Angela Wozniak Council Member - a blast from the past 2012

[4248]

Could the Town Board take another look at downsizing ?


Motion to Downsize the Cheektowaga Town Board

Posted on January 29, 2013 by angelamwozniak
0
At the work session on Tuesday, January 29, 2013 I will present a motion to downsize the Cheektowaga town board to 5 members (four council members, 1 supervisor). Since August of 2012 the board has operated with only 6 members as Council Member Jaworowicz has been ill. Although her position has not officially been reduced, with her absense the board has proven its ability to operate successfully less 1 member. The board can easily reduce down to 5 members and not only handle the same work, but become more efficient and save tax payer dollars.

Council Members earn a wage of $20,680 annually, but the cost be per council member can actually be more than double, reaching as high as $44,137.39 per council member. Currently the overall cost to the town for all 6 members is $219,269.14 with an average cost of $36,544.86 per member. If the board is reduced by two council members, the direct savings will be no less than $52,134.28 and potentially as high as $88,274.79 per year. Over $800,000 could be saved in 10 years. Our town will continue to pay these enormous costs every year until the board is reduced. The irresponsible spending needs to end, and our government must become more efficient in order to ensure a prosperous future for our town. I believe that downsizing our bloated town board to 5 members will be a step in the right direction. There are other costs at stake here as well. I’m alluding to the indirect cost of an inefficient government, and the cost of poor decisions.

The 2013 budget increased the tax rate for the Town of Cheektowaga (outside of villages) by 3.14%, the Village of Depew by 2.39%, the Village of Sloan by 3.10%, and the Village of Williamsville by 3.09%. Also, the overall budget went up $1.103 million. Although I voted down this obscene budget, the other board members passed it with the belief that this was the best that could be done for taxpayers.

I believe the current Cheektowaga Town Board has often fallen victim to “group think.” By definition on Wikipedia, group think “occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an incorrect or deviant decision-making outcome.” Examples of this in 2012 include a budget that increased taxes by $1.103 million and raised the tax rates between 2.39%-3.14%, the passing of the TCEA contract which failed to reduce TCEA employees by 10 members by the end of 2012 which in turn cost the town $1.88 million in 2012 alone, and not updating the ethics code to prohibit individuals who hold an officer position within a political party from also holding key managerial positions within the town which would prevent abuses of power, just to name a few. Clearly this board has failed to make common-sense decisions many times throughout 2012.

Downsizing the town board will empower residents to hold their elected officials accountable. If the board is reduced to 5 members, it will be far more difficult for board members to hide with the crowd on such poor decision making as one of many. If you’ve attended a few board meetings, you’re probably witnessed a council member acting defensive while being questioned directly. Often questions to the board are answered by the Supervisor, but when they’re directed to an individual council member, often the “We as a Board voted…” comes out as if to say, “there are many of us so we know better.” With only 5 members, residents can more easily direct their questions to individual board members and hear why he or she voted in a particular way, holding them individually accountable.

Other council members have already expressed their disagreement with downsizing as they believe that if the board is downsized to 5 then residents might submit a petition for a referendum item to reduce the board to 3 members. They have spread fear to residents that if the town board was ever to be reduced to 3 members that it would be hardly operable due to the open meetings law. The truth behind the issue is this: with a 7 member board, residents cannot force a referendum item to downsize. I believe the motive behind other council members not yet supporting this motion is in their desire to not lose control of the board, and see that control being being placed in the hands of residents. I sincerely hope that they change their past position on this issue and support this motion.

I trust in the judgment of Cheektowaga residents and believe that they know what is best for our town. This motion is in response to their desire to downsize the board to 5 members and make our town government more efficient. I am dedicated to representing Cheektowaga residents as they see fit, with this motion and all others. I would also like to point out, this motion to downsize the board is effective in 2016 (which is also my re-election year). I’m willing to possibly eliminate my own council position for this cause.

Amherst voted in 2010 to reduce their board to 5 members which is roughly 40% larger than Cheektowaga. Cheektowaga has the largest town board out of its 3 neighboring towns, Lancaster, Amherst, and West Seneca. It’s time for the Cheektowaga town board to become more efficient, save tax dollars, and become more effective in their work.

I believe down sizing the town board has an enormous potential to benefit the town of Cheektowaga and I hope my colleagues will second and pass this motion.

Angela Wozniak
Council Member
Town of Cheektowaga

[WNYresident]

Can anyone find the motion of not allowing a party chairman/officer to work for us?

[cheekman]

res, that will take some work to find that..

[gorja]

http://www.thesunnews.net/news/229-T...thing_new.html

Town board meeting sees something old, something new

Friday March 23, 2012 | By:Metro Source Staff | News
Monday evening’s board meeting at Cheektowaga Town Hall was equal parts something old and something new – with a “business as usual” agenda and the return of a code of ethics debate ringing in the old; a new police captain and some new plans for town ringing in the new.

The promotion of Scott Pilat to Police Captain, an amendment to an investment agreement, support for new legislation, and a Canadian geese problem highlighted the meeting agenda, along with the usual awards of bids and notices of public hearings.

In contrast to a relatively typical agenda was yet another active public comments period, heightened by the return of Republican Party member and former candidate for supervisor Ted Morton in defense of Councilwoman Angela Wozniak’s proposal to amend the town’s code of ethics. In past weeks, Wozniak has tried to garner support from other board members to amend the town’s code of ethics so it would prohibit town employees from serving as political party leaders under the conviction that maintaining the two positions creates a conflict of interest.

At the last Cheektowaga Town Board meeting, Morton showed his support for Wozniak’s proposal, attempting to prove her point about conflicts of interest by releasing phone records of Sanitation Department head and Democratic Party Chair Frank Max. Morton alleged that there was a clear conflict of interest and abuse of authority in Max’s circumstance, as records showed he made several phone calls from the Sanitation Department that did not pertain to departmental business.

Prior to Morton’s words before the board Monday night, Councilmember Gerald Kaminski came to Max’s defense, saying that after an extensive review of said phone records, only three of the calls could have been deemed “political,” although two of them were made to the Republican Party

“It is not here,” Kaminski said, referencing Morton and Wozniak’s allegations of potential corruption.

Wozniak, still unable to acquire the support necessary to bring the ethics issue to a vote, said, “At this time, the town is not going to address the situation, and it’s unfortunate.”

Morton, however, addressed the situation again – this time handing out copies outlining instances in which codes of ethics were amended to prohibit government employees from serving on political committees. All board members and the media were given a copy by a quick moving, visibly fervent Morton, who began his remarks with reference to Councilmember James Rogowski’s claim that amending the town’s code of ethics would be a violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

While the two disagree on the matter, Rogowski maintained his stance on the constitutional right that he believes would be impinged upon should the town amend its ethics code.

Morton moved on to the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from participating in political activities. In the documents presented, he referenced a case in which a 1977 ruling in Onondaga was overturned to prohibit government employees from serving as heads of political committees.

He also referenced Broadrick v. Oklahoma, which found that, “Employees of state and local governments may be subject to a ‘little Hatch Act’ designed to ensure that government operates effectively and fairly, that public confidence in government is not undermined, and that government employees do not become a powerful political machine controlled by incumbent officials.”

The unrelenting Morton seemed to have fallen onto deaf ears, as the town board heard out his last remarks before immediately making motion to adjourn. Judging by his comments, Morton did not seem intent on letting go of the board’s reluctance to amend the code of ethics.

[gorja]

http://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sho...Code-challenge