Term Limits ? Does Lancaster need them ?

[grump]

Pro's and con's to this.

In Cheektowaga I think term limits would help in eliminating status quo and nepotism. Think about the the same names we see on our town board or elected positions over time. I know people say "Well the people elected them again so they must be doing something right". Yes and no. What I see is a small social club of people who happen to market themselves better than others. Doesn't mean they are more qualified to run our town, it means they are just better at keeping control for their friends and family.

The winners of elections invariably win because they market better than their opponents. Like him or not, Trump at least had a message..."make America great again." What was Hillary's message..."elect me & I'll make sure boys in frilly underpants can pee in the ladies room"?

[gorja]

Originally posted by 4248:
in Lancaster they have what's called the "Benefits Menu" - where the elected and appointed folks can chose all the eligible benefits like no copay dentistry - eye care - hearing aids -AFLAC insurance and many more tax funded options.

If the town councilmen (women) want it, they have to pay 100% of the premium since January 1, 2009.


If the town justices want it, they have to pay 100% of the premium since January 1, 2014.

[4248]

The pay their own healthcare now - I was wrong. I was reminded that was changed when Mrs Stempniak wanted to punish Mr.Amatura. Sorry about that. They still receive the tax funded NYS pension benefits.
So you still have less than part time employees/elected officials collecting NYS pension credits.

[gorja]

The pay their own healthcare now - I was wrong. I was reminded that was changed when Mrs Stempniak wanted to punish Mr.Amatura. Sorry about that. They still receive the tax funded NYS pension benefits.
So you still have less than part time employees/elected officials collecting NYS pension credits.

Yep, that's the way it went, Stempniak and Ruffino. Only one of those two bad asses left.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Politicians and diapers should be changed often,and for the same reason. Term limits would keep both parties in check . I was told that many of the Lancaster Republican candidates are harassed,threatened,and intimidated. I also heard the Democrats may have a primary for town board. Let us hope a few brave people step up. Will the winds of change blow through Lancaster? Maybe the statistics of Lancaster 2016 voting will continue.

Republican candidates have always been harassed and intimidated by the well organized Lancaster Democratic political machine. To demean and destroy the opponent’s character has worked well for the party in the past; and especially in the last election where the only viable Democratic Party candidate was Johanna Coleman.

The party was so bankrupt of winnable candidates that the DEMS endorsed a conservative and a blank for council positions. And, they won and are doing a credible job.

If you are taking the position that term limits will be your chosen party’s big agenda item to rid career politicians from office that will never sell because the great majority of voters know that’s a pipe dream.

And, term limits will have no impact on the two incumbents who I understand will seek re-election and by definition are so-called career bent politicians.

What will have a big impact on voters is the settlement of the police contract where the sticking point remains on the police contributing to their health plan; where they now do not contribute anything to a plan that costs $20,000 annually, has dental and vision coverage and low co-pays. And of course the tentative budget which precedes the election.

[mark blazejewski]

Republican candidates have always been harassed and intimidated by the well organized Lancaster Democratic political machine. To demean and destroy the opponent’s character has worked well for the party in the past; and especially in the last election where the only viable Democratic Party candidate was Johanna Coleman.

The party was so bankrupt of winnable candidates that the DEMS endorsed a conservative and a blank for council positions. And, they won and are doing a credible job.

If you are taking the position that term limits will be your chosen party’s big agenda item to rid career politicians from office that will never sell because the great majority of voters know that’s a pipe dream.

And, term limits will have no impact on the two incumbents who I understand will seek re-election and by definition are so-called career bent politicians.

What will have a big impact on voters is the settlement of the police contract where the sticking point remains on the police contributing to their health plan; where they now do not contribute anything to a plan that costs $20,000 annually, has dental and vision coverage and low co-pays. And of course the tentative budget which precedes the election.

Greg, believe me, I share your views and commiserate with your concerns. I know what it is like to be on the receiving end of the local Democrat machine. I am confident that you know that.

However, Lee's points are very valid, and are well taken.

Character assassination, distorted truths, and guilt by association, are synonymous with the local Democrat Party.

A classic example is Russ Sugg's 2015 campaign for Town Council Member. This good and decent man, this very able public servant, was the victim, yes victim, of such disgusting tactics. Truly, a loss for the Lancaster family.


In fairness, there are some Lancaster officials, with the Democrat label, that I believe are of sound character and great ability. Although I have some differences with them, I am specifically referring to Highway Superintendent Amatura and Supervisor Coleman. Furthermore, after a full year in office, I am currently inclined to view Council Member Walter rather positively.

I do however, have significant concerns about the remaining Town Council Members. There is one Council Member that I simply can never support.

These remarks are written to suggest to the Lancaster Republican Party, that it should understand, that, in the world of PUBLIC perception, the disgusting harassment and character assassination tactics of the local Democrat political machine, stands separate and apart from the perceived qualifications, conduct, competence, and commitment of some elected Democrat officials.

Therefore, IF the Lancaster Republican Party is relying on a theoretical sympathetic voter backlash, or on a singular platform of term limits, IMHO, the party is going to suffer the same old, same old.

The local Republican Party should consider the recent success of the Trump campaign. Although resplendent with controversies and burdened by follies, that candidate was successful in large measure because he spoke to specific concerns, and offered concrete remedies.

I am generally supportive of a brisk gale which would blow-in the refreshing winds of calm and respectful alternative commentary, civil discourse, and minority dissent. But those breezes should not echo issues of controversial personal conduct, political opportunism, a platform devoid of specifics, or of a campaign based upon a mere celebration of electoral competition,

Competent, committed, viable and substantive candidates are needed.

All this, IMHO, but what do I know?

[gorja]

Greg, believe me, I share your views and commiserate with your concerns. I know what it is like to be on the receiving end of the local Democrat machine. I am confident that you know that.

However, Lee's points are very valid, and are well taken.

Character assassination, distorted truths, and guilt by association, are synonymous with the local Democrat Party.

A classic example is Russ Sugg's 2015 campaign for Town Council Member. This good and decent man, this very able public servant, was the victim, yes victim, of such disgusting tactics. Truly, a loss for the Lancaster family.


In fairness, there are some Lancaster officials, with the Democrat label, that I believe are of sound character and great ability. Although I have some differences with them, I am specifically referring to Highway Superintendent Amatura and Supervisor Coleman. Furthermore, after a full year in office, I am currently inclined to view Council Member Walter rather positively.

I do however, have significant concerns about the remaining Town Council Members. There is one Council Member that I simply can never support.

These remarks are written to suggest to the Lancaster Republican Party, that it should understand, that, in the world of PUBLIC perception, the disgusting harassment and character assassination tactics of the local Democrat political machine, stands separate and apart from the perceived qualifications, conduct, competence, and commitment of some elected Democrat officials.

Therefore, IF the Lancaster Republican Party is relying on a theoretical sympathetic voter backlash, or on a singular platform of term limits, IMHO, the party is going to suffer the same old, same old.

The local Republican Party should consider the recent success of the Trump campaign. Although resplendent with controversies and burdened by follies, that candidate was successful in large measure because he spoke to specific concerns, and offered concrete remedies.

I am generally supportive of a brisk gale which would blow-in the refreshing winds of calm and respectful alternative commentary, civil discourse, and minority dissent. But those breezes should not echo issues of controversial personal conduct, political opportunism, a platform devoid of specifics, or of a campaign based upon a mere celebration of electoral competition,

Competent, committed, viable and substantive candidates are needed.

All this, IMHO, but what do I know?

I, agree Mark. There are some officials that I have NO issues with.

But. . . .
Ruffino's and Abraham's past performance on the board should not be ignored.





In my view, Gaczewski screwing the poor and the elderly prior to becoming a councilman can never be excused.

[mark blazejewski]

I, agree Mark. There are some officials that I have NO issues with.

But. . . .
Ruffino's and Abraham's past performance on the board should not be ignored.





In my view, Gaczewski screwing the poor and the elderly prior to becoming a councilman can never be excused.

Where's that like icon?

[Breezy]

Greg, believe me, I share your views and commiserate with your concerns. I know what it is like to be on the receiving end of the local Democrat machine. I am confident that you know that.

However, Lee's points are very valid, and are well taken.

Character assassination, distorted truths, and guilt by association, are synonymous with the local Democrat Party.

A classic example is Russ Sugg's 2015 campaign for Town Council Member. This good and decent man, this very able public servant, was the victim, yes victim, of such disgusting tactics. Truly, a loss for the Lancaster family.


In fairness, there are some Lancaster officials, with the Democrat label, that I believe are of sound character and great ability. Although I have some differences with them, I am specifically referring to Highway Superintendent Amatura and Supervisor Coleman. Furthermore, after a full year in office, I am currently inclined to view Council Member Walter rather positively.

I do however, have significant concerns about the remaining Town Council Members. There is one Council Member that I simply can never support.

These remarks are written to suggest to the Lancaster Republican Party, that it should understand, that, in the world of PUBLIC perception, the disgusting harassment and character assassination tactics of the local Democrat political machine, stands separate and apart from the perceived qualifications, conduct, competence, and commitment of some elected Democrat officials.

Therefore, IF the Lancaster Republican Party is relying on a theoretical sympathetic voter backlash, or on a singular platform of term limits, IMHO, the party is going to suffer the same old, same old.

The local Republican Party should consider the recent success of the Trump campaign. Although resplendent with controversies and burdened by follies, that candidate was successful in large measure because he spoke to specific concerns, and offered concrete remedies.

I am generally supportive of a brisk gale which would blow-in the refreshing winds of calm and respectful alternative commentary, civil discourse, and minority dissent. But those breezes should not echo issues of controversial personal conduct, political opportunism, a platform devoid of specifics, or of a campaign based upon a mere celebration of electoral competition,

Competent, committed, viable and substantive candidates are needed.

All this, IMHO, but what do I know?

The deluded petting the heads of the deluded.

Good boy, Mark. Good boy!

Roll over now, and I'll pet your belly.

Good grief, where's Frank Broughton, he could come in handy now?

Here ya have the Milo of SpeakupWNY - quoted above in another fake news rant, warts and all with his own vile and misleading rants back in 2015, too.

Good grief.

Twisting and turning.

TROLL!

Mark with all his righteous indignation - for all the world to see; yet, he has just as much bovine on him with all his malarkey from 2015 as any Democrat around Lancaster fighting back against his bovine.

AND ALL HIS CANDIDATES LOST!!!

And if he was sooooooooooo concerned about the food pantry, he would have gotten off his lazy rump and called his pal Slugg and straightened the thing out with one telephone call.

LAZY!

Precious, just precious.

Sorry, Mark, but I don't think you have any influence with Lancaster voters anyway!

Good luck in 2017, Mark. You'll need it.

[Breezy]

The winners of elections invariably win because they market better than their opponents. Like him or not, Trump at least had a message..."make America great again." What was Hillary's message..."elect me & I'll make sure boys in frilly underpants can pee in the ladies room"?

Last I heard, it was Trump with all the pee!

[Breezy]

I, agree Mark. There are some officials that I have NO issues with.

But. . . .
Ruffino's and Abraham's past performance on the board should not be ignored.





In my view, Gaczewski screwing the poor and the elderly prior to becoming a councilman can never be excused.

I was going to reply to this clip when it was first posted, but I passed.

But when I look at Lancaster today, it's pretty much in a very good place probably because of these two in the video.

The clip is too long, only because it repeats itself over and over, the same swipes against these two.

I think they have a lot of positive things to say if they run for re-election.

If was funny, gorja, but keep your day job! LOL

Anyway, tell me with a straight face that Sugg isn't "screwing the poor and the elderly" with his performance in that snafu, just saying!

[gorja]

I was going to reply to this clip when it was first posted, but I passed.

But when I look at Lancaster today, it's pretty much in a very good place probably because of these two in the video.

The clip is too long, only because it repeats itself over and over, the same swipes against these two.

I think they have a lot of positive things to say if they run for re-election.

If was funny, gorja, but keep your day job! LOL

Anyway, tell me with a straight face that Sugg isn't "screwing the poor and the elderly" with his performance in that snafu, just saying!

It was Dawn's lack of performance not Sugg's performance that screwed the poor and the elderly.

If you heard me sing, you'd be saying, gorja keep making those videos so I don't have to hear that screach

[mark blazejewski]

The deluded petting the heads of the deluded.

Good boy, Mark. Good boy!

Roll over now, and I'll pet your belly.

Good grief, where's Frank Broughton, he could come in handy now?

Here ya have the Milo of SpeakupWNY - quoted above in another fake news rant, warts and all with his own vile and misleading rants back in 2015, too.

Good grief.

Twisting and turning.

TROLL!

Mark with all his righteous indignation - for all the world to see; yet, he has just as much bovine on him with all his malarkey from 2015 as any Democrat around Lancaster fighting back against his bovine.

AND ALL HIS CANDIDATES LOST!!!

And if he was sooooooooooo concerned about the food pantry, he would have gotten off his lazy rump and called his pal Slugg and straightened the thing out with one telephone call.

LAZY!

Precious, just precious.

Sorry, Mark, but I don't think you have any influence with Lancaster voters anyway!

Good luck in 2017, Mark. You'll need it.

Hey Breezy,

"Get off his lazy rump and ...call his friend Sugg." How crude. More urgently, I am curious to know why you are so focused on my physical body in this post Breezy?
But, I digress. It seems you can't keep your own lies straight in this post.

"Call his friend Sugg?: THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE DID!!! We also contacted Trustee Dawn Robinson. Why did you leave that reference out?


In 2015 and 2016 you seemed obsessed by female issues visa v two Democrat candidates. But, regarding your obsession with 2015:



You will recall that my wife, in the summer of 2015, expressed her sincere PERSONAL and PROFESSIONAL concerns about the Trinity Food Pantry, and how it's 2015 financial status stood to impact the participant volunteer outreach program of a local sheltered workshop. That workshop relied on the Trinity Food Pantry for the continuance of that outreach program.

You discounted my wife's concerns in support of your intense advocacy for your female candidate.

Your 2015 candidate is now a Town Council Member. Since that Town Council Member obviously knows that you publicly advocate for her, do I understand that she, as Council Member, would:



(A) Publicly deny the validity of the issue(s) raised in 2015, regarding the sheltered workshop in question and the attendant Food Pantry Issue?

(B) Publicly diminish the critical human needs attendant to the issues of those with developmental and intellectual intellectual disabilities?

(C) Publicly discount the necessity of the services rendered by direct service providers, such as, but not limited to, the sheltered workshop in question?


Breezy, your positions, articulated in 2015 and again tonight, seem to contradict the gracious words spoken by Assembly Member Monica Wallace AT THE EXACT SAME SHELTERED WORKSHOP on October 7, 2016 .

Are you suggesting that Assembly Member Wallace's words were hallow or, using your new buzz words, "fake news?"

Are you suggesting that Assembly Member Wallace's remarks were a disingenuous rant?

Are you suggesting Assembly Member Wallace was merely pandering for votes at the EXACT SAME SHELTERED WORKSHOP relevant to the 2015 Trinity Food Pantry Issue, while concurrently misleading the participant population and DAWNY?


Think about what you are saying, STUPID!



To Western Res:

Can you kindly instruct the ANONYMOUS commentator Breezy to refrain from making references to my physical body using inappropriate comments regarding his physical intentions toward it?

Moreover, it seems to me that Breezy's comment "Good luck in 2017, you'll need it" suggests some sort of threat, perhaps physical, against me, and since she was a significant component to the 2015 narrative to which the commentator Breezy OBSESSIVELY refers, my wife?

[WNYresident]

To Western Res:

Can you kindly instruct the ANONYMOUS commentator Breezy to refrain from making references to my physical body using inappropriate comments regarding his physical intentions toward it?

Moreover, it seems to me that Breezy's comment "Good luck in 2017, you'll need it" suggests some sort of threat, perhaps physical, against me, and since she was a significant component to the 2015 narrative to which the commentator Breezy OBSESSIVELY refers, my wife?

Is this what your referring to?

The deluded petting the heads of the deluded.

Good boy, Mark. Good boy!

Roll over now, and I'll pet your belly.

Don't so that again Breezy. THank you.

[mark blazejewski]

Is this what your referring to?




Don't so that again Breezy. THank you.

YEP. Thanx Res.