Submitted by Fred Gundell

I have lived in Batavia for basically a short time. Only nine years. But I do know enough to see this is a poorer community with an aging population. Some empty businesses. A small but efficient police department and other public services. I heard yesterday that 35% or higher of our population is considered elderly. We appear to have an overabundance of low-income housing and very little or no middle-income housing. This does not attract younger people or add to the tax base. But not the purpose of this letter.

This city has only a very few sidewalk plows for our extended winter months. Seems like Downtown and Schools are the only requirement. If you live on East Main Street or Ellicott Street (and other places) and are elderly or, for that matter, any age and need to get up the sidewalk, it is impossible. Local homeowners (and local businesses)seem to shovel their personal walks to their porches but leave the public walk untouched. (Not all, but many) This forces elderly and handicapped folks to walk on the roads to get to the store or church or the doctor, or where ever they have to go. This is not acceptable. I was raised in Rochester. Much bigger than Batavia, and our sidewalks were always plowed by the city. If this city can not hold homeowners and businesses to shovel their walks, they should provide plowed and passable sidewalks.

The financial costs for more plows and folks to run them are, of course, the continual claim by the City Manager, City Council and DPW. But I did not see any of this fiscal restraint recently when City Council voted for many pay raises for city officials that were well beyond the 2-3 percent that most of us get. They also went beyond the State's two percent tax cap, which we will pay for. I urge residents to let their council members know of their distaste for this waste of public money. And urge them to purchase whatever plows we need for our sidewalks, so anyone in a wheelchair can get to their doctor's office. I submit for the amount of taxpayer money that just went to pay increases, we could have purchased five more plows and people to run them. Which, to me, is far more important to our community and the well-being of our citizens. 

Ellicott Station was sold to Batavia as part of our community's "Pathway to Prosperity." 

It was going to bring more people Downtown to help bolster business, fill vacant storefronts, and put more feet on the street.

At the groundbreaking for the project, developer Sam Savarino, along with state, city and GCEDC officials, talked about "workforce housing." These would be apartments for people with jobs, earning $18 to $20 an hour.  They would be college students just starting their careers.  They would be part of the workforce at STAMP.  There was no mention of people relying on government assistance to make rent, buy food, or get medical care.

Don't get me wrong, like the economic philosophers who helped define what a free-market economy is, such as Adam Smith and Friedrich Hayek, I believe some level of social welfare is necessary to help level the disruptions wrought by markets.  It's good for society to ensure that nobody is left unsupported in dire poverty.  So the complaint here isn't about Section 8, SNAP, or Medicaid.  All of those programs have their appropriate place in our society and in our community.

But Sam Savarino is receiving millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded grants and tax incentives on the promise that his project would set us on a "Pathway to Prosperity."

Now that apartment applications are available for Ellicott Station and we can read what the rental criteria is, we predict that this project is unlikely to help the local economy and may even hurt it.

Only "very low-income" people can apply.  If you're making $18 an hour, you're earning too much, unless you have dependents. 

Prior to Friday, The Batavian made attempts to find out what the criteria would be to qualify tenants for Ellicott Station.  The project manager for Savarino wouldn't return our calls or answer our emails. Local officials were loathed to reveal the primary criteria was "low income."  

The state's Housing and Community Renewal site tells us that Ellicott Station is reserved exclusively for "low-income" tenants. That in itself may be misleading.

The federal government, Housing and Urban Department (HUD), defines low income as 80 percent of an area's median income.  Ellicott Station is reserved for people making 50 to 60 percent of an area's median income.  According to HUD, that is "very low income."  

This isn't workforce housing, as we were promised.  HUD defines workforce housing as units intended for people making 80 to 120 percent of an area's median income.

We didn't know until yesterday that this is housing intended primarily for people who qualify for Section 8 housing vouchers.  Yes, since our story was published this morning, we've heard that all landlords must accept Section 8.  But here's the thing: if you're renting a unit for $900 or $1,200, or more, your likely tenants earn too much money to qualify for Section 8. When your top-end rent is $740 for a family of four, as it is for Ellicott Station, there is a likelihood the applicant qualifies for Section 8.

That just doesn't fit into anybody's definition of "workforce housing."

And people who qualify for Section 8 often also qualify for SNAP and Medicaid.

Here's where that's a problem:  There's no guarantee that Ellicott Station will be filled by residents of Genesee County.  In fact, it seems likely that many of the new tenants will move to Batavia from outside Genesee County. Savarino can't discriminate against applicants, from what we've been told, based on current residence.  The company can't exclude residents from outside the county.  Since tenants will be selected by lottery, it seems likely, some percentage of residents will both be drawing on social services and from outside that county.  That is going to drive up the costs of Medicaid -- already a big tax burden -- for county taxpayers.

I don't want any tenants of Ellicott Station to ever read this and think I'm against them. That isn't the point.  This is a program opening up for a bunch of low-income people to have a better life. For them, that's great. They will get subsidized rent on units that include washers and dryers, refrigerators, dishwashers, microwaves, water, electricity, and air conditioning with access to broadband. Some will even get covered parking.  Good for them.  I remember what it was like to not have much, barely able to make rent, and constantly low on fuel for my car, so I'll cheer for the individuals who have a chance now to live a more comfortable life. I hope they make the most of it and are able to move up in the world.

That's not the point.

The point is, we were promised a "pathway to prosperity." 

When I was working for low-level wages, I wasn't able to go out to nice restaurants regularly. I couldn't shop at stores like Valle Jewelers or Charles Men's Shop.  I had to watch every penny. Ellicott Station isn't likely to produce a lot of foot traffic for Batavia's upper-end restaurants nor help attract new retail to Downtown and help fill some of our storefront vacancies. 

And this comes at a time after we've all seen our assessments go up significantly, which is a defacto tax increase that is leading the City Council toward a vote to override the property tax cap, along with a proposal to raise water rates.

It is positive that the eye sore that was the Della Penna building and Santy Tires is gone, and we can hope good businesses move into the commercial space being built, though time will tell what businesses want to be part of the same complex that includes "very-low-income" apartments.

I've been a cheerleader for Ellicott Station because I believed even "workforce housing" would lead to more customers for Downtown businesses.  I thought it could be transformative for a Downtown bespotted decades ago by Urban Renewal.  A chance at a new life.  I feel misled. There was a time some years ago when Savarino and city officials promised "market-rate housing" for Ellicott Station. I understand that financing big projects can be a challenge.  Savarino's inability to raise the financing necessary for "market rate" is understandable. But when HRC got involved, it should have been made clear by all involved that these apartments would be for "very low-income" individuals and families and tenants would be eligible for vouchers. The lack of transparency on this point is disappointing.  If we had known years ago, or at the groundbreaking, what this complex was really about, it might have seemed less than ideal, but at least, we could shrug and be thankful we're getting rid of an eyesore and getting a vacant property back on the tax roll.

It now seems clear that Savarino, GCEDC. the City of Batavia, the BDC, and HRC has misled us all over the past few years about the kind of housing going into Ellicott Station. This isn't looking like a "pathway to prosperity." Instead, it's looking like a new burden on taxpayers.

I'll be happy if I'm proven wrong.

One evening in the 1940s, a teenage Wes Montgomery went to a dance with his wife and heard a record by Charlie Christian for the first time. The next day he went out and bought his first six-string guitar.  He tried to teach himself to play guitar by listening to Christian.  By the time he was 20, he was performing in clubs in Indianapolis.  Touring through Indy, Lionel Hampton heard Montgomery and hired him to play in his band. That started his career.

Montgomery was known for playing with his thumb, helping to give him a distinctive sound, along with his use of octaves and chordal melodies.

He’s widely regarded as the greatest jazz guitarist in history, hugely influential … and he’s a joy to listen to.

As a young man growing up in Mississippi, Muddy Waters fell under the delta blues, acoustic blues influence of Robert Johnson and Son House. When he moved to Chicago, he found what worked in small juke joints back home couldn't be heard in the Windy City's crowded bars, so he started playing electric guitar.

And Chicago Blues was born.

He's one of the most influential artists of the 20th Century.

George Harrison once observed,

"If there was no Lead Belly, there would have been no Lonnie Donegan; no Lonnie Donegan, no Beatles. Therefore no Lead Belly, no Beatles.”

For those who don't know Lonnie Donegan -- he was a British musician who, as a side project, started performing American folk music, which started the Skiffle movement. He was hugely successful for a time and influenced a host of young teenagers in England to put together bands. Often they were poor and played homemade instruments. This is how the Quarrymen got started, with John Lennon at the helm, and the Quarrymen evolved into The Beatles.

Lead Belly also influenced Bob Dylan.

Letter to the Editor:

New Year, New You

New Year’s Day symbolizes fresh starts and new beginnings. People use January as a benchmark to reprioritize their lives. Wellness is often at the top of people’s priority lists with things like making time for self-care, ending harmful habits, or wasting less and saving money.

With the introduction of Mobile Sports Betting last year, the Western Problem Gambling Resource Center (PGRC) has seen a dramatic impact on people’s lives in a variety of ways linked to emotions, behaviors, and finances. Young people ages 18-24 and their families are being most affected, many of whom have had little experience dealing with other addictions or mental health issues.

Like other types of gambling, Mobile Sports Betting includes negative effects like sleep issues, strain on relationships with loved ones, financial problems and increased alcohol or drug use. People who struggle with gambling are also at a higher risk for other mental health problems. The ease of access and lack of awareness about risks of MSB are fostering the development of problems quickly at a point in time when many of these young adults are learning to navigate life on their own.

The problems associated with gambling are not reserved only for the person engaging in the activity. Other loved ones, particularly parents in this case, are finding themselves worried about their loved ones, trying to help financially, and wondering how to best handle the situation. 

The most important message for the beginning of this new year is that help is available if you or someone you love has been exhibiting warning signs of a gambling problem, such as unusual financial problems; feeling stressed or anxious over sporting events or other gambling activities; low school performance due to absence or preoccupation with gambling; or lying to family and friends about how much money and time is spent on gambling. January is a great time to reach out to the Western PGRC.

The Western PGRC is here to help anyone who is looking to reprioritize their lives and overcome the problems that gambling has caused. Private-practice counselors, behavioral health and treatment facilities, recovery groups and other community services throughout Central New York make up a vast referral network. When people call (716) 833-4274 or email [email protected], they confidentially connect with a knowledgeable PGRC staff person who will listen to and connect them with the resources that best meet their needs. Whether you are ready to get help, or you are just curious about your options, call us today. We’re here to help.

Jeffrey Wierzbicki
Western & Finger Lakes Team Leader
Western & Finger Lakes Problem Gambling Resource Center's
NY Council on Problem Gambling

The social media debate on our story about Sweet Betty's closing has been, um, interesting.

Opinions have been wide-ranging, from "people don't want to work" to "restaurant owners don't pay enough."  

A sampling and my thoughts:

"Yet you have the government saying that unemployment is at all-time low but retail or restaurant has lack of employees."

Well, if unemployment is low, that means there are fewer people looking for work.  That means it is harder for existing businesses to fill open positions.  More people working leads to a "lack of employees" looking for work. 

That was a small business they should have been able to run themselves, with little help. I know, because I did the same exact thing. They either weren't willing to do what it takes to be successful or they weren't willing to pay someone what they were worth. Simple as that.

Clearly, a comment by somebody who has never owned a food service business.  Running such a business means multiple jobs overlap -- taking orders, cooking food, washing dishes, cashing out customers, and then somebody has got to keep the books.  It's not a one- or two-person business.

They are getting money to stay home and not work!!! Stop the free hand outs... And watch how many people look for work...

Extended unemployment benefits ended a long, long time ago and the economic evidence is the payments had little impact, when still active, on people's willingness to work.  There are currently 900 people drawing unemployment in Genesee County, according to the most recent Labor Department data.  That is not a number that screams "People are mooching off unemployment insurance payments."  

3% unemployment rate yet why are there almost a million on welfare! Time for workfare for the lazy!

Actually, in the U.S. there are nearly 60 million people drawing some sort of assistance, and nearly all of them who are of working age and not on full disability have jobs.

Then there are the people who blamed the owners:

Love how they say it's the workers why not blame the owners for not paying more for the work or putting on the work outfit and working themselves. Simple supply = demand and people have a life simple you wanna pay minimum wage you get minimum result

crazy how they’re closing and many other family-owned restaurants aren’t…time to stop blaming staff and look to themselves as to where the problem lie, whether it be their management or their product.

And some readers did jump to their defense, such as Susan Macomber:

The owners,family and friends worked there 99% of the time...They were very hard working and very friendly, and the food was delicious...The owners also closed for holidays and closed at times to give their workers some time off because they couldn’t get enough help. And they paid their workers well.

More blaming the owners from somebody who almost certainly never owned a business:

Unemployment is lowest it's been in 40 years... only the failed businesses are having trouble finding employees. The strong survive my friends, it's survival of the fittest, and you ain't fit.

Look around you, there are help-wanted signs everywhere.  There was a time, more than a decade ago, when economists considered an unemployment rate of five percent to be "full employment."  The idea is that at five percent, being unemployed was transitory.  People moved quickly from one job to the next.  It was temporary and the normal economic shuffling of the deck as businesses changed strategy, closed for various reasons, or people quit jobs just to have the time to find a better job. 

Also, COVID itself has taken a lot of people out of the workforce.  More than one million people in the U.S. have died, and nearly half of them had not yet reached full retirement age, and presumably, a lot of them were or could be in the workforce.

This is a very, very tight job market, probably the tightest any of us have seen in our lifetimes.

So let's talk about the free market:

This makes me so sad. I love Sweet Betty’s!!! But I get it. No one wants to work anymore, or if they do, it’s completely on their terms and hours. Businesses everywhere are impacted by this.

Here's the thing  -- in a free market, people can choose where they want to work.  They want to work on their terms.  I want to work on my terms.  You want to work on your terms.  We all want that opportunity.  I own my own business so I can work on my own terms.  When I worked for other people, I worked hard and improved my skills and knowledge so I could advance and make more money.  That's working on my own terms.  When there isn't a tight labor market, employers have the leverage to say, "work on my terms or leave" (perhaps with more nuance than that).  In a tight labor market, the power imbalance shifts to the workers.  But that's how free markets work, should work, and we want them to work if we want a thriving economy and an improving standard of living for everybody.

One reader asks legitimate questions:

How much were you paying? How many hours did you guarantee? Was it a regular schedule, or did it vary from one week to the next? Were your cooks treated with respect ot treated like they were disposable? People work when they feel like they are valued. If that's not the case, they go elsewhere. There are LOTS of jobs out there. Make yours the one everyone brags about.

Those are all things that will impact the ability of a business to hire good and qualified people.  However, there is only so far a business can stretch on pay and hours and benefits.  Running a business is not as easy as this reader makes it sound,  as I'll address later.

Another take on the "people don't want to work" theme:

To all who wonder why they can’t get help….. PEOPLE DONT WANT TO WORK TODAY! THEY WANT TOP PAY FOR DOINB LITTLE! There are plenty of jobs all over…. It seems to me that if you REALLY want a job or NEED a job…. Then take one of the jobs!!! Money is money!

Let's just say there are in fact people who don't want to work.  There are undoubtedly some people who don't want to work. Period.  There is no wage that will entice them to leave their bedroom.  But this poster seems to assume that just because there are jobs, there are jobs that the people without jobs want to take those jobs.

There are a number of reasons that people not working won't take a job you think they should take: They're not qualified. It doesn't fit their career path.  The hours won't let them take care of their children or go to school.  The job won't help them advance their career and could even derail it.  Or maybe the job you think they should take isn't just offering enough of an incentive to give up fishing to go to work.  Money is, as the poster says, is money.  And yes, sometimes it takes more money to entice a person to take a job.  

In order for a worker and an employer to find each other, the worker needs to be qualified to work the job that's open.  Even if a worker who has spent the past few years pushing a broom is willing to take a job as a line cook, that doesn't mean he's qualified to be a line cook.  Employers don't like to hire unqualified people because they don't have the track record to ensure they can do the job or will stick with it.  Unqualified workers cost money and can be a disaster.

A more nuanced take that deserves a response:

Restaurants took the worse beating when that Covid crap shut N.Y. down. The ridiculous cost of living made it so minimum wage skyrocketed. Instead of putting caps on rent increases and utilities the more pay made prices go up MORE. Small business owners suffer because with their overhead and insurance payments they cannot afford to hire as much workers. Everyone suffers. And people complain about higher costs in restaurants. They HAVE to raise prices just to make ends meet.

Restaurants got a lot of financial help during and because of the pandemic restrictions.  All of that money being pumped into the economy is part of the cause of current inflationary pressures (it's basic economics: increase the money supply and prices generally go up).

Restaurants by and large stayed alive with delivery and curbside pickup while maintaining lower overhead with the dining rooms closed. When the economy kick-started again, companies were scrambling to fill open positions.  A lot of former workers found new jobs, retired, started their own businesses, went back to school, decided to become stay-at-home spouses, picked up a job with Uber, Door Dash, or Instacart, or otherwise left the workforce (and not just because they became lazy, but in the human condition, there is always some of that, too).  With a shortage of workers, restaurants and other businesses were forced to raise wages. That started before the current inflation cycle and is one of the multiple causes of today's inflation.  The sad thing is, the wage gains workers first realized after the end of the pandemic have been wiped out by inflation. 

Adrian Fitzgerald Harris has an informed view:

Low Birth rates, massive boomer retirements and no one solving the immigration problem have caused some of this.

The decline in the stock market might coax some people out of their early retirement. The low birth rate isn't going to change so long as we remain a first-world economy. So that leaves immigration.  Want more workers?  Let more workers into the country.  We need about one million working immigrants flowing into this country ASAP.  That would spur the kind of economic growth we need to stave off a recession and stem inflation.  The economy would boom.

Terry Paine left an intelligent comment:

You can tell the people that have never had a business with employees before. Maybe these business geniuses could offer some advice on what an employee's pay should look like since we know $14 to $17 is not enough. Then the employer can make a decision whether they can themselves take that big of pay cut or if raising the cost to the customer will reduce sales enough that the business has to close anyway. Tough balance.

I can say that their standards for hiring wait staff is pretty high since I have enjoyed every one I've ever had wait on me. That standard might be just as important of more important than the food.

So to sum up.  There are two main camps here: blame the employers and blame the employees.

How about if we not blame either?

Running a small business is hard, especially a food services business.  You have government regulations to worry about, employees stealing (a big problem in a mostly cash business), taxes, insurance, lots of overhead, employees who have their own lives and own issues that you need to balance, supply issues, competition to worry about, customers who complain, and so on.  You pretty much have to be insane to run your own business.  It's a hard life.  Thank God there are people who do it though, because small business owners are the true backbone of America and our communities.  They offer more charitable support to their communities, give communities a sense of cohesion and pride, and the owners are often more involved and more often make fine mentors for the young people they meet.  

And employees have their own wishes and desires. They have aspirations, dreams, ambitions.  They might have families to care for or passions they wish to pursue away from work.  They are often not business owners themselves because of these other constraints or priorities.  But humans evolved to acquire resources to make their lives more stable and better.  For the vast majority of us, we want more money and better things, so naturally, we want better pay.  And if we can't get better pay, then we look for other tradeoffs, such as more time to go fishing or play in a rock and roll band.  

In our rush to make everything political these days, we miss how complex our economy really is and how something as seemingly straightforward as a restaurant closing is really about a world of competing economic forces. Sweet Betty's closing is sad. It shouldn't be fodder for scoring political points.