 |
| Search |
|
|
|
|
Editorials
“If you don’t know the system or what you’re talking about don’t say anything or write anything on it,” declared Lancaster Supervisor Robert Giza during Monday evening’s work session.” With that, Giza lashed out at the media for implying he had done something illegal when he purchased his new SUV Tahoe.
The Supervisor’s invective words and anger led to the writer addressing the board on the matter with the following:
At the last meeting, I questioned the Supervisor on the purchase of his new Tahoe SUV. The Supervisor asked why people come to me to ask the questions I had brought forward.
I answered your question and told you that your responses would help calm those who couldn't understand why you needed such a large, expensive gas guzzling vehicle at a time when other governments are looking for ways to cut spending, reduce the number of take-home vehicles and why hadn't they had an opportunity to comment on the purchase.
"We are seeing the public having to make sacrifices and setting priorities and we should be doing the same," says NYS Governor Patterson. The state is going to cut spending by $6 billion and much of those cuts will impact local municipalities.
I can understand Supervisor Giza's taking umbrage at my line of questioning, but taxpayers have a right to know when and how their money is being spent; especially when the town is nearing formulating the 2009 budget and where property taxpayers are already overburdened and where state funding to municipalities and school districts will most likely be cut. It's just a matter of transparency and a right to know!
At no time did I say the purchase was illegal. I do believe the bid process was flawed because three bids were not had and had the purchase been put to resolution for approval, as is the norm, the residents would have had an opportunity to comment on the purchase.
That said, I thought the issue closed. Anything that transpired after that did not come from me. However, the Lancaster Bee thought otherwise and stated in their editorial that some of the questions were turned into faux controversies that are nothing but counterproductive.
Is it indeed counterproductive to inquire how the town spends taxpayer money and whether due process was followed to get the lowest price for one of the largest and most costly SUV’S made? I think not!
More Bee ink should be spent on what’s relative to the best interests of town residents rather than best interests of town officials.
As you took umbrage to what I asked, I too took umbrage to the Lancaster Bee’s editorial. The resident referred to in their editorial could be none other than me as I was the only one to address the board on the vehicle purchase.
That said, let me tell you what I and others believe is counterproductive to Lancaster taxpayer best interests and gets little, if any, media attention, namely, the status of the Colecraft building and the vacant Depew library. And you spoke of those earlier. That was good and appropriate as openness and transparency are what residents want.
Supervisor Giza reiterated that he purchased the vehicle legally, through a county bid, end of story. “The Lancaster Bee was the only one that took the time to look at it.” And you didn’t look at it either (referring to this writer).
“I never said you did anything illegal,” I interjected.
“Ah, you never say anything Lee,” Giza fired back. You got more crap on Speakupwny than you can shake a stick at.
Councilman Dan Amatura interjected that Supervisor Giza could have bought other SUV vehicles for less money. “You could have bought a Durango like you had for under $20,000 and other like vehicles as well. Also, if you deem something surplus, it has to be okayed by the Town Board.
A 2008 4x4 Tahoe was listed in this past weekend’s news as selling for $20,000.
According to Amatura, the Supervisor purchased the 2008 Chevy Tahoe SUV at the September 2007 County bid price of $32,225, to replace a 2001 Dodge Durango. The State bid price for the same 2008 Tahoe SUV is $29,740 - $2,485 less.
General Municipal Law Section 103 requires that the Town invite public bids for any item over $10,000, but permits the Town to use County or State bid dealers. The premise being that the price from these bids should be similar to bids the Town would receive.
“The Town has a procurement policy in place which requires that any purchase over $10,000 be the subject of bid. The Supervisor should have come to the Town Board and discussed his proposed purchase. That way the Board members could have discussed using the State bid and saved $2,385 off the County bid, or better yet given the lower State bid prices on other models, the Board could have used the State bid to purchase a Dodge Durango 4x4 delivered for $21,046.”
“Following the bid process, buying this vehicle we could have saved taxpayers over $11,000 from the cost of the Tahoe. The same could be said for several other like SUV models.”
“Furthermore, the Town Board is charged with the responsibility of deeming what Town property is surplus and causing its sale or trade in. The Supervisor didn’t follow State law in regard trading in the 2001 Durango.”
“With only 70,000 miles on it, I’m sure we could have used it somewhere,” declares Amatura.
Comment
Did Supervisor break the law? No one ever said he did! Should he have followed the prescribed bid process to attain the lowest cost? Of course, and in doing so could have saved town taxpayers at least $10,000.
Did anyone ever say that the Supervisor does not need a take-home vehicle, or that it should not be a 4x4? Not to my knowledge. But why a Tahoe and at such cost does need questioning!
© Copyright 2023 - Speakupwny.com
hosted by Online Media, Inc
Buffalo Web Design and Web Hosting
Top of Page
|
|
|
Editorials
Latest Headlines
|
|
Buffalo Web hosting and Buffalo Web Design By OnLineMedia, Inc
www.olm1.com
Part of
www.onlinebuffalo.com
|