Having attended Lancaster town board meetings religiously over 20 years, I was alarmed in reading what is posted in this week’s Lancaster Bee.
Ruffino reminded residents that public comment is not a question-and-answer period but is only a comment period.
At no time in those 20 years of attending town board meetings when addressing the town board at either the prefile resolution period or at the closing time of addressing the board was I denied a response to a question seeking clarification.The following are the guidelines regarding residents wishing to address the town board:
The Town Board will hear the concerns of persons desiring to address the Town Board on any prefile or proposed suspended resolutions.
The agenda states: Persons Addressing the Town Board (on any subject)
What has changed where Supervisor Ruffino can now declare that addressing the board is only a time for the public to comment; that the board does not have to answer questions? This coming from a Supervisor who promised transparency and openness if elected.
In another matter, the Bee reported:
Ruffino stopped the conversation, saying that the board needed to have further discussion on this issue, adding that Leary should have had a discussion with Amatura before the board meeting.
Why did Ruffino stop the conversation when it was a matter of interest and waste of taxpayer money?
Why should Councilman Leary have discussed the matter with Amatura before the meeting when the dumping issue was brought up by a resident at the end of the meeting.
Politics indeed! Further discussion and review needed. This is not going away. Where is Henry Gull and his ‘Truth Machine’. Then again, interested parties can listen to the recording of the testy exchange on the town website at the 37:00 minute mark:
https://soundcloud.com/user-32929237...0GJDg7jzE3YjZI
Kudos to you Mr. C., because your comments hold great weight.Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec
They are a wonderful blend of historic insights and a contemporary reaction with a presaging foresight.
Well said Lee; well said!
Last edited by mark blazejewski; May 20th, 2021 at 02:20 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?"
Ruffino is going in the wrong direction. He has become a great disappointment. But residents have to come alive, they need to attend these meetings and shake things up.
It was disturbing to hear Supervisor Ruffino admonish the first two individuals to address the town board at tonight’s closing public comment session that the board was there to listen to the public’s comment, but not to answer questions or comment in return.
The next several speakers received no such admonishment and received copious responses from several board members (including the Supervisor) and the Town Code Enforcer as well..
This obvious inconsistency in protocol gives the appearance the board will only respond when the occasion suits its best interest. How can one speak intelligently on a matter of concern if that individual is not given the opportunity to ask for clarification to ensure their address is based on fact?
Transparency, Supervisor Ruffino, you promised transparency!
Just My Opinion:
Lee,
You have been steadfast in standing up for the people of Lancaster before I hit middle age; long ago and far away. You have earned that distinction because you are one who values equally the concerns, dignity, and opinions of all residents. You are deserving of the thanks and praise of all of Lancaster residents.
In your efforts to confront the town's powerholders, you never distinguished be Rs and Ds, and I understand that one prominent figure once referred to you as an "equal opportunity offender." Until this year, I never fully appreciated the priceless value of that distinction, because for the first time, each major party separately unmasked themselves, and through a form incestuous osmosis, jointly appeared as the singular face of an ugly beast, to be forthwith sustained by a common diet of self-enrichment, privilege, arrogance, and narcissistic elitism.
IMHO, these powerholders represent only themselves and their collective interests, the residents, taxpayers and families of Lancaster be damned!
Indeed, when you observed "the board will only respond when the occasion suits its best interest," you went to the core of the problematic state of affairs in Lancaster. Those prevailing political attitudes in Lancaster may be vividly illustrated by comments directed to me by the imbecilic REPDEM Libslayer.
Consider in its own words, Libslayer's values:
Do I understand Libslayer to have observed that Rudz is a good family man because he has been a Republican for 30 years, and a claim that he is a RINO would reduce that Rudz characteristic?
Politics is the measure of a loving family man, that appears to be the value set of the REPDEM Libslayer, eh?
I hope that Rudz, who has a strong reputation for decency, at the very least refutes that ridiculous Libslayer comment.
This is how the REPDEM Libslayer describes those who do not chose to submit to its political passions:
Does "People like me,' refer broadly to all of the REPDEM elitists?
Lee, your comment...
...serves simply as a vivid illustration of the seemingly REPDEM Ruffino's less caustic way of rephrasing the REPDEM Libslayer, who claims to be authorized to speak for Rudz:
Indeed Lee, as you have said many times "With few exceptions, all politicos suck," but in this Lancaster campaign year, for the general population of Lancaster, the REPDEMS seem to have placed transparency on life support, made respect a reward for political obedience, and reduced opposing and neutral voices to irrelevancy.
Just musing, but sometime I think that with certain things, such as a broken old toy of childhood, the infrequent joys of sentiment are not worth the efforts required to save it.
But, in any event, if the voters this elect those REPDEMS who think them irrelevant, they deserve the government they get, just my opinion.
Last edited by mark blazejewski; June 8th, 2021 at 03:51 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?"
Lee, you observations of last night's meeting were candid and right on the point. I understand serious consideration is being given to a lawsuit against the town of Lancaster for their attempt to separate citizens into groups according to their medical status. If this order pertains only to the public meetings and not the ENTIRE town facilities and the workers and employees, I think the case against him may have teeth. Is his policy the same for everyone in the town's employment? Are all such persons vaccinated? Has anyone been made to prove their status to the King? Is the 6 foot rule being used to protect vaccinated white and blue collar employees from the dangerous unvaccinated? I hope so or it looks like the Stupervisor is impeding the people's right to an open an honest governing of their town. But that is exactly what is going on,from the on purpose back round noise to silence a valid complaint by a citizen ,to not allowing questions from some citizens under the guise of a made up "rule' and dropping that rule for the very next citizen's complaint. So citizen voters can't ask any questions the board chooses not to address but each of the board members can jump in and question each other and whom ever they want. Does this seem proper? Does it seem like a good ides to try to separate the voters by continuing to scare those that have been vaccinated that they something to fear from their neighbors? Ron Ruffino is hiding from the truth. His administration is wrought with the corruption that longevity brings. Time for a change Lancaster.
Frank Lee Speaking....
Only My Opinion:
Indeed Blunt, the noise seemed planned and orchestrated to me as well.
To cover their butts, it was a tactic which was cleverly staged with a bit of noise at the beginning of the session, then at Ruffino's request, stopped.
But when Mr. Sojka began to speak in the Participation Forum, it was ongoing, and it was left to an unidentifiable actor to ask for the noise to stop; a request that seemed to be ignored, or so it seemed to me.
Strange how the noise seemed to disappeared after the Sojka remarks, eh?
Last year, it was Ruffino's query regarding the ability to trace callers.
Earlier this year, the Supervisor amplified on an agenda issue only with the comment "Basically, I have three votes."
Also, can anyone forget the harsh words to former Town Clerk Thill?
During the May 17, 2021 session, a seeming imposition of a no questions, just comments limitation concerning Public Participation forums; a limitation which last night appeared to be whimsically applied.
Last night, more heavy-handed theater.
Does it not appear that those who do not honor the Ruffino message are "irrelevant" and are being canceled?
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?"
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote