Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40

Thread: Parks laborer hiring; clarification, please

  1. #16
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    12,146
    Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
    There are also rumors circulating that should certain candidates win office changes are also coming to certain town appointed positions. That would be particularly disturbing to me as I believe the town’s strength lies in those positions and the individuals now occupying those positions are deserving of keeping those positions.
    I've heard some too. Ron Giza be appointed to Parks crew chief, Melissa Heath appointed to a Deputy town clerk position
    and removal of the Highway superintendent's stipend for parks overseer.

    But rumors are defined as currently circulating stories or reports of uncertain or doubtful truth.


    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  2. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I, honestly don't know. I was asking you because you seemed certain that there was only one position.
    I thought you may have had information from your sources to that fact.
    Going strictly by what I have heard on the recordings.

    Still don't see the need of a second job creation with the information that has been publicly disseminated.

  3. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    gorja;1881955]I've heard some too. Ron Giza be appointed to Parks crew chief, Melissa Heath appointed to a Deputy town clerk position
    and removal of the Highway superintendent's stipend for parks overseer.
    Ah, there are more rumors out there than what you posted. It's politics at its ugliest - especially so when qualified individuals are replaced for patronage reasons. Has the recent primary not taught you the ugly machinations of politics even at the town level stage?

    But rumors are defined as currently circulating stories or reports of uncertain or doubtful truth.
    Agree! But as I had stated the laborer hiring was also a circulating rumor, has been made public and seems to have credibility, eh?
    Last edited by Lee Chowaniec; July 19th, 2019 at 08:40 AM.

  4. #19
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    12,146
    Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
    Agree! But as I had stated the laborer hiring was also a circulating rumor, has been made public and seems to have credibility, eh?
    The rumor that I heard on the afternoon of the July 1st meeting was that Michelle Barbaro was not selecting the appointee but Ron Giza was.


    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    The rumor that I heard on the afternoon of the July 1st meeting was that Michelle Barbaro was not selecting the appointee but Ron Giza was.
    Yes, that rumor is out there as well.

  6. #21
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    3,247
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Ah, there are more rumors out there than what you posted. It's politics at its ugliest - especially so when qualified individuals are replaced for patronage reasons. Has the recent primary not taught you the ugly machinations of politics even at the town level stage?


    Some of these rumors seem to be supported by historical circumstances.

    The Ron Giza vs. Barbaro rumor appears to be supported by Giza's historic "reputation."

    The rumor regarding a possible appointment of Melissa to the position of Deputy Town Clerk, as I understand it, seems to echo a similar rumor back during the 2015 Town Clerk's campaign.

    According to some very reliable source(s), Melissa it was rumored, was in line for the Deputy Town Clerk's position had Lindsay won the office. That rumor, according to some, emerged rather late in the campaign, and blinded many on the right. Some have suggested that it may have been a contributing factor in Lindsay's defeat.

    If these are rumors, they are very informed rumors, and not just "shots in the dark."
    "Ronnie, get to work and get the agenda going."---"The Handler"

  7. #22
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Some of these rumors seem to be supported by historical circumstances.

    The Ron Giza vs. Barbaro rumor appears to be supported by Giza's historic "reputation."

    The rumor regarding a possible appointment of Melissa to the position of Deputy Town Clerk, as I understand it, seems to echo a similar rumor back during the 2015 Town Clerk's campaign.

    According to some very reliable source(s), Melissa it was rumored, was in line for the Deputy Town Clerk's position had Lindsay won the office. That rumor, according to some, emerged rather late in the campaign, and blinded many on the right. Some have suggested that it may have been a contributing factor in Lindsay's defeat.

    If these are rumors, they are very informed rumors, and not just "shots in the dark."
    The Melissa rumor, and others as yet unmentioned, is particularly disturbing because it implies promised jobs to party support individuals who may not be worthy of occupying town appointed positions; and even worse the removal of individuals deserving to hold their positions and reappointment.

    As a 'blank' I never paid much attention to a primary because I didn't have skin in the game. This year, for myriad reasons, I did pay attention and learned the importance of a primary, the machinations / lying involved and the unexpected line-stealing results. Results so unexpected that I will be forced to vote on a Democratic or Republican line (ugh) because my election candidate's name will not be on an Independence or Conservative line - even though they were endorsed by those minor parties.

    Two of the most revolting rumors remain unmentioned. Hopefully, these rumors are nothing more than that, unfounded rumors. But as one has already seen the light of day, anything is possible.

  8. #23
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    12,146
    SO, that's why you haven't taken shots at the one supervisor candidate
    Posted by Lee Chowaniec:
    I will be forced to vote on a Democratic or Republican line (ugh) because my election candidate's name will not be on an Independence or Conservative line
    Last edited by gorja; July 21st, 2019 at 03:46 AM.


    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  9. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    SO, that's why you haven't taken shots at the one supervisor candidate
    No need to. You have done a good job of that. Your Ruffino support is obvious. All I am saying is peel the onion. It is early in the election campaign.

    Where the candidates stand on issues of today remain to be seen – hiring, spending (budget due date is getting close), debt load, infrastructure, future development policy, athletic fields, dog control, etc.

    I have posted several times that Gaczewski ‘has a lot of explaining to do’. Primarily in distinguishing herself as a conservative when she ran and won as a democrat for council and too often serving on and voting on a board supporting liberal policies, hiring and spending habits.

    I was very impressed with Gaczewski calling out the patronage hiring in town. That shot was directed at the Dems and rogue Republicans. If you can produce any rumors, more importantly verifiable facts that either Gaczewski or her Republican Party (today’s Republican Party) have also promised jobs to their supporters, put it out there.

    I like the individuals now serving in appointed positions just fine. Keep in mind when these people are appointed, they are sworn with the words: The individuals so appointed shall serve at the will of the Town Board unless otherwise specified by law.

    With the exception of a one-four-year term, the Democrats have enjoyed a majority- controlled board for 70 years. If there are any issues in town, it’s pretty hard to blame a Republican Party administration.

  10. #25
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    12,146
    Actually, all I was saying was that we now know who you're backing for supervisor.
    As in the past, you indicated at that time, you had no candidate for supervisor only for town clerk.


    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    Actually, all I was saying was that we now know who you're backing for supervisor.
    As in the past, you indicated at that time, you had no candidate for supervisor only for town clerk.
    Actually, I have given you no reason to make that assumption because if I were committed to supporting Gaczewski I would not have written that my ‘candidate’ is not found on the Independence or Conservative line. Gaczewski is the endorsed Independence Party candidate for Supervisor, no?

    While you have given reasons for your backing of Ruffino and the savaging of Gaczewski, I have given you reasons why your candidate does not walk on water. Two years of championing fiscal responsibility does not eradicate 14 years of supporting policies and programs that cost the town millions.

    My only commitment at this time is to support Terranova – who was not endorsed by her Democratic Party Committee but challenged and won the party’s endorsement anyway. She gets endorsed by the Republican, Conservative and Independence Parties and winds up endorsed on only two – the one she was not endorsed by. Strange, eh?

    Let the games begin. Can’t wait for budget time. And wouldn’t it be nice if the budget was finalized and voted on by the town board before Election Day?

  12. #27
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    12,146
    I very well understand the past.
    But since I guess the last 4 years don't count, it was okay for Gaczewski to vote to approve creating the Assistant Park supervisor position
    and the Forestry supervisor position and I guess wrong for Ruffino to vote no


    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  13. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    6,522
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I very well understand the past.
    But since I guess the last 4 years don't count, it was okay for Gaczewski to vote to approve creating the Assistant Park supervisor position
    and the Forestry supervisor position and I guess wrong for Ruffino to vote no
    Why are you saying: “Since the last four years don’t count?” Of course they count. You have been making the point that in the last two years Ruffino has become the fiscal watchdog.

    I agree that Ruffino was in his right to vote ‘no’ on the two resolutions and I for the most part agree with his decision because in the last four years the town has done a lot of questionable hiring and spending has increased significantly.

    Refresh my memory. How did the other four members vote and what was their reasoning for the ‘yes’ vote? Parks, Recreation and Forestry has added several positions this year. Ruffino did vote ‘no’ on these two but recently voted ‘yes’ to add two full-time laborers to the department without any explanation as to reason for the need. He was also adamant that Speyer should have been one of the individual’s hired.

    Ruffino and Highway Superintendent Amatura claimed that it was not the town board’s place to authorize the Park’s recommended hiring, but Amatura’s as he is the department overseer. Not so, from my understanding. Amatura does the hiring in the Highway department and the town board by resolution formally recognizes the hiring. The Park’s crew chief recommends a hiring and the town board authorizes it’s approval.

    The language in today’s resolutions is so nonspecific and/or obtuse, and with but so few in the public asking for clarification, transparency is lacking.

    While focusing on board votes, I hope you didn’t miss the irony of Supervisor Coleman explaining her support for the hiring of a part-time payroll supervisor (who would actually be earning more per hour than the newly elected full-time supervisor) and the resolution ‘no ‘votes cast by both Ruffino and Gaczewski. And then Ruffino one-ups Gaczewski by voting ‘no’ to the hiring of the new payroll supervisor.

    I am tired of hearing the same old BS every election year. I want to hear what plans the candidates have in place to make Lancaster a better town; now and in the future.

  14. #29
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    12,146
    Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
    Refresh my memory. How did the other four members vote and what was their reasoning for the ‘yes’ vote?
    The only other 'NO' vote was Matt Walter voting no to the Assistant park chief position.
    I don't remember any commentary on the 'yes' votes. But you know me, my memory isn't the greatest.

    And the part time payroll position, I didn't look back to the supervisor's wish list raises. But I do wonder if that particular
    per hour wage for the part time payroll position was what was originally requested by Coleman for the payroll supervisor at that time.


    Have a GREAT day,
    Georgia Schlager

  15. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,456
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    I've heard some too. Ron Giza be appointed to Parks crew chief, Melissa Heath appointed to a Deputy town clerk position
    and removal of the Highway superintendent's stipend for parks overseer.

    But rumors are defined as currently circulating stories or reports of uncertain or doubtful truth.
    gorja,

    I went and did some research and contacted people.
    1. No, Melissa is not going for the Deputy Town Clerk-False
    2. I have my connections out on Ron Giza. I'll let you know what the answer is.

    But insider did tell me this one:
    I am to ask the question, which by the way is in public meetings: ……………………………………..favors for endorsments Hmmmm

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Residents request clarification on language use/policy changes
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 9th, 2013, 07:40 PM
  2. Mr. Marrano please provide Lancaster airport assessment/tax clarification
    By Lancaster Resident in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: March 1st, 2010, 08:56 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 13th, 2009, 07:47 PM
  4. Clarification
    By Stevenco in forum Morning Breakfast - Breaking News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: January 24th, 2007, 07:29 PM
  5. Clarification on protest Please
    By watchdog in forum Erie County Politics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: January 30th, 2005, 10:41 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
  •