Bid for grant on dissolution contains caveat in E. Aurora
Published: February 08, 2010, 12:30 am
Story tools:
Share this story:
After fighting for nearly two months, East Aurora officials are seeking a $50,000 state grant to study the feasibility of dissolving village government.
Caution, though: Many who backed the measure last week, just to seek funds for a study, say they still are opposed to dissolution and would prefer to find other ways to combine and share services with the town.
“This is in no way endorsing village dissolution,” Deputy Mayor Libby Weberg said Saturday. “My goal would be to get the information out there, showing us we can save more money by consolidating versus dissolving, so we don’t get a petition [from residents] to dissolve.”
Weberg’s take on the board’s reversal is that it’s not leaning toward dissolution, but is just gathering information and data.
The debate over dissolving has triggered intense discussion inside Village Hall in light of a new state law that takes effect March 21. The law requires just 10 percent of voter signatures to call for a referendum on village dissolution.
Despite earlier efforts by Mayor Clark W. Crook to get the board to approve a resolution seeking the state grant to study dissolution, a majority of the board balked at that — citing concerns about dissolution and questions about the new law and its impact.
In fact, in January, the board backed a loosely worded measure calling for efforts to look at consolidating or finding other ways to save money between village and town governments. That resolution, drafted by Trustee Peter M. Mercurio, went out of its way to distance the board from any public perception that it supported dissolution in any manner.
But last week, the board reversed its earlier decision by voting, 6-0, to seek the state grant after all, but not commit to dissolution. Mercurio was absent.
The change of heart came after the New York Conference of Mayors held a Jan. 20 forum for local officials to learn more about the new law, village dissolution, rules of consolidation and the urgency of trying to secure the competitive grant money that may not be offered again.
Crook, who has made dissolution the cornerstone of his reelection bid, said the board approval last Monday of the grant resolution essentially mirrors the same resolution for which he unsuccessfully sought board approval in December.
Weberg, however, painted a different picture. She said her three-pronged approach not only called for a study to begin so details could be learned; she also cited the need to investigate ways to combine and share services with the town to reduce the cost of local government.
“What do we have to lose by gathering this information?” Weberg said. “It’s better to have information rather than get hit with a petition and not have enough time” to scramble to get grant money and do a study.
The hitch is that if a citizens petition were filed, the village would have only 60 days to hold a referendum — giving it no time to study the matter and meaning that a vote would be taken on dissolution with no plan created for it. Crook, however, had stressed these same points in December.
Weberg and Trustee Allan A. Kasprzak, who is trying to unseat Crook as mayor, said the Conference of Mayors meeting and urgencies cited about the impact of the new law pushed the board to back the grant resolution.
“This board went from being wildly against dissolution to completely in favor of the [study] resolution,” Crook said. “I was pleased, and it was nice to see that this board cares and is willing to consider all options and do what is right for the entire community.”
Crook acknowledged that the study does not mean that the village will begin a process to dissolve. “That’s a critical point,” he said. “A lot of things we need to do to dissolve would be the same things we need to do to streamline, or consolidate departments.”
Aside from the grant resolution, a second Weberg measure that received board support sought efficiencies in town highway and village public works operations — something that already is being studied.
It also called for an analysis of what town services are received by village residents for the taxes they pay to the town. Weberg also called for a task force to study a single front-office structure for administrative services to complement a grant already under way to study consolidating town, village and library services into one facility.
Despite his vote to seek grant funds to study dissolution, Kasprzak quickly noted: “None of us are in support of dissolution, I might add.
“There are still huge, huge questions. Now, Clark is changing his tune here, and saying he’s now not really for dissolution. We’re not backpedaling by doing this, and we’re not validating dissolution. We can make sure it’s studied thoroughly.”
krobinson@buffnews.com
Newsletters
Sign up now for daily and weekly newsletters from BuffaloNews.com and get quick links to the info you want delivered directly to your inbox.Reader comments
Log into MyBuffalo to post a comment
MyBuffalo is the new social network from Buffalo.com. Your MyBuffalo account lets you comment on and rate stories at buffalonews.com. You can also head over to mybuffalo.com to share your blog posts, stories, photos, and videos with the community. Join now or learn more.
Comments have been disabled.
Due to a high volume of submissions that violate The News’ guidelines, commenting is no longer available on this story. If you’d like to share your thoughts on this story, click here to get information on contributing to The News’ opinion pages.