Golisano supports downsizing the WSTB

[dtwarren]

Spin it any way you awnt to,you are agood little bundist.So you dont think referendums are a good thing.You know what over my head your love for politicians.To many free cheesers to many elected clowns.

Referendums are good so long as every one is clear as to what they are voting for. Even Mr. Gaughan acknowledges that the petition did not accurately state the date that such a downsizing would become effective.

[keyboard150]

Referendums are good so long as every one is clear as to what they are voting for. Even Mr. Gaughan acknowledges that the petition did not accurately state the date that such a downsizing would become effective.

You know what, Daniel? I strongly side with you in many instances, but, In this case I have to absolutely disagree with your tactics.

Kevin exercised his right as a taxpayer to generate a petition demanding the taxpayers RIGHT to vote on a referendum.
You as a challenger should have had to complete the same process to defeat it.

I find your method in this case to be very obstructionist. Whether Kevin was right or you were right, I do not care. Both of you should have had to go through the same motions.

How many referendums are put through every year that taxpayers don't understand? More than can be counted, surely.

It doesn't make sense to me at all.

This is very much like the casino issue---the public should have been allowed to vote on whether they wanted a casino, instead of one group finding a loophole to build one, and another one thinking they knew what was best for the taxpayers.

When is the MAJORITY ever going to ACTUALLY get the chance to vote on SOMETHING?!

[dtwarren]

You know what, Daniel? I strongly side with you in many instances, but, In this case I have to absolutely disagree with your tactics.

Kevin exercised his right as a taxpayer to generate a petition demanding the taxpayers RIGHT to vote on a referendum.
You as a challenger should have had to complete the same process to defeat it.

I find your method in this case to be very obstructionist. Whether Kevin was right or you were right, I do not care. Both of you should have had to go through the same motions.

How many referendums are put through every year that taxpayers don't understand? More than can be counted, surely.

It doesn't make sense to me at all.

This is very much like the casino issue---the public should have been allowed to vote on whether they wanted a casino, instead of one group finding a loophole to build one, and another one thinking they knew what was best for the taxpayers.

When is the MAJORITY ever going to ACTUALLY get the chance to vote on SOMETHING?!

What he did was in essence ask for, and was prepared to take, a check dated for January 1, 2012 and intended to cash it on January 1, 2010. Gaughan does not even dispute this.

[keyboard150]

What he did was in essence ask for, and was prepared to take, a check dated for January 1, 2012 and intended to cash it on January 1, 2010. Gaughan does not even dispute this.

That has NOTHING to do with what I said and you know it. As I said, whether he was right or wrong in what he did, he went through a process to get something put onto a referendum.

If that piece is to be removed from the referendum, it should have to go through the same process. That is a serious flaw in the system that has some very scary connotations for the future.

[Comet]

It's really pretty simple, and I think Dan is right.

Here's my take.

1. In this instance in the Town of WS and given the players, I would vote against the reduction in the size of the town board, if it were to be on the referendum; but

2. I am in favor of the issue being decided in a referendum vote; provided that

3. The proponents of the referendum follow the specified rule of law and regs and correctly submit and state the terms of the referendum...

Otherwise the prospect of "stealing" the result and hoodwinking the electorate is ominously real.

[Cgoodsp466]

It's really pretty simple, and I think Dan is right.

Here's my take.

1. In this instance in the Town of WS and given the players, I would vote against the reduction in the size of the town board, if it were to be on the referendum; but

2. I am in favor of the issue being decided in a referendum vote; provided that

3. The proponents of the referendum follow the specified rule of law and regs and correctly submit and state the terms of the referendum...

Otherwise the prospect of "stealing" the result and hoodwinking the electorate is ominously real.

You are one of those free cheesers,You love spending the tax payers money on more Idiots instead of less.

[Save Us]

Yes, I feel my quality of life is soooo much better because I am well represented with my abundant government

I am in favor of more representation and more government...

I know tons of people that want to move here because they will get great representation and have all the government they want

[Roberta]

The cost-savings logic for reducing the size of West Seneca's Town Board does not hold much water. (What was it, $60,000 a year? $1.00 per resident?) There are many ways to cut government costs by an equal amount that do not come at the expense of representative government. The risk of despotic leadership is quite real in local government, because you do not have the safety net of bicameral legislature. As for the petition, it was misleading, poorly-crafted, and deliberately timed to provide little opportunity for educated discussion of the topic. Thanks to Dan for saving democracy in the Town of West Seneca.

Here where I live now in Virginia, part-time local government elected officials are not entitled to health insurance at taxpayer expense. I have read that there is only one county in all of Virginia that provides health insurance to its County Board of Supervisors at taxpayer expense. I really do believe that providing health, life insurance, etc. benefits has an impact on the type/qualifications of people who are attracted to office in New York (and not in a good way).

Another cost saving opportunity in West Seneca is the outrageous payments to those who serve on Zoning and Planning Boards. It seems that, from what I have observed, these are political favor appointments crafted to line the appointees' pockets. That system hardly promotes public service and decision-making for the public betterment.

I hate to say what we pay in taxes here. It would only depress you.

[FisherRd]

Even LuckyLarry knew the petition he had people signing was misleading. He admits that the people that signed it didn't even read it.

If people want to do a referendum, they should make sure they do it right. In this instance they did it the wrong way. That's the way the cookie crumbles.
Besides, the $60,000 savings is ridiculous. Buy 2 less cars next year and you'd have your savings.

This was more about a feather in the cap of Gaughan and claiming a victory in his long fought and fruitless war than it is about $60k.

[BigGuy]

The whole point here is, will the voters of West Seneca have the opportunity to vote "yes" or "no" on the issue of downsizing the Town Board when they vote in November?

The supporters of the issue did a lot of work to collect far more than the required number of legitimate signatures to bring the referendum to the November ballot. It is clear that many supported the idea, and many opposed it.

Mr. Warren, whom I do not know and have never met, presented another one of his obscure theoretical issue challenges in questioning the effective date of the vote. The NYS statute spells out, in great detail, how the process would work. The presented referendum did not change that procedure, and I am confident that before the November 4th election date the entire question would have been well explained to the voters.

While Mr. Warren may believe the denial of this referendum to be a "great victory", all this does is deny the voters the choice of approval or disapproval this November, and make the effort of so many volunteers moot.

I hope those volunteers remember that it was Mr. Warren who disqualified their work in going door to door, and when this issue comes up again at what will probably be a special election at great expense to the Town of West Seneca, they can remember that it was he who caused the huge extra expense for that special election.


By the way, I was looking forward to exercising my rights and voting "no" on the question. While I do not support the issue, I do support the right of the citizenry to bring the issue before the voters.

[Comet]

You are one of those free cheesers,You love spending the tax payers money on more Idiots instead of less.

No, I am not. I earn a healthy 6 plus figure salary in the private sector and pay a ton of income and property taxes to the state, local and fed govs.

But I am a realist and I am concerned that the republicrat oligarchy that has held reign in WS needs to be vanquished. WP's power grab will do nothing to improve the state of representative government in WS.

Nor will it measurably reduce the cost of government to the taxpayers. There are other measures that would have a much more significant effect.

Btw, I DO believe that the county legislature should be reduced to at least 9 or even better, eliminated.

[dtwarren]

The whole point here is, will the voters of West Seneca have the opportunity to vote "yes" or "no" on the issue of downsizing the Town Board when they vote in November?

The supporters of the issue did a lot of work to collect far more than the required number of legitimate signatures to bring the referendum to the November ballot. It is clear that many supported the idea, and many opposed it.

Mr. Warren, whom I do not know and have never met, presented another one of his obscure theoretical issue challenges in questioning the effective date of the vote. The NYS statute spells out, in great detail, how the process would work. The presented referendum did not change that procedure, and I am confident that before the November 4th election date the entire question would have been well explained to the voters.

While Mr. Warren may believe the denial of this referendum to be a "great victory", all this does is deny the voters the choice of approval or disapproval this November, and make the effort of so many volunteers moot.

I hope those volunteers remember that it was Mr. Warren who disqualified their work in going door to door, and when this issue comes up again at what will probably be a special election at great expense to the Town of West Seneca, they can remember that it was he who caused the huge extra expense for that special election.


By the way, I was looking forward to exercising my rights and voting "no" on the question. While I do not support the issue, I do support the right of the citizenry to bring the issue before the voters.

While both of us are able to look up law and come to the correct understanding of the law and the process a large number of citizens do not and did not before they signed the petition. This confusion was evident by the account of this past Town Board meeting as reported in the WS Bee.

The one who rendered the work of those volunteers moot is Mr. Gaughan in his drafting of the petition. And if the the requisite number of signatures is obtained on a valid petition and a special election called at least the people signing the petition and voting on the question will have a clear understanding of the question.

As far as cost of having to call a special election if Mr. Gaughan re-circulates a proper petition he controls the timing of it by his filing. He can file it within a proper time frame to have it coincide with the school elections in May which is still before the November Town election or present it at an appropriate time for then.

The voters may have their voice heard at a referendum presented by a proper petition.

I suspect Mr. Gaughan and his supporters do not believe they would garner the required number of signatures otherwise they would do that then raise a frivolous court challenge to the determination.

[Save Us]

The cost-savings logic for reducing the size of West Seneca's Town Board does not hold much water. (What was it, $60,000 a year? $1.00 per resident?) There are many ways to cut government costs by an equal amount that do not come at the expense of representative government. The risk of despotic leadership is quite real in local government, because you do not have the safety net of bicameral legislature. As for the petition, it was misleading, poorly-crafted, and deliberately timed to provide little opportunity for educated discussion of the topic. Thanks to Dan for saving democracy in the Town of West Seneca.

Here where I live now in Virginia, part-time local government elected officials are not entitled to health insurance at taxpayer expense. I have read that there is only one county in all of Virginia that provides health insurance to its County Board of Supervisors at taxpayer expense. I really do believe that providing health, life insurance, etc. benefits has an impact on the type/qualifications of people who are attracted to office in New York (and not in a good way).

Another cost saving opportunity in West Seneca is the outrageous payments to those who serve on Zoning and Planning Boards. It seems that, from what I have observed, these are political favor appointments crafted to line the appointees' pockets. That system hardly promotes public service and decision-making for the public betterment.

I hate to say what we pay in taxes here. It would only depress you.

I have lived in many other states including KY and I agree with you,

People here know nothing else and are slowly starting to wake up.

I bet your garbage gets picked up, your children get educated and you have police and fire service too.

Most of the idiots up here think the purpose of government is to provide jobs... it's pretty sad.

[Cgoodsp466]

I have lived in many other states including KY and I agree with you,

People here know nothing else and are slowly starting to wake up.

I bet your garbage gets picked up, your children get educated and you have police and fire service too.

Most of the idiots up here think the purpose of government is to provide jobs... it's pretty sad.

West Seneca is probably one of the most Dysfunctional towns in Western NY.Look at the clowns who serve there? What is it with the broad on the town board? She is a two bagger but all the boys love her.

[keyboard150]

While both of us are able to look up law and come to the correct understanding of the law and the process a large number of citizens do not and did not before they signed the petition. This confusion was evident by the account of this past Town Board meeting as reported in the WS Bee.

The one who rendered the work of those volunteers moot is Mr. Gaughan in his drafting of the petition. And if the the requisite number of signatures is obtained on a valid petition and a special election called at least the people signing the petition and voting on the question will have a clear understanding of the question.

As far as cost of having to call a special election if Mr. Gaughan re-circulates a proper petition he controls the timing of it by his filing. He can file it within a proper time frame to have it coincide with the school elections in May which is still before the November Town election or present it at an appropriate time for then.

The voters may have their voice heard at a referendum presented by a proper petition.

I suspect Mr. Gaughan and his supporters do not believe they would garner the required number of signatures otherwise they would do that then raise a frivolous court challenge to the determination.

Dan, I'm sorry, but that is not the point. The point is that Kevins group had to sign petitions to get a referendum. Whether they knew what they were signing or not is NOT THE ISSUE. That is THEIR problem for signing something if they didn't understand it!

The point is, that YOU should have had to follow the same procedure to get the issue OFF of referendum.
The way this was handled is wrong, and frightening. It just goes to show how much power politicians really have. If government was working the way it was supposed to, your lawsuit would have been thrown out, and you would have been told to file a petition just like Kevin did.

This isn't about whether downsizing is right or wrong. It's about the voice of the people. Whether it was right or wrong means NOTHING. The people spoke. They wanted a chance to vote on the issue. No ONE person has the right to decide for the people.

There is something extremely wrong here.