Bad Governance Alert!

[Foot Fungus]

From SUWNY Front Page:

Back to the future for Walden Avenue warehouse renovation for police and courts facility; Part: I
By Lee Chowaniec

Like Phoenix rising from the ashes, the 3949 Walden Avenue warehouse building purchased in March of 2003 to house the merged Lancaster Town and Village police forces, and dubbed the “white elephant” by the “you guys” (regular board attendees), will undergo another feasibility study to determine whether renovation costs to house the police and courts is fiscally responsible.

Is this really another feasibility study or something else?

The resolution sponsored by Councilmember Ron Ruffino continues to “evaluate the feasibility of converting the Walden Avenue warehouse property into a police and courts facility...

Sounds like a feasibility study, Ron Ruffino states that it is.

...and commissions the Town to receive qualification submittals from qualified firms for the provision of architectural and engineering services in relation to the renovation...

Provision of services in relation to the renovation? Maybe it's not a feasibility study.

...Town officials are authorized to do all things necessary to effectuate the intent and purpose of the resolution.”

What exactly is the intent and purpose of this resolution?

Councilman Dan Amatura cast the lone dissenting vote declaring that the resolution leaves out a feasibly study for alternatives – namely, a new facility at the current Pavement Road site.

Now that would actually be a feasibility study, wouldn't it?

For the past year, it had been suggested by some town officials and numerous residents that the Walden Avenue building was a poor investment that should be sold and a new one built. In recent months, the board was one in favoring having the building appraised, put up for bid and sold. What changed?

Was this building even appraised when it was first purchased, or was a price just agreed upon between two parties and other peoples' money just spent on a whim? One would think that an appraisal done a few years ago would be fairly accurate a few years later. Let's see it and actually dtermine what a wise decision was made to purchase this mistake in the first place.

Town Board work session minutes

Supervisor Robert Giza declared that some people have accused the board of dragging its feet on putting up a police building. “These same people will be complaining about the taxes going up if we do something.”

These same people have been advocating for a new building for some time. The costs of a new building compared to the one built in 1964 should be fairly in line with each other when factoring in that repairs will probably be frequent on an older building as they already are today.

Whoa, big fella! These same “you guys” (labeled regulars, obstructionists, cave dwellers, etc.) accepted the fact years ago that a new police facility was needed for the newly combined town and village police forces. The “you guys” objected to the manner in which the Walden Avenue Colecraft warehouse building was purchased, the condition and aesthetics of the building and the initial grossly underestimated renovation costs projected by the Supervisor.

Yeah, that's it, it was opposed when looking at the grossly underestimated renovation costs as determined by a feasibility study (that one and the one that followed when the numbers were too high on the first one were actually feasibility studies, you know the kind, the ones that anyone versed in business would have performed before spending over 1.5 million dollars of other peoples' money). But then again, we're not talking about anything inappropriate here, just bad governance (a judge's words, not mine). Yet now the bad governors are moving forward once again, it's just got a new cheerleader this time.

The “you guys” have favored building a smaller, state of the art police building on town-owned property on Pavement Road. The “you guys” are as equally disturbed as Amatura that the town is not going to consider a feasibility study for another option.

But that would actually make it a feasibility study instead of looking for someone to renovate.

Supervisor Giza pointed out that he wanted to do the water line project (now in progress), but was hesitant in doing it because he didn’t want to raise taxes. But wanting to protect our homes and businesses (firefighting with low water pressure) he did it.

Taxes go up every year in Lancaster, so what's the big deal. Would it despoil the "savings" from the police merger? Would it expose that we overpaid for a building that was unwisely purchased?

Well, truth be told the supervisor and the former Town Engineer told residents complaining about home low water pressure issues and firefighting low water pressure issues were told they didn’t know what they were talking about.

A different subject, but it's still pretty interesting how things happen here in relation to their stated need by our "bad governors".

Thanks to councilmember Amatura and present Town Engineer Robert Harris those water line issues are being addressed and in a manner and over time where the taxpayers are not seeing a noticeable tax increase.

Danny A has been doing pretty good here lately. Anyone else noticing that a lot of the good things and long needed things happening lately seem to be associated with him?

Amatura asked why the resolution was not written to include a new build as well as the renovation to the Walden Avenue building? Ruffino responded that the building had been purchased with the intent to renovate it.

And then after the purchase was made, it was determined to be too costly. Does Ruffino really think that the costs are going to go down instead of up? If we are now doing the renovations solely because it was the original intent, we are now witnessing another prime example of "bad governance". Personally, anyone that would fight to spend $30,000 on a bell should not be looked as qualified to initiate any kind of business contract for services that will total in the millions of dollars.

He added that they thought they could sell it at one time and look at another option, but the sale didn’t take place. “If we would have sold it, a new build would have been an option.”

Actually taking the proper steps to initiate the sale process might be wise in trying to make a sale. Maybe we should look up all of the other "interested parties" that the Supervisor spoke of in making his hasty decision to purchase the building in the first place.

Amatura replied, “I thought we all agreed to put the building up for bid.

Yes, they did. I heard it myself. It's been written about many times on this message board.

We now have probably $2.5 million stuck in this building. Giza interjected that they paid $1.6 million for the building and we put some roof repairs... “Yeah but the last study say we need a new roof on the building and that would be another $500,000 and we have been paying on the debt, $90,000 per year. I think in total it’s going to cost us more money than to erect a new police building. We need a new building, but we only need to build a 30,000 square foot building and we need to go cheaper (not with all the bells and whistles).

Amatura could have added into that cost the heating / energy / maintenance costs for the building since 2003 and lost tax revenues once the town took ownership (approximately $50,000 per year times 5 years).

Maybe they're realizing that putting this diamond in the rough up for sale might expose the mistake that it really was. When you total up what has been spent so far, it's impossible to make this up by selling the building. Not a really good idea in an election year is it Ron?

Ruffino (and later Giza) claimed that there were parties interested in purchasing the building, but then “they walked away”.

It's a shame that these parties weren't there the first time to set a good example of sound business practices for the home team.

Amatura responded that they did not follow through on their assurance to the public that they would get the building appraised, have it put up for bid, and build a new one on town owned property on Pavement Road for about $7 million. “Do we need a 76,000 square foot building and to throw that kind of money in an old building when we can build a new police station on the same property the court building sits on? I would like to see a proposal that considers both, the renovation of the Walden Avenue building and a new build. (It was never considered and/or voted on)

There's Danny A saying the right thing again.

Ruffino interjected that the Walden Avenue building was purchased with the intent to renovate it. “Why don’t we say we made a mistake and move on,” said Amatura?

There's the original intent thing again. This town has a really hard time admitting to mistakes.

Ruffino countered that everyone at the time of purchase thought it was the right thing to do and now board members and the Chief of police say we should go with the original plan. “If we sold it, we could have looked at building a new one. But I’m not going to build a new one and then try to sell the old one.”

Well...not everyone...

Wait a minute here. I like that statement, "But I'm not going to build a new one and then try to sell the old one." Is Ruffino taking the helm here and calling this fiasco his own? Neat! The Supervisor must be smiling from ear to ear.

“But we haven’t tried to sell the building,” replied Amatura. “That’s the point I’m making.”

But that would actually make sense. Can't do that.

Mars to Ruffino, hello, you haven’t made a formal attempt to sell the building. Judge Dwan told the board over a year ago to sell it build a new one and move on. The “you guys” have been bugging the town on this for months.)

"Well, I don’t know who have been talking to about this, but the guys in the police department are all for this," declared Ruffino. "And, since we merged with the Village police, Walden Avenue is a better site,” added Ruffino.

And it's a closer location for the officers to pick up their fellow officers when they take them back and forth to work. Hey, the Supervisor needed a new SUV because he wasn't going to use his vehicle in the nasty snow, why should these guys. What's good for the goose...

Supervisor Giza interjected that if it doesn’t work out they could always go to plan B.

“Plan B, we should be doing it now and compare apples to apples,” replied Amatura.

Danny A needs to save his breath at this point. Rational thinking does not exist in the Town Chambers.

Supervisor Giza added that there were a lot of things you could do with this building. “Right now our cars are out in the open. Here, you can bring them inside, deice them and wash them. You can have a pistol range and there’s lots of room to store evidence. They got stolen boats and motorcycles inside, etc.”

A pistol range is basically four walls and a counter with a few lockers. Couldn't one of the existing buildings on the Pavement parcel be easily and inexpensively converted to such a structure if a new facility was erected on the Pavement Road site?

Maybe we should sell all of the boats and motorcycles to help defray the costs. Isn't that what happens to impounded materials? But then again, it has been long rumored that town employees were storing personal materials in there, I've even heard of boats and motorcycles. One easy way to find out...announce an impound sale and see if there's anything left to sell. That's a good idea.

Note to self: Call Ron Ruffino.

Are there really that many boats and motorcycles stolen in Lancaster to keep a never ending inventory? Why not just give them back to their rightful owners? They have serial numbers and things so it can't be too hard to find out who they belong to. Did people that have boats and motorcycles stolen stop reporting them as such?

But I digress...

Supervisor Giza declared that he believed this was still the right thing to do and the right location for the building. “I guess when I heard the price for the renovation I was scared a little bit and thought maybe we could get something more workable, but...

There must be another reval coming. Wasn't all of the development in this town supposed to add to the tax base? One would think that after the last 5 or 6 years that building a new police facility would be a cakewalk with the added revenue. Something must have gone wrong there too. Oops.

“The first price we had for renovation was $11.5 million and the next estimate was $7.5 million for less renovation,” said Amatura. If you put the $1.6 million purchase price in with the $7.5 million, that’s $9 million. And, that was 2-3 years ago. So, what will that price be now? And when the bids come in, they will be for labor. The money is usually made on the material costs.”

Ruffino countered that the cost for a new police station years ago was estimated at $13 million.

Ron, quit while you're ahead.

“Yeah, but that was for a 76,000 square foot building,” said Amatura. We don’t need one that size. That’s what I’m trying to tell you. You guys do what you want. My opinion is that both options should be considered; now.”

Amatura was outvoted 4-1.

Of course.

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"And I'm cookin' up a Filipino Box Spring Hog" -Tom Waits

[Foot Fungus]

From SUWNY Front Page:

Back to the future for Walden Avenue warehouse renovation for police and courts facility; Part: 2: Residents speak out
By Lee Chowaniec

It was made quite clear in the Lancaster Town Board work session of January 5th that the town would not consider including a new build into the resolution they were proposing for performing another feasibility study for renovation of the Walden Avenue building for a police and courts building.

Councilman Dan Amatura suggested at the work session that the town also consider adding to the resolution their looking at building a new, smaller police facility at the Pavement Road site.

That went over like a lead balloon.

Or the sale of an old warehouse to be converted into a police/courts facility.

Resident comments

“You Guys” Dan Beutler asked for a resolution explanation on the proposal to renovate the 3949 Walden Avenue warehouse building. Town Engineer Robert Harris declared that the resolution basically states that the town is putting out a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) from various firms to get a special purpose contract to design a renovation plan for the building to convert it for police and court use.

Wait a minute. That doesn't sound like a feasibility study.

Beutler asked how many feasibility studies had already been performed on the building to determine renovation costs.

“Just one…to my knowledge answered Supervisor Robert Giza.
Beutler: “I have documentation that says two were performed, by Trautman Associates and by Clough Harbour & Associates.

Selective memory has it's perks...until the truth comes back to bite you on the behind.

Councilman Dan Amatura interjected that the feasibility study was performed by Trautman and that a cost estimate analysis was made by Clough Harbour & Associates.

Aren't those two things fairly similar? Couldn't one rationally put together an educated correlation of the result of the latter with the information of the former?

Beutler stated that numerous estimates have been given over time, with building purchase price exclusions, with square footage differences, building additions, etc. “We have not been comparing apples to apples in the past when a new build was mentioned. This sounds like more redundancy and a waste of taxpayer money.”

If we could have only just bought some apples...but then again, this town board would probably buy an entire orchard to acquire a bag of apples...and the apples would probably have worms...

“Why wasn’t this done years ago,” Beutler asked Supervisor Giza.

“Because we didn’t want to,” answered Giza.

There's a good sound answer. I'll remember that when it's time to pay the taxes.

"Mr. Fungus, why didn't you pay your taxes?"

"Because I didn't want to."

Beutler closed by stating the renovation project should have been done years ago when construction and material costs would have been lower. “I understand the foundation is going to need resurfacing and that a new roof is needed, how much is that going to cost?”

Now where did that info come from? Methinks we need a new whistle blower law. Wait...we do! You can't hide everything in an "Executive Session". Crap.

“You Guys” Lee Chowaniec inquired on the “new construction” language in the resolution. “Does this mean the building will be torn down and another built in its place?”
Councilman Ron Ruffino answered that that was not a viable option.

Chowaniec: “Is this ‘new build’ language a typo error?”

Ruffino: “No we were looking at one time if the building were sold. Once that fell through, it shifted back to renovating this building (Walden Avenue) for various reasons. We don’t want to be in the realty business. The Walden Avenue building was purchased for that reason (renovation for police and courts). That building was looked over by numerous people, including the police department and this has been found to be a viable option.”

So then, by Ruffino's statement, we should take it that this resolution has been on the boards for some time now. So why all of the smoke and mirrors about selling the building a few months back? Shouldn't we redo the wording of the resolution to reflect the current status? Did the Town Attorney write this resolution or did someone else? One would think that the Town Attorney would reword a resolution to reflect it's current status. Weird.

Thank God that the Police Engineers approve. That makes it all better.

Chowaniec: “For the past several months it was agreed by all parties that the plan was to sell the building and build a new one on town-owned land. Was the building officially appraised and put up for bid? One way or the other, something has to be built, but I don’t understand the change in plan.”

Ruffino answered that people approached Supervisor Giza and asked him about purchasing the building. Giza interjected that he would on the side take them through the building, but that nothing official happened. “We did not hire a real estate (company) or contact a real estate agent.”

That probably would have been the best course of action from the outset of this little adventure, along with a little transparency.

Chowaniec: “Is there a limit the town will spend on the renovation or the amount of space determined for renovation?

That sounds like a good thing to think about when looking to spend a large amount of money in bad economic times.

It is estimated that a smaller new build would cost $7-$8 million on property the town owns on Pavement Road. Going this route would put the Walden Avenue building back on the tax rolls. The added tax revenue would help offset the debt interest cost on a new build.

More sound thinking.

“You Guys” Mike Fronczak asked Police Chief Gary Stoldt his opinion and preference on a renovated Walden Avenue building or a new build on Pavement Road. “Councilman Ruffino stated at the pre-meeting work session that there was unanimous agreement among the police that the Walden Avenue building was preferred over a new build. What’s your take, Chief?”

Chief Stoldt: “We need a new building. If it’s going to be Walden Avenue, it’s going to be Walden Avenue. I don’t care where it’s going to be. Whatever the board determines! It’s only a mile from the Pavement Road site, less than a mile (1.6 miles to be exact). I’ll take anything!

How about what's the best bang for the buck? This board made a determination years ago and it's been a money vacuum. We're looking at a 44 year old building here. Who's not to say that in ten years we won't have the same complaints that we do with the current facility (which may have been a good thought before all of the development as it would have been with the water pressure...and the traffic...and the sewer capacity...and the pushing of water...).

Fronczak asked whether there would be a communications issue because of putting up a tower with the airport nearby.

“No, there is no problem with that,” said Stoldt. “And, I don’t know who’s telling “you people”, what people are telling “you guys” that the foundation is shot, the roof is shot. If it’s coming from my officers, that’s not their determination, that’s my call.”

Darned "whistle blowers". Where's that nasty little whistle blowers law when you need it?

Stoldt made it clear that it would not be practical to spend any money to renovate the current Pavement Road building. “It wouldn’t be feasible, there’s just too much to be done.”

That's the point. And this was known long ago and botched by the powers that be. Stop going after the people that wanted to see this done right the first time. Maybe if things were looked at from a point of practicality instead of political BS this whole mess would be a moot point.

Councilman Dan Amatura had made it known at the work session that the current police facility is no longer adequate for continuing services. “I’ve been there when the snow blows through the closed windows.”

And that's a damned shame. All of the residents that I have spoken to favor a new facility, even knowing that it could be a tax hit, but they seem to understand that an old building is just that, an old building, and it will cost more in the long run as costs for repairs will continue to rise as they always do. This seems like another situation where future residents will be asking "what were they thinking?"

Comments

What really does this request for qualifications from architectural and engineering firms for the possible renovation of the Walden Avenue warehouse building entail, or even mean?

It’s to contract an architect or engineering firm to consider scope and design and perform a cost analysis. Dress it up anyway you want, it’s another feasibility study.

Or is it?

Supervisor Giza and Councilman Ruffino declare that if the renovation cost is too high, they can go to Plan B, a new build. How do you consider whether the renovation cost is too high when you have no alternate comparable (new build)?

At this point, it looks as if there is no Plan B. Why compare anything? These folks seem to always know better even though everything they do gets patched up at a later date at a higher cost.

As stated in Part: I, the “you guys” understood back in 2003 during the police merger that a new police facility was needed. They never opposed that from happening. They did oppose the purchase and use of the Walden Avenue building because the supervisor entered into a contract to purchase the building without Town Board approval, never consulted the Village of Lancaster on the purchase and said that a feasibility study had been performed when in fact it had not been done.

Hey, there should be a lawsuit over that. Nevermind. It would just be an excuse as to why they were dragging their feet on actions surrounding this building anyway. Wait...Ruffino does that...he did that again with the News and The Bee after this meeting even though the Supervisor admits freely that the lawsuit filed by residents didn't hold up anything.

When entering into an agreement with the Town to have a feasibility performed, the Village of Lancaster was mislead into believing the Town had not entered into a contract to purchase the Walden Avenue building (which it did).

A lawsuit was initiated by some of the “you guys” to have Town Board reps pay back the $15,000 for the feasibility study, as the building had already been purchased.

Despite Councilman Ruffino’s allegations (to this very day) that the lawsuit impeded building renovation, it did not! The following is taken from the Town Board meeting minutes of February 2008:

"Beutler responded that he needed that clarification because he wanted everyone to understand that the lawsuit that was instated against the town never prevented them from moving forward in refurbishing the building, selling it, or whatever - unlike what one Town Board member continued to publicly state."

See. Told ya' so. I wonder if there will be a clarification in the News or The Bee that Mr. Ruffino was speaking out of his keister?

Beutler to Supervisor Giza: “That misinformation has been cleared up in the press and over the Internet, but as one who was involved in that suit, I want to again make it clear that the suit had nothing to do with the building per se.”

Apparently not, it was printed in the local rags just this week.

http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregio...ry/541270.html (paragraph 3)

Giza interjected that he had received a grant to help revitalize the building.

Whatever happened with that grant? Wasn't it to clear up some environmental issue? (maybe they should think about doing that for the joe blow residents whose properties have become environmental issues). If anyone knows of it's correct reasoning, the department that provided the grant and it's disposition, please let us know. Grant money is in all actuality taxpayer money after all.

Beutler shot back, “You owned it from day one!” The point is that there was nothing legally done to stop you from refurbishing the building.”

Giza responded: “Nothing, you are correct.”

Beutler declares he needed to hear that considering Council member Ronald Ruffino keeps insisting on stating publicly that the civil lawsuit impeded building progress.

Once again, see above.

Nostradamus sez: You really don't think that's over and will never be said again, do you?

Other

It appears that some town elected officials find the “you guys” irritating and counterproductive; obstructionists. They say the “you guys” are against everything.
Against everything? On average there are approximately 15-18 resolutions on Town Board meeting agendas. If the “you guys” speak on one or two of them, that’s it. The town likes to discredit the “you guys”, but they’re big kids and can take it. Unlike the politicos they have no personal agenda, but act for the best interests of residents and taxpayers.

The "You Guys" should never question the "Made Guys".

Police Chief Stoldt did not say that the roof was sound, as was quoted in the Lancaster Bee. The Trautman feasibility study concluded that the roof was in severe disrepair and needed to be resurfaced at a cost of $170,000. Foundation integrity was also considered; more to come on this in Part III.

In one of the consulting estimates consider renovation and new build costs, Councilman Ruffino asked that the purchase price of the Walden Avenue building be removed from the equation. This is comparing apples to apples – especially when the new build would go on town-owned property and not cost $280,000 as estimated?

That's already spent, no reason to think about that anymore. I love bankers.

It appears to the “you guys” that the board is dead set against building a new police facility, rather in saving face. From day one this project was clouded in controversy. The contract agreement to purchase the Walden Avenue building was entered into without Town Board approval and without Village of Lancaster input.

And, Mr. Ruffino please stop saying that a lawsuit stalled the renovation process. It did not and yet you keep bringing it up that it did.

But what other excuse can they use? It's hard to be an election year hero if there's no big bad wolf.

Part III: ‘Why not a new build’ will consider past study comments on roof and foundation condition, comparative cost analysis between Walden Avenue building renovations and a new build, etc. (Trautman and Clough Harbour studies).

That should be interesting.

But hey, what’s with the new “Whistle Blower” policy? Is this an attempt to intimidate and/or shut up town employees from passing out information to the “you guys”? It will soon be posted on the web site.

http://www.speakupwny.com/article_3908.shtml

Gitmo will be vacant soon, maybe we could buy that too to house the whistle blowers. We could call it Gizmo. Sounds cute.

If we added a skate park to the police facility do you think Mr. Pickle might be able to front us a few million?

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"A rat always knows when he's in with weasels" -Tom Waits

[WNYresident]

Maybe we should sell all of the boats and motorcycles to help defray the costs. Isn't that what happens to impounded materials? But then again, it has been long rumored that town employees were storing personal materials in there, I've even heard of boats and motorcycles. One easy way to find out...announce an impound sale and see if there's anything left to sell. That's a good idea.

Note to self: Call Ron Ruffino.

Are there really that many boats and motorcycles stolen in Lancaster to keep a never ending inventory? Why not just give them back to their rightful owners? They have serial numbers and things so it can't be too hard to find out who they belong to. Did people that have boats and motorcycles stolen stop reporting them as such?

But I digress...

You gotta be making that up. Using town building for personal storage..

[Foot Fungus]

Originally Posted by WNYresident

You gotta be making that up. Using town building for personal storage..

The building has to be used for something. For the millions of taxpayer dollars that have been spent on this fiasco, it's certainly void of it's intended use (and it will take 5 times the money already thrown away to make it usable for it's intended purpose-coming soon?-could be-it's now in the hands of the guy that spends tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars on clocks and bells-that's scary).

Set a public sale date for all impounded material and lets see what remains on the impound list (one would think that there should be one, otherwise things could just disappear). Could be neat. All this type of info seems to come from "whistle blowers", maybe they should pass a resolution on the correct procedure on reporting such issues.

http://www.speakupwny.com/article_3908.shtml

You have to be afraid of something to create crap like that.

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"A rat always knows when he's in with weasels" -Tom Waits

[Foot Fungus]

From SUWNY Front Page:

http://www.speakupwny.com/article_3909.shtml

The Comment section of the article puts it all in pretty good perspective.

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"A rat always knows when he's in with weasels" -Tom Waits

[Wag]

I just finished reading Mr. Chowaniec's article. What a nightmare.

[WNYresident]

I dont know why they just can't build a steel frame building on the cheap. They work fine and for the most part recyclable.

[Wag]

I dont know why they just can't build a steel frame building on the cheap. They work fine and for the most part recyclable.

Do you mean, like one of those General Steel buildings? I've read that they are inexpensive and durable. It doesn't seem like a bad idea.

[Foot Fungus]

Originally Posted by Wag

I just finished reading Mr. Chowaniec's article. What a nightmare.

Yes, but nightmares usually don't last for years and cost millions of dollars.

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"A rat always knows when he's in with weasels" -Tom Waits

[Wag]

Yes, but nightmares usually don't last for years and cost millions of dollars.

Yeah, but this nightmare not only has lasted, but it's still going on. If it wasn't our money, I'd be laughing my keester off.

[WNYresident]

Do you mean, like one of those General Steel buildings? I've read that they are inexpensive and durable. It doesn't seem like a bad idea.

And the way things change in WNY build something cheap. THere is no reward by over building something that is clearly not required.

Or just lease space from one of the many empty larger strip malls in the area. Set up cubicles with little ceiling signs. Detectives, chief, ticket givers, patrol, slackers, etc..

[Foot Fungus]

Originally Posted by WNYresident

Or just lease space from one of the many empty larger strip malls in the area. Set up cubicles with little ceiling signs. Detectives, chief, ticket givers, patrol, slackers, etc..

It would be a good place for another Tim Hortons too.

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"A rat always knows when he's in with weasels" -Tom Waits

[Wag]

And the way things change in WNY build something cheap. THere is no reward by over building something that is clearly not required.

Or just lease space from one of the many empty larger strip malls in the area. Set up cubicles with little ceiling signs. Detectives, chief, ticket givers, patrol, slackers, etc..

I've always wondered why they never considered the Village Mall, former Harvest Markets building, sitting mostly vacant in downtown Lancaster. It's actually big enough to house the entire town government. Right now there's a Save-a-lot using much less than a quarter of the space and possibly another business using even less space. Heck, with some renovations, they could put everybody in there and turn the current town hall into a restaurant, historical site, and live theater venue, an idea the stupervisor has proposed. He hasn't proposed using the Village Mall, but he has suggested building a new government center and turning the town hall into a restaurant, theater.

There's plenty of empty space in Lancaster. The town board just lacks the imagination to use it.

[pudge]

I've always wondered why they never considered the Village Mall, former Harvest Markets building, sitting mostly vacant in downtown Lancaster. It's actually big enough to house the entire town government. Right now there's a Save-a-lot using much less than a quarter of the space and possibly another business using even less space. Heck, with some renovations, they could put everybody in there and turn the current town hall into a restaurant, historical site, and live theater venue, an idea the stupervisor has proposed. He hasn't proposed using the Village Mall, but he has suggested building a new government center and turning the town hall into a restaurant, theater.

There's plenty of empty space in Lancaster. The town board just lacks the imagination to use it.

Why would you think that the Supervisor would cut a deal with someone other than he has political ties with? Giza illegally entered into a contract to purchase the Colecraft Walden Avenue building from T.R. Mnufacturing working through a personal friend who worked there as a vice president (R.B.).

When residents toured the building, invited by Giza, one of them stated that R.B. worked here and whether Giza knew him. The supervisor answered that he thought R.B. was a fork lift driver.

Remember when Giza told the Lancaster Village Mayor and Trustees that they had to work fast in buying the building because there were other parties interested in buying the building? Did we get snookered and maybe that's why they aren't attempting to sell the building because it just isn't worth $1.6 million?

R.B. served on the LIDA, then and for years after. The supervisor was on the LIDA then and most likely the Chairman as he now is. Strange, that Giza didn't recognize his LIDA budd's name, eh?

[Foot Fungus]

Originally Posted by pudge

When residents toured the building, invited by Giza, one of them stated that R.B. worked here and whether Giza knew him. The supervisor answered that he thought R.B. was a fork lift driver.

R.B. served on the LIDA, then and for years after. The supervisor was on the LIDA then and most likely the Chairman as he now is. Strange, that Giza didn't recognize his LIDA budd's name, eh?

Selective memory can be fun. Either way, the taxpayers of Lancaster got "forked".

Remember when Giza told the Lancaster Village Mayor and Trustees that they had to work fast in buying the building because there were other parties interested in buying the building? Did we get snookered and maybe that's why they aren't attempting to sell the building because it just isn't worth $1.6 million?

Once again, wouldn't you think that an appraisal from the time of purchase should be available somewhere. 1.6 mil is nothing to sneeze at, unless it's other peoples' money of course.

___________________________________

"I have some of the more experienced people in the legislature working for me. That's why my monetary situation is different." - State Senator Dale "Mr. Pickle" Volker when asked about cutting his office expenses.

"It's a perfect example of you need to get out and vote because all your votes count".
Mark Montour- Democratic, Republican, Independence, Conservative and Working Families parties candidate for Lancaster Town Justice

"I don't think it was luck" -Donna Stempniak, unopposed candidate for Lancaster Town Council on winning re-election.

“What these towns are about to do, if they have their way, is kill the goose that laid the golden egg” -Victor Martucci, vice president of Marrano Marc/Equity in response to local towns opposing the 339-y condo law.

"A rat always knows when he's in with weasels" -Tom Waits