Town of Niagara approves budget

By Benjamin Joe

The Town of Niagara passed its 2026 budget at the board’s regular business meeting on Tuesday. Each council member voted for the approval of the budget, except outgoing board member Charles Teixeira, who did not run for reelection earlier this month.

After the meeting, Teixeira said he voted “No” because he did not believe it was necessary to override the 2% increase cap on town taxes.

Deputy Supervisor Marc Carpenter, who was reelected along with Robert Herman, said the final budget was a product of rising insurance costs, and a new contract with the CSEA union’s workers in the town.

Also after the meeting, Supervisor Sylvia Virtuoso said she hoped the tax cap would not have to be overridden again in next year’s budget. She noted costs are not getting lighter for the town, but she is hopeful.

“We’re going to try our very best,” Virtuoso said. “We have a lot of development that wants to come in and, if everything comes to fruition, we should be able to stay underneath the 2% tax cap.”

In other news

Wieslaw Walawender, owner of the property at 2920 Birch Ave., was represented by attorney Geffrey Gismondi in a hearing that was followed by the Town Board voting to demolish a vacant house on the property if it is not repaired in 45 days.

While Gismondi admitted the structure was in need of repairs, he said the onus was not on his client to show the house could not be repaired, but on the town. As it is, Walawender would have to prove that 50% of the structure was repairable through a structural analysis, which is quite expensive.

Gismondi also said the addition on the house would be voluntarily demolished by Walawender, while the rest would be repaired.

After the meeting, Walawender said the cost to repair the house would also be under 50% of the assessed value of the home if such an analysis was not undertaken, which was another condition that determined Acting Building Inspector Charles Haseley’s opinion the house could be legally demolished by the town.

Walawender and Gismondi also took issue with this point, stating the code said, “original value” not “assessed value.”

“The original value is not defined in the code,” Gismondi said. “And it’s an ambiguous term. I think it’s problematic for a procedure like this, and I don’t think the board has a calculation of the original value – at least I haven’t seen it.

“The board has the assessed value. It’s not been established that the property has deteriorated 50% of its value, because we don’t even know what that is.”

Gismondi suggested Walawender was being held to a higher standard. He said he “didn’t know” if every homeowner would have to have “as-built drawings stamped by an engineer or architect.”

Teixeira rebuffed that claim.

Virtuoso said, “Mr. Gismondi, you’ve come to the table late in the game – and I apologize, because you really have no comprehension of what we’ve been through with this gentleman. He has a pattern of maintenance neglect. On all of his properties.

“We’ve already demolished a home (of his). He brought us to court and lost. He has another property we just condemned on the corner of the same street. We have neighbors who have complained continuously. …

“He asked to speak with me. I spent over an hour in my office. He has called continuously, every single department. …

“Forget everything prior to May. Forget all of that. Start in May of 2025. The gentleman has done nothing. Not even taken garbage off his property. So, all he’s done is called and finds fault with everybody but himself. We are tired of it, and you are wrong when you say that we don’t require the same. We require the same for every household. And he just seems to have more properties, neglects them all, and expects us to keep waiting for them to get fixed.

“How long would you wait for a house in your neighborhood to get fixed? Fifteen, 20 years? Even from May to now is six months. He’s not done one thing. Not a bag of garbage taken off the property. So, you want to tell me, ‘Give me ‘till spring now’? To start something that’s never been taken care of – now? I’m sorry, I disagree. We’ve done this, really, a long time, and I disagree with your comments.”

On the list of concerns for the Town Board is perceived openings where children can get into the structure, the possibility of feral cats living inside of it, and garbage littering the yard.

Walawender took issue with each list item after the meeting. He said there is no opening into the building, and his neighbors have been feeding the cats. As to the garbage, he said about “12 loads” of garbage were taken off the property. While there is still garbage, the amount is much less.

During the meeting, Walawender asked if he could speak. Town Attorney Michael Risman told him, “No, we are in a hearing process.”

Gismondi did not reply to questions by this reporter after the meeting, saying he did not have anything more to say.