Amherst GOP candidate: Residents should have been included in Westwood Country Club property plans
BUFFALO, N.Y. (WIVB) — A Republican candidate for town supervisor in Amherst said that residents should have been included in discussions for what to do with the old Westwood Country Club property.
Dan Gagliardo, who is the GOP-backed candidate for the position, said his company, Nicklaus Design Group, did an assessment on the property to develop a private 18-hole golf course. He said that he submitted the request to the town, but it was rejected.
In April, the town announced that they are working with Erie County to develop the site into a public nine-hole golf course and a public park.
Gagliardo said that he believes the town should maintain ownership of the property.
'We got to get people to buy in to what we're talking about,' Gagliardo said at a Monday news conference. 'They didn't want to talk to any of those people, why?'
The Westwood Country Club closed in 2014. Amherst bought the 171-acre property in April 2023 for $7.8 million, some $5 million more than what Mensch Capital, an investment firm, paid for the property about a decade prior. Initial plans included a splash pad, playground, ice rink and a community theater on the space, but the plans for the theater were scrapped last year after public outcry about the $11 million cost.
The space is bordered by Sheridan Drive to the south, North Forest Road to the east, Maple Road to the north and Fairways Boulevard to the west. The county will provide funds of $6.7 million for the project. The golf course and the park are currently scheduled to open in 2026.
Current Amherst town supervisor Brian Kulpa declined to comment.
Aidan Joly joined the News 4 staff in 2022. He is a graduate of Canisius College. You can see more of his work here.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
4 minutes ago
- CBS News
Watch Live: Blue state governors testify on "sanctuary" policies amid L.A. protests over immigration raids
Washington — Three Democratic governors are defending their states' policies toward migrants and dispute claims of failing to cooperate with federal authorities, according to prepared remarks that will be delivered Thursday before a House oversight panel. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz are among the witnesses testifying before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on so-called "sanctuary policies." "Let me be clear: Sanctuary policies don't protect Americans. They protect criminal illegal aliens," Oversight Chair James Comer, a Kentucky Republican will say in his opening statement. The governors' appearances come as President Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom remain embroiled in a legal and political standoff over the deployment of the National Guard troops and Marines to quell immigration protests in Los Angeles. Demonstrations have spread to other U.S. cities, including New York and Chicago, following a series of deportation raids. The hearing "Minnesota is not a sanctuary state," Walz will tell lawmakers. "It is ridiculous to suggest that Minnesota — a state that is over 1,500 miles away from the Southern border and a thousand miles from lawmakers in Washington, D.C., who decide and implement border policy — is somehow responsible for a failure of immigration enforcement." The former vice presidential candidate has drawn intense scrutiny not only over immigration policy but also for his handling of social justice protests that broke out in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd in 2020. Trump administration officials have cited Walz' actions to justify the president's decision to federalize troops in California. While Walz does not appear to directly address the controversy in his testimony, he says he is "disappointed" in the federal government's overall approach. "As governor of Minnesota, it is incumbent on me to use the state's resources to help Minnesota families—not turn those resources over to the administration so they can stage another photo-op in tactical gear or accidentally deport more children without observing due process," Walz is set to say. Ahead of the hearing, the GOP-led panel released a video compilation of various news clips accusing the governors of "shielding" undocumented immigrants and "causing chaos" in their states. A memo from Hochul's office suggested the hearing could be "derailed by wild accusations" and "twisted characterizations" but noted the governor's position is "clear" when it comes to supporting strong borders and comprehensive immigration reform. "New York state cooperates with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in criminal cases," Hochul says in her prepared testimony. "And our values as New Yorkers demand that we treat those who arrive here in search of a better life with dignity and reject policies that tear law-abiding families apart." Hochul also addresses the influx of more than 220,000 migrants to New York City since early 2022, many of whom were bussed from border states, calling it "an unprecedented humanitarian crisis." "We have responded to this crisis with both compassion and pragmatism," Hochul states."And as a result, we largely prevented what could have become an additional crisis — one of street homelessness and tent cities." Pritzker says Illinois also stepped up to the challenge, and blamed the lack of federal intervention and cooperation from border states for exacerbating the problem. "As governor, my responsibility is to ensure that all Illinoisans feel safe in their homes, their businesses, and their communities," Pritzker is prepared to say. "That is why my administration continued to make significant investments in public safety, even as our resources were strained because of the lack of federal support during the crisis — expanding our state police force and investing in efforts to reduce gun violence." Congressional focus on "sanctuary" polices Thursday's session follows a March hearing on sanctuary cities with four Democratic mayors: Eric Adams, of New York, Mike Johnston of Denver, Brandon Johnson of Chicago and Michelle Wu of Boston. Comer launched an investigation in January into "sanctuary jurisdictions," including states, counties or cities, to examine their impact on public safety and federal immigration enforcement. President Trump has vowed to crack down on localities that don't back his immigration agenda. Earlier this month, the Department of Homeland Security removed its list of sanctuary jurisdictions after several cities challenged the findings.
Miami Herald
5 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Full List of Lawmakers Who Traded Stocks After Trump's Tariffs Announcement
In the days that followed President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements, the climax of his second-term trade policy, lawmakers reported hundreds of stock trades. Newsweek has compiled a ranking of trades made by members of Congress between April 3, the day after President Trump unveiled reciprocal tariffs on dozens of trading partners, and when these were paused on April 9. The imposition and subsequent reversal of the president's sweeping tariff policies resulted in significant stock market volatility, with indexes crashing following the announcement and those who purchased in the interim benefitting from a boost when these were placed on hold. The high number of trades made by lawmakers during this period has again raised questions about the ethics of congressional stock trading. Members of Congress are permitted to buy and sell stocks, provided they disclose these within 30 days of the transaction, per the 2012 Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act. However, many lawmakers, including some of those in the list below, have advocated that lawmakers be banned from stock trading altogether, given the insider knowledge they may have of market-moving events, as well as the concerns this could raise among citizens' regarding possible conflicts of interest. Surveys have also shown that overwhelming bipartisan majorities are in favor of banning stock trading by members of Congress. Below is a list of trades made by U.S. lawmakers between April 3 and April 9, based on publicly available disclosures tracked by The list includes both sales and purchases during this time and is ranked according to the total number. Representative Rob Bresnahan, Republican, Pennsylvania Total trades: 182 Representative Josh Gottheimer, Democrat, New Jersey Total trades: 87 Representative Jefferson Shreve, Republican, Indiana Total trades: 57 Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, Republican, Georgia Total trades: 42 Representative Julie Johnson, Democrat, Texas Total trades: 31 Representative Jared Moskowitz, Democrat, Florida Total trades: 25 Senator Markwayne Mullin, Republican, Oklahoma Total trades: 20 Representative Michael McCaul, Republican, Texas Total trades: 18 Senator John Boozman, Republican, Arkansas Total trades: 14 Representative Dwight Evans, Democrat, Pennsylvania Total trades: 13 Representative April Delaney, Democrat, Maryland Total trades: 10 Representative Bruce Westerman, Republican, Arkansas Total trades: 7 Senator Dave McCormick, Republican, Pennsylvania Total trades: 6 Representative Tony Wied, Republican, Wisconsin Total trades: 5 Senator Ashley Moody, Republican, Florida Total trades: 4 Representative Gilbert Cisneros, Democrat, California Total trades: 3 Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat, Rhode Island Total trades: 2 Representative Mike Collins, Republican, Georgia Total trades: 2 Representative Kevin Hern, Republican, Oklahoma Total trades: 2 Representative Rick Larsen, Democrat, Washington Total trades: 2 Representative Vicente Gonzalez, Democrat, Texas Total trades: 2 Representative Gilbert Cisneros, Democrat, California Total trades: 1 Representative Victoria Spartz, Republican, Indiana Total trades: 1 Representative Max Miller, Republican, Ohio Total trades: 1 Representative Donald Sternoff Beyer, Democrat, Virginia Total trades: 1 Despite being the two most prolific traders on this list, Pennsylvania Republican Bresnahan and New Jersey Democrat Josh Gottheimer have both in the past advocated for regulations on congressional stock trading. In 2024, Bresnahan penned an article in the Pottsville Republican Herald in which he said he would "happily co-sponsor" bipartisan legislation aimed at banning congressional stock trading. In May, following a report on his stock trades in the New York Times, Bresnahan introduced a bill entitled the Transparency in Representation through Uniform Stock Trading Ban Act, which would go into effect in 2027 and require lawmakers to place certain assets into a blind trust, an arrangement in which assets are transferred to and managed by a third party without the individual's knowledge or control. Bresnahan said he would work to move his own personal assets into a blind trust in a May 6 press release. Gottheimer told CNBC in 2022 that he didn't believe members of Congress should not be "be directly involved in trading," and instead said hand control of their investments over to a blind trust, later cosponsoring legislation to this end. Gottheimer said that his own investments were managed by an outside party, adding: "I think that's the way it should be: Hands off, third-party, no decision-making from a member of Congress." Newsweek has reached out to the offices of Representatives Bresnahan and Gottheimer via phone for comment. Republican Representative Mike Lawler, in response to a chart showing the gains made by a stock purchased by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, wrote: "Just another reason why stock trading by members of Congress or their spouses should be banned. The appearance of impropriety, or worse, is too great." Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff, in a statement following the introduction of the Ban Congressional Stock Trading Act, said: "Members of Congress should not be playing the stock market while we make Federal policy and have extraordinary access to confidential information. Stock trading by members of Congress massively erodes public confidence in Congress and creates a serious appearance of impropriety, which is why we should ban stock trading by members of Congress altogether." President Trump's Liberation Day tariffs are still subject to the 90-day pause announced on April 9, which will expire in early July. The administration has said that this window will allow for comprehensive negotiations with America's main trading partners. Related Articles Donald Trump Issues Next Trade Deal Update After ChinaTrump Tariffs Face Delay as White House Struggles To Meet 90 Deals DeadlineTrump Says Trade Deal With China 'Done'Retail Layoffs Soar Nearly 300% So Far This Year 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
The Hill
9 minutes ago
- The Hill
Republicans barrel toward risky vote on DOGE cuts
House Republicans are facing an uncertain vote Thursday on legislation codifying cuts made by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Democrats are all expected to vote against the White House request — known as a recissions package — to claw back north of $9 billion in funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid. But in a bad sign for the House GOP, a number of Republicans have voiced opposition to the legislation, too — with member particularly upset with cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which funds PBS and NPR. The vote comes as internal battles over deficits and funding slashes roil the party, and after Elon Musk — the billionaire who hatched the idea for the White House DOGE effort — fell out of favor with President Trump amid his criticism of the separate megabill of Trump's tax cut and spending priorities. Republicans can afford to lose just three GOP votes on the measure, assuming all Democrats are present and voting against it, and two Republicans told The Hill this week that the opposition hovers around 10 GOP lawmakers. Republican leaders have championed the cuts of over $1 billion to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting — which provides grants to PBS and NPR stations across the country — arguing that the government should not be funding media outlets that they say are biased against the GOP. But skeptics of the clawbacks, including more moderate Republicans and those in rural areas, worry about the practical impacts that could harm the information-sharing infrastructures in their districts. 'A lot of these public television networks are kind of the backbone infrastructure for a lot of rural Western states. So, there's more to it than just Frontline and PBS News Hour or whatever,' one GOP member said. As of Wednesday afternoon, the member said, there did not seem to be much movement in swaying the holdouts. Earlier this week, Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Nev.) — an Appropriations subcommittee chair and the co-chair of the Public Broadcasting Caucus — called on the Trump administration to rethink its cuts in the space. 'From coast to coast, Americans rely on public broadcasting for lifesaving emergency alerts, trusted news, and coverage on key issues that connects communities across our nation,' Amodei wrote in a joint statement with Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), a co-chair of the group. 'Our local stations are dedicated to serving their communities, but their ability to continue offering free, high-quality programming would be eliminated if the federal funding is rescinded,' they added. 'Rescinding this funding also would isolate rural communities, jeopardizing their access to vital resources they depend on.' Additionally, some Republicans have said they are worried about the future of the United States President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which the package cuts. Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who has been outspoken in saying the program must be protected, said he would not support the bill if it gutted PEPFAR. Earlier this week, however, he said he was okay with the cuts, but would not reveal whether he will vote for the bull. '[I] feel better about that,' Bacon said, referring to the clarifications he got on the PEPFAR cuts, 'but I'm going to work with some of my colleagues on the PBS, NPR stuff, and I'll leave it at that for the time being.' Beyond specific policy qualms, some Republicans have also raised concerns about the White House-driven rescissions package usurping authority from Congress. The legislative branch has the power of the purse, which the claw backs are cutting into. 'I think there's two major concerns: One is that this is top lines and not specifics so it is undermining Congress's authority, and two, there's concerns about some the potential cuts that people have, and that's what we're working through,' a second House Republican told The Hill this week. The bulk of the recessions package claws back billions in foreign aid programs, including many that were spearheaded by United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which was largely dismantled earlier this year through DOGE projects. The special rescissions process allows Republicans to approve clawbacks of previously-approved funds identified by the White House with just a simple majority in each chamber of Congress — circumventing the 60-vote threshold in the Senate that requires approval from Democrats to advance regular legislation. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) praised the package of cuts this week. 'It's a critical step in restoring fiscal sanity and beginning to turn the tide to removing fraud, waste, abuse from our government,' Johnson said in a Tuesday press conference.
