HT Artvoice & Rus Thompson

The New York Post is holding an “I Love NY” video contest, so please vote for this entry by Ben Porcari:

I Love New York - video powered by Metacafe

God almighty, someone remind me again why we maintain a Thruway Authority again?

HT Bill

People leaving, energy prices staggering, taxes higher than average, and it’s only now - at the doors of a crisis - that action is going to be taken. Governor Paterson estimates a $6.4 billion deficit for 2009 - 2010, and in the middle of an election year, he’s calling the state legislature back in mid-August to take a break from chicken BBQs and do some work.

Not just any work, but the kind of work that New York legislators are loath to do. They’re going to have to make extraordinarily tough choices with respect to spending and borrowing - the sorts of choices that piss of a great many of their special interest constituents.

But what I’d like our legislature to remember is that they work for all of us. Not for SEIU, not for NYSUT, not for CSEA, but for every single New Yorker. They work for you and me, and they have hitherto tended to abandoned their responsibility to the population at-large in favor of the big donors and powerful lobbies. Lax oversight and regulation of lobbying means that Joe Bruno can go to work as a lobbyist - he can’t lobby the legislature, but the governor’s door is open.

So, I don’t want to hear that such-and-such special interest is going to go ballistic over cuts that are desperately needed to fix what’s broken. I want to hear that these people who keep getting re-elected over and over again are making the hard choices and decisions that they supposedly get elected to make.

The New York Post is reporting that Governor Paterson has “passion” of his own. He’s set to scare the holy bejeezus out of a lot of us with this:

Gov. Paterson, convinced the state faces its worst fiscal crisis since the mid-1970s, will deliver the grim news in an unprecedented special address to New Yorkers as soon as tomorrow night, The Post has learned.

The governor’s address - which his aides hope will be televised by public and cable news stations - will say that plunging state revenues will force painful cuts in state services, necessitate a reduction in the state work force, possibly through layoffs, and require other difficult economic measures, source said.

Paterson is also expected to announce that he’s ordered state agencies to slash spending beyond the relatively modest 3.3 percent cuts he ordered in late spring.

He may also call a special session of the Legislature to propose reducing some of the record-high levels of spending that were approved as part of the state’s new budget in April.

“The situation is worse than anyone realizes,” said a source close to Paterson.

“The governor has said he’s tired of the state going from deficit to deficit, spending like it has a credit card that never has to be paid, and that he’s prepared to take action,” the source said.

Paterson in recent days has huddled with budget planning officials from the administrations of former Govs. Mario Cuomo and Hugh Carey “to get their ideas on how to manage a fiscal crisis,” the source said.

It would have been better had cuts been able to be done in a systematic, planned fashion, rather than as a panicky reaction to reality, but I give Paterson credit for this:

The governor has said he’s tired of the state going from deficit to deficit, spending like it has a credit card that never has to be paid, and that he’s prepared to take action

Those just might be the most profound words said by a New York State politician in the last decade or generation. I’m wishing the governor a lot of luck with this.

Joe Bruno, that is.

He was on the state payroll for 39 years, and his base legislative salary was $79,500. But you will be financing his retirement with an annual pension of $95,000, based on 41.7 years of pension credits.

How’s that?

Well, the pension calculation also takes into account an additional “stipend” of $41,000 he got as majority leader. And he gets an extra two years of pension credits as a Tier 1 system worker qualified for Section 80-a benefits for legislative employees who began before July 1, 1973 under a law that somehow got through the Senate in 2000 — while Joe Bruno was majority leader.

So, he passed a law that approved more money for him.

To eject Dale Volker from the State Senate this November.

The Senecas are being quite clever with respect to Judge Skretny’s Monday ruling that the Senecas could not legally operate Class III gaming on Michigan Avenue.

They’re going to keep it open, and keep building the new casino, until the matter has been “finally resolved”, which means that it’s been decided by the Supreme Court, or by the 2nd Circuit and the Supreme Court declines to hear the case.

Since the Senecas aren’t a party to the lawsuit that led to Skretny’s ruling, they aren’t immediately required to do anything about it. Either the Justice Department or some other federal law enforcement branch will order the Senecas to shut down, or else someone will go to court and seek an injunction. To do that, they’d have to prove that there is an imminent threat of irreversible harm for which money damages would be inadequate. I don’t think the casino meets those criteria. After all, if the final decision of the courts is that the casino is illegal and must shut down, then all the Senecas have to do is lock the doors; the “harm” is reversible.

Personally, I do not at all like the idea of sovereign Seneca exclaves being carved out of urban property so that Class III gaming might take place there in contravention of the New York State Constitution. I would much rather that State law be changed to permit legal gambling under specific circumstances and regulations, which would keep the property on the tax rolls. I would much rather that the people of Buffalo and Niagara Falls and Salamanca at least had a direct hand in approving or disapproving casino gaming in their cities via referendum. I would much rather that the deal with the Senecas had been made directly between the Nation and the municipalities, so that the money received by the host community could have been maximized beyond the current fraction of a fraction of slot revenues that Pataki negotiated.

But Skretny’s decision is that the exclave-carving was perfectly legal and remains in place. So, my opinion on that issue is worthless, pending appeal. Assuming that the exclave is maintained, and assuming that the Senecas go back to the drawing board pending appeal and are able to finagle a way to maintain the Buffalo casino (which I fully expect them to do), then I hope they build something glorious that will help transform the Cobblestone and Canal Side areas into fantastic tourism destinations.

I want that Casino to encourage - not discourage - pedestrian traffic to and from the building so that it’s less of a fortress and becomes part of the fabric of that area.

The Fallsview Casino in Niagara Falls is an example of a casino project that is integrated into its surroundings, offering a park overlooking the Falls, shopping, improved pedestrian access, and parking that is ample yet unobtrusive.

Responsible New York is just the latest effort by someone fed up with New York’s mediocrity and nonsense to try to shake things up. In this case, however, it’s being funded with $5 million from a billionaire, so there’s a lot more where that five mill came from.

It’s been reported that the new Responsible New York PAC will attempt to raise/spend/donate $1,000,000 for candidates “Baby” Joe Mesi and Kathy Konst in their bids to be elected to State Senate.

So long as Responsible New York works independently from the campaigns, that very well might happen. Here, however, Golisano has already met with Konst privately, and Golisano’s political guru, Steve Pigeon, is also very closely connected with Mesi, so the issue of coordination between the PAC and the campaign becomes an issue that will, no doubt, be decided by Judge Makowski. (He always seems to get these types of cases).

If the PAC spends more than $6,000 on the primary campaign and/or $9,500 on the general for, e.g., Mesi, you can bet that Iannello or Ward will sue. They’ll argue that there is improper coordination and that the PAC should be limited to those maximum amounts. Anything more would require the expenditure to be “independent of the candidate or his agents”, and no one from a campaign could “authorize, request, suggest, foster or cooperate in any such activity”.

Another problem arises from another section of the election law:

14-116

8. Except as may otherwise be provided for a candidate and his family, no person may contribute, loan or guarantee in excess of one hundred fifty thousand dollars within the state in connection with the nomination or election of persons to state and local public offices and party positions within the state of New York in any one calendar year. For the purposes of this subdivision “loan” or “guarantee” shall mean a loan or guarantee which is not repaid or discharged in the calendar year in which it is made.

Golisano’s goals for change in Albany are shared by many, especially in upstate and western New York. The problem is that laws are designed specifically to prevent the extraordinarily wealthy from having an unfair advantage in elections, unless they themselves are running.

Late yesterday, it was reported that Golisano’s plans have, therefore, changed…

Trying to avoid the legal restrictions of a political action committee, Golisano plans to amend his filing with the state Board of Elections to create a different kind of entity that will enable him to spend unlimited amounts for or against - but not on behalf of - state legislative candidates, according to his top advisor Steve Pigeon.

Instead of a PAC, Golisano will create an unauthorized multi-candidate political committee, which will act independently of all candidates (and still be called Responsible New York), Pigeon said. This committee will not make any direct contributions.

The Golisano camp had already filed paperwork with the state yesterday to create the PAC he unveiled this morning and said he would seed with $5 million….

…But, Brehm said, a political committee that is independent and not authorized by any particular campaign can spend whatever it wishes on ads, mailings, and signs.

Such committees, which deal with mandated free speech requirements, merely have to register what candidates they are oppose or support and how much it has taken in and spent.

According to Pigeon, Golisano will still establish a PAC called People for Responsible New York, which will accept donations up to $100 and will make campaign donations (adhering to the existing campaign finance limits) to candidates Golisano is supporting.

One thing that is not clear is whether the fact that Golisano has already spoken to some candidates, plans to have candidates fill out questionnaires and might meet with them after they do so would disqualify him legally from claiming his committee is independent and unauthorized.

Brehem did not have an immediate answer.

Golisano and Pigeon maintain they are merely seeking out the viewpoints of candidates, but will be working alone in deciding whom to back and how to spend Golisano’s money.

So, there ya go.

The New York Post publishes an op-ed piece by the Manhattan Institute’s EJ McMahon. New York’s decline is Nelson Rockefeller’s fault. Discuss.

If a neglectful owner like Robert Freudenheim gets slapped with a city lawsuit for permitting his property to crumble and become a public nuisance, why isn’t a neglectful owner like the City of Buffalo held accountable for maintaining its properties at some basic, limited nature?

David Torke has been documenting city-owned blight for years, and it’s a problem that has no easy solution. The city doesn’t have the money to demolish them all, and it probably doesn’t have the money, manpower, or political will to cut lawns and secure the properties.

A few weeks ago, Sam Hoyt’s land banking bill passed the state Assembly and Senate, and is awaiting Governor Paterson’s signature. If signed, it could provide at least part of the answer. The bill would create an Erie County land bank, which Buffalo could opt to join (and hopefully would). A land bank acquires and demolishes the vacant structures, and then holds onto the land until such time as a reasonable redevelopment project is proposed to it.

Local housing advocates have pushed the idea of a countywide land bank for years. They point to Flint, Mich., as the best example of its success in curtailing blight and stabilizing neighborhoods.

“The newly passed land bank legislation, based on highly regarded best-practice models, adds a powerful tool for New York’s distressed areas,” said Michael Clarke of the Local Initiatives Support Corp. in Buffalo, a nonprofit group at the forefront of the vacant housing issue.

In Flint, the county-run land bank has become the city’s biggest landowner and the primary vehicle for putting its huge inventory of housing back into productive use.

The land bank’s primary job is acquisition and demolition, but it doubles as a redevelopment authority.

Since Sam Hoyt and Byron Brown don’t get along, the city isn’t saying it would join a regional land bank, but may seek to get its own bill in Albany. Perhaps the city might just go with the regional approach, as it seems to make perfect sense given that the vacancy problem is no longer just limited to city limits, and the last thing we need is two land banks when one will do just fine. You can learn more about the Flint program at its website.

Senate President Joe Bruno has decided not to seek re-election this fall.

Gee, and not a moment too soon.

According to Politics on the Hudson, he says, “it is time for me to move on with my life”. Newsday quotes him as having said, “enough is enough.” Capitol Confidential has his full annoucement, and Bruno says, “it’s time to move on.”

But, timing in life is everything. While there may never be a good time to make these kinds of life decisions, I have decided that it is time for me to move on with my life.

Perhaps Senator Bruno has seen which way the wind is blowing, and realizes he probably won’t be majority leader next January. Either way, there’ll be a new person with the other two in the room who make all the decisions in the excuse for representative democracy that is the State of New York.

Via Capitol Confidential, comes this video of a news conference that Governor David Paterson held yesterday with Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi and various taxpayer activists.

The Suozzi Commission recently concluded that, among other things, a property/school tax cap is necessary to help ease New Yorkers’ local tax burden, which is significantly higher than the national average. Although opposed vehemently by exactly whom you’d expect, the vast majority of New Yorkers support it. Suozzi reminded Paterson of that fact in a humorous fashion as the two of them essentially declared political war on opponents.

The state comptroller has a new website:

New Yorkers have a right to know how their tax dollars are spent. Open Book New York is a project by the Office of the State Comptroller that gives taxpayers unprecedented access to the financial information of State government.

Easy-to-use online search tools identify spending for 113 State agencies and public authorities and display more than 60,000 State contracts. These tools will help you find out how much state government spends on everything from travel and employees’ salaries to telephones and consultants. You can also search State contracts in real time to see who is doing business with the State.

The long crawl towards Albany transparency continues apace.

The small aircraft hanger that passes for a casino in Buffalo’s cobblestone district has shat out its first single-digit percentage payout from slot revenue that goes to the host community.

Buffalo’s the host community, right?

Or is it the great County of Erie?

Or both?

The payout is $700,000 whole, entire dollars. That buys less than 7,000 barrels of light crude. Or something.

In any event, as the Buffalo News indicates, this is going to be a battle:

The money will be staying in Albany for the foreseeable future because the city and county cannot agree on a formula to split it up.

City Hall and County Hall have staked conflicting claims on the revenues, a pot of money from slot machines that’s expected to swell to as much as $7 million annually when the permanent Buffalo casino opens in 2010.

“There’s no question in my mind that the city should get 100 percent of those revenues,” said Mayor Byron W. Brown, who makes a case for the state-mandated “host community” share to flow entirely to Buffalo.

“The casino is located in Buffalo. The city provides all the police support services and infrastructure,” Brown said. “The intent of the 2002 gaming compact between the Seneca Nation and New York State was to aid weak communities, like Buffalo, with those casino revenues.”

But County Executive Chris Collins is equally adamant about spliting the payments right down the middle.

“I’m still thinking a 50/50 split between the city and county is the right formula,” Collins said.

While the casino is situated in Buffalo, it’s a regional asset, the county executive said.

Fighting over crumbs. What a crap deal this was, and all the politicians who were associated with its negotiation should be ashamed. Ceding territory to a foreign entity in the middle of Buffalo? Taking an entire swath of land off the property tax roll in order to get a tiny percentage of slot revenue (and slot revenue only - not tables). They should have held a referendum and let the people decide whether they wanted this. Or better yet, they could have proposed lifting the idiotic, hypocritical ban on Class III Casino Gaming through New York’s constitutional process. We have casino gaming at racetracks, and we have the lottery, and we have Keno, and we have all sorts of manifestations of gambling that to ban proper casino gambling has become just silly.

The thing is - all of this was predictable and I predicted it. Niagara Falls and Niagara County underwent the same nonsense when the first casino cash made its way down the pipeline, and ne’er-do-well Mayor Anello threatened to lead a picket over it.

I think that the intent was for the city to be the “host community” and to reap the entire benefit of the casino. The county is overreaching here and should take a step back.

Or something.

Remember how Governor “black socks” Spitzer got into it with Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno? They feuded for practically the entirety of Spitzer’s reign, because the governor figured that by bringing Bruno down, he could push his agenda through. Hence “troopergate”.

Paterson isn’t spying on Sheldon Silver - at least, not that we know of. But they aren’t getting along at all, and that’s good and bad.

The insiders said Silver’s resistance to Paterson’s proposals are largely rooted in the unwillingness of lawmakers, who must face voters in November, to back spending restraints that are bitterly opposed by the powerful public-employee unions.

“[Former Gov. Eliot] Spitzer couldn’t figure out how to work with the Legislature and neither can Paterson. How do you ask Shelly to do something a few weeks before the end of the session that will damage his members in November?” asked a senior state official.

It’s good because Sheldon Silver needs standing up to. It’s bad because if Sheldon Silver has a sniffle, the rest of New York State gets SARS.

From Politics on the Hudson:

[T]he state Commission on Property Tax Reform, headed by Nassau County executive Thomas Suozzi, is recommending a school property-tax cap of 4 percent annual growth, tying property taxes to incomes (called a circuit breaker) and relieving schools of state and local mandates.

“There are only three options to address the ever increasing cost burden of the New York State education system: 1) decrease expenses (or at least decrease the rate of growth), 2) increase state aid, or 3) increase property taxes,” the report reads.

“These options involve hard choices, but this Commission concludes that, regardless of any other factors, it must be a priority to limit property tax increases above a capped amount.”

The entire - yet preliminary - report is here (.pdf).

It’s 112 pages long, so no I haven’t read the whole thing yet. But this stood out within the first few pages:

High property taxes have the most negative impact on low and moderate income working families, seniors on fixed incomes, and small business owners, who must shoulder this burden regardless of their ability to pay. Whether your concern is decreasing education costs, or increasing education spending, or addressing inequities in school funding, or improving programs, virtually all agree the answer cannot be to continue to increase property taxes at the current rate. The rate of increase in property taxes over recent years is unsustainable, and simply unfair to those who cannot afford to pay.

and

Expenses are high. New York schools outside of New York City spend more per student than any state in the nation – an estimated $18,768 in 2008-20091. New York’s per student spending is more than 50 percent above the national average. New York is a proud state with a progressive history and a social compact devoted to improving the quality of life for all New Yorkers. Generations of New York’s leaders, committed to maintaining its status as a national model of social responsibility, have adopted laws and regulations that require local school districts and local governments to provide certain functions in certain ways. The unintended consequence is government that is very expensive. The thorny challenge is to help school districts and other local
governments reduce these expenses, while remaining faithful to our social compact.

State aid as a percentage of total cost is below the national average. It must be noted that New York State spends a great deal on public education, well above the national average. In fact, the State has dramatically increased spending over the past several years and intends to do even more over the next several years, which the Commission applauds. However, the State’s contribution represents, as a percentage of the total cost, only 43 percent, which is below the national average of 47 percent.

In addition to the property tax cap on the rate of growth and the “STAR Circuit Breaker”, which ties STAR property tax relief to one’s ability to pay, the commission suggests changing state mandates that help drive up the cost of education throughout the state, including salaries, pension, and health care costs.

Take a look at the report and report your thoughts in comments. This might be one of the most significant reform efforts in the state in decades. Is it enough? Is it a good start? Will it help?

Good? That it’s being considered at all, and some solutions are being proposed. Bad? I don’t really know. I’m mostly concerned that it’s a Spongebob Band-Aid being placed over a gaping wound.

The other day, Governor Paterson declared that New York would recognize gay marriages performed in Canada, Massachusetts, and California.

Naturally, some are up in arms about it. Outgoing crap Congressman Tom Reynolds said,

This is a terrible decision, directed in a secretive and abusive manner, designed to circumvent any sort of public hearing or comment from the New York people. The Governor should full well know the rightful role and prerogative the legislature has in the rule of law in this matter.

Therefore, I am calling on the Governor to suspend this ill-advised executive directive. I intend to call the Catholic Conference, the New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, legislative leaders and other interested parties to assist in looking at the options available in helping cease and desist the Governor’s directive.

Frankly, this is yet another example of a New York Governor abusing his power to disregard the legislature, the rule of law and most importantly the people of New York. Whether it is trying to issue drivers’ licenses to illegal immigrants or attempting to recognize gay marriages this pattern of circumventing the legislature and the will of the New York people is not only troubling but should not be recognized by the legislative or judicial branch or the public as a whole.

Why?

I mean, why not just consider my Massachusetts marriage invalid in New York State, too? It was entered into outside the purview of New York statute and law, after all.

I understand that there are people who are opposed to this quite strenuously on a variety of grounds. Primary among them is religion. But when you subtract relgion from the argument, what are you left with? What is the reason why we shouldn’t just let gay people get married to each other? Does it really cheapen or weaken heterosexual marriage? Then ban divorce. Is it really equal to letting pedophiles marry kids, or letting people marry pets? Of course not, and it’s just idiotic to suggest that.

Watch liberal pinko commie Bill O’Reilly tackle the issue with a gay marriage opponent:

UPDATE: There’s a debate going on in comments, where some are alleging that Paterson’s directive to state agencies that they recognize same-sex unions entered into legally out-of-state is an improper usurpation of democracy and the rule of law. Naturally, I disagree strenuously.

But I wanted to add that I listened to Paterson’s statement on this issue just now, and to his rationale. For instance, New York State has no such thing as “common-law marriage”, but other states do. We have traditionally recognized the validity of those unions when those couples come to New York.

Furthermore, Paterson’s order is based on a February 1st 4th Appellate Division decision, (penned by Republican Supreme Court Justice Erin Peradotto), in the case of Martinez v. County of Monroe, linked to here. (.pdf) The key point and rationale:

For well over a century, New York has recognized marriages solemnized outside of New York unless they fall into two categories of exception: (1) marriage, the recognition of which is prohibited by the “positive law” of New York and (2) marriages involving incest or polygamy, both of which fall within the prohibitions of “natural law” (Matter of May, 305 NY 486, 491; see Moore v Hegeman, 92 NY 521, 524; Thorp v Thorp, 90 NY 602, 605; see generally Van Voorhis v Brintnall, 86 NY 18, 24-26). Thus, if a marriage is valid in the place where it was entered, “it is to be recognized as such in the courts of this State, unless contrary to the prohibitions of natural law or the express prohibitions of a statute” (Moore, 92 NY at 524; see also Thorp, 90 NY at 606; Van Voorhis, 86 NY at 25-26). Under that “marriage-recognition” rule, New York has recognized a marriage between an uncle and his niece “by the half blood” (May, 305 NY at 488), common-law marriages valid under the laws of other states (see Matter of Mott v Duncan Petroleum Trans., 51 NY2d 289, 292-293), a marriage valid under the law of the Province of Ontario, Canada of a man and a woman both under the age of 18 (see Donohue v Donohue, 63 Misc 111, 112-113), and a “proxy marriage” valid in the District of Columbia (Fernandes v Fernandes, 275 App Div 777), all of which would have been invalid if solemnized in New York.

We conclude that plaintiff’s marriage does not fall within either of the two exceptions to the marriage-recognition rule. “[A]bsent any New York statute expressing clearly the Legislature’s intent to regulate within this State marriages of its domiciliaries solemnized abroad, there is no positive law in this jurisdiction” to prohibit recognition of a marriage that would have been invalid if solemnized in New York (May, 305 NY at 493 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see also Van Voorhis, 86 NY at 37). The Legislature has not enacted legislation to prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriages validly entered into outside of New York, and we thus conclude that the positive law exception to the general rule of foreign marriage recognition is not applicable in this case.

(Emphasis added.) So, as you can see, there is not only legal precedent, but legal justification and rationale for what Paterson did, which is merely to implement the holding of the 4th Department across all state agencies and entities.

That’s how a democracy works.

From another local website, Republican County Legislator, and candidate for SD-61 Michael Ranzenhofer writes:

Michael Ranzenhofer (R), a veteran of 19 years as a county legislator from Amherst, is off and running as the expected Republican candidate for the State Senate seat being vacated by retiring Mary Lou Rath.

“Spending is out of control in Albany,” said Ranzenhofer in a telephone interview … “My platform will be about cutting spending, reducing taxes, and eliminating the terribly burdensome regulations that drive up the cost of doing business in this state.”

As a county lawmaker, Ranzenhofer says he never voted for a tax increase. The lawyer/legislator also said he has tried to cut wasteful and unnecessary spending, pushed for road and bridge repairs, and helped restore the ranks of volunteer fire fighters by offering an education incentive similar to what is offered by the military for years served. The “V-Fire” program allows for fire fighters with at least five years experience to become eligible for free education at Erie Community College.

He never voted for a tax increase, and he didn’t do a whole lot to battle spending increases. He was instrumental in promoting the Giambra budgets that led to fiscal disaster. He is loath to lend any support to rank-and-file county workers, but went along with every single request for a variable minimum put forth by Giambra and Collins (a variable minimum is a way for the government to give a candidate for an appointed county job years’ worth of seniority on day one - and an instant pay raise).

He never voted for a tax increase, but one of the gimmicks he pushed for time and time again throughout his time on the legislature was for a gas tax holiday. Unfortunately, gas taxes happen to pay for road maintenance, and if one was to ask his constituents on Tonawanda Creek Road in Clarence whether that road has properly been maintained, I think they’d give you an earful. The road slid into the creek years ago, and hasn’t yet been fixed.

As for the county budget crisis of a few years ago, Ranzenhofer says he stood up against the political establishment and the power brokers by refusing to go along with the one percent sales tax increase without accompanying spending cuts.

“I insisted we must have cuts to go with tax increases, and frankly many people backed away [from me],” says Ranzenhofer. “But I held fast that we can’t do business this way and I was the first legislator to favor a control board because no information about our finances was forthcoming from the county executive’s office. I thought we needed a control board to make sure fiscal discipline was re-established.”

Think about that for a second there. He had been in the legislature for about 16 years before the budget crisis came down the pike, and he was the majority leader during the run-up to it. He was supposed to be that control board - the legislature is a check on the executive’s power, yet Ranzenhofer and the other Republicans in the legislature behaved as if it was a rubber stamp for anything and everything Giambra wanted.

That led to a $200 million budget deficit that had to be plugged.

Yes, he’s made noise about spending cuts, but when the budget crisis was in full effect, and legislators met with Giambra during late-night and weekend sessions to figure out what would get cut, and by how much, Ranzenhofer was absent. It’s so easy and convenient to bleat on about how we need to find $200 million in spending cuts.

But when the hard work came along to figure out where the cuts would be made, he let others do the work and take the heat.

He claims to want to work bipartisanly, yet he has no record on which to run, and no evidence of bipartisanship exists there.

In essence, Ranzenhofer is saying that the county needed the hard control board to clean up what was partly his own mess.

Now that the county has a control board, which currently is at odds with the county executive over borrowing for capital improvements, Ranzenhofer says he still favors a hard board “but I think the time will come where they can go from hard to soft where in the past I felt a hard board was essential.”

Ranzenhofer says if elected to the 61st District seat, which includes the city of Tonawanda, Town of Tonawanda, Amherst, Clarence, Newstead, and all of Genesee County, he will work in a bipartisan fashion to get things done.

Republicans are expected to put plenty of resources behind Ranzenhofer’s bid to keep the seat in the GOP aisle, given the very slim majority Republicans hold in the Senate.

For his part, Ranzenhofer says, “I think the importance [of the seat] is that if it goes from the Republican side to the Democratic side, it could change the over-all balance of power in the state and we would, in effect, have one-party rule which includes the governor. Taxes would skyrocket and spending would go way up. We would also see a very liberal fiscal and social agenda.”

One would hope that the importance of the seat is to represent one’s constituents in Albany. One would hope that the importance of the seat in this day and age is to work for change and reform in a dysfunctional state legislature.

But then, we’re talking about the guy who voted against the creation of the County Charter Revision Commission, so we’re unlikely to see any push for reform from him.

Spending went way up under Giambra and the Republican county legislature.

Ranzenhofer, who said he is also seeking minor party backing, says he is out every night, going from place to place throughout the district, talking to one and all about his candidacy.

He’s been in the County Legislature since 1989. The question that he should be asked over and over again: What is your record?

Hand it to him for one thing - he sure has vast experience dealing with dysfunctional governmental entities.

Yes, it’s true that New York is one state; geographically and to a degree politically.

Economically, though, there’s a distinct difference between upstate and downstate; between east and west. The upstate economy is saddled with fail. Whether it’s taxes higher than that of neighboring states, regulations that are too onerous, or a general business unfriendliness, there’s really no compelling reason why a company might locate in Utica or Rochester or Buffalo when Erie and Toledo and Columbus are also available.

I’ve said before many times that, to compete, all of upstate should be a massive empire zone. That hasn’t happened. But under former governor Spitzer, at least upstate had a dedicated upstate economic “czar” named Dan Gundersen. Not only that, but his office was going to be based in Buffalo.

Governor Paterson is considering scrapping the downstate/upstate economic czars. Upstate business leaders and the heads of Unshackle Upstate aren’t happy, and they hope that - if this does happen - that Gundersen become the head of the united Empire State Development Corp.

I think that it’s a given that, when forced into competition, downstate interests will prevail over upstate interests, and losing a dedicated advocate for upstate business development is a massive step backwards.

Upstate New York of the 2000s is not unlike the eastern Europe of the 1990s. It needs Sachsian shock therapy. It needs people to fight for it. It needs fundamental change in the way government works.

All I know is that, Albania and Slovakia have more robust economies than Western New York.

UPDATE: Read what In Java, Literally has to say. NYCO notes this Rochester D&C article alleging that Gundersen is very loosey-goosey with his state plastic.