More tax dollars for Mr. Sweeney?

[GroundControl]

Tomorrow morning we will find out where this new LIDA board stands on doling more tax dollars for the floundering Sweeney Development Project. It seems Mr. Sweeney has been wooing certain board members with lunch and sweet talk. I am not sure that is allowed. At least it looks kind of shady going direcly to the LIDA board members to coerce or badger them into voting for more money that keeps his company afloat!

I hope these members have seen enough of the Sweeney way of doing business to realize throwing more of our tax dollars to one business entity is NOT good for the economic health of the VOL

It's time to hold Mr. Sweeney's feet to the fire and let him stand on his own. He has been given every chance to succeed and he has not been able to fund his own project still! In the end he will own a large portion of valuable Lancaster Business real estate and hold a heavy lever over the the village board.

Mr. Sweeney is not the savior of the VOL! He is an opportunist who took advantage of an uneducated village board who had wasted a valuable portion of the village business property by letting it go to spoil and hiding it within the CDC until literally giving it away to Tom Sweeney.

Doing the right thing and clearing way for a more competent and better funded developer would be actually open the door for a better outcome

[mark blazejewski]

Mr. Sweeney is not the savior of the VOL! He is an opportunist who took advantage of an uneducated village board who had wasted a valuable portion of the village business property by letting it go to spoil and hiding it within the CDC until literally giving it away to Tom Sweeney.

GC, that is truly a diplomatic, benefit of the doubt characterization. My compliments!!!

[mark blazejewski]

Tomorrow morning we will find out where this new LIDA board stands on doling more tax dollars for the floundering Sweeney Development Project.

The issue was tabled, 3-2, until June, 2024.

To Table:

Braun, Leary, Lemaster

Not To Table:

Getzoni, Sportelli

[Lee Chowaniec]

So, Ground Control, what was your take on the LIDA meeting this morning?

The Sweeny IDA extension request was tabled until June when the approved application contract ends, which includes the sales tax abatement.

LIDA Chair Lemaster suggested the tabling, member Leary seconded the motion, and a vote ensued. The motion was adopted 3-2; Lemaster, Leary, and member Braun voting ‘yea’, members Getzoni and Sportelli ‘nay’.

Surprised by the vote G.C.? I wasn’t. Mr. Sweeny no longer has a LIDA board willing to do his bidding. He received LIDA approval with conditions set and is expected to live by them. Few jobs are created in his mixed-use project and are low-wage positions at that. There was controversy when the project was found eligible for an IDA and granted near $500,000 in tax breaks.

This is not that board as was evident from the public hearing held this morning on TOPS receiving a mortgage tax abatement for refinancing their loan. Despite being told the nature of the mortgage abatement sought, that it ensures the continuance of over 500 full-time jobs, that its financial position is secure, a resident opposed the approval of the IDA.

Admonished and charged with being anti-development, this board is anything but, is committed to approving IDA’s that are in the best interest of the community – not in the best interest of favored applicants / special interest groups. LIDA Consul Paul Leone interjected that the INPLAN study the board conducts to determine a projects overall merit favored the applicant receiving the mortgage tax abatement.

[mark blazejewski]

This was posted on The Town of Lancaster Democratic Committee FB page. Click on attachment to enlarge:

image (37).jpg

This is the response of the Lancaster Conservative Party on its FB page:

IN RESPONSE TO THE LATEST STATEMENT ON THE TOWN OF LANCASTER DEM Committee FB PAGE:

It is good that all residents of Lancaster pay attention to the affairs of both the town and village, especially in the aftermath of having a Town Supervisor who during his tenure, spent so much in Florida. Thank you for your concern town Democrats, but you should have spoken-up during the Ruffino administration.

Although I can not authoritatively speak as to why Town Clerk Terranova gave a State of the Town address, what I do know is during the 2019 election campaign, and again in 2023, Town Clerk Terranova and Bob Leary were running mates on the Conservative Party line for their respective offices. You Democrats surely remember the 2019 election campaign, because that was the year that the Democrat Party refused to endorse Ms. Terranova in your party primary.

In that regard, I understand that ever since 2020, Ms. Terranova and Supervisor Leary have worked together very closely; an association built on mutual trust and respect which holds the interests of Lancaster over any personal political affiliation.

As such, it is of no surprise to me that Mr. Leary may have entrusted such an important task to our great Town Clerk.

To your misguided point on Leary's prioritization of his LIDA attendance, Supervisor Leary was indeed present at the LIDA meeting in question, and in so doing, was keeping faith with the Lancaster voters who believe that IDA funds should be earmarked for projects which have a great potential to produce a significant amount of good, permanent, full-time jobs which provide a livable wage.

Nevertheless, Supervisor Leary is committed to the fulfillment of his LIDA duties, unlike his predecessor who purportedly left LIDA in a huff because he was not re-elected as LIDA Chairman. Sadly, the ego of Ron Ruffino was on full display in early 2022.

To your point about Supervisor Leary's transparency, it was Bob Leary's initiative that brought the Town Board into the age of livestreaming. What could be more transparent than that?

I also know that Supervisor Leary makes every attempt to answer questions during the public participation forum of the Town Board meetings, or otherwise arranges for such an answer, unlike the terse "Thank you for your comments" responses related by the Ruffino administration.

As far as social media, Leary does not rely exclusively on private social media to convey town information. In addition to other avenues of mass communication, Leary's perspectives are reflected on the Town's website. That website remains a great source for official information which, during January's weather emergency, well-served the residents of Lancaster.

Your final point regarding the tabling of what you refer to as a "transformative project" just may be in conflict with your stated transparency concerns.

I understand that the developer in question acquired the village downtown properties in a "no bid" purchase process. To some, the history of that process seems rather murky, because rightly or wrongly, much of the story appears to be buried purportedly in executive session privilege, contradictory accounts and questions left unanswered by past and present VOL officials, CDC Members, and other power players holding an interest in so much of the downtown area of the VOL.

(BTW, were there not two other developers interested in the VOL downtown project, but shunned by the "no bid" process?)

Since I understand that Mr. Sweeney's projects have been in part financed by two IDAs and now may be eligible for New York Forward Money, perhaps you should pay equal attention to these matters, as well as to those targeted in your post?


Reference: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100069124513526

[GroundControl]

Mark
I was not surprised by the decision taken by the LIDA board, but I was a little apprehensive. Counting votes is pretty easy with a 5 member board. After that vote I believe a message was sent clearly to Mr. Sweeney, your money tree of public tax dollars has been felled as for as LIDA is concerned.

I believe a lot more info about the shady land sale and the fragile financial structure of Mr. Sweeney's smoke and mirror operation will be made public. I have seen some interesting communication from records acquired of Mr. Allein's official CDC txt messages for a year when a lot of conflict of interest was happening between VOL board members, the CDC and Mr.Sweeney.

I am not sure where that all will go but the Mayors and Trustees from Cansdale to Ruda are all involved by serving at an elected position and allowing this debacle to morph into the boondoggle it has become. All that went before them was pushed by Mr. Sweeney for his own profit and gain and done with an awful lot of help from the current Mayor, Lynn Ruda.

In the end no more breaks from LIDA may actually cause Mr. Sweeney to get out of the way for a real quality developer to finish rebuilding the VOL up to the standards the people deserve.

On the Write-In candidate....

I read his latest post and he seems like a change of personality to the present VOL members. That might bring a different perspective[ that of a hands on laborer} to a board made up of school teachers and business owners, no disrespect to Trustee Malone, who I understand works for the LAPD.

If Mr. Lista somehow gets elected it will be interesting to see what his does concerning the Sweeney influence over this present VOL administration

[GroundControl]

I thought the Dems response to Town Clerk Terranova giving the State of the Town was a wonderful compliment to how quickly a new regime of a Republican leadership and majority have brought about such a good state of the town with projections of an even better outcome in the future.

The State of the Town is good. Doesn't matter who delivers the message does it? The message is what is important to this board, they are doing a great job. Lancaster Dems should pay a little more attention to their own house because the Reps are coming heavy for Monica. Maybe figure out how she is going to be received by voters who remember her stance on Councilman Adam Dickman's false charges a couple cycles ago and her attack of Mayor Ruda during the same time.

The challenger to Monica has the credibility and hometown connection to beat her and will give her a real fight.

[mark blazejewski]

Mark

I believe a lot more info about the shady land sale and the fragile financial structure of Mr. Sweeney's smoke and mirror operation will be made public. I have seen some interesting communication from records acquired of Mr. Allein's official CDC txt messages for a year when a lot of conflict of interest was happening between VOL board members, the CDC and Mr.Sweeney.

GC, what I do believe is the interests of residents of the village, and because of the previously granted IDAs and the current New York Forward pleadings, the taxpayers of the town and the state, will be well-served by full disclosure. Such revelations may serve the same purpose as the opening credits which pre-identifies the characters in a cheap "B" grade crime mystery.

[mark blazejewski]

Maybe figure out how she is going to be received by voters who remember her stance on Councilman Adam Dickman's false charges a couple cycles ago and her attack of Mayor Ruda during the same time.

It is laughable to see the Democrats now refer to "Our Democratic Town Clerk Diane Terranova," when they shunned her attempt to receive the Party's 2019 Democratic Party endorsement.

To your point relating to Dickman, do the Democrats really hold disdain for those who reach across the aisle in the noble task of governance, targeted at serving the best interests of our town, or is such cooperation only valued, accepted, and applied in the world of political machinations, like when RINO Republicans joined with Democrats to push their UNI-PARTY candidates in 2021???

[Lee Chowaniec]

Much ado about nothing!

The politically bankrupt Lancaster Democratic Party fielded no candidate for Supervisor or Councilmember in the 2023 town election dares to post an asinine Facebook report whose only intent was to rile the opposing political parties and their supporters, and it worked.

The Democratic Party made a fool of itself in the 2021 election and was destroyed at the polls. It had no viable candidate for 2023, except for Town Clerk Diane Terranova – whose endorsement was denied by the Democratic Party in 2019. Bitter and grasping for straws they make an issue of Supervisor Leary not attending an annual Chamber of Commerce ‘State of the Town and Villages’ presentation (YAWN).

The Facebook post admonishes Supervisor Leary for not attending, rather designating Town Clerk Terranova to present in his stead. Imagine that Terranova a Democrat, and in my opinion the most knowledgeable in town operations found wanting. Supervisor Leary was where he was supposed to be, attending a scheduled Town of Lancaster Industrial Development Agency (LIDA) meeting. A meeting where he cast a vote to table a Village of Lancaster (VOL) extension request for a project already approved an IDA in June of 2023 - not expiring until June 2024.

Nor did Leary lead the vote to table the extension as suggested in the Facebook post. Nor did the tabling impact the project from moving forward. Mr. Sweeny’s hardship was self-created, and he is looking to LIDA for relief.

There is much controversy ascribed to this project regarding land purchase, land exchanges, tax breaks, IDA eligibility, etc. An individual stuck in quicksand up to his neck should keep his mouth closed. Perhaps another reason why the Village is reticent in livestreaming its meetings. Four months age a Trustee declared they were looking into it. Since then, crickets.

In 2015, when then Democrat Town Clerk Johanna Coleman announced her campaign for Supervisor, I asked her why she wanted to do this. Her exact words were: “Because we don’t have anyone.” I answered that Ron Ruffino was interested in running. Her exact words were: “Like I said, Lee, we don’t have anyone.” No truer words were ever spoken.

After four years of Ruffino, Supervisor Leary is on course to right the ship. And now the Democratic Party dares to label Supervisor Leary ‘vindictive’ because they have nothing else to offer. Stupid is what stupid does!

[mark blazejewski]

Nor did Leary lead the vote to table the extension as suggested in the Facebook post. Nor did the tabling impact the project from moving forward. Mr. Sweeny’s hardship was self-created, and he is looking to LIDA for relief.

Prior to March, 2021, Mr. Sweeney, was purportedly a non-political actor, but then involved himself in the March VOL elections. His claim at that time was that his involvement was a "1-time exception."

Click On Image To Enlarge:

image (38).png

I now understand that subsequent to that March, 2021 message, Mr. Sweeney became a Democratic Committeeman.

I find it curious, if not concerning, that the Town Democratic Committee permitted use of its FB page to convey this message of rather questionable accuracy:

"...he was in a Lancaster Industrial Development meeting to try to block an important project that would continue the fantastic redevelopment of downtown Lancaster."

Is the Lancaster Democratic Party morphing into a mere extension, aka the mouthpiece, of Mr. Sweeney's business interests?

[GroundControl]

Mark, your observation concerning the Dem/Sweeney connection is right on target. The quick response on the Dem Facebook page may well have been authored by Mr. Sweeney himself considering his insider status as a Committeeman. If it were not he, it certainly appears as if it was subtle left handed salute to him more than a slap at the present Rep/Con leadership.

As Lee so aptly pointed out, the Lancaster Democrat party got sent a very loud and clear message by the voters last time out. There is a reason for that. They became deaf to the peoples concerns and did not face up to the real problems of the Town. They will continue to lose for a while because they are made up of a group more interested in the self promotion and careers than in finding valid candidates that will really do what's best for the voters.

Mr. Sweeney way of doing business brings all of that to their group and they accept his ways naturally.

The difference between the two political operations of the Dems and Rep/Con is glaring, it is so easy for the voters to see when they know the facts. And there's the rub.....Dems will fight tooth and nail to keep VOL voters in the dark by obstructing the flow of information as much as possible. It's the reason there is no live feed still

[mark blazejewski]

Mark, your observation concerning the Dem/Sweeney connection is right on target. The quick response on the Dem Facebook page may well have been authored by Mr. Sweeney himself considering his insider status as a Committeeman. If it were not he, it certainly appears as if it was subtle left handed salute to him more than a slap at the present Rep/Con leadership.

An itsy-bitsy corporate state oligarchy in the making, eh GC.

That is what many in the VOL, well-intention or not, are not getting!

[mark blazejewski]

It's the reason there is no live feed still

Just My Opinion:

Perhaps the Ruda gang is awaiting the election returns, because if Santoro wins, the status quo will truly be preserved, and livestreaming can then be relegated to the graveyard of the evaded?

Right now, it appears that the livestreaming issue resides in what might be termed the "VOL Board's Investigatory Limbo."

Regarding livestreaming as an issue in the Special Election, as far as I know, in the world of campaign rhetoric, only Schroeder appears to have displayed an overt curiosity about that specific proposal.

That brings me to your comments on post #6...

On the Write-In candidate....

I read his latest post and he seems like a change of personality to the present VOL members. That might bring a different perspective[ that of a hands on laborer} to a board made up of school teachers and business owners, no disrespect to Trustee Malone, who I understand works for the LAPD.

Your points are very well taken GC, but in the past, there have been several of those working in the private sector who were elected, only to be co-opted by the VOL Swamp.

To me, livestreaming is the fundamental issue, and so far, I have not seen that Lista has addressed that issue. Correct me if I am wrong, GC.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Mark / Ground Control

Excellent posts regarding the recent ones and there lies where the real focus should be – another meritless / sour grapes Democratic Party report whose intent is to demean Supervisor Leary and to openly welcome / support their newly selected committeeman, Tom Sweeny.

Leary has been a force and a threat to the decades long Democratic board-controlled status quo agenda and policies that favored patronage and picking developers and business winners and losers. Highlighting the mismanagement under his predecessor, Supervisor, Leary was called a ‘bully’ and charged with the resignations that occurred in the then Supervisor’s office, the contracting of failed financial and human resource ‘experts,’ and a budget proposal requiring a slew of amendments.

Leary and the new LIDA board are also being charged with being anti-development. If residents took the time and made the effort to watch the livestreaming of the LIDA meetings they would see / hear the direction this board is taking to clear up past mismanaged practices and regulations, becoming aligned with IDA guidelines that favor ‘fairness’, not favoritism, an agency that is a ‘watchdog’ for the taxpayers’ dollars, ensuring IDA approvals are based on their intent of favoring business growth while creating sustainable living-wage jobs. Not handouts to developers favoring their best interests.

Aligning with Mr. Sweeny the Democratic Party will be seen by many as having an albatross around their necks, causing problems they will not be able to escape. This LIDA board will not be influenced – at least the majority.

The Dems have a hissy-fit because the Town of Lancaster Supervisor missed a Chamber of Commerce gathering. Does any resident really give a rat’s ass?

Other

As reported in today’s Buffalo News, this is Sunshine Week, but the state of access to information in New York State is no brighter than it was last year at this time. In fact, statistics show that it may be even gloomier. Some relief could be at hand.

According to 30 New York transparency advocates, the big picture across New York shows that most state agencies take more than the 20 days required by FOIL to provide requested records, 72% of towns do not post meeting documents online, 75% of planning boards do not post meeting documents online, and 35% of villages did not even post a meeting agenda – to name just a few of the depressing statistics gathered by the New York Coalition for Open Government and Reinvent Albany over 2022-24.

Town of Lancaster residents are fortunate to have a website that provides all that and extensive other information as well. In addition, the Town livestreams its Town, Planning Board, Zoning Board of Appeals, Lancaster Industrial Development Agency (LIDA) meetings, and now development moratorium meetings. The videos are archived and open for viewing at any time.

We now have a supervisor who is willing to engage the public at public comment sessions; unlike his predecessor who told those addressing the board that they were there to only listen to the public’s comments.

Openness and transparency to the max! Transparency is important and should not be treated in the cavalier fashion that seems to be increasingly common throughout New York governments and agencies, both state and local.