Lancaster’s Organizational Meeting; or, whose on first and why

[mark blazejewski]

Mark,

This is where I will respectfully disagree. Although I think Deb would've done a fine job on Zoning Board, political leanings should have nothing to do with it. In all my conversations with the supervisor's office, political affiliation was never mentioned once as a factor to be considered for the position. In my opinion, the zoning board should not be an arena where we play politics but rather place the most qualified applicants.

Just my $0.02

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

I only observed that Mrs. Lemaster would have lent political balance, and did not, nor do I, hold that political considerations should transcend qualifications. In this particular instance, with the wise selection of Mr. Sojka, I believe that Mrs. Lemaster's confirmation would have been an overtly outstretched hand of political, and in fact, gender-based, inclusiveness.

It is my position, and opinion, if Mrs. Lemaster's overall credentials were seriously considered in their entirety, it would have been rather obvious to the unbiased eye, that the political, and gender aspects of her entire credentials package,significantly enhanced her resume, entirely consistent with the non-partisan, all-inclusive flavor that I think you desire for the Lancaster's government.

Thank you for your reaction Councilman.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Greg Sojka:
I believe Mrs.Lemaster should of been hired as she followed the rules and procedures.

Exactly.

[gorja]

Originally posted by MaddMatt:
Mark,

This is where I will respectfully disagree. Although I think Deb would've done a fine job on Zoning Board, political leanings should have nothing to do with it. In all my conversations with the supervisor's office, political affiliation was never mentioned once as a factor to be considered for the position. In my opinion, the zoning board should not be an arena where we play politics but rather place the most qualified applicants.

Just my $0.02

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

I totally agree with this too. Politics should not play a role in the selection. She should have been selected in my view because she knows and has researched much of the town code. She is well aware of the Comprehensive plan and she would make decisions in the best interest of the future of the community.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Mark,

This is where I will respectfully disagree. Although I think Deb would've done a fine job on Zoning Board, political leanings should have nothing to do with it. In all my conversations with the supervisor's office, political affiliation was never mentioned once as a factor to be considered for the position. In my opinion, the zoning board should not be an arena where we play politics but rather place the most qualified applicants.

Just my $0.02

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

Seriously Matt, politics and party affiliation played no part in a process that covered six months and where in the last month five applicants appeared and all from the same party - and where some of those last five applicants were 'encouraged' by town board members to seek a ZBA position?

There was no way a Conservative was going to get a ZBA appointment after the Conservative Party decided not to endorse Abraham.

[mark blazejewski]

I think it bothers some people that others can chime in on here yet have no real connection to the Lancaster political parties. I did say many times that a neighbor is a committeeman.

"Signs point to yes." [/FONT][/COLOR][/LEFT]

Breezy,

I have been given this post a great deal of thought.

If your political insights are strictly occasioned by your engagement in some type of mental osmosis, emanating from a neighbor-committeeman, you need to relocate in order to address one of your truly basic deficiencies.

If you could only buy a house located between a brain surgeon and a proctologist, perhaps you could self-cure your brains-up-your-ass thinking!!!

All-in-all, all signs point to the fact that you are FOS.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Still waiting to hear of the Town Committee appointments and who will Chair them.

Looking at Monday’s resolution sponsors it would appear:

Coleman – Chari of Planning Committee and Abraham’s successor as Town/Planning Boards liaison – at least temporarily

Gaczewski – Parks

Ruffino – Highway

Walter – Police/Public Safety

Why there is no formal announcement to this announcement is puzzling – or to the naming of a Deputy Supervisor.

It would be helpful If you anyone attending the board meeting would ask about the changes and whether a new list is out and available to the public. Interested in seeing if Dickman gets to Chair any committees.

[gorja]

Still waiting to hear of the Town Committee appointments and who will Chair them.

Looking at Monday’s resolution sponsors it would appear:

Coleman – Chari of Planning Committee and Abraham’s successor as Town/Planning Boards liaison – at least temporarily

Gaczewski – Parks

Ruffino – Highway

Walter – Police/Public Safety

Why there is no formal announcement to this announcement is puzzling – or to the naming of a Deputy Supervisor.

It would be helpful If you anyone attending the board meeting would ask about the changes and whether a new list is out and available to the public. Interested in seeing if Dickman gets to Chair any committees.

They do have 18 committees that I'm aware of. I would think Dickman would be a chair to at least one of them.
Buildings, Grounds & Lighting
Conservation & Tree Planting
Dog Control
Drainage, Water & Sewers
Finance & Management
Highway
Human Services
Investigating
Library
Municipal School Liaison
Parks & Recreation
Personnel
Planning & Zoning
Public Safety
Records Management
Salvage Yards
Sidewalks & Curbs
Solid Waste

[shortstuff]

Mark,

This is where I will respectfully disagree. Although I think Deb would've done a fine job on Zoning Board, political leanings should have nothing to do with it. In all my conversations with the supervisor's office, political affiliation was never mentioned once as a factor to be considered for the position. In my opinion, the zoning board should not be an arena where we play politics but rather place the most qualified applicants.

Just my $0.02

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

I keep reading what you wrote here Matt and it baffles me. On one hand you state Lemaster would have done a fine job on the zoning, yet on the other hand you indicate *qualified* applicants was the consideration. gorja hits on a basic fact, Lemaster is versed and comprehends the town code, zoning laws, compatible use, infrastructure/comprehensive master plan(s), experience in the demographic(s), long standing taxpaying resident and has the alertness/intelligence to function far beyond some who sit on that board. But when you look at how Bob Thill was treated (politically) who was by and large the most versed ZBA board member that has ever sat on that board.

Your position on this, was purely political. You are acting disingenuous Matt to say the contrary.

[mark blazejewski]

I keep reading what you wrote here Matt and it baffles me. On one hand you state Lemaster would have done a fine job on the zoning, yet on the other hand you indicate *qualified* applicants was the consideration. gorja hits on a basic fact, Lemaster is versed and comprehends the town code, zoning laws, compatible use, infrastructure/comprehensive master plan(s), experience in the demographic(s), long standing taxpaying resident and has the alertness/intelligence to function far beyond some who sit on that board. But when you look at how Bob Thill was treated (politically) who was by and large the most versed ZBA board member that has ever sat on that board.

Your position on this, was purely political. You are acting disingenuous Matt to say the contrary.

IMHO:

In regard to his response to me, Councilman Walter seemingly focused on the "political balance" aspect of Mrs. Lemaster's qualifications, to the exclusion of her overall resume.

Given the oft-time articulated summary of Mrs. Lemaster's experience, Councilman Ruffino's past appraisal(s) of the Lemaster resume, and his own rather qualified endorsement, the Councilman's comments, bracketed below, appear to be an incomplete, selective, superficially virtuous, and entirely disingenuous chest-thumping admonishment, which opportunistically attempted to camouflage obvious intent: political damage control.

Mark,

This is where I will respectfully disagree. Although I think Deb would've done a fine job on Zoning Board, political leanings should have nothing to do with it. In all my conversations with the supervisor's office, political affiliation was never mentioned once as a factor to be considered for the position. In my opinion, the zoning board should not be an arena where we play politics but rather place the most qualified applicants.

Just my $0.02

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

In a phrase, "Nice try Councilman."

[MaddMatt]

I keep reading what you wrote here Matt and it baffles me. On one hand you state Lemaster would have done a fine job on the zoning, yet on the other hand you indicate *qualified* applicants was the consideration. gorja hits on a basic fact, Lemaster is versed and comprehends the town code, zoning laws, compatible use, infrastructure/comprehensive master plan(s), experience in the demographic(s), long standing taxpaying resident and has the alertness/intelligence to function far beyond some who sit on that board. But when you look at how Bob Thill was treated (politically) who was by and large the most versed ZBA board member that has ever sat on that board.

Your position on this, was purely political. You are acting disingenuous Matt to say the contrary.

I am sorry for the confusion. Hopefully I can clear it up for you....

My post was in direct reply to an earlier one which stated that it would have been nice to have different political representation on the zoning board ( or something to that effect). I stand by my reply that I don't believe politics should have anything to do with zoning. At no point did I have a discussion with the supervisor regarding placing a vote for someone based on their political affiliation. In fact, she went out of the way to say it should be based on who we felt was most qualified. And that is how I voted.
As for Bob, I agree that he is and continues to be a wealth of information on not only zoning but many other issues that I've discussed with him over the past couple of years. It is too bad that he is not on the board any longer, IMO.

I find it interesting that you start off saying you are confused by my position but finish with the certainty that I was playing political favors and am disingenuous. Those are very strong statements to make about an issue that you admit to not understanding.

Matthew Walter
Lancaster Town Council

[mark blazejewski]

[QUOTE]

My post was in direct reply to an earlier one which stated that it would have been nice to have different political representation on the zoning board ( or something to that effect). I stand by my reply that I don't believe politics should have anything to do with zoning.

I am not going to beat the proverbial dead horse. I did not characterize my feelings about "different political representation."

I did observe it would have lent balance to the ZBA, and that balance would seem to have kept faith with the all-inclusive, non-partisan, gender-inclusive tone/pledges of the 2015 Democrat campaign.

[MaddMatt]

IMHO:

In regard to his response to me, Councilman Walter seemingly focused on the "political balance" aspect of Mrs. Lemaster's qualifications, to the exclusion of her overall resume.

Given the oft-time articulated summary of Mrs. Lemaster's experience, Councilman Ruffino's past appraisal(s) of the Lemaster resume, and his own rather qualified endorsement, the Councilman's comments, bracketed below, appear to be an incomplete, selective, superficially virtuous, and entirely disingenuous chest-thumping admonishment, which opportunistically attempted to camouflage obvious intent: political damage control.


In a phrase, "Nice try Councilman."

Mark,

Actually, my point was that political balance played no part in who got my votes. Early on in this process (months ago) when I was questioned about the vacancy, I had responded that I preferred to see more applicants before handing the job to the sole applicant so far. If the sole applicant were of a different party, I would've been roasted for settling on a candidate without a thorough search or possibleyeven accused of political patronage. Once we had additional applicants, who were all well qualified in their own right, each council member submitted their votes. I voted solely on whom I felt was the most qualified based on their individual education and real world experience.

Over the last two years, I have never once requested political affiliation prior to voting on a hiring. In fact, it turns out that some of the candidates I fought hardest for because of their experience and qualifications were of a competing political party. It doesn't matter to me as long as the town gets the best person for the job.

I am not sure if I can say that any clearer but feel free to pick apart my words and question me on it. I'll continue to answer...

Matthew Walter
Lancaster Town Council
716.901.5340

[mark blazejewski]

[QUOTE=MaddMatt;1775363]

I am not sure if I can say that any clearer but feel free to pick apart my words and question me on it. I'll continue to answer...

It is not a question of me picking your words apart; it is a question of you reading what I actually wrote, and responding without adding words to my post(I never used the word "nice" or otherwise conveyed an emotion), and perhaps gratuitously attempt to twist my comments to conform to a scripted political spin.

This was my original post, #89:

Mrs. Lemaster would have lent a political balance to the selection process.

That was an observation, not an emotion.

[MaddMatt]

[QUOTE=mark blazejewski;1775370]

It is not a question of me picking your words apart; it is a question of you reading what I actually wrote, and responding without adding words to my post(I never used the word "nice" or otherwise conveyed an emotion), and perhaps gratuitously attempt to twist my comments to conform to a scripted political spin.

This was my original post, #89:



That was an observation, not an emotion.

Mark,

You are absolutely correct. I apologize.

Matt Walter
Lancaster Town Council

[shortstuff]

I am sorry for the confusion. Hopefully I can clear it up for you....

My post was in direct reply to an earlier one which stated that it would have been nice to have different political representation on the zoning board ( or something to that effect). I stand by my reply that I don't believe politics should have anything to do with zoning. At no point did I have a discussion with the supervisor regarding placing a vote for someone based on their political affiliation. In fact, she went out of the way to say it should be based on who we felt was most qualified. And that is how I voted.
As for Bob, I agree that he is and continues to be a wealth of information on not only zoning but many other issues that I've discussed with him over the past couple of years. It is too bad that he is not on the board any longer, IMO.

I find it interesting that you start off saying you are confused by my position but finish with the certainty that I was playing political favors and am disingenuous. Those are very strong statements to make about an issue that you admit to not understanding.

Matthew Walter
Lancaster Town Council

Thank you Matt as always for appearing on Speakup to facilitate a conversation about the issues at hand or ideas of the mind(s) to further express clarification(s) if necessary. I always respect your input, however with that said, I feel you are not being quite upfront with your constituents, but that is my opinion. The vote was politically motivated. My disappointment in Council member Ron Ruffino's changing his mind on his vote and all of the shenanigans that occurred.

Matt, have you ever heard the phrase, "walls have ears?"

Again, I thank you for expressing your (clarifying) position on this.