Shelly Schratz should be removed from office if she refuses to resign. This whole incident has a stench to it.
August 11, 2008 Amherst, New York
THE FAIRWAYS GROUP UPDATE
SCHRATZ VERSION DEFIES FACTS & ORDINARY COMMON SENSE
Grass-roots constituencies are trying to challenge the abuse of power by our elected officials where laws, procedures and fundamental rights of homeowners are being denied. Discussions are commencing among the coalitions to unify and mobilize for common purpose. No longer will we tolerate divide-and-conquer.
On July 7th, the day of the expected vote on the Rubino rezoning, Deputy Supervisor Shelly Schratz and John Rubino visited the homes of four targeted, SENIOR citizens that were CRUCIAL to getting the proposal passed. These SENIORS had held to the petition for months, despite calls, letters and visits but WITHDREW on the SAME DAY of their visit, thereby breaking the SUPERMAJORITY.
DAMAGE CONTROL, CONTAINMENT, COVER-UP & PUBLIC OUTCRY:
1. One of the senior withdrawals submitted a written statement that John Rubino and Shelly Schratz visited her home. All parties knew, she was a proxy representative entered into the Clerk's record. She was revisited by the proxy representative and revealed the facts of what occurred. So-called ethical investigation: Pressure for retraction commenced on witness. She is afraid and intimidated. Her son fears for his mother's welfare.
2. Councilmember Schratz made a phone call to Ms. Marando (Foxberry resident), from Canada, the evening Ms. Marando's statements went public, July 28. Marando had stated: " The perceived influence of the Councilperson lends credibility and was effective with these seniors." " Isn't this a conflict of interest for an elected official who serves in a fiduciary role to be visiting homes of petitioners who opposed this project?" Conversation consisted of political spin. "She made no negative comments about this project, however, she did make positive comments." "Why is there this appearance of comradery?"
3. M. Washer, 480 Campbell Blvd., also received a phone call from Schratz on July 28. Washer was told she went to her home but no one was home. Schratz is now saying she saw someone in the yard but missed him. Washer stated: "It is wrong an elected representative would use their position to aid a developer in removing names from a petition." "One has to wonder, what was in it for Ms. Schratz." " Is Democracy for sale?"
4. Stender, 480 Campbell Blvd., stated at the recorded, August 4, 2008 meeting: "My neighbors on both sides of me made deals with Rubino, taking money and took their names off the petition." He said he did not receive a visit from Ms. Schratz on July 7, even though he was home. He was told she was across the street talking with Rubino. When she got done talking with two other residents, she went across the street and talked with Stender's neighbor. All three of the residents, she mentioned, took their names off the petition, that day.
5. 465 Campbell Blvd. , another staunchly opposed homeowner who lives ACROSS from Stender and NEXT DOOR to the property was not visited by Rubino/Shelly Schratz either, at the time and place of question. States: " It was wrong to show up at anyone's door to help a developer." "She has lost credibility and trustworthiness." (Favata)
6. J. Ferraro presented witness note at August 4 meeting and said: "We did not elect any of you to LOBBY for ANY DEVELOPER."
7. Cover-up: " A petition with the signatures of people against the Rubino development has vanished." " I have never seen a more scrambled mess." ..... several important papers were missing." "It would take Einstein to figure out what everything meant ....."
"This type of bookkeeping was not the standard of Mrs. Jaros or her staff." "I have to question what the people signed at their homes when the Rubino brothers/Shelly Schratz visited them."
(Aug. 6, Amherst Times). RECORDS CAN COME UP MISSING BUT EYE WITNESSES CANNOT. Public meeting recordings, written records and witnesses substantiates the evidence.
8. "Shelly said she did speak to four of the people whose names were on the petition voting "no" to the Rubino project." "Interestingly the four people she spoke with did remove their names from the petition sheets." (Aug. 3, Amherst Times). This substantiates the four, targeted seniors that were crucial for maintaining the Supermajority and getting the proposal passed. (see record)
Recall vote took place Aug. 4. Councilmember Schratz continued, at the least, to exercise poor judgment. She did not remove herself from the vote as conflict of interest.
"She said her purpose in going out to the area was to help some people who were having trouble with their land." (Aug. 3 Amherst Times). For the record, the two referenced by Schratz with drainage concerns (Lieber, 541 Campbell, Zebrowski 537 Campbell), were publicly opposed until July 7, the day in question (see public recordings June 16, July 7). These too, were now in favor as entered into the closing argument submitted by Rubino's attorney on JULY 8. (see record).
9. Public comment (Aug. 3, Amherst Times ). " What Shelly did was sell out her name to help a developer. She should be removed from the Town Board now."
Our elected officials are held to a higher standard, ethically and legally. They are entrusted to act in the best interest of the constitutency, at large. Deputy Supervisor has violated the fiduciary role that she was elected to do. Her action is a dereliction of duty. ON PERCEPTION ALONE, the honorable measure for Ms. Schratz would be to step down. For every day she presides in office, she taints all honest politicians in the duly rank and file of our elected officials. In this Presidential election year, constituencies at large are crucial to the vote.
A SWIFT RESOLUTION IS NECESSARY.
Please visit www.fairwaysblvd.com for important updates. We will post information when available.
Sincerely,
The Fairways Group
The Fairways Group
http://www.fairwaysblvd.com
Shelly Schratz should be removed from office if she refuses to resign. This whole incident has a stench to it.
I agree. Shelly Schratz should be removed from office at once. Maybe an executive session could be called & a resolution offerred. Facts are facts. I was at a TB meeting when people spoke & thanked Schratz for visiting with them, thus removing their names from the petition. Schratz is as corrupt as she is STUPID!
I taped the TB meeting and watched it tonight. At least the last hpur and a half. Shelly looks as guilty as hell. She sure wrapped herself in Motherhood and apple pie, "My God loves me and my family loves me and nothing else matters!" Huh? Sorry, but when you are an elected official, it sure does.
Shelly has always been the lowest of the low among the Town Board members. So, ok, Mohan is right down there with her. But she has been around longer. And she may not be planning to run for the TB again but I would bet the farm she plans to run for something.
I watched the meeting as well. I've also watched her actions over the last few years. Nothing has changed with this person. Lies, manipulation, stupidity, and all the while professing how everything is OK because she prays.
She should pray for guidance and take a hike. She would have been better off to tell the truth for once.
Which brings me to my next question why would she propose to down size the town board and who would it benefit
She made this statement to the crowd at the meeting?Originally Posted by left wing
Buffalo Web Hosting and Graphic Design
www.onlinemedia.net - www.vinyl-graphics.com
Web hosting / Web Design - Signs, Banners, Vehicle Graphics
All she has ever said was she was not running for hert Town Board seat. She has every intention of running for a County Leg. seat next year. Every thing she does from this point forward will be part of her campaign...look at me I'm a reformer.
Originally Posted by huh
She wants to downsize the Town Board because (1.) (and most importantly) IT WON'T AFFECT HER! And (2.) It is political pandering because it is the sort of thing the public likes to hear.
Originally Posted by WNYresident
Yup! That is vintage Shelly. Well, actually, not a crowd, since it was at the end of a meeting that lasted till 1 AM. But for the cable cameras, which broadcast these marathon slug-fests on Friday and Sunday evenings and lots of people watch!!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)