The benefit of a viable opposition party is that voters have a real choice of candidates, something Saugerties voters did not have for most of the past decade. Without a choice, voters stay away from the polls, evidenced by record low election day turnout. Without a viable opposing political party, those in power don’t risk re-election. Even the most well-intentioned candidates may forget their responsibility or lose touch with voters. No longer accountable to voters, Village Hall becomes susceptible to complacency, cronyism, patronage and behind-the-scenes control. Running more candidates for office creates a wider pool of talent and ideas, increases voter interest and brings accountability to Village Hall’s elected officials.
With the addition of the Village Democratic Party, voters have a choice of candidates on election day, March 16th. On some issues, the two opposing Village political parties overlap. For instance, we are in agreement that the Village should maintain its distinct historic character and quality of life. The newly-formed Village Democratic Party also stands for fiscal responsibility on the Village budget, fairness and transparency in government, and responsive, friendly Village services. To make the choice clear, it’s important to highlight the differences between the two political parties on major issues:
Police Consolidation The Village Democratic candidates are decisively in favor of police consolidation and encourage voters to show up at the polls on March 16th and vote for the fiscally responsible choice of abolishing the village police department so that it can be merged with the town police department. Consolidation has been a long time in coming, so now that the moment of decision is upon us, voters should think about the long-term financial health of the village. The Village will ultimately benefit from increased law enforcement services such as detectives that the town can provide through economies of scale. Candidates for the New Vision Party may be nostalgic about seeing police officers at school crosswalks, but this is an expensive and inefficient allocation of law enforcement resources, especially when the job can be done by a crossing guard instead of an officer.
Transparency, Ethics and Open Government In a community of this size, it’s important that residents feel like they have a voice in their government. For the public to feel like they have a stake in government, they need to be informed. The Village has yet to fully enjoy the promise of transparency that new off-the-shelf internet software can offer. There is free and open-source software that can bring transparency to the budget process and make more public information available to citizens online. For instance, the budget process could be made more transparent by using publicly viewable Google spreadsheets that can be edited in realtime by board members. Moreover, the village could do a better job of informing the public, not just bare minimum that is legally-required. For instance, why aren’t planning board meetings listed on the calendar at the village website? and meeting agendas? The Village Democrats also favor an ethics law for Village Hall that would address issues of nepotism and conflicts of interest. Finally, a top priority of the Village Democrats to implement an open and responsive process for handling citizen complaints.
Transfer of water and sewer revenue into general fund A major budget issue is the transfer of funds from water and sewer departments into the general fund. This is an example of “stealing from Peter to pay Paul.” These are supposed to be separate budgets from the general village budget, but the state comptroller allows the transfer of a “reasonable amount” to cover administrative expenses and the like. What constitutes a “reasonable amount” is certainly debatable. Last year, the Village transfered $225,000 from water and $180,000 from wastewater. Deputy mayor Bill Murphy was quoted in last week’s newspaper saying that these departments “generate income for the village.” Should the Village operate the water and sewer departments as sources of revenue? Shouldn’t those funds be reserved for future capital needs for water and sewer? Is that money needed to bring the sewage treatment plant into compliance? Or money to implement the Source Water Protection Plan for the Blue Mountain Reservoir? The Village Democrats think that the Village should not operate these departments as money-making ventures to the detriment of the drinking water supply and sewage treatment. Accepting sewage from outside septic haulers is a questionable practice that places an additional burden on the sewage treatment plant. An increase in the draw rate from the reservoir may lead to water shortages during drought periods. The New Vision Party is seeking a draw rate that is triple the current water usage in order to meet development pressures and increase revenue for the Village. The Village Democrats think it is short-sighted and misguided to manage the drinking water supply as a “cash cow” for the village general fund. At the very least, the increase draw deserves greater study of the capacity and recharge rate of the reservoir.
Development The Village boards such as the Historic Review Board should be allowed to do their jobs without undue interference. As the Village faces increasing development pressures, it is important that developers are not allowed to “game the system” to their advantage and thwart the public interest. These boards should not just lay down and roll-over for the developer. The Historic Review Board, the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan, the Saugerties Comprehensive Plan, the Village Zoning Laws: these are important corrective measures for those who, if given free rein, would turn Saugerties into an upstate version of Long Island. We have good laws and long-range plans on the books. They just need to be vigorously applied. We’d all like to see implementation of recommendations of the Saugerties Area Mobility Analysis and the initiative to reduce large truck traffic on local roads.
Partition Street Project We encourage people to attend the public hearing on Thursday, March 18th. The Planning Board will be taking comments on the site plan, special use permits and a lot line change. The Village Democrats unanimously support the Partition Street Project with modifications to conform with zoning law. It’s important that the Planning Board use its authority and scrutinize the project to make sure it meets criteria in the zoning law for the Planned Waterfront district including: “The quality and extent of views from the adjacent public streets through the development to the water” and “The design, location and function of easements or other access providing public access to the water’s edge.” (210-21) The Planning Board has the authority to insist upon site plan changes to make sure that the plans conform to law and will not clash with the historic character of the village or create traffic congestion at the bottom of Partition Street. There are alternatives to dynamiting Nanny Goat Hill for a parking lot, and these alternatives should be given full consideration.
We need to steer the Village away from budget deficits. Village Hall should be run by the book & aboveboard. Village government should be inclusive, and Village services should be responsive to the needs and concerns of residents. These are the priorities of the Saugerties Village Democratic candidates. To bring accountability to Village Hall, we urge voters to come out on election day March 16th and vote their choices for the Village Board of Trustees. To vote for reform, vote Row A. Vote Democratic.
Patrick Landewe – candidate for Village trustee
Differences between political parties, candidates
The benefit of a viable opposition party is that voters have a real choice of candidates, something Saugerties voters did not have for most of the past decade. Without a choice, voters stay away from the polls, evidenced by record low election day turnout. Without a viable opposing political party, those in power don’t risk re-election. Even the most well-intentioned candidates may forget their responsibility or lose touch with voters. No longer accountable to voters, Village Hall becomes susceptible to complacency, cronyism, patronage and behind-the-scenes control. Running more candidates for office creates a wider pool of talent and ideas, increases voter interest and brings accountability to Village Hall’s elected officials.
With the addition of the Village Democratic Party, voters have a choice of candidates on election day, March 16th. On some issues, the two opposing Village political parties overlap. For instance, we are in agreement that the Village should maintain its distinct historic character and quality of life. The newly-formed Village Democratic Party also stands for fiscal responsibility on the Village budget, fairness and transparency in government, and responsive, friendly Village services. To make the choice clear, it’s important to highlight the differences between the two political parties on major issues:
Police Consolidation The Village Democratic candidates are decisively in favor of police consolidation and encourage voters to show up at the polls on March 16th and vote for the fiscally responsible choice of abolishing the village police department so that it can be merged with the town police department. Consolidation has been a long time in coming, so now that the moment of decision is upon us, voters should think about the long-term financial health of the village. The Village will ultimately benefit from increased law enforcement services such as detectives that the town can provide through economies of scale. Candidates for the New Vision Party may be nostalgic about seeing police officers at school crosswalks, but this is an expensive and inefficient allocation of law enforcement resources, especially when the job can be done by a crossing guard instead of an officer.
Transparency, Ethics and Open Government In a community of this size, it’s important that residents feel like they have a voice in their government. For the public to feel like they have a stake in government, they need to be informed. The Village has yet to fully enjoy the promise of transparency that new off-the-shelf internet software can offer. There is free and open-source software that can bring transparency to the budget process and make more public information available to citizens online. For instance, the budget process could be made more transparent by using publicly viewable Google spreadsheets that can be edited in realtime by board members. Moreover, the village could do a better job of informing the public, not just bare minimum that is legally-required. For instance, why aren’t planning board meetings listed on the calendar at the village website? and meeting agendas? The Village Democrats also favor an ethics law for Village Hall that would address issues of nepotism and conflicts of interest. Finally, a top priority of the Village Democrats to implement an open and responsive process for handling citizen complaints.
Transfer of water and sewer revenue into general fund A major budget issue is the transfer of funds from water and sewer departments into the general fund. This is an example of “stealing from Peter to pay Paul.” These are supposed to be separate budgets from the general village budget, but the state comptroller allows the transfer of a “reasonable amount” to cover administrative expenses and the like. What constitutes a “reasonable amount” is certainly debatable. Last year, the Village transfered $225,000 from water and $180,000 from wastewater. Deputy mayor Bill Murphy was quoted in last week’s newspaper saying that these departments “generate income for the village.” Should the Village operate the water and sewer departments as sources of revenue? Shouldn’t those funds be reserved for future capital needs for water and sewer? Is that money needed to bring the sewage treatment plant into compliance? Or money to implement the Source Water Protection Plan for the Blue Mountain Reservoir? The Village Democrats think that the Village should not operate these departments as money-making ventures to the detriment of the drinking water supply and sewage treatment. Accepting sewage from outside septic haulers is a questionable practice that places an additional burden on the sewage treatment plant. An increase in the draw rate from the reservoir may lead to water shortages during drought periods. The New Vision Party is seeking a draw rate that is triple the current water usage in order to meet development pressures and increase revenue for the Village. The Village Democrats think it is short-sighted and misguided to manage the drinking water supply as a “cash cow” for the village general fund. At the very least, the increase draw deserves greater study of the capacity and recharge rate of the reservoir.
Development The Village boards such as the Historic Review Board should be allowed to do their jobs without undue interference. As the Village faces increasing development pressures, it is important that developers are not allowed to “game the system” to their advantage and thwart the public interest. These boards should not just lay down and roll-over for the developer. The Historic Review Board, the Local Waterfront Revitalization Plan, the Saugerties Comprehensive Plan, the Village Zoning Laws: these are important corrective measures for those who, if given free rein, would turn Saugerties into an upstate version of Long Island. We have good laws and long-range plans on the books. They just need to be vigorously applied. We’d all like to see implementation of recommendations of the Saugerties Area Mobility Analysis and the initiative to reduce large truck traffic on local roads.
Partition Street Project We encourage people to attend the public hearing on Thursday, March 18th. The Planning Board will be taking comments on the site plan, special use permits and a lot line change. The Village Democrats unanimously support the Partition Street Project with modifications to conform with zoning law. It’s important that the Planning Board use its authority and scrutinize the project to make sure it meets criteria in the zoning law for the Planned Waterfront district including: “The quality and extent of views from the adjacent public streets through the development to the water” and “The design, location and function of easements or other access providing public access to the water’s edge.” (210-21) The Planning Board has the authority to insist upon site plan changes to make sure that the plans conform to law and will not clash with the historic character of the village or create traffic congestion at the bottom of Partition Street. There are alternatives to dynamiting Nanny Goat Hill for a parking lot, and these alternatives should be given full consideration.
We need to steer the Village away from budget deficits. Village Hall should be run by the book & aboveboard. Village government should be inclusive, and Village services should be responsive to the needs and concerns of residents. These are the priorities of the Saugerties Village Democratic candidates. To bring accountability to Village Hall, we urge voters to come out on election day March 16th and vote their choices for the Village Board of Trustees. To vote for reform, vote Row A. Vote Democratic.
Patrick Landewe – candidate for Village trustee