Pelham Examiner

Pelham Examiner

Pelham Examiner

Savings from consolidating Pelham’s villages and town needed to pay huge costs of storm sewer projects

To the editor:

With both villages facing massive flood control costs, I thought the following letter to the mayor of Pelham Manor might be helpful. That village has never studied the benefits of consolidation. Now may be a very good time. I have been through it with the Village of Pelham. It works for the taxpayers.

Dear Mayor Lapey:

It was a shock to learn that your engineering consultants put an $8 million price tag on partial steps to mitigate flooding in our village. God knows what a final price tag might be. The Village of Pelham engineering consultants have put a $40 million price tag on flood remediation in that village.

Neither village is in a position to go it alone. The Manor budgeted amount for flood remediation of $250,000 this year means decades of continued flooding. Finding millions of dollars in village budgets is not an option.

My suggestion is that the Town of Pelham marshal its resources by eliminating costs that are duplicative and devote the savings to flood remediation. Two of this and three of that is a luxury Pelham can’t afford. The seventeen village and town board members need to prove their value to the taxpayers by uniting.

On the back of an envelope, I can come up with $2 million in savings; namely, one administrator, one police chief, one fire chief, the five officers it takes to man one of the two police desks for a total of eight positions at a minimum of $250,000 per person for a total of $2 million in savings. That amount of money at 5% interest could raise $40 million. There are a lot more savings to be realized by applying business principles to the matter.

If you have a better approach, I would love to hear it.

Michael Treanor

622 Pelhamdale Ave.

View Comments (1)
More to Discover

Comments (1)

The Pelham Examiner intends for this area to be used to foster healthy, thought-provoking discussion. Commenters must provide their FIRST NAME and their LAST NAME. Comments are expected to adhere to our standards and to be respectful and constructive. As such, we do not permit the use of profanity, foul language, personal attacks or the use of language that might be interpreted as libelous. Comments are reviewed and must be approved by a moderator to ensure that they meet these standards. The Pelham Examiner does not allow anonymous comments, and requires a valid email address. The email address will not be displayed but will be used to confirm your comments. We will check to see if it works and may also request a street address if an email looks to be spam.
All Pelham Examiner Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • C

    Chris GanpatNov 24, 2023 at 10:29 am

    While this is a very thoughtful analysis, it is one sided, The Manor carries no debt and a majority of the school tax burden, which are a very heavy weight to us in the Manor, Pelham carries a heavy debt and is very poorly managed not only now but for years leading up to now. The long time residents of Pelham Manor understand, Pelham wants us to pay for everything with Manor budgets which are surplus, we are not interested, and as long as I’ve lived here which has just passed 30 years, we are understand this concept, it is a conservative mentality versus the lather, unless the homestead evens out with the property taxes, There are a lot of residents in the Manor and especially on the Manor Board Of Trustees, which we continue to elect officials, that will never want to merge with a municipality holding the debt of Pelham. In the best interest for Town of Pelham they should be most focused on building up the business district and filling in a lot of those empty store fronts. Opening more businesses, which can bring needed income (sales tax) back, more than a merge will help. We need businesses that can attract outside visitors to Pelham. Better restaurants also. Taxes are high enough on the Manor side and we are separate municipalities for a reason and very long time. Time for another proposition