Proposed appointment causes debate among residents
I believe it's a town board seat not a Democratic seatby ERIKA CARLSON
Editor
The issue of appointing a person to fill Supervisor Diane Benczkowski’s vacant council seat caused some debate during the Cheektowaga Town Board meeting on Tuesday.
The seven-member Town Board has been short one seat for nearly four years due to council members resigning or being elected to higher offices.
A resolution to appoint Dennis Smith to fill the remainder of Benczkowski’s council term, which expires at the end of December this year, was brought before the board on Monday, causing some questions from residents about the appointment.
“Most of us are rookies here except for one Town Board memb er,” Benczkowski said. “The Town Board has been in a transition period for many years, at least four or five. Residents are not being appropriately represented.”
One resident inquired as to why candidates who ran in the November election but ultimately lost were not considered. Smith did not run for office in November.
“The reason why that has happened is because this seat is a Democratic seat, so naturally it would go to a Democrat,” said Deputy Supervisor Tim Meyers.
Benczkowski said Smith had been endorsed by 84 percent of the town’s Democratic Party Committee. She said Smith has been involved with the party for 27 years.
When asked if the seat was legally required to be filled by a Democrat, Town Attorney Kevin Schenk said it was not a requirement.
Council Members James Rogowski and Gerald Kaminski made a motion to table the resolution for further discussion.
http://www.cheektowagabee.com/news/2016-01-21/Front_Page/Proposed_appointment_causes_debate_among_residents .html
Georgia L Schlager
There is no legal requirement that a democrat be appointed to the vacant seat. I would prefer that the seat be left vacant, with an eye to reducing the town board by a member or two. But if it is to be filled, it it only makes sense that it would be filled by appointment of a person from the party that the majority of voters have elected. Not one republican was voted in last election, so it seems clear that the majority of voters would not want a republican on the board at this time.
I believe when Markel left office, there was a vacancy and Diane was going to be appointed. Then it got pulled and the seat stayed open for the year. Slippery slope I guess
[QUOTE=nogods;1612594]There is no legal requirement that a democrat be appointed to the vacant seat. I would prefer that the seat be left vacant, with an eye to reducing the town board by a member or two.
Again the Party Lawyer steps on his own tongue - he has been totally against the reduction in size of any Local Boards. He has constantly mocked Mr.Gaughan's(spelling?) efforts to accomplish Government down sizing. What a misleading beginning to his response/position/comment.
But if it is to be filled, it it only makes sense that it would be filled by appointment of a person from the party that the majority of voters have elected. Not one republican was voted in last election, so it seems clear that the majority of voters would not want a republican on the board at this time.
Now here's what he always pushes for - Party Control. Of course he believes the Boards Controlling Members or his Committee should fill the vacant seat. There's no room for less than one party control - there's no reason to have a comprise governing body
- CONTROL - WINNER TAKE ALL - STATUS QUO MUST BE THE RULE !
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
The quotes from Tim and Diane really make me laugh! Lets look at their response that this is a Democratic seat and should go to a Democrat. Let say I agreed with this, would the next democrat from this past election get the seat? Nope..They want someone from they can control, not what the voters want! Leave it empty, same us some money, and let the voters decide next November!
They're listening to youOriginally Posted by cheektowaga
Vacant seat on Cheektowaga Town Board to stay that way until November election
By Joseph Popiolkowski
on February 1, 2016 - 11:10 PM
http://www.buffalonews.com/city-regi...ion-20160201/1A vacant seat on the Cheektowaga Town Board will remain that way until a candidate is elected in November.
The board Monday night withdrew a resolution appointing Dennis A. Smith Jr. to fill the seat formerly held by Supervisor Diane M. Benczkowski on the seven-member board. The board had tabled the resolution at its Jan. 19 meeting after concerns were raised about the process for selecting an appointee.
“After lengthy conversations with the supervisor and fellow board members, and listening to the public, at this point we’re going to forgo this major distraction and get on with the business of our residents, which is our No. 1 priority,” said Councilman Timothy J. Meyers, who is also deputy supervisor.
Smith, an investigator for the Buffalo Sewer Authority, said he was endorsed for the seat last month by the Cheektowaga Democratic Committee with 84 percent of the vote. Smith, who was present for Monday’s meeting, acknowledged he was disappointed to not be chosen, but said he was intent on running for the seat in the fall.
“I feel it’s best to let the residents decide,” Smith, 47, told The Buffalo News. “I feel I proved with 84 percent of the vote that I am the best candidate because I work with all factions. But it’s about the people’s business and not me personally, and I just want to do what’s best for the Town of Cheektowaga.”
Georgia L Schlager
To them it all belongs to the Democratic party.
Riven37
_________
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson
Is there any legal reason this seat has to be filled?
With the loss of approx 25k people since 1990 it only makes sense to not have a 6th town council member.
Right now I see it as a $20,000/yr savings for the tax payers with little to no effect on the operation of the town or representation of the people.
The only possible adverse affect I see is an even number of board members/supervisor with no tie breaker vote if needed.
5 board members should be enough. But if you think about it $20k to have an extra set of eyes monitoring things isn't that bad. Problem is when the eyes are all from the same self serving social club.
Buffalo Web Hosting and Graphic Design
www.onlinemedia.net - www.vinyl-graphics.com
Web hosting / Web Design - Signs, Banners, Vehicle Graphics
You see - even though some try to tell us this site and posts on here are irreverent to anyone else - this proves once again - they too read and understand they will be brought into the light.
Just a few years ago these deals and Party Favors were the status quo.
Slowly but surely they are being made public - they have to now and going forward be accountable for their actions. We will help them do so !
Bravo to those who made the posts, emails and made the phone calls and ask questions at Town Hall !
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
[QUOTE=4248;1612611]You just hate the process of voting, don't you? If the majority of voters wanted a republican on the town board they would have elected one. absent an affirmative action for the losers, they won't have a seat on the current board. Do you favor affirmative action programs for public employment as well as for elected offices?There is no legal requirement that a democrat be appointed to the vacant seat. I would prefer that the seat be left vacant, with an eye to reducing the town board by a member or two.
Again the Party Lawyer steps on his own tongue - he has been totally against the reduction in size of any Local Boards. He has constantly mocked Mr.Gaughan's(spelling?) efforts to accomplish Government down sizing. What a misleading beginning to his response/position/comment.
4248
But if it is to be filled, it it only makes sense that it would be filled by appointment of a person from the party that the majority of voters have elected. Not one republican was voted in last election, so it seems clear that the majority of voters would not want a republican on the board at this time.
Now here's what he always pushes for - Party Control. Of course he believes the Boards Controlling Members or his Committee should fill the vacant seat. There's no room for less than one party control - there's no reason to have a comprise governing body
- CONTROL - WINNER TAKE ALL - STATUS QUO MUST BE THE RULE !
Given that the town board even with the vacancy has 6 members that are at-large, since the town has not adopted the ward system, I do not believe that there is a need to fill the vacancy. They can just leave it vacant and allow it to be filled through the upcoming election in November.
“We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson
Why not downsize the board by one member?
The town is loosing population and it is proven that extra member is not necessary....PLEASE SAVE us the TAX payers the money!!!
Downsizing by 2 would be even better, but you are right, given we haven't been any worse off with one less its almost impossible to justify not eliminating at least one.
Reminds me of the employer who needed to reduce his work force so he announced that a storm was approaching and that non-essential employees could go home, eliminating the need for him to decide who to fire.
How many months in the past five years has the town board actually been at full strength?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
