Village Functions

Village Government

In New York State, the village is a general purpose municipal corporation formed voluntarily by the residents of an area in one or more towns to provide themselves with municipal services. But when a village is created, its area still remains a part of the town where it is located, and its residents continue to be residents and taxpayers of that town.

The first village was incorporated at the end of the eighteenth century. The village form of municipal organization became a prominent feature of the state's growing metropolitan areas between 1900 and 1940. The patterns of village organization are similar to those of cities.

Many people think of villages as being small, rural communities. Population size alone however, does not determine whether one community becomes a village and another remains as an unincorporated "hamlet" in a town. In New York State a village is a legal concept; it is a municipal corporation. The largest village in the state, Hempstead in Nassau County, had more than 56,000 residents in 2000, while the smallest city, Sherrill, had 3,147. Fifty-two of New York's 62 cities had populations in the year 2000 that were smaller than Hempstead's.

Villages were originally formed within towns to provide services for clusters of residents, first in relatively rural areas and later in suburban areas around large cities. Today, many of the existing 556 villages are in the areas surrounding the state's larger cities. Many villages have public service responsibilities that differ little from those of cities, towns, and counties, and village officials face the full range of municipal obligations and challenges.

What is a Village?

A village is often referred to as "incorporated." Legally cities, towns, villages and counties are all "incorporated." Hence, there are no "unincorporated villages" in New York State. The vernacular "incorporated village" likely came to be used because villages are areas within towns for which an additional municipal corporation has been formed.

Many places in the state having large numbers of people living in close proximity are neither villages nor cities. Many have names, some have post offices. Some, like Levittown on Long Island, have thousands of residents. If the people in such communities have not incorporated pursuant to the Village law, they do not constitute a village. While many people refer to such places as "hamlets", the term "hamlet" actually has no meaning under New York law.

By definition, a village is a municipality which, at the time of its incorporation, met statutory requirements then established as prerequisites to that incorporation. Although the Village Law now sets area and population criteria for an initial village incorporation, a number of existing villages have populations smaller than the present statutory minimum.

Historical Development

The earliest villages in the state were incorporated partly to circumvent the legal confusion about the nature and scope of town government that resulted from legislative modification of English statutes. Generally, in the decades after the Revolution, villages in New York were created because clusters of people in otherwise sparsely settled towns wanted to secure fire or police protection, or other public services. Those inhabitants receiving the fire or police service, and not the whole town, paid for such services. A forerunner of villages appears to have been a 1787 legislative act granting special privileges to part of a town, entitled "An act for the better extinguishing of fires in the town of Brooklyn."

The appearance of the village as a formal unit of local government began in the 1790's. Villages were created by special acts of State Legislature, but the starting date for this process is in dispute among historians due to a lack of precision in terminology in those early legislative acts. In 1790, the Legislature granted specific powers to the trustees of "… part of the town of Rensselaerwyck, commonly called Lansingburgh." The term "village" first appeared in state law in a 1794 enactment incorporating Waterford. The legislative act of 1798, providing for the incorporation of Lansingburgh and Troy as villages, is seen by many historians as the first formal authorization in the state for the village form of government. This enactment included all of the legal elements (including an incorporation clause and delegation of taxing and regulatory power) deemed necessary for a true unit of local government.

First mention of the village as a constitutional civil division appeared in a section of the 1821 New York State Constitution prescribing qualifications of voters. The Constitution of 1846 required that the Legislature "provide for the organization of cities and incorporated villages." The Legislature passed a general Village Law in 1847, but continued to incorporate villages through the enactment of special charters, as it had for the previous half-century. Separate incorporation led to a variety of village government forms, even for villages of similar characteristics. In 1874, a revised State Constitution forbade incorporation of villages by special act of the State Legislature. Since that time, New York State villages have been formed through local initiative pursuant to the Village Law.

An 1897 revision of the Village Law required those villages with charters to comply with provisions of the Village Law that were not inconsistent with their charters. It also gave the charter villages the option of reincorporating under the general law. Although numerous charter villages did reincorporate, 12 villages still operate under charters. These are: Alexander, Carthage, Catskill, Cooperstown, Deposit, Fredonia, Ilion, Mohawk, Ossining, Owego, Port Chester and Waterford.

In the first 40 years of the twentieth century, as people moved from cities into the suburbs, more than 160 villages were incorporated under the Village Law. The rapid growth of towns in suburban areas in the late 1930's and following World War II emphasized the need for alternatives to villages. To provide services, suburban areas made increasing use of the town special district. This had a profound effect on the growth of villages.Although more than 160 villages were formed from 1900 to 1940, only 31 new villages have appeared over the succeeding 66 years, and 24 have dissolved during that period.

There were 556 villages in New York State in 2006. They range in size from the Village of West Hampton Dunes with a 2000 Census population of 11, to the Village of Hempstead, with a 2000 Census population of 56,554. The majority of villages have populations under 2,500, although there were 25 villages between 10,000 and 20,000 population in 2000 and 10 villages with more than 20,000 population.

Over 70 villages are located in two or more towns. There are seven villages which are in two counties. One village, Saranac Lake, lies in three towns and two counties. Five villages - Green Island inAlbany County, East Rochester in Monroe County, and Scarsdale, Harrison and Mount Kisco in Westchester County - are coterminous with towns of the same name. A coterminous town-village is a unique form of local government organization. The town and village share the same boundaries and the governing body of one unit of the coterminous government may serve as the governing body of the other unit (i.e., the mayor serves as town supervisor and trustees serve as members of the town board).

Creation and Organization

The Village Law governs the incorporation of new villages and the organization of most existing villages. The 12 remaining charter villages are subject to this law only where it does not conflict with their respective charters.

Incorporation

A territory of 500 or more inhabitants may incorporate as a village in New York State, provided that the territory is not already part of a city or village. The territory must contain no more than five square miles at the time of incorporation, although it may be larger in land area if its boundaries are made coterminous with those of a school, fire, improvement or other district, or the entire boundaries of a town.28

The incorporation process begins when a petition, signed by either 20 percent of the residents of the territory qualified to vote, or by the owners of more than 50 percent of the assessed value of real property in the territory, is submitted to the supervisor of the town in which all or the greatest part of the proposed village would lie. If the area lies in more than one town, copies of the petition are also presented to the supervisors of the other affected towns.

Within 20 days from the filing of the petition, the supervisor of each town affected must post and publish notices indicating that a public hearing will be held on the petition. Where the proposed village is in more than one town, the giving of notice and subsequent hearing are a joint effort of the affected towns. The purpose of the hearing is to determine only whether the petition and the proposed incorporation are in conformance with the provisions of the Village Law. Other considerations and objections to the incorporation are not at issue. This formal hearing must be held between 20 and 30 days after the date of posting and publication of notice.

Within 10 days after the conclusion of the hearing, the supervisor of the affected town(s) must judge the legal sufficiency of the petition. If more than one town is involved, and the supervisors cannot agree on a decision, their decision is deemed to be adverse to the petition. Any decision made is subject to review by the courts. If no review is sought within 30 days, the decision of the supervisor(s) is final. If the decision is adverse to the petition, a new petition may be presented immediately. If the decision is favorable to the petition, or if the petition is sustained by the courts, a referendum is held within the proposed area no later than 40 days after the expiration of 30 days from the first occurring of either the filing of the supervisors' favorable decision or the filing of a final court order favorable to the petition. Only those residing in the proposed area of incorporation and qualified to vote in town elections may vote in the referendum.

Where the proposed area lies in one town, an affirmative majority of those voting is required in order to incorporate. Where more than one town is involved, an affirmative majority in the area proposed for incorporation in each town is required. If any required majorities are not obtained, then the question is defeated, and no new proceeding for incorporation of the same territory may be held for one year. If a majority vote(s) in favor of incorporation is obtained, and there is no court challenge, the town clerk of the town in which the original petition was filed makes a report of incorporation.

TABLE11

Village Incorporations Since 1940

VILLAGE

COUNTY

DATE

Florida

Orange

08/05/1946

Prattsburg

Steuben

12/07/1948

Tuxedo Park

Orange

08/13/1952

Sodus Point

Wayne

12/30/1957

New Square

Rockland

11/06/1961

Atlantic Beach

Nassau

06/21/1962

Port Jefferson

Suffolk

04/09/1963

Amchir

Orange

09/09/1964

Pomona

Rockland

02/03/1967

Lake Grove

Suffolk

09/09/1968

Round Lake

Saratoga

08/07/1969

Sylvan Beach

Oneida

03/17/1971

Lansing

Tompkins

12/19/1974

Harrison

Westchester

09/09/1975

Pelham*

Westchester

06/01/1975

Kiryas Joel

Orange

03/02/1977

Rye Brook

Westchester

07/07/1982

Wesley Hills

Rockland

12/07/1982

New Hempstead

Rockland

03/21/1983

Islandia

Suffolk

04/17/1985

Cape Vincent*

Jefferson

04/15/1986

Montebello

Rockland

05/07/1986

Chestnut Ridge

Rockland

05/16/1986

West Carthage

Jefferson

07/22/1987

Pine Valley

Suffolk

03/15/1988

Kaser

Rockland

01/25/1990

Bloomfield*

Ontario

03/27/1990

Airmont

Rockland

03/28/1991

W.Hampton Dunes

Suffolk

11/19/1993

East Nassau

Rensselaer

01/14/1998

Sagaponack

Suffolk

09/27/2005

S.Blooming Grove

Orange

07/14/2006

Woodbury

Orange

08/28/2006

* Cape Vincent was created in 1853 but the proper incorporation paperwork was not filed until 1986.
* Pelham and North Pelham were consolidated into Pelham.
* Bloomfield was created by the consolidation of East
Bloomfield and Holcomb.

The report is sent to the Secretary of State, the State Comptroller, the State Office of Real Property Services, the county clerk and county treasurer of each county in which the village will be located, and the town clerks of each town in which the village will be located.

Upon receipt, the Secretary of State files the report in his/her office and prepares and sends a Certificate of Incorporation to the clerks of each town in which the village is located. The village is deemed incorporated on the date the report is filed with the Secretary of State. Within five days after the filing of the Certificate of Incorporation, the clerks of each town in which the village is located jointly appoint a resident of the new village area to serve as village clerk until a successor is chosen by the village's first elected board of trustees. Election of the board and mayor is held within 60 days of the appointment of the interim village clerk, except in instances where the new village embraces the entire territory of a town. In that case the election of village officers is held at the next regular election of town officials, occurring not less than 30 days after the filing of the certificate of village incorporation.

The Legislative Body

The legislative body of a village - the board of trustees - is composed of the mayor and four trustees. However, the board may increase or decrease the number of trustees, subject to referendum. Trustees are elected for two-year terms unless otherwise provided by the board of trustees and subject to permissive referendum.

The village board has broad powers to govern the affairs of the village, including:

· organizing itself and providing for rules of procedure;

· adopting a budget and providing for the financing of village activities;

· abolishing or creating offices, boards, agencies, and commissions and delegating powers to these units;

· managing village properties; and

· granting final approval of appointments of all nonelected officers and employees made by the mayor.

The mayor presides over meetings of the board. A majority of the board, as fully constituted, is a quorum. No business may be transacted unless a quorum is present.

Executive Branch

The chief executive officer of most villages in NewYork State is the mayor. Unless otherwise provided by the board of trustees, the mayor is elected for a two-year term. In addition to his/her executive duties, the mayor presides over all meetings of the board of trustees and may vote on all questions coming before that body. The mayor must vote to break a tie. The mayor is responsible for enforcing laws within the village and for supervising the police and other officers and employees of the village. The mayor may share the law enforcement responsibility with a village attorney - who may handle prosecutions for violations of village laws, and the county district attorney - who usually handles general criminal prosecutions in the county.

At the direction of the board of trustees, the mayor may initiate civil actions on behalf of the village or may intervene in any legal action "necessary to protect the rights of the village and its inhabitants." Subject to the approval of the board of trustees, the mayor appoints all department and non-elected officers and employees. Except in villages that have a manager, the mayor acts as the budget officer. The mayor may, however, designate any other village officer to be budget officer. The budget officer serves at the mayor's pleasure.29 The mayor ensures that all claims against the village are properly investigated, executes contracts approved by the board of trustees and issues licenses. In certain cases, when authorized by the board of trustees, the mayor may sign checks and cosign, with the clerk, orders to pay claims.

At the annual meeting of the board of trustees, the mayor appoints one of the trustees as deputy mayor. If the mayor is absent or unable to act as mayor, the deputy mayor is vested with and may perform all the duties of that office.

Village Managers or Administrators

In order to provide full-time administrative supervision and direction, some villages have created the office of village manager or administrator. The position of village manager is created by a local law, which fixes the powers of the office and the term of the incumbent. As an alternative to direct adoption of a local law establishing a village manager, a village may create a commission to prepare a local law establishing a village manager and defining the manager's duties and responsibilities. The commission must issue a report within the time set forth in the local law, which can be no later than two years after the appointment of its members.30 While there is no mandate that the commission prepare a local law creating a village manager, if the commission does prepare such a local law, it must be placed before the voters at a referendum; the board of trustees need not approve the local law.

The village manager is usually assigned administrative functions that would otherwise be performed by the mayor. Under the Village Law, the manager may designate another village official as budget officer, to serve at the pleasure of the manager.

Sixty-seven villages in New York State had an administrator or manager in 2007; they are listed in Table 12. Some of these individuals hold more than one title and some are known as "coordinator".

TABLE 12

Villages Which Have Administrators/Managers

Akron

East Rochester

Irvington

Pelham Manor

Southampton

Alden

Ellenville

Lake Success

Pleasantville

Spencerport

Amityville

Elmsford

Lawrence

Perry

Springville

Ardsley

Fairport

Lowville

Phoenix

Sylvan Beach

Attica

Farmingdale

Mamaroneck

Port Chester

Tarrytown

Blasdell

Floral Park

Massapequa Park

Port Jefferson

Thomaston

BriarclifManor

Fredonia

Massena

Potsdam

Valley Stream

Brockport

Garden City

Monticello

Rockville Centre

Walden

Bronxville

Great Neck Estates

Mount Kisco

Roslyn

Westbury

Buchanan

Groton

Oakfield

Rye Brook

Westfield

Croton-on-Hudson

Hamburg

Ocean Beach

Scarsdale

Williamsville

Dobbs Ferry

Hastings-on-Hudson

Old Westbury

Sea Cliff

East Aurora

Horseheads

Ossining

Seneca Falls

East Hampton

Huntington Bay

Pelham

South Floral Park

SOURCE: 2007NYCOM Directory of City & Village Officials, New York State Conference of Mayors and Municipal Officials,2007.

Other Village Officers

The village treasurer is the chief fiscal officer of the village. The treasurer maintains custody of all village funds, issues all checks and prepares an annual report of village finances.31

The village clerk has responsibility for maintaining all records of the village.32 The clerk collects all taxes and assessments, when authorized by the village board, and orders the treasurer to pay claims. The clerk is required "on demand of any person" to "produce for inspection the books, records, and papers of his/her office."33 The clerk must keep an index of written notices of defective conditions on village streets, highways, bridges, crosswalks, culverts or sidewalks and must bring these notices to the attention of the board at the next board meeting or within 10 days after their receipt, whichever is sooner.34

Unless local law provides otherwise, the mayor appoints both the clerk and the treasurer with the approval of the board of trustees. Terms are established at 2 years and may be increased. In many villages, the offices of clerk and treasurer are combined and are held by a single person.

Where no village office of justice has been established, or where the office has been abolished, the functions devolve on the justices of the town or towns in which the village is located.

Organization for Service Delivery

Differences in the size of villages and in the services they perform make it difficult to describe the organization of a "typical" village. Larger villages often have multidepartmental organizations similar to cities, while small villages may employ only one or two individuals. Functions performed by villages range from basic road repair and snow removal to large-scale community development programs and public utility plants. A number of villages operate their own municipal electric systems.

Financing Village Services

Like most local governments, villages have a strong reliance on the real property tax to finance their activities. In the 2004 fiscal year the real property tax accounted for nearly 45 percent of total village revenues in New York State. The balance of the revenues comes from a variety of sources; these include user charges and other revenue from water and sewer services, electric systems, airports and marinas, as well as license and rental fees and penalties on taxes. Special activities generated about 39 percent of all village revenues in fiscal 2004. Sales tax revenues in 2004 accounted for 5 percent of total revenues for villages. State and federal aid provided 11 percent of village revenue in 2004.

State Aid and Village Finance

State aid programs that provide funds to villages are Aid Incentives for Municipalities (AIM) program, mortgage tax, aid for the construction and operation of sewage treatment plants and aid to youth bureaus and recreation programs. A more detailed discussion of revenue sharing and other state aid appears in Chapter XI.

The mortgage tax is a state tax is collected by counties. The allocation to towns is made according to the location of the real property covered by the mortgages upon which the tax was collected. For towns that contain a village within its limits, a portion of the town allocation is made to the village according to the proportion the assessed value of the village bears to twice the total assessed valuation of the town. While a village under this formula would receive aid even if no mortgages were registered in a village, the town may receive the greater amount of revenue, even though much of the property that yields the revenue may be within villages in the town.35

Village Dissolution

Just as villages are formed by local action they can be dissolved by local action. Article 19 of the Village Law provides the procedure for village officials and electors to disband their village. Since villages are formed within towns, the underlying town or towns would become fully responsible for governing the territory of the former village after it is dissolved.

The dissolution process may be commenced by the village board of trustees on its own motion or through the presentation of an appropriate petition to the board of trustees. If a proper petition is presented, the board is obligated to prepare a "dissolution plan" and to submit a proposition for dissolution to the electors. If the board seeks to initiate the dissolution process on its own motion, it may submit a proposition to dissolve the village to the electors, again in accordance with a plan for dissolution. In either case, the question must be decided by the voters of the village at an election.

The village board of trustees is responsible for preparing the dissolution plan. The village law lists 8 criteria which must be addressed in a plan. The plan must contain provisions relating to: (1) the disposition of the property of the village; (2) the payment of outstanding obligations and the levy and collection of the necessary taxes and assessments or same; (3) the transfer or elimination of public employees; (4) any agreements entered into with the town or towns in which the village is situated in order to carry out the plan for dissolution; (5) whether any local laws, ordinances or rules and regulations of the village in effect on the date of the dissolution of the village shall remain in effect for a period of time other than as provided by section 19-1910, i.e., two years; (6) the continuation of village functions or services by the town; (7) a fiscal analysis of the effect of dissolution on the village and the area of the town or towns outside the village; and (8) any other matters desirable or necessary to carry out the dissolution.

The village board of trustees must appoint a study committee to prepare a report on the dissolution of the village. The study committee must include at least two representatives, who reside outside the village boundaries, from each town or towns in which the village is situated. A copy of the report must be sent to the village board of trustees and supervisor of each town in which the village is situated. The report must address all the topics required to be included in the dissolution plan and alternatives to dissolution. The committee may also propose a plan for dissolution for consideration by the board of trustees. Prior to submitting its report, the study committee must hold at least one public hearing upon 20 days notice published in the official village and town newspapers.

The village board of trustees must also hold at least one public hearing, which must be preceded by notice provided by certified mail to the supervisors of the town(s) involved, and published at least 10 days but not more than 20 days prior to the hearing in the official newspaper of the town(s) and village. Once the board of trustees' hearing is concluded, the proposition is generally presented to the village voters at the next regular or special village election for officers held not less than 30 days after the board of trustees hearing.

The proposition to be submitted to the voters must contain the question of dissolution and, numbered separately, a plan for disposition of village property, the payment of its outstanding obligations including the levy and collection of necessary taxes and assessments and such other matters as may be necessary. Although all or any part of such plan can be made the subject of a contract between the village and the town prior to submission of the proposition, the primary objective of this plan is not to legally bind either the village or the town. Rather, it is a document that will educate and inform the resident village electors as to the consequences of their vote. By outlining an orderly program for the transfer to the town of village functions, assets and properties, and for the disposition of any outstanding debts, obligations or taxes, the plan will provide the village residents some picture - incomplete though it may be - of the tangible effects of the dissolution.

If the proposition is approved by a majority of those voting on the question, a certificate of the election must be filed with the Secretary of State and clerks of each town and county in which any part of the village is situated. The village would then be dissolved as of the thirtyfirst day of December in the year following the year in which the election took place. If the proposition is defeated, no similar proposition can be submitted within two years of the date of the referendum.

TABLE13

Village Dissolutions in New York State Village

Village

County

Date

Roxbury

Delaware

04/18/1900

Prattsville

Greene

03/26/1900

Rifton

Ulster

08/18/1919

Union*

Broome

1921

LaFargeville

Jefferson

04/18/1922

Brookfield***

Madison

12/31/1923

Oramel

Allegany

12/23/1925

Eastwood**

Onondaga

08/06/1926

Newfield

Tompkins

12/02/1926

Pleasant Valley

Dutchess

05/22/1926

Marlborough

Ulster

04/20/1928

Northville

Suffolk

05/16/1930

Old Forge

Herkimer

10/21/1933

Forestport

Oneida

06/18/1938

North Bangor

Franklin

03/24/1939

The Landing

Suffolk

05/25/1939

Downsville

Delaware

09/21/1950

Amchir

Orange

04/30/1968

Prattsburg

Steuben

09/22/1972

Pelham

Westchester

06/01/1975

N.Pelham

Westchester

06/01/1975

Fort Covington

Franklin

04/05/1976

Friendship

Allegany

04/04/1977

Belleville

Jefferson

04/20/1979

Rosendale

Ulster

05/23/1979

Savannah

Wayne

04/25/1979

Elizabethtown

Essex

04/23/1981

Bloomingdale

Essex

02/26/1985

PineHill

Ulster

09/24/1985

Woodhull

Steuben

01/13/1986

East Bloomfield

Ontario

03/27/1990

Holcomb

Ontario

03/27/1990

Pine Valley

Suffolk

04/04/1990

Ticonderoga

Essex

05/01/1992

Westport

Essex

05/29/1992

Henderson

Jefferson

05/23/1992

Schenevus

Otsego

03/29/1993

Fillmore

Allegany

01/13/1994

Mooers

Clinton

03/31/1994

Andes

Delaware

12/31/2003

* date of 1921 based on the last financial record on file at OSC; annexed into the village of Endicott, April, 22, 1964
** annexed into the city of Syracuse
*** based on referendum date

Trends

Several significant trends, issues, and problems affecting village government in New York have become apparent in the last quarter of the Twentieth Century.

Zoning

The power to zone the area of the village separately from the remainder of the town still provides an incentive for village incorporation. The 1972 recodification of the Village Law continues the authority of the board of trustees to regulate land use, lot sizes, and density of development. With certain exceptions, villages that adopt their first zoning law must establish a zoning commission to draft regulations and establish zone boundaries. They must also establish a zoning board of appeals to hear appeals from decisions made by the village official who enforces zoning regulations. A more detailed discussion of zoning and other aspects of land use regulation appears in Chapter XVI. It should be noted that the proliferation of villages in Nassau County resulted in a charter provision that grants zoning authority to towns within any territory incorporated as a village on or after January 1, 1963.

Village-Town Relations

Fiscal relations continue to be a source of contention between towns and villages. Village residents are liable for payment of taxes to the town in which their village is located, as well as to the village in which they reside. Before the advent of the automobile, village residents rarely considered this dual taxation unduly burdensome. However, the need for miles of paved town roads and the rapid growth of population in towns near the state's metropolitan areas has greatly increased expenditures for town highways and highway-related items.

The State Highway Law exempts village residents from paying the costs of repair and improvement of town highways, thus relieving them of a substantial portion of the town highway maintenance expense. Unless exempted by the town board, however, village residents must help bear the costs of town highway equipment and snow removal on town roads. Village residents not exempted from such highway costs often feel that they are being taxed for town services they do not receive or use in addition to being taxed for the same services within their village. Villages also regard as inequitable the rent the town may charge for village use of the town highway equipment that the village residents have already helped pay for through taxation.

The question of who should pay for what services has been a source of contention between towns and villages since the 1950's, but it can be resolved through local cooperative action. Towns and their constituent villages often undertake formal and informal cooperative ventures. Many share municipal buildings as well as officials and employees, or engage in cooperative purchasing, auto maintenance, and emergency vehicle dispatching. For example, one government may provide library, ambulance, landfill or recreation programs to the other at a negotiated fee.

INFORMATION COURTESY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE