Back To The Drawing Board

Carlaw you are mistaken. Only 9 voted not to sell, 3 in the south and 6 in the north. The 6 in the north voted as their constituents wished them to vote, the 3 in the south did not.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

16 Legislators voted not to sell to this nursing home operator, not just Whitney, Hoyer and Cornell. Most of them did so because their constituency in the N County support the home.

0 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

To the employees of the county home, with a new owner, you will get an immediate raise of what ever the union has been taking from you. Thats cash in your pocket. You will not have to keep guessing if you will have a job. Job positions at the home will expand and give you more opportunity for advancement which means more cash for you.

A win win for everyone.

7 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

So the.coffee shop talk is that the legislature voted this deal down, because the company that made the offer.is kinda shady, and untrustworthy. However if someone more reputable came along, thry would sell in a heatbeat!

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

So the.coffee shop talk is that the legislature voted this deal down, because the company that made the offer.is kinda shady, and untrustworthy. However if someone more reputable came along, thry would sell in a heatbeat!

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Leejones, your right,

I believe its a great opportunity for the employees, patients, taxpayers, nys taxes, fed taxes, local budgets. A win win for everyone. A new owner can assure long term employment.

5 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Too bad the county home employees who are justly worried about their jobs do not understand that the greatest threat is the status quo! I hope they remember who led them down that path!!!!

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Hoyer, cornell and whitney are three that voted not to advance and promote a bigger and better home for the patients that would have added new jobs.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

What legislators voted yes or no????? Don't see it reported anywhere.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Just think what the county home COULD be, it could offer additional services to the elderly that are currently there plus new additional patients on a out patient basis plus assisted living patients( adding services means adding building and construction jobs) all bringing cash into chautauqua county. The additional services will mean new additional jobs at the home. Bringing the property onto the taxable role would guarantee much needed funds for the kids schools in dunkirk and could help avoid layoffs. The 16 million plus dollars for the sale price could help the poor via mandated social programs, the income from the new owners will be taxed at the state and fed levels. And us chautauqua county taxpayers can save over 3 million in tax subsidies.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The only way the county home can stay open is to sell it.

And id believe the actual budget and revenues quoted by edwards long before id believe sammie the blogger.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

HOW ABOUT BACK TO THE VOTING BOOTH?*******DEMS AT WORK.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Edwards keeps quite a bit of information from all of you. Do your homework and maybe you won't be so quick to agree with him. By believing everything he says and the pj reports you show your ignroance.

1 Agrees | 12 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

whitney is nothing more than a union mob boss, He wont get my vote and he barely won his last election.

The unity to sell the home is far beyond anything Ive seen.

When the union wants to take on the taxpayer, good luck....

12 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Awwwww, the kick-the-poor-and-old 'cause they can't fight back crowd all got their panties in a wad 'cause their hero couldn't sell his bad deal with a questionable buyer to the legislature. Poor babies.

2 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Sell the Home ! and Whitney, your not getting my vote next time around.

8 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Retoric- we stop the sale of the CCH, and put more restrictions on Fairmount Ave so no viable business wants to come, and then we say "are the signs too bright"? Brighter than some who represent us!

10 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

This is the only home in the county that is not privately owned and they are doing fine.

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

We are referring to the elderly people who built our community. This is not WalMart. It is not a business. The Chautauqua County Home is and essential public service. With this kind of thinking, our county will be selling off the schools, the water and the local police....

3 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Just 1 vote short, getting rid of cornell or whitney or hoyer will get the job done. Then the county home can be disposed of. The only option may be closing down the home and transferring the patients to existing homes in the county.

If you see hoyer, cornell or whitney, they should be reminded of their vote if you dissagree.

10 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Do it the oldfashoned way. Send cousin viney up to mayville for a visit

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

From the CGR report "Some argue that while the Home is needed and must be sustained, it is not necessarily the role of the County to own and perate it, especially when there is an existing competitive market, and that a private operator may be able to institute efficiencies and various modifications that would reduce costs and improve services.Under all foreseeable scenarios, CCH will require some level of County taxpayer support in the future."

6 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

How imbecile...we should just get out a countdown clock for the day when the home closes down in a year and a half...

8 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Solve the real problem: Mismanagement by the county executive is the reason why a financially stable, essential public facility has been undermined. Who is checking the numbers Edwards misrepresents? Implementation of proposed cost cuts and revenue enhancements, (many offered by the union) would allow the home to remain part of the commons that is fast disappearing to Big Business.

3 Agrees | 15 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

The CCH only has a "surplus" because it received $14.6M in IGT funding (tax dollars) in the last 5 years. The home does NOT have a $5M fund balance and the $2M in savings offered by CSEA over the next five years will reduce the losses to $14M as the home is losing over $3M per year.

15 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »