The CDC Issue, Lancaster Bee, November 30, 2023

[mark blazejewski]

The Community Development Corporation in Lancaster has been a relatively frequent topic of discussion for residents at meetings and online, with some confusion surrounding the organization’s objective, members, directors and their timeline of events.

Fixating on the past decade, where some questions seem to exist, members and directors, past and present, were forthcoming in a discussion about the CDC’s history and its objectives after last Monday’s regular meeting of the Village Board.

For clarity, as noted in the Nov. 16 edition of the Lancaster Bee and Depew Bee, community development corporations are 501(C)(3) nonprofit organizations created with the intention of revitalizing communities, especially in impoverished areas. They are non-governmental bodies, but members of local government may serve in various positions. Their main function is acquiring funding, mostly from local, state and federal grants, and choosing projects where they can apply that funding to benefit local residents.

Tom Sweeney, a former employee of M&T Bank’s technology department, who became interested “in the historical side of the village” after buying 5 West Main St. in 2014, discussed his time with the CDC. While his background is not in development, Sweeney entered into the field after seeing the disrepair of the village’s downtown core, hoping he could make an impact in revitalizing key properties. He also detailed his history with the village’s Historic Preservation Committee, delivering notes on when he was and was not involved. Here is a timeline of Sweeney’s involvement:

In 2014, Sweeney began attending Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee meetings as an interested member of the public.

In June, 2017, Sweeney was nominated as an alternate to the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee. The same year, he also purchased the building at 4 West Main St. from Clark Packard of Carson’s Jewelers. The building, which was in disrepair, was renovated and reopened in 2018.

At this point, Sweeney is not on the CDC.

In April, 2018, a unanimous decision was approved by the CDC to sell the property to Sweeny’s company, Plum Bottom Creek Properties. He was not on the CDC. In October 2018, the sale of the property was closed.

On Feb. 25, 2019, Sweeney was nominated to join the CDC to assist with treasurer duties when John Mikoley stepped down. He was also asked to help shape the future vision for the CDC.

On June 10, 2020, Sweeney resigned from the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee. This was done to ensure there was no conflict of interest on future votes concerning votes on his West Main Street properties, he said.


In July 2020, a preliminary project proposal was presented for Phase One development of 19 West Main St.

On Aug. 8, 2020, the zoning board of appeals passed four required zoning variances for the project at 19 West Main St.
On Aug. 20, 2020, the Lancaster Village Center site plan was presented and unanimously approved by the Historic Preservation Committee.

On Sept. 9, 2020, plans for phase one of development for the Lancaster Village Center was presented to the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee.

On Jan. 19, 2021, the sale of the music store and other lots was signed by Mayor Bill Schroeder. This parcel was up for sale to raise funds for phase one development of the Lancaster Village Center and had multiple buyers. Sweeney noted that Dick Young had backed out of the original purchase partnership of this parcel. The village had an interest as well, so the lot’s price was reduced in order to be used as public parking.

In March 2021, phase one of the Lancaster Village Center project began.

In January 2022, an amended site plan was approved with Jim Allein abstaining. This modification was to change the phase two building type. Phase two is the development of apartments and shops at 20 West Main St., mirroring the development at 19 West Main St.

On March 9, 2022, the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee extended its approval of the Lancaster Village Center project for one year.

Sweeney says that he believes a lot of the confusion within the community surrounds an investment in 2022 by Allein, another former member of the CDC and HPC, into unrelated properties in West Seneca owned by Sweeney. In any case, Allein abstained from a board vote by the HPC concerning a modification to phase two at 20 West Main St., feeling it was appropriate to avoid any appearance of a conflict of interest.

Sweeney added that some confusion seems to stem from his purchase of properties in 2018 from the CDC. He explained that the request for proposals to purchase properties on West Main Street had expired in 2017, which outlined specific requests of interested developers, including regulations on the project’s scheduling. Sweeney believes these strictures pushed developers away, with the CDC abandoning some of their regulations for developers by 2018. At this point, the CDC was going into foreclosure, with their former offers on properties at that location (19 West Main Street had been multiple properties before their consolidation under Sweeney’s project) not able to balance their budget. Sweeney was able to make a lumped purchase of these properties for his development and revitalization project. He asserts that there were no offers on the table apart from his that would have revitalized so much of the downtown core, all while adhering to the multiple regulations for maintaining the village’s historic appeal.

More specifically, on the CDC, Sweeney says his properties never received any grant awards from the organization. His interactions with the CDC was solely dealing with the purchase of downtown properties.

Members and directors of the Community Development Corporation, director Lynne Ruda, and members Cyndi Maciejewski and John Mikoley, also discussed the CDC and their mission going forward.

“The thought in 2019 was let’s re-purpose,” said Ruda, who was a member during her time as a village trustee, and is now a director. “There was an idea for a Main Street manager. There were a whole lot of ideas and needs brought up by the merchants,” she said.

Following the finalization of selling properties on West Main Street, Ruda says the CDC board members and directors were bouncing around a lot of ideas. “Then COVID hit,” she said, noting that the shutdown of economic activity and development stunted the CDC’s ability to move forward at that time. During that period, research was even done on the dissolution process for the CDC, being that their goals were achieved.

“What really changed the conversation with the village board and the CDC directors was when that New York Forward opportunity came about and there could be a possibility of a small projects fund,” said Ruda. “That could be upward of a maximum of $300,000.” The process would mimic the initial New York Forward program, with calls to the community for projects and a local committee making selections.

“We thought there may be an opportunity for the CDC to then take over if we are awarded,” said Ruda. “We want to have an entity in place that will be able to oversee that [small projects fund] process.”

Ruda says the possibilities go further than just New York Forward-related opportunities. “There are a lot of economic development programs that the CDC could eventually be applying for grant funding,” she said. “These are the types of things that this organization could do.”

Addressing the loss of members recently, Ruda says it reflects the CDC’s changing course, a natural progression of a shifting organization. “Yes, there is a turnover in the board, as there should be, as we decide what direction and those members are deciding if they want to be involved in that. What skill set do we need? What qualities do we need from board members for this new purpose?” Ruda added that the CDC’s past work involved a lot of overseeing leases, “that day-to-day kind of grunt work of property management.”

“We need the right people at the table,” she said.

Ruda added that some current things the CDC needs to do is find out how their grant writing process will take place, and initiate a revenue stream. “We have to figure out a longer term plan,” she said. She added that if funding didn’t come through for the small business fund, “that could change this conversation immediately.”

Mikoley believes that some of this boils down to personal or political disagreements. “There’s people looking for something to be wrong. People that are pulling fire alarms and then looking for fires,” he said. On Sweeney’s involvement with the CDC and HPC, Mikoley was clear: “He is somebody who at that point, and still is, who is very involved and invested in the community. To have somebody who is a big stakeholder in the community on the CDC makes sense.

Reference: https://www.lancasterbee.com/article...t-corporation/

[mark blazejewski]

Mikoley believes that some of this boils down to personal or political disagreements. “There’s people looking for something to be wrong. People that are pulling fire alarms and then looking for fires,” he said.

That appears to be a rather uncalled for comment.

Perhaps Trustee Mikoley, who was elected to represent the interests people of the village, should be thanking VOL residents for taking an interest in their village, rather than casting them in what some would consider to be a negative light?

Good grief, such characterizations may tend to make the taxpayers and residents hesitant to ask hard questions; questions that I thought a Trustee was in part, elected to answer---without editorial comment, eh?

[mark blazejewski]

I have just received this response from the VOL Clerk-Treasurer:

Mike Stegmeier
10:35 AM (44 minutes ago)
to me

Dear Mr. Blazejewski –



I have forwarded your inquiry to the Village Board. I will let you know when I hear back regarding the timeline for a response to your questions.

It appears that the choice for full responsive transparency rests entirely with the Village of Lancaster Board, eh?

"Timeline" was and remains a rather curious choice of words, eh?

The Community Development Corporation in Lancaster has been a relatively frequent topic of discussion for residents at meetings and online, with some confusion surrounding the organization’s objective, members, directors and their timeline of events...

Here is a timeline of Sweeney’s involvement:

Does the "TIMELINE" published in today's Bee constitute the VOL Board's response to my letter???

[Lee Chowaniec]

That appears to be a rather uncalled for comment.

Perhaps Trustee Mikoley, who was elected to represent the interests people of the village, should be thanking VOL residents for taking an interest in their village, rather than casting them in what some would consider to be a negative light?

Good grief, such characterizations may tend to make the taxpayers and residents hesitant to ask hard questions; questions that I thought a Trustee was in part, elected to answer---without editorial comment, eh?

What you see is not what we have here. This is a sanitized version of what took place over the years by the CDC and the Village of Lancaster Board of Trustees. This is not a fair and balanced report until such time others claiming collusion and self-serving interests took place come forward and are interviewed by the Bee. This one-sided story will stand.

Bee report: Mikoley believes that some of this boils down to personal or political disagreements. “There’s people looking for something to be wrong. People that are pulling fire alarms and then looking for fires,” he said.

Politicalized indeed! Doesn’t Trustee Mikoley operate (along with his wife) the Gilded Maple on 4 West Main Street and is a tenant of Tom Sweeny? Along with Sweeny a Town of Lancaster Democratic Committee person, and where both individuals endorsed Ruda when she ran for office?

Everything is about politics. The residents are entitled to government openness and transparency. And their right to opine. Until such time the Village of Lancaster livestreams its meetings, the Village holds all the cards! What you see is what it gives you.

[GroundControl]

I wonder Lee how many of those involved in this, scheme?, are registered democrats? I still don't know who the other bidder or bidders were in the beginning steps of this project. Was there ever a bidding process? This is starting to look politically driven but by democrats it appears. Their party seems to be represented heavily on all the various boards that Mr. Sweeney had to deal with. I would like to see the original artist concept posters that were supposedly shown at a unveiling on West Main St. Are you aware of those Lee? Does Mr. Mikoley understand the meaning of fungible as it applies to the Allen investment in Sweeney's business?

[Lee Chowaniec]

I wonder Lee how many of those involved in this, scheme?, are registered democrats? I still don't know who the other bidder or bidders were in the beginning steps of this project. Was there ever a bidding process? This is starting to look politically driven but by democrats it appears. Their party seems to be represented heavily on all the various boards that Mr. Sweeney had to deal with. I would like to see the original artist concept posters that were supposedly shown at a unveiling on West Main St. Are you aware of those Lee? Does Mr. Mikoley understand the meaning of fungible as it applies to the Allen investment in Sweeney's business?

I don’t reside in the Village and have no standing in that regard.

As stated previously, my involvement is based on projects receiving taxpayer funded grants / IDA’s / tax breaks.

Mr. Sweeny’s and the Lucas James mixed-use apartment-retail projects receiving IDA’s were inappropriate, IMHO.

Monday’s commercial-residential moratorium public hearing and vote is well intended and bears approval as it clearly defines needed code changes to shape future development and to consider impacts to the entire community, not the immediate development area.

Everyone is pro good development – where everyone’s safety and best interests are considered. This is not to stifle development, or anti-development.

As for the streetscape, I did not see any concept drawings but do know originally it was supposed to maintain the original Village concept.

Fungible, love that word, GC. Unfortunately, it is not a word used or understood by many.

Change is in the air, GC. Resignations galore. Some little piggies are squealing.

[mark blazejewski]

I notice that there does not seem to be any mention whatsoever of the Village Planning Commission in Mr. Sinner's "Timeline" article. Why is that?

Did the Village Planning Commission play no significant role in the developmental process?

Wasn't Mr. Allein recently Chairman of the Planning Commission?

[GroundControl]

Mark it does seem like the mayor missed a lot time on her "TIMELINE". There are gaps of time Mr. Allien appears sitting on the planning board and not recusing himself from important votes that helped Mr. Sweeney. I wonder if anyone has looked at the New York State Municipal General Law Section 801 Conflict of interest. I just read it. Very very interesting.

[mark blazejewski]

I wonder if anyone has looked at the New York State Municipal General Law Section 801 Conflict of interest. I just read it. Very very interesting.

Are you referring to this?

SECTION 801

Conflicts of interest prohibited

General Municipal (GMU) CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE 18

§ 801. Conflicts of interest prohibited. Except as provided in section
eight hundred two of this chapter, (1) no municipal officer or employee
shall have an interest in any contract with the municipality of which he
is an officer or employee, when such officer or employee, individually
or as a member of a board, has the power or duty to (a) negotiate,
prepare, authorize or approve the contract or authorize or approve
payment thereunder (b) audit bills or claims under the contract, or (c)
appoint an officer or employee who has any of the powers or duties set
forth above and (2) no chief fiscal officer, treasurer, or his deputy or
employee, shall have an interest in a bank or trust company designated
as a depository, paying agent, registration agent or for investment of
funds of the municipality of which he is an officer or employee. The
provisions of this section shall in no event be construed to preclude
the payment of lawful compensation and necessary expenses of any
municipal officer or employee in one or more positions of public
employment, the holding of which is not prohibited by law.

Reference: https://www.osc.ny.gov/files/local-g.../gmlposter.pdf

+++++++++++++++++++

To Another Topic...


Ah, isn't it convenient to blame COVID for an inability to estimate construction costs, labor shortages, and other circumstances?

Following the finalization of selling properties on West Main Street, Ruda says the CDC board members and directors were bouncing around a lot of ideas. “Then COVID hit,” she said, noting that the shutdown of economic activity and development stunted the CDC’s ability to move forward at that time.

Doesn't the Mayor seem to now admit that COVID had a negative effect on the development project "stunted the CDC's ability to move forward"?

However, in early 2021, that very same negative impact did not seem to be Trustee Ruda's top priority, eh?

I duly noted that during her Mayoral campaign:

Given the negative impact that Covid restrictions have had, and continue to have, on small businesses and daily life in Lancaster, does not this priority, ascribed to Trustee Ruda in the January 14, 2021 Lancaster Sun, seem perplexing?...

image (23).png

Given her contemporaneous understanding of the impact that Covid had on the West Main Street project, why didn't Trustee Ruda prioritize the West Main Street matter(s) over the the Climate Smart Task Force and environmental issues in 2021?

In 2021, I also subsequently noted:

I was indeed perplexed when I posted this...

Given the negative impact that Covid restrictions have had, and continue to have, on small businesses and daily life in Lancaster, does not this priority, ascribed to Trustee Ruda in the January 14, 2021 Lancaster Sun, seem perplexing?...

In light of your comment Frank, I wish to amend my referenced comment because "perplexed" may be the wrong verbiage; now "intrigued" may be the more appropriate term.

While the prioritization could be just a reflection of the Leftist agenda, it now occurs to me that the publicly prioritized environmental issue could be a feign designed to take the public's eye off the real backroom machinations to be put into play, do you not agree?

Reference: Post #2, https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...t=ruda+2021%5C

[mark blazejewski]

(4) I am given to understand that purportedly, the exact same CDC appointee referenced in three (3) above, now serves as a Member of the Village Historic Preservation Commission.

Will the Board enlighten me if there were any "conflict of interest" concerns expressed in non-privileged venues over that specific Village Historic Preservation Commission appointment?

Reference: https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...ancaster-Board

This timeline item appears to answer my question illustrated above:

On June 10, 2020, Sweeney resigned from the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee. This was done to ensure there was no conflict of interest on future votes concerning votes on his West Main Street properties, he said.

Thank you for the clarification.

[mark blazejewski]

On Feb. 25, 2019, Sweeney was nominated to join the CDC to assist with treasurer duties when John Mikoley stepped down. He was also asked to help shape the future vision for the CDC.

I am still confused about this timeline item.

"When John Mikoley stepped down," suggests the past tense, and that the Mikoley resignation had already occurred, does it not?

How can that be, when according to the February 25, 2019 Minutes of the CDC, John Mikoley apparently was still a Member of the CDC, and in fact seconded the Sweeney nomination and voted for his appointment on that very date?

Reference: https://ecode360.com/LA0609/document/492515895.pdf

Moreover, the March 6, 2019 Minutes of the CDC seem to suggest that both Mikoley and Sweeney served on the CDC concurrently.

Reference: https://ecode360.com/LA0609/document/492515901.pdf

Further clarification, please.

[mark blazejewski]

I am also a bit confused about this timeline item:

On Sept. 9, 2020, plans for phase one of development for the Lancaster Village Center was presented to the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee.

Unless I am not understanding something, the September 9, 2020 meeting concerned the development of Phase Two of the project, not Phase One, did it not?


Reference: https://ecode360.com/LA0609/document/605358876.pdf

I am a bit curious about the phraseology used in item "b." in the September 9, 2020 Minutes of the Historic Preservation Committee.

"b. Jim Allein and Tom Sweeney for the CDC

-CDC wants to COLLABORATE on a walking tour project with the Historic Preservation Commission. It would be self-guided on an APP and would require a historical analysis of properties."

[Lee Chowaniec]

Mark B.

I did not read the Lancaster Bee report until late last night. I had posted based on your initial thread post. When I read the Bee’s report headline ‘Sweeney provides clarity on time at Community Development Corporation’ I would have responded differently considering it was Mr. Sweeny’s timeline presentation.

I do not have the ‘standing’, knowledge, or wherewithal to challenge Mr. Sweeny’s version, but considering he was (until he recently resigned) a director of the CDC, a past member of the Lancaster Historic Preservation Committee (resigned in June 2020), a member of the Lancaster-Elma Chamber of Commerce, and developer his version may very well be considered biased and his actions a conflict of interest – as are his vast Village business district property holdings and how he managed to acquire them and become the Village’s favorite son at the same time.

Waiting for the other shoe to drop.

[mark blazejewski]

Mark B.

I did not read the Lancaster Bee report until late last night. I had posted based on your initial thread post. When I read the Bee’s report headline ‘Sweeney provides clarity on time at Community Development Corporation’ I would have responded differently considering it was Mr. Sweeny’s timeline presentation.

Spot on Lee, and my sincere thanks are attached to this response.

I wrestled with a proper caption for this thread and decided to honor lede in Mr. Sinner's story. That lede referred to "their timeline of events."

Nevertheless, I very much appreciate your observations, and if I had to do it over again, I would probably be very inclined to focus on the Bee's headline.

[mark blazejewski]

Does this lend some further perspective to the Bee's presented TIMELINE?

Timeline Item:

In June, 2017, Sweeney... purchased the building at 4 West Main St. from Clark Packard of Carson’s Jewelers. The building, which was in disrepair, was renovated and reopened in 2018.

Question:

Doesn’t Trustee Mikoley operate (along with his wife) the Gilded Maple on 4 West Main Street and is a tenant of Tom Sweeny?

Timeline Item:

In April, 2018, a unanimous decision was approved by the CDC to sell the property to Sweeny’s company, Plum Bottom Creek Properties...In October 2018, the sale of the property was closed.

Question:

If Mr. Mikoley is Mr. Sweeney's tenant, was he such a tenant at the time that Mr. Mikoley seconded the CDC motion to close or approve the sale?

Reference: https://ecode360.com/LA0609/document/474193807.pdf


Timeline Item:

On Feb. 25, 2019, Sweeney was nominated to join the CDC to assist with treasurer duties when John Mikoley stepped down. He was also asked to help shape the future vision for the CDC.

Question:

Is Mr. Mikoley truly a tenant of Mr. Sweeney, and if so, was Mikoley a tenant at the time that he seconded and voted for Mr. Sweeney's appointment to the CDC on January 25, 2019, or at any time during the March-July, 2019 time period, when both Sweeney and Mikoley concurrently served on the CDC?

Reference: https://ecode360.com/LA0609/document/492515895.pdf