It’s Not The Mount Vernon Charter — It’s Who Mount Vernon Elects

Mount Vernon’s leaders want to rewrite the rules, but refuse to fix the habits. That’s not reform — that’s misdirection.

There’s growing momentum to revise the city charter. On the surface, structural reform sounds like progress. But in practice, it often becomes a distraction from the deeper problem. The truth is simple: it’s not the charter that has failed Mount Vernon — it’s who the city continues to elect to operate it.

You can draft new rules and reorganize the structure of government all you want, but if the same ethically compromised individuals remain in control, the results will be the same—just repackaged under a different title. Among the reforms being considered is the shift to a city manager model, where a hired professional would run daily operations. Another is the proposal to move to district-based council elections instead of at-large seats was rejected by the commission. Both deserve attention, but neither will solve the core issue unless the political culture changes. However, the most dangerous proposal now gaining traction is the idea of removing the public’s right to elect the city comptroller and making that position an appointment. That is not reform. That is a guaranteed gateway to cronyism, nepotism, and the unchecked consolidation of power.

The comptroller is the city’s fiscal watchdog. Currently elected by Mount Vernon residents, the comptroller is accountable only to the people, not to any political figure. The job is to provide an independent check on how taxpayer money is spent—overseeing budgets, contracts, and payroll with a critical eye. Turning this role into an appointment removes that independence and opens the door to abuse. Appointees are not accountable to the public. They are loyal to the person or political machine that gave them the job. And in a city where political favors, insider dealings, and donor-driven decisions are already common, this move would virtually guarantee that the watchdog becomes a lapdog.

The danger becomes even clearer when considered alongside the fact that Mount Vernon’s City Council is still elected at-large. That means a single political group can effectively dominate every seat. Without shifting to district-based elections, which would allow for more equitable and geographically grounded representation, there is no true check on consolidated political power. Now add in the influence of political operations like Rise Up Mount Vernon PAC—an organization that appears to help shape who gets elected, fund campaigns, and promote a narrow slate of candidates. If that same network can influence the mayor’s office, shape the council, and now appoint both the city manager and the comptroller, the people of Mount Vernon will have lost every meaningful point of access to their government.

This is how good intentions result in bad political outcomes. What begins as an effort to increase efficiency ends as a blueprint for eliminating accountability. Mount Vernon’s history already proves this lesson, time and again. Mayor Ernest Davis pleaded guilty to a federal conviction for tax evasion but defiantly rejected calls for his resignation in 2014. Davis’ successor, Mayor Richard Thomas, campaigned on transparency and youth leadership, only to plead guilty to misusing campaign funds and resign in disgrace in 2019. Thomas’ Corporation Counsel, Lawrence Porcari, was convicted of public corruption charges and sentenced to prison. The current administration faces lawsuits and potential public scrutiny over alleged campaign finance violations, the political use of public employees, and close ties to developer-connected donors—all. At the same time, the city has given its residents no plan to address the DOJ report of its police department violating its residents’ rights.

A flawed city charter caused none of these failures. They were caused by poor decisions at the ballot box. The problem is not structural. It is cultural. And the public is not blameless. Too often, Mount Vernon voters reward loyalty over leadership, personality over qualifications, family affiliations, and empty rhetoric over measurable results. Leaders are elected because they are familiar—not because they are competent. This allows dysfunction to become tradition, and allows political insiders to present “reform” proposals that only deepen their control.

Some defenders of these changes will argue that professionalism matters more than elections. That hiring an “expert” for the comptroller role is better than leaving it up to voters. But professionalism without independence is worthless. An expert who reports to a political insider is no longer a watchdog—he or she becomes a shield for corruption. In the real world, qualifications mean little if your job depends on who you’re willing to protect. Expertise is only as valuable as the integrity behind it.

For a city that’s constantly claiming to be financially strapped, Mount Vernon already pays the mayor a $200,000 salary—making it one of the highest-paid mayors in Westchester County. Now, under the proposed charter changes, the city wants to add a second executive-level salary, paying a city manager another $180,000 to $220,000, plus benefits, severance protections, and possibly relocation assistance. Meanwhile, the elected mayor—still drawing a full salary—would be reduced to a ceremonial figurehead with little executive power. The public pays twice, and gets less in return. This is a city that can barely fix its parks, can’t keep basic services running consistently, and has few functioning programs for its children and youth. City departments are under-resourced, infrastructure is crumbling, and residents are paying more but getting less. Yet somehow, the priority has become adding another six-figure salary to an already bloated city hall. That’s not reform—it’s institutionalized foolery. You don’t fix dysfunction by expanding government overhead. You fix dysfunction by voting incompetent leadership out—which, sadly, Mount Vernon just can’t seem to get the hang of doing.

A City Without Wards Is a City Without Balance

In a city as diverse and economically divided as Mount Vernon, electing all City Council members at-large creates an uneven playing field where political machines and donor-funded campaigns dominate citywide races. This system dilutes local voices and often leaves entire neighborhoods without true representation. By shifting to a ward or district-based model, each community would elect its own councilmember—someone who lives in, understands, and answers directly to the people of that specific area. Districts decentralize power, make campaigns more accessible to real grassroots candidates, and reduce the influence of political PACs that bankroll citywide slates. If Mount Vernon wants government that reflects the will of the people—not just the will of those with resources—then fair, geographically based representation is not optional. It’s foundational.

How Mount Vernon Residents Can Legally Change the City Charter

If Mount Vernon’s leadership won’t initiate real reform, residents have the legal right to do it themselves through a petition-driven charter change. Here’s how the process works under New York State law:

1. Draft the Proposal
   Residents must clearly write out the proposed change to the charter. This can be:
   • A specific amendment (e.g., switching to district-based council elections, keeping the comptroller elected)
   • A proposal to form a Charter Revision Commission, which could recommend broader reforms
2. Prepare a Legally Compliant Petition
   The petition must include:
   • The exact wording of the proposed charter change
   • A clear statement of purpose
   • Signature fields with printed name, signature, full address, and date
3. Collect Signatures from Registered Voters
   You must collect valid signatures from at least 5% of Mount Vernon’s registered voters, or 15,000, whichever is less.
   • Mount Vernon has about 41,000 registered voters, so approximately 2,050 valid signatures are needed
   • Only registered voters in Mount Vernon can sign
4. Submit the Petition for Review
   Submit the completed petition to the City Clerk or Board of Elections.
   • This must be done well before the general election, typically no later than 4 months prior to November
5. Verification of Signatures
   The city will review the petition to:
   • Confirm signatures are valid
   • Ensure the wording complies with legal standards
   • Legal challenges may be filed during this stage, so clarity matters
6. Put It on the Ballot
   Once approved, the proposal must be placed on the next general election ballot.
   • A simple majority vote by the public determines whether the change is adopted
7. Implement the Change
   If voters approve the proposal, the city must implement the charter amendment or create the charter commission as outlined in the petition.

Important Note on Charter Commissions:

If a charter revision commission is appointed by the City Council or the mayor, there is no legal guarantee that it will act in the public’s best interest—or even act at all. In many cases, appointed commissions have delayed action, avoided substantive reform, or failed to meet critical deadlines. But in Mount Vernon’s case, the issue wasn’t inaction—it was omission. The commission produced a proposal, but left out one of the most vital accountability reforms: converting City Council elections from at-large to district-based representation. That omission isn’t a minor oversight—it protects the current power structure by allowing the same political networks to continue dominating every seat. When commissions are appointed by the very people who benefit from the status quo, they can become tools of preservation, not instruments of change.

When that happens, the public gets the appearance of reform without any results — and the opportunity for change is lost until the next election cycle. That’s why the direct petition process is the most powerful and reliable tool Mount Vernon residents have. It allows citizens to bypass political games and take charter changes straight to the ballot, where voters — not politicians — decide the future of their city.

Bottom line: If the people don’t drive the reform, the reform won’t happen.

If Mount Vernon truly wants reform, it must begin with restoring accountability—not removing it. That means keeping the comptroller elected and independent. That means restructuring the council into real districts, so each neighborhood has a voice. That means demanding transparency from political PACs and campaign finance operations that operate behind the scenes. And most of all, it means voters must change how they think, how they research, and how they vote.

Mount Vernon doesn’t need fewer elections. It needs better elections. Better candidates. And better-informed voters. If the city continues to elect the same individuals, it will continue to receive the same results. And if it removes the few remaining checks on power for the people, it won’t be reform—it will be political foreclosure.

The solution isn’t to silence the public. It’s to wake it up.

 Emotional Politics — Logical Failure is the book you need.

In this bold and unfiltered work, Damon K. Jones delivers the hard truths many are afraid to say out loud: Black America has been loyal to a system that has failed to deliver. We’ve mastered symbolism but forfeited strategy. We show up to vote, but not to fund. We speak out, but rarely build. And the result? Speeches instead of solutions. Visibility instead of victory.

This book is not about left or right. It’s about logic over emotion. Power over performance. It’s a call to wake up, re-strategize, and use our political currency with purpose.

If you’re tired of being used, overlooked, and sold out—this book is your blueprint for change. Your voice is powerful. Your vote is valuable. But your money, your mindset, and your political clarity are what will make the difference.

Read the book. Share the message. Challenge the tradition. And let’s finally start getting what we pay for.