The all-important holiday shopping season is something of a gift to job hunters. Employers in the retail, online, warehouse and shipping worlds are hiring.

These may not be career or target jobs. They’re unlikely to be full time with benefits. But the jobs can be a foot in the door for new or long-term job hunters who need income and something to fill a blank spot on their resumes.

Job hunters who’ve been collecting unemployment and delaying searches until after the holidays should rethink their strategies. If nothing else, be motivated by the likelihood that extended jobless assistance programs will end.

About 1.3 million workers who now get federal Emergency Unemployment Compensation checks will lose them in the week before New Year’s unless Congress reauthorizes the program. And don’t count on that.

An additional 850,000 workers will exhaust state unemployment eligibility in the first three months of 2014, with no access to further federal benefits, unless Congress acts. Again, don’t expect it.

There is substantial research showing the imbalance of skills and experience between many job hunters and the jobs that employers are trying to fill. That’s a long-term problem solved mostly by education and training – a huge barrier for low-wage and out-of-work people who can’t figure out a way to afford, much less obtain, it.

The U.S. economy has a job market imbalance. The national ratio of unemployed workers to posted job openings is about three to one. Clearly, the job market is difficult. Employers can’t find the quality of worker they need, and job hunters can’t find a suitable job for them.

But that in no way suggests suspending a job search. This is prime time to take advantage of the fourth-quarter hiring surge. This is also time to get ahead of job hunters who are waiting until the new year to look.

ASTRONICS CORP.: Keane, Kevin T., director and beneficial owner of more than 10 percent of a class of security, sold 33,231 shares of common between $49.31 and $49.51 each between Nov. 14 and 15 and now directly and indirectly holds 128,436. Peabody, Mark A., officer, sold 5,100 shares of common at $49 each on Nov. 15 and now directly and indirectly holds 22,072.

GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.: Comstock, Elizabeth J., officer, sold 60,000 shares of common at $27.27 each on Nov. 18 and now directly and indirectly holds 64,455.

M&T BANK CORP.: King, Darren J., officer, exercised an option for 1,089 shares of common at $91.75 each on Nov. 14.

MARSH & MCLENNAN COS.: Gilbert, Edward Scott, officer, exercised an option for 28,410 shares of common at $26.07 each on Nov. 18, immediately sold 28,410 shares of common at $47.38 each and now directly and indirectly holds 11,393.

NATIONAL FUEL GAS CO.: Kidder, Rolland E., director, sold 1,000 shares of common at $71.88 each on Nov. 14 and now directly and indirectly holds 28,240. Cellino, Anna Marie, officer, exercised an option for 30,000 shares of common at $28.16 each on Nov. 12, immediately sold 30,000 shares of common at $70.54 each, and now directly and indirectly holds 192,199.

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORP.: Cheston, Sheila C., general counsel, exercised an option for 29,158 shares of common at $58.58 each on Nov. 14, immediately sold 25,764 shares of common at $110 each, and now directly and indirectly holds 34,949. Palmer, James F., chief financial officer, sold 10,310 shares of common at $109.06 each on Nov. 13 and now directly and indirectly holds 196,894. Bush, Wesley G., chief executive officer, sold 30,000 shares of common at $109.18 each on Nov. 12 and now directly and indirectly holds 403,976.

NRG ENERGY: Muller, Edward R., director, sold 100,000 shares of common at $27.03 each on Nov. 15 and now directly and indirectly holds 205,400.

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Milch, Randal S., general counsel, sold 2,823 shares of common at $50.35 each on Nov. 18 and now directly and indirectly holds 29,714. Carrion, Richard Louis, director, exercised an option for 15,600 shares of common at $34.15 each on Nov. 14, immediately sold 15,600 shares of common at $50.35 each, and now directly and indirectly holds 1,260.

Prepared by First Call/Thompson Financial of Boston, from Securities and Exchange Commission filings.

WASHINGTON – There are two requests Don Mahoney, otherwise known as Santa Claus, keeps getting day after day: Barbies and Legos.

“There are a whole bunch of toys out there, but the kids really know what they want,” said Mahoney, who has been stationed outside his “North Pole workshop” at St. Charles Towne Center in Waldorf, Md. since early November. “The Barbie dolls and the Legos, those are really big.”

In a year when one toy has yet to emerge as the must-have of the season, analysts say retailers and consumers are reverting to the basics: cars, dolls, Legos and bicycles. But that may not be enough to save what many expect to be a slow holiday shopping season.

“There are no hot toys this year; there really aren’t,” said Gerrick Johnson, a toy industry analyst at BMO Capital Markets. “We don’t have a Tickle Me Elmo or a Zhu Zhu Pet or a Cabbage Patch Kid – nothing that is approaching phenomenon status.”

Instead, decades-old classics are inching their way back to the top of Christmas lists. According to a National Retail Federation survey released Thursday, 25.8 percent of shoppers said Barbies would be their primary purchase for girls. For boys, Legos were the most popular item, with 10.6 percent of customers on board.

There are hints of burgeoning demand for high-tech items. For the first time, iPads were among the most popular gifts for both girls and boys, outpacing the new Big Hugs Elmo, American Girl dolls and Furby. But overall, Hot Wheels and Disney Princesses have kept their stranglehold at the top of the rankings.

“The nostalgia surrounding some of the oldest toys will never go away,” said Kathy Grannis, a spokeswoman for the National Retail Federation. “A lot of kids are still growing up on traditional toys.”

That may not be good news for retailers. Sales of toys have remained flat in recent years during the choppy economic recovery. Last year, toys sales totaled $22 billion in the United States, down from $22.2 billion in 2008, according to data from research firm NPD Group. That trend is expected to continue this year as analysts predict another lackluster holiday shopping season.

“In the 12 years I’ve been covering toys, we’ve always had something selling for a premium on eBay,” Johnson said, referring to the online auction site. “This is the first time we’re not seeing that.”

Just 44.3 percent of shoppers said they plan to buy toys this holiday season, down from 45.1 percent last year, according to National Retail Federation data.

“The problem is that what really gets people spending on toys is not necessarily the same old, same old,” Johnson said. “It’s innovation, compelling new toys – and we don’t have a whole lot of that right now.”

WASHINGTON – Job openings climbed to a five-year high in September, indicating employers were confident about demand before the federal government shutdown.

The number of positions waiting to be filled in the U.S. rose by 69,000 to 3.91 million, the highest since May 2008, from a revised 3.84 million in August, the Labor Department reported Friday in Washington. The pace of hiring increased.

Further gains in the job market would help drive wage growth and boost consumer spending, which accounts for almost 70 percent of the economy. Employers have added 186,300 workers on average from January through October, up from an average of about 173,000 in the same period last year.

“Things are genuinely getting better,” said Brian Jones, senior U.S. economist at Societe Generale in New York. “I don’t think we’re at the point where people will quit without having something in hand, but hopefully we’re moving in that direction.”

The Job Openings and Labor Turnover report is among data monitored by Janet Yellen, the nominee for Federal Reserve chairman, and helps shed light on the dynamics behind the monthly employment figures.

Payrolls expanded by 204,000 workers last month after rising 163,000 in September, a Labor Department report showed earlier this month. The jobless rate rose to 7.3 percent in October after as many as 800,000 federal workers were furloughed during the 16-day government shutdown.

Friday’s report showed the number of people hired increased to 4.59 million in September, the most since August 2008, from 4.56 million. The hiring rate rose to 3.4 percent from 3.3 percent in August. The gauge calculates the number of hires during the month divided by the number of employees who worked or received pay during that period.

Job openings increased at construction companies, retailers, professional and business services, and in the trade, transportation and utility industries.

The number of total dismissals, which excludes retirements and those who left their job voluntarily, rose to 1.73 million from 1.68 million in August.

Some 2.34 million people quit their jobs in September, down from 2.36 million the prior month. The quit rate, which shows the willingness of workers to leave their jobs, held at 1.7 percent in September, down from a 2.1 percent reading when the recession started almost six years ago.

An increase in the gauge would indicate that “workers perceive that their chances to be rehired are good – in other words, that labor demand has strengthened,” Yellen said in a March speech before the National Association for Business Economics.

In the 12 months ending in September, the economy created a net 1.9 million jobs, representing 52.7 million hires and 50.8 million separations.

Considering the 11.3 million Americans who were unemployed in September, Friday’s figures indicate there are about 2.9 people vying for every opening, up from about 1.8 when the last recession began in December 2007.

Payroll data released earlier this month also showed that private employment, which excludes government agencies, rose 212,000 in October, the most in eight months.

Retailers are among those adding employees in anticipation of holiday demand, with Amazon.com Inc. expected to hire 40 percent more workers than last year and Walmart taking on 10 percent more seasonal employees and an additional 700,000 workers.

In total, retailers added 159,000 holiday jobs in October, the strongest start to the season in 14 years, according to employment consulting firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

Other businesses are taking steps to cut staff. Lockheed Martin, the largest U.S. government contractor, said last week it will cut 4,000 jobs and close some operations in response to decreased federal spending. HJ Heinz, the ketchup-maker owned by Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and 3G Capital, said it will fire 1,350 workers as it closes manufacturing plants in North America.

Fed officials are gauging the outlook for the labor market as they consider scaling back their $85 billion-a-month bond-buying program, known as quantitative easing. Policymakers this week signaled they may taper “in coming months” if the economy improves as anticipated.

Fed officials “generally expected that the data would prove consistent with the committee’s outlook for ongoing improvement in labor market conditions and would thus warrant trimming the pace of purchases in coming months,” according to the record of the Federal Open Market Committee’s Oct. 29-30 gathering, released Wednesday in Washington.

With its moratorium on providing incentives for senior citizen housing projects set to expire in a little more than a month, the Amherst Industrial Development Agency is poised to let the temporary ban expire.

But that doesn’t mean the agency is ready to start approving tax breaks for that type of housing project that has proliferated in recent years.

James J. Allen, the IDA’s executive director, said Friday he is not recommending that the moratorium be extended. But he said the board should approach senior housing projects with caution while the issue is debated by officials from all of the county’s six IDAs at a forum, possibly as early as January.

If the moratorium lapses, Nathan Neill, the IDA’s attorney, recommended that the board adopt temporary guidelines, covering concerns about the impact of senior housing projects and whether they would be permitted outside designated enhancement zones.

The IDA imposed the moratorium in June in the wake of a study by the Regional Institute at the University at Buffalo that found that fewer than 1 percent of senior citizens in the county move away because they can’t find appropriate housing, contradicting a long-held notion that a lack of housing was driving residents away. That finding raised the question whether there is still a need for IDAs to support the development and construction of new senior housing throughout Erie County.

“We still need more data,” Allen said.

The IDA imposed the moratorium a month after it turned down an incentive package worth more than $1.3 million for an $8.9 million project to build 99 market-rate apartments for senior citizens on Maple Road. Without the incentives, the developer said monthly rents, which would have averaged $900 to $1,000 with the tax breaks, would increase by as much as $200. “Every developer that we have discussions with says that without incentives, the project doesn’t work,” Allen said. “And the one project we turned down didn’t get built.”

email: drobinson@buffnews.com

The stock market brushed past another milestone Friday.

The Standard & Poor’s 500 index closed above 1,800 for the first time, capping seven straight weeks of gains.

The broader index is on track for its best performance in 15 years as a combination of solid corporate earnings, a strengthening economy and easy-money policies from the Federal Reserve draw investors to stocks. Stocks have also gained because they offer an attractive alternative to bonds, whose interest rates remain close to all-time lows.

“You can’t really get better returns other than in the stock market,” said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at Rockwell Global Capital. “It’s been a quality run-up in stocks.”

The S&P 500 index rose 8.91 points, or 0.5 percent, to 1,804.76. The index has advanced 26.5 percent in 2013. If it finishes at that level, it would be its strongest year since a 26.7 percent gain in 1998.

The Dow Jones industrial average also continued its upward march after finishing above 16,000 for the first time Thursday. The index gained 54.78 points, or 0.3 percent, to 16,064.77.

The Nasdaq composite rose 22.49 points, or 0.6 percent, to 3,991.65.

Friday, health care stocks led the market’s rise. Biotechnology company Biogen Idec surged on reports that it won market exclusivity for its top-selling multiple sclerosis drug in Europe. The company’s stock jumped $33.19, or 13 percent, to $285.62.

Health care stocks have also led gains in the S&P 500 this year, rising 38 percent. The industry is attractive to investors. Some of its companies, like Biogen Idec, offer the possibility of explosive growth. Others are established players like Pfizer, which pays big dividends. Health insurance companies have also done well this year as the Affordable Care Act rolls out.

Despite their big gains, stocks could continue to rise. The economy is forecast to keep recovering, and that helps companies increase their earnings. And while stock valuations have risen, they are still attractive compared with bonds.

However, investors will likely have to look harder to find winning stocks next year, said Paul Hogan, co-manager of the FAM Equity-Income Fund.

“We’ve had the rising tide, but going forward, it’s the stock pickers that will tend to do better.”

Among single stocks that have done well this year, there are two standouts: Netflix and Best Buy.

Netflix has surged 276 percent as the video streaming service and DVD rental company continues to add subscribers. Best Buy has surged 232 percent as the company’s turnaround strategy appears to be working after a tough 2012.

Still, there are also grounds for caution. Given the strong gains this year, stocks are no longer a bargain.

“I’m not pounding the table anymore saying this is the cheapest U.S. equity market in decades,” said Andres Garcia-Amaya, a global market strategist at J.P. Morgan Funds. While investors shouldn’t necessarily sell, they should temper expectations for the level of returns, he said.

The price-earnings ratio of S&P 500 companies, a measure of how much investors are willing to pay for a stock in relation to its earnings, has climbed to 14.9 from 12.6 at the start of the year.

Investigators from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California are looking into whether a Caterpillar subsidiary may have dumped train parts in the ocean near the Port of Long Beach as part of a scheme to conduct fraudulent train repairs, according to a regulatory filing and newspaper report.

Caterpillar Inc. disclosed in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission three weeks ago that Progress Rail, a rail and locomotive repair firm it acquired in 2006, was being investigated for possibly improperly disposing of train parts, equipment and other items.

The Wall Street Journal, citing anonymous sources, first reported Friday that Progress Rail was possibly breaking environmental laws by dumping in the ocean.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to comment on the investigation. A spokeswoman for Caterpillar said the company is cooperating with the authorities and declined to comment further.

Nonetheless, the filing said Progress Rail on Oct. 24 received a grand jury subpoena requesting documents and other information relating to the allegations that it was conducting unnecessary repairs and billing clients for the work. The company said in the filing that it can’t predict the outcome of the investigation but that the “matter will not have a material adverse effect on the company’s consolidated results of operation, financial position or liquidity.”

Caterpillar acquired the Alabama-based Progress Rail seven years ago for $1 billion. It’s one of the largest rail repair firms in the country.

New York State is betting $225 million on a pair of Silicon Valley startup companies from the highly competitive solar and LED lighting industries.



Top state officials spent nine months secretly researching about 35 potential tenants for a new, high-tech manufacturing campus in Buffalo before coming away convinced that Soraa and Silevo were the right partners for the state.



Soraa, which makes premium LED lights, and Silevo, which manufactures highly efficient solar panels, are young, and the clean-energy marketplace is a crowded one where profits early in a company’s life can remain elusive.



But analysts and industry experts say the companies boast attractive, cutting-edge technologies and a solid business strategy of performing low-end manufacturing overseas and advanced manufacturing in the United States – including the planned Buffalo facilities.



“Any dollar they make, they’re investing back into the company for growth, for construction and expansion, so they achieve a critical market share,” Alain E. Kaloyeros, chief executive officer of SUNY Albany’s College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s economic development rainmaker, said Friday.



The governor swept into town Thursday to announce the state’s largest commitment of money to a single local business venture – $225 million to build two research and development and manufacturing facilities for Soraa and Silevo in a reclaimed brownfield site.



With so much taxpayer money at stake, the announcement raises two key questions: Are LED lighting and solar the right sectors for the state to invest in now, and are Soraa and Silevo the right business partners for New York?



The project won guarded praise one day after its unveiling.



“You’ve seen this: ‘The green revolution is going to bring all these jobs.’ Well, here it is,” said Michael Siminovitch, director of the California Lighting Technology Center, a research and development facility based at the University of California, Davis. “It’s a growth opportunity for any state to support innovation.”



The clean-energy industry is heavily subsidized, and the Obama administration came under sharp criticism when Solyndra, a solar power company, went bankrupt after receiving $535 million in federal loan guarantees to build a manufacturing plant in California.



Kaloyeros and Cuomo maintain the state is protected from a similar catastrophe, even if Soraa or Silevo go belly up, because the state still will own the buildings and equipment.



Soraa and Silevo have agreed to spend $750 million each and hire a total of 850 employees at the facilities the state will construct on the former Republic Steel site along the Buffalo River.



Kaloyeros said state officials talked to investors in the companies and industry analysts and reviewing internal financial documents – because, as privately held companies, Soraa and Silevo are not required to file earnings reports.



The state is satisfied the companies are in good financial health and believes their strategy of looking for opportunities to perform low-cost, low-end manufacturing in China, “while high-end, high-tech will be manufactured in Buffalo,” is a sound one, Kaloyeros said.



“The green-energy market, if you look at all the projections, it’s booming,” he said.



Here’s more about the two companies:

Soraa

Lighting makes up a significant portion of the electricity use in a building, so customers are looking for lights with better efficiency and a longer life than incandescent lights but with a better quality of light and color than compact fluorescent lights, or CFLs.



LEDs, or light emitting diodes, fit that bill. They still are relatively expensive, and still make up just a small share of the lighting market, but there is room for growth, experts said.



“So we’re seeing some really innovative companies come along that understand this nexus of lighting quality and energy efficiency, putting those two things together,” UC Davis’ Siminovitch said.



He said Soraa – founded in 2008 by three professors and now based in Fremont, Calif. – is one of those companies.



Soraa’s slice of the marketplace is at the higher end, making more efficient, longer-lasting lights that boast better color for customers willing to pay a little extra.



“So that niche is very attractive for retail and grocery lighting,” said Christopher Hwang, a research associate on the Lux Research energy electronics team.



Soraa has raised more than $100 million in financing and as of last winter had about 250 employees, according to the industry website Edison Report.



“I would say they’ve made very good progress, for a startup, in terms of the amount of funding they’ve raised and the number of employees they have and the amount of development projects they have,” Hwang added.



Referring to New York’s decision to pick Soraa as its LED lighting industry partner, Benya said, “If you were going to marry a startup company, these guys would be at the top of my list.”

Silevo

One of the founders of Silevo, Zheng Xu, said after Thursday’s announcement in Buffalo that the solar-panel maker is not yet profitable but he hopes the company will break even by next summer.



Founded in 2007 by Xu and an Applied Materials colleague, the company had $16 million in revenue last year, according to Fatima Toor, a research analyst who leads Lux’s solar components team. As of this summer the company had raised $72 million in two rounds of financing, Bloomberg News reported.



Silevo produces solar cells at a 32-megawatt factory in China. Their new Riverbend facility will build a 200-megawatt solar cell and module.



What do experts and industry partners think of the state’s selection of Silevo and solar?



“It is impossible to deny that there is meaningful risk in investing anywhere in the solar space in general. The industry is still young, very volatile and extremely competitive. Continuing dependence on subsidies also creates risk,” Shyam Mehta, senior analyst for GTM Research, said in an email.



Mehta noted, however, that fossil fuels and nuclear power industries also received subsidies, while solar industry subsidies have declined even as the cost effectiveness of solar power has improved in recent years.



Nathan Rizzo, vice president of Solar Liberty, an installer of solar panel systems based in Amherst, said he looks forward to installing Silevo solar panels manufactured locally.



“They’re making a premium panel,” Rizzo said, before adding of the state investment: “I think it’s exciting. It shows that solar is a stable technology, as far as renewable energies are concerned.”



Silevo is a relatively small company – with just 200 employees – that has largely focused its sales in Europe as high tariffs have prevented it from getting much of a toehold in the United States, Lux’s Toor said, so the manufacturing expansion in Buffalo makes sense.



“The U.S. is a huge market,” she said. “The U.S. has so much potential. Silevo’s not the only company that’s putting manufacturing capacity in the United States.”







email: swatson@buffnews.com

New York State is betting $225 million on a pair of Silicon Valley startup companies from the highly competitive solar and LED lighting industries.

Top state officials spent nine months secretly researching about 35 potential tenants for a new, high-tech manufacturing campus in Buffalo before coming away convinced that Soraa and Silevo were the right partners for the state.

Soraa, which makes premium LED lights, and Silevo, which manufactures highly efficient solar panels, are young, and the clean-energy marketplace is a crowded one where profits early in a company’s life can remain elusive.

But analysts and industry experts say the companies boast attractive, cutting-edge technologies and a solid business strategy of performing low-end manufacturing overseas and advanced manufacturing in the United States – including the planned Buffalo facilities.

“Any dollar they make, they’re investing back into the company for growth, for construction and expansion, so they achieve a critical market share,” Alain E. Kaloyeros, chief executive officer of SUNY Albany’s College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering and Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s economic development rainmaker, said Friday.

The governor swept into town Thursday to announce the state’s largest commitment of money to a single local business venture – $225 million to build two research and development and manufacturing facilities for Soraa and Silevo in a reclaimed brownfield site.

With so much taxpayer money at stake, the announcement raises two key questions: Are LED lighting and solar the right sectors for the state to invest in now, and are Soraa and Silevo the right business partners for New York?

The project won guarded praise one day after its unveiling.

“You’ve seen this: ‘The green revolution is going to bring all these jobs.’ Well, here it is,” said Michael Siminovitch, director of the California Lighting Technology Center, a research and development facility based at the University of California, Davis. “It’s a growth opportunity for any state to support innovation.”

The clean-energy industry is heavily subsidized, and the Obama administration came under sharp criticism when Solyndra, a solar power company, went bankrupt after receiving $535 million in federal loan guarantees to build a manufacturing plant in California.

Kaloyeros and Cuomo maintain the state is protected from a similar catastrophe, even if Soraa or Silevo go belly up, because the state still will own the buildings and equipment.

Soraa and Silevo have agreed to spend $750 million each and hire a total of 850 employees at the facilities the state will construct on the former Republic Steel site along the Buffalo River.

Kaloyeros said state officials talked to investors in the companies and industry analysts and reviewed internal financial documents – because, as privately held companies, Soraa and Silevo are not required to file earnings reports.

The state is satisfied the companies are in good financial health and believes their strategy of looking for opportunities to perform low-cost, low-end manufacturing in China, “while high-end, high-tech will be manufactured in Buffalo,” is a sound one, Kaloyeros said. “The green-energy market, if you look at all the projections, it’s booming,” he said. Here’s more about the two companies:

Soraa

Lighting makes up a significant portion of the electricity use in a building, so customers are looking for lights with better efficiency and a longer life than incandescent lights but with a better quality of light and color than compact fluorescent lights, or CFLs.

LEDs, or light emitting diodes, fit that bill. They still are relatively expensive, and still make up just a small share of the lighting market, but there is room for growth, experts said.

“So we’re seeing some really innovative companies come along that understand this nexus of lighting quality and energy efficiency, putting those two things together,” UC Davis’ Siminovitch said.

He said Soraa – founded in 2008 by three professors and now based in Fremont, Calif. – is one of those companies.

Soraa’s slice of the marketplace is at the higher end, making more efficient, longer-lasting lights that boast better color for customers willing to pay a little extra. “So that niche is very attractive for retail and grocery lighting,” said Christopher Hwang, a research associate on the Lux Research energy electronics team.

Soraa has raised more than $100 million in financing and as of last winter had about 250 employees, according to the industry website Edison Report.

“I would say they’ve made very good progress, for a startup, in terms of the amount of funding they’ve raised and the number of employees they have and the amount of development projects they have,” Hwang added.

Referring to New York’s decision to pick Soraa as its LED lighting industry partner, James Benya, a lighting designer in Davis, Calif., said, “If you were going to marry a startup company, these guys would be at the top of my list.”

Silevo

One of the founders of Silevo, Zheng Xu, said after Thursday’s announcement in Buffalo that the solar-panel maker is not yet profitable, but he hopes the company will break even by next summer.

Founded in 2007 by Xu and an Applied Materials colleague, the company had $16 million in revenue last year, according to Fatima Toor, a research analyst who leads Lux’s solar components team. As of this summer the company had raised $72 million in two rounds of financing, Bloomberg News reported.

Silevo produces solar cells at a 32-megawatt factory in China. Their new Riverbend facility will build a 200-megawatt solar cell and module.

What do experts and industry partners think of the state’s selection of Silevo and solar?

“It is impossible to deny that there is meaningful risk in investing anywhere in the solar space in general. The industry is still young, very volatile and extremely competitive. Continuing dependence on subsidies also creates risk,” Shyam Mehta, senior analyst for GTM Research, said in an email.

Mehta noted, however, that fossil fuels and nuclear power industries also received subsidies, while solar industry subsidies have declined even as the cost-effectiveness of solar power has improved in recent years.

Nathan Rizzo, vice president of Solar Liberty, an installer of solar panel systems based in Amherst, said he looks forward to installing Silevo solar panels manufactured locally.

“They’re making a premium panel,” Rizzo said, before adding of the state investment: “I think it’s exciting. It shows that solar is a stable technology, as far as renewable energies are concerned.”

Silevo is a relatively small company – with just 200 employees – that has largely focused its sales in Europe as high tariffs have prevented it from getting much of a toehold in the United States, Lux’s Toor said, so the manufacturing expansion in Buffalo makes sense. “The U.S. is a huge market,” she said. “The U.S. has so much potential. Silevo’s not the only company that’s putting manufacturing capacity in the United States.”

email: swatson@buffnews.com

Family firms account for about 90 percent of all businesses, but the failure rate is enormous.

To help with that, the University at Buffalo’s Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership is launching a program designed to help with the specific challenges that can befall a family business.

In addition to traditional services, like succession planning and creating advisory boards, the program starting in February will apply principles of positive psychology to help local family businesses thrive.

There will be a focus on creating healthy interpersonal relationships, peer-to-peer support groups, improving communication skills, dispute resolution, and identifying and aligning individuals’ strong suits with their jobs.

“It’s a unique set of support and services,” said Thomas Ulbrich, assistant dean and executive director of the Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership. “Family businesses are complex systems, and we’ll provide an environment where family members can flourish individually while collaborating to run a business successfully.”

Scott E. Friedman, local attorney and family business consultant, is the co-founder of the program and will serve as its executive-in-residence, along with Ulbrich and Amy Habib-Rittling, a family business adviser. Friedman’s fifth and latest book, “Family Business and Positive Psychology: New Planning Strategies for the 21st Century,” is the foundation for the new program’s curriculum.

“This program is ground-breaking, there’s nothing like it anywhere,” said Friedman, who is a managing partner at Lippes Mathias Wexler Friedman LLP. “It’s like counseling for the family business, getting to the causes of family business dysfunction.”

While family businesses account for 90 percent of all businesses, “nine out of ten of them don’t make it to the grandchildren,” Friedman said.

Family businesses become stagnant due to issues like “convenience over fit,” where promotions are doled out to individuals because they were next in line, not based on ability or qualifications. Feelings of unfair compensation or lack of recognition for contributions are also eating away at the foundation of family-owned firms, Friedman said. Those issues, along with others, will be addressed in the program.

Its offerings will include workshops, round-table conversations, coaching and a 10-week course, “Growing a Healthy Family Business.”

The program’s cost ranges from $500 to $1,700 and includes special pricing for multiple family members and enrollment in the new Family Business Association.

Members of the association can attend four major networking and two major speaker events a year. Sylvia Lafair, author of “Don’t Bring It to Work,” and an expert on pattern awareness in families and generational differences, will be the program’s first speaker in March.

Ulbrich said because of the abundance of family businesses and their high failure rate, a new approach was necessary to help these ventures survive.

“We didn’t want to create another business center; we wanted it to be special,” he said. “We wanted it to fill a gap.”

To learn more or become a member, call 885-5715 or email mgt-cel@buffalo.edu.

email:esapong@buffnews.com

Construction is scheduled to get started next month on the redevelopment of the former Spaghetti Warehouse and Sensationz nightclub building at 141 Elm St.

The $7 million project, to be known as The Planing Mill, will consist of about 22 market-rate residential apartments and 10,000 square feet of office space in the 43,500-square-foot, three-story brick building.

The apartments include three two-level units with interior staircases, 12 regular two-bedroom units and the rest one-bedroom apartments.

The project is being done by TM Montante, the company that last week won the rights to develop the former Millard Fillmore Hospital at Gates Circle.

Environmental remediation of the site is already underway, and construction will continue through the winter, said firm President Tim Vaeth. He said most of the building will stay as it is, with the exception of window replacements. The first residential apartments should be ready by late spring, although the office space may be available sooner.

The project will benefit from historic tax credits because the building dates to 1878. It was owned by E.M. Hager and Sons Co., a lumber mill operator. The mill operated six 10-hour days each week, using about 100 railroad carloads of lumber per year, and was one of the prime construction contractors for the 1901 Pan American Exposition in Buffalo. It was added to the state Register of Historic Places in March.

More recently, it was targeted to be redeveloped into 32 upscale apartments by Kevin Townsell in 2006 and then again by Greenleaf & Co.’s Jim Swiezy and Paul J. Kolkmeyer, who had a contract to buy it and invest $6 million to $7 million to turn it into 38 to 40 loft apartments.

Vaeth said Montante will also seek “gold” LEED certification for the building as environmentally friendly. Montante, which also owns a solar installation business, plans to mount solar panels either on the roof or in the parking lot.

email: jepstein@buffnews.com

If Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo’s plan works out, Buffalo will be transformed from the City of Light to the City of LED Lights.

It will become a hub for sophisticated and technologically advanced clean energy products, ranging from the high-efficiency solar panels that one of its first companies, Silevo, makes, as well as the high-efficiency LED lights made by the complex’s second firm, Soraa.

But clean energy is far more than lights and solar panels. It is a fast-growing industry that ranges from renewable energy projects, such as wind and solar energy farms, to technologies that allow consumers to use less energy, thereby reducing the demand for electricity or fossil fuels.

Those technologies are attracting billions of dollars in investment, with the biggest money flowing into power generation projects that rely on renewable sources, such as wind, solar or biofuels. “It’s not going in any direction but up,” said Jackson Morris, the director of strategic engagement at the Pace Energy and Climate Center in White Plains, which last week released a report on New York’s renewable energy initiatives.

And it’s the investments for high-end products and technology that the Cuomo administration is hoping to capture by investing $225 million to build the Buffalo High-Tech Manufacturing Innovation Hub at Riverbend on the old Republic Steel site on South Park Avenue.

The concept, mirroring an approach used to build the nanotechnology industry in Albany, is to create a state-owned complex packed with cutting edge equipment and technology that clean energy companies will clamor to use because it is too costly to develop on their own.

“These facilities are state-of-the-art,” said Alain E. Kaloyeros, the senior vice president and CEO of the SUNY College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering and the driving force behind the Albany nanoscience center. “They’re expensive to maintain. They’re sexy facilities.”

Cuomo, in making the state’s biggest single investment in a Buffalo economic development project, sees clean energy as an industry of the future.

In the United States, power generation from solar energy panels is expected to jump by 87 percent over the next 10 years, according to forecasts from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Growth in geothermal power generation is expected to jump by 62 percent, while the growth of wind power is seen to be slowing to just 4 percent. The growth is global, too. The International Energy Agency projects that renewable power, from hydroelectricity to wind and solar, will grow by 40 percent over the next five years. Excluding hydropower, the percentage of electricity that is generated by renewable sources, such as wind, solar, bio-energy and geothermal, is forecast to double, reaching 8 percent in 2018, up from 4 percent in 2011 and just 2 percent in 2006.

The clean energy industry has been evolving rapidly as new technologies improve efficiency and the costs of many clean energy sources come down, said Warren Leon, the executive director of the Clean Energy States Alliance. “Both old and new technologies are experiencing a period of rapid change,” he said. “It’s not just the direct technology, like wind and solar, that need continual investment. It’s the technology that supports them, too.”

So while analysts at clean energy consulting firm Clean Edge predict that global investments in solar energy will double between 2012 and 2022, that growth should create new opportunities for innovative companies that provide services and equipment for solar power generators, he said. One area that’s attracting a lot of attention is in the sophisticated battery technologies that would allow the electricity produced at solar energy farms to be stored until it is needed later, Leon said.

Other technologies that are in the spotlight would make the nation’s electrical grid more resilient and less vulnerable to power failures, while increasing its ability to handle power sources that generate electricity only intermittently, such as wind and solar, which only produce electricity when the wind is blowing or the sun is shining, he said.

The clean energy field includes companies that make smart thermostats that adjust temperatures based on factors such as weather forecasts, a homeowner’s usage patterns and even motion sensor data. It includes transportation products, like the start-stop batteries that now are coming into use on U.S.-made vehicles to boost fuel economy.

“One thing about clean energy is that you’re not talking about one technology or one application,” Leon said. “The technologies come in all kinds of sizes and shapes. Some require a large amount of investment. Others come together more easily.”

The Cuomo administration is focusing on the more capital-intensive technologies.

Silevo and Soraa are expected to move into the first two buildings of the 90-acre complex by early 2015, with upward of 850 jobs being created there as the companies gear up for full production during the following year to 18 months.

Analysts said the clean energy industry has gone through significant changes in the last few years, from tight financing as the economy remains weak and lenders and investors remain cautious, to low natural gas prices that make it harder for renewable power projects to compete against the falling cost of electricity from plants that run on the increasingly abundant natural gas.

At the same time, improving efficiencies in clean energy products are beginning to reduce the reliance on taxpayer incentives to make projects economically viable.

That change is especially apparent in the solar power industry, where a drop in the cost of solar panels has made those projects much less reliant on incentives as they once were.

Five years ago, solar energy projects produced electricity at an average cost of about $7 per watt. But because of today’s lower costs, solar projects now can generate electricity for around $2.33 per watt, on average, according to a study released earlier this year by Clean Edge.

In New York, where Cuomo’s NY-Sun initiative aims to invest $150 million a year in solar energy projects through the next 10 years, the average incentive for solar projects has dropped by about 20 percent over the past two years, to 84 cents per watt, down from $1.03 per watt two years ago, according to the Pace report.

Some energy experts, including former U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu, have predicted that solar energy projects could be in position to stand on their own – without incentives – by the end of the decade.

“It’s reasonable to think that, by the end of this decade, you could reach that reality,” Morris said. “The actual cost of the equipment has gone down significantly, so that reduces the size of the subsidy needed.”

email: drobinson@buffnews.com

CAMBRIA

• Baer Road, Alexander Young Jr.; Evelyn A. Young to Melissa Forsey; Craig J. Forsey, $16,000.

HARTLAND

• Gill Road & Hartland Road, Roscoe Fancher to Brereton Acres, $154,103.

LEWISTON

• Chicora Road, Joseph P. DiFonzo; Linda J. DiFonzo to Holly E. Sloma, $286,000.

• East Eddy Drive, Holly E. Sloma to Linda DiFonzo, $160,000.

• River Road & Chicora Road, Alexander V. Allen; Vera J. Allen to Shelly Reed, $90,000.

• Swann Road, Sarkee Sanoian; Patricia A. Sanoian to Cynthia Marie Sanoian; Patricia Sanoian Gormley, $14,200.

• Swann Road, Sarkee Sanoian; Patricia A. Sanoian to Cynthia Marie Sanoian; Patricia Sanoian Gormley, $11,300.

LOCKPORT

• Morton St., Robert W. Tinklepaugh to Christopher Wright, $41,000.

• Juniper St. & Pound St., James M. Rockwood; William W. Wertman to Shaun H. Aiken; Keri A. Aiken, $38,500.

TOWN OF LOCKPORT Highest price: $300,000 Average price: $167,814 Median price: $170,000 Number of Sales: 9

• Day Road, Michael Aronson; Wendi Aronson; Wendi Lehrer to Steven A. Cotten; Cynthia S. Cotten, $300,000.

• Sherwood Drive, George A. Bojalad to Judy K. Bykowski; Michael B. Bykowski, $247,900.

• Emily Lane, Karen Maurer; Karen Matsulavage; Karen Dipasquale to Rosemary Doeing; Douglas W. Doeing, $191,000.

• 5927 Stone Road, Bryan W. Schubring; Colleen A. Schubring to Weichert Relocation Resources Inc., $170,000.

• 5927 Stone Road, Weichert Relocation Resources Inc. to Shelly B. Liaros; Theodore P. Liaros, $170,000.

• Amy Lane & Angela Drive, Sara Beth Schmidt; Sara Agostini; Daniel J. Schmidt to Brenda M. Schuler, $161,500.

• 6096 Strauss Road, Travis L. Dries to HSBC Bank, $148,924.

• 7224 Akron Road, Marjorie A. Singleton to Lourdes Hardy; James D. Hardy, $111,000.

• Wynkoop Road, Richard Raymond; Christine Bern to Noah Raymond, $10,000.

NEWFANE

• Phillips Road, Mary R. Dobbs; Thomas A. Dobbs to Kristen H. Andrews; Chad L. Andrews, $233,000.

• Maple Ave. & Prospect St., Michelle S. Wedekind; Clifton J. Wedekind III to Tammy A. Dunkelberger; Clark J. Dunkelberger, $140,000.

• 6239 East Lake Road, Jared M. Baker; Tina B. Baker to HSBC Bank, $91,136.

• Main St. & Clinton St., James L. Skutt to Kimberly A. Hardt; Fredrick A. Hardt Jr., $40,000.

NIAGARA FALLS Highest price: $197,000 Average price: $67,209 Median price: $54,000 Number of Sales: 17

• North Council St., Barbara Ann Kudela to Wayne Kostuk; Angela Ciraolo-Kostuk, $197,000.

• Sunnydale Road, Hudson S. Rankin; Elaine E. Rankin to Debbie Ann Mazzara; Jack P. Mazzara, $131,000.

• 1002 South 86th St., Amor Markel; Lynn Martino to Constance E. Mcmonagle, $119,000.

• 98th St., Johanna Pawlukovich to Thuy T. Nguyen, $88,000.

• 87th St., Erik J. Nowakowski; Deborah E. Nowakowski to Joshua Lilienthal; Amy Oswald Lilienthal, $85,000.

• Joliet Ave., Kathleen Kenney; Fred W. Kenney; Robert A. Kenney; Kathleen Blake to Marilyn Uren; Samantha Uren, $85,000.

• 58th St., Scott C. Sexton; Darlene M. Sexton to Renee Rozicki, $75,000.

• 70th St., Merle Smouse to Madeline V. Demunda; Linda A. Warren, $72,900.

• 80th St., Colleen Dawn Davis to Pareshbhai F. Patel, $54,000.

• South Ave., Patricia A. Shahin to Thomas R. Collins III, $53,000.

• 71st St., Charles W. Goss to Jerrica Davis, $45,000.

• Willow Ave., Shaun Keller to Smartwholesaler Llc, $30,000.

• 15th St. & Ferry Ave., Terrance J. Franckowiak to YHK Properties, $28,000.

• Welch Ave., Terrance J. Franckowiak to YHK Properties, $28,000.

• 2494 Grand Ave., Gabriel Manro to US Bank, $24,650.

• Memorial Parkway, Sharon E. Burton to Shelly Reed, $18,500.

• Pierce Ave., Roger Brown; Camille J. Brown to Victoria Dolansky-Gentner; Peter Dolansky-Gentner, $8,500.

NORTH TONAWANDA Highest price: $251,400 Average price: $130,113 Median price: $110,000 Number of Sales: 9

• Walck Road, Crasandan Homes Inc. to David Szuromi, $251,400.

• Daigler Drive, MCW Construction Inc. to Joy B. Heim, $209,900.

• 96 Northeast Ave., Harold Robert Fritzke; Harold Robert Fritske to US Bank, $162,728.

• Eggert Terrace, Renee Rozicki to Marianne E. Lovullo, $158,800.

• Remington Drive & Wayne Ave., Sandra M. Burgstahler to Paul Eichler; Linda M. Eichler, $110,000.

• 683 Nash Road, Kevin J. Morgan to Fannie Mae, $102,121.

• 1338 Brookfield Drive, Amber A. Foley; Kevin D. Foley to Kimberly M. Cudzilo; Deborah L. Cudzilo, $97,000.

• Oakwood Ave., Michael Doktor to Jill K. Harms; Karl D. Harms, $60,000.

• 108 Cramer St., Sherry L. Bronson; Troy J. Bronson to Troy J. Bronson, $19,066.

PENDLETON

• Fiegle Road, Barbara Hobart; Alice L. Alexander; Henrietta M. Moje; Ann H. Maerten; Rosemary M. Miller to Gloria Evereth; Michael G. Evereth, $8,000.

PORTER

• Water St., Main Street Properties North Llc to Kent P. Frey; Laurie A. Frey, $255,000.

ROYALTON

• Cottage Road & Highland Drive, Dominick Ciliberto; Helene M. Ciliberto to Christine A. Biro, $145,000.

• Cottage Lane, Dennis Higgins to Jenna M. Baehr, $78,000.

SOMERSET

• Johnson Creek Road, Bertha Wronski; John P. Wronski to Mary C. Orr, $121,000.

WHEATFIELD Highest price: $2,158,229 Average price: $430,137 Median price: $225,000 Number of Sales: 9

• Forest Park Way & Shawnee Road, CO8 Holdings Llc to Riester Wheatfield USA Llc, $2,158,229.

• Stone Ridge Road, Brenda M. Schuler to Eun Ha Haynes; Thomas Haynes, $300,000.

• Summer Set Court, Mansoor A.F. Kazi; Shahida A. Kazi to Jimmy P. Vigil; Olga L. Vigil, $285,000.

• Sage Court, Renee Mapes; James Mapes to James A. Johnson; Doreen M. Porpora, $277,000.

• Niagara Falls Blvd., Bethany L. Snyder; Bethany L. Kasprzak to Colton Auto Properties, $225,000.

• Rachelle Drive, Elizabeth M. Longo; Joseph C. Longo to Michael C. Biondo; Deidre M. Olson, $220,000.

• Shawnee Road, Carol Treichler-Hewett to Gabrielle Kujawa; Thomas R. Kujawa, $200,000.

• Washington St. & Stoelting Road, Jamie Swanson to Suzanne Halliday, $153,000.

• Walmore Road, Betty J. Dolan; Francis C. Dolan to Timothy L. Foster; Lisa M. Foster, $53,000.

WILSON

• 2273 Riverview Drive, County of Niagara to Roy Francis Warner, $5,495.

ALDEN

• 500 Briarwood Court, Lawrence M. Schalberg; Marie A. Schalberg to Tammy Achkar; Michael Achkar, $207,500.

AMHERST Highest price: $550,000 Average price: $217,927 Median price: $202,383 Number of Sales: 38

• 8610 Transit Road, Kevin M. Curry; Paul M. Bliss to 8610 Transit Road Llc, $550,000.

• 124 North Cayuga Road, Brunswick Terrace Llc to M. Lemoyne Rhoades, $435,000.

• 44 Brynstone Court, Kathlyn H. Koepeczi-Deak to David G. Hodge; Kristina T. Hodge, $425,000.

• 40 Pineview Drive, MJR Associates to Vital Pineview Llc, $395,000.

• 133-147 Denrose Drive, Joseph D. Teresi; Jane H. Teresi to Denrose Drive Llc, $384,000.

• 357 Lebrun, Rebecca Demakos to David Hogan; Martha Hogan, $350,000.

• 192 Lord Byron Lane, Norma Jean Pawley; Brian L. Pawley to Rosalie A. Foti; Sebastian L. Foti Jr., $325,000.

• 10 Greenboro Court, John J. Wiertel; Rosa M. Willett; Rosa M. Wiertel to John S. Loffredo; Karen P. Loffredo, $319,500.

• 51 Pino Alto Court, Seung Wook Lee; Sang Dae Lee to Wiam Bshara; Kristine L. Bshara, $315,000.

• 33 Hunters Glen, Thomas Sanborn; Tiffany L. Sanborn; Tiffany L. Paulsgrove to Jeffrey R. Incorvia; Michelle M. Incorvia, $299,000.

• 106 Patton Place, Roger A. Forden; Carol M. Forden to Timothy J. Breier, $256,000.

• 16 Amsley Court, Chris J. Seeton; Chreyl L. Seeton; Cheryl L. Seeton to Stacey A. Webb; Brian E. Webb, $250,000.

• 24 Fox Chapel Court, J. Roger Quimby; Linda Quimby to Susan E. Wiese, $250,000.

• 92 Wyeth Drive, Florence Alberts; John F. Alberts to Carol B. Giangreco, $249,000.

• 170 Meadow Spring Lane, Melissa D. Grimm; Melissa D. Bault to Mary E. Gaffney; Thomas J. Gaffney, $240,000.

• 328 Countryside Lane, John A. Maines; Marianne L. Maines to Timothy P. Mondello, $230,000.

• 231 Presidio Place, Lisa Malkowski; Steven Foti; Sebastian Foti; Rosalie A. Foti; Sebastian L. Foti Jr. to Jerry D. Slipko; Jeanine K. Slipko, $225,000.

• 54 Bauman Road, Wei-Dong Yu; Rui-Xian Kong to Olia Golimowski; James M. Golimowski, $210,000.

• 93 Cherrywood Drive, John J. Carney; Maureen C. Van Strijp to Daniel R. Obst; Jaime R. Obst, $208,000.

• 2837 Dodge Road, Tara Kamble; Sean Laughlin to Nationstar Mortgage, $196,765.

• 296 Seabrook Drive, Susan E. Wiese; Susan E. Gundel to Paul M. Keck, $176,000.

• 340 Muegel Road, Margaret Knoerschild Maurer; Margaret Knoerschild; Margaret H. Knoerschild; Barbara J. Blocher to Beverly G. Brownell; Mark A. Dettmer, $170,000.

• 68 Cascade, Samuel Barabash to Margarita Barabash, $169,000.

• 409 Sherbrooke Ave., Anthony J. Gugino to Kari Piazza; Matthew Piazza, $152,000.

• 31 Cottonwood Drive, Ish Munjal to Frank Decarlo; David Cutter III; Kristen Cutter, $150,250.

• 173 Allenhurst, Xuewei Li; Xiangtao Zhao to Colleen P. Culleton, $149,200.

• 21 Monarch Drive, Matthew Licata to Katie A. Thompson; John J. Thompson Jr., $148,000.

• 2130 North French Road, William H. Buckeye; Adina D. Buckeye to Michael J. Young, $135,000.

• 105 Homer Lane, Harold B. Rosenberg to Jeannette Paternostro; Ann M. Sorrentino; Russell L. Paternostro; Lisa M. Calabretta; Russell J. Paternostro; Michael A. Paternostro, $131,500.

• 529 Windermere Blvd., Jonathan Demeis to Beverly M. Alexander, $130,000.

• 253 Stevenson Blvd., David W. Dietz; Tina L. Dietz to Joy Pulera, $125,000.

• 650 Youngs Road/Unit C, Sandra Lee White to Evelyn V. Nowak, $112,000.

• 12 Hamilton Drive, Robert E. Pope; Carol A. Pope to Ross L. Goddard; Erica L. Goddard, $97,500.

• 26 Callodine Ave., Victor P. Deplato to Juan Carlos Perez Deleon, $84,000.

• 382 Windermere Blvd., Theresa Lattuca; Salvatore Lattuca; Angelo Lattuca to Amy M. McClosky; Stephen J. McClosky, $82,000.

• 3940 Ridge Lea Road, Lori A. Roessler to Mario Giancola, $75,000.

• 60 Old Lyme Drive, Cecile Tegler to Sherri L. Lojacono, $62,500.

• 2497 Sweet Home Road, Anthony J. Galasso Jr. to Giuseppe Holdings, $20,000.

AURORA/EAST AURORA

• 623 Person St., Tracy J. Hinman; Donna M. Hinman to Carissa Dirado; Nicholas Dirado, $169,900.

• 480 Oakwood, Judy Lee Ball; Iva A. Webster to Jefferson C. Walker II, $156,000.

• 285 North St., Debra A. Reformat to M. Bradley Rogers; Anne M. Rogers, $153,000.

• 1546 Quaker Road, BP&A Real Estate Management to David W. Janca, $128,000.

• Vacant Land/Lewis Road, Richard E. Koch; Ladonna K. Koch to Clemons Construction, $28,000.

BOSTON

• 7953 Boston State Road, Rosebud Solutions Inc. to Christie N. Rosputni, $174,000.

• 7519 Valley Circle Lane, Ann Marie Santonocito; Joseph R. Santonocito to Phyllis I. Langan, $140,000.

BUFFALO Highest price: $710,000 Average price: $105,578 Median price: $45,600 Number of Sales: 73

• 33 Chapin Parkway, Robyn Regehr to Alexander E. Gress, $710,000.

• 2207 & 2199 Elmwood Ave., Robert Mangano; Ursula Mangano to Waheeb Ali Ahmed; Waleed A. Ahmed, $500,000.

• 54 New Amsterdam Ave., Sarah A. Mahoney to Michael J. Weber, $500,000.

• 892 Main St., 892 Main Street Llc to Manley Real Estate Holdings, $485,000.

• 35 Lexington Ave., Diane D. Ivins Trust; Clinton F. Ivins Jr. Trust Agreement to Emily Santos; Todd Santos, $410,000.

• 43 Cleveland Ave., Hilkka Leone to Matthew D. Georger; Christine C. Georger, $382,450.

• 54 New Amsterdam Ave., WBF Properties VII Llc to Sarah A. Mahoney, $375,000.

• 66 Middlesex, Kevin R. Billet; Annick M. Billet to Rhea Anna; Michael Meyer, $375,000.

• 372 Hudson St., Theresa Stephan Hains to James T. Solomons, $280,000.

• 78 St. James Place, Scott F. Propeack to Andrea L. Milazzo; Joseph S. Fanara Jr., $218,000.

• 198 University Ave., Joseph D. Provenzano; Nicole L. Provenzano to Melissa D. Grimm, $180,000.

• 27 Ketchum Place, Julie Jackson-Forsberg; Eric M. Jackson-Forsberg to Joseph C. Smith, $180,000.

• 16 Cleveburn Place, Steven E. Wright to Armin Properties, $178,000.

• 137 Mariner St., Amy L. Torres; Edward O. Watts Jr. to John Laven, $167,000.

• 78 Tracy, Thomas Kobus to Albert Litto, $153,600.

• 199 Colvin Ave., Scott C. Roberts to Laura Rayner, $150,000.

• 230 Taunton, Stephen J. Duszynski to Jeffrey Young; Linda M. Young, $140,000.

• 3215 Bailey, James S. Rados to M&M Dearot Inc., $135,000.

• 47 Blantyre Ave., Lubavitch Bais to Joseph A. Granata; Cynthia W. Thomason, $130,000.

• 247 Crestwood Ave., BBB Real Properties to Katelyn M. Brickhouse, $127,000.

• 223 Virgil, Brandon J. Lutz to Matthew L. Amerosa, $124,000.

• 100 Villa Ave., Paul F. Desantis; Yadira D. Desantis to Daniel G. Fisk; Keyla G. Zintek, $112,500.

• 529 Lisbon, Harold Palmer II; Terri L. Lotempio to Fannie Mae; Mae Fannie, $91,434.

• 18 Brinton St., Ronald C. Serio to 18 Brinton Llc, $85,000.

• 47 Ripley Place, Jose R. Vega; Julia V. Vega to Eric P. Heine, $84,900.

• 150 Choate Ave., William P. Lewis; Elizabeth A. Lewis to Brian J. Bartosik, $80,000.

• 412 Winspear Ave., Winspear Properties to Lulix Llc, $79,000.

• 210 Tupper West, Andre Dortch to Jeffrey T. Bochiechio, $75,000.

• 68 Schiller St., Joshua Dubs; Lawrence P. Fumanti to HUD, $71,346.

• 663 Hopkins, ABS Enterprise to Sokolov 94 Llc, $71,000.

• 205 Lisbon Ave., Flavia J. Acevedo to Jako J. Mondal; Camielle A. Mondal, $66,000.

• 420 Riley, Glebova Realty Group to Fang Liu, $62,000.

• 38 Duerstein, OPM Niagara Llc to Zaw Hein, $56,000.

• 63 Rachel Vincent, Dato Development to M. Rogan Morton; Joseph F. Cardinal III, $55,000.

• 314 Potomac, Westend Properties of Buffalo to Kevin Helfer Sr.; Kevin Helfer Jr., $52,000.

• 309 Fargo Ave., Jesus Acosta; Anna Acosta to 307 Fargo Group Llc, $50,000.

• 253 Rosalyn, Equity Trust Company; Francis Rogoyski to Level Field Spread Llc, $45,600.

• 171 Landon, Glebova Realty Group to Sankt Pauligatan; Sven T. Tiedtke, $42,000.

• 149 Roesch, Peter Hartmann; Mary A. Hartmann to Richard Medico; Christina Medico, $35,000.

• 155 Roesch, Peter Hartmann; Mary A. Hartmann to Marissa Draksic; Mark Draksic, $35,000.

• 116 Greenwood Place, India Asplundh; Michael Morton to Morton-Werner Real Estate Income Fund, $32,900.

• 17 Okell, GJ Brewerson Llc to PCS Landholding, $32,000.

• 79 Freund, KC Buffalo Enterprises to Manderly Hill Llc, $31,000.

• 135 Roesch, Anna M. Kieser to Jure Draksic; Mark Draksic, $30,000.

• 439 Normal Ave., Charlotte Leap; Richard Leap to Bethany Wagner, $30,000.

• 317 E. Delavan Ave., Salvatore Mistretta; Rosie Mistretta to Jimmie Larke III; Carmen Wingo, $28,000.

• 680 Fulton, KC Erie Niagara Properties to Manderly Hill Llc, $28,000.

• 39 Argus, Patricia R. Schmitt; George W. Schmitt Jr. to Jeffrey A. Keitel; Jarred C. Hudson, $26,000.

• 181 15th, Maria A. Rosario to Farhana Akther, $25,500.

• 184 Congress St., Darren Wayne Priddey to Schlomo Rosenfeld, $25,000.

• 82 Newfield, Peterson Corp. to Keith Canazzi; Equity Trust Company, $25,000.

• 86 Greeley, Peterson Corp. to Kevin Seaman; Equity Trust Company, $25,000.

• 598 Tonawanda St., Steve Kovats; Elizabeth Kovats; Elizabeth C. Kovats to YS Buf Holdings, $22,500.

• 97 Huntington Ave., Terri Lewis; Carol A. Flaherty to Anthony Dillon; David M. Mueller, $18,000.

• 298 Jewett Ave., Steven P. Greene to Ajm Salek, $16,500.

• 102 Howell, Peterson Corp. to Wing Properties, $15,000.

• 251 Esser, Peterson Corp. to Wing Properties, $15,000.

• 160 Courtland, Pravin D. Suchak; Dinesh D. Suchak to KC Erie Niagara Properties, $14,000.

• 734 Prospect, Ramanico Inc. to Mohammed M.R. Salim, $14,000.

• 66 Hirschbeck, Francis W. Kaczmarek to Evelyn Owens-Hennings; Michael L. Harris, $13,500.

• 308 Florida, Kiante S. Lynch to Glebova Realty Group, $11,500.

• 124 Liddell St., Robert Folting to RPS of Western New York, $10,000.

• 222 Riverside, Peterson Corp. to KC Buffalo Enterprises, $10,000.

• 120 Gatchell St., Ron C. Lane; Cynthia L. Lane to Premier Investment Properties, $9,000.

• 291 Sumner Place, Sushil Kaur; Khazan Singh to Zabiullah Omari, $8,000.

• 886 Kensington, Mary Ann Canella; Joseph P. Canella to Anita Sanders; Enterprise Woodruff, $7,000.

• 267 Hambur, Suzanne Y. Janik; Kenneth J. Janik Sr. to Glebova Realty Group, $6,000.

• 373 Fargo, Charles Strickland to Sarah Spurlock, $5,000.

• 42 Philadelphia, Peterson Corp. to KC Buffalo Enterprises, $5,000.

• 56 Hawley, Peterson Corp. to Wing Properties, $5,000.

• 620 Fulton St., Ann Marie Lommer; Michael Lommer to Ali H. Aljamali, $5,000.

• 73 Victoria Ave., Del-Rich Properties Inc. to Mohammed Alamgir Pathwary, $5,000.

• 94 St Joseph, Richard Siuda; Eleanor Siuda to Eric Joseph, $5,000.

CHEEKTOWAGA Highest price: $295,000 Average price: $105,388 Median price: $93,500 Number of Sales: 17

• Vacant Land/Transit Road, RMF Holding Corporation to National Retail Properties, $295,000.

• 15 Harvest Lane, Judith C. Travis; Judith C. Desiderios to Kathleen Wielinski; Brian Wielinski, $174,000.

• 243 Zoerb Road, Kristie L. Slack; Kristie L. Martzolf to Andrew Smith, $132,000.

• 27 Pamela Court, Robert L. Tyler; Susan J. Tyler to Darrell E. Londos, $131,000.

• 20 Leni Llane, Thomas S. Scherer; Natalie T. Scherer to Jonathan P. Fax; Michelle B. Lafratta, $124,000.

• 47 Doyle Court, James P. Karas to Vincent L. Andolina, $119,500.

• 482 Lamark Drive, Joanna Korman to E. Kathryn Deavers, $114,000.

• 60 Ledyard Ave., Peggy A. Karp; Joseph P. Karp to Diane Brindle; Michael Brindle, $112,600.

• 14 Calderwood Drive, Kathleen Schafer; Thomas Whissel; Eugene M. Whissel to W. Scott Leuth, $93,500.

• 280 George Urban Blvd., Lorie Maciejewski; Lorie Brindle; Michael Brindle; Lorie L. Brindle to Syed Muhammed Z. Burney; Syed N.A. Burney, $78,500.

• 41 Dania Drive, Ralph Joseph Mueckl; Suzanne E. Miller to Tammy Sessanna, $77,500.

• 6386 Transit Road, Lorenz & Sons Inc. to RMF Holding Corporation, $75,000.

• 35 Southcrest Ave., CJE Holdings Inc. to Kenneth J. Costa, $69,500.

• 2 Normandy Ave., Leanne Bober to Robert Conly, $57,000.

• 271 Oehman, Sandra Lehner; Daniel F. Lehner to Stephen Cavers, $54,000.

• 188 Harvard Ave., Alexander P. Gelley; Susan A. Gelley to David Deutschlander, $49,000.

• 15 Marne Road, Anna Appleby; Nancy A. Appleby to Robert Rash, $35,500.

CLARENCE Highest price: $701,000 Average price: $279,300 Median price: $250,000 Number of Sales: 9

• 9736 Stonecliff Court, Brandon Hickey; Martha Hickey to Elizabeth Kraus; David P. Kraus, $701,000.

• 6341 Bridlewood Drive S, Audrey G. Coviello; Patrick M. Coviello to Tenzing T. Deck; Neha T. Deck, $344,900.

• 6257 Emily Court, Michael Saeli; Karen M. Saeli to Martha L. Hickey, $335,000.

• 6046 Samantha Lane, Ranch View Llc to Nancy Digiore; Daniel J. Digiore, $329,900.

• 8960 Candlewood Lane, Dennis P. Cole; Carrie A. Cole to Keith Demonstoy; Marissa Demonstoy, $250,000.

• 4148 Fireside Drive S, Deborah L. Honsberger; Deborah L. Bernd to Paul F. Desantis; Yadira D. Desantis, $190,000.

• 4551 West Overlook Drive, Clare A. Rey; Joseph C. Rey Jr. to Brandon J. Hickey Jr., $185,000.

• 8295 Ericson Drive, Marjorie L. Baker to Marcus Newhouse, $147,900.

• 8270 Tonawanda Creek Road, Jacqueline A. Kenney to Mike Wood, $30,000.

COLDEN

• 9557 Blanchard Road, Allen Kick; Allan F. Kick; Jeanne L. Kick; Jeanne F. Kick to Rasc 2005-KS2; US Bank, $107,828.

COLLINS

• 3813 Woodside Road, Kelly A. Tamberino; Paul R. Tamberino to Eileen L. Bauth; Richard K. Bauth, $181,000.

CONCORD

• 5988 Genesee Road, Dolores C. Gunsher to Colin W. Miller, $82,500.

• 9266 North St., Patricia Harshbarger; Allen Meyers; James A. Meyers; Marsha L. Smith-Solari to Marsha L. Smith-Solari, $80,000.

EDEN

• 8839 East Eden Road, Tammy S. Sessanna; Tammy S. Hecke to Brian R. Mathews, $165,000.

• 2513 North Creek Road, Daniel R. Martucci; Sandra L. Martucci to Matthew M. Kirsch; Viki L. Kirsch, $58,500.

ELMA

• 1761 Transit Road, Cindy M. Youngers; Andrew J. Youngers to Cadets Federal Credit Union, $265,000.

• 61 Summerdale Drive, Louis R. Reboy; Louis R. Reboy Sr. to Matthew M. Reboy, $185,000.

EVANS Highest price: $285,000 Average price: $130,306 Median price: $120,000 Number of Sales: 9

• 402 Lakeside Road, Anthony P. Buttino; Suzanne M. Buttino to Joseph F. Chimento; Roseanne P. Chimento, $285,000.

• 761 Lake St., Shannon M. Renaud; Derek S. Renaud to Melissa M. Tessoni, $193,000.

• 628 Seymour Terrace, Mark W. O’Connell to John R. Simet, $150,000.

• 707 Monroe Ave., Andrew R. Kulikowsky to Sean M. Vanhatten, $125,500.

• 8073 Delamater Road, Virginia E. Fennell; Virginia E. Bittinger; Richard D. Fennell Sr. to Tammy S. Barry; James A. Barry, $120,000.

• 9681 Oakgrive Drive, Venita Viapiano Wright; Dennis F. Wright to Lillian Dechellis; John D. Kary II, $117,000.

• 714 Burvch St., Scott Petrus; Tanya M. Petrus to Christopher A. Porter; Mariah E. Porter, $105,000.

• 6825 Revere Drive, Randall Gillick; Barbara A. Gillick Puskas; Thomas J. Gillick; Deanne M. Tripi; Candice D. Gillick; Candice D. Hawkins to Green Tree; US Bank, $54,758.

• 6895 Hamilton, Mellon Bank of New York; Protium Master Grantor to Brian T. Schroeder; Kristen M. Schroeder, $22,500.

GRAND ISLAND Highest price: $235,000 Average price: $167,250 Median price: $185,750 Number of Sales: 8

• 907 Carter Creek Drive, Kent D. Jayme; Jillian M. Jayme to Valery P. Sandyrev; Liya V. Lukyanchuk, $235,000.

• 141 Bradfield Drive, Benjamin J. Hoey; Barbara A. Hoey to Mark D. Hoey, $219,000.

• 3073 Stony Point Road, Bonnie J. Beam; Kenneth R. Beam Jr. to Joseph E. Winski, $217,500.

• 285 White Oak Lane, Edward O. Watts; Lydia T. Watts to Jerry W. Vereeke, $211,500.

• 3410 Stony Point Road, Paul C. Reger to Charles E. Jones; Michelle R. Jones, $160,000.

• 3344 Wallace Drive, Joseph A. Mondoux; Nicole M. Mondoux to Marcia A. Hagerty, $121,000.

• 1942 Broadway, Paul Gast; Dana Gast to Luis Ezquerro; Regina M. Guenther, $114,000.

• 145 Sturbridge Lane, New England Estates of Grand Island to Ryan Homes of New York; Nvr Inc., $60,000.

HAMBURG Highest price: $380,000 Average price: $150,000 Median price: $132,000 Number of Sales: 22

• 4592 Winding Woods Lane, Gwen Conway; Michael Conway to Brett T. Baker; Lynette M. Baker, $380,000.

• 2150 Shadow Lane, Ryan Homes of New York; Nvr Inc. to Holly L. Amodeo; Michael L. Amodeo, $360,920.

• 1446 Evergreen Drive, Eddy & Lewin Homes Inc. to Daniel J. Schmitt; Jessica A. Schmitt, $220,204.

• 5665 Southwestern Blvd., Villas At Brierwood Llc to Kathleen M. Pack; Michael T. Pack, $209,900.

• 4231-4233 Sowles Road, Philip J. McConkey; Deborah J. Angell to Steven D. Daly; Donna M. Daly, $204,000.

• 3376 South Creek Road, Shirley A. Beale to Rosemary Dippert, $181,500.

• 4674 Newton Road, Julie Salem; Corey Salem; Francis A. Salem; Carter G. Salem III to Mary Anne Goodheart, $170,000.

• 5056 McKinley Parkway, James R. Brown; Karen J. Brown; Susan B. Stanton; Kathlyn A. Edwards; Rosanne L. Radigan; Roberta L. Wicinski to Patrick N. Marsillo Jr., $155,000.

• 236 George St., Robert C. Waterfield; Darlene M. Waterfield to Darlene K. Marilla; John W. Marilla Jr., $144,900.

• 2229 Hobblebush Lane, Marissa Russo; Marissa Dahn; David S. Russo to Brandon Farrell; Rebecca Simon, $143,000.

• 5191 Briercliff Drive, Michael R. Solly; Barbarfa A. Solly; Barbara A. Bednarek to Patrice Truskey; James M. Truskey, $134,000.

• 164 Oak Hill Drive, Amy N. Brodfuehrer; David A. Brodfuehrer to Emmy S. Fahey; Joseph C. Joy, $130,000.

• 3041 Ansdell Road, Diarmuid P. Flanagan to Joann Mohler; Michael Mohler, $130,000.

• 5000 Morgan Parkway, Scott May; Mary E. Giallanza; Scott P. Mayh to Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, $129,166.

• 5717 Lakeview Terrace, Roy E. Campbell; Dorothy A. Campbell to Jeffrey S. Lewis Jr., $110,000.

• 4283 Elmwood Ave., Joseph Grajeda; Esther Grajeda to Bernadine Almasi; Zoltan R. Almasi; Zoltan R. Almasi Jr., $100,350.

• 5035 Morgan Parkway, Roxann Ferazzoli to Kristine M. Koerner, $100,170.

• 83 Pine St., Nancy M. Ranic; Nancy M. Clark; Harold T. Clark to Kelly A. Tamberino; Paul R. Tamberino, $99,900.

• 63 South Lake St., Scott R. Redmon to Travis A. Czerwonka; Thomas A. Czerwonka, $87,000.

• 4838 Lake Ave., Emily Hallden to Anthony Bernardi, $55,000.

• 5383 Bayview Road, Darlene K. Marilla; John W. Marilla Jr. to Barbara Sarick; Francis Sarick, $45,000.

• 38 Scooter Circle, Country Meadows Llc to Bernadette Knighton; Bryan A. Knighton, $10,000.

HOLLAND

• 205 Capitol Heights, Nicholas G. Ruchser to Yue Song, $135,000.

LACKAWANNA

• 63 Baker Court, Maureen T. Druzbik; Joseph P. Garvin to Patrick F. Gorman Jr., $121,000.

• 361 South Shore Blvd., Robert Cintron; Benjamin Cintron; Michael Cintron; Thomas J. Gaffney; William Cintron; Susan Sullivan to Frances Gadomski, $60,000.

• 58 Myrtle Ave., Sadeq Ahmed to Priyanka Chugh; Pankaj Chugh, $60,000.

• 60 Sharon Parkway, Magdalena Viterna; Stephen G. Gelle to Gerald W. Biles, $46,900.

LANCASTER Highest price: $365,000 Average price: $124,451 Median price: $130,000 Number of Sales: 22

• 32 Worthington Lane, Windsor Ridge Partners to Peter F. Nawojski, $365,000.

• 640 Aurora St., James M. Brundage; Joanne P. Giordano; Joanne P. Brundage to Kevin E. Vandermeid; Jamie R. Vandermeid, $315,000.

• 15 Ryan St., Kevin E. Vandermeid; Jamie R. Vandermeid; Jamie R. Miranda to Jason W. Godios; Paulette M. Godios, $230,000.

• 37 Grafton Court, Ann Marie Kornacki Delzer; Ann Marie Kornacki; Robert M. Kornacki to William L. Travis; Judith C. Travis, $221,160.

• 21 Cumberland St., Marrano/Marc Equity Corporation to Paul Debergalis; Laura M. Debergalis, $215,370.

• 581 Aurora St., Mary Ann Metzgar to Ian W. Jenney; Jenna M. Jenney, $200,000.

• 40 Pleasant View, Linda Kinal; Linda Grzybek; David J. Grzybek Sr. to Mary Virginia O’Brien; Michael D. Basinski, $170,000.

• 6 Transit Blvd., Betty Ann Bosworth to David J. Grzybek; Linda M. Grzybek, $166,000.

• 38 Bottimer St., Anne Antes; Robert L. Antes to Ronald P. Mantz, $152,000.

• 33 Milton Drive, Edward H. Kusmierczyk; Georgia R. Kusmierczyk to Scott C. Grant, $150,000.

• 38 Lombardy St., Carol Ann Beckman; Robert G. Beckman to Allison Monaco; John Santora III, $140,000.

• 14 Antoinette Drive, Michael A. Sedia to Joseph C. Sedia, $120,000.

• 90 Irwinwood, Bernadetto Papili; Bernadette Magiera; Filomena Papili; Michael Papili to Jonathan M. Berent; Kira N. Ceppaglia, $113,000.

• 9 Silent Meadow, DJC Land Development to Sharon L. Norton, $58,500.

• 36 Muskingum St., Michael P. Darcy to Raymond J. Enser, $40,000.

• 48 Crane St., Larry Rawa to LR Property; David R. Lambert, $30,000.

• Vacant Land/Mohawk Place, Abadon Revocable Trust to Kenneth J. Sielski; Jamie L. Johnson, $14,000.

• Vacant Land/Mohawk Place, Abadon Revocable Trust to Craig M. Pauline, $8,410.

• Vacant Land/Mohawk Place, Abadon Revocable Trust to Eleni Tshulos; Nicholas Tshulos, $8,200.

• Vacant Land/Mohawk Place, Abadon Revocable Trust to Jennifer Glenn; Eric B. Glenn, $7,990.

• Vacant Land/Mohawk Place, Abadon Revocable Trust to Laura Szefel; Joseph S. Szefel, $7,000.

• Vacant Land/Mohawk Place, Abadon Revocable Trust to Patrick Shafer; Sarah Shafer, $6,300.

MARILLA

• 12881 Bullis Road, Maria Bliemeister; Jacob A. Bliemeister to Lynn Fox; Brock Fox, $193,000.

• Four Rod Road, Patrick Francabandiero; Patrick M. Francabandiero to Joseph Knarr, $30,000.

NEWSTEAD

• 12143 Nice Road, Shannon M. Thompson; Shannon M. Connors to Allison Stoll; Aaron Stoll, $248,800.

• Vacant Land/Cedar St., Nancy E. Peters to Tammy Fox, $60,000.

ORCHARD PARK

• 66 Hilltowne Drive, Ryan Homes of New York; Nvr Inc. to Jason S. Winkelman; Jessica L. Winkelman, $333,035.

• 6437 Milestrip Road, Elaine M. Widmer to Anthony Dibiase, $140,000.

• 31 Woodhaven Road, Richard D. Hallett to Esther M. Hallett; William J. Hallett; Richard D. Hallett, $139,000.

• Vacant Land/63 Hilltowne Drive, Hilltowne Estates to Ryan Homes of New York; Nvr Inc., $88,000.

• 4631 Abbott Road, Kathleen Breault to Karl Kofod, $35,000.

CITY OF TONAWANDA

• 155 Minerva St., Kariann Kiener; Thomas J. Kiener to Thomas D. Neff Jr., $132,000.

• 79 Frederick Road, John R. Krywcun to Richard T. Tice, $86,500.

• 137 Delton St., Lore Hoffman; Werner Hoffman to Holly A. Milewski, $86,000.

• 78 Cranbrook Road, Christopher F. Zmuda to Charlene Thomas, $84,000.

• 245 Main St., Clara Garrity; Douglas J. Garrity to Timothy S. Wrazin; Heather M. Wrazin, $35,000.

TOWN OF TONAWANDA Highest price: $282,520 Average price: $124,104 Median price: $116,000 Number of Sales: 22

• 2355 Elmwood Ave., Leemilts Petroleum Inc. to Hari Bhumi Corporation, $282,520.

• 40 Allegany Ave., Douglas P. Leising to Christopher J. Kacala; Kristin K. Bentley, $180,246.

• 335 Clark St., Brian E. Webb to Michael R. Brynildsen, $156,000.

• 111 Palmer Ave., Allison F. Stoll; Aaron D. Stoll to Jason D. Walker; Titeca M. Walker, $138,600.

• 4 Kingsbury Lane, Joanne M. Janish to Azhar Gill, $135,000.

• 224 Dexter Terrace, Derek McGee to Stephen M. Kniery; Julie M. Kniery, $132,000.

• 48 Wendover Ave., Jason A. Kocot; Valeri A. Notto; Valerie A. Kocot to Jennifer Simpson, $128,500.

• 195 Delaware Road, Kristine L. Stoklosa-Bshara; Kristine L. Stoklosa to Brandy L. Vandermark-Murray; Matthew D. Murray, $123,711.

• 274 Orchard Drive, Marilyn Demarchis; Anthony J. Demarchis to Joel W. Nelson; Melissa G. Gebauer, $122,000.

• 480 Zimmerman Blvd., Robert D. Dinunzio to Sarya Abihabib; Elias A. Mansour Jr., $117,200.

• 128 Woodward Ave., Charles E. Jones; Michelle R. Jones to Megan Notaro; Derek A. Notaro, $116,000.

• 82 Lowell Road, Thomas M. Bishop to Susan M. Dicenso, $116,000.

• 161 Fairfield Ave., Susan Gregory to Matthew V. Donatelli; Rachael J. Donatelli, $114,900.

• 674 Fries Road, Nancy Molyneux to Christopher G. Bellegia; Rachel J. Bellegia, $113,000.

• 119 Harrison Ave., Francesco M. Germano; Judith A. Germano to Michael Labelle, $110,000.

• 80 Enola Ave., Elizabeth A. Metzen to Beth A. Holleran, $106,000.

• 25 Kenton Road, Amy L. Blake; Richard J. Blake to Carolyn R. Frandina, $105,000.

• 61 Hoover Ave., Dawn M. Krupczyk; Dawn M. Core to Patricia R. Grabowski, $105,000.

• 304 Wabash, Leonard J. Thornton to Corey Berger, $100,700.

• 95 Koenig Road, Norman C. Bedient; Norma Bedient to Antonio Capaccio, $84,000.

• 281 Parkhurst Blvd., Michael J. Johnson; Rebecca A. Bylewski to State of New York Mortgage Agency, $76,017.

• 405 Westgate Road, Julie Atti Rogers; Jay A. Joslyn to State of New York Mortgage Agency, $67,905.

WEST SENECA Highest price: $288,779 Average price: $143,962 Median price: $114,000 Number of Sales: 10

• 96 Chancellor Lane, Marrano/Marc Equity Corporation to Elizabeth A. Zogaria, $288,779.

• 135 Chancellor Lane, Marrano/Marc Equity Corporation to Valerie L. Andrews; Eric E. Andrews, $251,340.

• 20 Sunset Creek Drive, Tracy L. Dominiak; Brian J. Dominiak to Bruce H. Gibson; Melinda L. Gibson, $215,000.

• 3648 Seneca St., Christine A. Blonski; Richard A. Blonski; Patricia L. Blonski to Craig Horner, $125,000.

• 91 Theresa Court, Kim A. Dahn to Samantha J. Wurstner, $123,000.

• 73 Ludwig Ave., Laura Pieprzny; Leocadia Pieprzny; John Pieprzny to Daniel L. Nowak; Sarah A. Nowak, $105,000.

• 52 Singer Drive, Kuei-Hsiang Mu; Mei Lin Jan; Ying-Yeh Mu; Shih-Yuan Mu to Nicholas D. Chojecki; Denice M. Chojecki, $100,500.

• 32 Collins, Mary R. Szczesny; John F. Garvey; Judith A. Bondanza; James J. Garvey Jr. to Karen Reichert, $98,000.

• 231 Chamberlin Drive, Laura Tirone; Linda Huber; Paul J. Huber to Michael S. Maciejewski, $88,000.

• 940 Reserve Road, Dante Pacella; Angeline Pacella to Jozefa Sajecki; Stanislaw R. Sajecki, $45,000.

It’s looking like a pretty sure bet that the Delaware North Cos. office and hotel complex will get its tax breaks after all.

The Erie County Industrial Development Agency on Monday approved the smaller portion of the two-part bid for incentives when it granted Delaware North $807,000 in sales tax breaks as it prepares to spend upward of $17 million to outfit its headquarters in the new building at 250 Delaware Ave.

The second part of the tax break package is being sought by Uniland Development Co., which is asking for at least $3.2 million in incentives for its $81 million portion of the project, covering the actual construction of the complex. The IDA is expected to vote on those incentives at its meeting in mid-December after Uniland dropped a controversial proposal for using taxpayer money to finance the complex’s parking garage and sliced the ramp from five stories to four.

While the project still has some disturbing shortcomings – from using taxpayer subsidies to help a company move a little more than two blocks, to adding subsidized office space to a stagnant market – there are plenty of reasons to expect the Uniland portion of the project to win the backing of the IDA.

For starters, the vote for the Delaware North portion of the incentives was unanimous. Not one IDA board member raised any questions or concerns about the project during Monday’s board meeting or the policy committee meeting that preceded it.

Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz, who has been among the IDA board’s most outspoken members about questionable tax breaks, supported the Delaware North portion of the incentives. “It was important to show the community ... that we support our home-grown businesses,” he said.

Yet Poloncarz also acknowledged that without the Uniland tax breaks, the complex probably won’t get built, leaving Delaware North back at square one in its hunt for a new headquarters. If voting for Delaware North’s tax breaks was a show of support for a home-grown business, wouldn’t a vote against the proposed Uniland tax breaks be a show of nonsupport for that very same business if it meant the project was derailed?

Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown, an avid supporter of the project, went so far as to predict that the Uniland incentives would be approved by the IDA at its Dec. 16 meeting.

Poloncarz, who carries more weight than most on the IDA board, wouldn’t go that far. He said he’s still reviewing the Uniland application and that there still are some loose ends to tie up, but he thinks the revisions that the developer made to its tax break request have made it much more palatable.

The biggest change centered around Uniland’s original proposal that would have let the developer use money it paid through a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes agreement to pay down the borrowings it took on to build the parking garage. It would have been akin to a homeowner being able to have their property tax payments used to make the mortgage payments on their new house.

“I had serious problems with the prior application” because of the funding for the parking ramp, Poloncarz said.

Uniland initially said it needed the rarely used financing mechanism to close a $10 million financing gap on the 515-car parking ramp it planned to include in the project. But as the public outcry against the incentives grew, the developer scaled back the size of the ramp and reduced its capacity to 380 cars.

And it dropped the financing request in favor of a bid for a package of property, sales and mortgage tax breaks that have become standard fare for most any office project in Erie County. The 119-room hotel that also is part of the complex isn’t getting any incentives because it doesn’t qualify for incentives under the IDA’s eligibility guidelines.

Will that be enough to get the tax breaks through the IDA board?

“I don’t know if we’ll have unanimous support,” Poloncarz answered.

But it doesn’t appear that enough IDA board members are willing to risk angering Delaware North – and tempting them to move their headquarters – by opposing a project with serious shortcomings.

They don’t appear willing to draw the line on a project that continues the sense of entitlement that now is common among companies making any kind of investment in their local operations, even if it just moves their offices a couple of blocks.

It uses taxpayer subsidies to throw about 94,000 square feet of new office space on a stagnant downtown market that already is saddled with a 38-story office tower at One HSBC Center that soon will be nearly vacant. It will leave a gaping vacancy in the Key Center, where Delaware North now occupies more than 100,000 square feet of space on seven floors.

That would be an issue even if the Buffalo Niagara region was growing steadily and more able to absorb all that new office space. But we’re barely growing, which makes it even more of a problem because all it does is just add to a glut of empty space that further depresses rents across downtown.

“I think we’re all concerned about the ripple effects this and other projects will have,” Brown said.

“I think one of the ways to break the cycle is to create more demand,” he said. “We are seeing more investment in this community than we’ve seen in the last 43 years.”

Frank Mesiah, an IDA board member and the president of the Buffalo branch of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, sees it too. He looks around and sees a region that has a lot going for it, from the waterfront and our affordable cost of living to our lack of traffic jams.

“We’re always talking about people moving out of Buffalo. We ought to be selling Buffalo,” he said. “This talk is always about a company getting up and leaving Buffalo. I think it would cost a company a fortune to set up somewhere else that has all of these things.”

But it’s because we still have such an inferiority complex that we can’t imagine that a business would really want to stay here when it has the chance to go someplace else. After all, didn’t National Gypsum move to Dallas in the 1970s? Didn’t Greatbach Inc. move its headquarters to Dallas just last year?

And so we keep on giving tax breaks. Because we’re not growing. And because we still fear that the grass is greener someplace else.

email: drobinson@buffnews.com

Nigel Travis became CEO of Dunkin’ Brands in 2009, adding the title of chairman earlier this year as he took the reins from Kenmore native Jon Luther.

Before taking the top post of the $6.9 billion corporation that encompasses Dunkin’ Donuts and Baskin-Robbins, Travis helmed the Papa John’s pizza chain, Blockbuster video stores and held top positions at Burger King. A graduate of England’s Middlesex University, Travis was in Williamsville Thursday to meet with local franchisees.

Q: How big a market is Western New York for you?

A: We think this is a great Dunkin’ market. It’s got a good mix of hot weather, which is good for our iced coffee, and cold weather which is good for our more traditional coffee.

We have 46 stores in Buffalo. We see that as a market we want to grow. We’ve got more than 1,000 stores in upstate New York and I think we can have more than 1,500 over the next seven to 10 years.

Q: How will the FDA’s proposed trans fat ban affect your donut formula?

A: We don’t think it’s going to cause us that much difficulty. We think it may actually be a competitive advantage because I think we’re ahead with all the research that we’re doing.

Q: Why are Tim Hortons and Dunkin’ Donuts often located right next to each other?

A: Well, we probably both do the demographics and the traffic patterns.

We were here first by a long way. We were here back in the ’60s. We’re very proud of our long Buffalo heritage and proud that everything we do comes from the U.S. We have a wonderful partnership with Rich’s, a major employer here. They are one of our top suppliers in the whole country. Tim’s came from across the border.

Q: People here could debate Tim Hortons versus Dunkin’ Donuts all day. Does it surprise you that people are so passionate about coffee and donuts?

A: Obviously we think ours is better, so I’m surprised there’s any debate.

I think people get passionate about products they see and taste every day. The first thing I do every morning is drink a cup of Dunkin’ coffee, so I can fully understand why people get emotionally attached to the product.

Q: How are your K-cups doing?

A: K-cups have been very successful for us. There’s no doubt with the increased competition and the number of brands in grocery stores, it has impacted our business some. Our franchisees are very passionate about keeping it just in [Dunkin’] stores, so that’s something that’s different for them and we’re working with them on that issue.

We think K-cups are a great way to build customers’ resistance to competitor brands because they can very conveniently drink Dunkin’ coffee at home. The biggest part of the coffee business is actually at home, so K-cups are an important extension of the store.

Q: What are the biggest opportunities for Dunkin’ Brands?

A: We’re introducing a loyalty program with our mobile app, and I think that’s going to increase the frequency of our customers and it’s going to be great for our franchisees.

Q: What are some challenges facing the industry?

A: We live in a very competitive industry. Coffee is very unconsolidated – there are a few big players and a lot of independent operators. There’s a greater percentage of independents in the coffee and bakery segment of the food and drink industry than any other part, so I think it is ripe for consolidation.

I think some of our bigger competitors like McDonald’s will continue to see coffee as a great opportunity. I think you will see more and more people trying to get into coffee. I think it’s going to be an interesting corporate area for development.

Q: Does Dunkin’ have regional menu items overseas?

A: We do. When you go someplace like China, you have donuts with things like seaweed, and donuts that have much more of a savory taste.

Even in America, people forget what a big country this is. We have a product called a kolache, [a fruit pastry originating in Central Europe] which was sold in shops in Dallas that we’ve picked up and is very big there.

Q: What percentage of the business is coffee?

A: We never break down coffee but in the U.S., beverages are about 60 percent of sales.

Q: How do you address food allergies, such as nut allergies?

A: We understand that concern and many other concerns. We have tried many things and when you actually put them out there, you find you don’t get the response you’d expect.

We’ve never discussed going nut-free. We’ve got a gluten-free donut in some stores. Interestingly, it doesn’t sell that well, but we do have the products.

Q: Some consumers don’t like your Styrofoam cups for environmental reasons.

A: We feel our traditional cup is as good as any other but we recognize the concerns. We’re working with several startups to develop a new cup.

A lot of people think the paper-lined cup is better. It isn’t. It can’t be recycled. We’re working on some ideas that build in recycling.

My vision is to have a cup we can totally recycle and reuse in Dunkin’ Donuts. It will take a little time because it hasn’t truly been developed yet, but there are some promising signs.

Q: Where is the industry headed next?

A: Clearly, everyone talks about healthy food. We were leaders, launching our DD Smart menu in 2008.

Mobile ordering is big. It clearly worked in the pizza industry. Chipotle is doing well with it. I think some kind of out-of-store ordering is going to be a big trend.

I think ethnic foods are going to be interesting. Anything people want is going to be the news. But the key thing is going to be engagement in loyalty programs and social media.

email schristmann@buffnews.com

Have you heard that 70 is the new 65?

If not, you will. Momentum is growing to get people to think that way before retiring. The notion is being trumpeted in the nation’s capital as a way to ease pressure on Social Security, and it is circulating among financial planners. The idea is to get people to work longer and delay retirement so they end up with more money for monthly retirement living expenses.

With the notion strong in public policy circles, the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College recently analyzed the implications. Its initial conclusion is that people need to start thinking of 70 as the new retirement age.

If 70 becomes the age when people can start collecting full Social Security benefits, those who naively retire earlier could end up struggling with far less monthly income than they will need.

“Cuts in benefits, by extending the full retirement age, will lead to very low benefits for early retirees,” said Alicia Munnell, director of the Center for Retirement Research.

Of course, at this point the change is not imminent. There are multiple proposals in Washington for dealing with the time when Social Security is no longer able to pay people what they are expecting. And the political pressure to insulate the system from change is tremendous.

But people need to be thinking ahead so that if they plan to retire earlier than 70, they will have enough savings to fill in where Social Security leaves off. Even now, financial planners are urging people to work to 70, so they end up with more spending money than if they retire at the full retirement age of 66, or even earlier at 62. At 62, people can get small Social Security benefits, but each year they wait increases their monthly check about 8 percent.

According to Munnell’s research, retiring at 62, rather than 70, cuts the monthly benefit almost in half. A person who would receive a monthly Social Security check of $1,000 upon retiring at 70 would get $568 at 62.

That’s been a huge selling point for waiting to retire. In addition, financial planners have emphasized that while investments in 401(k) plans and IRAs can lose money during a bad period in the stock or bond markets, Social Security remains a sure thing – a benefit that consequently must be embraced fully. Not only does it provide a guaranteed payment each month for as long as you live, but it also increases as inflation occurs. So, if you retire now and figure you can live on $3,000 a month, inflation of 3 percent a year will mean you will need about $6,300 for the same lifestyle 25 years from now.

Before retiring, it’s wise to try an inflation calculator online for a view of your future needs. Many people retire without considering how much they will need or the sources of their income. Besides Social Security, people need savings from individual retirement accounts, 401(k) plans or other sources.

Munnell says a retirement age of 70 makes sense because people are living longer, and are healthier, than when the retirement age was 65. Since 1940, she said, life expectancy has increased seven years for both men and women. In 2015, the average woman who is 65 can expect to live another 21.6 years. In 1940, it was only 14.7 years. The average man of 65 in 2015 is expected to live 19.3 years – significantly longer than the 12.7 years for a man in 1940.

The increase in life expectancy “suggests that people may have outgrown the physical need for retirement at 65,” said Munnell. On the other hand, she cautions policymakers that the ability to keep working is not uniform, so a hard-and-fast retirement age of 70 could be painful for people who are not healthy.

Social Security is used by lower-income people as the major source of retirement income, and she cautions government about raising the retirement age to 70 in an attempt to reduce the level of monthly benefits it would pay to someone retiring at the full age.

Currently, she notes, Social Security will replace about 50 percent of the monthly income a medium-earner would have earned on his or her last job before retiring. But she notes that Medicare premiums are deducted from Social Security benefits, and retired individuals with income over $25,000 pay taxes on Social Security.

Wendell and Linda Ramage could give Congress and the Obama administration some lessons on paying off massive debt.

I can’t help but admire the story of these two retired teachers from Florida, both 71, who sacrificed and went without so they could pay off $50,000 in credit card debt they had accumulated because of medical expenses and overspending. It’s the couple’s resolve to buckle down and pay off their bills and stop living beyond their means that should be a lesson for our government.

The couple was honored recently as client of the year by the National Foundation for Credit Counseling.

Wendell explained why he began running up credit card debt. It was after being diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2001 and told he had about four years to live.

“I think, inside, I felt that having terminal cancer entitled me to get whatever I wanted, and so I was reckless with credit cards,” he said during a video that was played at a recent conference in Denver.

But his cancer went into remission. And it was then he realized that, no matter what, he didn’t want to leave an inheritance of debt to his wife. The couple recently celebrated their 49th anniversary. He recalled the sandwiches his wife would make for him each day and how on top she would place a love note.

Once their debt reached $50,000, they started paying $100 over the minimum payment each month. “We soon realized ... it was going to take us many years to pay off all of our debt,” Wendell said. “We also knew that retirement was around the corner for both of us, which would mean a significant reduction in income.”

The Ramages decided bankruptcy wasn’t an option – not because they wouldn’t qualify to erase their debts or that it was wrong to seek relief. They just felt an obligation to pay their debts. So they contacted a nonprofit credit-counseling agency – the Consumer Credit Counseling Service of Middle Georgia – and were put on a debt management plan in 2008.

Ah, but life got in the way again. Soon after starting the plan, Wendell was diagnosed with a more advanced stage 4 prostate cancer – again with a prognosis of four to five years to live. He was no longer able to keep up with his duties as a teacher and so he retired after 32 years. Then the school where his wife had been teaching for 32 years closed. She too retired. The bad news kept coming. In January, Linda was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease.

With their income reduced, the couple worked with Nicole Caldwell, their credit counselor, to rework their debt-reduction plan. The key is they didn’t stop trying. “We would not let life get in the way of us finishing,” Wendell said. “We had to make a lot of sacrifices, many of them hard, but it was necessary.”

They ate a lot of grilled cheese sandwiches and tomato soup during the home stretch of their debt payment plan, Caldwell said.

Their debt management plan had them repaying nine credit cards with a total debt of $50,957. Their monthly payment was $1,081, and the average interest rates were reduced by 9 percent. With the return of cancer and reduction in their income, it became difficult to make their original monthly payment. Working with creditors and the counseling service, they got the payment reduced to $768 in 2012.

On May 6, the couple dropped off their last debt payment.

“Even with difficult life situations such as cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and reduction in income, Wendell and Linda always exhibit a positive attitude and dedication to pay off their debt,” Caldwell said.

Wendell, with Linda by his side, accepted their award and their story left many of us in the audience in tears.

“We made it,” he said, his voice shaking. Then he gave a thumbs up.

The couple is now doing great financially. Wendell even started a job at a prison teaching inmates and preparing them to take the General Educational Development (GED) tests, which, when passed, allow people to earn a high school equivalency diploma.

The Ramages are a real inspiration for paying off debt.

This isn’t easy for long-term job hunters to hear, but the advice comes from people who make a living helping people find jobs.

I asked a group of career counselors what they tell job hunters who say they can’t get past the computerized hiring systems that reject them before they have a chance to talk to a human being, much less a hiring manager.

The group’s advice: Forget the computerized hiring system.

“If you’re responding to an ad, you’re already too late,” one adviser said flatly.

That may sound harsh, but it comes from experience.

People who are landing good, professional jobs aren’t squeaking through digital screeners that put resumes in “in” or “out” piles. They’re finding job opportunities that aren’t even posted.

How? The counselors said two things are producing job offers: networking and volunteering.

Networking means finding the people who do what you want to do (or have hiring power over those jobs) in the organizations or industries where you want to work. It means going to chamber meetings and professional and fraternal organization meetings. It means creating face-to-face contact. It means telling basically everybody you know what you have to offer.

Read that last sentence again.

That doesn’t mean asking everybody you know for a job. It means telling them what skills and experience you can bring to the table. Someone will know someone who needs you. That’s how networking works.

The second tip is to volunteer your time and talent. Volunteering expands your contacts, exposes you to more organizations, and gives you a bullet point to fill what otherwise would be a resume blank spot.

Yes, you can include volunteer work on your resume, especially if it’s professionally relevant. Just do it, the counselors said. And don’t say you’re too busy.

You can use your telephone to call any other phone in the world. But if you want to place a video call to someone, good luck.

Thanks to the incompatibility between video calling services including Skype, Google Hangouts and Apple’s FaceTime, there’s a good chance that the person you want to reach isn’t on the service you use.

If you want to reach someone, you have to know what video calling service that person uses, make sure you have access to that service and, in some cases, know the nickname the person uses on that service. And to ensure you can connect with a wide range of people, you’d have to run multiple applications.

Imagine if AT&T cellphone users could only call other AT&T customers and Verizon Wireless customers could only call other Verizon Wireless users. To reach everyone, you’d have to have a cellphone for every network.

Ridiculous, right?

And yet, we consumers have had to deal with this situation for years when it comes to Internet-based communications technologies. PC-based instant messaging has long suffered the same problem as video calls. You still can’t use AOL’s AIM chat application to send a message to someone using Yahoo’s Messenger service, even though both have been around for more than 15 years.

And we’re likely to have to continue to suffer with incompatible messaging services for years to come. That’s because newer mobile-based messaging apps – including WhatsApp Messenger, Apple’s iMessage and BlackBerry’s Messenger – are generally closed to outside connections.

Cullen Jennings, a Cisco fellow who is working with the Internet Engineering Task Force to develop standards for messaging technology, is optimistic that the various messaging services will eventually connect with one another – just not anytime soon.

“That’s looking more in the 10-year time range,” Jennings said. “This is a slow shift.”

The problem, he said, is not a technical one. Many messaging and video calling services are built using the same Internet standards, so allowing the services to interconnect would be relatively trivial.

Instead, he and other analysts say, the lack of interoperability has more to do with companies focusing on their own narrow business interests. Messaging service companies are still trying to figure out how to make money and think that to be competitive, they’ve got to accumulate as many users as possible, analysts say. So they are more interested in locking in new customers than in allowing their existing customers to connect with friends on rival services.

Meanwhile, there’s little to no government pressure pushing companies to cooperate. Governments could mandate that telephone networks interoperate, because those networks were controlled by a limited number of heavily regulated companies. But many of the newer messaging services are offered by startups that fall outside of existing regulations. Even the services offered by giant companies like Apple or Google haven’t yet seized enough control of the market to draw regulatory scrutiny.

To be sure, there have been some stabs at interoperability over the years. Apps such as Trillian and IM Plus allow users to sign into multiple messaging services at the same time. You can use AOL’s AIM or Yahoo’s Messenger to send instant messages to friends on Facebook, and can use Skype to make video calls to your Facebook friends. Apple’s iMessage allows iPhone users to send and receive regular SMS text messages. And the Skype app has long been able to make voice calls to regular telephones.

But the connections are disjointed at best. And for every step toward integration, there seem to be other steps away from it. Microsoft replaced Windows Messenger, which connected to Yahoo Messenger, with Skype, which doesn’t. Google’s now-retired Google Talk chat service was built on an open standard; its Hangouts service is built on proprietary technology and unlike Talk, doesn’t allow users to communicate with AIM or other outside chat services.

And then there’s Apple. When the company launched its FaceTime video service, then-CEO Steve Jobs announced the company would make the technology behind it an “open industry standard,” which would presumably allow non-FaceTime users to make video calls to those using Apple’s app. More than three years later, the iPhone maker still hasn’t followed through, and FaceTime remains as closed today as it was then.

The IETF’s Jennings remains optimistic. As adoption rates slow, he said, messaging providers will come to realize that they can provide more value to their users by tapping into the network effects of connecting to other networks than by keeping users locked into their services. And corporate clients and regular consumers will push the messaging providers in that direction.

Maybe so, but even Jennings admits that day is a long way off. So for the time being, we’re stuck with an unruly mess of messaging systems, none of which wants to talk to the other.