Primary - Cheektowaga Town Board

[Breezy]

A few people mailed items or dropped them off at the office.

I have to say this is an EXCELLENT idea, posting flyers, mail literature and the like on here so everyone can see.

Especially seeing the material from areas where the candidate's district does not include where I reside, to me that would be interesting to see.

I hope someone from Cheektowaga drops off some of the flyers from the primary for the council races there. Does someone put out there the fact that the incumbents refused to downsize the council from 6 councilmen to 4, and of course that the Democratic chairman, Frank Max, is a big-time political type being paid by town tax payers while doing politics at work.

And the mayor's race in Buffalo should have some interesting flyers, and in Niagara Falls some council races are hot, county races too in both Erie and Niagara.

Great idea!!!!!

[nogods]

I have to say this is an EXCELLENT idea, posting flyers, mail literature and the like on here so everyone can see.

Especially seeing the material from areas where the candidate's district does not include where I reside, to me that would be interesting to see.

I hope someone from Cheektowaga drops off some of the flyers from the primary for the council races there. Does someone put out there the fact that the incumbents refused to downsize the council from 6 councilmen to 4, and of course that the Democratic chairman, Frank Max, is a big-time political type being paid by town tax payers while doing politics at work.

And the mayor's race in Buffalo should have some interesting flyers, and in Niagara Falls some council races are hot, county races too in both Erie and Niagara.

Great idea!!!!!

I think all candidates for Cheektowaga Town board should be required to state their position on the two most recognized political issues: 1. downsizing the town board; and 2. privatizing reuse collection.

We have tried to get at least one of those candidates to state her position on this forum but she just cut and ran.

I'm not saying that who gets my vote would be determined by just those two issues, but if a candidate can't state a definitive position on the two most talked about issues, then they don't deserve anyone's vote.

[gorja]

Nogods had a very reasonable request of the Cheektowaga town board candidates. Those are 2 very important issues to the residents in your town. Wasn't it Diane B who didn't give a response?

[Breezy]

Obviously, Cheektowaga Town Supervisor Mary Holtz needs to grow a spine and just fire Frank Max. Would be easy seeking a privatizing plan for refuse collection once Mr. Max is removed from town government. I'm surprised that the supervisor, who seems to be a very strong woman, would let Mr. Max get away with as much as he has in his town office.

Concerning the downsizing of the town board, you would think that all the candidates would push for that, but with the attitude of "keep the Meyer traditions," together with the next generation of Rogowski politicians now in power, maybe that would not be allowed under that Max regime. Meyer is even advertising his family linage as something residents should embrace. Has he no shame? You would think he would not flaunt that old-time political scheme.

Of course, tax payers would probably not have any problems with just 4 councilmen in Cheektowaga, and Supervisor Mary Holtz.

It's not like they would be downsizing to 2 councilmen (plus supervisor), as other towns have, with some of those downsized boards complaining about it. Seems like 6 down to 4 would work just fine. Problem for residents eager for new ideas and new leadership is that these politicians would probably run Meyer and Rogowski if there were only two seats up this year. Hard to believe someone in town doesn't challenge this "leadership by political pedigree" scam.

Either way, those two questions are on lots of peoples' minds.

Adding a question on the future of Mr. Frank Max, if they keep the sanitation department intact, would also be one to consider. With this man out of Cheektowaga town government altogether, perhaps property tax payers could have some relief.

Seems to me that Cheektowaga is at a crossroads. Their Democratic town committee has proven to be wholly inept in the last two elections, losing two judge seats, one councilman, nearly lost the supervisor seat, and are poised for at least one loss in the upcoming primary with an expected victory for Diane B. What is remarkable to me is that they continue an obstinate, maybe even dimwitted, policy path for their town board in their insistence on having a huge 7-member town board.

Any candidate running against this failing political machine could get elected this time around.

[SabreTooth]

I think all candidates for Cheektowaga Town board should be required to state their position on the two most recognized political issues: 1. downsizing the town board; and 2. privatizing reuse collection..

these two issues are your issues. more important issues that are brought up are term limits and party bosses holding a foreman position or management position in the town giving too much power to one individual and also the friends and family being hired without these jobs being posted

[WNYresident]

From the group that operates out of our sanitation department.

Jim Rogowski
Stan Kaznowski
Tim Meyers

[Breezy]

From the group that operates out of our sanitation department.

Jim Rogowski
Stan Kaznowski
Tim Meyers

Looks to me like Mr. Stan Kaznowski will be the odd man out in this group come primary day. Too bad, at least he is somewhat a fresh face, no pun intented.

I would rather the other two were defeated by Cheektowaga town voters, due to their friends and family plan.

The copy on this flyer sounds like something a sixth grader could write. No imagination whatsoever. How has the incumbent "worked to think outside the box," as Mr. Rogowski writes?

"Has worked hard improve (sic) the quality of life for all Cheektowaga residents by keeping our streets clean" - WHAT DOES THAT MEAN ??

I guess you can sum this one up to FLUFF!

They could have at least used different photos on the other side. Those mugs are hard to look at once, let alone a second time.

LOL

[SabreTooth]

Looks to me like Mr. Stan Kaznowski will be the odd man out in this group come primary day. Too bad, at least he is somewhat a fresh face, no pun intented.

I would rather the other two were defeated by Cheektowaga town voters, due to their friends and family plan.

The copy on this flyer sounds like something a sixth grader could write. No imagination whatsoever. How has the incumbent "worked to think outside the box," as Mr. Rogowski writes?

"Has worked hard improve (sic) the quality of life for all Cheektowaga residents by keeping our streets clean" - WHAT DOES THAT MEAN ??

I guess you can sum this one up to FLUFF!

They could have at least used different photos on the other side. Those mugs are hard to look at once, let alone a second time.

LOL

Well said breezy. How can one improve quality of life by having clean streets? Just saying

[nogods]

these two issues are your issues. more important issues that are brought up are term limits and party bosses holding a foreman position or management position in the town giving too much power to one individual and also the friends and family being hired without these jobs being posted

Those are BS loser whining issues.

Term limits only limit the choices of voters. We, the People. have the power to decide who We the People want to be in office. Term limits deprive We the People of that right. Every candidate is free to promise that they will only serve one term or whatever number of terms they think the majority of voters want. every voter can then exercise their vote accordingly. We don't need to impose artificial term limits just to help the losers win an election.

Prohibiting town employees from participating in politics would be a violation of the 1st amendment, if not in law, certainly in spirit. Our founders never envisioned a government run by people who didn't participate in the political process. Hell, our founders shot each other over politics.

[Breezy]

Those are BS loser whining issues.

Term limits only limit the choices of voters. We, the People. have the power to decide who We the People want to be in office. Term limits deprive We the People of that right. Every candidate is free to promise that they will only serve one term or whatever number of terms they think the majority of voters want. every voter can then exercise their vote accordingly. We don't need to impose artificial term limits just to help the losers win an election.

Prohibiting town employees from participating in politics would be a violation of the 1st amendment, if not in law, certainly in spirit. Our founders never envisioned a government run by people who didn't participate in the political process. Hell, our founders shot each other over politics.

I am not against term limits myself, however, there is plenty of real world experience out there that says with the imposition of term limits, that all the staffers behind the scenes become much more powerful, and in most cases, untouchable by voters because they work out of the public eye. You would not even know who these people are unless they told you.

The problem is "institutional knowledge," and with elected folks not putting in, say 25 years (ouch), the staff would need to be expected to know how things work, and the history of the government entity, if you will. Unless these folks also have term limits put upon them, the staff becomes more powerful than the elected officeholders.

I also don't think the writer was saying he though "party bosses holding a foreman position" should be outlawed. Of course that should be no problem whatsoever, and yes a right under the Constitution's First Amendment, however, that does not mean anything goes, as so clearly has been spelled out here with the "foreman." When the "foreman" spends his entire day running the political party out of his government office, complete with hundreds of documented political telephone calls on Cheektowaga government telephones, then that should not enjoy constitutional protection.

Anyway, even when smiling, these fellows on the slinger posted by WNYresident, project a kind of frightening persona. Especially frightening to Cheektowaga town property tax payers, I have to say.

[nogods]

I am not against term limits myself, however, there is plenty of real world experience out there that says with the imposition of term limits, that all the staffers behind the scenes become much more powerful, and in most cases, untouchable by voters because they work out of the public eye. You would not even know who these people are unless they told you.

The problem is "institutional knowledge," and with elected folks not putting in, say 25 years (ouch), the staff would need to be expected to know how things work, and the history of the government entity, if you will. Unless these folks also have term limits put upon them, the staff becomes more powerful than the elected officeholders.

I also don't think the writer was saying he though "party bosses holding a foreman position" should be outlawed. Of course that should be no problem whatsoever, and yes a right under the Constitution's First Amendment, however, that does not mean anything goes, as so clearly has been spelled out here with the "foreman." When the "foreman" spends his entire day running the political party out of his government office, complete with hundreds of documented political telephone calls on Cheektowaga government telephones, then that should not enjoy constitutional protection.

Anyway, even when smiling, these fellows on the slinger posted by WNYresident, project a kind of frightening persona. Especially frightening to Cheektowaga town property tax payers, I have to say.

We are talking about town government, not the federal bureaucracy. In a town the size of Cheektowaga a candidate can personally visit everyone who voted in the last election. Ward used to do that in Amherst, riding his bike from June to election day.

[SabreTooth]

Prohibiting town employees from participating in politics would be a violation of the 1st amendment, if not in law, certainly in spirit. Our founders never envisioned a government run by people who didn't participate in the political process. Hell, our founders shot each other over politics.

I did not suggest prohibiting employees from PARTICIAPATING in politics, I merely suggested that a person in a foreman or management position not be the party boss (or CHAIRMAN) of a political party. being a party member is totally different than a party boss

[WNYresident]

I did not suggest prohibiting employees from PARTICIAPATING in politics, I merely suggested that a person in a foreman or management position not be the party boss (or CHAIRMAN) of a political party. being a party member is totally different than a party boss

I don't believe Jeremy should be employed by us either.