At a jointly-held meeting on July 10, New Paltz town and village leaders spoke about how an effort to consolidate these two local governments might move forward. In discussing a proposal for a work plan prepared through the Laberge Group, it became clear that holding a public vote on the question of consolidation this November is unrealistic.
This kind of vote stands out in New York law. In nearly every other situation, a resident of New Paltz’s village gets to vote on any decision related to town governance, simply because every single resident of the village is also a resident of the town. Shorthand suggesting that “town residents” are separate and distinct from “village residents” is always inaccurate and misleading. However, in order to preserve the principle of each voter only voting once on an issue, the votes of town residents outside of the village would be counted separately from those of town residents within the village on any consolidation referendum. The hope is that these two votes could be conducted at the same time and in the same place to make the process seamless for all residents; doing it during a November election would also have as a benefit shifting the cost from local budgets to the county line for election oversight.
As this process is likely to be at least in part funded through state grant money, it’s been agreed that to simplify administration that the contract with the consultant Laberge Group would be a village agreement, supplemented by an intermunicipal agreement to ensure that the costs are shared between the two governments. The contract lays out what must be produced by the consultant, including preparation of a timeline, specification as to the number and type of committee and public meetings, collection of data since the creation of the Fairweather report on consolidation in 2011, establishing a baseline of what the employees of both governments are doing right now, analysis of the fiscal impacts of consolidation, drafting a consolidation plan and gathering the necessary public input ahead of an eventual vote on the question. Ben Syden, for the Laberge Group, stressed that since this is a board-initiated process, there are no mandatory deadlines and no requirement that there ever be a referendum. Syden also said that this is the first time in state history that this board-initiated process to explore consolidation is being used.
There will be a need for volunteers to help out, either on the steering committee for this process or in a working group focused on a specific area. The steering committee will likely be comprised of two members each of the two boards, and Syden said that anyone from the general public asked to fill a seat should have subject matter expertise, such as having been an elected official with familiarity with the operations of local government. Syden added that in New Paltz there is a unique opportunity to pick someone with those particular skills, if Gerry Benjamin is available. Benjamin is a retired professor and former county legislator, who among many other accomplishments was instrumental in the creation of the charter for Ulster County’s current form of government.
While November is not in the cards, there was a sense around the table that this referendum should be during a general election, to aim for higher turnout. State law now ensures that many local positions will be subject to elections in even-numbered years only, although some positions — such as district attorney — have different years specified in the state constitution. This may provide for ample time to get a consolidation plan hammered out beforehand, and to work on informing members of the public about its contents.
Village officials approved the contract, but the intermunicipal agreement’s approval won’t be finalized at least until the next town council meeting, to allow members to review the document more thoroughly.
Rodriguez offers context, receives support
The joint New Paltz town-village meeting on July 10 was the first since newly-appointed town council member Edgar Rodriguez was exposed as having made comments that appeared to celebrate the atrocities committed by Hamas members during their surprise attack on Israelis last fall; the video content containing those comments date to the ceasefire protest that took place on May 4, shortly after a related mass arrest on campus received widespread coverage.
During the October 7 attacks, Hamas members took hundreds of captives, and killed some 1,143 in a variety of ways. Mounting evidence has led to an investigation into the atrocities — including using rape as a weapon of war — as possible war crimes.
Rodriguez expressed the beliefs that “all killings are tragic” and that war is “nothing but failed politics.” Reading a prepared statement, Rodriguez said, “I sincerely regret that I hurt several of my beloved community’s members’ feelings with my thoughtless response to a counter-protestor” on that day. Then, Rodriguez sought to draw a parallel between the lengthy and complicated history of that region and Rodriguez’s own history by noting that not everyone believes that the current war is merely a response to the attacks of October 7, but rather is part of a larger struggle around the modern settlement of Israel dating back at least to the Balfour declaration of the early 20th century, and its impact on those who had lived in what was wholly known as Palestine before the establishment of Israel. In the Balfour declaration of 1917, the British declared the intention to create a “national home” for Jews in Palestine. Historians agree that this boosted Zionism onto the world stage, but some scholars have shown that the motivations were likely themselves rooted in the desire to curb or influence the power of “world Jewry,” referencing an antisemitic trope about Jews secretly controlling world affairs as a cabal.
Just as Rodriguez feels that the current war cannot be evaluated solely based on the events of October 7, the new council member does not wish to be judged solely based on the comments made on May 4. Instead, Rodriguez encourages voters to consider a 50-year history of activism on social justice issues in New Paltz, including work with undocumented immigrants. Rodriguez asserted that a search of that history “will not find any trace of antisemitism, or discrimination against any group.” Additionally, Rodriguez has been working with Jewish leaders on restorative justice in reference that the impact of that video, and engaging in self-reflection. While deriding the snap judgments rife in modern cancel culture, Rodriguez acknowledged the need to learn more about the impacts of impulsive behavior.
During public comment, both Janice Butcher and Anthony Dandridge spoke glowingly about Rodriguez’s role in the community. Dandridge called the videos that were released “misinformation,” and Butcher stated unequivocally, “I believe this person.”
Trustee Stana Weisburd took that opportunity to note that Alex Wojcik, the village’s deputy mayor, had last month also been hit with allegations of expressing antisemitic beliefs — in that case, through posts on social media. Weisburd feels that Wojcik’s words have also been misrepresented. In earlier coverage about the Rodriguez video, a resident expressed the belief that Wojcik is antisemitic; the deputy mayor later provided links to positions about the conflict and said, “Being against the genocide of the Palestinian people is not antisemitic.”
Maggie Veve commented to agree with Weisburd, commending Wojcik’s “firm commitment to social justice equity and making sure that all voices are heard,” and the deputy mayor’s work with college students, and adding that there is “no way to say Alex was trying to be a proponent of anything antisemitic.”
None of those who offered these words of support asserted that they are Jewish, and as of this writing no statements released through local Jewish organizations have referenced the Rodriguez video or work that Wojcik offered to undertake with those leaders to address the June allegations.
An additional discussion later in the same meeting was focused on the possibility of using the services of a dispute resolution center to facilitate difficult conversations on contentious topics.
Amanda Gotto wins Democratic nomination for town supervisor
The New Paltz Democratic Committee nominated Amanda Gotto for town supervisor during its meeting on Thursday, July 11. Because of the timing of former supervisor Neil Bettez’s resignation, the responsibility to nominate a candidate for the Democratic ballot line in November fell to the committee. A process that included substantive outreach to the community, comprehensive virtual interviews and a recorded in-person candidate forum, concluded with Gotto winning over 60% of the vote.
Gotto — a former town board member, planning board member and retired scientist — ran on a platform of creating affordable housing solutions, attracting good paying jobs and fostering diversity in town operations. “I am honored to have received the nomination from the New Paltz Democratic Committee. I am certain that I will live up to the expectations of the committee as the Democratic nominee for town supervisor,” said Gotto.
“Voters in New Paltz now have an incredible supervisor candidate to vote for in November,” said chair Holland-Shepler. “Amanda has the tenacity and skills to do a great job, but most important is her capacity to listen to all the voices in a room. I am confident that with the quality of our candidates for local, state and federal office we will achieve record turnout in New Paltz. By electing Democrats, voters will defeat MAGA, safeguard our democracy and protect our fundamental freedoms.”
The New Paltz Democratic Committee is also seeking candidates to fill the new vacancy for town council. Any registered Democrat interested in seeking the nomination is invited to contact NewPaltzDems@gmail.com and submit a letter of interest and CV
Join the family! 
