There’s a new report of interest to taxpayers in Port Chester, Rye Brook and Mamaroneck—or anyone who can’t resist a title like “Review of Governance and Service Alternatives.”
The report is the result of a study on whether it could save money to eliminate the Town of Rye, a thin layer of government that collects taxes in Port Chester, Rye Brook and a portion of Mamaroneck. This draft analysis describes a scenario that is projected to generate savings on property tax in all three places by replacing the town with three coterminous town-village governments. There are also costs, in the case of Rye Brook.
Have a look at the study, posted here by consultants CGR, and let us know what you think. The study’s steering committee, made up of municipal officials, called the report merely a “starting point” for discussion and will hold a forum at 7 p.m. Nov. 28 in Rye Brook Village Hall. And if this is all new to you, you might want to start with our blog post on the five wackiest things about Rye town.
(ADDED: Read our Sunday Journal News article on the report here.)
Here is a summary of the fiscal impacts of the CGR’s model for dissolving the town:
1. Recurring savings of $25 on a $500,000 property in Port Chester, Rye Brook and Rye Neck by eliminating the Town of Rye property tax;
2. Recurring savings of $459 on a $20,000 property in that portion of the Village of Mamaroneck located in the Town of Mamaroneck (i.e. outside the Town of Rye) by eliminating the Town of Mamaroneck property tax;
3. Recurring savings of $52 on a $500,000 property in Port Chester, recurring costs of $22 on a $500,000 property in Rye Brook, and recurring savings of $72 on a $500,000 property in Rye Neck as a result of Town of Rye revenue reallocations, cost shifts and certain service adjustments that would be required by the elimination of the Town of Rye; and
4. One-time benefits from the disposition of certain Town of Rye assets and properties, valued at $1.42 million in Port Chester (the equivalent of $252 on a $500,000 property), $1.44 million in Rye Brook (the equivalent of $290 on a $500,000 property) and $0.80 million in Rye Neck (the equivalent of $199 on a $500,000 property).
3 Comments
In regards to number 2, how can taxes be lowered in another town, Mamaroneck, with the dissolution of the Town of Rye? I guess this is assuming the entire village of Mamaroneck forms its own town/village. This is fine but it also requires the additional steps of the other half of Mamaroneck seceding from the Town of Mamaroneck, which probably will incur some cost, lowering savings, not to mention a referendum and a vote, which also costs money. Playing the whole scenario out, this could become quite costly, perhaps as much as folding the entire village of Mamaroneck into the already existing Town of Mamaroneck. Why put the teaser of potential savings if so much more then simply the town of Rye’s dissolution has to occur to achieve it?
If Port Chester wants to become a city, why not merge with the City of Rye?
[...] She summarizes the fiscal impacts on the Sound Shore blog. [...]