Unifying Pelham’s two villages and one town should be goal of all municipal officials
To the editor:
Pelham unification just naturally appeals to many people. The continued division has its defenders. I doubt that either perspective is dependent on some mathematical calculation. People’s’ attitudes rarely are.
The original three villages in the town were incorporated in the 1890s to provide neighborhood services in the different population centers in Pelham that the town taxpayers, through the town council, were unwilling to pay for. It was the horse and buggy era, and even a few blocks were a time consuming distance if you needed a policeman or fireman. One hundred years ago, we had three train stations and three police lock-ups. Time moves on. Since 1975, we are down to two villages and two lock-ups and one train station.
Is there any good reason why we have three municipal governments in Pelham? The defenders of the present set up have their own reasons—whatever they may be. After 70 years in Pelham and having owned homes in all three original villages and in the new Village of Pelham, I have my attitude. Now and for the greater part of my life, I have lived in Pelham Manor. I am here because I like it here, as I liked it in the other villages while raising a family. In fact, I just like being anywhere in the town. I’m content with one school district, one chamber of commerce, one little league and one Junior League.
So that’s my attitude. As a result, I think unification should be the goal of each of the 17 incumbent municipal officials. Having two or three of everything in the smallest town in the state of New York is inefficient and expensive. I know the very substantial benefits of unification from my years in village and town government. But it is my attitude that animates me.
Michael Treanor
Former Town Supervisor
622 Pelhamdale Ave.
David Joachim • Nov 9, 2020 at 10:44 am
Re-upping my report from a couple of years ago on this. Among my findings: The Village of Pelham debt that is so often cited as problematic is overstated: https://davidjoachim.com/pelhams/
Adam Ilkowitz • Nov 7, 2020 at 12:49 pm
I’ve lived in PM for 5 years and never understood the opposition to a merger. But now I do.
My gut (emotions) argue for merger; there will be cost savings in total. I always assumed the money could “worked out.” When VoP was forced to cut trash service, it was a factual wake up call.
The higher taxes, debt, and reduced services mean this would not a ‘merger of equals.’ If the VoP gets its financial house in order, and the gap is smaller than it is now, I’d be back on board.
But as Ferdinand said, it’s possible the Schools are a richer and more appropriate target.
Ferdinand Spucci • Nov 6, 2020 at 9:42 pm
When the question of merging occurs as it regularly does, those in favor neglect the fact that Pelham Manor has significantly better services than the village of Pelham. Just as an example, an emergency call to Pelham Manor police results in an average of 90 seconds. The Fire department is without peer and we still have garbage pick up twice a week. As Mr. Breidbart wrote, Pelham Manor residents would have higher taxes as a result of the merger and most assuredly receive no additional benefit.
If the townspeople really want to save money, they would consider the most expensive item on our tax bill… the school system. We could save a fortune and actually wind up paying less in property taxes if we were to merge the Pelham School District with New Rochelle or Mt. Vernon. A quick glance at the alumni from either of these school systems shows that the quality of education is excellent.
If you don’t want to reduce the most obvious cost to taxpayers, just drop the nonsense of “saving money” by merging the villages. Pelham Manor is well run with excellent staff thank you and I, for one, do not want that to change.
Bryan Cover • Nov 6, 2020 at 9:09 pm
As a new resident to Pelham, I completely agree with the sentiments and opinions expressed. Is there a movement to make this happen? How do I get involved? Upon moving here, this was one of the ideas that I wanted to see happen. Thanks!
Emily Pauley • Nov 6, 2020 at 8:39 pm
I was told by a fellow Manor resident that this was considered a few years back but the Village has so much debt that the Manor could not justify merging. The tases would increase because of this and other factors (lot sizes and number of homes in the manor compared to the village). And I’d say most residents live in Pelham Village/Manor 20 years not 10 as said above because they are here to send their children through the public school system and normally have a few children.
I’m all for considering the merge as I agree the duplication of services create an a duplication of expenses. I am also aware that I am paying a lot in taxes and would not be willing to pay more for what I see a decrease of services.