Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Gaczewski Mailer

  1. #1
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307

    Gaczewski Mailer

    Dawn Gaczewski Mailer



    Gaczewski Mailer Primary006.jpg

  2. #2
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Oh, my bad, I forgot this side...



    Is Mr. Ruffino texting in this picture? I understand he does that at Council meetings, so I wonder if he sleeps at those meetings too?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; June 21st, 2019 at 09:41 AM.

  3. #3
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Dawn Gaczewski Mailer



    Gaczewski Mailer Primary006.jpg
    Other things she has done over the past 3 1/2 years.


    This was the response of the current Lancaster conservative co-chair -
    October 18, 2016
    Deb Lemaster-
    I was VERY disappointed that Dawn, John and Johanna voted YES to override the tax cap.
    https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...=1#post1672341



    And this was the response from the current Lancaster conservative co-chair -
    August 22, 2017
    Originally Posted by gorja
    There was only one fiscally responsible person on that board last night and it wasn't the Conservative or the Blank.
    Councilman Ruffino is the lone man.On his resolution #22 to save money with a different process in utilizing outside counsel, he couldn't even get anyone to 2nd it.
    Deb Lemaster-
    I agree gorja. The big excuse of the evening was that no one attended the public hearing regarding override of the tax levy. Why would I ever believe that they would vote YES? Comparing the override to "car insurance" is insane and totally irrelevant. There is a reason most town boards vote NO!!!!! Very disappointing meeting.
    https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...=1#post1742036

    I know Sojka has said that they never did override. That is true. But as you can see the conservatives didn't view it that way.
    Of course, that was 2 and 3 years ago. The Conservatives may now feel it's okay to vote for an override.

    Georgia L Schlager

  4. #4
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post

    This was the response of the current Lancaster conservative co-chair -
    October 18, 2016

    Deb Lemaster-

    I was VERY disappointed that Dawn, John and Johanna voted YES to override the tax cap.


    And this was the response from the current Lancaster conservative co-chair -
    August 22, 2017
    Originally Posted by gorja


    Deb Lemaster-


    I agree gorja. The big excuse of the evening was that no one attended the public hearing regarding override of the tax levy. Why would I ever believe that they would vote YES? Comparing the override to "car insurance" is insane and totally irrelevant. There is a reason most town boards vote NO!!!!! Very disappointing meeting.
    I know Sojka has said that they never did override. That is true. But as you can see the conservatives didn't view it that way.
    Of course, that was 2 and 3 years ago. The Conservatives may now feel it's okay to vote for an override.
    Just my opinion Gorja,

    The override votes, as I understand them, were taken to confront a possible calamity, and were not indicative of a frivolous disregard for fiscal conservatism.

    Once the limited, cautionary nature of such prudent votes became a recognized trend, Mrs. Lemaster perhaps grew comfortable that Ms. Gaczewski was faithful to her conservative values, and not was not engaging in liberal governance.

    Recklessness in the pursuit of grandstanding a political philosophy is not a desirable trait, but steady, thoughtful prudence is the earmark of a true Conservative, and a world class legislator.

    Also, skeptical, critical observations on the part of a party co-chair is the mark of a responsible, dedicated leader, IMHO.

    Moreover, I believe that, at the time, you were supportive of the vote(s) because of the emergency nature of those votes. Straighten me out if I am wrong.

    Just bear in mind, the Gaczewski was a vote to give the Town Council "Standby Authority," which resulted in no increase in tax dollars.

    As I understand history, the Ruffino-Colecraft debacle result in a $2,000,000 LOSS to the taxpayers.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; June 21st, 2019 at 11:50 AM.

  5. #5
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Just my opinion Gorja,

    The override votes, as I understand them, were taken to confront a possible calamity, and were not indicative of a frivolous disregard for fiscal conservatism.

    Once the limited, cautionary nature of such prudent votes became a recognized trend, Mrs. Lemaster perhaps grew comfortable that Ms. Gaczewski was faithful to her conservative values, and not was not engaging in liberal governance.

    Recklessness in the pursuit of grandstanding a political philosophy is not a desirable trait, but steady, thoughtful prudence is the earmark of a true Conservative, and a world class legislator.

    Also, skeptical, critical observations on the part of a party co-chair is the mark of a responsible, dedicated leader, IMHO.

    Moreover, I believe that, at the time, you were supportive of the vote(s) because of the emergency nature of those votes. Straighten me out if I am wrong.
    Originally posted by mark blazejewski:
    Also, skeptical, critical observations on the part of a party co-chair is the mark of a responsible, dedicated leader, IMHO.
    So true, I very much respected Deb Lemaster's opinions at that time.
    Moreover, I believe that, at the time, you were supportive of the vote(s) because of the emergency nature of those votes. Straighten me out if I am wrong.
    I was NOT supportive of the 'YES' votes. I did disagree with some posters who had indicated that it was a vote to override the tax levy limit
    when it was a 'just in case' vote.

    Georgia L Schlager

  6. #6
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    So true, I very much respected Deb Lemaster's opinions at that time.


    I was NOT supportive of the 'YES' votes. I did disagree with some posters who had indicated that it was a vote to override the tax levy limit
    when it was a 'just in case' vote.
    Thanks for the clarification, and the support you have given to my observations that it was not a vote to raise the tax cap, and that it was only a measure to give the Town Council "Standby Authority" to do so, in the event of an emergency.

  7. #7
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,307
    Why would I ever believe that they would vote YES?
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    So true, I very much respected Deb Lemaster's opinions at that time.
    After a trend was established, perhaps these previously written comments explain what happened...


    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Just my opinion Gorja...

    The override votes, as I understand them, were taken to confront a possible calamity, and were not indicative of a frivolous disregard for fiscal conservatism.

    Once the limited, cautionary nature of such prudent votes became a recognized trend, Mrs. Lemaster perhaps grew comfortable that Ms. Gaczewski was faithful to her conservative values, and not was not engaging in liberal governance.
    Some of us, although previously un-supportive of a candidate, are open to objective assessment of the candidate-turned-office holder, AS OFFICE HOLDER, and base our future support strictly on its tenure performance.

    Just sayin', Gorja, Shortstuff...

    ...and "Breezy/" Bobby, some of us who actually live in Lancaster, and do not selectively post comments to keep political patronage favor, feel as I described above.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; June 21st, 2019 at 02:42 PM.

  8. #8
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Since there wasn't even a resolution last year. I doubt that ot would come up again this year.

    I do believe, of those 2 years only one year would have been considered a potential calamity.

    I also believe thought I may be wrong. If a tax override resolution was offered this year and Gaczewski were to vote again for it, I
    don't think Mrs Lemaster would be okay with it. She is not a waffler

    Georgia L Schlager

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Valid questions swirl around Town Board Candidate Dawn Gaczewski ????????????????????
    By 4248 in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 247
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2016, 10:25 AM
  2. To Dawn Gaczewski and her supporters
    By mark blazejewski in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2015, 09:30 AM
  3. Dawn Gaczewski endorsed by Liberal "The Women's TAP Fund"
    By ichingtheory in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2015, 09:12 AM
  4. Mc Cracken's mailer
    By gorja in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: November 7th, 2011, 04:00 AM
  5. Oakley Mailer
    By Gentleman Jim in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: October 4th, 2007, 11:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •