The Village of Brockport has had some spectacular fights over the years.
When the state wanted to close the Normal School in the 1930’s, Brockport residents fought and convinced higher-ups to keep it open; what was once a teachers’ school is now SUNY Brockport. The community also waged a high-profile, protracted campaign to get polluted lands cleaned up. And village officials battled with the towns of Sweden and Clarkson over fire services.
But right now, the village is in the middle of its most pressing conflict in years, and it concerns Brockport’s very existence.
On May 24, Brockport voters will decide whether to dissolve the village government. Brockport is within the Town of Sweden.
“It is about taxes, no matter what anybody says,” says Rhett King, a leader of One Brockport, the group that’s advocating for dissolution. King submitted the petition which forced the vote.
Group members say that the village is a redundant layer of government and provides services already provided by the Town of Sweden and Monroe County; eliminating the village would save money, they say.
But it’s not that simple.
With a population of 8,400, Brockport is Monroe County’s largest village. Its canalside downtown bustles with shops, restaurants, bars, offices, and apartments.
The village is also home to SUNY Brockport, which brings in droves of people from outside of the village each day, including commuting students and members of the public who come to the campus for cultural events.
The village needs its own code enforcement and police because of its size, the college, and its concentration of rentals, says Mayor Margay Blackman, who opposes dissolution. And the village government is best suited to provide these services, she says.
Only Brockport residents get to vote on May 24; Sweden voters don’t get a say, even though the town would have to provide services to village residents if the measure goes through. If voters decide to dissolve Brockport, the village government will develop a plan for continuing services, though Sweden doesn’t have to follow it.
“Dissolution is not the solution,” says Pro-Brockport member Jo Matela, who owns the Red Bird Cafe & Gift Shop on Main Street and is a former Brockport mayor. “This is not real tax reform. To have a law that one municipality votes to dissolve and the other one takes on the burden — because it will be a burden — and they have no say, it is totally ridiculous.”
Brockport residents rejected dissolution in 2010 by a vote of 959 to 662, and dissolution opponents say that they are confident that they’ll win again this time.
But pro-dissolution forces are confident, too. King says that eliminating the village government would lead to lower property taxes; Brockport’s tax rate is the highest of all Monroe County villages.
Nobody’s formally studied the potential savings, but King points to the police department as an example. The Brockport Police Department would in all likelihood cease to exist if dissolution goes through, saving about $1.5 million that is the BPD’s annual budget, King says.
“These are tough times in the past 10 or 15 years with layoffs and consolidations and people that were making $30 an hour making $10 an hour,” King says. “It’s a different world for people. Some recover and some don’t.”
With successful dissolution votes in Macedon and Lyons, One Brockport sees reason to be encouraged this time around. And Macedon shows that just because village voters rejected dissolution in the past, doesn’t mean that they’ll always reject it.
Voters chose to dissolve the Wayne County village last year after two previous votes failed. The town had by that time taken over the Macedon police department and arranged for community-wide ambulance and fire coverage, so dissolution supporters argued that the village wasn’t providing much in the way of major services anymore. Voters agreed.
But dissolution is a local decision. Each community that goes through it has its own issues, politics, dynamics, and grudges. Brockport has shed some services over the years: emergency dispatch is now handled by the countywide 911 service, for example, and ambulance and fire services are provided through districts. But Brockport still has a police department, and last year, a new village court started handling criminal, traffic, and code violation cases.
Brockport’s a college community and rentals are something of an industry; more than half of the residential spaces in the village, from single-family houses to apartments, are rentals. And many are occupied by students.
The animosity between the village and some of its bigger landlords is a major source of strife in Brockport. Those tensions drove the 2010 vote and are a significant factor in this year’s pending vote.
The friction stems from village rental and property maintenance regulations. The regulations limit the number of unrelated people who can live together in rentals, for example, and require landlords to register the properties. But some of the landlords say that the regulations go too far.
Officials and members of Pro-Brockport say that the village needs strong property codes with robust enforcement to ensure that the rental properties are safe. If voters dissolve the village, code enforcement will fall to Sweden, which could have trouble keeping up, they say.
And the village police force is necessary to make sure that the village has a safe, orderly environment for all who live there, they say. The Monroe County Sheriff’s Office, which would take over policing duties, does a fine job, they say, but it simply can’t compete with Brockport police in terms of presence and community focus.
Matela, the former mayor, says that dissolution supporters, a group that includes some of the landlords who have been at odds with the village, want to get rid of code enforcement and police so that they can operate with less oversight.
But King says that’s wrong. The town is perfectly capable of providing code enforcement, and already deals with rental properties, including student apartments, outside of the village, he says.
And King and other One Brockport members say that the village would be served well by the sheriff’s office. Dissolution opponents are mischaracterizing supporters’ motives, King says.
“It’s the fear,” he says. “It’s all they have.”
This article appears in May 18-24, 2016.
Would they be really well served by the sheriffs department? If units in the area are already on a call, who is coming to the rescue? Units on the other side of the county which leads to greater response times. I’m not advocating for or against dissolution but look at all the possibilities before making a choice and make sure you make an informed choice
First of all, I was born in Brockport many years ago at Lakeside Memorial Hospital over on West Avenue. I went to High School there and I still have plenty of family and friends who live in this village. My name is Ove Overmyer—and I’m sure most residents of the area will recognize my family name—we have been living in this village for more than four generations.
I mention my personal history because I want to squash any notion that I don’t have a horse in this race—in fact, I do and so do you no matter where you live in this country. Anytime there is a threat to one’s quality of life, folks need to speak up and take a stand. This is because it’s not just a fight for Brockport residents to keep their village whole– this is about something much much greater.
This fight over village dissolution is really an ideological attack on the existence of government itself. I believe government is a positive social force and a civil contract that attempts to improve people’s lives and hold everyone accountable. Government gets a bad rap and I’m here to defend it.
By virtue of full disclosure, I must also state that I work for a union who represents the DPW workers who are employed by the Village of Brockport. That being said, this makes my resolve all the more meaningful.
I personally consider putting a vote to village dissolution an act that threatens our personal safety and financial security—and it will inevitably diminish our quality of life. While I know some people think local governments are dysfunctional, I respectfully disagree. After careful consideration of the facts and circumstances surrounding this vote, I’m pretty sure most rational folks will come to same conclusion that I have—residents will have a better quality of life if they vote no on May 24.
Dissolution is devoid of any civic meaning
If you believe the landlords, the dissolution argument, the conservative and libertarian arguments, then you probably believe Americans are cast as victims of a vast corrupt political system. As the narrative goes, we are just taxpayers bearing up under the obligation to pay into federal, state and local coffers. Some are stoic in the face of the inevitability of “death and taxes,” while others burn with resentment like the old Tea Party folks.
Here is the problem. What is missing from this picture is any sense of a larger meaning in the act of paying taxes in the first place. Most other things that require effort and sacrifice– family, service, charity, and volunteerism– have virtuous or at least redeeming value associated with them. That meaning helps us face life’s challenges with a larger sense of purpose that make these acts worth the investment.
When we lose sight of this, taxes and government are seen as merely depriving us of our individual property. If, on the other hand, we see ourselves as government stewards of common good, as citizen managers of public systems and structures that secure the village, city, state and country we live in, then taxes are our contribution to something bigger than our individual selves.
The stories we hear about government dissolution and not paying taxes reflect a chronic disconnection from our role as citizens; they are devoid of any civic meaning. The real meaning of local government and taxes pays for the things that underpin our public life and connect us to one another through our villages, our communities, our states and our country.
The fact remains, no one can predict what will happen if the village dissolves. Every village dissolution process is different—and yields unintended consequences every time. To compare other jurisdictions that have dissolved to what would happen in Brockport is like comparing apples to oranges.
We all need to be telling a new and meaningful story about the positive aspects of government and taxes that celebrate the concrete opportunity it offers we the people.
Post Script:
If voters really want to know what motivates those who support dissolution, all you have to do is think of revenge and greed. It’s no secret the dissolutionists inordinately own most of the real estate rental property in the village and want to stick their finger in the eye of village government. After all, village officials are the only stop-gap measure in preserving property values and the historic landmarks that dot each village street.
The landlords selfishly think by eliminating village government, code enforcement and public safety officers, it will remove all barriers to increasing their industry profit margin—all at their neighbor’s expense. This is really about greed folks—plain and simple.
As it is, this landlord group continues to thumb their nose at their neighbors as they destroy the housing stock in one of New York State’s most historically valuable communities. It would be a travesty if voters allow them to get away with it.
-Ove Overmyer