As for eliminating the Village

[WNYresident]

As for eliminating the Village, this should be researched from an economic and services perspective and put to the residents for a vote.

When I hear "it will cost the taxes payers MORE by eliminating something it will cost us more! You usually only hear that from the people that will be eliminated to the political players who need those people's support. I just don't see how in some cases.

You are removing some duplication of employees and that's really about it along with some equipment that might not have to be duplicated. Just as example if you have 3 snow plow drivers laid off and a couple drivers of the larger entity take over that duty you still removed those three drivers.

The drivers who take over are still on payroll and may add hours to their time but you are eliminating the bene's of 3 employees. Even if you transfer a driver or two to the larger entity afterwards you are still cutting something. At minimum you are removing some of the administration costs of the entity that was dissolved. One supervisor can supervise 6 employees or 8. It isn't like his work load literally increases by 25%.

Lets say the supervisor says "I want more money if I'm supervising 8 people instead of 6"

If I was Supervisor of the that town I would say you are paid more than enough to baby 8 employees versus 6. If you are not happy with that don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out. There are more than enough qualified people in Erie County that will do this job for $XX,XXX amount. Time to cut the BS. Some of these positions have less accountability than someone who manages (supervises) a fast food place/donut shop.

Same goes for school districts. Why does Cheektowaga have like 5 school districts. You are duplicating 5 departments. 5 6+ figure superintendents with support costs. etc...


Some political parties have so badly negotiated in the interest of the property/business owners we have employees working 4 hours yet being paid 8. Get this. If they go over 8 hours they still get over time. What about "undertime" You work 4 you get paid 4. Or you bank some of the hours not worked to cover some of the hours that were over 8.

If the reason continually comes up as it does in Cheektowaga that our hands are tied or we just can't do this or that it is a monopoly of services.


I see how it works. The people who negotiate have "secrets" on the people who finally vote on this type of stuff. IE: Town boards... The negotiators play this stuff back and forth and before you know it.... we are the highest taxed area in the USA

[nogods]

Villages usually grew out of the desire of people living in the most populated area of a town to have services beyond that required or desired by the rest of the town. Foe example, farmers burning trash might not have been a problem in the outlaying ares, but if everyone in the village had to burn their trash it could be a big problem, so a village might want garbage collection where the rest of the town didn't need it.

There may be less need for villages today in many first ring towns but that doesn't mean there is no benefit to maintaining a village. If that is what the majority of village residents want, even if it cost them more because they have to pay the village tax in addition to thbe town tax, then that is what they should have.

Perhaps the best solution would be for the state to change the village law to require a vote on dissolution once every 50 years. That way each generation of citizens would get to vote at least once on whether or not to continue the village.

[grump]

You don't have to wait 50 years. Just carry the petitions, get the signatures required by law and vote. So far, most votes to dissolve around these parts have failed. If you don't want to live in a village, move! How the hell hard is that to figure out?!

[grump]

When villages have dissolved the savings are never as great as people think. And if you're a resident of the town do you want to have to pay back the villages debt? Of course not! So you end up with the remains of the village as a special district within the town. It's largely a pig in a poke but Il Duce has people thinking its reform while he rapes upstate fir money to give to democratic "green" contributors.

[WNYresident]

Villages usually grew out of the desire of people living in the most populated area of a town to have services beyond that required or desired by the rest of the town. Foe example, farmers burning trash might not have been a problem in the outlaying ares, but if everyone in the village had to burn their trash it could be a big problem, so a village might want garbage collection where the rest of the town didn't need it.

There may be less need for villages today in many first ring towns but that doesn't mean there is no benefit to maintaining a village. If that is what the majority of village residents want, even if it cost them more because they have to pay the village tax in addition to thbe town tax, then that is what they should have.

Perhaps the best solution would be for the state to change the village law to require a vote on dissolution once every 50 years. That way each generation of citizens would get to vote at least once on whether or not to continue the village.

What service does the Village of Depew provide that most other towns don't?

[nogods]

What service does the Village of Depew provide that most other towns don't?

Don't they have their own police department? That gives them control over leo policy rather than being subject to town-wide policy, which a majority of villagers might prefer.

[nogods]

You don't have to wait 50 years. Just carry the petitions, get the signatures required by law and vote. So far, most votes to dissolve around these parts have failed. If you don't want to live in a village, move! How the hell hard is that to figure out?!

It is not a matter of "waiting 50 years" but rather one of having village law require a re-affirming vote every 50 years. A majority of residents would always have the power to dissolve earlier if they wanted to, but the 50-year rule would require a re-affirming vote every 50 years.

[WNYresident]

Don't they have their own police department? That gives them control over leo policy rather than being subject to town-wide policy, which a majority of villagers might prefer.

If something is illegal it's illegal. What type of policy would be different? Village police will allow speeding while other department's policy would be to give out tickets? One allows robbery while one wouldn't? So when I drive through the Village of Depew to Cheektowaga and back what differences should I notice? One difference I do notice is various people complain about their extra Village tax.

[WNYresident]

It is not a matter of "waiting 50 years" but rather one of having village law require a re-affirming vote every 50 years. A majority of residents would always have the power to dissolve earlier if they wanted to, but the 50-year rule would require a re-affirming vote every 50 years.

50 years is a life time. People want to see a change now not change once they pass. This is like when a town board says "Changes we implemented today will help our town 20 years from now" That means nothing when people/business flee as we have seen in our own town.

[4248]

Beginning with a backward statement doesn't explain anything, nogods stated "Villages usually grew out of the desire of people living in the most populated area of a town to have services beyond that required or desired by the rest of the town"

Villages usually appeared before Towns - there needs are mostly the same as larger areas. Towns grow around Villages and there need increase services needed - not eliminate or change the needs - they increase demand. Laws or law enforcement doesn't change - need increases and often just duplicates its self.

Government grows out of a representation need - which in it self is a illusion invented by those who want to grow the beaurocracy. They tell people, "we wont be heard as part of the bigger system - our people wont be represented" -

"their people" are not tax payers - they are tax funded/paid.

The tax funded insiders want to grow their control by hiring more "service providers" who are dependent on the tax funded system. They want to maintain the feeling that tax funded employees should be beholden to the "Party Players" - not the "Home owning tax payers"

All the other arguments against consolidation or Village governmental dissolution is just self preservation talk of tax funded voter groups.

Not one argument supports reduction or stabilization of long term taxes.

[grump]

It is not a matter of "waiting 50 years" but rather one of having village law require a re-affirming vote every 50 years. A majority of residents would always have the power to dissolve earlier if they wanted to, but the 50-year rule would require a re-affirming vote every 50 years.

Why have a mandatory reaffirming vote every 50 years if people have the option to dissolve at any time and have chosen not to do so? Just so you can hear them say "no"? They've already said it by not dissolving voluntarily.

[Linda_D]

When villages have dissolved the savings are never as great as people think. And if you're a resident of the town do you want to have to pay back the villages debt? Of course not! So you end up with the remains of the village as a special district within the town. It's largely a pig in a poke but Il Duce has people thinking its reform while he rapes upstate fir money to give to democratic "green" contributors.

Excuse me, but why the hell should people who have wells and septic systems have to pay the debt that the village residents incurred building the water and sewer systems that only they use??? Why should people who live out in rural areas have to pay for street lighting and sidewalks that they don't have?

[WNYresident]

Excuse me, but why the hell should people who have wells and septic systems have to pay the debt that the village residents incurred building the water and sewer systems that only they use??? Why should people who live out in rural areas have to pay for street lighting and sidewalks that they don't have?

Be careful with that statement. Same can be said about libraries and senior centers. Correct?

[4248]

Most people with wells and septic do still pay maintenance fees - if you know one - ask them to look at their property tax statements. They pay fees for services they don't get.

I live on a county road - I pay all the same taxes everyone else does and receive no services provided by the Town. Research before making a statement of that sort.

Its the same as tax assessments - why should older homes be reassessed at higher values just because a subdivision is built ?

There's many overlapping/duplicated services in every Town/Village situation. Like I said - every Town/Village has unnecessary patronage jobs.

Its all about creating and maintaining "Friendly Party Voter Blocks" and its all tax funded.

[WNYresident]

Its all about creating and maintaining "Friendly Party Voter Blocks" and its all tax funded.

Lot of truth to this statement. This is why a party chairman/officer should not work for any town.