Every American is supposed to have the right of having a say in how his/her government operates. It's known as "The Consent of the Governed" from our Declaration of Independence. The closer one is to the elected representatives, the better able to give consent. Voter apathy can be blamed for many village government problems, I believe that a lot of people don't vote, because they believe that the county, state and federal government will supersede the village anyway. It's hard to find fault with that, they way things are now. I think we can change that attitude and improve our municipal governments by electing people who respect individual rights and will stand up for them. Local folks understand local problems and local values. Going along to get along, doing it the way we always have and kicking the can down the street, are all tired out cliches and should become far more rare than they are. Once villages all get their acts together and stop asking the county, state and feds to solve their problems, then we, the people can demand better from our county and state and even federal governments.
It all starts at home, and should stay strongest at home; if you dissolve your villages, you are in effect asking to be part of the collective.
I voted no and believe we should dissolve from the top.The plan up there isn't working.A complete resturcture of the federal goverment would be in order in my mind.NUFF said..
Correct me if I am wrong but didn't we fight the Revolutionary War to gain representation in the government. Why would we want to give up any representation especially on the local level?
Too general of a poll question to answer. Are there some village governments that add nothing to their residents? Absolutely - the current bozos in Corfu are giving evidence to that. However, the Village of Corfu does add some nice services to their residents, so to grade the system based on the current office-holders is unfair.
Full disclosure - I grew up in Corfu during the 70s. Things may have changed since then, but my guess is that many of the benefits are still worthwhile. Even more so if the village merges their sewer system with the Town of Pembroke (that might be a n expansion in to Pembroke - I do not remember the details)
There are some villages that due to declining population can not afford to provide the level of service the residents want. The Village of Pike was an example, and they voted to dissolve.
But it should be up to the village residents if they want to stay or go, not Albany.
Makes sense to me: dissolve local governments that afford the most immediate and direct civilian/government interaction, concede to the corporate-owned federal bureaucracy. ...And thank our Republican-small-government advocate Collins for voting for internet censorship. Eat more corn. Buy things. Watch TV. Believe.
Village government is a leftover from the 1800s. Village governments were formed back when the town was all farms and everyone lived in the Village. No one but farmers ventured out of town because it was a journey to get from Le Roy to Batavia. Now you can make it from village to village in ten minutes, and get services online.
There is nothing a Village does that the Town level couldn't do. Is the Town government too far away to have direct contact with? Village residents actually pay BOTH Village and Town taxes. The Villages in WNY have the highest property tax rates in the entire nation. We wonder why manufacturing fled our Villages?
Why is it that village residents have to pay for town services, but town residents don't have to pay for village services, even though they benefit from them directly and indirectly? Does it make sense to keep them separate and have two highway crews, two courts, two clerks, two town/village halls two blocks from each other?
1) The size and inhabitance ratio of the Town/village and
2) [ULTIMATELY] Whether the citizens of the Village chose to disband their local government.
If the voters of a village want a village Police department and the local government to manage it, then it should be their and only their decision. Whether it be Attica, Leroy, Corfu, Bergen or Elba, what is good for the voters in one village may not be acceptable for the voters in another.
What is important is that the voters in those villages understand fully what the trade offs are.
Good points. Mark is right,especially about #2 being the ultimate factor. i can see Tim's points about redundancies but many villages don't seem to agree. Howard, as well makes a great point about Albany and Washington, although I'd go with much more limited. Even I don't want to abolish them. Finally, to me the best is Mark's last sentence: "What is important is that the voters in those villages understand fully what the trade offs are." Transparency everywhere in all levels of government
How many governments do 50,000 people need to feel connected? You people have a strange connection to something you can't and never will be able to control. More government equals higher and higher costs, period. Your delusional localism is a smoke screen to ever increasing taxes. Pay up...
PS The only reason I would be close to government would be to smother it.
How many governments do we have in genesee county..Population 58,000..Good question Charlie..If you add up all the village,town, city and county it does become redundant..I would go for one government for all of Genesse County..Including the school district and police and fire.. but government should be from the bottom up instead of the top down..
I don't object to village government, I object to village government as is. Right now village government is another level of mandates and an extra tax burden providing duplicating services. We have thousands of governments in the State of New York and it's crushing our competitiveness, if you look at that problem beyond face value, it's increasingly clear that having one government on top of the other on the local level is just as bad as state mandates. I would rather have villages be totally independent of towns, but otherwise, it doesn't serve much of a purpose in the digital age. If you're goal is streamlined, efficient and better government, make it simpler.
Definitely against getting rid of local governments. That is not how our system was set up. Multiple tiers or levels to insure the people have their say.
A village board deals with the concerns of the village, and has a rep on the town board. The town board deals with the concerns of the town and has say in the county board. The county board looks after county wide concerns, etc. The system keeps going up to the federal level.
If the village board goes away, the village residents lose a lot of their say in the town board. If you get rid of the town boards, town residents get lost in the county system.
The more "lower" governments you get rid of, the more the power gets concentrated in a smaller group of people to govern a larger group of citizens. The individuals lose their voice.
You hear that money can be saved, and that things will be more efficient. Well that is true, but is comes at the cost of your voice and freedom. When the few rule the many, the many lose their voice and control.
Efficiency is the last thing we want in our government system, and the last thing our founders wanted. They knew that a slow and inefficient system protects that rights of the people. The longer things take to get done, the more is exposed, the more the masses see what is going on and can voice their input on whatever issues arise.
Of course that is not what is happening today. People are not involved in the issues of the day and governmental operations like they were in years past. Village, town, county, and school board meetings packed with involved citizens. People seem to just sit back and let the elected run amok, then complain later.
Who is supposed to be in control of this nation? "We The People" Read the constitution folks, WE THE PEOPLE! Using the Law of Grammar, reading the preamble, it states The Constitution FOR the United States of America. Not "of" the United States. We the people gave this document to the government, not the other way around. We control the government, the government is not there to control us. It is an administrative body of We The People. Not our controllers, keepers, and nurse maids. Stop rolling over and get back your control.
It is worth the extra dollars in administration costs as long as you maintain control of the administrators. As far as having an efficient government? Remember the most efficient form of government is a dictatorship!
Have a problem with your local government? Get off your butt, get involved, and fix it! Run for office yourself if that is what you think needs to be done. But, if you get rid of your local board, you will get lost in a bigger bureaucracy. Fix what you have, do not give up your voice.
Scott - I agree that there should be local government, but I'm not for a giant complex cog that crushes residents with more and more layers and tax burdens. I'd like to see villages exist totally independent of towns. That way, you only have to deal with one local government instead of two if you live in a village. Ideally, government should be as streamlined and modernized as possible. The Constitution gives powers to the states and communities on how to set up their local governments.
Dan, my post was not for or against you in any way. I hear this argument a lot. This was a general statement to all citizens as kind of a civics lesson as to how the framers set up this nation. The reason we could use some streamlining is that people have stopped getting involved. The lunatics are now running the asylum.
Nostalgia? It's TOO convenient to lump all villages together in the 'obsolete' category. Bergen Village has its own water system (under auspices of MCWA), its own electric distribution system and sanitary sewer system. Although the water district has been expanded to locations in the town; sewer and electric have not. As a village resident, it is worth a couple hundred bucks a year to maintain those systems. The savings on electric (the town electric is provided by National Grid) cost, alone, render the additional tax benign. I'm sure there are villages that could dis-incorporate with negligible result. Not all villages are the same. Value is in the eye of the beholder.
Every American is supposed to
Every American is supposed to have the right of having a say in how his/her government operates. It's known as "The Consent of the Governed" from our Declaration of Independence. The closer one is to the elected representatives, the better able to give consent. Voter apathy can be blamed for many village government problems, I believe that a lot of people don't vote, because they believe that the county, state and federal government will supersede the village anyway. It's hard to find fault with that, they way things are now. I think we can change that attitude and improve our municipal governments by electing people who respect individual rights and will stand up for them. Local folks understand local problems and local values. Going along to get along, doing it the way we always have and kicking the can down the street, are all tired out cliches and should become far more rare than they are. Once villages all get their acts together and stop asking the county, state and feds to solve their problems, then we, the people can demand better from our county and state and even federal governments.
It all starts at home, and should stay strongest at home; if you dissolve your villages, you are in effect asking to be part of the collective.
I voted no and believe we
I voted no and believe we should dissolve from the top.The plan up there isn't working.A complete resturcture of the federal goverment would be in order in my mind.NUFF said..
If you eliminate government
If you eliminate government at the local level, you are in essence trading personal liberty in exchange for perceived lower cost.
You minimize your chances for any really positive change because you hand the motive and input for any change to a politically elite, yes I said that.
Dave is pretty much right on, on this one.
As I like to say, we need to govern from the BOTTOM UP and NOT from the TOP DOWN if we want to protect our personal liberties.
Correct me if I am wrong but
Correct me if I am wrong but didn't we fight the Revolutionary War to gain representation in the government. Why would we want to give up any representation especially on the local level?
Too general of a poll
Too general of a poll question to answer. Are there some village governments that add nothing to their residents? Absolutely - the current bozos in Corfu are giving evidence to that. However, the Village of Corfu does add some nice services to their residents, so to grade the system based on the current office-holders is unfair.
Full disclosure - I grew up in Corfu during the 70s. Things may have changed since then, but my guess is that many of the benefits are still worthwhile. Even more so if the village merges their sewer system with the Town of Pembroke (that might be a n expansion in to Pembroke - I do not remember the details)
Anyone that is surprised that
Anyone that is surprised that yes is currently winning shouldn't be. The electorate is lazy, stupid, and misguided.
There are some villages that
There are some villages that due to declining population can not afford to provide the level of service the residents want. The Village of Pike was an example, and they voted to dissolve.
But it should be up to the village residents if they want to stay or go, not Albany.
Makes sense to me: dissolve
Makes sense to me: dissolve local governments that afford the most immediate and direct civilian/government interaction, concede to the corporate-owned federal bureaucracy. ...And thank our Republican-small-government advocate Collins for voting for internet censorship. Eat more corn. Buy things. Watch TV. Believe.
Village government is a
Village government is a leftover from the 1800s. Village governments were formed back when the town was all farms and everyone lived in the Village. No one but farmers ventured out of town because it was a journey to get from Le Roy to Batavia. Now you can make it from village to village in ten minutes, and get services online.
There is nothing a Village does that the Town level couldn't do. Is the Town government too far away to have direct contact with? Village residents actually pay BOTH Village and Town taxes. The Villages in WNY have the highest property tax rates in the entire nation. We wonder why manufacturing fled our Villages?
Why is it that village residents have to pay for town services, but town residents don't have to pay for village services, even though they benefit from them directly and indirectly? Does it make sense to keep them separate and have two highway crews, two courts, two clerks, two town/village halls two blocks from each other?
Good points, Tim. I agree the
Good points, Tim.
I agree the best government is the government closest to the people and if anything should be abolished its Albany and Washington.
However, would any real representation be lost if towns and villages merged?
Tim and Howard, wouldn't that
Tim and Howard, wouldn't that depend on
1) The size and inhabitance ratio of the Town/village and
2) [ULTIMATELY] Whether the citizens of the Village chose to disband their local government.
If the voters of a village want a village Police department and the local government to manage it, then it should be their and only their decision. Whether it be Attica, Leroy, Corfu, Bergen or Elba, what is good for the voters in one village may not be acceptable for the voters in another.
What is important is that the voters in those villages understand fully what the trade offs are.
Good points. Mark is
Good points. Mark is right,especially about #2 being the ultimate factor. i can see Tim's points about redundancies but many villages don't seem to agree. Howard, as well makes a great point about Albany and Washington, although I'd go with much more limited. Even I don't want to abolish them. Finally, to me the best is Mark's last sentence: "What is important is that the voters in those villages understand fully what the trade offs are." Transparency everywhere in all levels of government
How many governments do
How many governments do 50,000 people need to feel connected? You people have a strange connection to something you can't and never will be able to control. More government equals higher and higher costs, period. Your delusional localism is a smoke screen to ever increasing taxes. Pay up...
PS The only reason I would be close to government would be to smother it.
How many governments do we
How many governments do we have in genesee county..Population 58,000..Good question Charlie..If you add up all the village,town, city and county it does become redundant..I would go for one government for all of Genesse County..Including the school district and police and fire.. but government should be from the bottom up instead of the top down..
I don't object to village
I don't object to village government, I object to village government as is. Right now village government is another level of mandates and an extra tax burden providing duplicating services. We have thousands of governments in the State of New York and it's crushing our competitiveness, if you look at that problem beyond face value, it's increasingly clear that having one government on top of the other on the local level is just as bad as state mandates. I would rather have villages be totally independent of towns, but otherwise, it doesn't serve much of a purpose in the digital age. If you're goal is streamlined, efficient and better government, make it simpler.
Nostalgia is not a good
Nostalgia is not a good governing strategy.
Definitely against getting
Definitely against getting rid of local governments. That is not how our system was set up. Multiple tiers or levels to insure the people have their say.
A village board deals with the concerns of the village, and has a rep on the town board. The town board deals with the concerns of the town and has say in the county board. The county board looks after county wide concerns, etc. The system keeps going up to the federal level.
If the village board goes away, the village residents lose a lot of their say in the town board. If you get rid of the town boards, town residents get lost in the county system.
The more "lower" governments you get rid of, the more the power gets concentrated in a smaller group of people to govern a larger group of citizens. The individuals lose their voice.
You hear that money can be saved, and that things will be more efficient. Well that is true, but is comes at the cost of your voice and freedom. When the few rule the many, the many lose their voice and control.
Efficiency is the last thing we want in our government system, and the last thing our founders wanted. They knew that a slow and inefficient system protects that rights of the people. The longer things take to get done, the more is exposed, the more the masses see what is going on and can voice their input on whatever issues arise.
Of course that is not what is happening today. People are not involved in the issues of the day and governmental operations like they were in years past. Village, town, county, and school board meetings packed with involved citizens. People seem to just sit back and let the elected run amok, then complain later.
Who is supposed to be in control of this nation? "We The People" Read the constitution folks, WE THE PEOPLE! Using the Law of Grammar, reading the preamble, it states The Constitution FOR the United States of America. Not "of" the United States. We the people gave this document to the government, not the other way around. We control the government, the government is not there to control us. It is an administrative body of We The People. Not our controllers, keepers, and nurse maids. Stop rolling over and get back your control.
It is worth the extra dollars in administration costs as long as you maintain control of the administrators. As far as having an efficient government? Remember the most efficient form of government is a dictatorship!
Have a problem with your local government? Get off your butt, get involved, and fix it! Run for office yourself if that is what you think needs to be done. But, if you get rid of your local board, you will get lost in a bigger bureaucracy. Fix what you have, do not give up your voice.
Scott - I agree that there
Scott - I agree that there should be local government, but I'm not for a giant complex cog that crushes residents with more and more layers and tax burdens. I'd like to see villages exist totally independent of towns. That way, you only have to deal with one local government instead of two if you live in a village. Ideally, government should be as streamlined and modernized as possible. The Constitution gives powers to the states and communities on how to set up their local governments.
Dan, my post was not for or
Dan, my post was not for or against you in any way. I hear this argument a lot. This was a general statement to all citizens as kind of a civics lesson as to how the framers set up this nation. The reason we could use some streamlining is that people have stopped getting involved. The lunatics are now running the asylum.
Nostalgia? It's TOO
Nostalgia? It's TOO convenient to lump all villages together in the 'obsolete' category. Bergen Village has its own water system (under auspices of MCWA), its own electric distribution system and sanitary sewer system. Although the water district has been expanded to locations in the town; sewer and electric have not. As a village resident, it is worth a couple hundred bucks a year to maintain those systems. The savings on electric (the town electric is provided by National Grid) cost, alone, render the additional tax benign. I'm sure there are villages that could dis-incorporate with negligible result. Not all villages are the same. Value is in the eye of the beholder.