Skip to main content

St. Nick's closing its doors

By Brian Hillabush

Saint Nicholas Social Club president Michael Rimmer wrote a letter to the editor in The Daily News in early December saying that he planned on the club remaining open for another 65 years.

But, after many decades of being a meeting place for friends and a place for social groups to gather, St. Nick's will be closing its doors for good on Monday.

Rimmer expressed concern but said the club was trying its best to stay open in a June 5 story on The Batavian. He talked about how the poor economy has hurt many local businesses.

The rumors that have been passed around for many months are finally becoming true, adding yet another sad chapter that is the current state of Batavia.

St. Nick's will stay open for Monday night's Lions Club meeting and then will be shutting down. The Lions have been meeting at the club for many years and are searching for a new meeting place.

John Roach

While it is sad another business is now gone, I want to hear from Councilman Ferrando. He got them thousands of dollars in city bail out money and is/was on the Board of Directors. Where did our city money go? I think he should tell us.

Aug 24, 2009, 6:39am Permalink
Timothy Paine

John that was a small business loan wasn't it?. Wasn't it was given to them as a loan? "Bail-out money" is a new term and you're just trying to spin it as government corruption and tack it on to todays headlines. The financial problems the club has endured have been in the news and everyone knows about it. Nice job trying to turn a sad situation into political fodder for your hack-attack agenda. It is sad to see another entity succumb to this economy, especially when it has such a rich history in our community.

Aug 24, 2009, 9:12am Permalink
John Roach

It was a $30,000 loan from the city that was a bail out and they got a $6,000 grant (free) money from the city also. I was agaisnt it from the start, as I have been against any bail out money.

Call it what you want, I would like to see the paper trail where all that money went.

Mr. Ferrando was involved, but you also just went to a fund raiser for him also, so how political is your post?

Aug 24, 2009, 9:54am Permalink
Bea McManis

I'm curious why a private club would qualify for a $30,000 amall business loan. The club was restricted to members except for the meals (no different than other private clubs in the city). I'm surprised that a city loan would go to a "members only" entity.
If they are not-for-profit then I could see them qualifying for a grant.
Yes, the history of the St. Nicholas Society is rich and had it's beginnings at St. Anthony's Church. They met, for years, at St. Anthony's Community Center.
When did it become a small business and how did it qualify for that loan in the first place?

Aug 24, 2009, 10:42am Permalink
Karen Miconi

We've been to a few Grad ,and B-day parties there. I remember Cappy in the kitchen making the sauce, and the servers. Food was good, but the place never seemed to be doing very well. One things for sure, the place holds alot of memories, and I'm sure will be missed. I think if they would have opened their doors to the public, maybe they would have done better.

Aug 24, 2009, 10:57am Permalink
Timothy Paine

"except for the meals"? Doesn't that qualify it as a restaraunt? John, have you ever approached the City on what it takes to get a loan? You think Frank just gave it to them? You have to present a business plan, have a credit check, be approved and put up collateral if needed. It is a big process and not done with a wink and a nod. They must have qualified or they wouldn't have been approved. As far as the fund raiser for Frank, why are you so interested in where my wife takes me to dinner for my birthday? We had a good time and the food was great. It was the first time I've eaten at the track. (yes Dan, the FIRST time). I got a free spin on the wheel and won a $5 free play. Back to the thread. Sometimes businesses still can't make even after in infusion of money. It's sad it had to happen, but let's make sure we can attach some political rhetoric to something when ever possible. This is about a business closing its doors, poeple losing jobs and a place where friends and families have shared memories and fun for years leaving our community. That's what this is about.

Aug 24, 2009, 12:45pm Permalink
Bea McManis

Tim, it was me who made the comment about "except for meals".
I guess I'm curious when it became a small business (restaurant) and not a private club.
The meals, when served to the public, is considered an on-going fund raiser for the club. Generally the wait staff are members of the club or volunteers.
I liked the club. We had many meals there and our family gathered after many funerals.
I'm not questioning the loan, per se, but the designation of the facilty.
I have a difficult time understanding how the city could invest money in a 'private club'.
No different than my confusion about a lady who used to be the postmistress of Lilydale but couldn't live there because she wasn't a psychic. How could the government fund a public post office in a restricted town?
Just the way my mind works.

Aug 24, 2009, 11:59am Permalink
Timothy Paine

I know Bea. Just saying they did serve meals. I just know what it takes to get help from local institutions as far as small business loans go. It's not easy. I don't care who you know, it's a lot of work and you have to be approved by many people. They would have to have had the right credentials and met all the qualifications needed to get a loan.

Aug 24, 2009, 12:42pm Permalink
John Roach

You tell me what's wrong with wanting to know where the money went? There should be records and it was the public's money, right?

It also happended that a leading member of the Board of Directors of the club was also Council President and he is running for reelection. He also had a major say in who approved the loans. Current Council members also questioned the process the "committee", who apprioved the loans, was using. Even the City Manager at the time of the loan said this was not a good idea, but there really wasn't much he could do.

Tim, this has a political tone. Two years ago, when you ran for City Council, you sat with us many times having coffee and said that this was not right. Now, you say its ok. Why?

And Bea is right. This was not a "restaraunt". It was a private, members only club. I could not go in anytime I wanted, only at certain times.

Aug 24, 2009, 12:46pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

John, guess what, it was a loan. It is no longer the City's money. It was lent to the Nick's Club. It is now their money to spend as they choose. We did not attach any restrictions to how, or where they used it. As far as what I said when we had coffee, I never said we had control over how it should spent. I never asked to see where it went. That part of it is none of our business. If you feel the need to persue some "conspiracy theory" about how the loan was approved, fine. That still has nothing to do with a business closing. You are so focused on stinging someone you don't get that this is sad. That's still what this thread is about.

Aug 24, 2009, 3:38pm Permalink
Chris Charvella


If what John is saying is correct, and I have no reason to doubt him, then his points are certainly relevant to this year's City Council race.

It is sad to lose such an integral part of Batavia's culture but mourning the loss of a Batavia icon is no reason for us to neglect our duty as citizens to hold our elected officials accountable for their actions.

Aug 24, 2009, 3:11pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Chris, correct. But I wouldn't think you would want the bank or any lender telling you how or where to spend money for your business, especially if the loan wasn't structured that way. If he is claiming that funds were mis-appropriated or embezzled, that's different. If John is claiming that illegal activities were involved, yes it should be looked at. If the money was used to run a business that just simply failed then what recourse is there? Is John claiming illegal appropriation of funds? Did the City loan require disclousure of how and where to spend it? Did the managment team at the Nick's Club do it's best to succeed, and is that even our business? Chris, as a business owner do you know what is required to get a loan from the City? Can one man make it happen with-out others approving the loan as well? Can it be done with a wink and a nod?

Aug 24, 2009, 3:37pm Permalink
John Roach

The point of my thread was that this was a private social club.

I do not think they would have been given a penny of City money if Mr. Ferrando was not both on the Board of Directors of the club and City Council President at the same time. It was not a “business” and I do not think it should have received the money. That’s my opinion and I have stood by it for over two years.

Further, two years ago, you agreed, now you don't.
But Mr. Ferrando is running again. I have never made a secret that I do not support him and this is just one reason why.

Aug 24, 2009, 3:48pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Calm down John. This is about another business closing. It's not about Frank giving out illegal loans as you claim. It's about the loss of another local institution. Brian was telling us about a sad event, not a "conspiracy theory". Thanks for the article Brian.

Aug 24, 2009, 4:02pm Permalink
Chris Charvella


I'll have to start by clearing something up. I am not the owner of our business.

I will say that in nearly 52 years of operation, we have never sought public funds from the City in the form of grants or loans and we will continue to operate in this manner as long as we exist.

Can you really say with a straight face that a man who was the City Council President and also sat on the Board of Directors for the entity in question wouldn't have the clout to push a loan through; particularly when that loan was approved by a committee and not by a vote of the entire Council? Weren't that committee's members approved by Council President Ferrando?

Council President Ferrando should have stayed a thousand miles away from that committee while the loan was being approved and, from what I understand, he did not.

The whole thing smells unethical at best.

Aug 24, 2009, 4:17pm Permalink
John Roach

Your not having another "bad" day are you?

This was not a business, but a club. You get an "A" for effort. Sorry you don't know which is which.

And who said Frank did anything illegal, only you said that. It was legal, but it was not right and again, two years ago, you agreed. What made you change your mind?

Aug 24, 2009, 4:18pm Permalink
Russ Salway

I'm sure this thread could go on forever! What matters the most is that another part of our city, our memories, our history is now gone! This would make just another chapter in Bill Kauffman's "Dispatches from the Muckdog Gazette"! How many more local businesses, local history, heart and soul institution's in our backyard will we lose before we say enough is enough? Yes these are tough economic times! We need to come together as a community and save what we have left. If not, all we will have left are stories of how great Batavia used to be and just chapters to read! Pointing fingers will get you nowhere fast! Why don't we all try and point them at ourselves and see what we can do to make our community great again! Don't just type and point out problems, involve yourself to fix them! Let's use our energy in a positive way! Let's stop losing what we have left!

Aug 24, 2009, 4:26pm Permalink
John Roach

I just got an email that pointed out this has become about you and me, and it was right.

I made my point and you made yours. Neither of us is going to change the others mind, so I am ending this one. There will lots of time to debate candidates later.

Aug 24, 2009, 4:29pm Permalink
Chris Charvella

Well said Russ and I'd like to point out that I have stepped up to help our community. Creating an open and honest government is a major reason why I'm running for the County Legislature in the 8th District.

Mr. Ferrando may not have done anything wrong, but his actions certainly drew the wrong kind of attention. If he had disclosed his affiliations to the public and removed himself from the transaction, we wouldn't be having this coversation. Elected oficials should consider the ethics of every situation they're in and act accordingly.

Aug 24, 2009, 5:13pm Permalink
John Roach

A change in the post.

Is there a place for this type of social club in Batavia anymore? There were many private clubs at one time with their own buildings, but it seems they have gone out of style.

Aug 24, 2009, 4:48pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

I might take the time later and do a post about what is happening to social capital/social connectedness across this country. This club closing is, to my mind, symbolic of what all civic institutions are facing -- a decline and erosion of participation that started in the mid 1960s, and catches up with more and more institutions. A large measure of the blame can be laid at the feet of television, which not only sucks up a lot of the time that people used to devote to their communities, but actually encourages passivity.

I'd also like to associate myself with Russ's comment.

Aug 24, 2009, 5:50pm Permalink
Mark Potwora

John I would think if the city loaned them 30,000 dollars they must of had to use the property as collateral,so when they sell the property the city should get paid back then..Any loan I have ever had I needed to put up something as collateral..Hopefully the city manager is on top of this..Nobody lends out money with out looking at the income statements to make sure they can pay it back..So you would think the city as looked at their books..As Tim said this is a business, and thats what you need to show to get a business loan..

Aug 24, 2009, 5:55pm Permalink
Gabor Deutsch

Howard, I agree ! " A large measure of the blame can be laid at the feet of television, which not only sucks up a lot of the time that people used to devote to their communities, but actually encourages passivity". I think that another large measure is due to the internet and other technoligies too. No, wait.....oh yes well, this website as example.....

Aug 24, 2009, 6:47pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Garbor, the decline in social engagement started in the mid 1960s, and the decline continued, according to sociologists, until the mid 1990s, where it leveled off (and I'm not sure what's happened since 2000 or so, haven't seen that data).

So the Internet can't be blamed.

But I do think the Internet can help solve the problem, which is part of the reason I started The Batavian.

Aug 24, 2009, 7:43pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

I did try and steer the post back to what it was really about, the closing of something that has been a long time part of our community. Thanks Russ! It is a sad thing and that's what Brian wrote about. There are plenty of political subjects, this isn't one of them. Thanks Brian, Howard, Russ, Steve, Amy, Karen and Bea and anyone else who knew what this story was about.

Aug 24, 2009, 8:28pm Permalink
Gabor Deutsch

I can argue with you (Howard) forever on the point of social decline. Do your statistics include prices of things and the likelihood of people working longer hours and multiple jobs for each household member ? I dont think TV is to blame any more than Internet but they both can be as helpful/hurtful. I love this(your)website and was just using it as an example, But really...... If its social decay thats to blame then blame the automobile and technology for the sit on the butt problem , most people I know dont have time to do "community" stuff they are trying to make money.

Aug 24, 2009, 8:59pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

There is no statistical correlation between people working longer hours, or more women working, or just about any other change in society you can name, save TV. That and the dying off of World War II generation, which peaked as the most socially connected generation around 1965.

So, TV and generational change are the only two statistically valid explanations.

The biggest impact the Internet has had is to reduce the amount of time people watch TV. It's unlikely the Internet has contributed to social decline, but merely replaced one activity for another.

The fact that we can use the Internet for community conversation provides an opportunity to bring back some of the social capital that has been lost to TV.

Aug 24, 2009, 9:36pm Permalink
Bea McManis

Posted by Howard Owens on August 24, 2009 - 9:36pm
The biggest impact the Internet has had is to reduce the amount of time people watch TV. It's unlikely the Internet has contributed to social decline, but merely replaced one activity for another.

Or, in my case (when I was working and even now) the TV and the internet are interchangeable. As Gabor can testify, my computer monitor and TV are almost on top of each other. A throw back to when I worked with programs like Planet Earth; Deadliest Catch; Trading Spaces; Sunday Night Football and others where people could watch the program and discuss it, on line, at the same time.
TV kept people at home. The Wednesday night card parties; the Friday night dances; Sunday night progressive suppers etc. did become a thing of the past.
As insidious as TV invaded our lives, it has nothing on the technology we now have and enjoy. The internet email; chat rooms; bulletin boards and instant message brought people together, but destroyed spelling and grammer. People are connecting, but they are losing the social skills needed in a civil society.
We have learned to use the brb, afk, gtg, lol, hagd, etc. with ease. Texting reduced language skills even more.
Is there a need for clubs like St. Nick's and the others.
Yes, I believe there is. Can they survive in this economy? I'm not sure.

Aug 24, 2009, 11:42pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

I don't think social clubs are disappearing, I think they are moving. My parents were never members of any "club" until I was in high school when they moved their boat from Braddock's Bay out to Eagle Creek Marina in Kendall. Once there, they joined the Yacht Club. Most people think of yacht clubs as snooty. I only know this one and I can tell you that is far from the truth. The group is basically self sufficient and that is why you never hear for them. Aside from the annual Chicken BBQ, Pig Roast and Clam Bake festivities, the group is paid for by the members. They are full of trade workers. I dare say most of them don't have college degrees.

Many other people are joining Country Clubs. As people have become more successful, they are finding they like the amenities provided by these recreation clubs. People seem to work harder now a days then in the past. That makes them appreciate their free time more and spend it doing things to make themselves happy instead of clubs like the Lions and Elks where they can still be just as happy but maybe not in a way that is as enjoyable as the Yacht Club.

I am a member of the Rochester Erin's Isle Football Club. We are much more a social group then we are a football team. Yes we love to play but the good times afterwards are why we come to games even when injured or after our bodies fail us. We generally have one fund raiser all year. You never hear about us because our goal isn't community involvement. I have done the most work in the group in recent years getting our club into the realm of public knowledge. Sure we march in the annual St. Patrick's Day parade in Rochester, but this year through my efforts, I have post some teams news both here and on a sports fan web page devoted specifically to Rochester's team.

I think the argument that the internet caused spelling and grammar to go out the window is crap. Just look at this site and you will see that most people spell correctly. The grammar used here is a much higher level then that used in normal society.

If society were truly in the social death spiral that is inferred above, then we wouldn't have had the out pouring of support for Anthony Diponzio that was shown by the Rochester community these past few months.

Aug 25, 2009, 7:30am Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Peter, there are fewer people in yacht clubs than in 1965, fewer people in country clubs, fewer people participating in league sports -- from 1965, social participation in every respect has fallen precipitously.

Talk to any manager of say a country club, and they'll talk about how they struggle for membership.

It's worse in more urbanized areas than rural towns, but it's across the board.

What you observe is merely anecdotal. The sociologists who gather and track stats across the country on such things see a very different picture.

The decline in social capital is the main reason newspapers are dying. The Internet is merely exposing many structural weaknesses in the newspaper business, but the decline was already well documented before the first Web page was launched.

Read Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone -- stuffed with charts and graphs documenting all of this.

Aug 25, 2009, 7:41am Permalink
Bea McManis

Posted by Howard Owens on August 25, 2009 - 7:41am
The decline in social capital is the main reason newspapers are dying. The Internet is merely exposing many structural weaknesses in the newspaper business, but the decline was already well documented before the first Web page was launched.

Read Robert Putnam's Bowling Alone -- stuffed with charts and graphs documenting all of this.

For those who might want to see Putnam's take on Social Capital:

The central premise of social capital is that social networks have value. Social capital refers to the collective value of all "social networks" [who people know] and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other ["norms of reciprocity"].

How does social capital work?
The term social capital emphasizes not just warm and cuddly feelings, but a wide variety of quite specific benefits that flow from the trust, reciprocity, information, and cooperation associated with social networks. Social capital creates value for the people who are connected and - at least sometimes - for bystanders as well.

Social capital works through multiple channels:
- Information flows (e.g. learning about jobs, learning about candidates running for office, exchanging ideas at college, etc.) depend on social capital.
- Norms of reciprocity (mutual aid) rely on social networks. Bonding networks that connect folks who are similar sustain particularized (in-group) reciprocity. Bridging networks that connect individuals who are diverse sustain generalized reciprocity.
- Collective action depends upon social networks (e.g., the role that the black church played in the Civil Rights movement) although collective action also can foster new networks.
- Broader identities and solidarity are encouraged by social networks that help translate an "I" mentality into a "we" mentality

Good recommended reading, Howard. Another book to add to fall reading. Thanks :)

Aug 25, 2009, 7:55am Permalink
Peter O'Brien

I don't have time to read that.

Does he account for non tradition social groups like table top RPG'ers?

Video Game clans and guilds?

Just those two alone would account for millions of people.

Aug 25, 2009, 8:00am Permalink
Peter O'Brien

Table Top RPG'ers usually are since they meet in person. Some video game guilds and clans are local but most are nationwide and some are worldwide via the internet.

Aug 25, 2009, 8:17am Permalink
Bea McManis

Posted by John Roach on August 24, 2009 - 5:20pm
Thanks. I didn't know the Elks were still around.

The Elks' Club, in Batavia, is located on 213 E Main St

Aug 25, 2009, 8:27am Permalink
Daniel Jones

Back to an earlier point, and this is directed at Tim. How is this not a political issue? The person who at the time was the City Council President, was able to have Council authorize a 30,000 dollar loan for Saint Nick's. The group has now gone under.

There is a very simple and lurking question here, what happened to the money? I think that those who receive taxpayer funding should be held accountable, don't you?

Also, are you admitting to being at a Republican fundraiser?

Aug 25, 2009, 12:29pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Dan, you're in college so I'm reasonably sure you can read. This post is not and never was about politics. Instead of being so interested in my families lives, you really need to get one of your own. See you Saturday.

Aug 25, 2009, 12:40pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Tim, I'm not interested in your "families lives", I am interested to hear whether you were at a Republican fundraiser.

30,000 dollars is a lot of money. What happened to it?

Aug 25, 2009, 12:42pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Dan, Dan , Dan. You really kill me. My wife is a Conservative Committee Member. Am I not supposed to go out to dinner with my wife because I am a Democrat? Classy or not, you really, really need to get a life of your own.

Aug 25, 2009, 12:49pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Tim, despite your assertations that I don't have a "life", which I do, you still seem to be cryptic about your answer as to whether you were at a Republican fundraiser. Regardless of whether your wife bought the tickets, the fact that you were there indicates moral support for Republican candidates. This is while you are a Democratic committee member.

This, combined with your jumping at the chance to defend Frank Ferrando, a person whom you were vehemently against having the Council Presidency when you yourself ran for Council in 2007 makes me wonder about your loyalty to the Democratic Party.

To the original point though, and a again, 30,000 dollars is a whole lot of money, it is not unreasonable to ask Mr. Ferrando what happened to it.

Aug 25, 2009, 12:55pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

Until you are committed to someone, you will not understand Tim's position.

Why do you worry about his allegiance to party? Is that more important to you than his values? Than is commitment to his personal life?

You need to stop acting like your from the Democrat Underground and start pretending to be a human.

Aug 25, 2009, 1:16pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Peter-Ha! Tim is a Democratic Party committee member, he has an obligation because of that to support the Democratic party.

Your last statement doesn't even deserve a response. Nice try though.

Aug 25, 2009, 1:19pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Dan, this will be my last post with you. Where were you when Lew was cataloging the auction items for the Democratic Valentine's dance? My wife was at Lew's helping me. My wife who helped decorate the hall. She sat and sold 50/50 tickets. She did everything because she's my wife, not the opposition. I'd be willing to bet she's done as much for the Deomcrats and their fund raisers as you. She did those things because she's my wife. Politics is about 20th on the list of what identifies her. That's called having a life. Since you don't have a life, politics is your obsession. Dan, you finally made me recognize your age. I never acknowledged how young and immature you really are till just now. I always saw you as a friend and colleague, not a kid. You really think I should put party before my family? Is that what the Democrats want from me? Politics are important to me and a big part of my life, but I also know where they rank. Trust me, they don't even come close to to being in the top ten in my life. So, again Dan, where were you? Why is it OK for my wife to stand by me when the Democrats need to use her, but if I go to dinner with her as a birthday gift, all of a sudden I'm being disloyal? I knew this post started as something sad, but I never thought it would become pathetically hopeless. Have a nice day Dan, and a little advice: If you feel politics should come before family, just stay single. Don't put a family through your beliefs of party loyalty.

Aug 25, 2009, 1:23pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

I'm sorry, if one is not willing to go to a dinner with his wife because of his political associations, then his morale convictions should be in question. Not the other way around.

Aug 25, 2009, 1:24pm Permalink
Charlie Mallow

Dan, I want you to know that I sat between Tim and Frank at that dinner. Sure Tim spent most of his time pretending to enjoy the company of his wife, my wife and I. But, I did notice some winks and nods with Frank. I even seen them shake hands at one point, disgraceful! If I was you I would try to purge all the none believers out of the party!

LOL!!! Silly crazy politics. Listen to what your saying man!!

Aug 25, 2009, 1:34pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

This wasn't just dinner, this was a Republican party fundraiser.

Tim-Why are you getting so upset? Are you stumped by a 21 year old? Who's the immature one now?

Aug 25, 2009, 1:28pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

I am the first to not care how I appear in the eyes of others Dan, but you exceed even me in that department.

And yes it was just dinner. Do you frequent the businesses of large Republican campaign donors? If so then whats the difference?

Seriously. You are just making yourself look bad.

Aug 25, 2009, 1:49pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Peter-There is a major difference between patronizing the business of a Republican donor and attending a fundraiser that specifically raises funds for Republican candidates, candidates whom are running against the candidates that the committee that Mr. Paine and I are on have endorsed.

Seriously. Your are just making yourself look clueless.

Aug 25, 2009, 1:54pm Permalink
Timothy Paine

Dan, stumped by a 21-year-old? Are you serious? For a few years now, I thought of you as a friend and colleague. Only now do I realize how much of a naive child you really are. Where were you when we were at Lew's cataloging the auction items? Where were you when we were decorating the hall? Where were you when my wife was selling 50/50 tickets? She did all those things for the Democrats? No, she did those things because she is my wife, the mother of my children and many, many more things before politics come in to the picture. Politics are important to me, and a big part of my life, but they aren't even in the top ten of things that are important in my life. That is what's called having a life. I can't believe I'm arguing about politics and how they should rank above my family. I'm arguing with fellow Democrats about what I do with my wife? This is the party of acceptance? Again, where were all these dedicated Democrats? They weren't next to me or my wife when the party needed them. It just shows how dedicated they are. They'll sit at a keyboard and attack a fellow member's family and even his home, but they won't physically show up and help. Yes Dan, I was at a Republican function; yes, Dan my family is way more important to me than my party; yes, Dan, I don't care what a business did with a $30k "loan". What a great party I belong to. You should all be proud of how this party treats each other. Yeah Dan, you sure owned me. If politics are this important to you, and attacking fellow members is such a thrill, please stay single. No one deserves to go through life by your side and always play second fiddle to penny ante bullshit like politics. John, calm down. I'm having a great day. I never have "bad" days unless I'm dealing with people with misguided priorities. Since my day is going so well, this is my last post about.... oh yeah, the Nick's Club closing. Wow, is that what we were talking about?

Aug 25, 2009, 1:55pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

No Dan, there really isn't in both cases you are paying for a service or good in return. The money you spent is then being given to your opponent through one channel or another. Just because it goes through more hands doesn't mean its different.

Congrats though on providing posts that show how poor your character truly is which will prevent you from ever getting elected to office.

Aug 25, 2009, 2:00pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Tim-I thought your last comment was your "last post" with me. The fact that your getting personal here shows that you have effectively lost the debate on intellectual grounds and are now running on pure emotion.

By the way, I was at that fundraiser helping Lew sell raffle tickets and stayed well past 11:00 to help Lew tear down.

Aug 25, 2009, 2:02pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Peter-The point is the intent of the attendance, if I choose to patronize a business for a meal, then what they do with the revenue that they gain from my patronizing is up to them.

If the intent is to attend a fundraiser where the funding will go specifically towards Republican candidates while you are a Democratic committee member, that makes it a dereliction of duty.

Furthermore, why would a Republican fundraiser be a good place for a birthday dinner for a Democratic Committee Member.

Aug 25, 2009, 2:13pm Permalink
Peter O'Brien

Maybe his wife is friends with people on the Republican committee and wanted to spend the evening in their company as well as his?

Wow that is so out there that it is inconceivable, except that I did just conceive that exact scenario...

Keep Digging Dan...

Aug 25, 2009, 2:16pm Permalink
Richard Gahagan

Freaking one horse town pretend political clowns. Do small town political childrens games give you a false sense of importance.

Aug 25, 2009, 2:44pm Permalink
John Roach

You can put an end to this and other talk about your support of candidates.

As a City Democrat Party leader (Committee member), just publically announce you support all three of your Council at Large candidates against all three Republicans candidates.

That would be the end of it.

Aug 25, 2009, 2:42pm Permalink
Charlie Mallow

John, being on the committee does not obligate you to support anyone. Just as being on the committee doesn't make you a "party leader". Those are elected posts.

What does surprise me is why a party leader like Dan would want the public to know that Tim might not support all of their candidates. It's also strange that Dan would care where Tim has dinner. Why would someone think they have the right to tell another person where to eat or who to befriend? Isn't this still America?

Aug 25, 2009, 3:01pm Permalink
John Roach

The City Dem. By Laws require him and other committee members to support the party candidates. When you become a committee member, do you think you should bound by the rules?

Do you think that a committee member, elected by fellow Dems, would be ethicaly bound to support his party? And if he does not support his own party, then should that person resign from the committee?

Aug 25, 2009, 3:02pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Charlie-Actually, being a Democratic Committee member does obligate you to publicly support our Democratic candidates, it's in our by-laws.

I don't think that it's unreasonable to ask that Committee Members, whom are the leaders of the Democratic Party within a particular municipality to not attend Republican fundraisers, especially when the funding will go to support candidates whom we are running against.

Aug 25, 2009, 3:03pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

This thread is a strong reminder and Exhibit A of why I don't belong to any political party.

Partisan politics is one of the worst features of the American democratic system. It's ugly. It's vile. It's worthless.

Dan, personally, I like you, but to get on Tim for going to a function with his wife merely because it happens to be a Republic fundraiser is just silly.

According to the Bill of Rights I read, freedom of association is one of our cherished rights. Tim has the right to hang out with whomever he wants, whether his wife is there or not. To make a partisan issue out of it is just wrong.

Aug 25, 2009, 3:04pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

I will publicly right now declare my support for our City Council Candidates and all of our County Legislature candidates.

Will Tim do the same?

Aug 25, 2009, 3:04pm Permalink
Daniel Jones

Howard-We're not talking about arresting him, we're talking about whether a private organization should have the right to demand that their members support their candidates.

As a libertarian, you should have no problem with this.

Aug 25, 2009, 3:06pm Permalink
Charlie Mallow

Committee membership is an elected post and I think your not reading the by-laws correct. No where in there does it say you can't have dinner with your wife. No where does it say you can't eat with Republicans. The rules are also for party leadership spots. The fact is you couldn't throw Tim out if you tried.

Aug 25, 2009, 3:31pm Permalink
Charlie Mallow

Dan, I wonder how long it's going to be before you get a call from Lorie or Cathy telling you to stop embarressing the committee with this?

Aug 25, 2009, 3:42pm Permalink
Chris Charvella

It's the end of August and the political season is upon us. Can't you tell?

I like that the local Democratic Party members are full of piss and vinegar right now (that includes both Tim and Dan.) We intend to win a few races this year and some of the raw emotion that goes along with hard campaigning is bound to spill over into other forums.

We'll see eachother Saturday, shake hands, and get on with the work that we all know has to be done.

Aug 25, 2009, 4:14pm Permalink
bud prevost

Does my heart good to know the dems have such a compassionate, understanding young man like Dan Jones in their ranks. Who is obviously single, and clueless. But I gathered that in previous posts. While your zeal in defending your little political clique is commendable, the childish way you attacked a fellow committee member in a public forum is uncool. I'm married Tim, and I too put my family,friends,and community before my political convictions. Some have priorities mixed up in Batavia small town politics.

Aug 25, 2009, 4:35pm Permalink
Howard B. Owens

Dan, as a libertarian I support Tim's right to have dinner with his wife and whomever and wherever he likes, be it Frank Ferrando or Dick Cheney. The Democrats don't own him.

Aug 25, 2009, 4:36pm Permalink

Authentically Local