Re-Thinking Dissolution

To the Valley News:

We were glad when we were told that a study for dissolution was going to be done. We felt it was the right way of informing the village residents if dissolution was the way to go. Like many of the village residents we did feel dissolution would benefit the village home owners. Until the information started coming out how dissolution was not going to benefit the village residents in the way we felt it would or should. Over 66 percent of village residents would have an increase village taxes. Contrary to the article in March 6 paper this is not a small population. This does not include the fee for any special districts.

We decided to check with other villages who had dissolved or did a study and did not dissolve. Here is what we were told.

In larger areas, where there is huge population there was not much of change. They were a village in one town. Some special district had to be formed, but again because of the huge population in those areas the fee was not a real concern.

We then started looking into more rural areas. This was truly an education. One village that is in one town did a study and put it up for a vote. lt do not pass. When asked why? They said it was because the committee not only looked at what the consultant gave them, they chose to take it more in depth. They looked at what special districts may have to be formed, the number of people in the district and came up with an estimated cost. lt was very high. They looked at the water and sewer that was only in the village.

They felt that this would not make too much of a change. So why was dissolution voted down? In the end it was determined that the special districts would increase every village resident taxes. Voters felt that they were losing and not gaining. Most residence are happy with the village and liked their community.

Vote on this Story by clicking on the Icon


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment