As someone who had attended numerous Lancaster Industrial Development Agency (LIDA) meetings over a 20-year span (and currently watches all livestreamed meeting videos), I found Village of Lancaster Mayor / LIDA member Lynn Ruda’s commentary interesting, but open to rebuttal and need for clarification.

Ms. Ruda was correct in saying there were a lot of board changes in 2022 - seven inexperienced board members. Ms. Ruda adds: “Along with having seven inexperienced board members, the Lancaster IDA also replaced their chief financial officer, attorney, secretary and chairperson in that same year”.

Ms. Ruda fails to mention that Supervisor Ruffino was appointed to LIDA in 2022, was not appointed LIDA Chair as he expected and resigned during the very first meeting. Before the second LIDA meeting took place LIDA CFO Pam Cuviello (Town Director of Finance & Budget) and LIDA Secretary Cyndi Maciejewski (Supervisor Ruffino’s personal secretary) resigned. Experienced staffers were replaced because of said resignations. Supervisor Ruffino took umbrage to his not being elected LIDA Chair, took his office staff with him shortly thereafter and left LIDA high-and-dry.

Ruda Bee commentary: With all of the changes and turnover, the Lancaster IDA was unable to accomplish its main purpose, to induce projects and bring businesses into the community. Recognizing the need for direction and guidance, the Lancaster IDA board voted to move forward with a proposal from ConsultEcon, to undergo a feasibility study to help understand the potential that resides within the Town and Village of Lancaster and the Village of Depew to be able to bring in businesses that align with the community’s vision for growth.

Did I mishear what took place at 2022 LIDA meetings? Need clarification. The board was not floundering but spending time making changes to bring autonomy, set direction and policies that would recognize and approve IDA applications based on merit and community best interest before handing out taxpayer funded exemptions. It was LIDA member Ruda who advocated for the feasibility study and a repurposed ‘economic development’ vision that favors developer and municipal coffers over taxpayer best interests.

Ruda’s Bee commentary / vision: The goal of an Industrial Development Agency is economic development. While easily misconceived, the term “industrial” is often confused or interchanged with the synonymous term, “manufacturing.” The word industrial, as a part of the term industrial development agency, actually means relating to or characterized by industry. That industry could be the housing industry, or the entertainment industry, or any other industry that is going to be an economic driver within a community. There are strict guidelines regulated by New York state to hold Industrial Development Agencies accountable to the type of projects that can be induced, and to ensure that the projects that are induced bring job growth to that community, but those guidelines do not limit economic development solely to manufacturing. The Village of Lancaster has undergone tremendous economic growth in the past few years. As the mayor and director of economic development for the Village of Lancaster, I have worked hard to become versed in economic development, to participate in the New York State Economic Development Council conferences and training opportunities, and to continually question the leaders of thriving and successful communities and regions on how they have found their success. The answers always involve having site-ready development opportunities as well as the municipality being able to partner with its IDA to recruit the desired businesses and industry into the community.

This is Mayor Ruda’s interpretation / vision of economic development worthy of today’s IDA approval and public subsidization. IDA’ s was established in 1967 strictly for industrial / commercial development, job creation a vital requirement. Overtime they have been relaxed / diluted to encompass near any development under the auspices of ‘economic driver’. Projects bringing in no job creation, failing to meet application contract obligations and with no enforceable claw-back provisions if contracts are breached. We have all seen too many projects granted IDA’s that failed to meet contractual agreements in job creation, increase in town revenue, etc.

Community’s vision for growth? Housing (market rate apartment development)? Entertainment? LIDA’s vision in 2022 appeared to be (as it had been for prior decades) bringing in businesses that created sustainable jobs and adding to a municipal’s revenue stream. IDA eligibility based on projects that are in the community’s best interest – not corporate welfare.

The Lucas James (Broadway-Bowen mixed-use apartment/retail project) IDA application eligibility determination will be an excellent litmus test determining LIDA’s direction. It’s up for a vote at this coming Tuesday’s LIDA meeting (April 11, 3:45 pm).

Where 66% of American families declare they are living paycheck-to-paycheck in today’s economy, they don’t have the dollars to contribute to another’s investment without return. Whose best interests are really being served with Ruda's repurposed IDA mission interpretation / direction?