Ellenville Mayor Jeff Kaplan has put forth the possibility of opening a fund containing $4 million from the sale of village lands to the Open Space Institute to pay off the estimated $750,000 deficit the village is currently carrying. In order to do this, he and the board of trustees must first put the issue before village voters in the form of a referendum and let them decide whether or not to get village taxpayers and their officials off the hook for what appears to be a series of poorly planned budgetary policies.

The recent announcement comes as the village was informed that its previous unpopular plan of selling an art collection that includes works by Currier and Ives as well as E.L. Henry was found to be far less ($60,000) than was hoped for to cover the municipality's debt load.

With the proposal of this referendum, two questions must be answered. Is this a dangerous precedent to be setting? What are the other possible uses for such large amount of money?

With regard to the first question, there is great concern that if this "mountain money" is opened to square the books this time, what's to say that it won't become a common occurrence in years to come? The truth of the matter is that village officials have village taxpayers at a disadvantage, in that, if residents do not approve the opening of the fund, they may feel it in next year's taxes.

Most Ellenville residents are already having a hard time paying their current village, town and school taxes. The prospect of an increase in taxes, not just to offset annual raises in operating costs, but to pay off a massive debt, would seem to be enough to goad most voters into the booth to pull the "yes" lever.

If the referendum was to take place and the proposition was approved, it would be a benefit to start from a clean slate. But the real issue seems to be the spending practices of those individuals in charge of the village budget. If the deficit is eliminated and those practices don't change, then what residents are really being asked to do is to paper over the cracks in their fiscal foundation.

But is this the best use of our (and by "our" we mean village residents) monies? Obviously, you can't plan a new addition to your home if the roof is caving in, but the village government's proposed plan to open up this fund raises the question as to just how that money should be used. If it's meant to be used for an emergency, why have village officials not viewed the village's ailing business community as such an emergency and use those funds to assist in programs that could revitalize the community's economic fortunes?

If residents are so inclined as to open that fund, let it be used to move this community forward instead of being siphoned off by politicians trying to keep their own heads above water.

Whatever happens to that money, it should not be used as a hedge fund for future mistakes. At the very least, the money should be set aside for emergencies like natural catastrophes, not those made by our leaders.

COMMENTS about this article (63)