Primary Day Today

13 Sep

This little story about a pay-for-play solicitation letter is becoming something of a regional nanoscandal. Yesterday, Channel 2’s Marissa Bailey tried to interview Republican candidate for Supervisor, David Hartzell.  It went hilariously.


Finally, Hartzell sent along a statement reading:

I am fighting to end the “Pay to Play” mentality that is rampant in the Town of Clarence.

Quite obviously, what he really means is that he wants the pay to come to him, and he’ll control who plays, because as I’ve discussed, the current  town administration is hardly corruptible by money or influence – even the money and influence of a Wegmans.

Here’s what the Republican candidate says on his Facebook page:

All independence and Conservative voters who care about the future of the Town of Clarence need to get out and vote next Tuesday for the only ENDORSED candidate for Supervisor, Dave Hartzell. REFUSE to accept the current supervisors 35% tax increase over the next four years. YOU truly have the FUTURE of Clarence in YOUR hands!!

Setting aside the poor punctuation, you see where he accuses incumbent Supervisor Scott Bylewski of a “35% tax increase over the next four years”? That means that Dave Hartzell – former circus performer and current financial advisor – doesn’t understand how to read the town budget. That Facebook post echoes something Hartzell wrote in an ad that appeared in the Clarence Bee, where he referred to out-year projections as “proposals”.  They’re not.

Proposal vs. projection. There are either two explanations for this:

1. Hartzell knows exactly what’s in that document, and he’s lying to the electorate; or

2. Hartzell has no idea what the difference is, and is unqualified to be Supervisor.

Either way, it’s an insult to the voters in the town of Clarence.

If you’re a registered Independent Party voter or Conservative Party voter in the town of Clarence, I urge you to go to the polls today – Tuesday the 13th – and write-in Scott Bylewski for Supervisor.

He was denied these horrific minor party lines due to outright corruption. The Erie County Independence Party had recommended to the state committee that Bylewski be endorsed, but was overruled by a corrupt apparatus that has cast its lot with the Republicans in exchange for favors and patronage. The chairman of the Erie County Conservative Party withheld his personal party’s nomination due to the fact that Bylewski didn’t steamroll the Wegmans proposal through the zoning and town boards, and instead followed established process.

A vote for Scott is a vote against patronage, intimidation, pay-for-play, and the typical corruption one finds in the WNY politico-developer alliance.

Also on the ballot today are the special election for Sam Hoyt’s old seat, and the Democratic primaries for City Court and Common Council. Niagara Falls and Lackawanna also have primaries for Mayor.


14 Responses to “Primary Day Today”

  1. Buck Turgidson September 13, 2011 at 8:27 am #

    That would be Marissa Bailey who conducted the interview, not Melissa.

  2. Peggy September 13, 2011 at 9:17 am #

    Bylewski has been a true leader, a headliner for the Town of Clarence. He made us so proud when he represented us before the nation during the days following the tragedy of Flight 3407. Anyone who votes for Hartzell, the former sideshow performer, instead of re-electing a truly proven leader will have the knowledge that they would prefer a person with poor judgment, and a willingness to sell his soul to the highest bidder.

  3. MaGuinn September 13, 2011 at 9:19 am #

    I think it is disgusting that in the Town we have these two gentlemen (Weiss and Hartzell) who try to rule by being bullies. I would say go get a REAL job – quit consulting and try to fit in with the real world. As residents we have options to NOT vote Hartzell in and get Weiss OUT. As for Hartzell sending letters to law firms in the area asking for donations – ya right!!! – the Republican Committee should take his name off the ballot – again BULLYING!!! VOTE FOR SCOTT BYLEWSKI – the only honest candidate for Clarence Supervisor!!

  4. Love the Passion September 13, 2011 at 11:40 am #

    I love the passion Alan — kick some assess (sic)
    If progressives opened at least one eye and attended town meetings more regularly we could change the region

  5. Ed September 13, 2011 at 12:42 pm #

    Alan,I can’t disagree with you that Hartzell’s letter was embarassing blunder, but I do take exception to the point that Bylewski lost the minor party lines for political reason. Maybe that was the case with the Independence Party, but he lost the Conservatives that is not the case with the Conservatives. Both Bylewski and Hartzell interviewed with the Clarence Conservative Commitee (the same people that supported Bylewski in ’07). Hartzell’s endorsement resulted from their VOTE!!! You can’t have the rumors fly around town like the ones regarding Bylewski and expect to have the Conservatives to still back you. As for the pay-for-play, nothing is more agregious that Bylewski accepting $1400 from Dan Snyder two days prior to the scheduled firework vote. He should have recused himself or not accepted the donations. Either would eliminate the perception on being bought odd. I am sure you would have done a story on that if Scott was a Republican, or you weren’t his personal blogger!!! (feel free to chuckle, no one is watching)

    • Alan Bedenko September 13, 2011 at 12:48 pm #

      Well, Ed, plenty of people are watching. Snyder donated to Bylewski most likely because he wants Joe Weiss and his ilk off the board. Since Snyder’s applications for fireworks permits have been approved in the past without controversy, the politicization of this year’s effort rests solely with Mssrs. Weiss and, temporarily, DiCostanzo. As for what the Conservative Party committee does, if you’re suggesting that Lorigo didn’t drive that bus or exert any influence over the vote, I find that laughable.

  6. Ed September 13, 2011 at 1:32 pm #

    Alan, well structured response. I can’t believe that I could find so many things to disagree with you on in such a short posting. The assumpion that Snyder’s donation were anti-Weiss makes no sense. The two are not running against each other. Apples and oranges. Snyder wants one thing, his firework permit. That is it. It is the timing of the donation coupled with the reversal in recommendation by Bylewski appointed Town Attorney that look like it was a bought vote. As for Lorigo, I am sure he put in his two cents, but to assume Bylewski’s behavior played no role is just a laughable.

    • Alan Bedenko September 13, 2011 at 1:34 pm #

      Bylewski’s behavior?

      Also, you’re suggesting that Snyder paid Bylewski to gain an advantage – namely, approval this year of something he’s received approval for in the past.

  7. Ed September 13, 2011 at 2:02 pm #

    Alan, as for Bylewski’s behavior, I’m am not touching it.

    Are you aware that Snyder’s permit was denied in 2010? The Town Attorney recommended the permit denial due to a right to farm law. After Snyder’s donations, the Town Attorney, who is picked by Bylewski, reversed his decision. I understand that it is a condensed timeline, but do you really think that doesn’t at least appear suspicious?

  8. Peggy September 13, 2011 at 2:04 pm #

    I guess Ed does not know that Weiss is the Puppet Master for Hartzell’s campaign Weiss has shown nothing but disdain for Bylewski ever since the unfoturnate airliner crash in 2009 Weiss has often said if there is a disaster you can reach me at the hotel I will be staying in. Now he seeks revenge because Bylewski did a superb job handling the Town’s response and received some lime light he did not seek out like Hartzell did and that Weiss wants. Most don’t know that Hartzell went home to change clothes when he found out that someone wanted to interview him about what he saw that night but yesterday when a reporter from Ch 2 wanted a comment she was hung up on until Hartzell could piece together a nonsensical response. Having been an insider with the local Conservative Party Ed would know that some locals who previously supported Bylewski were lashing out at him for not putting the ice arena up for a vote. It is up to the entire Town Board to put something before the public for a vote so blaming one Board member is bogus. The real scoop is that well healed developers are in the wings helping Hartzell They want to reopen the Town to unchecked development They do not want their accumulated properties to go through public scrutiny.

  9. McGuinn September 13, 2011 at 5:06 pm #

    Ed – you really need to get the correct story before calling things “suspicious”. The only person who is not-legit in this whole blog is Hartzell. Here is a thought – maybe, just maybe they are pointing the finger at other people because they are really guilty of the “pay to play”!!!! Have you been to a town board meeting? Obviously you don’t know that it is the board that votes on things not the town attorney.

  10. Ed September 13, 2011 at 6:34 pm #

    McGuinn, I will refer you to the Town of Clarence web site for the June 23rd minutes for the 2010 vote. “Town Attorney Steven Bengart said he disagrees with Mr. Saleh and believes that the
    right-to-farm law applies.
    Motion by Councilman Weiss, seconded by Councilman Kolber to deny the request for a
    Fireworks Display Permit for July 4, 2010 at 5655 Newhouse Road” The Town Board uses the Town Attorney for legal advice. The suspicious part is when the donations came in two days prior to the scheduled 2011 vote and the Town Attorney changed his “legal interpretation”. Again, any way that you cut it, it has the appearance of a bought vote. The proper move for Bylewski would have been to either recuse himself not accept the donation. Should he really be accepting donations from people with active votes just two days out?

  11. mark September 13, 2011 at 6:55 pm #

    Riveting drama from Hooterville. I won’t pass judgement until Eb, Mr. Drucker, Arnold Ziffel and Mr Haney have weighed in. How about some good old fashioned city drama like banging 20 yr old interns or not paying taxes on your liquor store?

  12. MaGuinn September 15, 2011 at 3:16 pm #

    Ed – PLEASE!!!! You should probably read the minutes from the August 2011 town board meetings – they are all online – you can get your facts straight there.

Contribute To The Conversation

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: