Dissolution talks moving in Potsdam

POTSDAM — Potsdam officials want to conduct a study about dissolving the village and consolidating services with the town.

They reached a consensus shortly after hearing an expert on municipal dissolution and consolidation speak here. Wade Beltramo, general counsel for the New York Conference of Mayors, gave a presentation at the civic center Thursday night.

Town and village officials and residents from throughout the county attended, but those from Potsdam dominated the conversation.

One professor declared that Potsdam village residents are "mad as hell." Councilman Michael J. Zagrobelny objected to the suggestion that villagers pay taxes toward town services that don't benefit them. Everyone groaned at the mention of unfunded mandates sent down from Albany.

Mr. Beltramo said that dissolution is becoming a hot topic across the state right now, but he thought it was unlikely in the village of Potsdam.

"Most villages looking at this are not this large. The bigger you are, the more complicated it is," he said. "In Potsdam, you have a very urban village surrounded by a very rural town outside. Those are two distinctly different communities. Can one government entity represent them both? Maybe. I don't know."

Some people in the audience argued back and forth with the expert about his "pro-village" position.

Robert H. Wood Jr., director of government relations for Clarkson University, pointed to the creation of Canton-Potsdam Hospital as an example of modernization through consolidation.

"What about the Hatfield and the McCoy effect? This running soap opera of the town says the village did something wrong, and the village says the town did something wrong — how much does that cost us each year?" he said. "Why does there have to be no change in modern government to reflect the new realities?"

Town Councilwoman Judith R. Rich said Mr. Beltramo seemed to be "prophesying that everything would go to hell" if the village were dissolved.

"I don't want to get into the specifics here; I'm not privy, and I'm leaving this evening. Maybe I'll need a police escort," Mr. Beltramo said, laughing.

Stephen J. Warr, a Democrat who recently was voted overwhelmingly into office as trustee on a platform of dissolving the village, said he wants the municipality to apply for a grant to study dissolution as soon as possible.

Once that process is complete, he plans to either propose a resolution to dissolve the village or begin circulating petitions to call a public referendum on the issue.

"You don't need two layers of government, period, to govern 15,000 people," Mr. Warr said. "My personal view is if it says that it won't change taxes a lick, at least we'll have one government and none of this 'he said, she said' stuff going on between the village and the town."

DISSOLUTION: A PRIMER

There are several ways that a village can dissolve under a law approved by the state Legislature and signed by Gov. David A. Paterson this summer. Drafted and backed by state Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo's office, the law is called the Government Reorganization Act. It will become effective March 21.

Under the law, which covers villages, towns, fire districts and special town districts, a government can initiate dissolution on its own by approving a resolution endorsing a proposed dissolution plan. Counties also can establish laws to abolish governmental entities such as villages, but the plan has to be approved by voters in a countywide election.

Finally, residents can spur the dissolution process by collecting signatures from either 10 percent of electors — or the number of people who are registered to vote and participated in the last village election — or 5,000 people, whichever is fewer. In villages with fewer than 500 people, 20 percent of electors are needed on the petition.

There is no time limit for collecting signatures. Once the petition is filed, trustees have to enact a resolution to schedule a public referendum, which must be held within 60 to 90 days.

If voters reject the proposal to dissolve the village, they cannot try again for four years. If the measure passes, the municipality has 180 days to develop a dissolution plan. After that point, the plan will go into effect — even if elected officials oppose it — unless residents file another petition.

A petition to reject a dissolution proposal requires the signatures of at least 25 percent of the electors, or 15,000 people, whichever is lower. Opponents of a dissolution plan have only 45 days after its approval to submit a petition against it.

"This isn't something you want to rush. You're talking about the future of the residents of this community," Mr. Beltramo said. "We shouldn't be thinking that this is a panacea for all of our tax burdens."

NYCOM opposes the Government Reorganization Act.

TAX AND BUDGET SAVINGS

Mr. Beltramo noted the law doesn't address school districts, counties or cities, which represent 88 percent of the total property taxes paid across the state.

He also said increased efficiency by eliminating one government accounts for only a small amount of the spending and tax savings that come from dissolving a municipality.

"Villages provide different services and different levels of service than towns. They are usually very different from the rural area outside. Usually, you still need people to plow roads, maintain the water and sewer," Mr. Beltramo said. "At best, it will save 5 to 8 percent."

Dissolution savings also come from cutting or restructuring services and eliminating elected officials.

Mr. Beltramo said his research has shown that most of the savings for village residents come from increased revenue from "town outside" residents, and special aid from the state. The state offers an incentive for villages to dissolve, which increases aid to the towns in which they were located up to 15 percent of the tax levy — forever.

"Some people call this a tax shift, and that's what it is," Mr. Beltramo said. "We're in the system we are in, and I don't think a new law is going to make it any easier. If we got rid of the village government, would it really make us all one big happy family?"

A PLAN FOR POTSDAM

Mr. Warr said he already has heard from nearly 20 residents who are willing to sign and carry petitions to force a referendum on dissolution of the village of Potsdam. He said he wants to conduct a study before either the village board or residents bring the issue to a vote.

"This is an issue that's not going to go away. We need to get ahead of it, not stay behind it," he said. "We need to do the study and get ahead of it. Then nobody's forcing it."

Mr. Warr said he supports using a team of SUNY Potsdam researchers led by J. Patrick Turbett, a Democratic county legislator and Potsdam Central School board member, to conduct the study.

Mayor Reinhold J. Tischler said he "wouldn't be opposed to looking into" a study.

"I think everybody supports that," he said.

Trustee Steven W. Yurgartis also said he would welcome a motion to form a dissolution committee, and would urge the group to apply for grant funding to pay for the study.

"Such a study is a big undertaking. I know from my reading that these studies typically take about a year and cost about $50,000 or more," he said. "One of my observations was that all of the talk seemed to be about money. I think it is well known that I'm a fiscal conservative, but I do think there is more to our village than just money."

Mr. Yurgartis also said he was "troubled" to learn that town residents outside the village cannot vote in an election to decide whether to dissolve the village.

"It is action that will profoundly affect them. That doesn't seem fair," he said.

Deputy Mayor Ruth F. Garner said she remained sure dissolution would not save much money in Potsdam after Thursday night's presentation. She said she wouldn't object to a study being conducted but is skeptical it would produce results.

"It's easy to say that if there are fewer layers of government you're not going to have to pay taxes, but it has implications," Mrs. Garner said.

Supervisor Marie C. Regan said she doesn't necessarily support dissolving the village, since the action likely would increase property taxes for town residents outside the village.

"I just hope somebody doesn't jump the gun and call a referendum. That would really be half-cocked," she said. "I'm for a study. Then we'll see what we find out. A lot of people say the village should dissolve without knowing the ramifications."

Mrs. Regan said she would push for town officials and residents of the town outside the village to be included on a committee. She also wants a consultant to look at how the town and village could consolidate services to save money without the village dissolving.

"If we're going to put in all this time and money and effort, we should consider our other options too," she said.

Mrs. Regan also is interested in finding out what would happen if the village of Norwood didn't dissolve, but Potsdam did.

ON THE NET

Steven Yurgartis: www.yurgartis.net/dissolution.htm