WHEREFORE, Defendant, CITY OF LAKE WORTH, respectfully requests that this Court strike GREATER BAY GROUP, LLC’s Complaint as a sham, enter Summary Judgment in favor of the CITY OF LAKE WORTH on the merits and further award the CITY OF LAKE WORTH its reasonable attorney’s fees as provided under 57.105. Fla.Stat. and granting such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
The above is a paragraph in the recent Motion To Strike filed by our outside attorney, Brian Joslyn of Casey, Ciklin, etal. Joslyn's argument is that the Supreme Court has said that "it is a judicial prerogative inherent in a court to strike out pleadings that are either sham or frivolous." He proceeds to give all the arguments as to why Greater Bay's suit is a sham. He is also asking that our legal fees be reimbursed.
But we all knew about Greater Bay. Our three elected officials then had to have known as well but they proceeded anyway. What was really happening at our beach? What was motivating that Commission to make all the wrong choices and to give away our beach? What motivated one political faction in this City to run Mark Drautz out of town on a rail, a mayor who stood up for what was right--stood up for the people? I have my ideas on this one. It would be another "dirty dozen" story.
As one person said who e-mailed me yesterday, "Thank God he didn't get a hold of our Casino." Greater Bay did enough damage in the short time they were on our beach property with the pool renovation.
"Teamwork is key to the success of our projects" states Greater Bay Construction Company president Tim Steele. Greater Bay used sub-contractors because they knew nothing about pools and contracted with Pugh, a "friend" of the good ole boys. You remember the CRA scandal on his property at 6th Ave South. Our pool repairs originally were to cost $391,000. Before too long, the cost jumped up to $424,826. As everyone now knows--
- the pavers are sinking because sand was not packed correctly
- an incorrect sized pool pump was installed
- inferior materials used
- the pool pump house is unsafe
- the pool had to be closed
What about warranties? Are there any? What about insurance that Greater Bay carried? Peter Willard, if you recall, blamed the shoddy work on Pugh Pools, his sub-contractor. Greater Bay, however, is ultimately responsible for this mess.
Because of prevailing politics at the time in our city, Greater Bay was allowed to continue with our pool after non-performance and stalling, from inception, on the original Ground Lease and Development Agreement. When you reflect on all that occurred, you wonder how this could have happened...how did all this corruption take place for so long. Why wasn't our project manager looking out for our best interests? What happened to our staff that was directly involved?
Instead of Greater Bay suing us when they never performed, we should be suing them.
- Starting blocks installed incorrectly. Can't attract swim meets.
- Two diving boards in contract; 1 meter and a 3 meter-- only one used 1m board installed.
- Pool covers used to retain heat were made for residential pool--won't work on a competitive pool as they are too lightweight and will also blow off in a strong wind. We had to contract with Lincoln Equipment for a new pool cover because what we paid for was inferior in every way.
- Heater not connected.
Greater Bay even goes so far as to blame former city attorney Larry Karns and implied that Karns improperly recommended that the City solicit bids from other developers for the necessary pool improvements and not proceed with Greater Bay. Karns made this recommendation because they had failed to execute the City approved Amendment 1 which had to do with going forward with work on the pool which originally had been scheduled later in the original Agreement. An ineffectual city attorney overall, Karns' advice was right on this one but the Commission did not listen.
On February 8, 2008 and on a 4 to 1 vote with Commissioner Cara Jennings dissenting, the Commission voted for Amendment 1 to the Greater Bay Contract allowing them to proceed with repairs to our pool. Mayor Clemens, Commissioners Lowe, Golden and Vespo voted YEA in spite of the city attorney's legal advice. Have you ever heard of anyone going against the advice of their attorney? Lake Worth is an anomaly. Not only is it a mystery why various commissions continued in support of this sham (corruption or ineptitude) but it is because of bad decisions such as these that got us to where we are today.
Willard is finally running out of games in spite of his $40 million dollar law suit against the City of lake Worth. Some birds never know when to stop chirping.
5 comments:
an e-mail just received--
Lynn,
You may be looking at the wrong people to blame of the pool renovation.
The person's who should be named in a lawsuit are the PMP's (both 'Project'
and 'Construction') who oversaw the renovation. It was their
responsibility to turn over a swimming pool on time, on budget, and as designed. Shoddy
workmanship was PMP's responsibility, not Greater Bay's......or even the
City Commissioners.
The next time your city decides to renovate anything, go out and get
yourselves: 1) a licensed project manager and, 2) a licensed construction manager
who have experience in whatever it is you are building or renovating. I
know that it took myself (and my son) a great deal of hard work and money --
and then passing an incredible difficult test to obtain our PMP "Project
Management Professional" license.
In the future, if you cannot afford two good PMP's, then do not even
consider the renovation.
Absolutely great advice but you are way too kind towards our elected officials. They are the ones who contracted with GB. We had a Commission that didn't even allow then mayor Marc Drautz to read the Contract and snatched it away from him in a political move and had the Vice Mayor sign it--Retha Lowe. Anarchy on the Dais. They are the ones who contracted with the Project Manager. They are the ones who voted to go forward on every occasion. It comes down to them. they are the blame.
Lynn, you seem to miss the fact that the judge denied the City's motion to dismiss the Greater Bay lawsuit last Tuesday - I'm sure it's just an oversight. Apparently, the judge was not convinced that it was a "sham" lawsuit. Lighting the candles...
No problem. It was all strategy, because a motion to dismiss is not a responsive pleading. An Answer is. Wes, why not address the meat and potatoes of the blog? You seem to defend Greater Bay still. Out of that entire synopsis, you interject a Motion to Dismiss.
If we had loyal to L.W.Citizens interests', leaders in the present administration, we would file a suit against Greater Bay for non-performance.
For our loss of revenue(the job, Historic recreation,with grants, could have been finished by Straticon in 10mos.to 1 Year,our 1921 Casino opened and creating millions in revenue since Dec. 2008!
The pump house is part of our Olympic size messed up swimming pool,part of it's rehab.
One cannot legally have a Public Olympic size swimming pool without the mechanism(pump house)to keep it running.
The subContractor too, who neglected to restore that as part of pool restoration, is liable for non performance! Where is the warranty from Pugh and Greater Bay for the job. We got one even for the smallest restoration job we did on historic houses!
Is the administration going to roll over and play dead?
Do they only know how to waste our money?Utility Director's blown $997.000 damaged transformer repair cost, our money spent out of town?Still our employee? How much must she destroy before we replace her by a certified Electrical Engineer who knows how to switch on a transformer with checking it's circuit breaker, before doing so?
Dee McNamara
Post a Comment