Mamaroneck REVIEW THE
November 4, 2016 | Vol. 4, Number 45 | www.mamaroneckreview.com
Judge dismisses Rosenblum lawsuit By JAMES PERO Staff Writer Village of Mamaroneck Mayor Norman Rosenblum’s lawsuit challenging the village Board of Trustees on its adherence to Open Meetings Law was shot down by a judge last week. The decision, rendered on Oct. 27, will now guarantee the existence of two propositions on Election Day ballots; one altering the mayor’s power of appointment for the position of village attorney, and one altering interim appointments of members of the village’s land use boards. Rosenblum, a Republican who filed the lawsuit only two weeks ago, has repeatedly criticized the decision by the Democratic majority of the village board to put both propositions on the ballot, citing improper procedure and “petty politics.” “The real question is what the people decide,” Rosenblum said about the propositions. “If you vote yes, you are tipping the balance and eliminating the office of mayor.” grieved parties—to help mend The judge found that Open heated partisanship. Meetings Law—which requires “Would an ombudsman help proper public notice before muus to solve issues?” the question nicipal meetings are held—was asked. upheld, contradicting the mayDemocratic candidate and or’s claims. newcomer to village politics, Additionally, according to Keith Waitt, took his opportunity court transcripts, Rosenblum filed his lawsuit in his capacity DEBATE continued on page 11 as mayor, an action denied by
Village trustees debate highlights partisan dysfunction By JAMES PERO Staff Writer With Election Day around the corner, six candidates vying in a crucial village of Mamaroneck Board of Trustees race—with board majority at stake—got their first chance to address prospective voters on a wide range
of issues; not the least prominent of which was the village’s heated partisan atmosphere. At the Mamaroneck Town Center, amidst a modest-sized audience of village residents, candidates for the village Board of Trustees’ three open seats parsed through perennial issues like development and flooding.
However, at the heart of many of the topics discussed on Oct. 26 was the current board’s partisan divide, and its subsequent effect on local governance. One audience-submitted question penned by a longtime village resident, Jim Desmond, broached an idea of hiring on ombudsman—a mediator for ag-
the courts, forcing him to refile the case as a village resident. Both the mayor in addition to the three Democratic trustees— who were the defendants named in the suit—plan to file invoices that would obligate the village to pay for all legal expenses associated with the case. According to village of Mamaroneck law, village officials may retain outside counsel in the case of legal action against it. Village Manager Richard Slingerland said no invoices for legal services have been filed, as of press time, but he expects them to be submitted this month. Village board Democrats, who voted to put both referendums on the ballot in August, have repeatedly criticized Rosenblum’s use of what is known as the “hold-over” rule. In the case of either a land use member’s resignation or removal, the mayor is able to appoint an interim person to serve out the rest of the vacant member’s term. Once the remainder of that term has been served, the village board must vote on whether or not to retain the mayor’s interim appointee for an additional term. In this case, if the village board is not unanimous in its decision, the appointee remains on the board, allowing Rosenblum to retain his appointment by simply voting against the rest of the LAWSUIT continued on page 3