Dissolving village could raise taxes for town residents

By Victor Whitman (vwhitman@th-record.com)
Times Herald-Record, October 01, 2008 [source link]

LIBERTY — It would pay Liberty village residents to dissolve their government.

Village taxpayers would save $364 to $1,315 annually in municipal taxes on a home assessed at $150,000 if the village were dissolved, a study of options released by a town and village committee concluded.

But dissolving the village would also mean higher taxes for town residents — anywhere from $114 to $422 in increased taxes on a home valued at $150,000 — and layoffs in the village.

Village residents in Liberty pay some of the highest taxes in the state. Convinced that taxes are choking businesses and driving people out of their homes, the town and village obtained $100,000 to study merger options. A summary of the findings has just been released.

The Hudson Group study concludes that dissolving the village brings the greatest savings, particularly if the town qualifies for $1 million in incentives from the state for assuming village services. If that money came through, village taxpayers would save an estimated $1,315 on a $150,000 home, while town residents would pay an extra $214.

But any move is bound to be controversial.

The Village Board must approve putting a dissolution proposition to the village voters. Town voters would get no say in a vote to dissolve the village. Mayor Rube Smith didn't return calls for comment.

If the village were to dissolve, the study estimates 11 of the 44 full-time village employees and 13 of the 19 part-time employees would lose their jobs.

The study also recommends a townwide property revaluation, a move that would probably lower taxes for village residents and increase taxes in the town.

A public meeting on the findings will be held 7-9 p.m. Oct. 16 at the Liberty Senior Center.

Hearings ahead on possible merger for Liberty

By Victor Whitman (vwhitman@th-record.com)
Times Herald-Record, September 18, 2008 [ source link ]

LIBERTY — Does it make sense to dissolve the Village of Liberty?

That's what a consultant and a joint town and village committee are trying to find out.

Faced with whopping tax rates and enticed by a big annual payoff from the state to merge, Liberty's two municipalities hired a consultant to study dissolving the village and smaller scale mergers of services.

Two years ago, led by former Supervisor Frank DeMayo, the municipalities jointly obtained a state grant of $100,000 and hired Hudson Group to compile a report. The Saratoga Springs firm has interviewed town and village employees and will soon release its preliminary findings. A joint committee that has met for the past year will hold public hearings in October.

While Supervisor John Schmidt and committee members Lynn Killian and Charlie Barbuti confirmed that one option under study is dissolving the village, they also emphasized that's just one option. A limited merger of services could be possible.

Even if the study finds dramatic savings in dissolving the village of 3,894 residents, trustees might not go for it.

The Village Board would have to agree to put a proposition with a detailed plan for dissolution to village voters. The majority of village residents would have to vote in favor.

Such a move would leave open the questions of what would happen to the police department, the courts, other village and town employees and the debts.

"It might not even fly," Schmidt said. "Things like that become awful territorial."

Mayor Rube Smith and Trustee Shirley Lindsley, a committee member, did not return calls for comment.

For years, village property owners have paid near the maximum tax rate allowed by state statute, a combined $34.04 per $1,000 for town and village in 2008, not including certain fees.

The state is offering a carrot of up to a $1 million to municipalities for merging, what is known as an Aide and Incentives for Municipalities payment. Committee members believe the town would qualify for close to the maximum payment, if the village were to dissolve.

Reader Reaction

chrply September 18, 2008 08:38 AM

They been talking about doing this for 10 years but every supervisor seems to pass it along to the next one to deal with.

blowthisclambake, September 18, 2008 07:32 AM

DO it!

 

Woodbury paid a bill for the village and got nothing in return

Guest Opinion by Richard Moomey
Times Herald-Record, September 16, 2008 [ source link ]

When people go to the store and pay for a product, they naturally expect to receive something for their money. Everyone would agree to this. However, when the voters of Woodbury went to the polls to vote for the formation of a new village, have they received anything in return for the average of more than $500 in new taxes it takes to run the new village?

The answer is no. Three town departments were moved to village status, a village lawyer was hired and a village mayor and board were voted for and installed.

There are no new services nor improvements to existing services. Nothing but new money to be spent on a village that wasn't needed.

The people who voted for the new village were led to believe that the formation of such a new level of government would guarantee that any future request for annexation of Woodbury land from a neighboring village would be impossible.

The truth is, the town board of Woodbury could have prevented any annexation request by simply voting no to such a provision. The only thing having a village board would add is that it, too, would have to vote no. If the voters felt they couldn't trust the town board to vote no on such requests, then there wouldn't be a guarantee an additional village board vote should be trusted either. The truth is, no board of Woodbury government would ever vote yes for allowing a neighboring village to annex Woodbury property.

Fear drives people to do things without looking into the consequences. The vote to install a Village of Woodbury was prompted by fear. Most people did not look into it too seriously, but believed what they were told, and the result was a knee-jerk vote for the formation of the Village of Woodbury.

The decision can be reversed rather easily and not out of fear but out of knowledge of the facts. Obtaining the signatures of one-third of the registered voters for a presidential election would be the first step, followed by a public discussion and then a vote to dissolve the Village of Woodbury and return things to the sensible normalcy of the original Town of Woodbury Board.

The result would eliminate any new taxes to support a Village with the assurance that any request for annexation of land would be denied by a conscientious town board. Since we all pay far too many taxes already, I'd say this is an offer it would be hard to refuse. Couldn't most of us use the extra money?

I encourage all thinking Woodbury residents to check out these facts with Village of Woodbury authorities. The facts speak for themselves.

Let us all encourage this move to return to the sole town board status that served the community diligently for many years.

Richard Moomey is a retired school administrator from Monroe-Woodbury and lives in Central Valley.

Reader Reaction

September 16, 2008 02:52 PM

I think Mr. Moomey better check his "facts". Perhaps the real question here is why hasn't the "sensible Town of Woodbury Board" REDUCED their budget accordingly, thereby reducing our Town taxes?? If anything should be dissolved it's the Town Board. How come the salaries of the Town Supervisor and the other board members have continued to rise when they're managing less departments? That's the real farce here!

September 16, 2008 09:46 AM

How about EVERY VILLAGE in New York have such a vote to answer the question - Do you want to contunue with the out-dated system of village government that requires you to pay additional taxes including salaries and benefits for a board that essentially duplicates all the services your town can provide?

 

Municipal schizophrenia reigns

MID-HUDSON: What do the towns of New Paltz, Monroe and Liberty have in common? The villages of New Paltz, Monroe and Liberty.

And in Liberty, no one seems to know quite why or how it happened; all they know is it doesn't work very well.

A handful of municipalities in the mid-Hudson suffer from an identity complex: there are two of them, a town and a village. And most people familiar with the complex say split-level government is frequently redundant, always confusing and administratively inefficient.

Which is why, periodically, good-government crusaders launch campaigns to have one or the other municipality terminated, co-terminated or somehow consolidated. Such efforts haven't worked in these towns, though Ulster County can boast one successful dissolution.

Confused newspaper reporters, tourists and efficiency experts may find them bothersome, but multiple-personality municipalities aren't going away soon, if ever. They have different beginnings but also a common validity: They still serve a purpose to the people within their often-mysterious borders.

When most of tiny downtown Monroe burned up in the big fire of 1892, its merchants decided they had enough proof the town couldn't provide adequate service to the village.

"Water was the big issue," said town historian Jim Nelson. "The town had no fire company; this was back in the days when people basically grabbed a bucket and ran to where the fire was."

Since those days, the town has seen two more villages sprout in its midst – the villages of Harriman and Kiryas Joel. You'll also find three fire departments. And three police agencies.

"It gets confusing," Nelson said with a chuckle. "Maybe one day they'll all get together … "

The Town of New Paltz had provided its citizens with more than 200 years of faithful service before a handful of downtown merchants decided an incorporated village within the town would be a good thing for them.

It's been that way ever since, and the argument has withstood repeated testing. "Oh, every 20 years or so people get all worked up, and it's put to a vote and it gets smashed down again," said Town Supervisor Carol Roper.

Roper has supported those smashed-down efforts in the past, but when she talks about it today, she sounds resigned to municipal schizophrenia, especially when the issues of police protection or water and sewer rates comes up.

The village survives because it still continues to offer villagers "a sense of identity." And, since only villagers are allowed to vote to dissolve or not to dissolve, the result will always be the same.

A check with the Village of Liberty in Sullivan County reveals a municipal mystery: No one seems to know the story of the town-village split.

Village Historian Delbert VanEtten said the village was established first and then the town. "But I can't tell you why, except they never really got along too well," he said.

Village Mayor Kevin Mullen didn't know either. "Sometimes I wonder myself. It seems to me more often than not, in the end, we're on different pages."

The cure for multiple-municipality personality disorder exists, and it's name is "Rosendale." Make that the Town of Rosendale. The Village of Rosendale officially dissolved – died – at the stroke of midnight on Dec. 31, 1977.

"It was done in the name of efficiency, yes," said Town Clerk Mary Ann Tapley.

Tapley said many towns have called for information about the Rosendale solution, but, by the evidence, few have taken it.

Barnicle clinches mayoral win in Monticello

By Victor Whitman (vwhitman@th-record.com)
Times Herald-Record, March 17, 2004 [ source link ]

Monticello – The village has a new mayor.

Democrat and Conservative Jim Barnicle thumped six-year Republican Mayor Gary Sommers by a 2-to-1 ratio in a raucous race to the end.

"The people have spoken," said Barnicle, 55, a former village trustee and a key accounts manager with Anheuser-Busch.

Sommers had turned off his cell phone and couldn't be reached for comment last night.

In the four-way race for two open trustee seats, Democratic Incumbent Vic Marinello was the walk-away winner.

Republican Brian VanDermark had a 47-vote lead over Democrat Jeff Sternberg. Long-time Republican trustee David Rosenberg was far behind in the vote totals.

The outcome of the second trustee seat could hinge on a court challenge.

The state Republican Committee yesterday filed a lawsuit, challenging about 100 absentee ballots, Election Commissioner Tim Hill said. Arguments are scheduled for Thursday in state Supreme Court in Sullivan County.

Hill said the challenge won't affect the mayor's race, and Barnicle will be sworn in as soon as the race is certified.

The hard-fought mayor's race was nasty to the end.

Sommers ran on a "no strings attached" slogan, raising fears that Thompson Supervisor Tony Cellini and Barnicle would dissolve the village.

Barnicle, a friend of Cellini's, has called for closer cooperation with the town. He wants to combine parks and recreation and grant-writing functions immediately; however, he's consistently denied he'd dissolve the village.

On Election Day, Sommers ran a big display ad in the Times Herald-Record, with a hand holding a puppet by the strings.

The puppet held a briefcase labeled "my opponent" and the hand, "the town of Thompson."

Barnicle said the scare tactics failed.

"They understood a positive message and, I think, recognize the effort I've put into the community through my volunteer work and associations."

Goodbye Greenwood Lake?

By Dave Richardson (drichardson@th-record.com)
Times Herald-Record, November 12, 2002 [ source URL ]

Greenwood Lake – It's an idea whose time has come, some say – dissolve the village government and allow Greenwood Lake to be absorbed into the greater Town of Warwick.

Proponents say doing so makes sense.

Village taxes have been on the rise while the village's tax base is stagnant. And, proponents say, many of the services paid for by village taxes could be provided at less cost and more easily by the town.

But the plan is, perhaps not surprisingly, proving to be a tough sell. Opponents say dissolving the village will shortchange residents and could weaken the village's community identity.

Jan Greenfield, a Greenwood Lake school board member and former Village Board member, is pushing the plan.

"It's a groundswell that's been building for a while because taxes in this village are getting out of hand," Greenfield said.

Village residents pay $39.97 per $1,000 of assessed property value in village property taxes. For the average homeowner in the village, that's $999.

That figure jumped 7.7 percent in 2002, with personnel costs – negotiated salary increases and benefits mandated by union contracts – and budget increases to the village's police department – which makes up roughly $1 million of the village's $2.56 million 2002 outlay – largely to blame.

Greenfield worries taxes will just keep going up.

"By 2007, we'll be at $50 per thousand," Greenfield said. "The village won't be able to survive financially and there will be tremendous demographic upheaval as people will be forced to leave because of the taxes."

Barbara Moore, the village's deputy mayor, said recent tax increases were tied to improved village services.

"For many years taxes weren't raised and the village didn't have many services," Moore said. "Now, residents have a lot more services and even though the taxes have gone up, the village is a nicer place to live."

Police services, garbage pickup, a village water system and department of public works are covered by village taxes, Moore said. Residents also enjoy library, ambulance and fire protection services.

What happens to those services if the village is dissolved is an open question.

"Are our taxes really going to go down if the town has to provide all these services?" Moore asked. "Dissolution is something to be considered but the discussion has to have legs."

Moore said dissolution could also put an end to Greenwood Lake's unique character.

"I like living in a village community," Moore said. "Here we are, 45 minutes from New York City, in a gorgeous valley next to a beautiful lake. That's what my husband and I moved to Greenwood Lake for."

Mike Sweeton, Warwick's supervisor, agreed.

"It's not just as simple as saying you're going to dissolve and your taxes are going to be lower," Sweeton said. "There's a cost in having an identity as a village. It's up to the people to decide if it's worth that cost."

Dissolving into Warwick would be ironic for Greenwood Lake, considering past talk in the village of seceding from the surrounding town, much of which is separated from Greenwood Lake by a mountain.

The idea surfaced most recently – then died down again – after Warwick voters approved a new property tax to raise money for open space preservation. Voters on the Greenwood Lake side of Mount Peter strongly opposed the proposal.

Currently, there are 932 towns and more than 450 villages in the state. Some 253 of those municipalities are in the Hudson Valley alone.

"That's more municipalities than exist in the entire state of North Carolina," said Mike DiTullo, president and CEO of Mid-Hudson Pattern for Progress, an economic think tank. The number of overlapping municipal jurisdictions and responsibilities often means expensive duplication of services, DiTullo said.

"That's one reason taxes are so high," DiTullo said. "A lot of these are wearing suspenders and a belt."

Still, dissolutions are rare. The last village in the Hudson Valley to dissolve was Ulster County's Rosendale, which voted to dissolve itself in 1978.

Greenfield wants a resolution to dissolve Greenwood Lake on the March 2003 ballot.

He plans to make his pitch to the Village Board at its meeting tonight.

"It's our village," Greenfield said, speaking as a taxpayer. "It's our taxes and, in the final analysis, it should be our decision whether to dissolve or not. We are at a crossroads, and, given all the implications, something has to give."

Greenwood Lake at a glance:

Odd fact: Linda Tripp, a key figure in the Monica Lewinsky scandal that ended in President Bill Clinton's impeachment, was arrested in Greenwood Lake in 1969. Then 19, Tripp was accused of stealing $263 and a watch worth $600 from two men at the now-defunct Long Pond Inn. She was charged with felony grand larceny but never convicted.

Consolidation, verbal combat on Monticello agenda

MONTICELLO: Amid the insults, Tony Cellini and Gary Sommers are still talking consolidation.

By Ben Montgomery (bmontgomery@th-record.com)
Times Herald-Record, January 23, 2002 [ source link ]

They went back and forth in a war of words yesterday, Thompson Supervisor Tony Cellini from his roomy office in the Town Hall and Monticello Mayor Gary Sommers from his J.J. Sommers repair shop on Broadway.

And it got ugly.

Using the media as a messenger, the two well-known local politicians who have been openly at odds for years hurled insults at each other for most of the morning, this time over recent discussions about consolidating their municipalities.

While the argument between the two is nothing new, with the possibility of three casinos coming to the town, the notion of combining services could mean relief for taxpayers in Sullivan County's most populous town.

Sommers said he's gotten Sullivan County Director of Planning Alan Sorensen investigating the possibilities.

But negotiating a deal on how to consolidate means setting aside the differences, and that may be tough to do if yesterday's go-round is any indication of what's to come.

A few days ago, in a local newspaper, Cellini called Sommers uncooperative.

So Sommers responded yesterday by faxing a letter to county media, calling Cellini "Ayatollah Bin Cellini," and labeling him a "career politician." Sommers suggested Cellini is trying to take over the village.

"Apparently, one of my additional duties is to now protect our community from the 'terrorists' who are trying to take away our legal choices to our own destiny," Sommers wrote in the letter.

But Cellini got a copy of the letter. He faxed the letter to the village clerk, asking her to pass them out to the Village Board members.

"He's sick," Cellini said. "He's mentally ill and he needs help."

And Cellini said he takes offense to being called "Ayatollah Bin Cellini."

"He may be hearing from my lawyers," Cellini said.

And round and round it goes. Both say they're ready to meet to talk about consolidating services. Neither says he will make the first move.

Cellini won't talk to Sommers without his board. He doesn't trust the mayor. Plus, he said, the town can't force the village to dissolve.

Sommers said he's willing to meet, but he wants to first investigate the possibilities – like dissolving the village to form just one municipality, making the village a city and expanding that city's limits to include the Kiamesha corridor, or combining the town and village to make one giant city.

Sommers said that investigation will probably take until March to complete.

Thompson, Monticello Ponder Consolidation

By Matt Youngfrau
The Sullivan County Democrat, January 18, 2002 [ source link ]

MONTICELLO — Government comes in many forms and layers.

The levels go from village to town to city to county to state to federal. In Sullivan County, the only local government entities are village, town, and county. However, one day, there may be a city in the county.

Over the last week, a great deal of talk has been happening over the possibility of the Village of Monticello and the Town of Thompson consolidating into one government and forming a city.

While it is only talk at this point, this is not a simple process. Many things have to happen before it would become a reality.

To being with, the village would have to be willing to give up its status. Talks would then take place between the town and the village about a merger, and if both sides agree to it, the state must also approve it.

A public referendum may also be called for and if approved, it would take a year to consolidate the two entities into one.

To do all this would be a very arduous process, but there may be another option for the two governments: working together.

The village and the town may make efforts to try to get along and work together in the best interest of their constituents. After many years of bitter feelings and icy relations, members of both boards seem willing to work together, but they are being very cautious.

“We will discuss it [the possibility of consolidating] at the end of February,” Village Mayor Gary Sommers commented. “The answer is more cooperation. We could buy and combine products together. It would be advantageous and save money.”

Thompson Supervisor Tony Cellini is not so sure. “The mayor hasn't been cooperative. The best thing is to work together. We work well with the Village Manager (Richard Sush).”

Sommers stated he would investigate the process and see exactly what is involved, and he plans to give the Village Board a report on it by the end of February.

Meanwhile, Sommers has offered to sit down with Cellini and meet every week and discuss issues that affect both municipalities.

“I'll meet with him as long as both boards are present,” Cellini responded to the offer. “It would be a good idea to assign a committee to study the situation. It would be made up of seven members, three from the town and three from the village, with an independent person, like a Jonathan Drapkin, to chair the committee.”

At this stage no formal discussions have taken place.

The town has a discussion on the matter scheduled for their next board meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 22.

Municipality merger the talk of the town

MONTICELLO: As casino talks go on, village-town merger comes back into focus.

By Ben Montgomery (bmontgomery@th-record.com)

Times Herald-Record, January 15, 2002 [ source link ]

If you ask Mayor Gary Sommers, "The City of Monticello" has a nice ring to it.

Why?

If the Village of Monticello merged with the Town of Thompson to become one city, the combined municipality could get a quarter for every car that parks at one of the three casinos that might spring up here.

It could collect sales tax from restaurants, hotels and gas stations.

Things like roads, water and sewer service and garbage pickup would all be run by one government.

There hasn't been a new city created in New York in more than 50 years, but talk of three casinos landing in Thompson has town and village officials here thinking about a merger.

And if they can't form a city, officials from both municipalities say they want to form one government and consolidate services.

"That seems like the most likely way to go," said Thompson Supervisor Tony Cellini, who said he's been talking about consolidating since 1975.

And there are plenty of pros and cons to go around.

Village property taxes (currently $4.05 per $1,000 of assessed valuation) would drop, while town property taxes (currently $2.24 per $1,000) would likely increase.

There would be additional police protection for town residents, who are now covered by the sheriff's department. But the cost of maintaining a police force – which now eats more than half of Monticello's budget – would go up.

The process of changing status is long and messy, but it boils down to two possibilities:

--Dissolve the village and have just one government in Thompson. This would require a vote by the Village Board or a public vote and would take effect one year after the vote.

--Form an entirely new municipality called the City of Monticello, which would have the same boundaries the Town of Thompson currently has, but just one government. This would require the approval of the state Legislature, a tricky process since lawmakers in Albany aren't ready to give up dollars they plan on scoring off sales tax generated from the casino boom.

Dissolving the village seems more likely, several officials said.

And it happens more often.

Ten villages have dissolved in the past 20 years, according to Edward Farrell, executive director of the New York State Conference of Mayors.

The Town of Ticonderoga and the Village of Ticonderoga, north of Lake George, merged in the early 1990s.

"I don't see any negative difference in day-to-day activities here now compared to when it was a village," said Michael Diskin, who was mayor of that village during the merger. "And we removed a layer of government, which has proved to be a benefit to the taxpayers."

That's what Cellini and Sommers want.

"I don't care what you call it," Cellini said. "As long as it is a benefit to the town taxpayer, I think we need to do it."

It's simple for Francis King of Bridgeville, in the Town of Thompson.

Said King, "If they could find some way to provide transportation from Bridgeville to Monticello, I'm all for it."

N.Y. Town Picks Low Taxes Over Cops

PUTNAM VALLEY, N.Y. (AP)-- A town that lost a police department last year voted overwhelmingly Tuesday to do without one -- and pocket the tax savings.
Residents of Putnam Valley voted 2,473 to 1 ,035 against bringing back a force that was abolished by the Town Board in September.

The issue had long divided the townspeople, and Supervisor Charles Anderson said he was "ecstatic" with the turnout.

It shows the people wanted to decide this for themselves," he said.

The referendum was ordered by a federal judge to settle a lawsuit brought by unemployed police officers after the Town Board voted last year to abolish the Police Department in this town of 9,800, about 50 miles north of New York City.

Though meetings on the issue were contentious, with shouting, pushing and even tire-slashing, the board refused to put it to a townwide vote. Residents voted out the incumbents in November, despite the 31 percent cut in town taxes that came with the end of the Police Department.

The new board proposed a scaled-down force, depending heavily on part-timers, that would add $144 a year to the average homeowner's taxes -- less than half the $300 it cost for the old Police Department.

But at meetings last month, tempers again boiled over. Anderson himself got shoved as he tried to make peace and one man claimed he'd been spat upon.

County Sheriff Robert Thoubboron, who has taken over patrols of Putnam Valley, was not allowed to speak at the meetings because he's not a town resident. But he wrote to each resident, lobbying against the referendum.

"No professional police force that I know of uses part-timers to that extent... The liability aspect is scary."

Resident Patty Villanova, who favored the abolition of the Police Department last year, said she was happy with the tax cut, satisfied with the sheriffs service and glad to see the demise of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association.

"These municipal unions have a stranglehold on the taxpayers," she said. "Why do we have to take it back? It's a liability."

[ CONSOLIDATION INDEX | LOCAL HISTORY