Board pauses Hunter Tier negotiations after preliminary email review and ethics concerns

The Village of Mamaroneck Board of Trustees voted to pause negotiations on the Hunter Tier development after hearing a preliminary report and extended debate about the integrity of the procurement process and recent discussions with New York State Homes & Community Renewal (HCR).

The pause motion, made during the Nov. 12 work session and seconded from the dais, carried on a roll-call vote with recorded affirmative responses from trustees including Rawlings, Young, Lucas and Mayor Torres; the board agreed the incoming trustees should have the opportunity to set policy and determine whether negotiations continue.

Why it matters: Trustees and staff said recent developments — including an investigative summary of email records and a possible 50% HCR preference for flood-impacted residents — could materially affect the project’s terms and the village’s exposure to legal risk. The report’s authors used an AI-assisted review to reduce hundreds of thousands of server emails to a manageable set for human review; the board heard that roughly $63,000 has been spent on the initial investigative phase.

What the report showed and how trustees reacted: Village attorney Bob described the investigation’s methodology: investigators trained an algorithm using sample emails (including items identified by the mayor and public reporting) to search the village’s email system; human reviewers then read hits and prepared the summary. Bob said the approach was chosen because a full manual review would have required significantly more time and cost. “They used AI to comb the emails that were responsive to the search terms; when it identified the emails that were responsive, then human beings went through it,” Bob said in the meeting.

Some trustees said the initial findings identified 13 instances that suggest a vendor’s (identified in discussion as West Hab/WestHaab/WestTab) undue influence on elements of the RFP. "I think it absolutely shows that there was undue influence," one trustee said, urging continuation of the investigation and, if necessary, recusal by implicated trustees. Other trustees cautioned that the report was preliminary and that ultimate decisions about disqualification or legal actions should await the ethics board’s review and counsel’s final analysis.

HCR preference and the policy trade-offs: Several trustees described HCR’s recent indication that a flood-victim preference might be available — a proposal they framed as a potential way to secure housing for roughly 31 households displaced by repeated flooding. Supporters said the preference is a rare opportunity to move flood-impacted families to higher ground; skeptics raised questions about parking, unit counts, AMI levels, and whether HCR funding or preferences could be documented in writing.

What the motion does next: The board’s motion pauses active negotiations so the incoming trustees can review the report, consider any ethics-board determinations, and decide whether to resume or terminate negotiations. The village attorney said the ethics board and the village board still have options, including continuing the investigation, asking for a fuller legal analysis, or terminating negotiations if counsel advises.

Context and next steps: Trustees asked staff to preserve documents and to bring finalized wording and any written HCR commitments back to the board. Several incoming trustees who addressed the board said they support affordable housing in general but want greater transparency in negotiation and clearer assurance about how a flood preference and funding would operate. The pause allows the new board to act in public session when it convenes.

The board did not take steps to disqualify any bidder during the Nov. 12 work session; trustees said that determination would await the ethics board’s next steps and any additional legal review.