I just discovered that we have a city that is more fu**ed up than Lake Worth when it comes to politics--RIVIERA BEACH.
If you recall, a political action committee was formed in Riviera Beach, Citizens Task Force, that gathered signatures to get the marina development issue on the November 2, 2010 ballot. They did just that and kept city property under city control and retained the present land-use. They did it inspite of the odds and the $10 million dollar law suit filed against them by Wayne Huizenga, owner of Rybovich Marina who wanted to grab the property.
Well, you don't screw with the people with big bucks. There is something in their DNA that will not take "no" for an answer even if the voters have told them that they wanted to keep the marina in its present land-use and did not want a huge service yard for Rybovich. Pro development forces used every advantage they had (money) for yesterday's election and over-turned the Charter amendment that was passed in November.
The people who were influenced by developers and the pro-development crowd, lost their public marina by 923 votes. What happened Riviera Beach? What happened Emma? What happened Andrew?
Those with money can influence the world. They can get you to do what they want and influence the entire process to their advantage and the average Joe will never know what hit him.
Really sad. Oh well, the people get the government that they deserve! Wonder how much money changed hands under the table to the local Riviera Commissioners and various "Pastors" to tell their congregations to vote for this crock? How much pollution will this cause in the inracoastal waterway? We will never know, because the EPA is being gutted by the growth whores that RYBOVICH paid to get elected.
ReplyDeleteThis is without sarcasm.... How would this have played out if Amendment 4 were passed?
ReplyDeleteThat very question came to my mind the instant I read about it. That was the flaw with Amendment 4. You can't convince "stupid" without a LOT of money.
ReplyDeleteMoney talks and that's the trouble with our entire system. The minute someone gets elected, he is back campaigning and raising money. Sickening stuff.
ReplyDeleteWhat have I learned from all this? In Riviera Beach voters approved a charter amendment forbidding certain industrial activities in the public marina after getting a bunch of signatures and putting it on the ballot (and fighting a law suit over it). Last night they repealed the same thing.
ReplyDeleteNow St. Pete Beach.
Small turnout, coupled with the development side outspending and outworking the slow-growthers. Developers have every reason to fight tooth and nail--it's all about one thing: the money. The voters are swayed by advertising...that's the point of advertising. Florida voters don't seem to be interested in much other than their tax rates. They claim to be interested in growth issues, but clearly its secondary.
The pro-development side will fight tooth and nail to keep the power concentrated in the hands of those who do their bidding and they never quit. They keep coming back. The voters are not interested in these issues until a project threatens their doorstep.
I'm not sure what the solution is. DCA was never much more than a paper tiger ( with an $800 million budget or thereabouts) and honestly, I won't miss it that much.
L
I may be wrong, but according to my boating industry news letters Rybovich is proceeding with its service center north of the city marina on land it already owns and will not be using the marina.
ReplyDeleteI have been in the marine industry for about 30 years now and over the last few years have watched a steady decline in the United States ability to compete. Florida in particular has lost boat building and service facilities along the waterfront to condo and other development. While Florida used to be the center of yacht construction and service the amount of companies that have closed is staggering.
A yacht facility is not an enclave for the rich, I know first hand from working with them that they employee many "blue collar" workers such as carpenters, electricians and many other trades. Many of the companies I have worked with are the largest employers in their city.
I have visited many high end companies such as Rybovich in the course of my work, and without exception they were very clean operations that pay strict attention to EPA guidelines. The EPA does not give a hoot about who the builder or owner is when it comes to the regulation of some of the materials used in boat building and service.
While the original debate over the marina was indeed contentious, Rivera Beach should be delighted to have a 45 million dollar facility being built that may employ up to 1000 people.
Tom McGow
It may be the flaw, Lynn, but it is the only hope that we all have to stop the paving over.
ReplyDeleteAs a follow up here is information from Soundings Trade Only (a trade publication for the marine industry)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bizjournals.com/southflorida/news/2011/03/04/rybovich-unveils-45m-mega-yacht-hub.html
A few highlights;
Flanked by mega yachts Newvida and Fighting Irish, Rybovich owner Wayne Huizenga Jr. unveiled plans to sink a controversial repair hub at the Riviera Beach marina in favor of redeveloping a site his company owns nearby.
“We are willing to make the additional investment to be a good neighbor and a good partner,” Huizenga said to a bank of cameras and note-taking reporters on Friday.
The center is expected to create 3,400 new jobs – including 1,000 on-site jobs with average salaries of $45,000 a year – and inject $630 million into the Palm Beach County economy.
Friday’s announcement, viewed as a compromise, comes only days before Riviera Beach voters are set to vote on repealing a ban on private industry at the city marina, which was imposed by voters in November.
But, with the Rybovich super yacht hub no longer on the table for Riviera Beach’s marina, Council Chairwoman Dawn Pardo hopes voters will repeal the ban.
Tom
Tom, the Charter Amendment was over-turned that required the City to own, manage and operate the marina as well as the neighboring properties and it PROHIBITED industrial commercial boat repair operations THERE. We have gone through this "creating jobs" argument...did it with Amendment 4. Doesn't fly with me nor does giving up control of our public property to a private enterprise for this sort of use. The EPA does care about the environment and protecting our wetlands.
ReplyDeleteTom, to answer your post above, that was then, this is now.
ReplyDeleteHow will we ever survive without Amendment 4?
ReplyDeleteWait, Rybovich is not going to use the the marina property right?
ReplyDeleteAnd they are going to use their own property and create as many as 3400 jobs.
One of the many things that have been lost due to overdeveloping the shoreline is marinas (another blow to the boating industry in Florida). If the marina stays that's a good thing too. I actually hope it stays as a marina! Without marinas why build and service boats?
Adding more jobs with Rybovich's current plans is a good thing!
I may have been unclear, the EPA does a good job regulating the boat building / service industry, I have seen it first hand.
Tom
I agree with your comments, especially about the DCA. They were our only protection but most often they would negotiate and give in on most of the deviations to our comp plans. In the end, they were not very effective.
ReplyDeleteGeorge N
And that is what happened in winter Park yesterday. We lost two commission seats to developers. Low voter turnout.
ReplyDeleteFlorida is on its way to backsliding into history, makes the column written "This time we're taking the planet with us" all the more a reasonable reality.
ReplyDeleted
Tom doesn't even live here. What's his beef? He was always hugging that paver crowd.
ReplyDeleteTom you are very right but no one seems to be listening to you. The voters changed their minds because there was issues with how the charter admendment affected some local businesses and the Cra in the marina area.
ReplyDeletePMM? Are you kidding?
ReplyDeleteWithout sarcasm... again... Lynn answered my question by stating the flaw in having voters approve everything. All "they" have to do is keep coming back until you wear everyone down.
ReplyDeleteThis has always been my opinion of why "4" wouldn't work. Now, they've repealed it in St. Pate Beach, but THAT still isn't enough... low turn-out, idiots, well financed, etc. How about "it's a bad idea?"
You would just love that, wouldn't you? I disagree with you that Amendment 4 is or was a bad idea. I have been consistent that we all deserve the right to vote on land-use changes that affect our community and not left in the hands of a 3 to 2 vote. We would just have to do it smarter than those corporate fat-cats and work three times as hard because of the money factor. Money doesn't always win. Remember Romano?
ReplyDeleteEssentially private companies could now lease this marina like rybovich who wanted it originally. Who really knows why they will do on the RB council or if Rybovich will change its mind?
ReplyDeleteBilly
After the last election I kept saying to myself "People are so easily fooled." TV commercials are simply propaganda. I was thinking people should be taught to vote for the person or issue with the least amount of commercials. Or, vote for the person with the least amount of campaign contributions from corporations. Or, turn off your TVs one or two months before the elections so you are not swayed by the commercials. The vast amounts of money spent on TV commercials is what makes campaigns so expensive. If we could teach people not to watch them then they would no longer be effective and would at the same time take money out of politics... Am I dreaming?
ReplyDeleteBut as some famous person once said - If elections were effective, they would have been outlawed. Maybe relying on elections is not the answer.
Rich
In Lake Worth, we don't have money for TV propaganda. We, instead, rely on young idealists, activists and organizers, who after their annual bath, take to the streets in conservative clothing with hair coiffed, and spread lies the old fashioned way, one un-informed voter at a time.
ReplyDeleteThey do not inform people that they are against our constitution, sovereignty, the English language, individual rights, the right to fail, the right to succeed, gainful employment, soap and deodorant.
They do not inform people they are FOR open borders, socialism, communism, marxism, collective rights and one world governance.
On one level, we all can agree with their positions (who doesn't want a clean environment?)and then turn around and feel hypocritical because we also have common sense on other issues.
For instance, Lynn, while you can't stand the illegal hiring hall that we all railed against, but they ignored us (taxpayers) and it failed, now we should just forget about it because it has been closed down. Well what about the amount of blight that was created or expanded due to the policy of coddling illegal immigrants? We still have to deal with it, and will for the foreseeable future. What about the hundreds of thousands of dollars that could help us close our shortfall that was thrown away against our will and objections? Let's look at the bright side, Lake Worth is much more "affordable". There's a word for you.
Concentrations of affordable housing is a ghetto or projects. And that is what we've become.
Who has forgetten about our Shufflecourt building? Who has forgotten about the illeglas? Not I.
ReplyDeleteYou know, a lot of residents politically are backing an independent CRA that is all about AFFORDABLE housing. $23 mil to attract more poor folks is not my idea of cleaning up slum and blight, something the CRA has totally ignored.
What about cleaning up the blight and start building $250,000 homes and attract the working class folks, the ones who can pay their bills and not be dependent upon government hand-outs. I know, sounds too mean.
This is what just KILLS me about you. I AGREE with you!! But you support the, I can't call her an idiot because she's quite intelligent, anarchist as having done so much good for the city.
ReplyDeleteThis is diametrically opposing views in my opinion.
You defend her to the death then support building $250 k houses. Would she?
I find myself a hypocrite on "some" things because I do have a conscience. Don't you see conflict in your opinions?
And NO you don't sound too mean!!!
I was pointing out YOUR opposition to the illegals. Keeping the courts is inconsequential to me. They are underused and have been for years. Maybe keep 6 courts for a tourney, and turn the rest to B-ball courts or squash courts...
Maybe I wasn't clear.
There is good and bad in a lot of people, don't you agree? To put it better, everyone has good points and I recognize the good that Cara has done. I agree with you that she has done some things that I totally abhor. That does not mean that I should discount her all together. She has a good heart and has tons of empathy for people worse off than herself. That is admiral in my book. Someone has to care about people. I have a tendancy at times to say, "Let them eat dirt and go back where they came from." Now which is a nicer philosophy?
ReplyDeleteI do care about the shuffleboard courts. It is part of our history plus old people like to play. :) I have empathy for seniors too.