This bill authorizes the Town of Chester in Orange County to create a community preservation fund by local law. The fund would be financed at a minimum by revenues from a new local real estate transfer tax, and could also receive other local revenues, gifts of land interests, and interest earnings. The bill limits use of the fund to preserving community character through land conservation and related purposes, including open space, parks, farmland, wetlands, scenic areas, wildlife habitat, historic places, shoreline, forest land, public access, and greenbelt projects. It also allows the town to use the fund to support a transfer of development rights program and to manage and steward acquired interests, with a cap that no more than 10 percent of the fund may be used for management and stewardship.
The bill also creates a new article in the Tax Law specifically for a Town of Chester real estate transfer tax. The town board would be authorized to impose a tax of up to three-quarters of one percent on real property conveyances, subject to a mandatory referendum, and only after the preservation fund is established. The tax would apply to most transfers of real property interests in Chester, with detailed definitions, exemptions, filing requirements, collection procedures, refund rules, secrecy provisions, and judicial review procedures modeled on New York’s existing transfer tax framework. Revenues from the tax must be deposited into the preservation fund and used solely for the fund’s purposes. The tax article is temporary and would expire on December 31, 2045.
The bill would affect the Town Law and Tax Law by creating Chester-specific authority that does not apply statewide. It would give the town new powers to acquire land or conservation interests, adopt a preservation project plan, create an advisory board with conservation and farming experience, and restrict the disposition of land acquired with fund money. It also includes protections for farmland and requires public hearings before acquisitions. In practical terms, the bill would shift local land-use and conservation financing in Chester toward a dedicated, voter-approved transfer-tax revenue stream.
The overall sentiment in committee appears strongly favorable. The bill advanced unanimously or near-unanimously through the Local Governments, Codes, and Rules committees, and passed Ways and Means with only three nays. That voting pattern suggests broad support for the concept of local conservation financing and the town-specific tax mechanism.
The main points of contention are likely the creation of a new local real estate transfer tax and the potential impact on property transactions, especially residential and development-related transfers. The bill addresses some of those concerns by including exemptions, credits, and a mandatory referendum, and by prioritizing farmland preservation while limiting administrative spending. Another possible issue is the bill’s specificity to one municipality, which may raise questions about precedent for other towns seeking similar authority.
The bill would amend the Town Law to add a new Chester-specific community preservation fund mechanism and amend the Tax Law to authorize a local real estate transfer tax in the Town of Chester. It would create new local procedures for funding, advisory review, project planning, land acquisition, and long-term stewardship, while also establishing tax collection, exemption, refund, secrecy, and judicial review rules tied to the new tax. The legislation would directly affect property owners, buyers, sellers, and local government administration in Chester, and would sunset the tax article in 2045 unless renewed.
Committee action indicates broad support for the bill. It was reported favorably out of Local Governments, Codes, and Rules, and Ways and Means advanced it with only three negative votes before Rules reported it favorably. The absence of recorded committee transcript objections and the strong vote margins suggest the bill was generally viewed as a local conservation and planning measure with limited opposition.
The likely areas of disagreement are the new transfer tax and its effect on real estate transactions, as well as the town’s authority to dedicate revenue to land preservation rather than other local needs. Some may also question the administrative complexity of the new tax regime and the precedent of granting town-specific taxing authority. The bill responds to these concerns by capping the tax rate, requiring a mandatory referendum, providing exemptions and credits, and limiting spending to preservation-related purposes, with farmland preservation given top priority.