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

Sinking city losing its way

September 22, 2013

A thriving business makes money. A not-so thriving government keeps taking money. In addition, the not-so thriving municipality makes it tough on business while doing no business of its own....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(17)

rumblefish

Sep-22-13 8:01 AM

We would agree with this article if this city's leaders did not have such a poor track history, to criticize the three who are leary of being involved in another city financial boondoggle is wise not foolish, remember " fools rush in where angles fear to tread"

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hadenough

Sep-22-13 8:45 AM

The title says it all. Who and I mean who would pay $762,000 for a piece of property assessed at $250,000 in a city that is not growing? Not even Donald Trump would do that. How could the sitting council agree with and vote to purchase said property? The city of Dunkirk is no different politically than any big city. Back door deals are being done at the expense of the tax payer. The taxpayer has paid the price for these deals. And who profited? The seller of course. Things in the city are not what they seem. Deals are constantly being done at the expense of the taxpayer. Isn't it time the taxpayer got involved? When NRG shuts its doors what happens? Higher taxes, higher utility rates, less services provided by the city because of no money. This is what we have to look forward to and folks it ain't pretty.

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Sep-22-13 9:04 AM

Mr editor, the state of Dunkirk is considered a success by liberals.They work at it make it so. Dont believe me ? look at detroit and chicago, one has declared bankruptcy and chicago is on the same path.This is considered a success to the public employee unions . We can only hope dunkirk goes under to start afresh.Maybe then we can get some sense in govt.

4 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Dcronlg

Sep-22-13 9:22 AM

Hilarious -- the chronically clueless and economics illiterate church lady gaggle OBSERVER board calling others in the community clueless and economically illiterate...the apple doesn't fall very far from the tree.

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Sep-22-13 9:41 AM

more miss-information from this paper, the 4th ward councilperson is employed in the private sector, stranger yet they support the second ward councilperson who they have publicly criticized on more than one occasion fact is this city does not belong in real estate dealings period

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Sep-22-13 9:41 AM

If you were purchasing a house valued at 100k and you went to the bank asking for a 300k mortgage they would call someone to put you in the nut house. Purchasing this property for the outrageous price the City did leaves a lot of questions for taxpayers. This is a bad deal!!!!

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Steiner

Sep-22-13 9:58 AM

cronig, can you ever say anything other than church lady gaggle ? You dont know anything more do you ! it is you cronig who is mentally challenged. You support democratic policies in the face of enormous failures, ony to write over and over clueless, church lady gagle.you state very little facts just mockings, like christopher does. Why is that libs ? why the constant mocking with no facts ? It proves my theory, libs just cannot think, only use rhetoric.That is what you are known for the country over, no facts , just quips.

5 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

markindunkirk

Sep-22-13 11:12 AM

This column is...misinformation, disinformation and a lack of pertinent information.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

PhilJulian

Sep-22-13 1:14 PM

I might feel differently if the city had quality leadership and a record of accomplishment -0 but it does not and it does not belong in the real-estate business. Let the DLDC go bankrupt!!!!!!!

8 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

markindunkirk

Sep-22-13 5:25 PM

It's a shame that when the previous administration pushed this whole deal through without due diligence, the Observer never asked any questions...and now that questions NEED to be asked again...they have the gall to complain about council asking questions and doing their due diligence.

5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

concerned

Sep-22-13 6:41 PM

I still do not understand why this sale and the DLDC is not under investigation for criminal activity!!!!

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Sep-22-13 8:39 PM

"...Who and I mean who would pay $762,000 for a piece of property assessed at $250,000 in a city that is not growing?"

Silver Creek's board of trustees paid $725K for the old Bentges bldg that was worth about half of that. Guess Dunkirk just needs to be #1 when it comes to making bonehead decisions.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Captain

Sep-23-13 3:52 AM

concerned's got it right. Whenever elected officials take taxpayer's money and agree to purchase private property for far & above (double and triple) its true market value, then something is definitely wrong. If there were no competing bids on these properties, then such generous offers need to be explained, and an investigation may provide just that.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

StanleyCup

Sep-23-13 7:52 AM

I recall something about a run down multi-unit apartment building on the corner of Main and 2nd that was is such bad shape, it should have been torn down at the owners expense. The city of Dunkirk, however, paid the owner much more than the value and then I believe they paid to have it torn down. I was new to the city at the time, but recall the locals very upset. It appears someone made a few bucks on that deal. I'm sure a few pockets were lined over that one.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Sep-23-13 1:34 PM

we believe StanleyCup you referring to a prominent local attorney who profited more than once on property sales in the name of urban renewal, and it by far more than a "few" bucks

3 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hadenough

Sep-24-13 3:57 PM

Rumblefish. An elected official needs no track history when it comes to spending other peoples money. The entire deal stinks like a beach full of dead fish. Perhaps a state audit would reveal more than the local auditors did.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

localresident

Sep-27-13 1:35 AM

CORRECTION: Sinking city LOST its way. A LONG, LONG, LONG time ago.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 17 of 17 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web