there's a bottomless number of side topics to delve into here. I appreciate you both coming on here to give us a little bit more clarity on what's happening in the village of Mamaroneck. My guests have been Damon Ma and village trustee member Manny Rawlings. Thank you for being our guests. On 914 Wired on behalf of my co-hosts are Dina Seward and Peter Moses. I hope you'll tune in again, click, follow and like and all that great stuff and put a comment in the in the comments and we'll see you on the next episode of 914. Wired Thank you, everybody. Thanks us. They will.