 |
| Search |
|
|
|
|
Editorials
Unlike last year, Lancaster residents will have a voice in this year’s councilman election. Last year three Democratic incumbents faced no opposition.
This year, incumbent Councilman John Abraham is facing primary opposition from former Town Attorney Richard Sherwood. The primary winner will then face endorsed Republican candidate Marianne Scime in November.
A registered Conservative Party member, Abraham, was appointed to the vacated councilmember seat in January 2008. Abraham is also a political science teacher in the Lancaster Central School District. He is also endorsed by the Democratic and Independence Parties as well.
Excepting his no vote on approving the Wal-Mart site plan approval, Conservative Abraham has voted along with the majority of the Democratic Party members.
Abraham has publically stated that he understands the traffic and traffic safety issues in town and will be working to mitigate those issues. And yet, Abraham voted for site plan approvals that exacerbated traffic issues; like the Transit Road Aldi.
He states that he has no personal agenda, but that he loves working for the residents and will focus on the interests of taxpayers and working with the LIDA to bring businesses to Lancaster.
He has not touched on any of the issues Sherwood is focusing on, issues that have and continue to waste town taxpayer money.
He believes elected town officials are entitled to same buyout health care insurance payments and declares that town residents have told him that they are satisfied with the tax structure and the services provided from such taxes.
In other words, he believes the status quo is good enough for Lancaster.
Sherwood's letter
Challenger Richard Sherwood feels otherwise. In his recent political mailer, Sherwood writes on issues that are near and dear to the hearts of residents that have personally appeared before the Town Board to voice their concerns on same matters they feel are not in the best interest of the community.
Police Court Building
Like many others, Sherwood takes exception to the $1.85 million purchase of the Colecraft industrial building at 3949 Walden Avenue and the town’s failure to renovate the building to house the combined Lancaster Town and Village police forces and the town courts.
Purchased over five years ago, the building currently houses only the detective squad and is used to store equipment and materials at a cost to taxpayers in annual excess of $100,000.
Sherwood advocates selling the Walden Avenue building and using the money to build a new Police/Court Center.
Up to now, Abraham has been silent on this matter.
Depew Library
Sherwood declares that the town-owned Depew Public Library, vacant since 2005, is costing taxpayers at least $12,000 per year for upkeep and utilities. Sherwood fails to mention that keeping this property off the tax rolls is also costing taxpayers the like sum of revenue, at minimum.
Sherwood suggests the building offices be used by the Town Recreation Department and the remaining area used as a Community Resource Computer Center for Town residents.
Supervisor Robert Giza recently gave reasons why the building could not be used by the Recreation Department, but that perhaps the dog control department could be located there. Which idea sounds more appropriate to you?
Up to now, Abraham has not publicly voiced any opinion on the matter.
Town vehicle purchase accountability
Sherwood’s campaign literature assails the Town Supervisor’s purchase of a new $32,000 Tahoe SUV vehicle. Despite claiming the purchase was legal, the Supervisor could have saved town residents up to $10,000 had he pursued other channels in the bid process and/or even considered purchasing other 4x4 SUV models.
Why indeed did the Supervisor not consider a Chevy Trailblazer for $20,473, a Dodge Durango for $20,050 or a Jeep Grand Cherokee for $20,722?
Considering the budget appropriation for a “passenger vehicle” was listed at $25,000, shouldn’t there have been a process in place that called for the old vehicle being declared “surplus” and a supplemental budget approval for making up the vehicle cost vs. budgeted appropriation difference.
Why indeed did the Supervisor feel he needed a $32,000 vehicle, ignored the State bid process and or private bid process which would have been lower, made the purchase without Town Board approval and in the process cost the taxpayers $10,000?
So far, Abraham has been silent on the matter.
Buyout health care insurance
Sherwood denounces the practice of elected town officials selling back their health insurance coverage to the tune of $6,000 per year should they have coverage through a spouse or other employment.
Sherwood declares it was never intended that the town provide such buyout to elected officials. “Town Personnel Rules define “employees” as those working for the town other than elected officials.”
Sherwood declares he would work to put an end to such abuse that has cost town taxpayers over $150,000 since 1996.
As stated earlier, Abraham recently declared that he is okay with the process considering other town employees receive like compensation.
Adopt a New Ethics Policy
Sherwood takes to task several board members who he claims have accepted gifts of more than $75 that is not consistent with General Municipal Law Section 805-a, the “State Ethics in Government Law”.
He cites “gifts’ that were provided to certain board members by outside counsel (which firm bills the town $226 per hour for legal assistance) and from an engineering firm that was awarded a waterline contract that was higher by $33,000 than a lower bidder.
Comment
This “blank” has no dog in this race, however, it appears Democratic voters have any opportunity to vote for a candidate that favors the status quo or for one that favors spending and ethic change and/or reform.
Abraham, till now anyway, has not touched on any of the issues Sherwood is focusing on, issues that have and continue to waste town taxpayer money.
Abraham is a conservative that was appointed to fill a void in on an all Democratic Party board. Perhaps his position to continue the status quo answers the question why he was chosen and not another Democrat.
© Copyright 2008 by Speakupwny.com
Top of Page
|
|
|
Editorials
Latest Headlines
|
|
Buffalo NY Web hosting By OnLineMedia, Inc
www.olm1.com
Part of
www.onlinebuffalo.com
[where: 14206]
|