ROCHESTER - In the eyes of Rochester Town Chairman Gary Beck, there is no "us and them" when it comes to the two governments that share the name Rochester.

Tuesday, residents of the Town and Village of Rochester will have the opportunity to decide if Beck is correct in his assessment. A binding referendum is taking place in both municipalities to decide whether to merge the two governments into a single village.

If voters in both Rochesters approve the merger, an interim village board consisting of the current town and village board members will govern the consolidated village until after April's municipal election. Then, a new seven-member Village Board would be elected.

Proponents say the big plus in consolidation is that the land that sits in the current town boundaries will have set borders that could not be encroached upon by the Village of Waterford or the City of Burlington. Under Wisconsin law, incorporated villages and cities can annex contiguous land from adjacent towns upon a landowner's request. The Town of Rochester has lost territory to Waterford in past years, mostly in the area of the Waterford Industrial Park.

And through growth during the past five years along Highway 36, Highway W and Teut Road, Burlington is now contiguous to the Town of Rochester.

"We should have done it (consolidation) 25 years ago," said Rochester village resident Ray Moyer, the communities' historian and a resident for more than 70 years. "It will save the village and the town. Otherwise Waterford is encroaching from the north, Burlington from the south and pretty soon there would be no Rochester. If we're going to keep it, this is what we have to do."

Beck points to another key reason for consolidation - economy of government. It is something the two governments have been working at a long time, sharing a library, fire department and municipal building staff including a clerk/treasurer.

"There's no distinction between the town and the village," said Beck. "We do many things together right now."

Another plus, according to Beck, will be the new village government would have total planning and zoning authority over the entire Rochester area, from the Burlington city limits on the southeast, to the Honey Creek area in the northwest. Now, the town government shares planning and zoning authority with Racine County.

The two governments have been attempting consolidation for at least eight years, said Betty Novy, the clerk and treasurer for the two Rochester governments. Beck said that consolidation attempts for many years were thwarted by the state Department of Administration. The two communities did not meet the state's strict requirements for incorporation, chief among those were standards for population density.

Eventually, as was the case with Caledonia and Pleasant Prairie in those communities' attempts to transform from towns into villages, Rochester officials went to their legislators to get their help in getting around the requirements.

A special provision included in the last state budget bill allowed Rochester officials to bypass initial requirements and go directly to one of the final steps - a referendum.

"Now we're hoping that the people (residents) who said go forward with this step up and help us get this done," Beck said.

No campaigning

Just as in every other community in America, election signs for local and presidential candidates dot various yards and fields in the greater Rochester area. But on Wednesday, there were no signs one way or the other regarding the consolidation question. Beck and Novy said they knew of no organized efforts on behalf of or against consolidation.

"We feel we've done enough (publicity) through our quarterly newsletters, articles in the (local) papers and the informational meetings we've had," said Rochester Village President Chris Denman. "We've definitely done our homework on this."

Frank Steele, proprietor with his girlfriend Nancy Kolp of the Sit Crazy coffee shop in the village's historic downtown area, said he has heard no objections at the business.

"All the customers we talk to are for the merger," Steele said. "I think it's kind of unique here and people are really proud to live here. I don't think they should lose their identity."

But some residents are satisfied with the status quo.

"I just feel the village is our village and the town is the town," said Kim Emond, a village resident.

Emond said she and her husband, Steve, are worried about the impact a merger will have on property taxes, even though village and town officials predict little change from current tax rates.

Denman said the proposed tax rate for the consolidated village of $2.09 per every $1,000 of assessed property value is considerably lower than those in neighboring communities.

Carrie Zelechowski, who lives in the unincorporated Honey Lake community in the far southwest corner of the town, said she and her husband also are apprehensive of the consolidation.

"I don't think anyone I've talked to about it (consolidation) is for it," Zelechowski said. "What are the perks of it?"

Rochester Consolidation At A Glance

Population:

Current village: 1,165

Current town: 2,549

Consolidated: 3,709

Area of combined village and town: 17.5 square miles

Tax rates:

Village 2008: $2.67

Town 2008: $2.24

Combined proposed: $2.09

Advantages:

- Independent zoning and planning authority

- Territory preserved from annexations from Waterford and Burlington

What would change:

- No more caucus system for village elections

- No more annual town meetings

- The Racine County portions of the Honey Lake and Honey Creek communities would become part of the incorporated Village of Rochester

What would stay the same:

- Waterford phone exchange (514 and 534)

- Four Zip codes: Waterford, Burlington, Rochester and Honey Creek

- School Districts: Burlington Area, Waterford Graded, Waterford High

- Police and fire and rescue service (Racine County Sheriff and Rochester Volunteer Fire Co.)

- Rochester Public Library