Last night Commissioner Jo-Ann Golden made a final motion after several tries and after defeat of taking back the CRA. The motion was to
ask the CRA to improve communication
to provide the commission with copies of its budget
and give the Plan of its Cultural Renaissance Program to the City Commission within three months.
This passed on a 3/2 vote with Rene Varela and Scott Maxwell dissenting. Now I ask you, why would they do that? Do they not believe that this appointed Board needs to be accountable for taxpayer money or even return an e-mail?Aside from this meeting being the most disgusting one of memory, these two were playing politics even on a vote that just makes sense. The CRA needs to be accountable but Varela and Maxwell thought otherwise.
Is it possible their vote was just a protest of the whole issue being brought up?
ReplyDeleteHow accountable have the commission been on the illegal hiring hall?
How accountable have the commission been on requiring Publix to use union labor tomatoes and no plastic bags when being shown a rendering by their architect?
How accountable have they been by the total demolition of the casino building in order to renovate it and thereby "saving" it?
Who do we talk to and hold accountable for the negotiations that have residents of the town that supposedly OWNS, and must pay to maintain the beach have to park in the little lot accross the street from HoJo's on A1A?
Who's accountable for the largest drop in property values in the entire county? (I'm just glad they didn't compare us with the state)
So just WHAT does accountable mean?
in·noc·u·ous /ɪˈnɒkyuəs/
ReplyDelete[ih-nok-yoo-uhs]
–adjective
1. not harmful or injurious; harmless: an innocuous home remedy.
2. not likely to irritate or offend; inoffensive; an innocuous remark.
3. not interesting, stimulating, or significant; pallid; insipid: an innocuous novel.
...perhaps the motion was "significant" as contained in the definition above as no one really believes the attempts to take over tha CRA and it's funding will end with the motion made last night
WHATEVER. Thanks for your Webster's rendition.
ReplyDeleteOk--you are one of those who wants to blame this Commission on the entire economy. Let's look at where the blame should go--the Unions for a starter and all the rest of the greedy bums who p*ss away our money like it's candy spending $15 mil on two roads as an example.
ReplyDeleteIt was Jennings who screwed up our beach redevelopment, not this Commission. Thank her for the 55 spaces we will get for decal parking. NOT COOL.
It was Jennings who asked the question of Publix about tomatoes. The CRA gave them $500,000 of taxpayer money so a question or two is appropriate, don't you think?
As far as the Casino goes, those in charge, REG and Morganti, know what they're doing. It is not for me to second guess the best Plan. They will do what it takes or what they can to ensure historic designation of some kind.
The CRA should have some accountability to the Commission since it is funded by taxpayer money. We never want to return to a board like the one who thought it was okay to throw away millions of dollars on projects that had NOTHING to do with eliminating slum and blight.The past board under the control of Clemmens and then Riccards, was rude, arrogant, and totally out of control.Also the CRA should be redistricted out of our downtown area. As for the casino,Lynn is right. These guys know what they are doing.
ReplyDeleteIt's Rickards, with a 'k'; and Clemens only has one 'm'.
ReplyDelete"As far as the Casino goes, those in charge, REG and Morganti, know what they're doing. It is not for me to second guess the best Plan. They will do what it takes or what they can to ensure historic designation of some kind."
ReplyDeleteSo did the previous Building Official who said the building is unsafe and needed to be torn down. Now, you are right, and Morganti will have to tear down the WHOLE building.... except for a couple of columns at the South end on the East side according to the DEMO plan. Then once the roof and second floor are removed, tons of holes will be broken into what's left of the concrete first floor to drive pilings.
Just what will you be able to point to and say "that is part of our 1921 Historic Casino"?
My point is that 6 engineers and one building official who lost his job over it, said the building had to come down. Now the pin heads who are "saving" the casino can't even acknowledge that this is the case.
And you admit Cara screwed up the parking at the beach. The illegal alien issue and Publix with her social justice made us look like fools across the country.
But I admit she IS the sharpest knife in the drawer.
The City hired the ONLY forensic engineer who said, NOW LISTEN HARD--the building is structurally sound. GET IT????????????? NOW, LOOK, I AM NOT GOING TO CONTINUE TO DEBATE THIS. I understand that you have some gripe. You guys always do when it comes to politics in this city. Just keep complaining. The only fool here is you if you think that the city looked like a fool. What is making us look like a fool are a lot of things that the CRA did and the Commission failed to take it over the other night. How we get from a blog on a Motion and then twist it to the Casino, only you can do it. Twist it to death. Beat it to death. Keep griping about Golden, Jennings, Mulvehill, McVoy. See where this is going? BS.
ReplyDelete