About 200 Sloan residents packed the village fire hall on Gates Street on Monday, and all seemed to have the same question on their minds: What exactly will happen if we vote to dissolve the village?

As usual, no one could give an exact answer.

In this case, the person taking the questions and providing information was Wade Beltramo, representing the New York Council of Mayors, to inform residents of the pros and cons of dissolution.

Residents in both Sloan and Williamsville will vote a week from today on dissolving their respective village governments. Kevin Gaughan, the catalyst behind local efforts to dissolve the villages, attended Monday’s meeting but was barred from directly addressing the audience. Gaughan will hold his own forum at 7 tonight in the Dingens Bar and Grill, 601 Dingens St.

Beltramo assured residents that he was neutral on the issue of whether Sloan, specifically, ought to be dissolved. But the crowd became animated and vocal when Beltramo offered to help the village dissolve if that is what residents want.

The offer was met with an equally intense mixture of boos and applause. Many who expressed resistance to the idea of dissolution made it clear that it was precisely the unknown consequences that made them wary.

“How can you make a vote when you don’t know?” said Ralph Grzedzicki of Reiman Street.

Grzedzicki and other residents, like as Karen Mederski of Griffith Street, wondered aloud how dissolving the village would affect the level of services they currently receive from the village — such as sidewalk

plowing in the winter — and whether they would see a decrease in their property taxes.

Howls of protests and catcalls greeted Beltramo’s suggestion that dissolving the village would likely lower property taxes.

Still, Beltramo sought to assure residents that lower property taxes was not the only consideration for village property owners wondering whether or not it made sense to jettison village government.

“You can get rid of all your villages, but you still won’t get rid of the lion in the room, taxes paid to school districts and counties,” Beltramo said.

They take up a disproportionately larger share of the property taxes that homeowners pay and would not be affected by a move to dissolve the village, he added.

Beltramo also sought to inform residents that the issue of dissolving village governments is not new and that about 40 village governments across the state have dissolved since 1927. He said a change in state legislation making it easier for village governments to dissolve has spurred an increase in activity toward that end. However, Beltramo decried that such efforts could be pursued without benefit of a formal study first.

The issue never seems far from the minds of elected officials in either community.

On Monday, Williamsville’s mayor and other village officials sounded a little jittery when they warned that if the village is dissolved, they will have little say in trying to convince Amherst and Cheektowaga — which includes a small slice of the village -- to protect the interests of villagers.

“If the village goes away, our leverage goes away,” Mayor Mary Lowther warned the audience at the Village Board’s regular meeting. “It’s just common sense.”

The Village Board, at its regular meetings at least, has been fairly restrained about the move to dissolve Williamsville’s village government.

That seemed to weaken a bit Monday.

“If you care about the village, you know how to vote,” Lowther said.

Trustee Jeffrey Kingsley, an attorney, also appeared concerned about how much clout the board would have to negotiate such issues as services, zoning that maintains the village’s historic character and what happens to village-owned property.

“What leverage, if any, does the village have?” he said. “Those are the issues we will have to face.”