To the Editor:

I am writing in response to Village Trustee Steve Warr’s article/letter “Alarmists Scaring Voters” (Aug. 24-30).

First, I want to commend trustee Warr. When he ran for public office he was clear that he believed we should dissolve the village. Once elected as a village trustee he has faithfully served the village without changing that position: he still believes in dissolution and his actions as a trustee reflect that belief. So I commend him for his consistency and integrity.

I firmly believe, however, that he is wrong.

I think that one of the most important things to remember is that every resident of the village is also a resident of the town (and pays both village and town taxes). So why have both?

One reason is that the needs of those who live inside the village are very different from those who live outside the village.

It would be foolish to trust that those living outside the village would support the expense of services that only benefit those who live in the village.

It also wouldn’t be fair to expect this.

Most lots outside the village are larger and farther away from neighboring properties therefore the actions of one don’t impact the other to the degree that they do in the village where there are population density considerations.

If my neighbor is 100 yards away from my property his actions (noise, brush piles, building codes, fires, etc.) impact me much less than if he is 20 feet away.

Additionally the village is home to a very high number of student rental properties which bring a whole list of special concerns.

In his article/letter trustee Warr asked four questions to which I would like to respond:

1. “Are you unhappy where the village is going under the guidance of the current Village Board?”

My Answer: No. I think that between our new village administrator, Dave Fenton and some of the newer trustees (such as Steve Yugartis) we have people who recognize the need to improve the efficiency of government. It is time, however, for some of the “old guard” to step aside and bring in some people with new ideas.

2. “Will eliminating the village government increase our chances of attracting potential developers, thus increasing our tax base?”

My Answer: I don’t believe our current village government is an impediment to economic development within the village. We need to concentrate on making the village government more efficient and making our village more attractive.

3. “Can one level of government for 15,000 people be successful?”

My Answer: No. Not when there is such a wide range in the needs of that group.

4. “Can the bickering between the two boards be solved any other way than dissolution?”

My Answer: Yes. We don’t need to dissolve government; we need to elect better representatives – people who believe in working together; who think critically; and who work diligently for the common good.

In summary, I urge the residents of the Village of Potsdam to support candidates for office who believe in the value of our village; are open to fresh ideas; and who believe that government can be made responsive and efficient.

I also encourage my neighbors to elect town board officials who will recognize that village residents are also town residents, and who will work to improve both municipalities.

George Arnold

Potsdam