People of lancaster?

[mark blazejewski]

Mark / GC

Dream on!

Well, experiencing one uplifting dream may beat having a recurring nightmare, eh?

* The Villages of Depew and Lancaster merge to form a certified city?

The idea I ponder may appeal to the twin villages' common culture, history, and fiscal health.

Lee, let me explain it this way. If the villages are absorbed into both the towns of Lancaster and Cheektowaga, in some ways it may be compared to a tiny nation being split in half by, and then absorbed into, its two very powerful neighbors. The tiny nation would lose its common culture and there respective identities, and would be relegated to mere geographic areas of the two powerful nations. Poland in 1939 may be close to such an example.

The circumstance that I would envision is that of separate entities, previously bonded by common culture and history, uniting under one new common label.

I'm not saying it will happen, I am not saying it can happen, but it is worthy of exploration. Learning and creative thinking are always good, eh?

Politicians in the Villages wanted no part of that, wanting to govern their own little fiefdoms. They convinced their subjects how much better off they were with their ‘personal services’ touch.

The operative phrase in your comment Lee is "Politicians in the Villages..."

In 1983, I supported a candidate for the VOL Board who stood against the police merger as that movement began to grow. In the spring of 1990, the VOL residents in a special referendum overwhelmingly rejected a police merger proposal. That very same Trustee elected in 1983, later morphed into a boot-licking Cansdale lackey, who supported the negotiated 2003 police merger; a contradictory act done without the genuine consent of the governed.

In my opinion:

The Cansdale era brought to the VOL, a bi-polar approach to governance, which in retrospect, seemingly makes sense only to those who live in the worlds of self-interest, sadism, and greed. Cansdale and his puppet Board(s), who many believe governed against the true wishes of their constituents, were among the most vindictive, self-serving, petty, and arrogant power holders this village ever had. They seemed to glean some sort of excited satisfaction from their abuse of power and select favoritism.

BTW, didn't Cansdale reach to be elected Supervisor in 2003-the very same year of the police merger?

Wasn't he content with governing his own little fiefdom any longer?

No self-serving optics there, eh?

The Village was not in good financial shape even back then.

Indeed, but when the police contract expires, VOL: fasten your seatbelt.

Ask Mayor’s Ruda and Peterson if they would be willing to give up their autonomy for the best interests of their residents.

Maybe somewhere there lurks a visionary who sees a prosperous and united future for its people, not a ruler who is obsessed with a mirror?

[mark blazejewski]

Regarding post #31, this comment may be somewhat unclear...

Lee, let me explain it this way. If the villages are absorbed into both the towns of Lancaster and Cheektowaga, in some ways it may be compared to a tiny nation being split in half by, and then absorbed into, its two very powerful neighbors. The tiny nation would lose its common culture and there respective identities, and would be relegated to mere geographic areas of the two powerful nations. Poland in 1939 may be close to such an example.

This restructured comment may be more understandable...

Lee, let me try to explain it this way:

If the "twin villages" are absorbed into both the towns of Lancaster and Cheektowaga, in some ways those absorptions could be compared to a tiny nation which lies between two very powerful countries, and is ultimately split in half by, and then absorbed into, those two very powerful neighbors. The tiny nation, like the VOL and VOD, would lose its shared common culture and specific identity(s), and would be relegated to indistinct geographic areas of the two powerful nations. Poland in 1939 may be close to such an example.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Regarding post #31, this comment may be somewhat unclear...


This restructured comment may be more understandable...

Lee, let me try to explain it this way:

If the "twin villages" are absorbed into both the towns of Lancaster and Cheektowaga, in some ways those absorptions could be compared to a tiny nation which lies between two very powerful countries, and is ultimately split in half by, and then absorbed into, those two very powerful neighbors. The tiny nation, like the VOL and VOD, would lose its shared common culture and specific identity(s), and would be relegated to indistinct geographic areas of the two powerful nations. Poland in 1939 may be close to such an example.

As a former 30-year resident of the Village of Depew your analogy is wasted on me.

I loved living in the Village of Depew. Had great neighbors and friends, a pocket park where the kids spent much time playing and socializing and participated in many events. That said, I never felt like I was living in a social environment that warranted paying three taxes for redundant services and was outspoken when the politicos tried to convince me that my best interests were served by keeping their fiefdom intact.

I moved to the town because my family grew, I had a child with severe disabilities and the Lancaster Central school system provided the services for her to further her education. I love living in the town for same reason of friendly people and the proximity to the Villages and for what they have to offer. We still spend a lot of time and money in the villages and wish them success.

That said, the villages have seen their day – old, infrastructure in disrepair, lacking resources and unable to ever be in a position of merging and becoming a ‘certified city.’

When people say to me that when the 30-year police merger agreement ends and the Village of Lancaster gets their sales tax back and will be in a stronger position, I ask whether they actually believe that someone is going to pick up their policing at no cost. The sheriff’s department? All I hear is crickets!

[mark blazejewski]

As a former 30-year resident of the Village of Depew your analogy is wasted on me.

A analogy wasted upon a 30-year resident who was transplanted in the VOD, but not to this 70-year VOL native, eh?

[GroundControl]

Gentlemen, if I may, it seems to me the real question here is " what is in the best interest of the taxpaying residents of any municipality no matter the type. After all, it is all driven by their monies and recognized motivation of what they determine their own communities should be doing with that financial funding.

It is a very small number of local politicians who don't impose their own will or their donators will with proposals that hurt more than help the everyday Joe Schmoe.

Lee, you have a history in all three places involved in this thread. I think you made a good case actually for becoming a city as opposed to two different villages when you declared your dislike for paying three different municipalities tax dollars out of your own personal budget. I think a new Charter to become of an official city would instantly cure that problem of watching your tax dollars go to an entity that doesn't serve you directly.

Re-organizing and re-thinking to keep the citizen abreast of possible long term savings is the duty of our elected representative government. If consolidation as a city is a choice, I believe the residents of the financially struggling villages of Depew and Lancaster take their own opinions on this possible solution much more seriously than that of their elected representatives on this subject.

[mark blazejewski]

If consolidation as a city is a choice, I believe the residents of the financially struggling villages of Depew and Lancaster take their own opinions on this possible solution much more seriously than that of their elected representatives on this subject.

GC, I always enjoy our exchanges, but I have written all I am going to on this issue. Anyway, I am perfectly content with the stagnation and declining conditions, andreally don't mind subsidizing bars, cannabis joints, roundabouts, which serve to lift the political fortunes of a village elite now led by a snippy, heavy-handed, disrespectful actress.

In any event, methinks it is time for me to take another sabbatical from Speak Up, this time perhaps for twenty years, and leave such speculations to the perceived superior minds, elected, anointed, or self-assumed.

Gooobye.

[mark blazejewski]

It is a very small number of local politicians who don't impose their own will or their donators will with proposals that hurt more than help the everyday Joe Schmoe...

The satire contained in post #36 aside, if left to a continuance of their own closed counsels, this current bunch of VOL political actors will inevitably choose the road of self-preservation and self-profit, rather than the road to genuine remediation.

Words intended to ridicule the type of creative thinking which may defy the resident cronyism which attends the present decline of the village, may be the trademark of the grumpy curmudgeon, but that type of derision will not effectively remediate the long-term problems facing the VOL, nor will it produce the non-existent services that are suggested in the village's burdensome tax bills.

In those tax bills, one may assume that the village is providing services suitable for a village, not a newly developing town, but a village. Presently, we have no police force to assume the unique functions of a village police force. We have no codes enforcement office to assume its localized role. We have no refuse service which is appropriate for a village with an aging population. In short, we are paying for village-quality services, but are receiving a town-quality product. It is kind of like paying for prime rib, only to be served chuck.

I am tired of the ongoing temporary experiments which brought us the magic bullet marvels such as the Big H, the Lancaster Towers, roundabouts, and the other historic band aid-type attempts designed to lift the VOL out of the financial hole.

If thinking out of the box to effectively end this crap is a crime, I plead guilty to the charge.

[GroundControl]

Mark, I think your comment about thinking outside the box may be taking place in the VOL. But it pertains to the Village as it is presently chartered.

No talk of "Twin Cities", rather conversation about a hard change of the direction the village has been heading in the last ten years.

There really is talk about a group looking to clean sweep the Village Board no matter who is seated in next weeks election to fill a vacant Trustee seat. Talk is now going on on a couple different fronts as I understand about a serious challenge and they are already interviewing prospects. Rumor or not the last tie shows an equal amount of dissatisfaction with the Ruda/Sweeney team as it did their support. 50% of the peoples support is not a comfortable spot to be in. With just a very few votes the Ruda/Sweeney slate could be wiped clean.

I have already come to my own conclusion about all involved in the run off election next week. All are of the same cloth as far as I can determine from the public records I have seen from 10 years back to now.

[mark blazejewski]

I have already come to my own conclusion about all involved in the run off election next week. All are of the same cloth as far as I can determine from the public records I have seen from 10 years back to now.

Five days until the election, and I have seen no real evidence that either candidate has stepped-up its campaign game. The relative silence of the office seekers seems to BOOM support for your hypothesis, GC.

[GroundControl]

Maybe I am being fed unsubstantiated information Mark. Sometimes trying to figure out who to ask and who to believe is not easy in the two Lancaster's.

When I follow the official town and village records I can deduce enough to see who flys the DEMOCRAT flag and who doesn't.
Although, in the VOL the election law allows everyone to wear a mask of no affiliation to hid to whom their real loyalty belongs.

The last ten years shows a 180 degree difference between the two different political affiliations that presently enjoy leadership in either place.

The TOL, quite obviously, is under a full five seat majority of conservatives and republicans. Looking back at history says this was no easy feat to accomplish. Records show a very long democrat stranglehold on the board.

Something must have turned the tables. I credit the people that made a change, but after so long of a rule by democrats what changed?

I think the basic difference between the progressive method and the conservative method of governing becomes apparent when the voters are aware of how it directly impacts their pocket book.

The change happened the TOL, why is it not possible in the VOL? It is obvious what the progressive agenda of the present VOL board is. This board will be loaded by Mr. Sweeney, no matter the outcome of next weeks election.

That probably is concerning to more than a few VOL voters. As time moves toward the real election more and questions about the Sweeney/Ruda/Schroeder land deal will have to be answered and more of the citizens will take notice and an awful lot more voters that will turn out for that mayoral race.

Who will take advantage of that? If a concerned group is thinking about trying to duplicate what the rep/con's did in the dominating take over of the TOL in their last political outing, it might just be the time to do it and it might not be so out of the realm of reality

[mark blazejewski]

When I follow the official town and village records I can deduce enough to see who flys the DEMOCRAT flag and who doesn't.

In the VOL GC, the official records may or may not confirm an actor's party affiliation, but the VOL Board's unanimous imposition of the Green Agenda, governance in support of slouching civic values, specifically referencing the VOL Boards' decision to support a certain type of business opportunity, which was shunned by a unanimous vote of the Town Board, certainly speaks for itself.

The TOL, quite obviously, is under a full five seat majority of conservatives and republicans. Looking back at history says this was no easy feat to accomplish. Records show a very long democrat stranglehold on the board.

The town apparently chose to depart the stale left-wing form of governance, and then embarked on a course that would honor the more traditional community conventions.

In that connection, it was indeed a very difficult task to convince the local town population, that the membership of the current Conservative Town Board would actually put a rhythmic melody to what may have otherwise been shallow campaign lip service.

Something must have turned the tables. I credit the people that made a change, but after so long of a rule by democrats what changed?

Frustration with powerful developers and rather self-serving political actors; and competing strong civic and personal values amidst the voting public; and, courageous political leadership and strong, sincere, and highly committed candidates perhaps did it GC, but what do I know?

The change happened the TOL, why is it not possible in the VOL? It is obvious what the progressive agenda of the present VOL board is. This board will be loaded by Mr. Sweeney, no matter the outcome of next weeks election.

I think that the type of campaign that will be undertaken in the next five days will define the run-off candidates; silence will confirm their commitment to the unacceptable status quo.

[GroundControl]

Mark, I have come to the same conclusion that you did a long time ago about Mr. Schroeder's candidancy as opposed to Mr. Santoro's.

Mr. Schroeder is the better man in this particular election to represent a more homegrown feel for what the Villagers really desire in representation from the Village Mayor and Trustees. It's that simple.

With that said, I am on your page in that message to anyone interested in a more open and attentive local government in the Village of Lancaster. Get out on this coming Tuesday and vote for Mr. Schroeder.

[mark blazejewski]

Mr. Schroeder is the better man in this particular election to represent a more homegrown feel for what the Villagers really desire in representation from the Village Mayor and Trustees. It's that simple.

Very well said GC.