Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Jane Woodward Screws Amherst Again

  1. #1
    Townsfolk
    Guest

    Jane Woodward Screws Amherst Again

    Jane Woodward and the 3 who voted yes should be responsible for paying the settlement, not the taxpayers. Jane's been out for a few years now and she still manages to screw Amherst.

    AMHERST
    Street-lighting suit to cost $150,000
    By Sandra Tan NEWS STAFF REPORTER
    Updated: 01/17/08 7:06 AM

    Two years ago, the Amherst Town Board thought the town might save a lot of money if it took over the street-lighting system it leases from National Grid. The idea went nowhere, but it appears the town will have to pay $150,000 for seriously considering it.

    Officials expect to end 17 months of litigation Monday by approving a settlement with Custom Lighting Services. The suit stemmed from the town’s failure to complete a deal with the company to take control of the streetlighting system after signing agreements to do so.

    The Town Board had looked into taking over the street lights it leased from Niagara Mohawk, now National Grid, back in 2005, said Town Attorney E. Thomas Jones.

    Custom Lighting Services, based in Kansas City, agreed to do a feasibility study, create a detailed inventory report of the town’s light standards, and, if the town could indeed save money by buying and maintaining its own street lamps, the company would negotiate a purchase from the utility, Jones said.

    Custom Lighting would then have been contracted to maintain the town’s lighting system.

    The board voted, 4-3, to enter into contracts with the company but never gained the fifth vote needed to approve a $12 million bond resolution that would have been necessary for the takeover, Jones said.

    The town argued that payment for Custom Lighting’s services and the takeover of the street-lighting system were contingent on the approval of the bond sale, which never took place.

    Ultimately, the town cut ties with Custom Lighting Services without paying the company, Jones said, but by then, the company had already done a year’s worth of analysis for the board and continued to demand payment.

    In June 2006, the company filed a $2.2 million suit against the town for work already completed on the town’s behalf, loss of other business opportunities, punitive damages and attorney fees.

    A federal court decided in December that Custom Lighting was not entitled to punitive damages or attorney fees, Jones said. The balance of the suit went to arbitration.

    The company has now agreed to settle for $150,000, said Jones, who had discussed the details of the proposed settlement in a closed session with the Town Board on Monday. The board is expected to vote on the settlement at Tuesday’s regular meeting.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,442
    Quote Originally Posted by Townsfolk
    Jane Woodward and the 3 who voted yes should be responsible for paying the settlement, not the taxpayers. Jane's been out for a few years now and she still manages to screw Amherst.

    AMHERST
    Street-lighting suit to cost $150,000
    By Sandra Tan NEWS STAFF REPORTER
    Updated: 01/17/08 7:06 AM

    Two years ago, the Amherst Town Board thought the town might save a lot of money if it took over the street-lighting system it leases from National Grid. The idea went nowhere, but it appears the town will have to pay $150,000 for seriously considering it.

    Officials expect to end 17 months of litigation Monday by approving a settlement with Custom Lighting Services. The suit stemmed from the town’s failure to complete a deal with the company to take control of the streetlighting system after signing agreements to do so.

    The Town Board had looked into taking over the street lights it leased from Niagara Mohawk, now National Grid, back in 2005, said Town Attorney E. Thomas Jones.

    Custom Lighting Services, based in Kansas City, agreed to do a feasibility study, create a detailed inventory report of the town’s light standards, and, if the town could indeed save money by buying and maintaining its own street lamps, the company would negotiate a purchase from the utility, Jones said.

    Custom Lighting would then have been contracted to maintain the town’s lighting system.

    The board voted, 4-3, to enter into contracts with the company but never gained the fifth vote needed to approve a $12 million bond resolution that would have been necessary for the takeover, Jones said.

    The town argued that payment for Custom Lighting’s services and the takeover of the street-lighting system were contingent on the approval of the bond sale, which never took place.

    Ultimately, the town cut ties with Custom Lighting Services without paying the company, Jones said, but by then, the company had already done a year’s worth of analysis for the board and continued to demand payment.

    In June 2006, the company filed a $2.2 million suit against the town for work already completed on the town’s behalf, loss of other business opportunities, punitive damages and attorney fees.

    A federal court decided in December that Custom Lighting was not entitled to punitive damages or attorney fees, Jones said. The balance of the suit went to arbitration.

    The company has now agreed to settle for $150,000, said Jones, who had discussed the details of the proposed settlement in a closed session with the Town Board on Monday. The board is expected to vote on the settlement at Tuesday’s regular meeting.

    WHAT? You don't know your Town history. Woodward promoted this because EVERYBODY on a professional level involved, engineers, money people, etc., agreed that it would save the Town money. It was studied every which way. Then along came the vicious Ms. Schratz who proceeded to kill it to hurt Jane's election chances. The agreement was to pay CLS for their work if the Town opted not to take up their deal. The Town owed them the money. Schratz screwed the town, not Woodward.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    306
    Quote Originally Posted by left wing
    WHAT? You don't know your Town history. Woodward promoted this because EVERYBODY on a professional level involved, engineers, money people, etc., agreed that it would save the Town money. It was studied every which way. Then along came the vicious Ms. Schratz who proceeded to kill it to hurt Jane's election chances. The agreement was to pay CLS for their work if the Town opted not to take up their deal. The Town owed them the money. Schratz screwed the town, not Woodward.
    That's the way I remember it too. As I recall Bob Anderson spoke in favor of it and they showed pictures of the God awful disrepair of the lamp posts in front of Town Hall and other places. This was not a one man band. Many town departments participated in this and if it had gone through we would have saved money but politics raised it's ugly head and we get screwed again. Actually we're lucky that it only costs 150K. They could have gotten a lot more. Wasn't there some accountant who attended TB meetings who said the numbers didn't add up? Some guy attending meetings knew more than out Town Attornies, finance, highway lighting, etc.

    God, I hope this new group is smarter!!

  4. #4
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,772
    Quote Originally Posted by left wing
    WHAT? You don't know your Town history. Woodward promoted this because EVERYBODY on a professional level involved, engineers, money people, etc., agreed that it would save the Town money. It was studied every which way. Then along came the vicious Ms. Schratz who proceeded to kill it to hurt Jane's election chances. The agreement was to pay CLS for their work if the Town opted not to take up their deal. The Town owed them the money. Schratz screwed the town, not Woodward.
    How do? how would killing it hurt her re-election chances?

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    287

    Schratz Petty Politics Cost The Town

    There was a heated contest going on for reelection- When this occurs incumbants running again need to show the voters that they are saving the residents money. Schratz refused to vote for the bonding because it would have given Woodward an edge over her in the upcoming election.Schratz has never had the best interest of the town just her failing personal political career.

  6. #6
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,772
    Schratz refused to vote for the bonding
    OK that's one vote as a no. There still would of been the other board members voting yes. IT would have gone threw wouldn't it?

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    171

    Whatever happened to Schratz's idea to save???

    When the Town tried to push the CLS contract and the resident -Ed Shunk-came forward and stated that the CLS contract would cost the town hundreds of thousands of dollars...but he could not show how-he just said-prove me wrong-Shratz hired a consultant and assured the Board and the residents that this consultant would be free-and had a plan for the town to save thousands on the lights. WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THIS??? WHY HASN'T ANYONE HELD HER ACCOUNTABLE???? Schratz should be made to report to the board and the taxpayers on just what happened. Was this a big lie of hers? Was she so envious of Woodward that she was willing to lie to get teh Board to steer away of the CLS contract? Shelly must go!!!!! She is useless. What one single thing has she done to save a penny for the Town?????

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,442
    Quote Originally Posted by amherstfirst
    When the Town tried to push the CLS contract and the resident -Ed Shunk-came forward and stated that the CLS contract would cost the town hundreds of thousands of dollars...but he could not show how-he just said-prove me wrong-Shratz hired a consultant and assured the Board and the residents that this consultant would be free-and had a plan for the town to save thousands on the lights. WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THIS??? WHY HASN'T ANYONE HELD HER ACCOUNTABLE???? Schratz should be made to report to the board and the taxpayers on just what happened. Was this a big lie of hers? Was she so envious of Woodward that she was willing to lie to get teh Board to steer away of the CLS contract? Shelly must go!!!!! She is useless. What one single thing has she done to save a penny for the Town?????

    Shelly doesn't know how to get anything accomplished but she sure knows how to stab people in the back - which she will do at any price to the Town. But people swallow her bilge. She is nbow running on combining Youth, Rec., and Parks. Wanna bet she gets reelected in '09?

  9. #9
    Member Velvet Fog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Bflo
    Posts
    2,424
    Didn't she also help the apes?
    Peace Out Funky

  10. #10
    Member Gandalf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Middle Earth
    Posts
    1,757
    Quote Originally Posted by Velvet Fog
    Didn't she also help the apes?
    Of course she did, they're family!!

  11. #11
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,772
    Quote Originally Posted by WNYresident
    OK that's one vote as a no. There still would of been the other board members voting yes. IT would have gone threw wouldn't it?
    WHo else refused to vote for the bonding? If shelly was the only no vote it would have still gone threw.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    171
    What really matters is that Schratz was the one who said that she had a consultant that was going to show the town how they could save hundreds of thousands of dollars and kept repeating that the CLS contract was a sham. She convinced the others, through her LIES, that this was the truth. Yet she never produced an ounce of sav called savings from this other consultant and has never been held accountable. I think we should rate HER job performance!!!! The town continues to spend millions to RENT (never to own) the lights!!!!! Schratz MUST GO!!!!!!!!

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    2,442
    Quote Originally Posted by amherstfirst
    What really matters is that Schratz was the one who said that she had a consultant that was going to show the town how they could save hundreds of thousands of dollars and kept repeating that the CLS contract was a sham. She convinced the others, through her LIES, that this was the truth. Yet she never produced an ounce of sav called savings from this other consultant and has never been held accountable. I think we should rate HER job performance!!!! The town continues to spend millions to RENT (never to own) the lights!!!!! Schratz MUST GO!!!!!!!!

    The "consultant" was Ed Schunk. He is the ONLY person with any credentials (alleged) who claimed the idea would not work. But that was all Shelly needed. Nobody hold people accountable on that Board. That is why they get away with so much. They are a joke.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    954
    Is this the same "consultant" that advised the TS that there appeared to be a significant deficit in the last budget performed by the former TS? I was at the meeting when SS talked other TB members into stopping the CLS contract. It is true that the contract was reviewed to death by various actual experts into the financial as well as the practical acceptance of the proposal. To put it simply it was all about politics and an upstart on the TB trying to get an advantage in the upcoming election at the expense of the taxpayers. The $150,000 payment must be primarily placed on shoulders of this TB member. Tomorrow night at the TB meeting, the TB will be asked to approved this payment along with an additional $350,000 for the Eggertsville Community Ctr project, for once again the TB did not take experts' estimates on the true cost of this project. So add the two and we are talking about 1/2 MILLION DOLLARS! I guess at the end of the year when things do not look good with the mismanaged, miscalculated budget, it will be end up being the employees' fault once again.

  15. #15
    Member TheRightView's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    3,379
    Rumor has it she wants to do it again....... run for office...or so I've heard.
    "All government, -indeed, every human benefit and enjoyment, every virtue and every prudent act,- is founded on compromise..." -Edmund Burke
    A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.
    Mark Twain (1835 - 1910), (attributed)
    Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 George W. Bush

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. Crisis in Amherst
    By dragonslayer in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: November 26th, 2008, 10:05 AM
  2. The Jane Woodward Thread.
    By |- Amherst Stakeholder -| in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 92
    Last Post: November 13th, 2006, 10:55 AM
  3. Larry Hunter Vs Jane Woodward
    By |- Amherst Stakeholder -| in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 9th, 2005, 07:50 AM
  4. Why Did Council Member Jane Woodward Abandon Her Interigty Again?
    By WNYresident in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: August 19th, 2005, 01:43 PM
  5. 2 Serious Operations slow down Jane Woodward
    By AIN'T THAT THE TRUTH in forum Amherst, Clarence and Williamsville
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 22nd, 2004, 12:28 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
  •