Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 56

Thread: LIDA forgave $150,000 loan VLCDC

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873
    The $150.000.00 loan forgiveness is to supposedly help the West Main Street project move forward. Its also ends the questions and seemingly buries the final chapter of what was borderline fraud and out right tax funded abuse and deceit. Does that make it all right !

    If memory serves - that $150.000.00 was just part of what was "forgiven" - there was more - it just covered the gross inept management and supposed maintainense people received paychecks for doing. But - I guess no one cares !

    The IDA giving them money for the Gazebo is also borderline abuse as far as many see it - The money came from fees that were paid to garner tax relief and other forms of financial gain - so it is a product of those actions redirected.

    Just my opinion along with others I have talked to - the Veterans orgs would have helped - no one asked as far as I have been told so far !

    Those fees the IDA collects should be put directly back into the Community that will pick up the burden of lost tax revenue.
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  2. #17
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    Does this requirement hold the same for the LIDA assisting the Villages within its boundaries to reduce blight in the one and allow the other loan abolishment to move a project along?
    The Village's community development corp had how many years or should I say decades to move their project along. The community development corp should have been abolished.

    Do you feel the money spent was irresponsible considering it was LIDA funds used for Village improvements?
    Yes. It was LIDA funds used to refurbish a gazebo. That was as they say a public relations move. JMHO

    It's just too bad that the ABO doesn't have the power to do anything but they are making it known that the power is needed to enforce compliance.

    On average, over the past four years 125 authorities, primarily covered not-for-profit corporations, did not file an annual report in time for the data to be included in the ABO’s annual report on public authorities. Other than issue warnings and letters of censure, the ABO has limited options to enforce compliance or compel accurate reporting by public authorities, or to take action against those authorities that fail to take corrective action when notified of such failure. This is especially true for boards of directors cited for chronic failure to meet their collective fiduciary duty, or which have
    already been censured by the ABO but taken no action to correct this breach of the public trust. In these limited cases, stronger enforcement actions are necessary. The ABO requests that consideration be given to granting it the ability to assess fines, suspend directors or curtail certain activities of an authority and its board which have been censured but remain out of compliance with state law or deficient in performing its fiduciary duty.
    Hope they do get the power to enforce

    Georgia L Schlager

  3. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873
    This is why the Village VLCDC doesn't file their paper work on time - it avoids publication !
    - Who was in charge of that
    - Who managed the BOCCE property
    - Who was paid to do work on the building

    Isn't it a coincidence they were from the same Lan Dem Controlling Group !

    This is part of the secrets Politicians and Party Lawyer types know and taxpayers don't
    - THERES NO ENFORCEMENT
    - THERES NO ACCOUNTABILITY
    - THERES NO LEGAL RECOURCE = NO FEAR OF CONSEQUENCES.

    "On average, over the past four years 125 authorities, primarily covered not-for-profit corporations, did not file an annual report in time for the data to be included in the ABO’s annual report on public authorities. Other than issue warnings and letters of censure, the ABO has limited options to enforce compliance or compel accurate reporting by public authorities, or to take action against those authorities that fail to take corrective action when notified of such failure.

    This is especially true for boards of directors cited for chronic failure to meet their collective fiduciary duty, or which have
    already been censured by the ABO but taken no action to correct this breach of the public trust.


    In these limited cases, stronger enforcement actions are necessary. The ABO requests that consideration be given to granting it the ability to assess fines, suspend directors or curtail certain activities of an authority and its board which have been censured but remain out of compliance with state law or deficient in performing its fiduciary duty."

    We assume there is oversight - Politician watching Politician !

    This is why here in Lancaster we have no independent Board of Ethics - as Councilman D.Stempniak stated, "I wont have some Ethics Board Member watching over my shoulder"

    People ask - why are there so many Party Lawyers in Politics
    - they are doing it for the Community - BS
    Last edited by 4248; August 1st, 2015 at 12:14 PM.
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,918
    While some of you believe the LIDA expenditures were inappropriate, I feel otherwise as it gave back to a taxpaying community to lessen its financial obligations; and while addressing blight in one village and trying to move an economic project along in another.

    I don’t believe it was an improper use of funds and in anyway was a violation of its mission statement or public trust.

    Since the ABO has no enforcement power, but only a recommending body, and can’t act on the matter, shouldn’t the nest step be to attend the next LIDA meeting and personally inquire why te board felt they acted in compliance with requirements, and ethically as well.

    Shouldn’t the LIDA be given an opportunity to present their reasoning for the spending of agency funds?

  5. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873
    The LIDA doesn't have to explain anything - they did what they did - taxpayers/residents going to talk to them after the fact is a waste of time.

    Come on Lee how did this "gave back to a taxpaying community to lessen its financial obligations" - that's a stretch isn't it ?

    You might be slanting this a little because of the up coming election process - but wheres the relief for tax payers ?

    The tax payers paid to build the BOCCE building and maintain that plaza
    - Tax payers paid the cost to demolish the BOCCE building
    - The tax payers will pay to redo West Main Street - this because Politicians made taxpayers pay to cut off Main Street years ago - isn't that correct ?

    The only reason the BOCCE Building was removed is to eventually make room for a developer to build some housing - isn't that the long term goal ?

    Please - the game continues and your mellowing your IDA Opinions because Supervisor Fudoli is Chairman/Supervisor !

    If this situation happened under Supervisor Giza you'd be blowing a gasket - so would many more of us !

    Just like the tax funded baseball batting house at West wood - OH - some think its cool so - lets change our stance a little.

    Can't have it both ways - its either wasted tax dollars or "WE like it because our guy says its OK" -
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  6. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,918
    Quote Originally Posted by 4248 View Post
    The LIDA doesn't have to explain anything - they did what they did - taxpayers/residents going to talk to them after the fact is a waste of time.

    Come on Lee how did this "gave back to a taxpaying community to lessen its financial obligations" - that's a stretch isn't it ?

    You might be slanting this a little because of the up coming election process - but wheres the relief for tax payers ?

    The tax payers paid to build the BOCCE building and maintain that plaza
    - Tax payers paid the cost to demolish the BOCCE building
    - The tax payers will pay to redo West Main Street - this because Politicians made taxpayers pay to cut off Main Street years ago - isn't that correct ?

    The only reason the BOCCE Building was removed is to eventually make room for a developer to build some housing - isn't that the long term goal ?

    Please - the game continues and your mellowing your IDA Opinions because Supervisor Fudoli is Chairman/Supervisor !

    If this situation happened under Supervisor Giza you'd be blowing a gasket - so would many more of us !

    Just like the tax funded baseball batting house at West wood - OH - some think its cool so - lets change our stance a little.

    Can't have it both ways - its either wasted tax dollars or "WE like it because our guy says its OK" -
    That is your opinion and it is primarily based on the shady dealings that occurred under the Giza administration. I am speaking here of the merits by the LIDA in forgiving the LVCDC loan and the funding to repair the Depew Village gazebo. I find neither action inappropriate or improper.

    As all LIDA members who were present at the meeting voted approval to forgive the loan I would hope the reasoning was valid and had merit for reducing the cost to Lancaster Village taxpayers; taxpayers who pay town taxes.

    As for the gazebo repair, I was a former Depew resident and well remember the vitality and pristine condition of the park. It has been neglected by all sitting Village Boards in the last few decades. So the LIDA should just say just say screw you, you made conditions as they are or should they help the village?

    I have been at numerous LIDA meetings under the Giza administration and the 3-1/2 years under Fudoli leadership, wrote much on what I opposed and believed were misdirected decisions in giving PILOTS and tax breaks for undeserving projects. I have also written on the change in direction regarding decision making under Fudoli in tightening up IDA criteria for approving loans.

    My opinion is based on what I experienced in attending those meetings. You feel this action is a stretch and I would normally agree with that position. However, there is a night and day difference between the operation of the current LIDA Board and past boards when it comes to the stretch factor.

    You want to talk stretch factor, go back and review the IDAS and PILOTS that were given in the decade before the Fudoli administration; to the Lancaster Airport (three and with no job creation), successful businesses like Olive Tree and the bike shop because they were in the ‘red zone’, etc.

    The mismanagement here came from the villages’ past bad governance. And you still fail to see the benefit to the taxpayers of the villages by these actions.

    Lastly, it takes but a trip to the next LIDA meeting and asking the board by whose authority did they undertake the actions they took.

  7. #22
    Tony Fracasso - Admin
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Buffalo, New York, United States
    Posts
    64,947
    Just like the tax funded baseball batting house at West wood - OH - some think its cool so - lets change our stance a little.
    The batting house is paying for itself I'm assuming.

  8. #23
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Chowaniec View Post
    That is your opinion and it is primarily based on the shady dealings that occurred under the Giza administration. I am speaking here of the merits by the LIDA in forgiving the LVCDC loan and the funding to repair the Depew Village gazebo. I find neither action inappropriate or improper.

    As all LIDA members who were present at the meeting voted approval to forgive the loan I would hope the reasoning was valid and had merit for reducing the cost to Lancaster Village taxpayers; taxpayers who pay town taxes.

    As for the gazebo repair, I was a former Depew resident and well remember the vitality and pristine condition of the park. It has been neglected by all sitting Village Boards in the last few decades. So the LIDA should just say just say screw you, you made conditions as they are or should they help the village?

    I have been at numerous LIDA meetings under the Giza administration and the 3-1/2 years under Fudoli leadership, wrote much on what I opposed and believed were misdirected decisions in giving PILOTS and tax breaks for undeserving projects. I have also written on the change in direction regarding decision making under Fudoli in tightening up IDA criteria for approving loans.

    My opinion is based on what I experienced in attending those meetings. You feel this action is a stretch and I would normally agree with that position. However, there is a night and day difference between the operation of the current LIDA Board and past boards when it comes to the stretch factor.

    You want to talk stretch factor, go back and review the IDAS and PILOTS that were given in the decade before the Fudoli administration; to the Lancaster Airport (three and with no job creation), successful businesses like Olive Tree and the bike shop because they were in the ‘red zone’, etc.

    The mismanagement here came from the villages’ past bad governance. And you still fail to see the benefit to the taxpayers of the villages by these actions.

    Lastly, it takes but a trip to the next LIDA meeting and asking the board by whose authority did they undertake the actions they took.
    In my opinion, I don't believe either resolution was in the scope of the LIDA receiving any benefit that advances their mission or purpose. I guess we have to agree to disagree.

    Georgia L Schlager

  9. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873
    Me too -

    I am just not liking the fact that past shady deals are still being covered and ignored. End of story !
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  10. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,918
    Quote Originally Posted by gorja View Post
    In my opinion, I don't believe either resolution was in the scope of the LIDA receiving any benefit that advances their mission or purpose. I guess we have to agree to disagree.
    Agree that we will never agree on everything.

    That said I respect the research you do and highly respect your opinion as it is based on sound reasoning.

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    8,918
    Quote Originally Posted by 4248 View Post
    Me too -

    I am just not liking the fact that past shady deals are still being covered and ignored. End of story !
    I well understand what you are referring to as 'past shady deals'. Hopefully this is not a cover-up continuance of that. I am confident that if this action is improper or inappropriate it will be exposed as such in the near future.

    Just expressing an opinion that some change in direction has occurred with this present LIDA board; and I see it as positive change.

  12. #27
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
    Just expressing an opinion that some change in direction has occurred with this present LIDA board; and I see it as positive change.
    That is definitely true. No more Olive Garden and Tom's bikes like IDA give-aways to enhancement zone property businesses that are retail or restaurants.

    Georgia L Schlager

  13. #28
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Quote Originally Posted by Greg Sojka View Post
    Lancaster bus garage lawsuits , New York State lawsuits , and the bill gets picked up by all of us. Kenny !! witness, prosecutor,and judge OHHH my ! Wise choice not running for supervisor of Lancaster .
    From this week's Lancaster Bee-
    Superintendent Michael Vallely also addressed the meeting’s attendees regarding the allegations against the transportation supervisor brought up during the public comment session at the previous meeting.

    “It’s sort of a difficult thing because the Board of Education and myself cannot talk about personnel issues,” Vallely said.

    Even with a limit on what he can say, Vallely said he wanted to respond to the allegations.

    “First, let me assure everyone that the district follows its policies and the laws prohibiting discrimination and retaliation,” Val- lely said, noting that any complaints made to the district are thoroughly investigated and the violating party may be disciplined to some degree.

    “I can state that neither the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission nor the New York State Division of Human Rights has found that there’s been any unlawful conduct by district employees towards the employees who’ve raised complaints,” he said.

    “The district remains committed to a workplace free of unlawful discrimination and retaliation,” Vallely said. “We will continue following our policies, we will continue following the law, in regard to investigating promptly and thoroughly any complaints that are made.”

    Georgia L Schlager

  14. #29
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873
    When the EEOC states - "No violation found" - that's not the end of their findings - they can recommend or state - grounds have been found for "Further Court action" - so to say there's no further action available or to imply that isn't correct.
    #Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !

  15. #30
    Member gorja's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lancaster, NY
    Posts
    13,150
    Labor groups protest Niagara county IDA hotel subsidies

    http://www.investigativepost.org/201...tel-subsidies/

    It seems like our Lancaster IDA assists hotels hear, as well

    Georgia L Schlager

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Similar Threads

  1. LIDA #'s for 2009-13
    By gorja in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 26th, 2014, 06:13 PM
  2. LIDA budget
    By gorja in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 3rd, 2013, 05:09 AM
  3. Penora’s Pizzeria IDA application back before the LIDA
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: July 31st, 2012, 01:25 AM
  4. The LIDA enigma
    By Lee Chowaniec in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: November 19th, 2011, 05:29 PM
  5. Supervisor Giza cries over LIDA/ Consolidate IDA'S
    By 4248 in forum Village of Lancaster and Town of Lancaster Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: June 9th, 2007, 09:11 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •