Lan.Dems against downsizing unless they can control it.

[4248]

Lets talk openly - Lee your description of how Mr.Gaughan was bushwhacked by Town and Village Employees - is generous to say the least.

As witnessed by one attendees statement about Supervisor Giza's comments - it was a deck stacked with negative emotions.

First the Politically motivated Restaurant Owner reprimands Mr.Gaughan for holding his gathering in his establishment. Nice home Town kinda feeling that must have given him!!!!

Then the audience is stacked with "Employees," and others more concerned with their slice of the tax funded pie than tax savings or streamlining government. Yes, that includes the Volunteers who see their benefits and fire hall being affected.

You your self have made it clear on many occasions, you do like the idea of downsizing the Board. Lets be honest, most people weren't there to help create a "warm and fuzzing" atmosphere.

Lancaster will never be free from Patronage, One Party Rule and the "Sons of Patronage" because the non-tax fed residents don't get involved. This Town is run by Lancaster's Dem.Committee and those who are employed as a direct result of same.

The only way the Village will "change" is when the Controlling Committee feels they can control every job or appointment that comes out of that "Change"

Study all you want, spend thousands, hundreds of thousands of tax dollars! It wont amount to one tax penny saved if it isn't done.

[Lee Chowaniec]

[quote]

Originally Posted by 4248

Lets talk openly - Lee your description of how Mr.Gaughan was bushwhacked by Town and Village Employees - is generous to say the least.

Okay, let's talk openly.

It was not my intent to infer Gaughan was “bushwhacked”. I personally know of no town employees being present. Of the 20 attendees present, there were a few Village of Lancaster employees who had every right to be concerned about their jobs should dissolution take place. After all, let’s be truthful, the purpose of dissolution is to shrink government from the top on down.

As I stated, perhaps as many as 8 attendees were town residents seeking information on how tax savings would come about and whether town residents would be held harmless in the process. There were a few that were of the mind that the town/village police merger did not bring about cost savings; just the opposite.

The great majority of attendees came to hear about a “plan” on what petition carriers were to give residents as a reason for signing the dissolution petition. No plan was forthcoming from Gaughan; just a: “I have a plan and will bring it to light later.” It was disturbing to all when Gaughan stated that he had never heard of village employees losing jobs during a dissolution and/or that the town didn’t have to employ village workers to fill replacement jobs.

It was disturbing to hear Gaughan speak of his village “volunteer” numbers. They just don’t jive.

As witnessed by one attendees statement about Supervisor Giza's comments - it was a deck stacked with negative emotions.

That part was spot on by Gaughan. As someone who has been attending town board meetings for over a decade I can attest to people having been told years ago to “shut up”, and/or to sit down “you don’t know what you are talking about”. He is absolutely correct when he stated that town board meetings are attended by just a few individuals who will not be intimidated (those damn gadflies, as they are referred to.)

First the Politically motivated Restaurant Owner reprimands Mr.Gaughan for holding his gathering in his establishment. Nice home Town kinda feeling that must have given him!!!!

Didn’t see it that way, nor did Gaughan as he had apologized for not expecting that kind of a turnout and making proper advance arrangements.

Then the audience is stacked with "Employees," and others more concerned with their slice of the tax funded pie than tax savings or streamlining government. Yes, that includes the Volunteers who see their benefits and fire hall being affected.

Perhaps you have better information than I as to how many village employees were there, but I wouldn’t call the meeting stacked with individuals of any mind for the purpose of bushwhacking Gaughan. As I posted earlier, Gaughan had a sense of negativity because of the questions related to the process. In fact, several people voiced support of the dissolution if savings were had, workers didn’t lose jobs and town residents were held harmless.

You your self have made it clear on many occasions, you do like the idea of downsizing the Board. Lets be honest, most people weren't there to help create a "warm and fuzzing" atmosphere.

Most people were there to get answers as to the process and some sense that dissolution made sense. If a “warm and fuzzy” atmosphere did not result it’s because too many questions went unanswered. And, people will lose their jobs. That comes with downsizing. And when people tell us that some jobs will be saved by others taking early retirement packages, we are just shifting expenditures to the State and we are the state.

As to downsizing a board, I had some reservations regarding the Town of Lancaster going from 5 to 3 members. After hearing Gaughan’s explanation on town and village boards being set up with three members, regardless of size, and never being envisioned to grow to five members, I now favor downsizing to three. And, I agree with Gaughan that should for some reason a board member be absent, there is never anything before the board that can't wait until the following meeting date - although you wouldn't know that from the way the board operates.

And should dissolution not take place in either the Village of Lancaster of Depew, the boards there should be reduced to three. There should then be a consolidation of planning boards and zoning boards. Where there are now 15 board members there would be 9 (still too many for a total population of 50,000; where there are now 17 planning board and zoning board members there should be five.

Lancaster will never be free from Patronage, One Party Rule and the "Sons of Patronage" because the non-tax fed residents don't get involved. This Town is run by Lancaster's Dem.Committee and those who are employed as a direct result of same.

By being spot on 4248, you really live in the real world.

The only way the Village will "change" is when the Controlling Committee feels they can control every job or appointment that comes out of that "Change"
Study all you want, spend thousands, hundreds of thousands of tax dollars! It wont amount to one tax penny saved if it isn't done.

Regardless of who does the study and how flawed or directed it will be, information is needed by residents to make an intelligent vote. If the villages undertook the study, whichever side did not come out in front would yell fraud. If a study is done by outside “experts”, there are those who will say the experts were hired guns to provide the direction the village politicos favored. It is unfortunate that there are no intelligent residents around to form a citizens group to help in the review. However, as residents don’t show up at board meetings as it is, why would anyone think they would want to volunteer time to become involved in government policy? It’s easier to sit home and bitch.

[gshowell]

A group of residents has been formed. I'm just a little behind. More information to come.

[4248]

LC posted, "It was not my intent to infer Gaughan was “bushwhacked”."


That was my implication, not yours. Now this response was truly more enlightening as to your "personal Opinions" - Thank You!


I have said many times, I don't have the drive you do - I cant afford another "Town Sponsored Vacation" - thats why I don't attend.


Others and myself count on a handful of residents we trust to offer insight and information. The remainder of my information is present life experiences and past dealings with local Controlling Members.


Much of the "Towns Appearance" of growth and prosperity has been built on deception. Tax aided developers and bloated patronage. When, as with the schools, the State and Federal honey pots run dry - taxpayers will finally see the road this Towns Admin has paved for us.

Again, thanks for your openness.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Originally Posted by 4248

LC posted, "It was not my intent to infer Gaughan was “bushwhacked”."


That was my implication, not yours. Now this response was truly more enlightening as to your "personal Opinions" - Thank You!


I have said many times, I don't have the drive you do - I cant afford another "Town Sponsored Vacation" - thats why I don't attend.


Others and myself count on a handful of residents we trust to offer insight and information. The remainder of my information is present life experiences and past dealings with local Controlling Members.


Much of the "Towns Appearance" of growth and prosperity has been built on deception. Tax aided developers and bloated patronage. When, as with the schools, the State and Federal honey pots run dry - taxpayers will finally see the road this Towns Admin has paved for us.

Again, thanks for your openness.

Sad to say that you and I have been hoodwinked so many times in hearing from all sides, spinning their self interest agendas, that we don't know who wears the white hats these days.

[4248]

Lee, My hat is far from white. I walk a hard line. Its not easy, but I find I have no choice. I am cynical and suspicious, often critical - thats the end result of believing in a system that has failed me.

Maybe once I sell my house and move I can leave some things behind.I love my family, my job and this Country. I moved into what I saw, from an outsiders view as the ideal place to raise a family.

I regret the day I walked into Town Hall and met B.G. - I can only hope that when I move, I pray God gives me the strength to stay away from my new Town Hall.

Keep doing what you do, If I could help get residents out of their chairs and into the voting booths - I would gladly put my neck out again. I mean no disrespect to you or anyone else who is trying to educate others.

People think I am angry - far from that - I am saddened by what I have seen and lived through Politically. I thank God for my family. We started this together and despite some efforts to destroy that - some from within and mostly by outsiders - we are walking away united.

Studies don't create change, prolonged arguments don't create change - change is accomplished by action. The reaction is not always what one expects - so then you learn and create another change and learn.