Thank you Stacey for bringing to attention the new tax assessment model for Village taxes. I have a house built in 1908 and my taxes will increase by over $1,000 in 2026. I was deeply disappointed to learn Mayor Brian Pugh's Village taxes will decrease by over $1,700 annually. Will Mayor Pugh donate these savings to the Village for one year or in perpetuity?
All should welcome this breath of fresh air, this new blood, a new perspective for our village, that quite frankly, is past due. This ticket will provide all with a local village government that is looking out for our tiny village and not looking to score points for future political aspirations. Please ask your friends to follow VOC on Facebook and check out their website at www.voiceofcroton.org
Aside from their policy positions (which I don't think are supported by the vast majority of young people, or anyone who tried to buy their first house post-COVID), one thing I really dislike about the voice of croton candidates and their supporters, is the constant ad hominem attacks on the current mayor. You all constantly state or imply that the current mayor is up to no good. You want me to believe that Croton got rid of its village assessor because it would make the mayor's taxes go down by $1700 a year? Or that the mayor only acts while thinking about his own political career (which is kind of strange if you think about it. Won't his political career likely be benefited by doing things his current constituents want him to do?)?
Don't get me wrong. I haven't been here long enough to even vote in a mayoral election, I'm not defending the mayor per se. I just think voice of croton should try to run on its own merits and whenever I read what are clearly thinly veiled accusations of wrong doing, it reflects really poorly in my opinion.
Turning to more substantial matters, how can you be an advocate of our police, municipal and dpw employees, when these are exactly the types of employees that get priced out of living in the communities they serve? I'd love to hear some facts about whether new hires to any of the 'hyper-local' service providers in croton have any hope of buying a home here. Presumably, they cannot, and I'd like to hear what you intend to do about it if you are opposed building more housing.
Why do you think that any of the planned development would actually result in the local government employees you listed being able to live here? If they’re already unable to afford market rate housing, that’s not going to change as far as the planned market rate development is concerned. As for the affordable development, there is no local preference permitted for any of the affordable housing that has been built or is planned (note: no local applicants were selected for a unit at Maple Commons); to the extent that anyone local would be able to purchase an affordable condo by the train station, that would be pure luck, with the local applicant having been selected in a lottery that will include applicants from every surrounding county, all five counties of NYC and a couple of Connecticut counties as well.
Economic studies have shown that building housing of almost any kind, has knock on affects. We're in the middle of a housing crisis, we need to build homes.
But this is a question for the candidates. How exactly are you going to support these types of workers? Saying you're going to is nice, but how exactly?
Stick around for a while and you'll see what he is all about: himself. It started in 2012 or so when he and one of his friends (who now no longer lives here) cooked up a scheme to push a public referendum designed to move the village elections - formerly held in March - to November, under the guise of "cost savings." The then-head of the Croton Democratic Party Club (commonly referred to as the "Croton Dems") did not support this, and I believe publicly wrote that in The Gazette. In the end, the referendum passed because people were sold on the idea of "cost savings;" however, in the long-term, it did not save much in terms of cost, although it did achieve one notable thing: he and his friends started pushing the message of "vote Row A all the way" (Row A being the ballot line where all the Democrats are, from President of the United States all the way on down to Village Mayor and Village Board). Croton is a very left-leaning Democrat village, and historically, alternative parties are not successful; by consolidating the elections and pushing this message, it solidified the Croton Dems' power. You write that you "haven't been here long enough to even vote in a mayoral election," so you probably wouldn't know that the last six mayoral/Village Board elections have been uncontested. Sure, there have been some write-ins each year, but since 2019 there has been only one party listed on the ballot: the Croton Dems.
So now that you have the history, let's talk about the impact. What is the impact of having one group of people with one single ideology running things? (Hint: what you're seeing in Washington with one party in charge is exactly what we're all seeing locally, the only exception is the letter that comes after each person's name.) It started with small changes such as renaming the "public participation" part of Village Board Meetings to "public comment," which diluted the overall manner in which the citizens could have a significant part in their local government. Then, "public comment" was curtailed to only a certain amount of time at each Village Board Meeting, and if you happen to run over time, a buzzer rings and you're chastised. From there, "public comment" became a punchline. Over the last five years, there have been a significant number of plans and strategies (among other things, getting rid of the assessor, again under the guise of "cost savings") that have had the potential to affect each and every citizen in some way. Time and again, public comment and public hearings yielded enough evidence that many of those pressing issues were unpopular and that the citizens did not want the Village Administration to go through with those plans and strategies. And what happened? They (the Mayor and the Board of Trustees) did what they wanted to do anyway.
The good citizens of the Village of Croton on Hudson are tired of being cast aside, and as a result, we finally have a choice in the November election. Between the Mayor's typical arrogance (which has only grown since he became Mayor in 2019, mind you) and the straight up lies that we have been fed over and over again, the people are angry - and they have good cause to be, to boot.
If you're a supporter of 'voice of croton' I don't think you're doing their movement any good by constantly talking about the current Mayor. Even if he is a political evil genius who has manipulated things to his benefit and is currently ruling with an iron fist (which I strongly doubt), you still have to put forward a platform and ideas that people actually want and will vote for.
The "affordable" aka workforce housing that has been built and in the process of being built uses state and sometimes federal funding. A statewide or nationwide lottery is held to determine who gets one of the units. We saw this with Maple Commons. I think many people here in Croton would champion affordable housing for our first responders, DPW employees, our senior citizens, recent college graduates. But sadly, this is not the case and we learned this the hard way with Maple Commons...
I think the point is that any help our leaders could give, such as eliminating the RA 40 and RA 60 residential zones (RA 60 just recently created) and reducing the amount of property needed for new construction, or by reining in local spending and cutting property taxes, is not going to be achieved simply by permitting more development that will not be available to the people we would all choose to help, if given the opportunity to do so.
I think you make some good points in this and your previous comment. In this year’s village elections, in which everyone will be on the ballot and there will be a clear obligation to debate on both sides (but especially by the incumbents) it might be possible to have the detailed and serious debate about these issues the community really deserves. The Chronicle has requested of our local League of Women Voters chapter (anyone can make such a request) that it sponsor two candidate forums between now and November, so that all of the burning issues can be aired. The Chronicle will also be editorializing soon in favor of at least one additional Town Hall where residents can put questions directly to the candidates.
I don't think this is correct. We don't need to build housing tailored to individual groups, we need to build more housing and allow nature to take its course. There are definitely studies showing that any and all forms of housing help. If we allow high-end condos to be built, that takes some demand away from some high end single family homes, which takes away some demand from homes slightly less expensive, and so on and so forth all the way down.
VOC is not against development, you can ask them yourself. If MARKET rate housing is built vs. artificially reduced (affordable), which one will have a downward effect on rents? A potential renter can’t use affordable units as a negotiating tool when looking for a new rental and a rental unit owner doesn’t feel any competitive pressure from AH as well. So, I agree with your premise on building market rate housing with 10-20% set aside for affordable units, but at the right size and scope for the village.
Under the current model used by the village of public-private partnerships involving government money in which developers have to be essentially bribed into building affordable housing, that is probably true. There is even more resistance to other models of public housing which nevertheless have been successful in other parts of the country (and in NYC) and other parts of the world. I’m planning a story for the Chronicle about that, hope to get to it soon.
As I replied above, I don't think this is quite right. We need to allow housing to be built, and we don't have to dictate what kind to see the benefits to affordability across the spectrum.
What we've seen recently is two village-owned parcels (Maple Commons and Lot A) get sold without voter input and developed as (or proposed to be) 100% affordable housing. That's all well and good, I suppose, but it's a lot like dictating what type of housing can get built.
The question of whether the Board of Trustees should be able to sell village land without a referendum of the entire village, or whether village law should be amended to clearly require that, sounds like a potential campaign issue in the upcoming elections. I certainly plan to ask about that in upcoming Chronicle interviews with the candidates.
Thanks for publishing this piece. I’m glad that all candidates and parties will be able to share their view points.
I encourage anyone who hasn’t already done so, to follow the Voice of Croton Facebook page.
Additionally, log on and subscribe to their website: www.voiceofcroton.org to learn more and contribute to their campaign.
Thank you Stacey for bringing to attention the new tax assessment model for Village taxes. I have a house built in 1908 and my taxes will increase by over $1,000 in 2026. I was deeply disappointed to learn Mayor Brian Pugh's Village taxes will decrease by over $1,700 annually. Will Mayor Pugh donate these savings to the Village for one year or in perpetuity?
My guess is that he will do it once (and probably with great fanfare, too) and then very quietly never do it again.
I was wondering the same.
All should welcome this breath of fresh air, this new blood, a new perspective for our village, that quite frankly, is past due. This ticket will provide all with a local village government that is looking out for our tiny village and not looking to score points for future political aspirations. Please ask your friends to follow VOC on Facebook and check out their website at www.voiceofcroton.org
Aside from their policy positions (which I don't think are supported by the vast majority of young people, or anyone who tried to buy their first house post-COVID), one thing I really dislike about the voice of croton candidates and their supporters, is the constant ad hominem attacks on the current mayor. You all constantly state or imply that the current mayor is up to no good. You want me to believe that Croton got rid of its village assessor because it would make the mayor's taxes go down by $1700 a year? Or that the mayor only acts while thinking about his own political career (which is kind of strange if you think about it. Won't his political career likely be benefited by doing things his current constituents want him to do?)?
Don't get me wrong. I haven't been here long enough to even vote in a mayoral election, I'm not defending the mayor per se. I just think voice of croton should try to run on its own merits and whenever I read what are clearly thinly veiled accusations of wrong doing, it reflects really poorly in my opinion.
Turning to more substantial matters, how can you be an advocate of our police, municipal and dpw employees, when these are exactly the types of employees that get priced out of living in the communities they serve? I'd love to hear some facts about whether new hires to any of the 'hyper-local' service providers in croton have any hope of buying a home here. Presumably, they cannot, and I'd like to hear what you intend to do about it if you are opposed building more housing.
Why do you think that any of the planned development would actually result in the local government employees you listed being able to live here? If they’re already unable to afford market rate housing, that’s not going to change as far as the planned market rate development is concerned. As for the affordable development, there is no local preference permitted for any of the affordable housing that has been built or is planned (note: no local applicants were selected for a unit at Maple Commons); to the extent that anyone local would be able to purchase an affordable condo by the train station, that would be pure luck, with the local applicant having been selected in a lottery that will include applicants from every surrounding county, all five counties of NYC and a couple of Connecticut counties as well.
Economic studies have shown that building housing of almost any kind, has knock on affects. We're in the middle of a housing crisis, we need to build homes.
But this is a question for the candidates. How exactly are you going to support these types of workers? Saying you're going to is nice, but how exactly?
Stick around for a while and you'll see what he is all about: himself. It started in 2012 or so when he and one of his friends (who now no longer lives here) cooked up a scheme to push a public referendum designed to move the village elections - formerly held in March - to November, under the guise of "cost savings." The then-head of the Croton Democratic Party Club (commonly referred to as the "Croton Dems") did not support this, and I believe publicly wrote that in The Gazette. In the end, the referendum passed because people were sold on the idea of "cost savings;" however, in the long-term, it did not save much in terms of cost, although it did achieve one notable thing: he and his friends started pushing the message of "vote Row A all the way" (Row A being the ballot line where all the Democrats are, from President of the United States all the way on down to Village Mayor and Village Board). Croton is a very left-leaning Democrat village, and historically, alternative parties are not successful; by consolidating the elections and pushing this message, it solidified the Croton Dems' power. You write that you "haven't been here long enough to even vote in a mayoral election," so you probably wouldn't know that the last six mayoral/Village Board elections have been uncontested. Sure, there have been some write-ins each year, but since 2019 there has been only one party listed on the ballot: the Croton Dems.
So now that you have the history, let's talk about the impact. What is the impact of having one group of people with one single ideology running things? (Hint: what you're seeing in Washington with one party in charge is exactly what we're all seeing locally, the only exception is the letter that comes after each person's name.) It started with small changes such as renaming the "public participation" part of Village Board Meetings to "public comment," which diluted the overall manner in which the citizens could have a significant part in their local government. Then, "public comment" was curtailed to only a certain amount of time at each Village Board Meeting, and if you happen to run over time, a buzzer rings and you're chastised. From there, "public comment" became a punchline. Over the last five years, there have been a significant number of plans and strategies (among other things, getting rid of the assessor, again under the guise of "cost savings") that have had the potential to affect each and every citizen in some way. Time and again, public comment and public hearings yielded enough evidence that many of those pressing issues were unpopular and that the citizens did not want the Village Administration to go through with those plans and strategies. And what happened? They (the Mayor and the Board of Trustees) did what they wanted to do anyway.
The good citizens of the Village of Croton on Hudson are tired of being cast aside, and as a result, we finally have a choice in the November election. Between the Mayor's typical arrogance (which has only grown since he became Mayor in 2019, mind you) and the straight up lies that we have been fed over and over again, the people are angry - and they have good cause to be, to boot.
If you're a supporter of 'voice of croton' I don't think you're doing their movement any good by constantly talking about the current Mayor. Even if he is a political evil genius who has manipulated things to his benefit and is currently ruling with an iron fist (which I strongly doubt), you still have to put forward a platform and ideas that people actually want and will vote for.
The "affordable" aka workforce housing that has been built and in the process of being built uses state and sometimes federal funding. A statewide or nationwide lottery is held to determine who gets one of the units. We saw this with Maple Commons. I think many people here in Croton would champion affordable housing for our first responders, DPW employees, our senior citizens, recent college graduates. But sadly, this is not the case and we learned this the hard way with Maple Commons...
Um ok. I guess therefore it's impossible for our leaders to help our emergency and municipal employees afford to live here?
I think the point is that any help our leaders could give, such as eliminating the RA 40 and RA 60 residential zones (RA 60 just recently created) and reducing the amount of property needed for new construction, or by reining in local spending and cutting property taxes, is not going to be achieved simply by permitting more development that will not be available to the people we would all choose to help, if given the opportunity to do so.
I think you make some good points in this and your previous comment. In this year’s village elections, in which everyone will be on the ballot and there will be a clear obligation to debate on both sides (but especially by the incumbents) it might be possible to have the detailed and serious debate about these issues the community really deserves. The Chronicle has requested of our local League of Women Voters chapter (anyone can make such a request) that it sponsor two candidate forums between now and November, so that all of the burning issues can be aired. The Chronicle will also be editorializing soon in favor of at least one additional Town Hall where residents can put questions directly to the candidates.
I don't think this is correct. We don't need to build housing tailored to individual groups, we need to build more housing and allow nature to take its course. There are definitely studies showing that any and all forms of housing help. If we allow high-end condos to be built, that takes some demand away from some high end single family homes, which takes away some demand from homes slightly less expensive, and so on and so forth all the way down.
VOC is not against development, you can ask them yourself. If MARKET rate housing is built vs. artificially reduced (affordable), which one will have a downward effect on rents? A potential renter can’t use affordable units as a negotiating tool when looking for a new rental and a rental unit owner doesn’t feel any competitive pressure from AH as well. So, I agree with your premise on building market rate housing with 10-20% set aside for affordable units, but at the right size and scope for the village.
Under the current model used by the village of public-private partnerships involving government money in which developers have to be essentially bribed into building affordable housing, that is probably true. There is even more resistance to other models of public housing which nevertheless have been successful in other parts of the country (and in NYC) and other parts of the world. I’m planning a story for the Chronicle about that, hope to get to it soon.
As I replied above, I don't think this is quite right. We need to allow housing to be built, and we don't have to dictate what kind to see the benefits to affordability across the spectrum.
What we've seen recently is two village-owned parcels (Maple Commons and Lot A) get sold without voter input and developed as (or proposed to be) 100% affordable housing. That's all well and good, I suppose, but it's a lot like dictating what type of housing can get built.
The question of whether the Board of Trustees should be able to sell village land without a referendum of the entire village, or whether village law should be amended to clearly require that, sounds like a potential campaign issue in the upcoming elections. I certainly plan to ask about that in upcoming Chronicle interviews with the candidates.
I guess in order to run for office in Croton DEI credentials are a must have. Thank God our country as a whole rejected that last November!