Lancaster conservative party endorsements

[Lee Chowaniec]

Ruffino has always said he would leave HSBC resign or retire. He has over 30 years there

Thank you for posting this information. I had heard that Mr. Ruffino stated that in past years when he showed interest in being endorsed as Supervisor, but wasn't. Now he is endorsed and is open to being asked again as to his future employment plans.


We taxpayers are paying for a full-time Town Supervisor's position and are deserving getting that commitment from any candidate.

[mark blazejewski]

Would she be running her Adworks business from town hall?

Mrs. Gaczewski does need to give-up any conflicts of interest with the VOL.!

However, regarding her business, I see absolutely NO reason for her to relinquish her business, nor do I assume that she will be conducting business from the town hall.

All of the following, I believe, did not relinquish their respective businesses, and in fact have made, or continue to make, great efforts to separate their business affairs and tasks from their official duties, and to conduct those private sector duties from appropriate venues:

Stan Keysa Sr. did not give-up his law practice or insurance business way, way back when.

A previous Town Clerk, I understand, had a business and retained it during his tenure.

Leo Weimar did not give-up his insurance business.

Stan Keysa Jr. did not give-up his law practice.

Dan Amatura still owns a popular Lancaster business.

I have absolutely no problem with Ms. Gaczewski keeping her business, and I'm a sure someone at her home or business office has the skill set to take a phone message.

[Lee Chowaniec]

From the Erie County Conservative party website-


If that's the goal of the Conservative party, how could they endorse a candidate who consistently votes for a tax levy override law and voted liberally the last 4 years in office?

The ONLY council member who voted Conservatively was Councilman Ruffino

I am only aware that there were two Supervisor Coleman sponsored resolutions to override the tax cap levy. If memory serves me right, the first was approved by all council members but Ruffino. Regardless, it was warranted because there was a chance it may have been required an override because the gap was narrow,

The second Coleman sponsored override resolution (2018) was withdrawn and never saw the light of day again because Coleman was told she didn’t have the votes to approve it – and Gaczewski was one of the dissenters. There was no need for such override as the town was well within the established tax levy increase allowed.

There is a lot stuff going on behind closed doors and reasons why some vote results appear to be of a consensus nature, but not. Some council members showcase they’re opinions. I like that.

The horses have just left the gate, a long way to the finish line to declare a winner. For now, we should be in a listening / fact finding mode to determine which candidate (regardless of party) has the best interests of the community in mind and is best qualified to serve this community in the future.

It should be about the issues facing the town and the direction the town wants to take in the future – not whose the most likeable and kisses ass the best.

[gorja]

Mrs. Gaczewski does need to give-up any conflicts of interest with the VOL.!

However, regarding her business, I see absolutely NO reason for her to relinquish her business, nor do I assume that she will be conducting business from the town hall.

All of the following, I believe, did not relinquish their respective businesses, and in fact have made, or continue to make, great efforts to separate their business affairs and tasks from their official duties, and to conduct those private sector duties from appropriate venues:

Stan Keysa Sr. did not give-up his law practice or insurance business way, way back when.

A previous Town Clerk, I understand, had a business and retained it during his tenure.

Leo Weimar did not give-up his insurance business.

Stan Keysa Jr. did not give-up his law practice.

Dan Amatura still owns a popular Lancaster business.

I have absolutely no problem with Ms. Gaczewski keeping her business, and I'm a sure someone at her home or business office has the skill set to take a phone message.

Do you really believe that Gaczewski will not be answering her calls during work hours? I'm sure Amatura has a restaurant manager.

The woman does as she wants.

She owns the commercial lot at 176 Central Ave with an unlicensed trailer on it for years.
Yet, the village code states - In addition to prohibitions contained herein, unlicensed vehicles and trailers shall be prohibited from parking in such commercial parking lots at any time.

August 21, 2017 - https://cloudup.com/c8SbA43zqGg
You can listen here at 49:16. Deb LeMaster Lancaster Conservative chair thanking Councilman Ron Ruffino for his interest in promoting transparency by introducing the resolution requiring the Town Board meeting recordings to be put on the town website, She also thanked Councilman Ruffino for voting 'NO' for the tax levy override law and chastised Councilman Abraham, Councilman Gaczewski, Councilman Walter and Supervisor Coleman for voting for the tax levy override.

Why now is the Conservative leadership siding with that Liberal Gaczewski?

[mark blazejewski]

Do you really believe that Gaczewski will not be answering her calls during work hours? I'm sure Amatura has a restaurant manager.

The woman does as she wants.

I have no idea of what she will do, and I am not going to presume anything. My comments only spoke to precedent.

My concern regarding interests with the VOL, seem to have been answered

[mark blazejewski]

August 21, 2017 - https://cloudup.com/c8SbA43zqGg
She also thanked Councilman Ruffino for voting 'NO' for the tax levy override law and chastised Councilman Abraham, Councilman Gaczewski, Councilman Walter and Supervisor Coleman for voting for the tax levy override.

Correct me if I am wrong Gorja, but that "No" vote was only to preserve the town's option to increase taxes. I understand that the option was never applied.

Do I have that right?

As far as Mr. Ruffino is concerned, I can speculate that Mr. Ruffino understood that the vote was precautionary in nature, and most probably would not be applied. But, that is just my rather cynical speculation.

As such, IMHO, maybe he may have used a prudent, but unlikely-to-be-applied precautionary contingency power, to superficially enhance a lacking conservative resume?

Perhaps that "No" vote, IMHO, was another component to a disturbing pattern of self-serving behavior, which relies on what I consider to be choreographed performances, like the ZBA fandango, but, who knows?

If true, IMHO, one might conclude that the "No" vote may have reflected a possible temperament which suggests that prudence ends where political opportunism begins. Again, just my opinion.

[gorja]

Originally posted by gorja:
August 21, 2017 - https://cloudup.com/c8SbA43zqGg
You can listen here at 49:16. Deb LeMaster Lancaster Conservative chair thanking Councilman Ron Ruffino for his interest in promoting transparency by introducing the resolution requiring the Town Board meeting recordings to be put on the town website, She also thanked Councilman Ruffino for voting 'NO' for the tax levy override law and chastised Councilman Abraham, Councilman Gaczewski, Councilman Walter and Supervisor Coleman for voting for the tax levy override.

Why now is the Conservative leadership siding with that Liberal Gaczewski?

At that same meeting, https://cloudup.com/c8SbA43zqGg at 1:22:49, I asked the board about the status of the ZBA appointment in which Deborah Lemaster had applied for.
Councilman Ruffino stated that no one would second his resolution with no comment from the "Conservative" Gaczewski.

[mark blazejewski]

At that same meeting, https://cloudup.com/c8SbA43zqGg at 1:22:49, I asked the board about the status of the ZBA appointment in which Deborah Lemaster had applied for.
Councilman Ruffino stated that no one would second his resolution with no comment from the "Conservative" Gaczewski.

I understand that the resolution was never introduced, but perhaps my memory fails.

As I see it, Debbie was done wrong, period! But that is just my personal take on those initial ZBA proceedings.

[gorja]

Correct me if I am wrong Gorja, but that "No" vote was only to preserve the town's option to increase taxes. I understand that the option was never applied.

Do I have that right?

As far as Mr. Ruffino is concerned, I can speculate that Mr. Ruffino understood that the vote was precautionary in nature, and most probably would not be applied. But, that is just my rather cynical speculation.

As such, IMHO, maybe he may have used a prudent, but unlikely-to-be-applied precautionary contingency power, to superficially enhance a lacking conservative resume?

Perhaps that "No" vote, IMHO, was another component to a disturbing pattern of self-serving behavior, which relies on what I consider to be choreographed performances, like the ZBA fandango, but, who knows?

If true, IMHO, one might conclude that the "No" vote may have reflected a possible temperament which suggests that prudence ends where political opportunism begins. Again, just my opinion.

OMG, people call me a flip flopper. You and the conservatives are doing a pretty good job of it yourselves
https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...ts-coordinator

And this from 2016, but it was Ron and Matt, not John and Matt
https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...=1#post1672341

[mark blazejewski]

OMG, people call me a flip flopper. You and the conservatives are doing a pretty good job of it yourselves
https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...ts-coordinator

And this from 2016, but it was Ron and Matt, not John and Matt
https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...=1#post1672341

Not flip-flopping, just speculating.

Gorja, I know you are supportive of Ruffino. I get it, that's fine and I respect your decision.

I'm not supporting any candidate for Supervisor at this time, and I hope that both you and your candidate respect the undecided voter.

In the past, I have given extensive criticisms of one candidate. Since those facts and history do not change, and I stand by each and every comment. Those comments can be readily summoned to your clipboard.

BUT! I really, for a myriad of reasons, do not like the Democrat Candidate for Supervisor as well.

Ergo, I look upon myself as something of a neutral in the Supervisor's race, and hold that Mr. Ruffino, aka Councilman Colecraft, be subject to my same posted scrutiny and presentation.

These "flip-flop" characterizations which you attach to me distort my current position, and in my mind, reflect negatively on the candidate that you support. That tactic will go into my overall consideration of your candidate, along with what I understand and believe to be historically, some of his more "questionable" campaign tactics.

At the end campaign, I may decide on whom I believe will best serve the Interests of Lancaster. Or, perhaps I will do what I did in 2008 for President: Leave a blank spot on the ballot.

So, perhaps I can begin to post against Ruffino, and you can resurrect the his opponent's past-a past which the voters did not seem to care about in 2015.

Just sayin'.

[mark blazejewski]

Gorja, to illustrate my comments that you are distorting my current neutral position in the Supervisor's race, you may wish to view this YouTube clip from the "Winds of War."

You can get an appreciation of how the Nazis pressured neutrals to think and act in compliance with their desires.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJoMt0Igfgo


mitchum.jpg

[gorja]

Originally posted by mark blazejewski:
Gorja, I know you are supportive of Ruffino. I get it, that's fine and I respect your decision.

You don't get it.
I would vote for anyone against Dawn for all the reasons of the past few years including what she did to you and your wife.
****, I'd vote for Sojka over Gaczewski

[mark blazejewski]

You don't get it.
I would vote for anyone against Dawn for all the reasons of the past few years including what she did to you and your wife.
****, I'd vote for Sojka over Gaczewski

I do get it Gorja, and I know that you feel very passionately, and I respect that.

Above all, I thank you for all of your personal support over the years.

This is a race where I wish that there was one, virtuous alternative to both of these characters, and you know exactly who I mean.

No, I'm not supportive of either candidate, but, I really, and I'm not kidding, need to do some soul searching here. I do not like the stories of County Democrats allegedly coming in and taking over the town Party like some sort of Brownshirts.

If that story is true, and I emphasize if, My God, what have we come to as a community?

[gorja]

I do get it Gorja, and I know that you feel very passionately, and I respect that.

Above all, I thank you for all of your personal support over the years.

This is a race where I wish that there was one, virtuous alternative to both of these characters, and you know exactly who I mean.

No, I'm not supportive of either candidate, but, I really, and I'm not kidding, need to do some soul searching here. I do not like the stories of County Democrats allegedly coming in and taking over the town Party like some sort of Brownshirts.

If that story is true, and I emphasize if, My God, what have we come to as a community?

I guess what I don't get from all this is that there is one candidate who wears a Conservative label and could not vote conservatively
in her position as a councilman and the Conservatives and the Republicans are alright with that.

The other candidate is a Democrat who over the last 2 terms has voted conservatively and voiced his concerns during board meetings.

As far as the County Democrats, Poloncarz walked the streets with Terranova during their last election.

It would have been nice if the County republicans got involved when Sugg was running

Do you really think McCracken will allow a takeover?

[mark blazejewski]

As far as the County Democrats, Poloncarz walked the streets with Terranova during their last election.

From the fragments that I have heard, Poloncarz is supportive of Mrs. T; it is the party power holders, hacks if you will, that are not. I am not saying that is true, but that is what I understand is what happened.

Regarding the Terranova-Poloncarz business, I really don't care what political persuasion provides my dog license or handicapped permit. I know Mrs. T.'s office to be efficient and highly competent; her staff is pleasant, helpful, and engaging. And, as I pointed out, with the potential impact of the new "Fees" regulations, this no time for on-the-job training from someone with what I perceive to be , and this is an understatement, a very thin resume.

It would have been nice if the County republicans got involved when Sugg was running

That is why I am now a blank, and support the new leadership that Sojka has brought to the Lancaster Republican Committee.

Do you really think McCracken will allow a takeover?

Again, I have heard only stories from several sources. If true, those narratives are alarming.

The confirmation of that story will go along way in helping me come to a conclusion regarding my decision on Supervisor. This is Lancaster, not Thalburg.