Niagara IDA ups its subsidies for fast food eateries


The Niagara County Industrial Development Agency on Wednesday doubled down on two projects its leaders claim will convince tourists to spend their vacation dollars in Niagara Falls rather than across the border.

Those projects? Two fast food restaurants, a Moe’s Southwest Grill and an A&W.

The IDA had previously signaled it would offer tax subsidies to those projects — a total of $172,000 in property and sales tax breaks — and made those offers official at its monthly meeting Wednesday morning. That alone drew the ire of local politicians, namely state Sen. Sean Ryan, who’s pledged to reform IDAs across the state.

But IDA leaders decided the tax breaks weren’t enough. So, on top of the tax breaks, the IDA leaders on Wednesday approved two grants — worth a total of $261,750 — for the Moe’s and A&W. Coupled with the tax breaks, the IDA’s assistance comes to $433,000. That works out to $14,448 per job (30 full time equivalent positions). The restaurants will receive the grant money following construction, after the developer submits receipts to the IDA.

For the Moe’s, the grant and tax breaks equate to the IDA paying for 21 percent of the construction costs. For the A&W, the IDA’s assistance equates to paying for 27 percent of costs.

Ryan, a Buffalo-area Democrat and chairman of the Senate’s economic development committee, has called the tax subsidies “wrong” and “wasteful,” adding Wednesday that the additional grant money is “disappointing.”

But Mark Onesi, the IDA chairman, argued that the tax breaks and grants were necessary because fast food restaurants would otherwise never open in downtown Niagara Falls. The downtown area does include at least a dozen restaurants, however.

“(Businesses) are not coming here. It is a depressed area. We need jobs,” Onesi said. “I don’t think you understand that concept, that you give a little to get a little.”

“We need stuff like that to keep the tourists on our side of the bridge,” he added. “I’m tired of them going to Canada.”


Donate to support our nonprofit newsroom


The tax subsidies and grants come despite the developer, Muhammed Shoaib, saying he didn’t need the assistance.

“This is a little help, but we are able to do it without it as well,” Shoaib told Investigative Post last month after the IDA granted preliminary approval to the subsidies for his two restaurants.

That admission would normally disqualify the projects from receiving subsidies. Under state law, IDA subsidies must pass the “but for” test, meaning a particular project is only viable “but for” the assistance.

But Onesi argued Wednesday that Shoaib comments to Investigative Post were a “miscommunication” and that his project was “misstated.” An Investigative Post reporter recorded the interview with Shoaib, and published his comments verbatim.


Listen to the developer tell Investigative Post he doesn’t need a subsidy.


“He just stated right here that it was a miscommunication and he does need the money,” Onesi said. “Why are you bothering with these small things when the Buffalo Bills are getting 850 million dollars?”

Investigative Post has published extensive reporting on the planned Bills stadium, and the public’s $850 million contribution.

Shoaib, on Wednesday, declined to comment for this story.

Politicians, business leaders take sides

Ahead of Wednesday’s meeting, the proposed subsidies and grants for the Moe’s and A&W sparked controversy.

Following Investigative Post’s initial reporting on proposed subsidies, Ryan — along with state Assemblyman Jonathan Rivera and Niagara Falls City Council Member Donta Myles — spoke against the IDA, arguing that subsidizing fast food restaurants wouldn’t create the jobs or investment needed to alleviate poverty and unemployment.

“We know you can’t support a family by working at an A&W root beer and that’s the reason why retail isn’t eligible for this type of funding,” Ryan said at a press conference Jan. 27 in Niagara Falls. “They don’t provide family-sustaining jobs.”

“It doesn’t take an expert to look at this as bad, wasteful spending, bad economic development,” he added.

Niagara Falls business leaders, in turn, wrote letters and emails to the IDA to voice their support for the project, with one saying Ryan “has no clue about Niagara County.” Leaders from the Niagara USA Chamber, Destination Niagara USA, the Aquarium of Niagara, as well as several hotel owners wrote or spoke at a public hearing Jan. 30 in favor of the subsidies.

In addition to criticizing Ryan, several agreed with the IDA that downtown Niagara Falls is in need of more restaurants and that tax subsidies and grants are the way to get them.

“People want to stay here longer, but we don’t give them enough reason to do that,” said Frank Strangio, whose family owns several Niagara Falls hotels. “So, in my opinion, incentives like this are tailor made for this type of project. This is exactly what we’re looking for.”


Listen to an exchange between the IDA chairman and Investigative Post.


At least four of the business leaders who voiced support, including Strangio, Destination Niagara USA and the Aquarium of Niagara have received grants or subsidies from the IDA in the past, agency records show. 

Reforms coming?

Ryan, the newly appointed chairman of the Senate’s Committee on Commerce, Economic Development, and Small Business, has pledged to push forward legislation to reform IDAs, partially in response to projects like the Moe’s and A&W.

One bill would take away IDAs’ ability to grant tax breaks that take away revenue from local school districts.

A study released Wednesday by the nonprofit research and advocacy group Good Jobs First showed that New York public schools lost an estimated $1.8 billion from tax subsidies in 2021 alone. 

The Niagara-Wheatfield School District lost $3 million in 2021, according to the report, meaning it had $847 less to spend per student.

Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter


A second bill would require IDAs to get a third-party assessment before issuing tax breaks for tourism-related projects. The assessment, Ryan said, would verify that tourists would actually visit an area because of the subsidized project.

“Guess what, no third-party verifier is going to say an A&W root beer is a regional and tourist destination,” he said.

Ryan has expressed optimism that both bills could pass later this year, marking the most significant reform to IDAs in a decade.

“​​We’ve seen plenty of evidence that IDAs like the one in Niagara County aren’t going to stop making bad deals with taxpayer money until we pass laws to stop them, and I’m working hard in Albany to do that,” Ryan said in a statement Wednesday. “It’s a shame that Niagara County taxpayers are going to foot the bill for two restaurants that would have been built even without subsidies.”

Onesi shrugged off Ryan’s criticism as “fanfare” and all  but dared him to reform IDAs.

“He seems to not like this area. That’s my take,” Onesi said. “Why is he focusing on us when he’s from down there, why us? There’s a statute … it’s on the books. If he wants it changed, change it.”

The post Niagara IDA ups its subsidies for fast food eateries appeared first on Investigative Post.

Related articles

Don’t believe rumor Tim Walz gave $8B to Somali company to investigate fraud

The claim originated with The Babylon Bee, a Christian satirical outlet that Snopes has repeatedly debunked.

Trump stumbles over his words when cornered by reporters on false ICE shooting claims



An evasive Trump told reporters on Thursday that the American citizen shot and killed by ICE "behaved horribly," but stumbled when reporters pressed him harder.

As news of the fatal shooting of an observer by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Minneapolis began to spark outrage and protests, President Donald Trump took to his Truth Social platform to defend the officers' actions and falsely claim that the victim, Renee Nicole Good, was driving toward officers or even that an officer was hospitalized, none of which appears to be true from reporting or video footage.

New York Times reporters went on to confront Trump about these discrepancies on Thursday morning, and when put on the spot, he became evasive.

“She behaved horribly,” said Trump. “And then she ran him over. She didn’t try to run him over. She ran him over. I’ll play the tape for you right now.” Trump then had his assistant Natalie Harp bring over a laptop that played a slow-motion video of the shooting.

“With all of it being said, no, I don’t like that happening,” Trump added before the video played.

After Times reporters noted that the video didn't show any ICE officer being run over, Trump stumbled over his words, saying, “Well, I — the way I look at it — It’s a terrible scene. I think it’s horrible to watch. No, I hate to see it.”

Trump's claims that the shooting was justified have been echoed by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who said the officer “used his training to save his own life and that of his colleagues” from a woman who was "stalking" them.

The exact nature of what caused the officer to fire his weapon is not the only criticism ICE is facing; other reports have indicated the officers blocked a doctor who was on scene from rendering medical assistance after the shooting.

This Trumpist threat proved itself a danger — now it’s forming again



By Alexander Lowie, Postdoctoral associate in Classical and Civic Education, University of Florida

Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia, announced in November 2025 that he will relaunch the group after it disbanded following his prison sentence in 2023.

Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other crimes committed during the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

In January 2025, President Donald Trump granted clemency to the over 1,500 defendants convicted of crimes connected to the storming of the Capitol.

Trump did not pardon Rhodes — or some others found guilty of the most serious crimes on Jan. 6. He instead commuted Rhodes’ sentence to time served. Commutation only reduces the punishment for a crime, whereas a full pardon erases a conviction.

As a political anthropologist I study the Patriot movement, a collection of anti-government right-wing groups that include the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and Moms for Liberty. I specialize in alt-right beliefs, and I have interviewed people active in groups that participated in the Capitol riot.

Rhodes’ plans to relaunch the Oath Keepers, largely composed of current and former military veterans and law enforcement officers, is important because it will serve as an outlet for those who have felt lost since his imprisonment. The group claimed it had more than 40,000 dues-paying members at the height of its membership during Barack Obama’s presidency. I believe that many of these people will return to the group, empowered by the lack of any substantial punishment resulting from the pardons for crimes committed on Jan. 6.

In my interviews, I’ve found that military veterans are treated as privileged members of the Patriot movement. They are honored for their service and military training. And that’s why I believe many former Oath Keepers will rejoin the group – they are considered integral members.

Their oaths to serving the Constitution and the people of the United States are treated as sacred, binding members to an ideology that leads to action. This action includes supporting people in conflicts against federal agencies, organizing citizen-led disaster relief efforts, and protesting election results like on Jan. 6. The members’ strength results from their shared oath and the reverence they feel toward keeping it.

Who are the Oath Keepers?

Rhodes joined the Army after high school and served for three years before being honorably discharged after a parachuting accident in 1986. He then attended the University of Nevada and later graduated from Yale Law School in 2004. He founded the Oath Keepers in 2009.

Oath Keepers takes its name from the U.S military Oath of Enlistment, which states:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States …”

Informed by his law background, Rhodes places a particular emphasis on the part of the oath that states they will defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

He developed a legal theory that justifies ignoring what he refers to as “unlawful orders” after witnessing the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Following the natural disaster, local law enforcement was assigned the task of confiscating guns, many of which officers say were stolen or found in abandoned homes.

Rhodes was alarmed, believing that the Second Amendment rights of citizens were being violated. Because of this, he argued that people who had military or law enforcement backgrounds had a legal duty to refuse what the group considers unlawful orders, including any that violated constitutionally protected rights, such as the right to bear arms.

In the Oath Keepers’ philosophy, anyone who violates these rights are domestic enemies to the Constitution. And if you follow the orders, you’ve violated your oath.

Explaining the origin of the group on the right-wing website The Gateway Pundit in November 2025, Rhodes said: “We were attacked out of the gate, labeled anti-government, which is absurd because we’re defending the Constitution that established the federal government. We were labeled anti-government extremists, all kinds of nonsense because the elites want blind obedience in the police and military.”

Rebuilding and restructuring

In 2022, the nonprofit whistleblower site Distributed Denial of Secrets leaked more than 38,000 names on the Oath Keepers’ membership list.

The Anti-Defamation League estimated that nearly 400 were active law enforcement officers, and that more than 100 were serving in the military. Some of these members were investigated by their workplaces but never disciplined for their involvement with the group.

Some members who were not military or law enforcement did lose their jobs over their affiliation. But they held government-related positions, such as a Wisconsin alderman who resigned after he was identified as a member.

This breach of privacy, paired with the dissolution of the organization after Rhodes’ sentencing, will help shape the group going forward.

In his interview with The Gateway Pundit, where he announced the group’s relaunch, Rhodes said: “I want to make it clear, like I said, my goal would be to make it more cancel-proof than before. We’ll have resilient, redundant IT that makes it really difficult to take down … And I want to make sure I get – put people in charge and leadership everywhere in the country so that, you know, down the road, if I’m taken out again, that it can still live on under good leadership without me being there.”

There was a similar shift in organizational structure with the Proud Boys in 2018. That’s when their founder, Gavin McInnes, stepped away from the organization. His departure came after a group of Proud Boys members were involved in a fight with anti-fascists in New York.

Prosecutors wanted to try the group as a gang. McInnes, therefore, distanced himself to support their defense that they weren’t in a gang or criminal organization. Ultimately, two of the members were sentenced to four years in prison for attempted gang assault charges.

Some Proud Boys members have told me they have since focused on creating local chapters, with in-person recruitment, that communicate on private messaging apps. They aim to protect themselves from legal classification as a gang. It also makes it harder for investigators or activist journalists to monitor them.

This is referred to as a cell style of organization, which is popular with insurgency groups. These groups are organized to rebel against authority and overthrow government structures. The cell organizational style does not have a robust hierarchy but instead produces smaller groups. They all adhere to the same ideology but may not be directly associated.

They may have a leader, but it’s often acknowledged that they are merely a figurehead, not someone giving direct orders. For the Proud Boys, this would be former leader Enrique Tarrio. Proud Boys members I’ve spoken to have referred to him as a “mascot” and not their leader.

Looking ahead

So what does the Rhodes interview indicate about the future of Oath Keepers?

Members will continue supporting Trump while also recruiting more retired military and law enforcement officers. They will create an organizational structure designed to outlive Rhodes. And based on my interactions with the far-right, I believe it’s likely they will create an organizational structure similar to that of the cell style for organizing.

Beyond that, they are going to try to own their IT, which includes hosting their websites and also using trusted online revenue generators.

This will likely provide added security, protecting their membership rolls while making it more difficult for law enforcement agencies to investigate them in the future.