Potsdam leads the way
It's a little ironic that the village of Potsdam seems to be the cutting edge in the north country in studying the effects of dissolving the village and consolidating government into a single level. Ironic because it is one of the villages for which some argument can be made against dissolution, and ironic because there may not be a place in the region where the village and town governments have had so little in common.
For the past two years, village officials have castigated town government, primarily over efforts to secure new town offices. The confrontation has been embarrassingly public, with harsh words directed from the mayor toward the supervisor and town board, and general rancor distributed at will. Into this minimaelstrom step two village trustees – Stephen J. Warr, elected two weeks ago on a promise he'd force a serious study of dissolution, and Stephen Yurgartis. Both are ready to move the village into a position from which a public vote on the issue could become a reality, not just an idea.
There are a number of studies of dissolution recently completed or still going on across the state. One of note has been conducted in Seneca Falls, where village taxes have reached almost $17 per thousand assessed while town taxes outside the village do not exist because of the Seneca Meadows Landfill, which provides all the town-outside revenue the town needs. That study suggests dissolution, with police and highway services picked up by the town and no immediate reduction in municipal employment, would lower village taxes by about 50 percent and raise town taxes by a quite reasonable $4.50 per thousand. Town taxes could also be mitigated by state consolidation aid. (The village tax rate will be gone; the $8 per thousand figure comes from the town tax rate of $4.50 plus special district charges for lights, water, sewer and fire protection that now do not exist for village property owners.)
Potsdam is certainly a village where property taxes have become onerous. Its tax rate is similar to that of Seneca Falls, and when added to town, county and school district taxes, makes owning property in the village a very costly decision to make. For that reason, Yurgartis and Warr would do a great service if they moved the village to a serious dissolution study.
The dissolution of Potsdam would at first blush seem to be less important than, say the dissolution of Herrings or Deferiet or Rensselaer Falls – tiny villages that offer few services but still incur extra tax costs. Potsdam, after all, has a police department, the better to deal with issues created by the colleges and the size of the village itself. So the study by Seneca Falls is informative; it suggests consolidation of a village very similar to Potsdam would result in combined savings to taxpayers of more than $500,000 each year. And that presumes preserving almost all existing village jobs.
It's hard to predict what a dissolution study will show in Potsdam. While the state is pushing consolidation, the statewide organization of mayors is, unsurprisingly, quite opposed. You get the sense of the pet oxen that stand to be gored here; mayors and village trustees, absent your Yurgartis and Warr types, tend to fight against dissolution because, satrap-wise, it would eviscerate their political power. Taxpayers, on the other hand, are becoming more and more vocal about opposition to the status quo. The higher the local tax rate, the more vocal the opposition.
As of March, the rules of the game are changing for those taxpayers. At that point, a new law takes effect that will allow a petition of 10 percent of the electors of a village to trigger a villagewide referendum. If the referendum passes, the village has 180 days to develop a dissolution plan, which is subject to a public hearing and to a permissive referendum which would be triggered by another petition of 25 percent of the electors. With the new law in effect, village boards would be hard pressed to block dissolution efforts.
Potsdam will, in reality, be ahead of the curve if they quickly appoint a dissolution committee and commission a dissolution study. With such a group in place, the village could likely forestall a triggering petition at least until the study is complete. And with a study in hand, village residents would have concrete numbers before them to help them make up their minds.
Under the new laws, many villages are suddenly at risk – a reality for which the average taxpayer should thank his state senator or assembly representative. The ones that will avoid major political battles are the ones like Potsdam, which appears poised to get ahead of the new law with an independent study of the issue. The ones that will suffer are those that will be forced into a sudden dissolution plan and that will potentially be riven by not one, but two, referenda on an often emotional issue. Potsdam is acting like it is willing to go far the better route.
