Let’s Review Anderson’s “Facts”
Let’s review an article in the Amherst Bee from 4/08/2009 regarding Mr. Jay Anderson.
It looks like Mr. Anderson began exaggerating before he even took office! According to Anderson’s comments to the Bee…
1. “Anderson is a lifelong resident of Amherst and a first-time candidate. He has been a GOP committeeman for 14 years.”
How old is Mr. Anderson?? He looks(and acts) like a twenty-something. I thought you had to be at least 18 to be a committee person – but wait..it gets better, according the Bee article Anderson is….
2. “A medical equipment sales representative with Complete Healthcare,”
That was one of the jobs he was fired from. I think Mr. Anderson should tell people when he stopped working for this company. My scorces indicate he was fired BEFORE he claimed in this article, to be employed by Complete Healthcare. I’d be happy to review Mr. Anderson’s pay stubs to see if he was being truthful about his employment
3. “Anderson has 15 years of business experience”
OK, assuming the man is 30-32 years old, what 15-year business experience could he have as an 16 year old??????
4. “He is a graduate of Canisius College, with a master’s degree in science,”
There is no way on earth Jay Anderson has a Masters Degree in anything. I’d like Mr. Anderson to provide a copy of this Masters Degree.
5. “and is a U.S. Navy veteran, serving a 15-month deployment that ended in July”.
I applaud his service but my sources indicate his deployment was far less than 15 months.
If Mr. Anderson wants to clear any of this up, he knows how to reach this column.
Pat Paulsen Said,
July 25, 2010 @ 4:43 am
Picky, Picky, Picky.
So Mr. Andersen’s resume is more “creative writing” than an application for a security clearance. Does it really matter anymore. Enough voters believed what he said or the way he said it to elect him to the Amherst Town Board for four years. Its now up to him to provide the residents of Amherst with valuable service, which based on his work so far is almost non-existent.
His election says a lot more about how easily we voters are fooled by party affiliation and rhetoric. At board meeting lately he appears to be straining to contribute to the current topic being discussed, even if he has little knowledge of the subject matter. On the rare occasion he does speak, Mr. Marlette usually has to step in and explain what he meant before he makes too many mistakes.
Its time for Mr. Anderson to show everyone how he can contribute to the solutions for the many problems that the Town of Amherst encounters every day. This will require work, sometimes hard work on his part to produce real and valuable resolutions that go beyond the War of 1812 and the Glen Avenue Arts Festival.
One who cares Said,
July 26, 2010 @ 3:30 am
The other members of the Board aren’t any better. Marlette’s “explanations” are usually those of someone who doesn’t know what he’s talking about, but who delivers it like he does. Let’s hope voters aren’t fooled again next year.
Steve Said,
July 26, 2010 @ 12:25 pm
Your personal dislike for Marlette is quite obvious. Every subject about Anderson, you either bring Manna or Marlette or both into it. Both of whom, like them or not, have a better grasp of what’s going on than the other Board member.
If your intent is to “stick up” for Anderson, than do it based on Anderson’s record. Plan and simple. The topic/subject is Anderson….like it or not…he’s got problems…
Me Said,
July 26, 2010 @ 6:50 pm
He may have problems, but I don’t think public accusations should be made without proof. I think this reflects poorly upon those making the accusations.
One who cares Said,
July 26, 2010 @ 7:02 pm
He may have problems, but I don’t believe public accusations should be made without some form of proof. I think this reflects poorly upon those making the accusations and makes me wonder what their motive are.
As regards Marlette and Manna, it’s nothing personal, but I don’t care for their Machiavellian tactics. I don’t believe either deserves to be re-elected if they run again next year.
Judy Said,
July 26, 2010 @ 8:55 pm
What accusations? these are his words in a newspaper article. Why shouldn’t he be questioned? Did Manna and Marlette put those words in Anderson’s mouth? And if you want Manna and Marlette ( whom by all accounts seem to work together and get things done) to lose an election because of their “Machiavellian tactics” then you’re probably the same person that elected Anderson in the first place.
Steve Said,
July 26, 2010 @ 11:40 pm
I was at the meeting when this whole “time” thing came up…I know Manna made the accusation, Sanders and Nuchereno questioned him, Marlette asked the Town Attorney to clarify what they were voting on (no accusation) and Weinstein said basically nothing (no real surprise there). It seems like you’re trying to paint him with a brush woth no paint on it.
James Said,
July 27, 2010 @ 2:41 am
This is really a lot of talk about a councilmen that hasn’t done a thing on the board. We should stick to comments about policy and town issues. Anderson is a one termer,let it rest.
One who cares Said,
July 27, 2010 @ 2:57 pm
The accusations were not formulated at the Town Board meeting. We don’t live in a one dimensional society.
Why was there no proof provided when the accusations were made? Why didn’t Manna state his reasons for believing there was fabrication? Obviously he got information from somewhere. Hmm, where could that have been from?
Why didn’t Marlette come forward himself when he found out about the “fraudulent” time logs?
Steve Said,
July 27, 2010 @ 7:41 pm
Maybe Manna used his power of observation. His observation might have been that Anderson is never in Town Hall, but you would have to ask Manna that. Why don’t you call him directly and ask him.
Your last statement says it all….Marlette did not make any accusations, except now your argument is he should have.
You’re actually starting to sound like Anderson.
One Who Cares Said,
July 29, 2010 @ 1:22 pm
Steve, maybe you should call Marlette and ask him what he knew, when.
Steve Said,
July 29, 2010 @ 5:19 pm
OK…but to be clear, are you now saying that you know he knows something?