Even though it was agreed, even by the presenter, Nadine Burns, that public input was very valuable before any change to our Bryant Park was made and she was willing to get an extension from those she represented who were giving us this "valuable asset," Scott Maxwell did not agree.
At the end of the discussion, he disagreed that the labyrinth needed to go through proper channels, go before the Planning & Zoning Board and involve the neighborhoods, especially Bryant Park that it would affect the most. Public input had no importance with him, afterall, if you didn't agree with him, you were "playing politics." And because he disagreed that the "gift" should go back to the Recreation Department to ensure that it went through the proper process, the "visionaries" went along with him. We get the labyrinth. I suppose .0001 of 1% of our population might ever use it to meditate. Church would be much more inspirational. Maybe we'll get that next as a "gift" to be erected on Bryant Park.
Everyone on the dais "supported" the "gift" with Commissioner Mulvehill suggesting that another location might be more appropriate--this "gift" was going to be installed right next to the playground equipment. Can you even imagine a place for meditation being right next to screaming kids? My impression was that everyone on the dais was tip toeing around this labyrinth because it was proposed by former Commissioner Nadine Burns, the artist community that supports any form of art, and a few non-profits who will give work to some former felons or something.
The only person who made complete sense last night, and who was from the public, was no nonsense Loretta Sharpe. She was the only one who didn't dance around the politics of this supposed asset by stating the obvious: it should most definitely go before our Planning and Zoning board. Her argument was valid. We have a process for reasons and if we bypass the process, then we will have more and more of these types of "gifts" erected on city property anywhere the recipient chooses.
How dare any group or any citizen go to a department director to put something such as this on the Consent Agenda. We already went through a costly act when the Public Works Director, Joe Kroll, changed parking lots at Bryant Park with NO ONE'S PERMISSION or any input from Bryant Park neighborhood or anyone in the community. How dare a commission agree that this is proper? Perhaps they should go to The First Baptist Church on S. M Street where it was reported that they have a labyrinth.
We keep repeating the same egregious acts but this time it wasn't one lone rouge acting on his own but staff that was complicit. The only politics involved here was Maxwell's followed by the rest of the trio. Pretty sad commentary for a commission that says it values public input.
15 comments:
I'm getting really tired of the trio biting off their noses so as to not agree with the two other commissioners. Don't they know how foolish they are?
Triolo and Burns are friends. Burns persuaded her to run for Mayor. Politics. Andy just goes along for the ride.
Triolo and Burns are not friends. Burns had nothing to do with Triolo's run. Get real.
Actually, this matter was returned to Staff to be represented after prop & fulll process, including recommended alt. locations, Review by P&Z and input from the Bryant park Neighborhood Assoc.
Sorry Jack. The entire matter WAS confusing BUT--
The motion made by Mulvehill and seconded by McVoy failed on a 2/3 vote with the amendments added to the motion to give it back to Staff and go through the proper channels including public input that might take 60 to 90 days. Maxwell thought it "ridiculous" to put the gift givers through this procedure for such a "gracious" gift. No other motion was made. Anyone on the commission can bring it back at the next meeting if they have new and relevant information to do so.
Whats beautiful about it? It looks like a spaceship that landed. To modern looking. Something in natural stone. A fountain would be a lot better imo.
First of all, it was NOT approved.
It will probably come up at the next meeting, but if I have any faith at all in Nadine she will follow proper channels, and attempt to get a spot on the P&Z agenda next week, and talk to whatever people she needs to, and the idea will be a lot more developed in the next 2 weeks than what was presented last night, which was a bit rushed.
Second of all, I really wish this site would stop harping on the commission, and start showing some support. The town of Lake Worth is a great place, and some positivity would be great. The current commission is dealing with a lot of bad business from before, and they have a lot of work to do.
Well, that's FINE & DANDY ANONYMOUS--however, is there something about the truth you just can't deal with here? "You are sure" that Nadine will do the right thing. This is all about the Commission doing the right thing. They didn't do that last night. We are not mind readers here. They either bring it back at the next meeting once they find out that it needs to be in front of the P&Z afterall. I will show support when it is warranted and not before. Hopefully, there will be something on the horizon that will allow me to do that.
There was no motion to approve that was passed. There was no motion to disprove that was passed. That means exactly what it says. They cannot move forward. I am not sure Nadine will do the "Right Thing", whatever definition of that in is your mind,but I am sure she will try to make the best of the extra time given, and if she wants this to happen, she has the training, and experience to push it through PROPER channels, as was requested. If there is a second attempt at the next commission meeting, she would have a better chance of actually getting approval for this project. The questions that were raised included, location, structure, and citizen input. There is a P&Z, and a Shuffleboard meeting before the next commission, I would assume she might take advantage of that, and try to get some speaking time at either of those meetings.
It was on the Consent Agenda. Consent means just that--consent and approval. It was pulled to New Business for Discussion. The Motion there was to put it through the proper process--not just approve it automatically as staff wanted. This motion was defeated. Therefore, it seems to me, that it will pass, be brought up at the next meeting with new information that it must go before the P&Z as an example. The entire matter did not die anonymous. At this point, Nadine Burns has nothing to do with it. It is the Commission that will make the direction. It didn't do that because Maxwell was playing politics and voted against the process. We shall see at the next general meeting if anything occurs here. Nadine won't let the issue die on the vine. I would think that there will be some sort of citizen backlash.
Yes, I agree with you, it will come up again, and they will be more prepared...if I have guessed right. It is funny, because the project was first suggested as a possibility for the Shuffleboard area not even a month ago...
I disagree that is was passed as it was pulled from consent, and moved to new business. A motion was not seconded initially to approve it, but was seconded for discussion, which they did....so it is probably going to be a new agenda item again next meeting?? Not even old business I would think? What are your thoughts?
I don't have a guess as to how they will handle this. It went to New Business last night...did not pass under New Biz. I would think it would now be Old Business as it will come back for more discussion. Don't know really. But I am rather sure that the chamber will be packed with meditator/yoga/artistic/spiritual people who want to have this.
Whatever kind of business it was it was F*&^%$ up.
I would like to gift a dog park to Bryant Park. Sounds like I've got a great precedent with how the commish handled this one.
Come on, there are all kinds of gifts that crazy people out there with agendas might want in our public parks, proper procedure should be followed and public input from everyone in this city who uses this park should be heard.
I heard that it will be discussed at the next rec advisory board meeting which is next week.
Post a Comment