Westchester County is known for some of the highest property tax rates in the nation. We expect to pay a premium for our well-maintained village’s excellent municipal services and high-performing school system. However, as our village embraces the addition of high-density residential housing, we will further compound a structural disparity that many of our residents are entirely unaware of. This disparity arises from a massive payment gap in property taxes between single-family homes and condominiums or apartment complexes.
While two residential units in Croton might share the exact same market value, a single-family home will carry an annual village and school tax bill two to three times higher than that of a comparable apartment or condominium unit. This disparity does not result from local tax assessor valuation decisions. Instead, it has been structurally mandated by New York State Real Property Law (RPL) Section 581. This statewide law is the product of a political dynamic that has existed for decades, born from the dominance of New York City’s housing development needs within our state's political structure. Under Section 581, condominiums and apartment houses are assessed for property tax purposes using a methodology based on the net operating income of their potential rental value, rather than their actual sales value.
Currently, the Village of Croton-on-Hudson has approximately 2,900 to 3,000 housing units. Of those, 2,350 are single-family residential structures, while over 550 are apartments or multi-family units, including condominiums. This equilibrium has been reasonably static over the years. However, our village leadership and state politicians want to significantly alter that balance in the name of affordable housing. They are planning to bring an additional 150 condominium and apartment units online, on top of the 67 units opened in our village just last year.
Two of these upcoming projects are not just 10% affordable housing, but 100% affordable housing initiatives. In the case of Maple Commons, a 100% affordable housing initiative subsidized with federal and state money, the project was further subsidized by the village through a Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement. This agreement created a property tax schedule even more favorable than RPL Section 581. Thanks to our Mayor, in collaboration with our State Senator for whom he works, the developer will pay just $75,000 a year in lieu of property taxes for the next 30 years, capped at a maximum 3% annual escalator provision for 33 residential units.
By comparison, the median property tax based on a median local property value of $712,900 is $14,300 annually per residential unit—the vast bulk of which funds our village operations and school district. Meanwhile, the derived annual tax for an individual unit in a small multi-family apartment or condominium is approximately $4,000 a year, and the implied annual tax per apartment in a mid-size complex sits between $2,000 and $3,000.
The core concern is that these 150 planned units, coupled with an unspoken plan for additional units at the Finkelstein property near the Senasqua Park riverfront gateway, will throw our single-family-dominated tax structure completely out of equilibrium. All residents—whether they live in a detached house, a townhouse, or an apartment—utilize the same village roads, rely on the same emergency services, and send their children to the same local schools. When a significant portion of the village's housing stock is taxed on an artificial rental baseline, the tax burden shifts heavily onto single-family homeowners.
Furthermore, real distress is being introduced into this equation by the village's failure to take the necessary steps to ensure appropriate infrastructure is in place. Are we confident that our fire suppression water infrastructure, sewage disposal systems, and stormwater management systems are adequate to meet the intense, additional demands that high-density residential structures bring to our village?
It is incredible that there has been no open public discussion regarding tax reform associated with this high-density housing expansion. In fact, just last year in 2025, the Village Board of Trustees voted to relinquish their exclusive authority to assess properties in our village. They abrogated their right to control local taxation methodology simply to save the budget equivalent of one part-time employee.
While we cannot change the existing tax structure applicable to our current community of apartment and condominium residents, we must immediately explore structural tax changes associated with any future expansion of high-density housing initiatives. It is the responsibility of our local government to ensure the long-term well-being and continuity of the residents who have invested in single-family homes in neighborhoods like Harmon. A failure to acknowledge that responsibility should create a groundswell of political change in our community.
John McKeon
While two residential units in Croton might share the exact same market value, a single-family home will carry an annual village and school tax bill two to three times higher than that of a comparable apartment or condominium unit. This disparity does not result from local tax assessor valuation decisions. Instead, it has been structurally mandated by New York State Real Property Law (RPL) Section 581. This statewide law is the product of a political dynamic that has existed for decades, born from the dominance of New York City’s housing development needs within our state's political structure. Under Section 581, condominiums and apartment houses are assessed for property tax purposes using a methodology based on the net operating income of their potential rental value, rather than their actual sales value.
Currently, the Village of Croton-on-Hudson has approximately 2,900 to 3,000 housing units. Of those, 2,350 are single-family residential structures, while over 550 are apartments or multi-family units, including condominiums. This equilibrium has been reasonably static over the years. However, our village leadership and state politicians want to significantly alter that balance in the name of affordable housing. They are planning to bring an additional 150 condominium and apartment units online, on top of the 67 units opened in our village just last year.
Two of these upcoming projects are not just 10% affordable housing, but 100% affordable housing initiatives. In the case of Maple Commons, a 100% affordable housing initiative subsidized with federal and state money, the project was further subsidized by the village through a Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement. This agreement created a property tax schedule even more favorable than RPL Section 581. Thanks to our Mayor, in collaboration with our State Senator for whom he works, the developer will pay just $75,000 a year in lieu of property taxes for the next 30 years, capped at a maximum 3% annual escalator provision for 33 residential units.
By comparison, the median property tax based on a median local property value of $712,900 is $14,300 annually per residential unit—the vast bulk of which funds our village operations and school district. Meanwhile, the derived annual tax for an individual unit in a small multi-family apartment or condominium is approximately $4,000 a year, and the implied annual tax per apartment in a mid-size complex sits between $2,000 and $3,000.
The core concern is that these 150 planned units, coupled with an unspoken plan for additional units at the Finkelstein property near the Senasqua Park riverfront gateway, will throw our single-family-dominated tax structure completely out of equilibrium. All residents—whether they live in a detached house, a townhouse, or an apartment—utilize the same village roads, rely on the same emergency services, and send their children to the same local schools. When a significant portion of the village's housing stock is taxed on an artificial rental baseline, the tax burden shifts heavily onto single-family homeowners.
Furthermore, real distress is being introduced into this equation by the village's failure to take the necessary steps to ensure appropriate infrastructure is in place. Are we confident that our fire suppression water infrastructure, sewage disposal systems, and stormwater management systems are adequate to meet the intense, additional demands that high-density residential structures bring to our village?
It is incredible that there has been no open public discussion regarding tax reform associated with this high-density housing expansion. In fact, just last year in 2025, the Village Board of Trustees voted to relinquish their exclusive authority to assess properties in our village. They abrogated their right to control local taxation methodology simply to save the budget equivalent of one part-time employee.
While we cannot change the existing tax structure applicable to our current community of apartment and condominium residents, we must immediately explore structural tax changes associated with any future expansion of high-density housing initiatives. It is the responsibility of our local government to ensure the long-term well-being and continuity of the residents who have invested in single-family homes in neighborhoods like Harmon. A failure to acknowledge that responsibility should create a groundswell of political change in our community.
John McKeon
excellent but they won't care. it's their version of redistributing the "wealth".
ReplyDelete