When one town squeezes two governments—What dissolution or consolidation could mean for your taxes and services
May 24, 2025.
The Financier.
Two Plans, two visions.
Mayor Tim Rogers, leading the Village, initially proposed dissolving the Village of New Paltz outright. Under that plan, the Town would assume all municipal control—water, sewer, police, zoning—absorbing $1 million per year in state tax credits, he argues, while eliminating overlapping bureaucracy. Rogers says the Village is fiscally strong, well-managed, and not under pressure—this is his preferred moment to restructure "on our terms," creating a unified "super‑town."
By contrast, Supervisor Amanda Gotto supports a consolidation agreement, not a one-way dissolution. She emphasizes that the Town and Village have slightly different priorities—especially around tenant protections, zoning control, and development oversight—and that a formal contract governing shared governance would preserve those differences more democratically.
Most of New Paltz’s infrastructure (police, courts, emergency services, etc.) are already shared so the potential savings are not as great as they might at first seem. Additionally, the different nature of Village residents and Town residents means that there are still going to be different codes, different rules and the need for different experts/perspectives represented. Making a bigger entity is no guarantee of efficiency and effectiveness.
What’s at stake for taxpayers
A board-initiated dissolution is attractive on paper—but it only needs village votes, not approval from the rest of the Town. That means the 10,000+ town-only residents could lose a say in that decision unless consolidation, which requires all residents to vote, is adopted instead.
Mayor Rogers cites the Citizen Empowerment Tax Credit (CETC) as a major fiscal benefit—annual reimbursements up to $1 million. But state law mandates that 70% of that must go to taxpayer relief—it’s not a fund for new services or town-wide investments.
What we don’t yet see:
Budget details and Financial models to show where the promised efficiencies will be realized
Staffing plans and management structures
A consolidation plan for how responsibilities will be transferred and over what time frame
Bottom line: Don’t let the savings sell the system
My bottom-line financial takeaway? Efficiency is valuable—but only when it’s paired with accountability.
Dissolution may streamline the few governing structures that aren’t already shared, but it also consolidates power and makes quieter voices more difficult to hear. Will the voice of the Village be drowned by the louder voice of the town? Will a smaller group of powerful insiders lose sight of who they are meant to serve? Consolidation via negotiation and contract ensures that both Town and Village residents are heard and represented in the design of a governance system that works for everyone.
Whatever path New Paltz chooses, residents should insist on clarity—not just about savings, but about governance, representation, and long-term fiscal responsibility.