Reducing Uncertainty when Voters Consider Dissolution

Posted by & filed under CGR Staff, Rochester Business Journal.

Kent GardnerSeveral proposals to dissolve village boundaries were on the ballot last week. Voters in the villages of Malone (Franklin County) and Chaumont (Jefferson County), both rejected the idea. The Village of Lyons (Wayne County) embraced it, although by a very narrow margin (and absentee ballots, when counted, could change the vote).

Most village dissolution votes fail to gain the support of voters, putting Malone and Chaumont with the majority. Should these voters have chosen to dissolve these villages? Not being a resident of either community, we at CGR don’t have a voice in the decision. In fact, having studied the issue in both, we can make a case on either side. Our role is to lay out the facts to the best of our ability—informing the voters and empowering them to make their own decisions.

At issue in these votes is a possible loss of identity, and some loss of local control—the power to enact laws and to provide village residents with the services they alone vote to support. Village residents remain voters and taxpayers in the surrounding town and will look to their town for a continuation of needed public services. In exchange for giving up some autonomy, residents expect a smaller tax bill. Read more »

One Seneca Falls – from Concept to Reality

Posted by & filed under CGR Staff.

Scott SittigOn January 1, 2012, the Town of Seneca Falls became a unified municipality for the first time since 1831.  Communities across New York State have their eye on Seneca Falls to see what lessons can be learned from the dissolution of the historic village.  As the largest village to dissolve in New York State, the process and outcomes will serve as a great test case for many years to come.  However, some may be prone to draw conclusions from the outcomes that aren’t warranted.

Dissolution studies in most villages are initiated by citizens or elected officials because they believe it will save them money.  The most common argument is that two layers of government are more expensive than one, and eliminating a duplicate layer must produce savings that will cause a tax bill to go down.  When CGR models the fiscal impact of dissolutions cost savings are typically modest, usually in the 3-10% range.  This was true in Seneca Falls as projected cost savings were a little over 7% of the combined budgets.  Cost savings was not what pushed the lever in favor of dissolution. Read more »