Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Supervisor promised transparency, but…

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,921

    Supervisor promised transparency, but…

    In a lengthy Lancaster Sun article, Lancaster Supervisor Ronald Ruffino shared his fiscal goals for 2021. Fearing a more challenging fiscal year because of Covid related diminishing revenues, he reported the revenue loss would be made up through savings had from some town cut services related to Covid, appeal for more grant funding, and ‘just being innovative and implementing things that are cost effective’.

    When taking office a year ago, Supervisor Ruffino promised transparency and openness. Would that that transparency been evident in the 2021 budget process and the current fiasco taking place with the construction of the new dog control facility.

    In the past year there have been numerous instances where errors occurred in documents and resolutions, information withheld and where residents requested resolution language clarification. On Friday, Monday’s town board meeting agenda, communications and annual Organizational Meeting and regular meeting resolutions were published on the town website.

    Missing in the Organizational Meeting was a resolution to adopt the Schedule of Salaries – a schedule that names and posts non bargaining salaries. It affords the opportunity to examine and identify changes in board(s) \ department personnel staffing, and salary structures.

    Also missing is: GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTEES - individuals appointed to serve at the will of the Town Board unless otherwise specified by law, and compensation, if any, shall be paid consistent with the applicable Schedule of Salaries adopted by the Town Board.

    Missing is: MEMBERS OF AGENCIES, BOARDS, BUREAUS, COMMISSIONS, COUNCILS: ETHICS BOARD.

    Three Planning Board members' term expired. All three submitted requests for reappointment. An application and resume for consideration was submitted by another. Who were the three appointed? With rare exception incumbents get reappointed.

    Two Zoning Board of Appeals members' terms were up. Only one submitted for reappointment. Four applications and resumes were submitted for the remaining position. Who were the two appointed?

    Missing is: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY appointees

    The aforementioned is important because residents are allowed to address the town board on the pre-filed resolutions. With no information on who has been appointed to fill positions or salary structure information / changes published, residents are deprived of information and the opportunity to hold the board accountable. Especially when Supervisor Ruffino declared in the Lancaster Sun report that he was pleased with the election of another Democrat to the town board, declaring that ‘politics can now go away’. No more numerous 2-2 board votes where Democrat Ruffino and council member Mazur (Republican endorsed by the Democratic Party) vote allied against Republican council members Leary and Dickman.

    ‘Politics can now go away’ because Ruffino has acquired the majority vote? Seriously? My, my, how politicos hate being held accountable!

    I well remember a Republican Supervisor being told by one of the four Democratic council members: “Screw you, we have the votes. We will let you govern as it pleases us.”

  2. #2
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    In 2019, Coleman adopted the Schedule of Salaries for Non-bargaining in the 2nd meeting of the year. She also made appointments to the planning and zoning board at that meeting

    Georgia L Schlager

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,921
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    In 2019, Coleman adopted the Schedule of Salaries for Non-bargaining in the 2nd meeting of the year. She also made appointments to the planning and zoning board at that meeting
    Actually Gorga, the resolution to adopt the Schedule of Salaries was withdrawn at the second meeting of 2019:

    PREFILED RESOLUTION NO. 21 OF 1/22/19 Coleman/________Adopt Schedule of Salaries for Non-Bargaining For 2019 Salaries At the request of Supervisor Coleman, this resolution was withdrawn for further study. January 22, 2019

    The Schedule of Salaries was adopted on February 4, 2019 – unanimously. Don’t remember what caused the delay but there was this stipulation added to the resolution:

    BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that effective January 1, 2019, non-represented full-time employees and the Town Supervisor, Town Clerk, and Highway Superintendent, who are eligible for health insurance coverage from the Town, shall pay 9.0% of the premium equivalent cost of such coverage that they select, and the waiver payment made to such employees for declining health insurance coverage shall be reduced accordingly, pursuant to procedures established by the Director of Administration and Finance.

    Regardless, in the Organizational Meeting held on January 7, 2019, resolution #3 was proposed and adopted to Appoint Town Officials to Various Positions, Boards and Commissions [Boards & Commissions]

    This resolution resolved that the following appointments be and are hereby made by the Town Board of the Town of Lancaster. These appointments shall be effective January 1, 2019. The individuals so appointed shall serve at the will of the Town Board unless otherwise specified by law, and compensation, if any, shall be paid consistent with the applicable Schedule of Salaries adopted by the Town Board for the 2019 calendar year.

    Included in that resolution

    GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE APPOINTEES

    MEMBERS OF AGENCIES, BOARDS, BUREAUS, COMMISSIONS, COUNCILS: ETHICS BOARD

    INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY:

    PLANNING BOARD

    ZONING BOARD

    This section is also not included in Monday evening’s Organizational Meeting agenda up for adoption. Having this information at least allows one the opportunity to see who has been reappointed or appointed to the various positions in town. We should at least know who is running our town from day one. That is one of the mainstays in having an Organizational Meeting at the beginning of the year,

    Transparency and openness were promised. Information was delayed in the 2021 budget process – and often incorrect. The same is true for the dog control building project. There is a pattern here of obfuscation and/or ineptness.
    Last edited by Lee Chowaniec; January 2nd, 2021 at 02:23 AM.

  4. #4
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Thanks for setting me straight Lee. I didn't look any further than the agenda. My bad
    Since a lot of those requests for appointments came in December, could they be still conducting interviews?
    Just a question

    Georgia L Schlager

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,921
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    Thanks for setting me straight Lee. I didn't look any further than the agenda. My bad
    Since a lot of those requests for appointments came in December, could they be still conducting interviews?
    Just a question
    This is the 20th Organizational Meeting that Supervisor Ruffino will participate in – 18 as a Council member and second as Supervisor. In all those years, excepting 2019 (where the Schedule of Salaries was absent) and this year where both the Schedule of Salaries and Administrative Appointees are both absent, all other Organizational Meetings took place at the first meeting of the year and contained both Schedules. Why the exception?

    You’re asking whether they could be conducting interviews yet amuses me. In past years it has been the custom for petitions to come in December. Planning Board member (Chair) was the only November submittal out of 8 for Planning & Zoning Boards petition.

    Planning Board

    Connelly, Gorski, and Keefe’ terms were expiring. They all submitted reappointment petitions. No other petitions were cited in the communications. It is usually a given that those with expiring terms are reappointed. Here, IMHO, all three are deserving of reappointment,

    Zoning Board of Appeals

    Three seats available due to term expiration and resignation. 5 individuals entered petitions for appointment – Sojka (reappointment, current Chair), Stoerr, Tillmanns, Sugg, Doggendort. Who is in? What’s the hold up?

    My primary concern in not knowing who has been appointed is the apprehension that certain individuals I believe serve in the best interests of the town will not be appointed or reappointed.

    It was very unsettling to read Supervisor Ruffino’s quote that with the election of Wozniak as councilperson ‘the politics has been taken away’, the numerous 2-2 votes. Mr. Wozniak pledged independence when campaigning and when elected; voicing acting in the best interest of the residents will be paramount for him. It sounds more like Wozniak will be the third deciding vote for Ruffino. It would take away from public input and government integrity.

    Late at the gate again. Why is the question. This is usually attained absent the drama!

  6. #6
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    It was very unsettling to read Supervisor Ruffino’s quote that with the election of Wozniak as councilperson ‘the politics has been taken away’, the numerous 2-2 votes.

    "Democracy Dies in Darkness"
    Lee, I will defer comment on the specific issues until the Council session on Monday perhaps lends clarity to those issues.

    With that said, based on the information provided under this thread, the Ruffino quote is indeed unsettling. IMHO, it is not a comment reflective of reality; it is a bold and arrogant assertion of his intention to use unchecked power to suppress opposing views and to marginalize the broad interests of our town.

    On a personal note, Lee, thank you for all that you have done, and what you continue to do, for all the people of Lancaster. Your insights and thoughtful analysis continue to well serve our town, and inspire all of us to stay alert to chicanery and active in our public scrutiny.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; January 2nd, 2021 at 04:13 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,921
    Thank you for the kind words, Mark.

    I am saddened that age / health has diminished my activist capacity and am also without the support group (Dems and Reps alike) who likewise are no longer active. Miss the days of Henry Gull and his ‘Truth Machine’.

    No longer are there individuals who religiously attend town board meetings investing their efforts in holding the town board accountable regarding town growth (sprawl), public safety, protecting the environment, opposing rezones that were not in the best interest of residents, etc.

    Thanks to today’s technology no more going to the library or town hall to read and copy sections of Town / Planning / Zoning Board meeting agendas / resolutions. All there now on the town website.

    Gone are the so-called ‘NIMBYS’ who attended those meetings to voice comments and concerns on issues that plagued the town, not their backyards. Today the only voices heard are those addressing the board on personal matters.

    It is troubling to read in the Lancaster Sun Supervisor Ruffino referring to the two Republican councilmembers as ‘obstructionists’. “Too many 2-2 votes” claims Ruffino. Reading that will change with the newly elected councilmember was disturbing: “Wozniak, who ran with Democratic support is expected to cement a three-vote majority under Ruffino.”

    Mazur, a registered Republican, was also endorsed and supported by the Democratic Party and has supported Ruffino in voting on the great majority of resolutions.

    Since 1950, there has only been one Republican Party controlled Town Board. Councilmember Wozniak promised to govern independently with the town’s best interests in mind. We shall soon find out.

    Hopefully, councilmembers Leary and Dickman realizing they are the minority continue to fill the void of bygone activists by questioning / challenging town projects / policies / issues to ensure they are in the best interest of the town – to ensure the town is staffed with the most qualified individuals.

  8. #8
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,305
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    It is troubling to read in the Lancaster Sun Supervisor Ruffino referring to the two Republican councilmembers as ‘obstructionists’. “Too many 2-2 votes” claims Ruffino. Reading that will change with the newly elected councilmember was disturbing: “Wozniak, who ran with Democratic support is expected to cement a three-vote majority under Ruffino.”

    Mazur, a registered Republican, was also endorsed and supported by the Democratic Party and has supported Ruffino in voting on the great majority of resolutions.
    Just My Opinion:

    Odd that Mr. Ruffino did not refer to the third party to some of those 3-1 votes as "obstructionist." I of course refer to Councilman Mazur and to those votes which curtailed some of the Supervisor's more self-serving proposals. Indeed, so apparently distasteful and politically perilous were those attempted Ruffino overreaches, that his own 2019 running mate simply refused to support him.

    (Now that Ruffino has majority control of the Council for the next year, it will be interesting to see if Mr. Mazur will continue on a common-sensed path to self-preservation or whether he, now joined by Wozniak, will jointly travel the road to self-destruction, simply to further enable Mr. Ruffino's heavy-handed political approach to governance.)

    I note that over the last year, Mr. Ruffino has revealed what are to many, both a troubling governing temperament and oppressively insensitive personal style. As such, those to whom the Supervisor now refers to as "obstructionist" actors, many may refer to as "disinfecting" agents.

    In that regard, let me remind Lancaster residents of the Supervisor's prioritized request for a stipend; the inclusion of an insensitive pay raise in the 2021 budget; his rather questionable use of LCSD facilities for personal gas fill-ups; and more troubling, of his executive appointments, which appeared to me to be shameless celebrations of patronage, and a hefty display of his flawed discernment. To wit:

    (1) Ruffino's selection as Deputy Supervisor proved to be an actor whom he curiously did not activate to preside over a Town Council session in his absence; the key, if not the only, official duty of its office. Rather, he chose to undertake some rather curious contortions to avoid the public display of his appointee, who of course was entirely discredited in the 2019 campaign for Town Council.

    (2) Supervisor Ruffino appointed as his office secretary or manager, whatever the proper title, a political character who failingly sought elected office with a pledge to remove stipends, to now significantly benefit from such compensation.

    (3) A rather curious lending of the title of Supervisor to a letter, seemingly in support of a private energy business, whose history and practices appeared to be rather questionable.

    (4) I continue to be particularly concerned by his decision to replace Mr. Brown with a rather professionally-challenged refugee from Clarence. I believe that the 2021 Budget, as first prepared and submitted, attests to my concern.

    Sadly, Mr. Ruffino does not appear to realize that had it not been for Councilman Leary's tenacity and skill, along with your own publicly stated insights, questions, critiques, and advocacies, Lancaster in all probability would have been saddled with an expensive final budget fiasco.

    Perhaps Leary's "obstructionist" style may have bailed Ruffino's ass out of a shameful mess that the Supervisor, ultimately, may have created for himself?

    Nah Lee, if Messrs. Leary and Dickman were obstructionists, they were so in the interests of their public trust, the Lancaster residents, and in the fulfillment of their oaths of office. I am confident that they will continue down the same path that they traveled over the last year.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; January 3rd, 2021 at 08:12 AM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  9. #9
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,305
    Just My Understanding and Opinion:


    I have been listening to the Town Council session.

    When resident Kevin Lemaster polled the Council members as to whether they have "any relatives" that were recently appointed to Town of Lancaster government positions, I understood Councilman Wozniak to have replied "I don't."

    Mr. Lemaster then followed-up with Councilman Wozniak and seemed to challenge to Wozniak's reply, stating that it was his understanding the he (Wozniak) was in fact related to one such appointee.

    As I understood Councilman Wozniak's further response, he seemed to reverse his previous answer.


    Did I understand that exchange correctly?

    If I did understand that exchange correctly, would it not be accurate to state that
    Councilman Wozniak's first response was less than truthful?

    Was that exchange reflective of the "skills and thought processes" that Mr. Wozniak said will "move Lancaster forward to being the town our future generations will be proud of?"
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; January 4th, 2021 at 08:52 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  10. #10
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,305
    Just My Opinions based on my understanding of the January 19, 2021 Town Council session:

    Transparency On Life Support!

    On the matter of the Chairmanship of the ZBA, Supervisor Ruffino did not offer any explanation as to why Tyler Sojka was not reappointed other than, if I heard the Supervisor correctly, "I have three votes."


    On the matter concerning the legal necessity that Councilman Wozniak recuse himself in votes concerning his family members who are Town of Lancaster employees, Wozniak said, and Mr. Loftus seemingly agreed, that such recusal was unnecessary.

    I accept that legal opinion.

    However, in the way of personal reaction, again if I understood Mr. Wozniak correctly, he said tonight that he is "proud" of his family.

    I am sure he has a very fine family worthy of pride, and those words indeed reflect an admirable value, but I must muse "Why did he seem to twice deny that relationship(s) during the January 4, 2021 meeting?...


    Mr. Lemaster:

    "I have one simple question and one comment: Do any of the Town Board members, or the Supervisor, have any relatives or any type of family relations to any of the people being put on these committees, boards hiring positions, any one of you?"


    Supervisor Ruffino:

    "I do not, at all."

    Councilman Leary:

    "Bob Leary, I do not."

    Councilman Mazur:

    "I do not."

    Councilman Dickman:

    "Adam Dickman, I do not."

    Councilman Wozniak:

    "Mike Wozniak, I do not."

    Mr. Lemaster:

    "Pardon, I did not hear the last..."

    Councilman Wozniak:

    "Mike Wozniak, and I do not either."


    Mr. Lemaster:

    "Ah, you're not related to any of the Speyers? (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

    "You're related to the Speyers, aren't you?"

    Councilman Wozniak:

    "Yes."

    Mr. Lemaster:

    "Okay, then right there, you turned around and made an inaccurate statement."

    Reference at 7:45 on this audio link: https://soundcloud.com/user-329292372/2021-01-04-tbm

    Yikes, one more denial and he may need to change his name to Peter, eh?
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; January 19th, 2021 at 09:02 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

  11. #11
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,305
    From post #136, Dogs lives matter:

    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post

    Councilman Wozniak: Your time limit is up.

    Reference: https://www.speakupwny.com/forums/sh...-matter/page10



    There was a great deal of intense time-keeping last night.

    All of your questions and insights were stellar Lee, as were the questions and insights of former Town Clerk Bob Thill.

    Mr. Thill I believe was elected Town Clerk nine times. His exemplary work in that office, along with his other government duties and civic engagements, make him a Lancaster icon.

    Therefore, I do not think that Mr. Thill deserved what was, IMHO, Supervisor Ruffino's disrespectfully harsh admonishment "You are out of order Mr. Thill," or disgusting words to that effect; just my opinion of course.

    In my opinion, for the Supervisor of Lancaster to publicly engage Mr. Thill in such a tactless and tasteless manner reflected a shameful display of arrogant disrespect, which suggested the application of raw despotic rule.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; January 20th, 2021 at 01:18 PM.
    LIDA Member Rinow to Member Ruda: You were a sitting Trustee on the Board. Did you help support Mr. Sweeney getting a seat on the CDC Board?"

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Supervisor Benczkowski Seeks Residents to Serve on Supervisor's Budget committee
    By WNYresident in forum Cheektowaga, Depew and Sloan Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 18th, 2020, 12:04 PM
  2. More transparency and openness promised
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: May 21st, 2013, 03:37 PM
  3. State promised money
    By fp2206 in forum Grand Island, Town of Porter, Lewiston, Lockport and Youngstown
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: March 5th, 2013, 01:18 PM
  4. Spitzer Promised EVERYTHING Would Change On Day One...
    By politico in forum Albany NY State budget Capital and Governor Kathy Hochul
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 10th, 2007, 09:41 AM

Posting Permissions

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