hope you got a sense of humor
before the town can sell the land, they have to deem it surplus, then put it up for auction.
Wouldn't it be funny if a bunch of people got together, went to the auction and outbid the airport for the land?
I honestly can not believe that they would buy that other property, only to later find out that they need the Enterprise Rd property as well.So, why did Lancaster Airport Inc. approach the town for an endorsing letter? Could it very well be because in purchasing the E&E property they put the cart before the horse? They need the full parallel taxiway project to be a given (as per their plans approved by the state) before the state would approve funds for the E&E purchase which allows for further expansion for jet use.
If that's the case - and the E&E property can never be used, then someone should them for wasting over $900k of Federal money.
Although, I know that they have been speaking with the owner of the last building on that street for at least 3 1/2 years. So, the whole thing is perplexing.
Last edited by therising; January 22nd, 2010 at 03:21 PM.
hope you got a sense of humor
before the town can sell the land, they have to deem it surplus, then put it up for auction.
Wouldn't it be funny if a bunch of people got together, went to the auction and outbid the airport for the land?
The town board creates the problems and when the residents complain, the town board tells them it's the resident's fault.
Two things I know:
1) If they used Federal money to buy the E&E land, without having control over the other necessary parcels, then these clowns should be sued for wasting over $900k of Federal money.
2) I know they first expressed interest in the building in question on Enterprise Drive at least 3 1/2 years ago. So, they're trying to tell us that they're been working on it all that time, and just now, realized they need the cul-de-sac?
Please.
What if the town turns down giving up the piece of land the airport requires to extend their runway? Can the feds sue the airport to get the funds back?Originally posted by therising:
1) If they used Federal money to buy the E&E land, without having control over the other necessary parcels, then these clowns should be sued for wasting over $900k of Federal money.
Georgia L Schlager
Absolutely right. That would make a great centrally located place for a new police building with plenty of room for expansionOriginally posted by ichingtheory:
If that happens, we should be able to demand that land is turned over to the government. After all, we paid for it, right?
Georgia L Schlager
The Town Board cant "Give land away" - it has to go through the process of declaring it surplus, then putting it up for auction - public auction.
Like the piece needed for Mohawk Place. Keep an eye open for the list Supervisor Bob Giza asked Tax Assessor Marrano to produce. Theres always a game behind the game.
Remember at the meeting when the Mohawk Place access was discussed?
You can bet that was well documented - why? Now at this last meeting the issue of the Town owned Road was discussed - Why?
There's other parcels in Town that "People have inquired about," Said Supervisor Bob Giza!!! Who? - Why?
Now just consider this - open public discussion on this matter was documented. Like the Mohawk Place subdivision - the guy who bought it was lead to believe it was "Pre-Approved" - Why - How? -
Because as Town Council Member Donna Stempniak finally admitted, "We talked about" - plans were submitted, conversations at public meeting was established! If this were to go to court -????????
Don't believe things discussed at Town Board Meetings are "Random - Unplanned" events. Mr.Brady just happened to be there - they just happened to discuss the "Letter of Endorsement" - it just so happens Mr.Marrano is in the process of preparing a list of recommended surplus property????????
There is a few local, well connected investors wanting to buy some land in Lancaster - they have been picking up pieces quietly for years. Lots behind Basil Chevy were deemed "Unbuildable for years" - then most were recovered for back taxes and some quietly deemed surplus and sold.
This was no happen stance folks - its all part of a little dance our Town Leaders have been doing for centuries.
There wasn't cell phones and INTERNET chat rooms or blogs like speakup until the last five years or so.
Out of the dark back rooms - Town Hall is dragged kicking and screaming into the lite of day!
#Dems play musical chairs + patronage and nepotism = entitlement !
Good find gorja!
I had posted this earlier and it seems to have disappeared. It clearly indicated that Enterprise Drive is a town dedicated road, As such, how can any of it be deemed surplus property and sold?
It makes me further wonder why airport owner Tom Geles would approach the board and request it endorse a resolution that would that allow the airport to get the 2-1/2% state funding for the purchase of the E&E property. Shawn Brady, Passero consulting engineer, made it clear that, “It (approval) is done on every state grant that matches an FAA grant and has been done for 15 years at the airport.”
Who has been approving these “endorsing resolutions”, the county? The county has been involved with the process. Does that mean that the town has been truthful in saying they have no jurisdiction in the matter; that they did not act in support of the airport expansion? Well, we know they held a SEQR on the environmental impacts and declared there were no significant impacts associated with the expansion; did not hold a public hearing; approved the airport master plan; issued permits.
So, why did Lancaster Airport Inc. approach the town for an endorsing letter? Could it very well be because in purchasing the E&E property they put the cart before the horse? They need the full parallel taxiway project to be a given (as per their plans approved by the state) before the state would approve funds for the E&E purchase which allows for further expansion for jet use.
So, now the airport needs the end 0.2 acres (or miles of Enterprise Drive) to ensure room for the taxiway. Supervisor Giza misspoke when he said the property would have to be declared surplus and put up for bid. This is a town dedicated road, a different animal, not an SBL. To my knowledge the town has never sold a dedicated road and I don’t know what the legal process to do is; if it indeed is legal and deemed in the best interests of the community. This whole project is in the best interest of the airport, small aircraft flight hobbyists and a handful of privileged corporate jet users.
The town has maintained all along that they have not supported this project in any fashion, which is not true. However, the ball is certainly in their court right now. Residents have brought the Enterprise Drive issue up at several Town Board meetings. It was openly discussed and yet Mr. Geles proceeded to purchase E&E property for $938,000 before this issue was resolved. If the town acts in any way to appease the airport on a project that does not serve the best interests of the community, residents will be waiting at the voting booths.
What’s done is done. No further expansion should take place. As for the E&E purchase Mr. Geles, you bought what you bought. As many posters write on the message board, “You should have known better.” In fact, you did know better!
BTW - The last post in my name was not posted by me. Hey Res, check it out and what happened to this one that was posted earlier?
It clearly has been now laundered. The "dirty laundry" has been sent out to dry. A phrase that repells the imagination.
Let's remember the airport is now bag in hand and wants another hand out. Please for goodness sake's Mr. Giza & Co. show us your integrity and do the right thing. For I assure you, come election time~~this will be the straw that broke the camel's back.
Oops! Sorry, I mispoke. I meant "won't sell" not "won't give up"Originally posted by 4248:
The Town Board cant "Give land away" - it has to go through the process of declaring it surplus, then putting it up for auction - public auction.
We also know that the town board has been endorsing the Lancaster Airport for state aid for many, many years but-Originally posted by Lee Chowaniec:
Who has been approving these “endorsing resolutions”, the county? The county has been involved with the process. Does that mean that the town has been truthful in saying they have no jurisdiction in the matter; that they did not act in support of the airport expansion? Well, we know they held a SEQR on the environmental impacts and declared there were no significant impacts associated with the expansion; did not hold a public hearing; approved the airport master plan; issued permits.
the town board conveniently doesn't remember a thing.Lancaster Airport-12/6/1999
Support Grant for Land Acquisition & Improvement At Lancaster Airport
Lancaster Airport-4/17/2000
Support Grant for Equipment & Paving At Lancaster Airport
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport- 4/21/2003
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Construction for Eligibility for State Aid
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport-12/3/2007
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Projects for Eligibility For State Funding
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport-10/20/2008
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Projects for Eligibility For State Funding
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport - 11/3/2008
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Projects for Eligibility For State Funding
Georgia L Schlager
Thanks again gorja. I must be getting old as I didn't remember these resolutions - most likely because there was no reason to at the time. The date is wrong on the one. It should be 7/21/03. At least others will know your data has been verified.Gorja wrote: We also know that the town board has been endorsing the Lancaster Airport for state aid for many, many years but-
Quote:
Lancaster Airport-12/6/1999
Support Grant for Land Acquisition & Improvement At Lancaster Airport
Lancaster Airport-4/17/2000
Support Grant for Equipment & Paving At Lancaster Airport
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport- 4/21/2003
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Construction for Eligibility for State Aid
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport-12/3/2007
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Projects for Eligibility For State Funding
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport-10/20/2008
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Projects for Eligibility For State Funding
Buffalo-Lancaster Airport - 11/3/2008
Endorse Buffalo-Lancaster Airport Projects for Eligibility For State Funding
the town board conveniently doesn't remember a thing.
Game, set, match as far as the town board denying complicity in helping the airport receive state funding. But then again, even Lancaster Airport owner Tom Geles stated at a TB meeting early in 2009 that he found it onerous that the Town Board was in denial that it had helped make the airport expansion possible.
And they wonder why we don't place any trust in our local government. $12 million of taxpayer money pissed away on a project that brings little investment and revenue to the town. $28,000 in property taxes and less than $10,000 in fuel taxes on over a hundred acres of property.
Who really profited from this fiasco? Gee, one would have to think the airport, the parties selling the land at grossly inflated values and .....? $938,000 for less than 20 acres of E&E property? Who was asleep at the wheel at the FAA?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)