Fudoli votes no to amend employee agreements with police chief and captains

[Lee Chowaniec]

Prior to casting his lone 'no' vote on a resolution that amends respective employment agreements with the Lancaster Chief of Police and the two Police Captains whereby the three in question agree to contribute a flat $750 payment toward their $19,300 health care premium, and in lieu of their $6,000 and $5,500 recent wage increases, Supervisor Fudoli gave the reason for his dissent vote.

“As I stated at the last board meeting, I disagree with the highest paid employees paying only $750 toward their health insurance while some of our non bargaining members are paying more.”*

“I also disagree that this agreement says they are paying a dollar amount (not a percentage). With Obama care over the next couple of years health insurance premiums are going to skyrocket. When those costs continue to go up for the town the taxpayers are going to be bearing the burden of that. I would have voted yes if there was a percentage amount contributed to the cost of the health insurance premium. As it is not based on a percentage, I vote no.”

*Paying 8% or $1,544 and earning less than half the $114,000 the Chief will be getting and the $95,000 the Captains will now be earning. But hey, it’s a start claim the board members. Unionized town employees still contribute nothing.

[WNYresident]

It need to stop at all levels of government. You simply can not give continual pay raises based on nothing more than time.

[4248]

Supervisor Foduli said what needed to be said
- hope it was entered into the Official records.

These back door tax funded deals - Personal Political assassination's - smear and fear campaigns need to end.
They just keep showing over and over again how vicious and deceitful they will be to maintain control. While residents/voters believe they are electing "Community Minded People" - they are actually approving Patronage, Nepotism and rule by tax dollars for votes.

$800,000.00 back door deal for Police votes.
$500,000.00 for Town Clerk/Supervisor Elect Johanna Coleman Metz.

Now they set a token payment for the Chiefs and Police Captains where they pay a set fee instead of a percentage - looks like they are insulating their personal costs from what there subordinates will eventually pay.
- $750.00 payment toward their $19,300.00 yearly health care premium.
While their raises range from Chief = $6,000 and Captain = $5,500

While some of those same Chiefs and Captains arranged to stall off the contract for their subordinates - they negotiated with the Lan Dems for them selves. They realize the obvious back lash coming and building over Police not paying for their health care.

So they use the contract they stalled to insight employees and tax payers to vote against Supervisor Foduli.
They lie to voters using their facebook and the Bee to spread false rumors as to who was stalling the contract. The four Lan Dem Town Board Members were refusing to entertain any settlement ideas. They wanted to tell residents it was because the Supervisor couldn't secure a contract. While in reality - Town Hall and the Lan Dems were working behind the scenes to cut a deal for votes.

Their campaign manager Ron Giza admitted part of their "Scheme" involved getting the "Unions in line" with the Lan Dems. Part of their "Scheme" was to avoid negotiations on contributions to healthcare.

Part of Town Clerk/Supervisor Candidate Johanna Colemans "Scheme" was to get elected Supervisor
- then before being swore in next January
- she retires from the Town Clerks position and starts collecting her full tax funded pension
- waits a week and comes back as Town Supervisor at Full pay plus a retirement check and tax funded benefits.

This was known, planned, denied and now they are trying hard to justify keeping this hidden from voters/tax payers.

Blow all the smoke you want - make martyr's out of who ever you want ! Facts are facts !

Every Patronage move they make will be exposed and openly debated
- every back door deal or Board appointment will be exposed and openly debated
- every "Double Dip" they facilitate will be exposed and openly debated.

Tax Payers/Residents - ask your self these questions:

- If the Town Clerk/Supervisor Elect Johanna Coleman Metz's plan to "Double Dip" was not a problem
- why deny it and hide it for a year ?

- If there was no issue, no problem with her plan to receive $3000.00 tax dollars a week
- why deny and hide it?

- If they did nothing wrong - why such personal and vicious attacks against people who talk/post about their "Schemes" ?

Last but not least - why is Town Clerk/Supervisor Elect Johanna Coleman Metz now talking about reducing the Supervisor pay - because she knows she's still gonna take home more because of the "Retirement scheme" !

[gorja]

I agree with the supervisor that percentage is the way to go.

[shortstuff]

Supervisor - elect Coleman is talking about reducing her Supervisory salary? Wouldn't that be something. But knowing the psychology of human nature, you go from 80,000 a year to 66,000 without creating a buffer here, so hold on folks your taxes are going up. Any Democrat under the influence of the party players say they are fiscally conservative-I'll vomit.

The Chief's and the Captains package was so obvious and blatant that I just don't know how people can look these folks in the eye.

[WNYresident]

I agree with the supervisor that percentage is the way to go.

Why not just have a set cost. Nothing more. If the policies go up that increase is covered 100% by the employee. Do this across the entire public sector work force / elected officials in NYS starting at the town/village level. NO GRANDFATHERING because that just isn't in the best interest of the property/business owners who pay the bills.

WHY MUST people make simple issues complicated?

We will never see any meaningful change in healthcare if the people on the receiving end are those who make the decisions.

I see no good reason to continually cover the health insurance cost increases for every elected official or any government employee to a point. When does it stop? When healthcare premiums are $20,000 a year? $25,000 a year? $30k, $50k?

Someone like Breezy might say "You are anti worker!!!!" Or "why do you hate the public sector?" and so on. We all have read the BS that various elected officials say when they are trying to hold on to their seat.

My answer to that crowd is "Why are you anti worker?" Why do you want to see people who are hard workers pay more for a service that required? That is what it truly boils down to. Or, "Why do you hate us property owners?" We can throw the same crap right back at the people who send out misleading campaign literature. That is like taking the low road as they do. Shows you the class of people us property owners are dealing with.

[WNYresident]

Supervisor - elect Coleman is talking about reducing her Supervisory salary? Wouldn't that be something. But knowing the psychology of human nature, you go from 80,000 a year to 66,000 without creating a buffer here, so hold on folks your taxes are going up. Any Democrat under the influence of the party players say they are fiscally conservative-I'll vomit.

The Chief's and the Captains package was so obvious and blatant that I just don't know how people can look these folks in the eye.

Could it be there is a personal tax advantage to someone asking to lower the salary seeing they are already getting a revenue stream from the town?

[4248]

Part of what the "Double Dippers" do to beat even more income tax is called,
"Deferred Compensation"

.

Its a plan by which a certain percentage of the pay from ones "Current employment" (Town Councilman/Supervisor) position is put in a State run retirement Tax deferred money market type fund account.

This way the amount "deferred" is not taxed - so if they reduce their yearly income by say 30% - they don't pay the tax on that money either. While making their take home pay look smaller - its actually multiplying in a investment account tax free !

Not only is the Town pay check tax funded - then they actually avoid paying income tax on a percentage of each pay check as well.

So given that , you could reduce your own pay - then turn around and actually keep more of it by beating the taxes .

There is also a plan called "Catch Up" where if you haven't been in the program long or haven't been able to contribute much. They allow you to "Defer" larger amounts than normal. This little perk helps you "defer" even a higher percent of your current pay - tax free.

So unlike most working people, you can avoid paying even more taxes out of each and every paycheck.

Isn't it funny how a system based on taxing workers has so many programs/benefits for tax funded players to avoid paying taxes.

Now, I know they will attack me again - they don't like average working people knowing the perks they enjoy. But if they are doing nothing wrong - nothing unfair - why are they against everyone knowing about it ? This is current, this is factual - its not slanderous or speculative. But they will attack and deny !

[21BFD]

test test

[21BFD]

Part of what the "Double Dippers" do to beat even more income tax is called,
"Deferred Compensation"

.

Its a plan by which a certain percentage of the pay from ones "Current employment" (Town Councilman/Supervisor) position is put in a State run retirement Tax deferred money market type fund account.

This way the amount "deferred" is not taxed - so if they reduce their yearly income by say 30% - they don't pay the tax on that money either. While making their take home pay look smaller - its actually multiplying in a investment account tax free !

Not only is the Town pay check tax funded - then they actually avoid paying income tax on a percentage of each pay check as well.

So given that , you could reduce your own pay - then turn around and actually keep more of it by beating the taxes .

There is also a plan called "Catch Up" where if you haven't been in the program long or haven't been able to contribute much. They allow you to "Defer" larger amounts than normal. This little perk helps you "defer" even a higher percent of your current pay - tax free.

So unlike most working people, you can avoid paying even more taxes out of each and every paycheck.

Isn't it funny how a system based on taxing workers has so many programs/benefits for tax funded players to avoid paying taxes.

Now, I know they will attack me again - they don't like average working people knowing the perks they enjoy. But if they are doing nothing wrong - nothing unfair - why are they against everyone knowing about it ? This is current, this is factual - its not slanderous or speculative. But they will attack and deny !

my gawd........... you have really discovered something!! But before you immerse yourself even further in your persecution complex, all knowing one, perhaps you should quit trying to show your brilliance and consider the facts:

1. In a tax deferred plan, you do contribute with pre-tax dollars.

2. You pay every single cent of tax owed at the far end , when you take the $$ out.

3. It is such a big secret and devious plan they use, that it is available in one form or another to EVERY SINGLE AMERICAN who choses to contribute to his/her retirement!! Even members of the Bflo Fire Dept have the right to contribute to tax deferred plans.!!! ( Of course, if you had stuck around instead of gaming the system with a dbl, you would know that!!) ( speaking of gaming the system - do you know anyone who received public funded disability payments while also receiving income for serving on a local governing board?? DO YOU? ... and NO, I'm not referring Cheektowaga council member Merkel (?) , whom I believe was actually arrested for that!)

4. It does lower your taxable income for that year, as do ALL tax deferred plans . But it does NOT lower , as you assert, the actual amount of yearly income you receive as set forth on public documents) . It hides nothing - nothing.

5. Every single "revelation" in your post fills me with amusement - I'll bet almost every person who occasionally reads this forum has some sort of deferred plan ........... do any of the following come to mind?: IRA SEP 401-k etc etc..... granted, they are not all identical , but every single one of them, including what local public servants use, were passed by the government of the United States, and made available to all citizens who qualify

6. Over the past few months I was looking forward to a forum with a vibrant exchange of ideas.... and, to be sure, I have read some good, balanced stuff on here from some contributors . But you are way over the top - looks like those anger management issues still exist!!....

[4248]

If youd read what I was refering to - when a elected official/person "Double Dips" - and they try and make people think they are some how "reducing what they will be paid" by using defered comp. -

Also your statement is also misleading: You posted: "You pay every single cent of tax owed at the far end , when you take the $$ out"
- when you defer now your deferring under your current tax status/tax rate
- lets say 28%
- then when you retire and your taxable income is much lower. So your not paying what you would have paid now.

Besides what I was cutting at is the fact they mislead and say,"She is taking less pay - because she deferred it" = that is the lie now exposed. One less line she can now mislead tax payers with The more you debate what I post - the more I can explain how it works, Thank You !

You also just repeated what I stated: You posted, "In a tax deferred plan, you do contribute with pre-tax dollars" = No taxes taken from those contributed dollars - exactly what I stated. Thanks for verifying that. So if a person contributes/defers $125.(+/-) - then their paycheck take home is only reduced by about $85.(+/-)

If tax payers dont care that these loop wholes exist - if they don,t care these people are "scheming" to do these things - its up to them to judge ! But why hide it if there is nothing wrong with planning a "double dip"? Why deny it while running for office/elected position >

Did I scheme to retire and come back a week later and collect full pay - NO. This is a scheme that was hatched ahead of the elections. The "intent" was to double her take home pay. If you read before you speak you might under stand why I pointed out the tax benefit they use to "make it appear they are receiving less pay"

When Councilman Stempniak did it - they even said in the Bufnews - "She's even reducing her pay to save us money - she's deferring payments" - they tried to say she saved tax payers money by doing that.

When they said the Highway guy was retiring and coming back with a raise - did they tell taxpayers he would collect two tax funded checks and benefits - maybe that is OK with you - I don't think it should be hidden from tax payers, do you ? Or are you defending members of your Party ? Can you be honest with that fact ?

Your name insinuates your a BFD member and maybe from engine 21 - or did you just happen to make that up?

I did not say others aren't able to use the same program - I am just pointing out another lie they tell people to make it appear they some how reduced their compensation. You see by doing this - we already shut the door on that lie - get it ?. So, Thanks again - your actually helping me.

Yes, I collected two checks and if you know anything about the law - that I tried to fight - it stated I must be paid. Did I plan on getting sick - NO . Did I plan on getting hurt NO. So where is the game big mouth.

I got hurt trying to help someone - did her "scheme" come out of concern for others ? I wont apologize for my intent/actions.

I bet you live in Lancaster right big guy - why not use your name - everyone knows who I am. Just by your ID and rhetoric - I believe I have a good idea who you are any way. I'll remind you again like I did before !

What is this now - get as many Lan Dem supporters on here to repeat lies. If I did anything wrong - why was I never prosecuted - why did I win a rather sweat lawsuit settlement from the City ?

Good try ! You people love repeating the sh=t that your friends feed the Bufnews - but why do you always leave out the final judgement and court rulings - OH wait = I know why - it doesn't help fortify your BS.

It doesn't bother me one bit to debate this stuff - it only goes to show what your friends will do to maintain control of our tax dollars. If the Town Clerk wasn't "scheming" to double her tax funded pay - why hide it - why deny it - why attack me and anyone who speaks of it. Why does the truth bring out such vicious attacks ?

May you stay safe and out of harms way - may water always reach your hose-line - May the pavement rise up to meet you when you fall.

[gorja]

Why not just have a set cost. Nothing more. If the policies go up that increase is covered 100% by the employee. Do this across the entire public sector work force / elected officials in NYS starting at the town/village level. NO GRANDFATHERING because that just isn't in the best interest of the property/business owners who pay the bills.

WHY MUST people make simple issues complicated?

We will never see any meaningful change in healthcare if the people on the receiving end are those who make the decisions.

I see no good reason to continually cover the health insurance cost increases for every elected official or any government employee to a point. When does it stop? When healthcare premiums are $20,000 a year? $25,000 a year? $30k, $50k?

Someone like Breezy might say "You are anti worker!!!!" Or "why do you hate the public sector?" and so on. We all have read the BS that various elected officials say when they are trying to hold on to their seat.

My answer to that crowd is "Why are you anti worker?" Why do you want to see people who are hard workers pay more for a service that required? That is what it truly boils down to. Or, "Why do you hate us property owners?" We can throw the same crap right back at the people who send out misleading campaign literature. That is like taking the low road as they do. Shows you the class of people us property owners are dealing with.

If an employee's contribution towards their healthcare premium is a percentage of the whole premium, then every time the premium goes up, the employees contribution goes up in relation to the increase.

[4248]

All tax funded Employees.
Elected and Appointed Officials should contribute
- if they get health care
- they should contribute.
Not just Police - all tax funded personal.

.

Many (one could guess, most of the taxpayers) also believe the percentage would be the fairest solution.

- but the starting point is the only true debatable issue at this point in time.

Some say it should not be like what was just gifted to the Chiefs and Captains. That is ridiculous ! They traded a wiener for a ham !

It seems more like a deal to separate them from the average Police Personal. The Captains and Chiefs directly influence the other Union Members and their contract negotiations, yet they acted separately.

It should start at at least fifteen percent(15%+/-) of the cost of their healthcare benefits. When the cost of their plan increases, their contribution increases - this will help offset the cost of their plans when they increase and they will increase !

As a Tax payer - whats your take on this issue ?

[4248]

I was talking with a old timer today - he brought up a good question.

Is the Town gonna have more "negotiations" over the new Police Contract ?

If the Lan Dems already worked out a contract deal - will they just present it for a vote to the Union guys - then put it up for a Town Board Vote ?

Or are they gonna have some kind of "Dog and Pony Show" negotiation period ?

We heard the Supervisor say their (Controlling Members) deal includes or will cost about $800,000.00 for what has been back doored - so can we assume the Town won't be askin for any concessions or any talk of health care contributions?

Also, if they present the contract before the end of the year - can they still blame the cost on the present Supervisor even though it was negotiated without him ?

Just askin - be gentle !

[gorja]

I was talking with a old timer today - he brought up a good question.

Is the Town gonna have more "negotiations" over the new Police Contract ?

If the Lan Dems already worked out a contract deal - will they just present it for a vote to the Union guys - then put it up for a Town Board Vote ?

Or are they gonna have some kind of "Dog and Pony Show" negotiation period ?

We heard the Supervisor say their (Controlling Members) deal includes or will cost about $800,000.00 for what has been back doored - so can we assume the Town won't be askin for any concessions or any talk of health care contributions?

Also, if they present the contract before the end of the year - can they still blame the cost on the present Supervisor even though it was negotiated without him ?

Just askin - be gentle !

I'm thinking, maybe you and I are talking about 2 different police contracts. I've been referring to the $800,000 arbitration settlement this year which was negotiated by the input of all board members including the supervisor. They had said their hands were tied which was referred to in Swiatek's letter. For the years 2012 and 2013 back pay

Are you speaking of a new contract for other years?