Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

New buyer, new decision?

August 9, 2013

MAYVILLE — With a possible sale of the Chautauqua County Home back on the table, will any legislators change their votes? In January, nine legislators voted against selling the County Home to Willia......

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Aug-09-13 3:18 AM

ask if bill soto will buy it

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 6:43 AM

Why do we seem to ignore the real money looser - social services? That makes the losses at the county home look like pocket change. There's something wrong when school children are overheard stating that they are not worried about school - they're going to do like mom and dad do - sit home and wait for the money to show up.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 7:08 AM


3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 7:41 AM

"or a budget that he is willing to lose money on, we cannot sell the home responsibly." Spoken like a true politician.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 7:55 AM

Chuck392..where did you ever hear that? Oh yes that is right..on Beck and Rush who make stuff up all the time with their hate and fear agendas. do realize we will not save one dime in our taxes. How much do you think that operating the HOME is costing you and your family in taxes each year? Have you ever tried to calculate that? Really you still think it is too much to care for our most vulnerable citizens after all they have given to our community?

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:01 AM

You could not reach my legislator as he is on vacation out of the area. I know as I tried to reach him immediately with my disgust over this entire issue. Once again some are pushing their agendas blind sighting many in our area with their rush to make a decision quickly..before anyone could possibly get all the facts.

How can a for profit company make money when they promise to keep all the employees at the same wages? Let us ask them that..then why does the County not implement whatever answer they come up with. It clearly sounds like something only they one else not even the CGR is aware of.

The report clearly shows that the HOME operates at a SURPLUS. Yes the report. While there read the report on County Homes in general and what happens when they are sold to profit agencies. Note in particular the statement that approximately 25% of the residents will have to go somewhere else..due to their medical or emotional needs.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:17 AM

judeye is shining bright today. hate and fear from beck and rush!Hey judeye, did ya ever read your own posts ? end of fresh water due to fracking and end of world due to climate change. No fear here ? judeye, help me with this. judeye you are the best icon of left wing madness. She stands by her man, the govt ! Judeye, the govt was not meant to be a nanny, but the rise of women in govt after the right to vote turned america into a nanny state. The govt was not meant to be a perpetual money loser, but the simple minded libs sure did turn it into it. Judeye, give us more "facts". sell the home chautauqua legislators !

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:29 AM

To answer a few questions, the county has no control over social services. The expenses are dictated by NYS. You are correct Chuck, it is a major problem. A private company can make money because they are allowed to offer assisted living and independent living options which NYS does not allow a government owned home to offer.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:32 AM

Judeye, Judeye, Judeye, what spin you continue to put on the CGR report. The home is showing a surplus because it receives more than $3M per year in taxpayer subsidies.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:35 AM

Hoyer said it best: "Unless he shows us how he's going to have a budget that balances, or a budget that he's willing to lose money on, we cannot sell the home responsibly."

A detailed plan that addresses ALL the concerns the CCLeg may have with regard to the future success of this facility, assurances that the level of care will not be compromised, and one that allows the CCLeg to fulfill its duty to taxpayers, patients and employees is crucial BEFORE any vote is taken. Of course, regardless of the facts, there will still be those who won't change their minds.

Too many ppl who favor selling CCH are only concerned with one thing; what it costs THEM to run the home. This may be understandable, but it's selfish, and Hoyer also said: "there are no recognizable tax savings by selling the home."

The CCLeg has a greater responsibility, and it must weigh them ALL, and not just focus on property owners' exaggerated beliefs.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:41 AM

Chuck 392 you are right. Fredonia Fred You are so very, very wrong! Social Services represent over 80% of the county budget and although a mandated service we have control over the delivery of services. The Welfare to Work participation rate has not improved and is very low compared to other parts of the state. If the administration of that department improved we probably wouldn't feel the drain of the County Home. Go check the facts Fred.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:49 AM

FF and those supplements will not go away if we sell the HOME. They will be given to another County or another state.

How much subsidies do the other departments receive? Check it out..then tell me which department is operating a surplus without the supplements?

We are just getting back some of the money that we send to DC in the way of our taxes. I say, let us try to get back as much of it as we can for the people of our area. It is our money..let us make it work for us and not given to those other states who get much more back than they pay out (mainly southern states by the way)

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 8:59 AM

The really ridiculous part of the article is about DeJoe saying the county will lose money because the home purchases services from the county. Think about that for a moment. Judeye-no one is rushing anything and it's called "blindsided",not "blindsighted". I don't listen to Rush or Beck but obviously you do if you know what they say correct. If you think the home is operating in the black,pull a copy of the county budget,get out your calculator and then report back OK?

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 9:11 AM

Sorry Carlaw, I don't follow your logic on social services. The way the services are delivered? We're paying for able-bodied single individuals, convicted felons and baby-makers to sit on their rumps and collect a check. That's the reality and the law which our Social Services Department must follow. That fight isn't even related to the County Home. I agree Chuck, something has to be done - in Washington & Albany. The County Home is one issue, Social Service reform is another and BOTH should be worked on, by different entities. I don't know how selling the County Home means we're not caring for our most vulnerable citizens. We are caring for them by making sure there is a place for them in the coming years. Why has privatization become a dirty word? If the workers still have jobs with the same pay and benefits but it's not coming out of our pockets & the home will still be providing good care to our citizens, what is the craziness about? I don't get the anger.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 9:34 AM

Not only do we pay in the form of taxes, if you ever need the home it will cost you $8,000 per month and when you run out of cash they take your property. What are they going to do when they run out of OUR MONEY????

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:07 AM

Let the excuses and crying begin.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:08 AM

not to sell that is.

3 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:09 AM

God could come down and offer to buy the place and still SOME folks would cry and have excuses not to sell.

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:10 AM

How can a private owner keep the same number of employees (at the same rate of pay), provide the same level of care without needing the annual taxpayer subsidies (allegedly worth approx $2.4M per/yr), and still turn a worthwhile profit? The true value of CCH?...More like 4 times the amount of $16 million...

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:16 AM

People trying to make money,the root of all evil,on the sick,dying,elderly is disgusting,decrepit and sick...That is not Gods plan!...

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:25 AM

The homes this person owns in Erie County are rated only 2 stars by the website...Not too impressive...Also Mr.Platschek and his wife,Goldie,were involved in a $400,000 against them in 2004,his wife Goldie was threatened with contempt of court for withholding evidence...

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:29 AM

Read my lips...Mr.Platschek has never set foot in the County Home!!...Yet he wants to buy it??...Something is not right here...The County Home is worth a lot more then $16 million!!..Wake up!!..

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 10:35 AM

Mr.Platschek and his wife,Goldie,were involved in a $400,000 judgement against them in 2004,his wife Goldie was threatened with contempt of court for withholding evidence...They only paid $40,000,and were withholding records...This was a Supreme Court case...Not very honest people in my opinion...

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 11:00 AM

The nearly non-existent public outcry for trying to "dump" CCH at such an obscenely low price is worrisome enough, but to believe the prospective buyer will retain all employees at the same rate of pay & benefits, AND not sacrifice the level of patient care, AND produce a modest return is beyond ignorant!

Over a reasonable 5-yr business plan that doesn't provide $3M in govt subsidies, the new owner would have to identify $6.3M in annual savings JUST TO BREAK EVEN on the initial investment. Leg. Hoyer was absolutely right in demanding that the CCLeg be given details of such exceptional expectations.

I applaud those in the CCLeg who are looking out for the best interests of the patients, employees and taxpayers, even if they are the minority.

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Aug-09-13 12:16 PM

politicians will say anything to stay in the favor, the voter, we use Chuckie S for an example, but if people especially the over strapped taxpayer uses common sense and not emotion then the sale of a public albatros is a no brainer..

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 47 comments Show More Comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web