PDA

View Full Version : Yet another nail


Deerhunter
April 11th, 2004, 11:36 AM
in the Cities coffin. Cheektowaga getting the Casino is going to hurt Bflo. badly. Giambra successfully killed it by declaring the Convention Center, the Senecas first choice, out of the question. It is painful to watch his shortsighted decision, further stimulating the erosion of the downtown area. He could have negotiated a deal where Seneca money would have helped build a badly needed new Convention Center. But no , it would be his way, which again bit him in the ass. This guy is a cancer to this area, who under the guise of consolidation, wants to broaden his own power base, by increasing the number of political appointee jobs he has to fill after taking over some city services. He is doing a great job ruining what is left of the city. I like Matarese's idea of a city-county manager. It certainly wouldn't be Joel, his credentials don't warrant him running anything. Naples would be good, she seems to have some sense, and doesn't sugarcoat numbers for political gains, actually hurts her fellow republican, (in name only) , Joel. Does anyone realize the County has run an operating deficit for the last 3 yrs ? At this rate,The Control Board will oversee the counties expendatures as well. Then again, Joel , who refers to the extra 1% as, " the penny" will raise taxes, yet again, under the guise of Mandate relief, for the cost of medicaid, all while increasing the number of county employees on his payroll. It shouldn't surprise anyone though, after all, this guy was the Citys fiscal manager for 8 yrs as it spiralled into financial ruin. Great job Joel !!! Should be proud.

WNYresident
April 11th, 2004, 01:23 PM
I'm suprized the cheektowaga town board would of allowed it. YOu think they would of noticed they are turning our community into one giant strip mall entertainiment area. Isn't there enough traffic as there is?

Curmudgeon
April 11th, 2004, 04:08 PM
I guess the suburbs are there only for the people who got there first...
You want no traffic? Buy 10,000 acres and make your own roads on it.

WNYresident
April 11th, 2004, 07:44 PM
I don't mind the traffic but if my property taxes go up to offset the cost of that traffic then I don't want it. Curm you are far more intelligent to come up with

I guess the suburbs are there only for the people who got there first...

But in all actuallity they are there for the people that came first. Not the the point where one can demand I dont want this or that, but to have a say in the complete over all developement of the community and it's expansion. You forgot that the community is made up of people that live there.

Deerhunter
April 11th, 2004, 08:17 PM
There is nothing on that road except industrial buildings, for offices. It isn't in a residential area. At one time they wanted to put a golf course over there, haven't heard much about that lately. Thats probably why they picked it. The land may be contaminated that is why it hasn't been developed to date. It will be a suitable site for a casino. Genesee street is already busy with traffic. The strip joint , Madamusells (?) should benefit, I think Salvatore has a piece of that place. I'm glad we will have a casino in the area, just wish it was in downtown Bflo. Wishful thinking at this point. Looks like a done deal. Hope Bass Pro, with the Great Lakes Museum doesn't follow suit. I don't know how much the city can take.

WNYresident
April 11th, 2004, 08:31 PM
PUt something there that doesn't suck the money out of the community. OR make the take for the town worth while. I thought there wouldn't be no competing business other than the casino. Seems like it was mentioned in the paper they would like a hotel also. Did i read that wrong? What about the other hotels that are already in the area?

YOu all seem to be missing the point. Without records to show what is going on there it's one level about the mob. Have you seem the proceeds from the other indian casino benefiting all the indians involved in that project? Nope. Also, they are saying it's only employing a couple of hundred locals. WHy did the paper state it will employee 2000 or so. How many indians versus locals? hmm?

Anyway, the town isn't getting enough of the cut. THe state should get what the town is getting and vise versus worse case.

Anyhow, whos gonna travel to cheektowaga when you can travel to vegas? or niagara falls? ....

I was all for a casino area when it was first mentioned. Now all it is, is a way to get organized crime behind the face of the indians. If we can't see hte books we don't know what we are getting or not. Also, what is the average pay over all casino employees are getting?

therising
April 11th, 2004, 11:22 PM
quote:I guess the suburbs are there only for the people who got there first...

Curm is right on the money with this quote.

Perfect example: take a drive down William Street in Lancaster. There is one subdivision after another, all built within the past 10 years. Yet the residents of these subdivsions are always vehemently fighting newer developments. Tney all have the "close the door behind me" attitude. For some reason it was Ok for them to "sprawl" to the burbs, but no one else can.
Someone please tell me where is the logic in this way of thinking???

CheektowagaFan
April 12th, 2004, 03:51 AM
Originally posted by WNYresident
I'm suprized the cheektowaga town board would of allowed it. YOu think they would of noticed they are turning our community into one giant strip mall entertainiment area. Isn't there enough traffic as there is?


WNY just so you and the others know, The Town Of Cheektowaga has not 1 say so if it's going to be built in Cheektowaga. They can not I REPEAT can not say no , no matter what. The Indians can Buy and Build where they choose.

Did you guy's also know that not 1 permitt has to be bought to Build this CASINO?

I do not gamble , As Im kind of tight on my money, But Im for the CASIONO if you dont want it here dont support it.

WNYresident
April 12th, 2004, 08:53 AM
Originally posted by therising
quote:I guess the suburbs are there only for the people who got there first...

Curm is right on the money with this quote.

Perfect example: take a drive down William Street in Lancaster. There is one subdivision after another, all built within the past 10 years. Yet the residents of these subdivsions are always vehemently fighting newer developments. Tney all have the "close the door behind me" attitude. For some reason it was Ok for them to "sprawl" to the burbs, but no one else can.
Someone please tell me where is the logic in this way of thinking???


I agree with you there rising. You see one developement not wanting another in such a sort time frame.

My point is and i should of made if clearer, with all the building why are taxes not staying level versus rising? You have more people paying for services so you should see even a lowering of taxes if your building. IF all it does is add more people to the community and the community doesn't benefit why bother?

citymouse
April 12th, 2004, 09:03 AM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Curmudgeon
[B]I guess the suburbs are there only for the people who got there first...


Kind of an ironic statment when dealing with the Indians.

WNYresident
April 12th, 2004, 09:22 AM
Bravo, that was a good one.

therising
April 12th, 2004, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by WNYresident

My point is and i should of made if clearer, with all the building why are taxes not staying level versus rising? You have more people paying for services so you should see even a lowering of taxes if your building. IF all it does is add more people to the community and the community doesn't benefit why bother?

It's a very good question, and I'm not sure I know the answer, but it has something to do with this:

Residential development is what causes a strain on the taxpayers. I'm sure I don't have these figures EXACT, but I'm pretty close:

Studies have shown that, for each residential tax dollar collected, munipalities have to outlay something like $1.30. Residents use schools, roads, require plowing, police and garbage pick-up, etc,.
Bottom line is residents are loss-leaders for any municipality.

Commercial development, on the other hand, (stores, offices, warehouses) only cost the municipality something like $.75 - $.80 per each dollar collected. (School services being the big difference).

In a perfect world, the surplus from commercial development would be enough to outweigh the residential tax burden.

Curmudgeon
April 12th, 2004, 11:45 PM
good breakdown on the numbers, therising.

Now, you see your tax bill rising and you attribute that to growth. If that growth hadn't taken place, would your taxes not have gone up? Would they have gone up more? Less? I'm not really sure myself.

My gut tells me that limiting commerce and economic activity in the hopes of reducing taxes just ain't a common-sense thing to do. Kind of like killing the patient to alleviate the symptoms of his illness...

WNY is stuck with a bunch of fixed costs barreling down on the region, irrespective of how many (or few) strip plazas get built. It seems to me a in-depth analysis of WHY taxes are rising is in order, rather than trying to blame the entrepenures who are the best shot at generating new revenue.

morphinebrian
April 13th, 2004, 12:27 PM
The problem with the original legislation is it put no one in charge. It pitted all the communites against one another, and the Seneca Nation came out like bandits. They really don't care about the health of the Buffalo economy, only that they get paid.

WNYresident
April 13th, 2004, 12:36 PM
That's my point, they just want the money and will take every penny they can. It's a business. Why give the money away. Keep it in the area.

yokes
April 13th, 2004, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by WNYresident
That's my point, they just want the money and will take every penny they can. It's a business. Why give the money away. Keep it in the area.

All business' are in the business of making money. The trick is to find the balance of business and community. What we have in WNY is an imbalance causing many business' to flee. With proper reform of the local government and regulation you can find the balance again of proper service levels by the government while maintaining a good environment for business. If a business cannot make money in WNY but can in Albany they will locate in Albany.

Its not up to business to revitalize the local economy, its up to the government to create a suitable environment that makes the locality desirable to business which will locate here hire people and thus create more for the economy.

Unless every employee, supplier, contractor etc is located out of the area the money spent by the casino will be put back into the area. Not all because some will be retainmed for improvements to the casino as well as the better good of the Seneca Nation.

Contractors building, Utility employees, cab drivers and on and on will see benefit from this development.

morphinebrian
April 13th, 2004, 01:00 PM
You can't blame the Native Americans. You have to blame our delegates at the NYS Legislature. By writing the law as they did, they invited the mess they find themseles now it. They should have put someone in charge, whether it be the County Executive or whomever. But, instead, they say put it in Buffalo and if they find any reason not to, any other place in Erie County. By putting someone in charge whom the Seneca Nation would negotiate with, the Seneca Nation would not be able to pit communities against eachother. Its just like having competeing IDAs in Erie County.

WNYresident
April 13th, 2004, 01:24 PM
Its not up to business to revitalize the local economy, its up to the government to create a suitable environment that makes the locality desirable to business which will locate here hire people and thus create more for the economy.


The quote of the day!

citymouse
April 13th, 2004, 02:58 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by yokes
[B]
Its not up to business to revitalize the local economy, its up to the government to create a suitable environment that makes the locality desirable to business which will locate here hire people and thus create more for the economy.

But you must admit it is in thier best intrest to help however they can.

yokes
April 13th, 2004, 04:13 PM
But you must admit it is in thier best intrest to help however they can.

from a purely websters dictionary definition Not really no. If they cant make money here they can go somewhere else.

Night Owl
April 14th, 2004, 01:41 AM
Tney all have the "close the door behind me" attitude. For some reason it was Ok for them to "sprawl" to the burbs, but no one else can.

nice observation. I also agree with this.

absolivious
April 14th, 2004, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by CheektowagaFan
The Town Of Cheektowaga has not 1 say so if it's going to be built in Cheektowaga. They can not I REPEAT can not say no , no matter what. The Indians can Buy and Build where they choose. . . not 1 permitt has to be bought to Build this CASINO?

Call me skeptical about your statement.
But if it is true, it still only 57 acres and one building tucked up near your northern town border.

A drop in the bucket when you compare it to the 1200 acres that SUNY scooped up from the center of our town. Amherst still has zero control and no right of review whatsoever with respect to any development that occurs there. A lot of people don't realize that.

I think "Sharpeshooter" would back me up on this.

gshowell
April 16th, 2004, 11:06 AM
Okay, this column is on the casino. But I have to put in my two cents regarding the comments about suburban residents thinking the suburbs are for those who got there first.

I've never lived in the city. The Depew/Lancaster area has been my home for over fifty years. In that time I've seen nothing but development.

The vast majority of my friends have lived here for a shorter period of time than I have.

As far as I'm concerned anyone who wants to move here is welcomed. As a matter of fact, I know a lot of people who want to move to Lancaster, but can't afford to.

To me, that's the crux of the problem. Over development of residential housing has made the cost of suburban living prohibitive. Improper development in Lancaster is putting a strain on infrastructure that will raise the cost of living here in the future. Improper development is creating flooding problems that will raise the expense of suburban life in the future.

Improper development is creating a "sinking home" problem in Lancaster. Affected homeowners want to keep the problem quiet because they want to sell before the problem goes public.

One final note. The neighborhood I live in is fully developed. I don't live on 10,000 acres. There's less than 15 feet between my house and both of my neighbors. My neighborhood resembles a city neighborhood. The houses are older and the population is dense.

I love it. I can actually walk to stores owned by people I know to buy almost anything I want.

Unfortunately, new road development on Broadway drove the neighborhood hardware store out of business.

Regarding the casino. I'd like to see the casino built on the waterfront in Buffalo. I still won't go to it, but if it is architecturally unique, I'd admire it the four or five times I walk along the riverwalk.

WNYresident
April 16th, 2004, 11:47 AM
Improper development is creating a "sinking home" problem in Lancaster. Affected homeowners want to keep the problem quiet because they want to sell before the problem goes public.


Too late.. it already is public. The issue has been written about on speakupwny. :)

Night Owl
April 17th, 2004, 12:51 AM
There are a few stories here that 'went public' before the media aired/printed it.