Meet the Candidates: Rye’s Mayoral Contenders Talk City Issues With The Record 

Rye mayoral candidates independent Rick McCabe, Republican Bill Henderson, and Democrat Josh Nathan sat down with The Record’s politics team for wide-ranging interviews. The discussions centered on topics of importance to the city and its taxpayers.   

The following transcripts of those interviews have been edited for length.  

Additional reporting by Christian Falcone and Jon Elsen.  

  

Development

Q: There are 48 municipalities in Westchester County. Just two of those communities – one is the city of Mount Vernon – have older master plans than Rye’s, which hasn’t been updated since it was first created back in 1985. What problems do you think that has created for this city?  

McCabe: When you look at things like development – not just in terms of downtown development, but development overall in town – I think a topic like that can be served by having a comprehensive plan that’s been updated, that lays out where we want to be, where we want to go, and what things we agree on, and what things we need to talk about. When you read the one from 1985, it’s certainly not a dictum, and it’s not a silver bullet to solve any of the bigger issues that we need to talk about.   

Henderson: I don’t know if it’s created any problems, but I think we might know more when we do the master plan. I think where I’m surprised is we haven’t gotten further along on it. When I ran four years ago, everyone was asking me about the master plan, so I was like, “sure, let’s do a master plan.” I’m amazed that I’m sitting here four years later and we haven’t started the process yet. I think there’s really two decisions that need to be made by the council: One is to our consultant, and two is to select the committee.   

Nathan: We make reactive decisions. There’s a problem, everybody jumps on it, we debate and do something, but it may not be the smartest thing or fit long-term needs. For example, field replacements were considered without looking at overall usage, layout, or parking. At Gagliardo [Park], swing sets sit by I-95 without rethinking the park’s design. Recent legislation on flag lots, steep slopes, and trees were conceptually right, but not tied to an overall plan for density or growth.  

Q: An anonymous development group, which calls itself the Rye Community Planning Collaborative, began proposing development projects across the city last year, including transforming portions of Rye Golf Club into field space. Do you believe the lack of a current master plan paved the way for this group to surface? How should Rye respond to that group?  

Henderson: I’ve responded to them. I’ve told them, please identify yourself, and I’ll be happy to talk to you, but they don’t want to identify themselves. And you know, I’m not going to talk to a group of people that don’t even know who I’m talking to. So why are they’re doing what they’re doing? I don’t know. I don’t know what their interests are.   

Nathan: I don’t know why they’re doing this or who they are. I wish they would show their face and say, “Hey, we are ____.” I’ve heard rumors it’s guerrilla marketing for developers, or maybe just folks in Rye with different ideas. Not having a plan opens us up to this kind of thing. But you can’t do it anonymously from a home office somewhere, you need community engagement. Their proposals don’t connect to what’s needed, some involve areas not for sale or businesses not leaving, so their motives aren’t clear.  

McCabe: I think we shouldn’t respond to the group. I think any proposal from a mystery group that doesn’t have the wherewithal to put itself forward publicly isn’t putting serious ideas onto the table. I think the comprehensive plan needs to be updated, but unless someone’s going to step up and put their name on something like this, these are not worthy of merit.  

  

Q: Do you believe the anonymous group is trying to influence this election?  

Nathan: I don’t know what they’re trying to do in terms of the election, because I don’t know what their point is. The only response I can make is, who are you? We’ve asked that for years. They first came out with ideas near Rye Golf, then by the Ford dealership and CVS, and others since, but there’s never been a dialogue. City officials have invited them to meet, but they haven’t. So, if they want opinions on their plans around the election, they need to show who they are.  

McCabe: Oh, sure. They’re trying to just throw things out into the ether with a 12-point PowerPoint presentation. The next, deeper engagement on this is: Let’s put this in front of these three guys who are running for mayor and see if somebody bites. I’m certainly not getting engaged with it.   

Henderson: I really don’t know what they’re trying to do. Obviously, they’re interested in talking about development. Maybe they are. I don’t know.   

  

City Hall

Q: Former city manager Greg Usry resigned from the position back in March, after first announcing his intentions in December 2024. Why has the city not yet found his permanent replacement and when can residents expect a new hire?  

Henderson: I want to be careful, because it’s a personnel matter and we really don’t talk about personnel matters. I would say, I’m a little bit frustrated about how slow the process is taking.   

Nathan: We’re in a search process that’s moving along as it should. It’s hard to say much because it involves people and falls under personnel, but I’m confident we’ll find a very good candidate for Rye. These things take time. The schools, for example, announced their process at the beginning of the year and made a decision at the end. Cities don’t follow that same calendar, since people become available at different times. From the outset, we said it would likely take until the end of the year.  

Q: Over the years, several of Rye’s city managers have lived in the community. Do you believe that should be a prerequisite of the job?  

McCabe: No. I want the best person for that job. I don’t think that needs to be someone that lives within the city.  

Nathan: I don’t think it’s realistic to make that a requirement. Being close enough to the community is important, commuting 90 minutes isn’t great, but living near enough to be engaged, walk around, and join the community matters. Living in Rye, cost-wise, does not line up with what city managers get paid, even at the high end. It’s unlikely you’d find someone here with the right skill set. Far more important is knowing how to do the job and being able to work with a community like this.  

Henderson: No, I don’t think so. I think there’s a requirement for a lot of positions that you have to live in Westchester or in New York, and you can’t live in Connecticut. I think that’s limiting to who we can get. I think at least you already have to live in Westchester, but I don’t think you have to live in Rye City yet.  

Mayoral Debate Reveals Divide Between Candidates

Q: Name one issue that is on your radar that hasn’t been talked about in public, in the press, or at the City Council level?  

Henderson: The downtown parking lots are terrible; they need to be paved. I really think we should find some money and get them paved. Cell service is pretty bad. I think we should be trying to figure something out; that’s a safety issue. If you can’t call 911 on your cell phone, that’s not a good thing. So, I think those are two issues that aren’t really talked about a lot.  

Nathan: A lot of our time has been on the city manager search. The other thing is litigation. It’s been a terrible waste that we have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money, and that means we’re missing out on opportunities. I think it would be far more productive to put our time and money into solving problems for residents and finding more collaborative ways to work. On the positive side, we have phenomenal management staff and volunteers. They are highly talented, and a lot of good work is getting done.  

McCabe: My big thing that’s not something that the other two candidates are talking about is the outsized role that these political parties are playing in selecting candidates and putting people on the council. I think we can do better than that by even considering not having the parties involved and just having people run for office. I think this is a smart goodwill community that doesn’t need to have sort of an outdated party structure tell the people who they should be voting for. That’s something that I want to talk about between now and the election.  

  

Q: The current mayor has been unsuccessful in calling for a review of the city’s code of ethics after a tree-cutting controversy, and subsequent ethics board ruling, that led him and three of his City Council colleagues to file a shocking lawsuit against the city in 2023. The current council voted the review down, but Councilwoman Jamie Jensen suggested doing it after a new council is installed in January. Do you agree with her?  

Nathan: I think the new council is going to have to lay out its priorities within its bandwidth. We have a very talented Board of Ethics, one member is a national expert, another was responsible for ethics at the Westchester DA’s office. If they were to call me up and say, ‘we need to do a review,’ we’d do it. But they’re not asking. Ethics are time honored. What was ethical then is still ethical now: operating in the best interest of the community, not your own self-interest.  

Henderson: I don’t see any reason to review it. I don’t want to get into the whole mess; I don’t see this as a rewarding issue.  

  

Q: You’ve centered your campaign on, among other things, reviewing the code of ethics when a supermajority of the current City Council believes it is not a priority. Why is reviewing the code of ethics so important?  

McCabe: I think having a code that was written in the ’60s and not revisited since then is something that we should look at. But I’m not making it central to my campaign. I’ve mentioned it on my website, but I haven’t talked a lot about it. But I would say I do think at some point after the election, we should come back to it. Maybe we review it and say it’s perfectly fine, but if it hasn’t really been reviewed thoroughly in however many years, I think it’s something that we should look at.  

  

Playland

Q: The Rye assessor made a decision to place Westchester County-owned Playland on the city tax rolls in 2023, after the county outsourced management of the park to for-profit company Standard Amusements. That decision resulted in litigation between the two governments, a court battle that the city eventually lost. Did you agree with the assessor’s decision at the time and what is the relationship like now between the city and county?  

Henderson: Well, there are a couple pieces of this. One, Rye has had a lot of costs involved with Playland first responder services. And so, when you had a for-profit entity with a 30-year lease running Playland for profit and getting free services. The county’s not paying, and I think that, you know, they need to be a better neighbor.  

Nathan: The assessor is independent of the council, and their analysis led to that decision. The basis was that a private hedge fund controlled the property, and that fact doesn’t exist anymore. What was important was maintaining the relationship with the county. I worked hard on that, designing interim settlements to cap the litigation and ensure everything was done in the interest of protecting Rye.  

McCabe: It’s hard for me to say if I agree with the decision. Clearly it was not a legally sound decision, but I think that’s behind us now, and I think the relationship with the county is going to endure. And I think it’s key to our progress. The management issues and its impact on Rye have been an issue for decades, and I think we have to work closely with the county and not have that [relationship] be adversarial.  

  

Q: Now that Standard has pulled out of managing Playland – by all accounts the amusement park suffered through terrible attendance and revenue numbers this season – in an ugly separation, are you concerned about the future of the park?   

Nathan: I’m excited for the management, because that part will be much better managed as a county resource. You can’t run an amusement park like Disney World when it’s only open a few months a year. You have to run it like a nonprofit, cover costs, provide the service, build a responsible reserve, and that’s what Playland has been doing for nearly 100 years. I didn’t like when Standard came in. Ken Jenkins reopened the gates, and now they’re rethinking how Playland will serve the community, which will be really good for Rye.  

McCabe: I’m not. It’d be great if there was one solution that could solve the management of the park. Clearly, there’s not. I will say this – it’s a Rye landmark, but it’s way beyond that. But it’s also really the county’s responsibility to manage it appropriately, and we have to make sure we work with them as best we can do that.   

Henderson: Yeah, sure. Everybody’s concerned. Running an amusement park, I don’t know if many governments are very good at it. I know there was a lot of talk before the whole Standard thing about privatizing it, but I don’t know what the county is thinking about it. We want to go back to the way it was. I just think we’re paying a lot of money to support that place for first responders, and I think we should get paid.   

  

Field Space

Q: What lessons did you learn, if any, from the divineness of the Nursery Field artificial turf issue and how would you approach similarly controversial issues in the future, if elected mayor?  

McCabe: The first lesson I learned is that we make better decisions when we listen to everybody in town. It took longer than a lot of people would have liked, but if that was the cost of doing this the right way, then I think that’s how we should do these kinds of things. In a situation like that, you do need to listen to everybody in the community. Some people weren’t happy that it was approved; a lot of people are. Some people I’ve talked to that were generally opposed to it, are pleasantly surprised by how it turned out.   

Henderson: I voted to put a hold on it, because people with environmental concerns weren’t being listened to. So, I was happy to keep the discussion going. I had some concerns myself, and it wasn’t until the end of the year that I finally was able to have discussions with people. And it really was the most logical place to put it, and so I came around. … My view was that, here we were having a big conversation in the community about lack of play space and playing fields.   

Nathan: That controversy started before I got on the council, and the way it was set up pitted one group of Rye residents against another. I would never approach an issue that way. You first get everyone together and agree on a common goal, like more rec space for our kids, and then look at resources and solutions. What should have been a broader discussion about recreation got isolated, polarized, and handled badly. The donors and the neighbors all acted in good faith. They should never have been pitted against each other.  

  

Q: You were a vocal advocate of installing artificial turf at Nursery Field. Where do you stand on turf at other potential sites across the city, considering the growing environmental and health concerns being raised over synthetic fields?    

McCabe: I think it’s a case-by-case basis. If we have funding to do it, if we have the public opinion to say, “yes,” if people make a case for and against it, and people on the council or Planning (Commission) make a recommendation, that is the way to go. But I wouldn’t say that every field should definitely be turf. There’s going to be places where we might have a field where artificial turf isn’t what we should do.   

  

Q: You ultimately supported artificial turf at Nursery Field. Where do you stand on turf at other potential sites across the city, considering the growing environmental and health concerns being raised over synthetic fields? Additionally, what support has the Nursery Field donor group provided to you and the Republicans?   

Henderson: If it makes sense, we can afford it, if the community wants it, if it’s not a crazy environmental hazard, and we can pay for it – then I’d be supportive. I think this field came out beautiful. I’m not wedded to grass versus artificial turf. In terms of manpower and financially, the [donor] group has been involved very little. No one ever promised me anything. And sure, we know a lot of these folks, one of them is running with me – James Fee. I hope they vote for me, but as of right now, it’s not like any kind of organized support.   

  

Q: You were one of the biggest proponents for rehabilitating the grass playing surface in place of pursuing artificial turf at Nursery Field. Are you opposed to artificial turf at other city fields?  

Nathan: I was a proponent of exploring natural grass because systems are available that can support it better than traditional methods and can be less expensive than artificial turf. I’m not 100% for or against artificial turf. On the school board, we put turf at the high school where it was the best solution, but left two other fields as grass. You have to consider what you’re trying to accomplish, alternatives, and community input. My focus was on making the surface the best it could be for the neighborhood health and safety.  

  

Q: The Nursery Field project was bolstered by nearly $3 million in private funding from a local donor group. The group also offered to potentially help fund rehabilitation projects at other city-owned fields. Do you plan to re-engage that group, if elected, as the city looks to further improve its field inventory?  

McCabe: We all want fiscal discipline, but we all want nice athletic fields and park spaces. So I think if these kinds of private-public partnerships are available, we vet them, we examine them, we’re clear about expectations – I think that gives us an opportunity to work with groups like that. I would absolutely look at a partnership like that, but not always. It’d be really nice if we could do any of these projects without having to ask people to go into their pockets. But I certainly would never push that aside if it was an opportunity in the future.   

Henderson: I don’t know. It’s not a conversation that has started yet, and there’s no discussion yet about re-turfing the other fields. If there is a desire and a need, sure, why not? I think it’s fantastic that we got $3 million for Nursery Field. And, you know, if people want to donate money, certainly, and why wouldn’t we accept it?   

Nathan: I am, for starters, certainly never against working with any group in the community that wants to support doing something. Donor groups can be very supportive where the city can’t, like the Rye High School field. But it’s incumbent on the mayor to lay out a comprehensive plan for the city first and deliver essential services. If a donor group wants to help with something the city can’t fully cover, they should be welcome and treated well, but their first voice should be telling us what they want.  

  

Q: The city lost out on an opportunity to purchase the Boston Post Road field space from the Thruway Authority. However, when Rye Country Day purchased the property for $5 million it included a legislative clause that requires public use – the language is not specific to Rye – of the field space for 29 percent of the available hours. Are you optimistic that the city will be able to gain access to those fields for its recreational programs?  

Henderson: They now have plans for expansion, so I think this is a good time to talk about that and maybe get some clarity around what that 29 percent means. I think this is a good opportunity to really have a discussion with Rye Country Day, and I certainly am all in favor of that. Obviously, the more field space we can get, the better off Rye will be.   

Nathan: Now we’re fortunate that it’s being owned and controlled by a nonprofit that is very dedicated to the city, but it would be better if the city had owned the property and worked it the other way around. It’s in the deed, there’s a usage requirement or availability requirement. I’m very optimistic. I’ve met with Randall [Dunn], the headmaster at Rye Country Day, a couple of times, and we talked about how to make this work for everyone. When everybody has an interest in success, you can address a lot of issues.  

McCabe: Cautiously optimistic. I’d like to think that Rye Country Day, and our elected representatives that were involved in that agreement would keep that. I’d like to think that 29 percent is the minimum, and I’d like to think that the city of Rye, given that that’s where the home base is, has the ability to utilize those fields. It’s going to be an impressive complex when it’s done, for sure, and having access to it at reasonable times a day and days of the week would be a huge added bonus for rec programs in the city.  

  

Politics

Q: If elected mayor, you would be tasked with leading a City Council full of closely aligned Republicans and Democrats. As a political newcomer and unaffiliated with either local party, how do you plan to implement any of your platform?  

McCabe: It really starts and ends with a willingness to work with anybody. And I think if elected, I would start day one simply ready to work with all six of the other people that are out there. Your points of view may have been very different from mine on a certain topic, but that doesn’t mean we can’t sit down today and say, “okay, this is the new topic, let’s figure out where the common ground is.” I’ll never come at an issue with, certainly any sort of political affiliation or a locked in philosophy.   

  

Q: How involved were Mayor Josh Cohn, Councilwoman Julie Souza, and ex-Democratic Committee chairwoman Meg Cameron in your decision to run for mayor? And how involved are they in your campaign?  

McCabe: I would say Julie obviously has donated to the campaign and has been supportive of my doing this for a while. There have been other people around town who have volunteered to help me, Meg’s one of them. I have no problem saying that. Josh (Cohn) appointed me to the [recreation] commission, but to the extent that I have any organized campaign at all, more than just a text message chain of five or six people, Josh is not involved with that. These are friends and volunteers from around town that have given me some advice and counsel. I don’t really have a campaign manager, I’m doing signs out of the back of my car right now.  

  

Q: Did you consider running for council instead of mayor?  Why wouldn’t you run for council instead of mayor as your first step into local politics?    

McCabe: This is a cycle where the mayor’s seat is going to be open and so, I felt like, with all the work that goes into running for any public office and all the things that come with it, I wanted to try to make the most difference and make the most of this opportunity. I respect anyone that runs for public office, and respect for sure anyone that sits on that council. I’ve also just spent too much time watching politically driven, factional driven in-fighting. I think we can make more progress if we don’t spend the time punting on things or check-mating other people. And I think this was my time to do that.  

  

Q: You and your political counterpart have been firm allies on the City Council for several years, how would you say you’re different now?  

Henderson: I think it’s good that we have a debate about who’s going to be the best mayor. And if Josh wins, great. If I win great. I hope it’s a race that everyone will look back on say, “hey, you know that wasn’t like the rest of the country.” We’ve got a lot of problems in the rest of the country, and Rye is like our happy place. We really don’t want that kind of stuff here. I think one of us will probably win and we’ll move on. We are friends. I think we’ll be friends after the campaign.   

Nathan: I think Bill and I have been good about collaborating around process. The council was broken, and we both worked to make sure there was a fair process for the community. But we have not agreed in our voting on quite a host of things. My votes have been all for sustainability inspired projects that are cost effective. Bill voted to shut down food scrap recycling, against the tree law, resisted the banning of leaf blowers, opposed Westchester Power, and he’s not interested in sustainability the way I am. We are aligned on process, not substance.  

Q: Your campaign has struggled out of the gate to keep pace with your Republican counterparts’ fundraising, as the GOP has significantly outraised your ticket. What do you say to Democrats worried about the state of the campaign?    

Nathan: I don’t think so. That was the first financing report, and it’s changed. We had our fundraising event after that report, so we’re able to cover everything we need. We count on grassroots support, and it continues to build and grow, there’s tremendous momentum. Donations are coming in regularly, and our budget is working. The Republicans have always raised their money at the outset; they operate differently than we do. We go around and engage with voters, and then they come out and vote with their vote and their dollars.  

Q: Why would you be a better mayor than your opponents?  

McCabe: I think given this fresh start that we talked about in January, I think stepping into that role without really favor to anybody except the voters would give me an advantage in trying to find that consensus. This is not about some big philosophy. For me, this is about a tangible way to make more things happen and to make more progress. Lots of debate. But then let’s move forward.  

Henderson: I think I’m better placed to be mayor than Josh, I think I’ll be a better leader. I think the council will be more diverse instead of being all Democrats, and I think that’s a good thing. Differences of opinion are a good thing. The way I looked at it was, I’ll serve four years on the council, and I think I can do more as mayor.  

Nathan: I’ve had to lead through this kind of tension before. During the Great Recession, we put in tax cap compliant [school] budgets while still delivering an amazing program, adding foreign language in first grade, new curriculum, more sports and clubs. On the council, when the Osborn zoning amendment was pushed through in secret, I listened to the community, and the settlement reflected what they wanted. You need leadership that is open, transparent, and accountable. I have that track record. No one else running has led Rye through a fiscal crisis.  

  

Environment & Flooding

Q: When you officially launched your candidacy, you highlighted the environment as part of your platform. Name some policies or initiatives you plan to propose, if elected mayor, to protect the environment?  

Henderson: We have a lot of laws here in New York. Whenever you hear about a project like, for example, the Rye Nature Center and what they want to do with the streams, there’s a ton of study that goes into that. And so I don’t have any specific proposals to further protect the environment, I think we do a pretty good job of it.   

  

Q: The city continues to face devastating impacts from flooding. Even though it has been identified as a major concern in Rye over decades, not much has been done. What more should the city be doing to increase storm resiliency and what do you tell flood victims who have listened to a lot of talk and very little action for years?    

McCabe: I think we need to, frankly, pressure the county to help us with what can be done at the airport. I think we need to really re-engage SUNY Purchase and the state and our representatives to help us. I don’t think there’s a solution, though. There just isn’t. This is beyond the city, the state, federal government’s ability to control at this point. We can try to make it better. We can be smart about our zoning and our planning laws. We can find some of these upstream solutions and really try and work together to try and get some of those implemented.   

Henderson: The stuff we can do locally, we should be doing, and that’s resiliency. Fixing sewer and stormwater drains and that sort of thing. But the long-term fixes are hard – and you’re talking about flood mitigation, you’re not talking about fixing the problem. We’ve identified some projects, we have done studies. One issue when probably the top project we identified was at SUNY Purchase in the woods to build the berms.  

Nathan:  I’ve stood in people’s flooded homes while contractors hauled out ruined furniture. I tell them I’m extremely frustrated too, and that what we need is a team committed to doing something, not just talking. We should be doing a code review with flood resilience as a requirement, and we should make permitting for raising houses easier. We’re replacing the bridge over Playland Parkway and supporting the Rye Nature Center in restoring land to marshland and removing an old bridge there. Some things you need to be patient for because we’re actually doing them, and some things you should be very unhappy and pressing us with. There is progress being made, but not enough. 

Election Day is Tuesday, Nov. 4.