Share this article

print logo

Fontana says he has not followed up on residency opinion

A couple weeks ago, questions arose about whether one of Council President Richard A. Fontana's staff members met the residency requirement to be appointed to the vacant South Council seat.

Fontana_mugAfter it came to light that Bryan J. Bollman passed elections petitions for his boss that said he lived in Lovejoy instead of South, Fontana said he would be asking for a legal opinion from the city’s chief attorney.

At the time (April 18), Fontana (pictured at left) seemed to think Bollman (pictured at right) could still meet the requirements, arguing there was a difference between a “residence” and a “domicile.”

Since then, things have been quiet.

I checked with Fontana’s office the day after he asked for a legal opinion. Nothing had been delivered.  Bollman_mug

I emailed Corporation Counsel Timothy A. Ball on April 23 to ask about the status. Nothing was out yet, I was told.

When I talked to Fontana last week, he said he had not followed up with Ball about the status of the opinion.

So why not?

Fontana told me he was still “trying to get five votes” so a candidate could be appointed.

Here’s what I previously wrote about the residency questions.

In related news, some South Buffalo residents today are demanding representation, as the seat is still vacant.

--Aaron Besecker
Follow me on Twitter: @BeseckerBN

There are no comments - be the first to comment