We keep griping about slum, blight and code violations and rightfully so. This complaint is legitimate and it is city-wide. We expect everyone who owns property here to live within our ordinances and laws. There should be NO exception even if you are an elected official.
Elected officials get a campaign packet from the City Clerk as well as a disc that provide everything you need to know about running for office, the do's and the dont's, if you will--a Campaign Guide for Dummies.
Our mayor had these signs at her house for months. A door hanger was left at the property on October 6 after a citizen complaint. According to the top City administrator, the wrong city code was cited. It had an improper reference to a possible fine and contained incorrect information regarding a 24 hour response requirement. Even if an improper notice was given, it still does not excuse the illegal act. Occasionally we read about some murderer getting off because of a technicality and our blood boils.
Although unverified, I was told that the Code Enforcement Department was confronted by our Mayor and it wasn't pleasant. I have also been told that the illegal signs have subsequently been removed.
THIS
Eventually resulted in
THIS
Click to enlarge
23 comments:
Absolutely incredible. Just another blatant example of how the Mayor does not think the rules apply to her. Unfortunately for Mr. Vega this will possibly end his career with the City of Lake Worth. I was told there is a disciplinary hearing and the City is requesting termination.
Lynn,
It gets worse. Al Vega was in a reprimand hearing with his union representative this morning over this issue. He got reprimanded for doing his job! Funny he didn't get reprimanded when he came to my home and asked me to remove two of the four Pam Triolo for Mayor signs I had on my lawn. I respectfully deferred to his verbal warning and immediately complied and thanked him for informing me of exactly how many signs were allowed. I then emailed the code compliance manager with pictures of Ms. Waterman's home showing her that those signs were still up at 802 North A Street where Ms. Waterman resides. Where there are also two RV's plugged into the home. I have pictures of that too.
I wonder how much more we will have to endure before we see REAL leadership in our City!
Rachel is not about real leadership, it is about her power to disrupt and cause chaos, she is a protege of Cara Jennings and wants to do exactly as she wants and not follow the rules, she is an anarchist too, this all came up at the NA forum at the playhouse election campaign forum that night and she is showing her true colors now. I hope people wise up this time around for the elections in November and don't give her more of a chance to diss us all.
In LW you have a culture of entitlement that has grown exponentially since the arrival of the CM and the Mayor has become part of the culture rather than part of the solution. The revelation that the code individual is in jeopardy of losing his position over enforcing the rules is of no surprise. The CM has fostered an environment of fear and intimidation since her arrival so this is just another illustration of her presence and failed leadership, ask any employee that has the courage to speak. It is obvious that the only individuals left at LW are the drones who agree with the CM not out of respect, but fear. A classic narcissist who is so enamored with herself that her destruction is spreading like wildfire and the mayor is cut from the same mold. Little wonder LW is crumbling at the rate it’s heading, last one leaving LW turn out the lights.
Everytning said in the blog post and the previous comments is true. But there is more to tell. I heard the Mayor went to 1900 2nd Ave and caused quite a scene. The news was told the disciplinary hearing held today for Mr. Vega was because he was insubordiante and would not stuff envelopes! Did you know that is how your tax dollars are being used? With all the code issues in this city, we need the code inspectors out doing enforcement just like Mr. Vega did.
The lengths the CM, the Community Sustainability director, and the Mayor are going to on this one is incredible. The laws/ordinances of Lake Worth apply to everyone; no one is exempt!
I'm convinced that after 90 days our illustrious mayor has seen how difficult the job is and has decided she wants no part of being mayor, and so is doing everything she can to lose the election without looking like a quitter to her supporters and disappointing Cara. she'll then blame TRNA for all her problems and move away telling the PB Post Lake Worth is uncivil.
Ok. Show me the Jennings connection behind her campaign and I will post it. Send me the proof.
So what is the ordinance, how many signs can one have in their yard?
Ground signs are prohibited on property with less than fifty (50) feet of frontage. There shall be a minimum of forty-eight (48) feet between signs. Measurement shall be from any point on the sign face of the first sign to any point on the sign face of the second sign. The maximum number of ground signs on one (1) parcel shall be two (2).
If I remember correctly,the ordinance for political signs allows a total of 6 sq. feet of signage per 25 foot lot. There were actually two issues with the signs shown in Lynn's picture. One is the number of signs exceeds the limit and the second ia the large white wooden structure. The code sighted on the door hanger is for the wooden structure which is classified as an illegal billboard. It would be illegal no matter whose signs were posted on it.
With "Queen Stanton" and "Princess Rachael" we are all living in a Monarchy. The "Royals" can do whatever they want as they are not ordinary people. (ex. check out the "Royal Pearls") If she gets reelected, watch out for beheadings (oops. firings)). She already has her paid armed police officer at her mayoral hours, when will she demand a bodyguard full time? Is there a way to ask to see her expense accounts from the City? It might be interesting.
From our Code of Ordinances--
C (2) The maximum allowable sign area for a political sign shall be six (6) square feet. The total aggregate sign area for all political signs on a parcel of private property shall be twenty (20) square feet. If more than one political sign is posted on a parcel of private property, each sign shall be affixed to its own stake, pole, or other supporting structure and shall be placed no closer than twenty-four (24) inches from any other political sign on the same property. As used herein, "parcel of private property" means real property consisting of one or more adjoining lots under common ownership and not owned by a governmental agency.
Lynn, thanks for posting the code. Could you post item (1) which addresses illegal signs? Thanks.
23.28.06.00. - Prohibited and exempted signs.
23.28.06.01. Prohibited signs.
A.
Animated signs. (Except time and temperature.)
B.
Snipe signs.
C.
Billboards.
D.
A-frame, sandwich, sidewalk or curb signs.
E.
Streamers, twirling objects, balloons or any other air or gas filled figure or sign, or any other similar items.
F.
Search lights.
G.
Swinging signs.
H.
Outdoor advertising of any kind or character where any live animal or human being is used as part of the advertising and is visible from any public street or public place.
I.
Any unauthorized sign on city property.
J.
Any portable signs or signs attached to trees, utility poles, trailers, roller casters, or any unapproved supporting structures.
K.
Any sign or advertising structure displaying obscene, indecent and/or immoral matter.
L.
Any sign which becomes unsightly. Signs which contribute to unsightliness or are inappropriate as deemed by the building official may be appealed to the board of sign appeals.
M.
Abandoned signs.
N.
Vehicular signs.
O.
Any sign which contains or consists of a three-dimensional sculptured figure which is an emblem/logo of the business to which it is accessory or which represents products manufactured or sold by said business.
P.
Flashing sign.
Q.
Any other sign not specifically authorized by this article.
R.
String of light bulbs, except as provided in section 23.28.05.02 K.(4).
1. The placing of political signs anywhere on public property is prohibited. Signs located on public property shall be deemed to be public property and shall be summarily removed by the city.
Rachel is still the best chance Lake Worth has of digging itself out of the political morass it is in. So there were too many signs in her yard, big deal. Code enforcement warned her, and the signs were removed. I still support Rachel because she is the brightest and best currently running for Mayor. She has handled a lot of tough decisions during 3 months on the dais, and continues to make the right (although not always popular) choices.
It IS a big deal. Being in bed with the city mgr does not set well with most people. Running from debates was really stupid. She has aligned herself with liberals who think it alright to tax to the max and raise unnecessary money. She has been listening to all the wrong people here instead of the people she is supposed to care about.
Heath @ 4:46pm, you have a
different opinion about Waterman than others. How often do you attend city commission meetings, workshops, special meetings, etc? Perhaps you could explain the great decisions she has made.
Yes, I do have a different opinion of Rachel. I have known her for years, worked with organizations she helped start, and believe she uses her background in community economic development to make the tough decisions with logic and forethought as opposed to rash decisions based on emotion and the will of a very vocal minority. I also took part in the R.E.A.P. course through CCRT which she created. If more Lake Worth residents took this program, I'm sure the city would benefit. I am not deluded enough to say a politician listens to the wrong people just because she doesn't listen to me. The truth is, Rachel is an independently minded, educated person. I would rather have her for Mayor than a candidate who is, in my opinion, too much like the Washington politicians I want to vote out of office anyway.
Heath @ 4:46,
If you were in need of someone to handle your business, and you interviewed Rachel Waterman for the job, I would hope you would also google her and look at all your job candidate's public records.
Finding that she has had many financial problems in her past and present, would you really hire her to take care of your books?
Actually, I very likely would hire her. I wouldn't buy jewels from a brick-layer and I don't expect to get the best steaks from a baker. Her background is community economic development, not personal wealth management. She was affected by the recession like millions of other people. I do not expect that to acurately portray how she will manage city funds! And she is not in sole control, we have a weak mayor system! I would rather be represented by someone who has personally dealt with hardship, and therefore is able to empathise much more than someone who has not lost anything! As I said, I work with an organization Rachel helped establish and it is a shining example in the county of what empowered residents can accomplish. Mayor Waterman has my support, despite her past. Everyone stumbles, but real strength is standing back up.
P.S. Mayor Waterman did not confront the Code Enforcement Department.
Heath's right about Rachel. Demanding a pay raise 2 months into the job and bringing back a trolley that no one used or missed is surely going to save the city.
Gee Lynn maybe you should give them a course on the way it should be done
Post a Comment