1

Rye Town: 150 Years of Moving Government Closer to the People For the last 147 years - since 1868 when Port Chester incorporated as a village - the residents of TOR have progressively taken control of their own government, formed their own villages and separated themselves from the TOR:  Town of Rye (TOR) incorporated in 1660;  Village of Port Chester (VPC) incorporated; remained in TOR  Village of Mamaroneck (VOM) incorporated; Rye Neck remained in TOR  Village of Rye becomes the City of Rye; no longer part of the Town of Rye  Village of Rye Brook (VRB) incorporated; remained in TOR Since 1982, with the incorporation of the VRB, TOR no longer had any unincorporated area to govern; it makes no sense to have both Town and Village government. 2

Dissolution Process ( ) January NYS offers Local Government Efficiency (“LGE”) grants to municipalities in the State to study restructuring and consolidation of local government. July Elected officials from TOR, the Town of Mamaroneck (TOM), and the Mayors of the 3 Villages (VOM, VPC, and VRB) met to discuss restructuring local government.  While TOR Supervisor Carvin proposed to study the dissolution of the TOR and the Villages, it was quickly concluded there was no interest whatsoever in studying the dissolution of the Villages - particularly in view of the historic trend of forming the villages.  Consensus was reached to study only the dissolution of TOR; TOM withdraws from process 3

Dissolution Process ( ) January 2010 – TOR, VRB, VPC, and VOM agreed to apply to NYS for a LGE grant. March TOR, VRB, VPC, and VOM submitted formal grant application to NYS August NYS awarded TOR and the three Villages in TOR a $50,000 LGE grant for the “Rye Town Dissolution Feasibility Study and Village Alternative Analysis.” 4

Dissolution Process ( ) January TOR, VOM, VPC and VRB signed an Inter-Municipal Agreement (“IMA”) to form a Steering Committee to manage the Dissolution Study January to July Steering Committee launched an exhaustive RFP process and, after a thorough review of the five proposals that were received, unanimously selected the Center for Governmental Research (“CGR”) to conduct the “Rye Town Dissolution Feasibility Study and Village Alternative Analysis September Steering Committee holds Public Forum #1 at VPC to present the Dissolution process to the public; all elected officials attended and were supportive. December CGR issued Draft “Baseline” Report 5

Dissolution Process ( ) January 2012 – Steering Committee held Public Forum #2 at VOM to present draft Baseline Report to the public; all elected officials attended and were supportive. March to September 2012 – Steering Committee held four meetings to review Baseline report and to propose solutions for the villages to absorb TOR services, assets and liabilities after dissolution. Steering Committee agreed on proposed solutions that were incorporated into CGR’s next report. November CGR issued a draft of its “Governance and Service Alternatives” Report for public review and discussion 6

Dissolution Process ( ) November 2012 – Steering Committee held Public Forum #3 at VRB to introduce CGR “Governance and Service Alternatives;” all elected officials attended and were supportive. May 2013 to August the Dissolution Process delayed… It soon became clear that CGR’s proposal solution for separating Rye Neck from TOR would not happen since part of VOM is in TOM. The removal of Village of Mamaroneck residents from TOM tax rolls would mean higher taxes for the rest of TOM, and therefore it would be wholly unrealistic to expect TOM residents to vote in favor of higher taxes through the creation of a coterminous village/town. 7

Dissolution Process ( ) August 2013 – Research by Assemblyman Steve Otis indicated that in the case of dissolution of the TOR, the VOM could provide the limited services provided by the TOR directly to the Rye Neck section of the VOM. One option discussed was the use of a “paper town” organized within the village. Jan to Feb 2014 – VOM officials indicated the “paper town” option had drawbacks and requested a simpler alternative. Feb to April 2014 – Assemblyman Otis investigated the state constitution and discovered that there is no requirement that a town exist as long as there is a village government in the jurisdiction. This position has been supported by other local government experts in Albany and such a provision can be included in the state legislation authorizing a referendum. April Steering Committee re-engaged CGR to update its 2012 report. May 2014 – VOM reduced their participation in steering committee activities providing various explanations and dissolution process came to a halt. January VOM opted back in to the dissolution process 8

IMPACT OF DISSOLUTION (CGR 2012 est.) On $ 500,000 Property RecurringOne-Time Port Chester$ $ Rye Brook$ 3.37 $ Mamaroneck (Rye Neck)$ $

IMPACT OF DISSOLUTION (CGR 2014 est.) On $ 500,000 Property RecurringOne-Time Port Chester$ $ Rye Brook$ $ Mamaroneck (Rye Neck)$ $

NEXT STEPS January to March Steering Committee to finalize outstanding Dissolution issues and instruct legislature to produce Home Rule legislation for Town Dissolution April Legislation is produced. May All three villages boards and the Rye Town Council review proposed legislation and vote to let their residents decide on whether TOR should be dissolved May/June “Home Rule” legislation put before the NYS Legislature November 2015 – Rye Town voters vote on Town Dissolution. Four separate votes will be held – one in each village and one in TOR as a whole. All need to pass. January to December 2016 – If the Resolution were to pass there would be a 14 month transition period to effect and execute on the formal Dissolution of Rye Town. December 31, 2016 – TOR dissolves 11

Rye Town Dissolution Let Rye Neck Citizens Vote Let Rye Neck Citizens Decide 12