A number of Village of New Paltz residents showed up for the October 26 public hearing on expanding who can be appointed to the Affordable Housing Board. They were concerned about the idea of allowing some of the seats on this board to be filled by people who don’t live in the village at all. Several even volunteered for those and other open seats, but that does not appear to address the trends that have made it harder to get residents to step up.
Part of the concern was a misunderstanding, based on the multi-step approach trustees have been taking to change eligibility. Reading this proposal alone, it seems that there’s no limit to where one might live and serve on this board; Kingston was raised as a particular area of concern. Some months ago, trustees passed a law that extended eligibility for most volunteer boards to any town resident, as long as a majority remained village residents. More newly-created boards have the residency requirements baked in, which is why this hearing was about simply removing the requirement in regard to the Affordable Housing Board. That would, as a result, default to the more general law about residency.
While this mollified some of those testifying, it was not complete. Jane Schanberg said that placing the housing needs of the village’s most vulnerable residents into the hands of people who don’t pay village taxes would not be a good idea, making them “subject to outsiders.” Schanberg compared it to the “good cause” debate, which involved a number of non-residents attempting to get more tenant protections passed; Schanberg and others tie their own high rent increases since then to that aborted attempt by “outsiders.”
Amy Cohen explained that the “rumor was the people from Kingston” would be eligible, and was “not as upset” to learn it would be limited to town residents. Cohen noted that many business owners and landlords are willing to serve in a variety of volunteer capacities.
Jon Cohen put it more plainly, saying that “the process is too political.”
Adele Ruger went further, saying that “if we can’t find the people, we shouldn’t have a village.” That sentiment may be echoed by those in New Paltz who occasionally try to pursue some form of consolidation of the two governments, but eliminating the village is no longer possible. According to Mayor Tim Rogers, the agreement to secure funding for the new village firehouse means that there must be a village, if only for its fire department. A quirk in state law does not allow for town fire departments; instead, a separate fire district would have to be created complete with elected fire commissioners. The option of creating a fire district was taken off the table by accepting state money for the village fire department.
Ruger does think that joint boards would avoid issues of taxation without representation, but at present there is not a town affordable housing law that would need to be overseen by an affordable housing law, as there is in the village. Ruger could turn up no other example of this approach being used in the state.
While Ruger, Schanberg and others expressed willingness to serve, the reason this was considered at all is because repeated appeals to the public for volunteers has resulted in a diminishing number of applicants. This is true throughout the region. Trustees will presumably consider any written letter of interest submitted by those who spoke up, but the trend toward fewer willing applicants for these positions continues unabated.
Join the family! 
