Annexation Meeting Wednesday Evening
The Village of Trumansburg Board of Trustees will be holding a public hearing on the issue of the proposed annexation of land owned by Bill Auble this week. The meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, July 11th at 7:00 PM, and will be held in the auditorium of the high school.
Because this is a public hearing, there will be ample opportunity for citizens of Trumansburg to ask questions and express their opinions about whether the annexation should take place.
I will, alas, be out of town on the day of this meeting, as I was on the day of the first annexation meeting. I’d love to hear about what happens at the meeting from those of you who will be there.
I can’t go either. I am not really clear on the subject, although i would like to forward some feedback. Does anyone care to summarize what will happen if annexation is allowed or denied?
Carissa,
If the annexation is denied, nothing will happen. Things will stay as they are. The vacant land along 96 and the part of the trailer park that is in the town will remain in the town.
If the land is annexed into the village it will then become part of the village. This means the vacant land and 85 trailer homes within the park.
Currently, Mr. Auble pays the village rate and a half for his water and sewer which the village supplies to him. If his property is annexed into the village he will pay the same rate as those of us who live in the village. This means a lose of thousands of dollars in water and sewer revenue to the village. We will also loose money from the fire contract we have with the town as that is based on residents in the town. We will have the expense of maintaining roads, providing code inforcement and other expenses.
What I hope people understand is that the village already set its budget to cover expenses for the upcoming year and took into account that we would HAVE that revenue coming in from Mr. Auble. If we lose that money that we counted on, it will cause quite a financial struggle for the village. There was very little wiggle room with that budget this year.
We also have $178,000.00 worth of improvements that need to be done to our current water system.
I just don’t see how we can afford to take on additional property and expense when we struggle to take care of what we already have. We already bonded out 1.5 million dollars which covered the water tank and the emergency generators we need to put in.
I’m very worried we are getting into a serious financial situation that will affect all of us if this goes through.
Mr. Auble approached the village three years ago to be annexed in and it was denied for many of the reasons I stated above. The difference is the village approached him this time and I don’t exactly know why they did that…. that will be one of my questions.
Marcia,
with all due respect you are very incorrect on your assesment of the outcome of anexation. The village stands to lose a large source of revenue if the annexation FAILS. That is due to the water revenue from the auble park moving to the town. $100,000 if I am correct. The annexation makes perfect sense to bring in that property to the village…it is residential and gives the village opportunity to work with the property owner to develop it in the villages best interest. I think it only failed before because of personality issues with the owner.
Dear RM,
Your senerio would be very correct IF the town were able to provide water to Auble’s, It cannot. That is why they buy it from the village.
The only way your theory holds true is if WD#5 were to go through and the town was able to provide the water. Then, the annexation would become a very different thing.
I have attended town board meetings. It seems very clear to me that the board cannot come to an agreement to proceed with WD#5. They cannot agree on what color the sky is!
The village has to spend money to tend to our current water situation, a situation where we have been told we cannot extend our water service. So, for right now the land couldn’t be developed if we wanted to.
The town cannot develop it either if they don’t have the water. We cannot afford this right now. I don’t know why the village thought approaching Bill was a good idea, but right now it serves nobody but the lawyers putting money in their pockets.
I personally know and have spoken with a member of the board who voted down the last annexation and he said the cost was the issue. When you are playing with other peoples money, personality conflicts have no place in deciding what is best for the people.
Marcia, marcia, marcia. You speak as if you are a voting member of some board. Are you? What you give is an opinion. Are you against annexation because you have a personality issue with members of both boards? Do you want to see the water district developed? If it is developed would it not cost as the previous poster said approx 100k loss to the village/yr? What about the positives of annexing the trailer park- dont the people who live in the trailer park have the same desire to have cheaper water, road services, etc? Shouldnt they who live right next to the Village boudnry have the same services you enjoy by living in the village. Are you against economic diversity coming into the village?Some people say mr auble is pretty vindictive (pig farm and all), wouldnt it be nice for the village to be able to zone that property appropriatly for the village and avoid any auble shenanigans in the future? Just some serious questions for all to consider. I think the village is certainly doing the right thing getting this property into the village. My two cents.
I went to the meeting last night. I thought it was a good example of how local government should operate. It was well attended. Everyone who wanted to speak was allowed to speak. The question of wether to annex or not is very complex. The majority of speakers spoke against it, but perhaps it’s just human nature for those who are opposed to be more highly motivated to come to the meeting. There were a fair number of people who thought it was a good idea to annex in-order to exercise some control over the future use of the property, but then there is the question of wether we will finish the comprehensive plan and update the zoning ordinances (currently from 1971 and very lax) it time to be able to stop unwanted development. (David Filberto objected to my use of the word control – but I forget what word he prefers) I think the board should say no to annexation, and apologize to Mr. Auble, because a board member invited him to petition for annexation and thus has costed him some legal fees. They should suggest that he might try again in a year or two when the comprehensive plan is finished and the zoning ordinances are updated. The only board member who wasn’t there was John Hubros, which was odd because rumor has it that he approached Auble and suggested that he seek annexation. (some scheduling mixup I guess)
There was a little tension created by Mayor Petrovic’s insistence that we not discuss WD5. That was kind of hard because the two issues are intertwined, but had he not insisted, then the meeting might have lasted twice as long.
Bill Chaisson was there all night, so we can read his take on it soon in the Trumansburg Free Press
Rumor has it that Hubros asked Auble to seek annexation in-order to kill WD5. I am no closer to knowing wether or not that is true. If true, it seems like a slightly underhanded move, but it doesn’t really weigh upon the decision the board now has to make.
Did Mayor Petrovic say that if annexation was approved by the town and village and county, the next step is a general referendum? Did I get that right? If so does that mean every voter in both the town and village gets to vote on this during the next village and town elections?
One last question, at the risk of being perceived as very naive. There was a lot of discussion about the financial implications of annexation. I’m wondering if we could ignore that whole aspect, because government is a non profit enterprise. We pay taxes and fees and get water and sewer and fire and police etc. in return. The system is supposed to break even. We are all in this together. As citizens, why worry about the financial implications of relatively small decisions? Couldn’t we leave it up to our elected representatives to strive for equity between government bodies? Aren’t they doing a pretty good job of that now? Aren’t our relative tax rates in the town/village/county fairly equitable?
I called the Village offices and asked Tammy Morse about the referendum that Mayor Petrovic spoke about. Turns out it would be a referendum of the trailer park residents only. (doesn’t seem fair does it?)
Sue Heninger wrote an article about the annexation in the latest Tompkins Weekly. She writes “The village now supports the annexation of Leisure Living while the town is opposed” This makes it sound like a done deal. Neither body has voted, and anyone can contact their representatives and voice their opinion. My impression is that they still have open minds.
Allen–
Annexation under NYS municipal law is a fairly complex process. That is, as it turns out, part of why we in NYS have so much (and so many) local government(s), and overall high local taxes from all the overlapping, inefficient and redundant providers of municipal services, who often cooperate and coordinate poorly. There is little incentive for municipalities to “grow” their borders in response to dense residential and/or commercial development, and very few annexations take place in NYS, as the process is so complicated and there has not been funding or technical assistance from the state available to help municipalities make good decisions on these issues. [Note: I believe Gov. Spitzer and Marty Mack, his head of Intergovernmental Affairs and a former mayor of Cortland, have goals to have NYS provide this help in future].
It seems, however, that many of the citizens, both those who were present at last night’s hearing, and those who were not, would like to be able to form an informed opinion about this complex issue. A professional planning report, prepared by a consultant, or in collaboration with the County Planning Department, or by students of Cornell’s Department of City and Regional Planning, would give citizens a written document to look at to get the straight story on procedure, options, possible impacts, from an objective and informed source. It would frame the debate with facts.
Look back through the comments here, and see how much mention there is of rumors, what some official is said to have done or said, personalities, etc. And, of course, financial calculations that take only THIS year into consideration. This (annexation request, repeatedly submitted), is a long-term planning decision. It requires serious number-crunching over a long time horizon, as well as a comprehensive and in-depth consideration of impacts, positive and negative. It is not something that is simple enough to absorb enough information through hearing, or newspaper stories (much as I though Sue Henninger’s piece did a good job of bringing up a lot of different considerations).
Jim,
No, I’m not a voting member of the board, just a citizen with an opinion.
I am against the annexation because I have crunched numbers and I don’t believe we can afford it. I think first and foremost the village board needs to do what is best for the village. That should be their first priority.
Frankly, I believe I am one of those economicly diverse people you speak of. I work two jobs, as does my husband in order to be able to live in the village. I will be completely honest with you and say I wouldn’t be able to live here at all if I hadn’t been lucky enough to be able to purchase a small house that my grandparents owned. Houses here are out of my range.
The town can put the water district in without the village right now. However, they have failed to proceed with the process for about 3 years now. I would be very surprised if it moved forward. One productive talk with the village and town was a new proposal that if they did put in WD#5 the town would purchase the water from the village to cover the difference, that to me seemed a better deal for the village. Whether they proceed to discuss that further I don’t know.
As many stated in the meeting and I whole heartedly agree, is that this invitation to annex was premature.
We have many issues within the village that we need to attend to now, and the cost of those projects are significant.
I don’t disagree that there aren’t positive points to annexation, but before we do that I believe we need to lay the groundwork for that, plan, put aside money in order to pay the right people to do this responsibly and as economicly as possible. The village can’t just take on property and projects and keep raising taxes to pay for them, it will push people out.
If people need to make choices whether to pay their taxes to keep a roof over their head, they may decide they can’t afford to pay more school taxes. Thus our educational system suffers. It all works it’s way down.
If we control our spending, work on paying down our debt, take care of the things that are vital to our quality of life (water and sewer), then we can work on the bells and whistles. The things we would “like” to have. I just believe for right now we have to take care of the things we NEED.
NOTICE OF MEETING:
THERE WILL BE A SPECIAL MEETING HELD BY THE VILLAGE BOARD ON MONDAY, JULY 16th AT THE VILLAGE HALL AT 5:00pm.
THIS MEETING IS REGARDING THE PETITION FOR ANNEXATION.
Maybe other things, I don’t know but thought I would pass it on as the village website is currently down.
Marcia,
Thanks for the info.
5pm – not too convenient
Do you think they’ll be voting?
Kyrs,
You said we have “overlapping, inefficient and redundant providers of municipal services” Do you mean services like fire, water, sewer, road maintenance?
Krys,
I think you misunderstood my comment regarding the budget comment. I did mention that the village had already budgeted that revenue for this year. However, my big concern is over the long term.
I think it would be a completely different ball of wax, if we were able to extend our water lines and have planning in place for development there so we could recoup our loss of income within a reasonable amount of time. However we can’t do that, and the board did mention at the meeting we are talking several years away from being able to do anything with that property.
Our Main Street project started around 1999. At that time it was projected the cost would be a total of $904,000. Some of this expense paid back with grant money. To this day we are at around 1.4 million dollars and we are still gathering figures on the project.
My concern is we cannot get the money for the loss in revenue from the water and sewer any other place than to raise rates. Those rates will keep climbing. They were increased just recently. Compile that with the fact we still need to deal with our second source situation (somehow). Add to that the infrastructer we currently need to maintain. So, yeah I was talking the long term.
Thanks for clarification, Marcia. Crunching $$ numbers on long-term costs depends very heavily on what assumptions you use– like, for instance, when and how you think that the undeveloped land proposed for annexation would be developed. As far as the village board’s estimation of how long it takes to adopt a zoning ordinance…. well, forgive me if I don’t exactly consider them the experts on this. As I mentioned at the meeting, do-it-yourself municipal planning may take more time than Trumansburg has, if it is to seize its opportunities. IMHO, the investment in an annexation might well be a good value for the village, if pursued in concert with a “pick up the pace, already” approach to getting planning work done. I believe that the amount of free time available to village board and citizen volunteers is a poor way to measure how much planning work a municipality gets done in a year– but this does seem to be the way the village has been doing it (and so is way, way, way behind schedule as measured by needs). Town has gotten a bit better about this the past few years, and things have moved much more quickly.
Yes, Allen, I do mean fire, water, sewer, road maintenance are often administered in small units, sometimes overlapping, that tend to make them less efficient than they might be if they were larger units. Of course, units that are too large can also be inefficient, but, in NYS and New England, with our history of small towns and villages inherited from horse-and-buggy days, too small is usually the problem.
Krys,
I agree with that point. Since that is the way municipalities work, it is often hard to find people who want to dedicate that kind of time. The village has a hard time even finding people to work on the planning board.
I guess my concern is that Mr. Auble has requested this annexation before, on his own behalf. This time he was approached. I don’t understand why, if someone thought this was a wonderful idea, they didn’t do the cost analysis BEFORE approaching him. All of the questions the residents asked at the meeting regarding cost and extra services were ” We don’t know, we haven’t run the numbers yet.” To me that is just putting the cart before the horse.
Marcia,
Sorry, have to do it. Want to give us your long term plan? Don’t like the Main Street project, love WD5? Come on Marcia, let’s put the money where the mouth is. Want to be a Village Trustee, let’s hear something other than when the next meeting will be or that you’re wringing your hands over where the money will come from. That stuff’s easy.
Good point Richard. Keeping abreast of local politics in this town, interesting to note that the repubs are trying to get candidates in on the INDEPENDENCE ticket check it out:
http://www.co.tompkins.ny.us/boe/2007/Petitions%20Filed1.pdf
Smart move when you want to confuse an electorate with a party that’s just another arm of the republican wing. Independence sounds alot like independent doesn’t it? Seems like the minority party here in Ulysses will do whatever it takes to get them good ol’ boys (and girls;) in. Hope the silent majority doesn’t fall for all these shenanigans come November and March.
Richard,
If its as easy as you say, why don’t we know how much we have spent? I think fiscal management should be a consideration in order to continue to provide quality services to the community and PLAN for upgrades. It goes hand in hand. When you know how much you have to work with you can set goals for future improvements.
I think it is the responsibility of municipal government to spend your money wisely.
I would like the people who come here to be able to stay here. I would like the older segment of our community who have contributed so much to be able to sell the big houses they can no longer afford to maintain and have somewhere within the community to go.
I recently had the pleasure of meeting a young couple who bought a home in the village thanks to Better Housing. They are so thrilled to be here, a dream they thought they could never afford. I want them to be able to stay. I don’t want them to be taxed out of here.
Don’t get me wrong I’m not talking Slashing the budget or cutting services. Im just talking about responsible spending.
I think if we have a paid EMT service, we should charge for it. Every other municipality that has a paid Amubulance service, charges for the service. We service the State Parks and State Facilities with fire and ambulance service, why isn’t the State paying for that service?
I can’t answer your question on WD#5. As it was orginally proposed, I was against it. Further talks between the town and village happened with a new proposal from the town to buy enough water from the village to make up the difference. Whether they will continue to talk about that I don’t know.
I think there are alot of people who feel it isn’t the best idea in regard to the village’s interest. Currently, Im not convinced it is the best solution to our second source situation. I also want to know what happened to the $80,000.00 we gave the town orginally.
(Thank you Jackie Merwin for asking that question). I asked that question of the Mayor when I had my interview with him.
I will run on the ticket under which I am registered. I am not of the mindset that if a Democrat comes up with a good idea, I will not listen or support it because we are not registered the same. That is silly.
A good idea is a good idea, no matter where it comes from.
NOTICE OF MEETING DATES:
Regarding the annexation.
Tuesday, July 24th 7:00
Friday, Aug 3rd 5:30 pm (if needed so check on that)
Wednesday Aug 15th 7:00
Tuesday Aug 21st 7:00
All meetings are at the Village Hall
Future Trustee Marcia,
If the older residents with big houses can’t make enough money by selling them, they’re not trying. The local real estate market is booming. Just ask the county assessor!
In terms of the young couple, it isn’t taxes that are keeping them out, it is a housing stock that is basically saturated. Affordable housing is a wonderful issue, but I’d be amazed if a Repub. like yourself would really support the expenditures necessary to make it happen.
On the issue of charging for services rendered. Where do you draw the line? Should we be a strictly fee-based Village? Should people with fire hydrants near their houses pay more for it? Should the businesses on Main Street pay for the snow plowing they get on the sidewalks? Hmmmmm.
Finally, on the State Park paying for ambulance service, who is it that uses the State Parks and would need the service? I think it’s individuals, right? Want to charge them? See above.
On WD5, that answer is a perfect non-answer. Good for an aspiring politician!
I love that you’re willing to admit you’re a Republican. That’s not an easy thing to do these days, hence the “independent” greenhouse effect mentioned by John. If you ever get interested in a “Republicans Anonymous” session, I’m sure we can find a local chapter for you.
Dear Riddler,
My comment in regard to seniors who want to sell houses, isn’t whether they can or not, they can. It is where do they go if they want to stay here. Many certainly aren’t ready for assisted living, they are still very active and contribute alot in the way of volunteering and mentoring in the community. We have no place for them to move to if they want to downsize.
Affordable housing is an issue throughout the county.
Trumansburg successfully put in low income housing apartments that are very nice. I personally know several people who live there and they love it! The developer paid for infrastructer upgrades to put it in. I think the money is out there for us to be successful at that with the proper planning.
Regarding the ambulance service. It is expensive. If the village has committed to a paid EMT service we should bill for services rendered. I think this is a clear line to draw when you see where the money goes.
Did you know that tongue depressors have an expiration date? Did you know that we had certified EMT’s working for the village for less than $7.00 an hour? (mind you we did raise that when I was on the board).
My husband gets paid that to stock yogurt at Shur Save and these people are saving lives!
As far as servicing State facilities, does it hurt to ask if there is money out there for municipalities who service them? Just asking.
As for WD #5, if you have the answer, share it with me. I have no answers because I have gotten no answers that satisfy me. When I was first appointed to the board in March I met with Mr. Austic who explained his take on it. I thought it was a rotton deal for the village. As I explained in my above post, whether the current board is still talking about a compromise I don’t know.
When I don’t know something I will say I don’t know. I remain sceptical about WD#5.
Lastly, when I was 18 and registered as a Republican, I don’t ever recall signing a paper in blood promising that I would believe certain things, think a certain way, be for or against certain issues. I have my own mind. For a long period of time in my life I have lived without health insurance, worked at poverty level, been unable to work due to injury and unfortunately because of my vocation, if you don’t work you don’t get paid. I have been there. I understand those circumstances. I cannot begin to tell you what a godsend those low income apartments would have been to me at that time in my life, I wish they had exsisted then.
So dear Riddler, I hope with complete optimism, that before you pigeon hole your perception of a “Republican” you remain a bit more open. Could I change my affliation? Sure. I don’t think that is honest. I think if someone likes what someone has to say they should be able to pull a lever for that reason alone. I shouldn’t change my affliation to make someone “feel better” about pulling the lever.
You know what I mean?
Q: What do you call someone who consciously remains a Republican but says we shouldn’t assume that her choice of political party really means anything?
A: An aspiring politician.
Riddler,
I didn’t say that at all. But you can twist it however it suits you I suppose.
Riddler,
I thought about what you said…something I find interesting.
You could probably ask 1,000 Democrats what it means to them to be a Democrat or why they are registered that way and you will more than likely get several different answers. Same with Republicans.
Because people base their thoughts and beliefs primarily in relation to their personal experiences.
This is why each party has more than one candidate running for office. If they all thought the same way,
had no different opinion or idea, what would be the point? Why have debates? Why travel across the country to get your ideas heard?
Right now we are seeing debates and hearing from candidates who are registered under the same party who have very different ideas. So is one to assume that because they think differently their party affilation means nothing?
Riddler,
The best case yet of a Republican changing his stripes in order to appeal to Democrats and try to get elected was Mitt Romney. He ran against Ted Kennedy for Senator in the mid-90s and on the issues most important to the Republican National Committee he took Democratic positions. Check out this video of a debate with Kennedy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI) and compare it to what he’s saying now that he’s running in the Republican Presidential primary. You’re pretty cynical, but there’s something to your point (I assume it was a point even though you actually asked an abstract question) that whenever a politician starts to waffle on party affiliation, you can bet the house that there’s an election right around the corner.