One Last Look at Money in the 2026 Greenburgh Supervisor Primary

We now have the updated campaign finance disclosures for the 2026 Greenburgh Town Supervisor primary. This bar chart visualizes fundraising in calendar year 2026 for Paul Feiner and Barry McGoey. I'm also including the Greenburgh Democratic Party Committee in these charts as the Committee played an active role  - maybe the leading role -  in McGoey's campaign. Not all Greenburgh Dem Committee fundraising here was focused on the campaign, but most certainly was gathered for this effort.  

Among the individual, itemized donors, Feiner had 98 donors residing in Greenburgh who gave $16,961.  McGoey had 64 itemized Greenburgh donors who gave $15,575

Outside Greenburgh: Feiner had $2,050 from itemized donors.  McGoey received $19,608 in itemized donations from non-Greenburgh residents. Nearly all McGoey's Union, PACs and business donations came from organizations with non-Greenburgh addresses. However, the Teamsters office located in Elmsford gave the Greenburgh Democratic Party $11,000 presumably to support McGoey's campaign.  About 26 donors gave to both McGoey's committee and the Greenburgh Democratic Party during this time frame. 

Most of the consultants and bookkeeping spending certainly went for mailings, especially the Greenburgh Dem Committee allocations to North Shore Strategies.  The Greenburgh Democratic   Committee spent $42,000 on the campaign but still increased their account by $3,500 during the campaign season, I'm assuming that a significant portion of the money that the Committee raised - including during their annual fundraiser - went toward expenditures for McGoey's campaign. 

For context, here is a comparison of this 2026 campaign with spending in Feiner's three previous primary challenges. Unfortunately, I don't have the campaign finance filing for the Greenawalt primary in 2005 that nearly toppled Feiner.   The second bar graph shows how much money Feiner had in his campaign account when the primary season started.  It initially looked as though 2026 was the year to challenge Feiner with his account so depleted entering the campaign, but Feiner had an ace up his sleeve: he had $42,000 stashed away in federal campaign from his congressional campaigns against Ben Gillman in 1998 and 2000 that he shrewdly transferred over to this state campaign account. However, as Feiner ended the campaign with $32,187 in his state campaign account, he didn't end up needing most of this money after all.  

So it is interesting to see that the candidates themselves did not spend impressive amounts on this campaign. With numbers adjusted for inflation, McGoey spent less than Feiner's previous challengers.  Feiner spent in real dollars the least he has invested in any of these four campaigns.  The expenditure of the Greenburgh Democratic Party, however, in this campaign raised spending to a new level - although still less than Berger's spending in 2007 when adjusted for inflation. I can't really tell how much the Greenburgh Democratic Party spent in previous races against Feiner - expenditures can be identified that look like campaign spending - but those amounts do not come close to the $42,000 allocated by the Committee in the 2026 primary.to support McGoey. 

The 2026 Greenburgh Democratic Primary for Town Supervisor: Looking at the Numbers

Paul Feiner won again. He started his first two-year term as Greenburgh Supervisor in Jan. 1992 - you do the math. This was Feiner's 5th contested primary this century. While Feiner won comfortably, McGoey gave Feiner the toughest challenge the incumbent has faced since Bill Greenawalt in 2005, more than twenty years ago. Feiner's margin of victory has slipped in each of his four most recent primaries.

This map visualizes the comparative performances of Feiner and McGoey in each of Greenburgh's 79 electoral districts;

 

Turnout was unprecedented: in Feiner's four previous 21st century primaries, the highest total turnout was 6,507 back in 2007. This 2026 primary exceeded that 2007 primary's turnout by more than 1/3 with 2,314 additional voters. This record turn out came in both the villages and unincorporated Greenburgh, but not proportionately: the villagers' voting total of 4,335 was 58% higher than in 2021 - the previous high number. The record turnout in unincorporated Greenburgh, however, was just 17% higher than the previous peak in 2013.   This balance between village and unincorporated voters was much closer than ever before. In 2026, village voters comprised 49% of the primary electorate while in 2021 it had been 43%. As villagers comprise 50.4% of Greenburgh's registered Democrats, villagers are, for the first time, voting for town supervisor in numbers nearly proportionate to their actual population. 

Turnout by electoral district:

 

This balance in voting numbers between villagers and unincorporated resident also extended to turnout percentages. In a surprising development, turnout among village Democrats at 23% nearly equaled turned out among unincorporated Democrats at 24%.  
Turnout by % of registered Democrats in each electoral district

   

Low-stakes but enthusiastically voting village residents have their own mayors and village government toward which they pay the bulk of their municipal taxes. The Greenburgh Town Board administers a few services for the village residents. The Town Board, however, administers all municipal services for unincorporated residents. While the villages contain approximately 50% of the town's population and 50% of its tax assessable property, villagers pay less than 8% of all the property taxes collected by the town. The other 92% of collected property tax revenue is paid by the town's unincorporated residents. We are approaching the troubling scenario where village voters - who individually pay 1/13th of the property tax rate paid by unincorporated residents to the town (0.4628/1000 v. 5.5038/1000)- threaten to determine the supervisor and composition of the town board contrary to the intentions of the majority of unincorporated residents (this concern is heightened when realizing that about 80% of the town's Black population lives in the unincorporated area.) 

Although Feiner won four of the six villages in Greenburgh, he lost the village vote for the first time this century, driven by McGoey's success in Dobbs Ferry (63%) and Hastings-on-Hudson (57%). In the previous four primaries this century, Feiner had always won both the villages and unincorporated Greenburgh. 

Feiner, however, outdid his previous performance in unincorporated Greenburgh. reaching 66%, his highest percentage, and vote total, at nearly 3,000. Predictably, Edgemonters rejected Feiner, by giving McGoey 69% of their vote. Feiner received nearly 73% in the vote in the rest of unincorporated Greenburgh.

Is Feiner beatable? By winning the villages, McGoey is the first Feiner opponent to win one of the town's two sections. McGoey's achievement in the villages is evidence of the concerted efforts of the Greenburgh and Westchester County Democratic committees, which managed and financially supported this campaign. Whether a candidate can be found to also appeal to voters in Hartsdale, Fairview and the unincorporated areas of the Ardsley and Valhalla school districts is the remaining challenge.