Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Dissolve village now that police are out

July 21, 2013

The village of Silver Creek is one square mile in size with a population of approximately 2,700 peopl....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(24)

baseball

Jul-28-13 12:49 PM

MatthiasJ, Its called "the part Town fund", taxes to residents outside of Silver Creek and Forestville!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MatthiasJ

Jul-26-13 2:25 AM

Statler, according to the Town Clerk there is not a special district tax so who doesn't know what they are talking about and just what do the town taxes that the village of Silver Creek residents pay cover then if you are so wise???

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-23-13 5:12 PM

It's a moot point anyway Phil - We both know that consolidation as you dream of will not happen.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Jul-23-13 9:33 AM

CHUCK392 - as I said you are not capable of understanding. Find yourself a good comic book and enjoy your stay in fantasyland.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-23-13 6:50 AM

Phil - It is you presenting opinion. It is I that presents fact that can be backed up with studies. I repeat, we just went through this with Randolph where the former village residents saved nothing and the town residents saved only a tiny amount. Just because Dunkirk is poorly run and their costs are way above the rest of the communities in this county doesn't mean that the rest of the county should have to bail Dunkirk out. That's what I believe you really want.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

STUPADASO

Jul-22-13 3:14 PM

I WOULD SAY GET RID OF THE VILLAGES OF SILVER CREEK AND FORESTVILLE AS WELL AS THE FORESTVILLE SCHOOL

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

StatlerandWaldorff

Jul-22-13 7:37 AM

I was making the point that Village residents are taxed twice for Sheriff coverage not three times. Silver Creek residents do pay county taxes for road patrol and now Enhanced Police Services instead of their PD.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

StatlerandWaldorff

Jul-22-13 7:34 AM

MatthiasJ - I use my fingers! My point is residents of the Village of Silver Creek have never paid the additional tax for enhanced police coverage through the Town of Hanover. Like I stated, this is a special district tax for Police Coverages OUTSIDE Silver Creek and Forestville.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

bronski

Jul-22-13 7:32 AM

Dcronig: please tell me what the special needs does the village have? "Remove yourself as a resident of Silver Creek & relocate to an obscure patch of BF Chautauqua County?" I for one would be willing to relocate, are you willing to buy my house? No one wants to move here because of the issues and taxes. We do not need our own streets dept and clerks office. We can no longer afford these special needs. You may be willing to pay but I would like to retire and enjoy my money and not have to chose, do I pay high inflated taxes or food and medical. Did you know there are over 50 homes for sale in the village? People are tired of it. Time to consolidate and move on.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MatthiasJ

Jul-22-13 1:57 AM

Statler and Waldorf - don't know where you learned to count but you are the one with incorrect info according to the DOS Office of Local Govt. Efficiency who said exactly Mr. Kehrer said. Part of county tax goes to fund reduced coverage they are required to provide. In years past the sheriff charged us 50 to 60,000 a year to just drive through the village and provide back up if needed and then there is the enhanced contract look at past budgets

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

StatlerandWaldorff

Jul-22-13 12:47 AM

Mr Kehrer was the Village Attorney for several years, it amazes me that he doesn't even know that he has never paid a nickel tax for enhanced police coverage for the Town of Hanover. That is a special district tax paid by Town residents outside the Villages of Silver Creek and Village of Forestville. One would think that he would have known that?? After all he was the legal counsel to purchase the dpw bldg fiasco. Now he wants to dissolve after his mistake?

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MatthiasJ

Jul-21-13 10:40 PM

The village taxpayers will save money although not a lot until the debt is paid down which is down through a special tax district for the debt only. All employee salaries and benefits will be gone as well as the 26,000 plus state retirement credit they get for being on the board. DPW and Water and Sewer will be taken over by the town and costs will be less because they are non union and don't have the freebie health plan that costs the taxpayers a fortune. People also need to pay attention to why the Town contract for police services will go up as will SC, because the legislature doesn't think the sheriff charging enough when the 2 contracts already bring in more money for the county than any other enhanced coverage contract in the county. So not only are we cash cows for the county, we are paying 3 times for coverage from the same dept.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Jul-21-13 10:05 PM

CHUCK392 = let me repeat - I give up! You are not capable of understanding but I respect your opinions. Let me leave you with this thought. Imagine that Dunkirk had a separate government in each of it's four wards. We would have four mayors (at $60,000 each), twenty councilmen, four police chiefs, four fire chiefs, four directors of public works, four city clerks, four building inspectors, four treasurers and who knows how many support personnel. We would have about 640 city employees instead of 160. How do you think that would work out cost wise Chuck392? Maybe this will help you to understand why one central government makes sense. I repeat - I QUIT!!!!!

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-21-13 4:43 PM

From the same report --

Small police departments in independent communities produced at a higher level than large departments (citizens receive higher levels of police follow-up, call upon police for assistance more often, receive more satisfactory levels of police assistance, etc.).

Studies differ on the cost of providing similar levels of police services - one found costs to be lower in smaller jurisdictions and another found costs to be lower in larger jurisdictions. An additional study found the cost of providing police services in metropolitan areas to be significantly greater than the cost to provide similar services in smaller neighboring jurisdictions.

Findings of multiple studies show that larger departments do not provide higher levels of police services as measured by citizens’ experiences and evaluations of services.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-21-13 4:38 PM

Regarding the economic development effect of consolidation, a 1997 study by Florida State University examined the 30 year track record of the Jacksonville Florida/Duvall County consolidation, and “failed to find evidence of a link between consolidation and economic development.” The study concluded that consolidation “has not enhanced the local economy.

In contrast to these findings is a study conducted by William Blomquist and Roger Parks. It found that the Indianapolis consolidated government “... has enhanced the effectiveness of economic development strategy - there has been substantial economic development in the downtown that would have not occurred without Uni-Gov.

Personal note - I share the second paragraph as in this one instance, regarding economic development (not costs), consolidation was beneficial. Now don't run to the bank with this lone positive item, as they are extremely difficult to find. The negatives far outweigh the positives.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-21-13 4:29 PM

Purdue University conducted research which has shown that larger units of government are more expensive to operate, not less, than smaller units.

The Purdue study also says that “the bulk of the evidence indicates that consolidation increases taxes and spending.”

In 2000 the University of Georgia conducted a study which concluded, “Very few studies have examined the impact of city-county consolidation, and what little evidence does exist suggests that costs will actually increase in the short term.”

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-21-13 3:34 PM

What really baffles me is that Phil just complains how terrible things are here, and yet he stays. You gotta wonder! Go move to wherever this magic kingdom is and be done with it. Aside from that, kindly put up or shut up. I'd love to see some workable solutions that would actually help the area, but to blindly suggest taking actions with no reasonable hope of making an improvement is simply foolish.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-21-13 3:25 PM

" CHUCK392 - I have given you many examples in the past but you refuse to listen and you refuse to believe."

Phil, you have not given me a SINGLE EXAMPLE of governments that consolidated into one with the result being a substantial savings. NOT ONE! Instead, you point me to government structures that have been one entity from day one, and ASSUME that they are cheaper because they are one. Offer something that can be backed up, not just assumptions, please.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Jul-21-13 1:24 PM

I can't help but wonder if committed mental patients have access to the internet.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dcronlg

Jul-21-13 10:50 AM

In this country, government -- any government of any size -- is & always has been uniquely of the people, by the people & for the people. This has worked for well over 200+ years & is showing no signs of being any less valid or reliable, despite the selective at-the-fringe self-promoted victimization beliefs to the contrary.

The relentlessly obvious truth -- despite this small/no government religious snake oil hucksterism by misanthropic disciples -- is that no government will adequately service & meet the unique needs & wants of the Silver Creek residents except for a government of, by & for Silver Creek residents.

"Dissolve the village now that police are out"...how about you make yourself happy, be a standup principled guy & remove yourself as a resident of Silver Creek & relocate to an obscure patch of BF Chautauqua County?

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Jul-21-13 10:21 AM

Absolutely the thing to do. The biggest reason no money is saved is because they just spend the money they could have saved. Unless they stop the spend it like you have it and hit the taxpayer things will never change. Putting failing things together just creates a bigger failure. They must cut expenses and tighten belts.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Jul-21-13 9:48 AM

The writer is correct and so is Mr. Steiner. Silver Creek needs to dissolve their government much like the village of Forestville should be dissolved. In fact, all 27 towns, 15 villages, 2 cities and 18 school districts should be dissolved in favor of one centralized county administration with re-structured representation. Our present system was designed in the horse and buggy era when public employees were cheap and manufacturing was plentiful. Yimes have changed and so must government. CHUCK392 - I have given you many examples in the past but you refuse to listen and you refuse to believe. I give up!!!

7 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Jul-21-13 9:02 AM

Mr Kehrer, there are people like the learned posters judeye and cronig who believe the beloved govt employee gave us everything. So in their minds , an absolute catastrophe would occur if the village dissolves. I mean Petris would close for sure. This area is so full of hooked on govt people, sloppy thinkers for sure that you and i are hoping against hope that any real saving can occur.The govt is sacred, like religion was during the middle ages.

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Chuck392

Jul-21-13 7:54 AM

Just don't expect it to save you a lot of money. Similar consolidations have proven this to be a fact. If someone could point me to a consolidation that actually saved a meaningful amount of money on property taxes, I'd love to see it.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 24 of 24 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web