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

Hirings criticized

Councilwoman questions adding part-timers

December 4, 2013

After a year of reduced programming in its winter recreation program, the city of Dunkirk will be returning to a more ambitious program for 2014....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(32)

Santora

Dec-04-13 8:02 PM

fully idiotic subject as there are a few of us that understand (and read)these PT hires were budgeted and the budget was approved.Good luck in not voting for her Sveash....all these clowns ran unopposed last time. Szukala is in another world and she has so much faith in our Dunkirk young she sent her kids to Fredonia

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 5:44 PM

slipping some thing past the council by the mayor, why, why that's an out rage, believing this city is run on the up and up is like believing people will flock to city to shop and refuel

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Dec-04-13 5:44 PM

NO Taxpayer42 I DO NOT agree with hiring more union full time employees. Don't know why you assumed that. I agree with this program is unnecessary and there are other bigger problems to be solved.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Taxpayer42

Dec-04-13 5:00 PM

Stacey's argument that she'd rather see more full-time Union hires at the water plant - Commentor, you agree with that? Not surprised, just clarifying. The only legitimate complaint she has is that it wasn't made part of the budget presentation, even if the figures were in the budget. I don't know how they do theirs, but any staffing changes should always be one of the bullet points along with any other major changes. It sounds like it was slipped in in the hopes it wouldn't be detected. Shady. But as far as the programming goes - does anyone realize people come from other areas to use that facility, paying fees. It would be nice to see how much revenue offsets the expenses, but getting people out and about,active, bringing good people in from out of town - that's all positive. They buy gas, they stop at the store. It gives people a good reason to come to Dunkirk and it gives residents an outlet. People are very short-sighted. I do wonder as Escapee does WHO those hires will be.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 1:14 PM

wait and see the outrage that will come from those in favor of this "luxury" when fees and service costs are raised to support it and other programs like it

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 12:57 PM

we also think that those who favor this nonsense either don't know or have forgotten the difference between a " necessity and a luxury" we know city hall has and it appears that it becoming "contagious" after all last year certain council members pledged to cut more fat out of the budget not add, must be they have developed selected memory

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 12:34 PM

we have never posted to be saintly, never have been never will be,what we post we believe is "realistic" something that is not been a practice in city government for a long, long time

0 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Escapee

Dec-04-13 12:27 PM

Thank you foreveratownie. At least the new positions were advertised. Does anyone know if the new hires have family already working for the city?

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Butterfield

Dec-04-13 12:15 PM

Yeah Rumblefish, because your opinion is so godly that no one could possibly have one that differs without them having a personal stake in it. Get off your high horse.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 12:11 PM

one would think that those in favor of the hires, have a personal stake in this, and we don't mean "for the betterment of the children" and while your at it keep those disagrees coming, simply because we are not swayed by " bogus popularity polls"

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

dabegr

Dec-04-13 12:08 PM

This is just a symptom of the problems at city hall. Dolce ran on doing things differently, when he actually has increased the problems. Full time attorney, additional clerk position, additional positions in development office, paying part time people for holidays, $450k mistake in budget, making fiscal affairs full time in 2014, the list goes on. Stacy is at least trying, while it seems that Stephanie has now bought in to how well everything is running.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Sveash

Dec-04-13 11:37 AM

Its also pretty funny that everyone is so on top of everything that they are confusing Stacy Szukala with Stephanie Kiyak.

9 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Sveash

Dec-04-13 11:33 AM

Numbers, numbers, numbers...If you want them so bad, have you actually tried to reach out to the City to see if someone could provide them? If you read the budget and it is on the website, there are numbers for this program included, including these six positions. Why didn't any of the council people catch that? They supposedly review the budget line by line as part of a public meeting.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

foreveratownie

Dec-04-13 10:36 AM

Escapee, turn over to the Classified section of the Observer and check out the advertisement for the positions. I know I saw it in there a few days ago.

9 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

225522

Dec-04-13 10:30 AM

Stacy...a voice in the wilderness. Keep it up. By the mayor and/or the rec department being ready to provide the numbers this would not develop as it has. Or during the budget reviews the rec dept. should have "blown their own horn" by noting the improvements for next year and how it pays for itself. Thomas Paine 1776 "Common sense is not so common".

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Escapee

Dec-04-13 10:30 AM

I wonder when the open application period for these jobs occurs, or if the hiring is determined based on a nepotism scoring process.

3 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Dec-04-13 10:15 AM

Dolce fiddles while Dunkirk burns!!!

3 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

commentor

Dec-04-13 10:13 AM

Butterfield you also forgot to include the cost of the utilities. There are a number of school sports and hockey. This should satisfy youth activities. Plus there are different clubs in school also. The City needs to publish the "true" figures, cost and income, at the end of the three months. They should also post the number of participants.

1 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 10:09 AM

seeing that Buterfield, Shofuh, BrownEyedDevil, Sveash, and any other commenter who favor this spending should cover the cost between them, after all "it's for the children"

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 9:58 AM

numbers, numbers, we want numbers, maybe the council woman should have taken her shoe off, banged it on the table and uttered these words, as for leaf pick up, Teflon Tony has a explanation or excuse for task not being completed, always has, always will......................................................................

2 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DarkStar

Dec-04-13 9:46 AM

Sveash,

So where do you draw the line? Taxes and spending out of hand in Dunkirk, and if they can't cut the small expenses they will surely never cut the large ones.

Also even if you have never had a fire or called the police you still benefit from their existence, it just a matter of if local departments are cost effective.

Butterfield,

So if the program is bring in so much money shouldn't the figures be easily obtainable, and in fact shouldn't publishing them be required?

I have no problem if the city wants to run the program and have it pay for itself. Sure it would need seed money at first but after that it should be paid for by those who use it and not by the already overtaxed property owners.

2 Agrees | 10 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rumblefish

Dec-04-13 9:09 AM

all this chatter about revenue being brought into offset spending for staff program, yet we fail to see any mention on what that projected figure is, how about numbers to back up position, wait what are we thinking , we forgot, noting in this city is done with a full disclosed plan, months from now or never the rest of the details will or will not come to life, give it (2) weeks and this will be forgotten and replaced by another half explained venture, as for voting let us remind everyone, last election all ran unopposed, and this is an example of what you get when that happens

1 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

hadenough

Dec-04-13 8:58 AM

What is in that cup? Kool Aid. Your spending $12,000 for a four month program. Then summer rolls around and the city hires another 25 part timers to do the work of the city employees. It seems that the possibility of reduced tax revenue from NRG closing has no effect on the thought process of city officials. Kayak is correct in asking these questions. Seems she is the only council member who knows what's going on. Dunkirk is on a down hill slide and no one seems to care. How pitiful.

2 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Butterfield

Dec-04-13 8:43 AM

Darkstar,

If you pay attention to the world around you and read the observer articles (and they have a nifty search tool if your memory *****) you will see the City pays $200 a month for the facility and the insurance is covered under their normal policy.

So add another $600. So, you are arguing over $12,000 (just over $1 per resident) when the City wastes that amount of money every day.

Not including the money they bring in on programs, and if you ever used it you would know they bring in quite a bit of money and is almost always rented.

I will gladly pay my portion ($5, $1 for each member of my family) and I am a cheapskate republican.

13 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Sveash

Dec-04-13 8:35 AM

Darkstar, why should the taxpayers pay for anything? Im not a boater, should taxpayers have to pay for a boat launch or a pier? I have never called the police and have never had a fire, why should I have to pay for that? I am not a skateboarder, why does the city pay for that? I don't utilize sidewalks, why do we pay for them? I dont use the pavilions at the point, City should just get rid of them. I dont use the senior center, the library, the historical museum or many of the other amentities the City helps pay for. I for one am happy to pay taxes for these things because it makes our city a better place, even if I dont use them.

17 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 32 comments Show More 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