STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE A. RAND  

Regarding the Report of the Coterminous Committee
Delivered to the Rye Brook Board of Trustees
January 29, 2004

I am disappointed that the Coterminous Committee’s Report has been put on tonight’s agenda.  Unfortunately, because the presentation was a last-second addition to the Board agenda, very few village residents had the opportunity to question the Committee members about its findings, its conclusions or recommendations.  Indeed, at Village Hall, the only members of the public who are here tonight (aside from seven of the eight members of the Coterminous Committee) are  Rye Town Supervisor Morabito, Rye Town Council member Borrelli and one or two other souls who braved the cold.

It is ironic that despite the publicity the Committee and its Report got  - - in numerous articles in The Westmore News, The Journal News, The Item and The New York Times - - this presentation is getting such low-visibility “air time.”  And no surprise.  After months of hard labor the Committee came up with a not so startling conclusion:  “There is no strong financial incentive to become a coterminous town/village.”

When I first met with some members of the committee, including its chairman, Paul Rosenberg, I warned about being seduced by the promise of the revenues that might be generated by having Rye Brook become a town/village.  I also said that the critical issue would be the expense side of the ledger…how much would it cost Rye Brook to become a town/village?

I felt that leaving aside the practicality of actually being able to create a town/village without the concurrence of Port Chester and other governmental bodies...a highly dubious prospect at best…it would be the fiscal issue that would probably dictate whether it would be economically viable to create a town/village, and it would be incumbent upon the committee to demonstrate the overwhelming economic benefits that would accrue to a Town/Village of Rye Brook.

The Report defends its conclusion that financially the formation of a town/village would be, in the Report’s language, a “wash.”  I beg to differ.  As the report’s own figures indicate, there would be a net financial loss to Rye Brook if you assume we were already a town/village and took the Report’s financial statements on a pro forma basis. Mind you, these figures are being based at a time when our revenues from mortgage recording taxes were at an historic high.  Those revenues are already going down, and the concept that the loss of revenues will be offset by the interest income that Rye Brook will “earn” on the float from its tax collecting efforts (a function, by the way that Rye Brook  would have to assume if we became a town/village) is not a certainty, especially at a time when interest rates are at a 40 year low with the Fed  not seeming to be inclined to get into an active rate-raising mode. But why quibble about the economics?  There is a larger issue at stake. 

This whole coterminous process has been anything but a benign exercise; it has generated a great deal of concern and consternation within the community and has cost our village much in terms of good will, especially with the officials in Port Chester and the Town of Rye.  Indeed, one of the Committee’s own members was quoted as saying “If we keep indicting Rye Town, we are going to get less cooperation.”

 Whether it be seeking cooperation in building athletic fields, or using Rye Town facilities such as Crawford Park or its beach, or working together with Port Chester and Rye Town officials to find a new owner for the Altria/Philip Morris/Kraft building on Westchester Avenue, we will have to cooperate with our neighbors in order to achieve what needs to be done for Rye Brook.

Finally, the Coterminous Report recommends that the Board of Trustees pass two resolutions:  one of which may violate State law as it relates to one municipality’s oversight of another governmental body. Indeed, the Mayor and the Village Attorney said as much at the meeting by confirming that the village does not have the authority to provide the kind of oversight the committee is recommending..

The other recommended resolution calls for the taxpayers of Rye Brook to have in the words of the Report,  “an abstract of this report printed and mailed to all Village residents.” The Village of Rye Brook did not send its Vision Plan to residents, until it was accepted by the Board of Trustees (following three public sessions); this Coterminous Report, has not even been accepted by the Board yet is already posted on the Village’s official website!

I agree with the suggestion made by Coterminous Committee member Richard Lubkin who advised that the Board of Trustees “terminate the coterminous investigation with the Report.” To that sound advice I will offer my own suggestion to our Trustees:  thank the Coterminous Committee for its work on behalf of the Rye Brook residents, table the Report, and then concentrate on to more productive and pressing matters

Back to Press Releases