To the editor:

In March 2019, voters in the Village of Pelham approved a proposition to move village elections to November. The lack of contested elections since 2019 strongly supports a “no” vote on Proposition 3.

Proponents of Proposition 3 have emphasized increased voter participation. The ultimate goal to be achieved, however, is different; it is the best possible governance, and the two are not always synonymous. Local governance benefits significantly from having contested elections because they allow ample debate on the principal issues. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and with little coverage of local issues generally, it is only contested elections that bring out the sun. Moving the election date to November will ultimately result in fewer contested elections in Pelham Manor, just as it has in the Village of Pelham.

As then-Village of Pelham Mayor Michael Volpe and then-Trustee Pete Potocki noted in 2019, November elections mean that three village trustees are up in even years, and the mayor and the other three in odd years. (In the Manor, it would be two in even years, and the mayor and the other two in odd years.) It is generally agreed that Democratic turnout in New York is much more pronounced in even years (presidential election and mid-terms), and Democrats hold a registration advantage. Because there is agreement that a November election date brings out more Democratic voters, and because it is reasonable to infer that many of those voters who do not vote in March elections will mark their ballots across the “A” Democratic party line (given that it is national issues that are bringing them out), moving the election date to November gives Democratic candidates a significant advantage for half the trustee seats.

In order to have any chance of making a difference, therefore, non-Democratic candidates have to sweep the off-year elections, including the mayoral vote. That is a very tall task given the registration difference, and it is therefore not surprising that there have been no contested elections in the village since 2019.

So what about the Village of Pelham Manor?  The move to uncontested elections will take longer because the Manor has been a Republican stronghold. It is reasonable to infer, however, that November elections would give Democrats a very significant advantage for the two trustee seats up in 2026. In terms of the off-year, 2025 will no doubt be very contested. However, all it will take to shift to a likely Democratic majority in 2026 is one Democratic victory at the trustee level in 2025. There would likely be another contested election in 2027, but if Democrats hold a majority going into the 2028 election, the combination of new voters trending Democratic and a presidential year could make 2027 the last significantly contested election year in the Manor for the foreseeable future. It is difficult to recruit candidates for what is a massively under-compensated time commitment when there is no real chance of winning.

The lack of contested elections has not been good for the Village of Pelham, as a few examples will show.

In 2022, the village leadership extended the development-friendly “floating zone” to 2028, despite the effects of the current construction on parking and traffic downtown and in nearby residential areas, and when development’s effects on the village’s already overburdened sewer infrastructure remain unclear.

Village of Pelham leadership proceeded, at no little taxpayer expense, with an eminent domain proceeding against the school district for the use of land at Julianne’s Playground, making village taxpayers fund both sides of the legal proceeding and disenfranchising school district residents in both villages from a statutorily provided vote.

In 2022, the village distributed new garbage toters to all village residents, which village leadership described numerous times as “free.” The village’s most recently audited financial statements, however, contain a debt line item of $400,000 for “toters for garbage collections.” And although village leadership stated that the “free” wares would be less physically demanding because they work with garbage truck mechanical arms, every time I see garbage being collected (which is frequent), it is the old fashioned way.

Similarly, Village of Pelham Mayor Chance Mullen recently told the village of the restoration of its high credit rating, without disclosing that village debt has increased from $5.27 million in May 2019 to $10.4 million. Some of this debt is being used for current expenses like paving in addition to long-term projects (where it may, given the circumstances, be appropriate). As the Pelham Examiner has noted, much of the new debt has been authorized in July and August, where people’s attention is elsewhere.

The village’s website features the Sustainable Westchester electricity supply program, without disclosing, as has one Democratic supervisor, according to the Westchester Rockland Journal News, that the rates are currently, and have been generally since 2019, substantially higher than Con Edison’s rates. (Unlike in the Manor, Village of Pelham residents are forced into the higher rates unless they opt out.)

Village of Pelham Manor residents have had the benefits of two recent highly contested elections (2021 and 2024). They should not toss those benefits away this November.

Arthur Long

165 Boulevard