Town Board decision making on issues that baffles me & "conflicts of interests"

[shortstuff]

I have found myself out of the loop on town politics and issues that plague our community. Throughout the campaign trial this year, information that becomes known are often considered gospel especially when it comes from the *horses mouth* ... Within the past several weeks, resolutions put forth at the town board and issues that council members stand by and support and the ability to spend money for personal gain has caused me to make some comments or observations on some of the issues that do concern me.

1. The past Monday night town board meeting, I understand that it was passed and voted on to have 9 signs to memorialize Metz, the Supervisor's nephew who passed away in a tragic aircraft accident that occurred a few years ago. As I make myself very clear, that tragic accident which basically was established as *pilot error* by the NTSB report was horrible and a loss not only for the family members but for the community as a whole. Bryce who was tragically killed in a car incident was also a loss for the community, he was memorialized and rightfully so with the skate park. A yearly race is in his honor-great cause to reflect on such a tragic accident and acts as a reminder of what a wonder boy Bryce was. That being said, why are we placing "9" signs as we already have one memorializing Metz? I am in favor of the distinction in recognition of the memory of Metz, but 9? Council member Dawn G. is close friends with Sue Metz who sits on the BOE -- it was told that Dawn G. was influenced to vote Yes because of her relationship with Sue Metz. Is this a vote for personal reasons or was Dawn's vote to benefit a community? Is this a conflict of interest considering the close relationship?

2. Matt Walter's position on Dawson Field, do we have a decision on the assessment process which cost the taxpayers $1800.00? I am also baffled as to why Matt W. changed his mind two hours before the vote? We know from a source that Matt W. was in fact against the idea to assess/renovate Dawson Field, but yet two hours before the vote he changed his mind and voted with the Supervisor...

3. The Dispatch contract with the town. Just read the article in the Bee, I truly understand that their job is a tough job. Also understand that it is not your typical 9 - 5 job, and I agree that some incremental cost of living wages is in order like in the private sector, but to have retroactively pay back 5 1/2 years is IMO unreasonable. I get the notion that the ability to override the tax cap---or in Matt Walters words--" in case something comes up in an emergency situation," they can override the cap, is this one of those cases that might affect the cap? Because it seems they want a significant compensation here.

My disappointment with Dawn & Matt's governing has grown, and as I always say, "elections have consequences."

[gorja]

Originally posted by shortstuff:
3. The Dispatch contract with the town. Just read the article in the Bee, I truly understand that their job is a tough job. Also understand that it is not your typical 9 - 5 job, and I agree that some incremental cost of living wages is in order like in the private sector, but to have retroactively pay back 5 1/2 years is IMO unreasonable. I get the notion that the ability to override the tax cap---or in Matt Walters words--" in case something comes up in an emergency situation," they can override the cap, is this one of those cases that might affect the cap? Because it seems they want a significant compensation here.

I thought the dispatcher spokesperson was at the meeting to complain about the town board NOT giving in to their demands.
Maybe, I misunderstood.

Next Friday, we'll find out what's in the 2018 Budget officer's budget since the 30th is on Saturday.

[shortstuff]

Well gorja, the Dispatch played an intricate role in putting JoHanna in her seat. Their movement joined forces with the police. They are coming to collect. And a deal will be struck, it's a matter of how much. Watch how things occur from this point on until the election. You will see more excitement.

[gorja]

Well gorja, the Dispatch played an intricate role in putting JoHanna in her seat. Their movement joined forces with the police. They are coming to collect. And a deal will be struck, it's a matter of how much. Watch how things occur from this point on until the election. You will see more excitement.

Thanks shortie.
Okay, I'll be watching

[Lee Chowaniec]

shortstuff

Well gorja, the Dispatch played an intricate role in putting JoHanna in her seat. Their movement joined forces with the police.

Indeed!

They are coming to collect.

Indeed!

And a deal will be struck, it's a matter of how much.

How much out of the taxpayers when in fact they come hat-in-hand now and disingenuously claim that they understand they will have to contribute to their health care plan when all along they adamantly refused to consider that obligation to get a contract settlement.

Gee, I wonder if it will be that outrageous 5% number again (sarcasm). The town does not have to give them retro as well as there is no binding arbitration decision involved. And to think that the non union employees have to contribute 8.5% (oh the horror) of the premium cost on a $20,000 Cadillac plan.

Watch how things occur from this point on until the election. You will see more excitement.

Indeed! However, it may very well be the final budget in November that may be the ball-breaker when all the inclusions are added in.

Comment

Dispatch always waits until the police settle their contract (months ago) to see what they got before they get serious about settling their contract.

The following statement by the Dispatch rep is disingenuous and amusing: “We know that in order to settle our contract that there needs to be some kind of contribution. We’re all taxpayers, so of course [the town] starting to ask for a payment is not out of the ordinary. I guess that’s where they’re coming from, from their side,” said Schaefer.

That was the sticking point with the police contract (health care contribution) and Dispatch waited to see the police contract outcome. For a long time both took the position that contributing to their health care was off the table. And why did they come before the town board and the public to petition their case in the first place? We are not all ****ing stupid!

It is unfortunate that the election for Town Council takes place prior to the final budget being announced. Councilman Ruffino already voted ‘no’ to the tax cap levy override resolution vowing he would not vote for a budget that exceeded the tax levy cap. Should be interesting; INDEED!

[gorja]

I would like to know why there was a 6.12% increase in the 2017 budget for dispatchers if there was no contract?

[gorja]

This is from their Facebook page
Lancaster Dispatcher Employee Association

September 21 at 9:51am ·

Thank you Amy Robb and the Lancaster Bee! Again we are looking for job recognition to realize the pattern bargaining should not work for LDEA. We are looking for equitable pay. We are also taxpayers, and understand the importance of fiscal responsibility, healthcare can be looked at. What we are not in favor of is a pay cut after healthcare contribution. We look forward to putting this to rest soon and trust in the Lancaster Town Board will make correct choices!

[DebLemaster]

I would like to know why there was a 6.12% increase in the 2017 budget for dispatchers if there was no contract?

Great point!!!!

[jennifer7]

Why don't they have a County Regional Dispatch Center like the other 99% of the counties have ? That how other other cities & towns keep taxes low by eliminating duplications, Erie County Tax payers even paid & already built a new public safety building downtown built to be the regional dispatcher center that its mostly empty for over 10 years,
Can't do that, gotta keep control of those patronage & neptotism jobs for the privileged class. and The priveleged class says if you don't like it. "TOO BAD & THEN MOVE" exact quote from the union leaders of Erie County

[WNYresident]

Why don't they have a County Regional Dispatch Center like the other 99% of the counties have ? That how other other cities & towns keep taxes low by eliminating duplications, Erie County Tax payers even paid & already built a new public safety building downtown built to be the regional dispatcher center that its mostly empty for over 10 years,
Can't do that, gotta keep control of those patronage & neptotism jobs for the privileged class. and The priveleged class says if you don't like it. "TOO BAD & THEN MOVE" exact quote from the union leaders of Erie County

The is a valid point and to the point.

Property owners are not meant to be "job employment agencies" for the politically connected.

[gorja]

I would like to know why there was a 6.12% increase in the 2017 budget for dispatchers if there was no contract?

Could they have padded the budget in case there was a settlement?

[MaddMatt]

Hmmm.... I'm not sure who your sources are but they are incorrect. I have been in support of finding a use for the old Dawson field from the start. That is assuming that it could be obtained for a fair price. In addition to a lack of soccer / lacrosse / football fields, the town is also lacking in other recreational facilities.

I support investigating the merits of this project the same way I backed the new soccer fields project.

As always, feel free to reach out if you have any questions about my positions.

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

[gorja]

Originally posted by shortstuff:
do we have a decision on the assessment process which cost the taxpayers $1800.00

Shortie, by decision, do you mean, do we have a value of the property that will need over $100,000 of investment along with the cost of the property?

[shortstuff]

Gorja, yes what was the valuation on that property? Was a decision made yet? Sure has taken a long time to inform the public.

The Dispatch is astute when they come to the board at such an interesting time period before an election. Basically, we see this pattern every time. The public is not stupid.

Matt,
I refer to "a source" and stop playing politics. We know you were against the Dawson proposal and we know you changed your mind. You are being disingenuous.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Could they have padded the budget in case there was a settlement?

Did the town board anticipate there would be a Dispatch settlement and increase the salary line in the 2017 by 6.1% to compensate for it, most likely and a wise move - in my opinion.

Should that settlement be based on Dispatch getting a salary increase that outweighs their agreeing to start contributing to their health care plan (and by how much) is debatable. Will the health care contributions be retro just like the retro salary increases they are seeking. Dispatch has yet to contribute to their health plan - a very generous plan that many of us do not have.

And, they are looking to low-ball that contribution amount as happened in the police contract negotiated. The Police Chief and Captain contribute a flat $750 year toward their health plan; police officers approximately $1,000 per year (5%). I am a senior paying $4,660 per year for Medicare and a supplemental insurance plan (neither cover vision or dental). And many in the private sector are paying much more for high deductible premiums. School District employees contribute 14% to their health care plans. And until recently , town employees continued to kick and scream that they should remain exempt from contributing anything for a Cadillac Plan.

Yes, budget time is at hand. However, the initial proposed budget is nowhere near as revealing as the November final budget when all the inclusions appear. Should be interesting!