Lancaster 2019 election

[mark blazejewski]

https://www.facebook.com/lancastergo...0554667578851/

[mark blazejewski]

As Ruffino likes to say"From my first day..."

TOWN BOARD NOVICE READY FOR HIS DEBUT
By Deidre Williams
Published November 20, 2001



By his own admission, few people in Lancaster had even heard of Ronald D. Ruffino Sr. before the Nov. 6 election.

When the counting was done, though, enough people knew enough about the Democratic candidate to elect him to the Town Board, overthrowing a popular incumbent in the process.

"I'm as new as you could be," said Ruffino, an eight-year resident of Lancaster who will make his political debut when the new five-member Town Board convenes next month.

"In my campaign speeches, I would ask, 'Who is Ronald Ruffino?' Not too many people knew."

He speculated that anonymity may have worked in his favor while campaigning.

"Being new is good, because I have a lot of trust and belief in why I'm doing this," he said.

Ruffino, 40, received 4,512 votes to defeat Republican incumbent Georgette F. Pelletterie, who received the fewest votes: 3,910.

Her running mate, Douglas P. Szary, did slightly better, with 3,975. Democratic incumbent Mark A. Montour was the top vote-getter with 4,628.

"I was surprised with how well I won," Ruffino said. "Trying to remove an incumbent is a very difficult task."

Ruffino said he felt the race getting closer leading up to the election, but he didn't let that affect his judgment.

"I always treated it as if I was behind, right down until the time I found out I had won," he said.

Ruffino said he's looking forward to the next four years on the Town Board. High on his list of goals is controlling growth, which he says will benefit the community as a whole.

"There's room (for development) in the proper areas (in town)," he said.

Also on his list of priorities, he said, is to help restore professionalism to Town Board meetings and to put a positive spin on the negativism surrounding the community lately.

"We want to have other communities look to us for ideas, not as another negative story in the newspaper," he said.

"I want to give Lancaster the proper recognition it deserves for being a choice community to live in."

e-mail: dswilliams@buffnews.com

Deidre WilliamsDeidre Williams– Deidre Williams has been covering Buffalo City Hall for The Buffalo News since 2016. Prior to that, she reported on public schools in the city and was a suburban beat reporter for The News. Williams joined the Buffalo News in 1999.



https://buffalonews.com/2001/11/20/t...for-his-debut/

... this was Ron Ruffino's idea of controlling growth. He supported all of these...

*Summerfield Farms subdivision, phase 3, approved 12/03, 65 lots
*Whispering Pines subdivision approved 12/2004
*The Woodland at Pleasant Meadows subdivision, approved 2/06, 79 lots
*Summerfield Farms subdivision, part 4, approved 1/07, 45 lots
*Roseland subdivision, phase 2, approved 6/08, 59 lots
*Brookside Townhouses, approved 7/08, 39 units
*Pleasant Heights, approved 9/09, 8 homes
*The Greens at Pleasant Meadows, approved 5/08, 63 units
*Cross Creek subdivision, approved 1/08, 264 lots
*Prairie Landing subdivision, approved 5/11, 21 units
*Hidden Pines, phase 1, approved 3/12

...and and still today... (Click for larger image)...


Parking Space Increase Request Sparks Concern_JPG.jpg

[Lee Chowaniec]

Lanc;1895885]

Agreed the right people with experience should be voted in not just a popularity contest. The Town of lancaster should be run as a business by someone who has experience in managing people and Huge responsibility of tax payers dollars.
I want to see someone with proven responsibility and experience.
Just because you run a small corner shop business with no employees
,and the Mayor (who signs off on your expenses for the Village events) should make you a Supervisor candidate.
Come on Lancaster, put aside political affiliations and find someone who will do the Job. Not just take the paycheck.

Indeed, put aside political affiliations and put into office someone who will be committed to being on the job and looking out for Lancaster’s future regarding smart development and accommodating for it without adversely impacting its environment and infrastructure.

1. For Supervisor, it is important that the person who represents the town as the CEO of a substantial budget should be the person most suited to manage such a large town. That person should poses a fiscal mindset and expertise when sitting in that Supervisor seat. Experience is critical and when you think about the right person to vote for, start by looking at the candidates voting record. Go to the town website and view how both candidates have voted in their tenure as a Town Council Member(s). Decide who is a fiscal watchdog, have they challenged the current Supervisor in areas that reflects openness / transparency and who will have the taxpayers best interests. That is the person you should vote for.

As both candidates vying for the Supervisor’s position are current council members, it is most important to look back at the voting records of the two candidates to decide who has best served the community. While taking Gaczewski to task for her ‘lack of experience’ in managing people and financial experience, she has served on the town board but one term.

Mr. Ruffino has served 4 terms and looking at past voting records he never met a rezone he didn’t like or approve in all those and has been responsible for much of the development that has taken place in the town since 2002, the millions of dollars lost in the Colecraft Police Building fiasco, the Fire contracts fiasco costing the town substantial money and abetting the indiscriminate destruction / filling in of valuable, functional wetlands by SEQR and resolution approvals of development projects that were in the interest of the developer over than that of the community.

Indeed, look back at the voting records. The town website has all the information you need to make a sound decision.

[gorja]

[gorja]

[mark blazejewski]

Check this video out...

https://www.facebook.com/92467137429...3332945081053/

30 Second Video.jpg

[gorja]

Now she wants to listen; in the past she would stiff them

Why the long delay on pantry funding?

When will the citizens and taxpayers of Lancaster know why the funds earmarked for the Trinity Food Pantry from the Firefighters for Food 5K race were so drastically delayed?

In fact, the funds were remitted in May of the following year, long after the holiday season for which they were intended. Residents have a right to know if any of that money was at any time misappropriated or co-mingled.

Also, the Freedom of Information Law process should not include a visit to the FOILer’s residence to be intimidated by the special events coordinator and a trustee.

Since Ms. (DAWN) GACZEWSKI(special events coordinator) was not an employee of the village, any investigation of her poor service practices need not have been confidential. In fact, in the interest of transparency, all facts regarding this inappropriate handling of the funds should have been made public.

We are known as a caring community. Yet, in the “Season of Giving” when the neediest needed it most, where was the money?

Yes, where was that money, Dawn GACZEWSKI?

[Lee Chowaniec]

Hey, Gorga:

Do you think that Food Pantry misstep is going to cost Gaczewski as much as some of Ruffino’s boastful rhetoric on some of his self-proclaimed campaign accomplishments?

I understand the food pantry fiasco was blown out of proportion and that the food pantry was willing to submit a letter that the receipt of the fundraiser revenue was never in doubt.

I find some of the campaign rhetoric used by all candidates amusing regarding fact and claims. Mr. Ruffino’s claim to now being the fiscal watchdog on the board is based on his last two years of service as council member and voting against the past two budgets and tax levy overrides. I guess we should just disregard his prior 14 years as a council member and his prior budget votes, and/or the number of budget votes he missed, and millions of revenue lost in the police station and fire contract debacles.

His preservation of greenspace and controlled growth promises are suspect considering the number of rezones he voted for, the uncontrolled growth that occurred under his watch and the number of wetlands that were indiscriminately destroyed or filled in under his watch.

I would like to hear more on Gaczewski’s 10-year plan and plan to inventory available land remaining for development.

As for all candidates giving lip service to infrastructure consideration, like what? The town has spent $16 on replacing / repairing infrastructure. Where should the focus be?

And not one word about the 2020 budget.

[gorja]

Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
Do you think that Food Pantry misstep is going to cost Gaczewski as much as some of Ruffino’s boastful rhetoric on some of his self-proclaimed campaign accomplishments?

I honestly have no idea. Her misstep is an example of her ethical virtue.

[Lanc]

The food Pantry deal was a fund raiser. Who was totally accountable for the funds. The Village Events coordinator?
Why was there no accountability from the Village Board to get this paid. Or was there more cover up for months. And then when confronted there still was no answer as where the funds were?

[WNYresident]

When the funds finally were handed over to the food pantry was it in cash or someone's check? Wouldn't a check lead to where the funds were all that time?

[Lee Chowaniec]

I honestly have no idea. Her misstep is an example of her ethical virtue.

So, her personal ‘misstep’ and voting for one tax cap override as council member that never materialized disqualifies her for election vote consideration?

Not enough in my opinion that warrants dismissing her for election vote. Not enough especially considering Mr. Ruffino’s past track record (16 years) as a councilman.

What can you tell me about Gaczewski’s track record as a one term council member that is dissatisfying to you?

Who do you think has a better vision for Lancaster’s future?

Which candidate would be less inclined to play the friends and family patronage game?

[gorja]

Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
So, her personal ‘misstep’ and voting for one tax cap override as council member that never materialized disqualifies her for election vote consideration?

I never have said anything about anyone being disqualified for election vote consideration. Apparently, you and Mark feel that you are the only ones entitled to an opinion.
FYI - She voted twice for the tax levy override law. Once when there wasn't a lot of wiggle room between the budget and the tax cap. The other time, it was not.
As far as Gaczewski's track record, you tell me. What has been fiscally responsible in her voting record? It was Ruffino who got the ball rolling on the meeting recordings being placed on the website for transparency. Compare the two of them in the same time frame that they worked together on the same board. What did she do that was so special?

[Lanc]

This was also brought up before in Gaczewski’s bid for council seat. And see that after a few years it still has not been rectified.
The storage lot on Central and Laverack st. The Unlicensed trainer and other trailers. Illegal in both Village and the Town Codes
Could it be that They are above the Code as being Mayor and Councilperson.



Amended 2-11-1991 by L.L. No. 1-1991]
It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation, either as owner, occupant, lessee, agent, tenant or otherwise, to store or deposit or cause or permit to be stored or deposited an abandoned, damaged, discarded, unlicensed or inoperable motor vehicle or motor vehicles upon any private land within the corporate limits of the Village of Lancaster outside a completely enclosed building, except that:
A.
New and/or used motor vehicles which are operable and qualify for a New York State motor vehicle inspection sticker under Article 5 of the New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law and are offered for sale to the public may be stored on premises on which new car sales and used car sales in connection therewith may be conducted in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance of the Village of Lancaster.[1]
[1]
Editor's Note: See Ch. 350, Zoning.
B.
One noncommercial vehicle with a current inspection sticker may be stored for a period of not more than six months in any twelve-consecutive-month period with prior notice given to the Code Enforcement Officer of the Village of Lancaster, in writing, identifying the vehicle, specifying the period of storage, and provided further that the storage of the vehicle as aforesaid is not otherwise inconsistent with law.
§ 321-2
Notice.
[Amended 9-13-2004 by L.L. No. 6-2004]
A.
If the provisions of the foregoing section are violated, the Code Enforcement Officer shall serve written notice, whether personally or by mail, upon the owner, occupant or person having charge of any such land directing compliance with the provisions of this chapter and notifying said owner, occupant or person having charge of any such land of the remedies and sanctions provided by this chapter.
B.
Said notice should also provide that, if compliance with this chapter is not completed within 10 days, the Village of Lancaster, through its duly authorized agents and or employees, may enter the subject premises and remove the offending motor vehicle(s), and the expense incurred by the Village will be assessed against the above described land and shall constitute a lien thereon and be collected as provided by law, and that said owner, occupant or person having charge of such land may be subject to penalties as provided in Chapter 1, General Provisions, Article II, Penalties for Offenses, of Village Code.
§ 321-3
Failure to abate violation.
[Added 9-13-2004 by L.L. No. 6-2004]
If the owner, occupant or person having charge of any such land fails to remove or otherwise abate the violation of this chapter within 10 days after service of this notice, the Village may enter the property to remove or otherwise abate the violation. For this purpose the Village may use its own personnel or hire a contractor. The cost incurred, whether Village personnel are used or a contractor is hired, will be billed to the owner(s) of the property.

[mark blazejewski]

Did Ron Ruffino have the necessary approval to take this picture in the Town Hall workplace?...



Does not appear that he did...