Under budget, our new Casino is nearly completed. Read the article in today's Palm Beach Post."We're still working on the plans but it's going to be gorgeous," said Mary Hoertz, V.P of Mulligans when speaking about lighted palm trees and a fiber optic bar.
"Our landmark casino building is absolutely stunning. It's opening will send a message of renewal, confidence and success through the community." Commissioner Suzanne Mulvehill
"It will be a great source of civic pride." Laurence McNamara
Did you hear that--naysayers? UNDER BUDGET.
ReplyDeleteWhat a crock of human feces, I mean the statements coming from "Larry" and "Clueless", their contribution to the remodelin/reconstruction of the "Casino" amounted to zero-point-crap, now they want to appear as they were all for it. As for me, I'm very happy that finally LW is moving into the XXI century and will have an asset which if managed properly will pay for itself and provide income for the City. And please Ms. Anderson don't even attempt to tell me this was the doing of Ms. Stanton and/or Ms. Margoles were instrumental in making this happen, those two just were just City fixtures. Those are my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI have asked you not to come over here and rant, lie4 and slander people. But since you insist, I posted your commentary to show to people what a nasty piece of feces you are. Have a good day. And may you enjoy every aspect of this casino thanks to Margoles' hard work, Suzanne's vision and Laurence (NOT LARRY) and his good sense to fight the over-development and commercialization of our beach/park and giving it away on a lease that was going to be 40 years, not 20. Some people actually make sense in this city. Learn.
ReplyDeleteardue, McNamara and Mulvehill were all for the casino being built there and in the original style. Didn't you know that? Are you just ticked off because the Post quoted them instead of negative you?
ReplyDeleteIt will provide income to the city but we won't realize that for years until we pay off the loan.
ReplyDeleteMaxwell is sitting in OUR Commission seat not to abuse Commission member Mulvehill,the only one who has an MBA, not a degree from Burger King,like maxwell. She is the only one,who after Laurence and my 10 years of urging the self-absorbed, corrupt Commissions to recreate Lake Worth 1921 started Casino, brought this revenue creating project,to the fore.
ReplyDeleteShe understood the enormous positive economic impact our Casino plan would have.
Maxwell and his cohorts who are abusive to Mulvehill, have no idea of the value of a 2nd floor Palm Beach Oceanfront restaurant space and what it is worth.
$18.00 per sf.is for a backstreet center of small town location!
Not for a glamorous 1st Class(excuse the term)Palm Beach Island Location!!!!The best ones have not been approached because of quick commission chasing,sneaky Realtors and ignorance.
Maxwell has fought against any project which would bring revenue to our City. He is not sitting there to vent his personal anger, misery, hostility, negativism against Lake Worth.He does not pay our taxes!
He can go back to Burger King,which is looking for workers. What was the story about $5,000,- of Burger king receipts?
Dee
The Post comments referred to costs well in excess of budget. It doesn't matter to me which Budget had the over runs, I just want to know what the total costs are. Do you know? I have been told the total budget for the beach was $11,000,000.
ReplyDeleteIf there are substantial cost over runs, will it actually have an impact on our daily lives in lake Worth? Are they talking about a Special Assessment--How much--when---or is it all much to do about nothing?
Can we just have a civil discussion about facts?
The beach project are two separate projects. The original estimates for them were: the casino for $6 mil and the beach redevelopment for $5.
ReplyDeleteOnce the beach redevelopment allowed many people with interest to make a lot of money onto our property, the costs started to go out of control. Everyone on the commission wanted to go forward and get it done. NO ONE demanded that the contractor reduce the elements to bring down the costs. This commission voted FOR to spend $1.7 million over budget for the beach redevelopment portion of this contract. They had the power to stop the outlandish costs and did NOT do it. These costs were not over-runs until that point they voted to approve them. Look at Maxwell, Triolo, McVoy, Mulvehill and Amoroso--ALL OF THEM.
As far as paying for this down the road, I would say look to special assessments unless, of course, they stop some capital spending in other areas. This commission has been reluctant to do that in the past. They might be forced to in the future. If not, look for tax to the max and assessments. Your guess is as good as mine. Whatever happens, Maxwell will be controlling the direction of the beach, IMO.
Interesting.
ReplyDeleteThank you.
What are you talking about?? Why would there be an assessment for the beach? The additional capital costs were either in the budget for utilities or they were pulled from other capex funds. There will be no assessment. I predict that the beach project will make more than enough money to pay the debt. In 3 years we'll be fighting about what to spend the extra money on.
ReplyDeleteAnd the feces poster is a pretty funny guy. Or gal. Lord knows, we have some nasty broads in this town. Should we thank Scott Maxwell for finally getting the beach done? Maybe Triolo and Amoroso? No, I don't think so. Jennings, Golden, Mulvehill. That's who got this done. And even Varela. He would have made sure it was completed, if he had bothered to stay. Thanks to the ladies on the BEST COMMISSION EVER!
We are not talking about infrastructure costs here necessarily although those costs were to be included in the $5 million. We are talking about windmills, turtle lights, etc.
ReplyDeleteYou forgot padding the bills. Supervision on costs SUCKED.
ReplyDeleteTo the 4:13 Anon, I certainly hope your projects are correct. We certainly will find out in a very short period of time.
ReplyDeleteCongratulating a previous Commission for allowing an open checkbook to do the Beach Projects and to negatively impact the City's precarious financial position for years seems inappropriate to me.
Is that what the naysayers are saying--that a previous commission had an OPEN CHECKBOOK? How ridiculous is that? Look to all those on the beach redevelopment for the explosive costs. Ask Living Designs. Ask Michael Singer. Ask Morganti. Ask Kimley-Horn. Ask those in charge. It was NOT the commission.
ReplyDeleteIt was, however, this present commission that voted to spend nearly $2 million OVER BUDGET. Look to them for the answers instead of the complaints they dish out. Look to them why they didn't hold contractors to the carpet. They could have stopped this. The DIDN'T.
Tough to disagree with your point Lynn that it was the current Commission that approved the massive cost over runs. But for me, the overriding consideration was that the current Commission had no viable alternative than to approve the Budget excesse.
ReplyDeleteThose Budget excesses weren't revealed until after the Casino was 60% complete---what was the Commission to do? They couldn't stop the infrastructure improvements required to allow Tenants to open. They couldn't reverse the expenditures previously made.
It just doesn't seem right to me when you blame the architects and contractors that were chosen by the Commission. They didn't twist the arms of the commissioners to approve those contracts. I blame poor Staff Planning and terrible Staff execution of the poorly conceived Casino Business Plan as well as a lack of effective Commission Oversight.
First of all, I am not talking about the Casino construction. I am talking about the beach redevelopment portion. The Casino came in UNDER the $6 million budget.
ReplyDeleteThis commission had the power to change the direction of the costs but they voted to approve. WE HAD NOT, AT THAT POINT, dug one little piece of dirt on the beach part of this project, the $5 million Bond portion.
So, I really blame this commission but ultimately it was all those contractors, sub-contractors, etc. who came in with exorbitant costs. This commission only knows how to FIRE PEOPLE it seems.
Once again Lynn, you may be correct about the $6,000,000 Morganti Contract being under Budget, but it isn't even close to being the total Casino Budget. I guess that will be revealed when the building is completed.
ReplyDeleteWhat about all the change orders Margolis initiated to address the Tenant improvements required by the Leases? Why was the REG contract excluded from the Budget? What about the cost of Utilities required so the Tenants can receive a Certificate of Occupancy and open for business. These are the type of costs that need to be considered as part of the Budget. Turtle Lights are required for the Casino, not the parking Lot or green Space.
As far as blame is concerned, I agree with you—there is plenty to go around to everybody and anybody who contributed to the costs of the cover up.
As the beach will now be open until 1am on the weekends, turtle lights will be throughout our beach redevelopment, not just the Casino. At least this is how I understand it all.
ReplyDeleteI agree about the leases at the casino. This was the biggest bunch of crap I ever witnessed. None of these spaces were to be "Vanilla" boxes although I do agree, however, that we should provide that. The broker...don't even want to go there. It is the moral judgments made by Staff that are offensive. We have a chance to correct one of them...Barry Freedman and LW Tee Shirt Co. has put in a new offer(not sure if he has submitted a new lease) on the space that Fox wanted to screw us on.
Thanks Lynn. I look forward to your future posts on these important topics.
ReplyDeleteYea me too. I want to read more of how the "visionaries" are responsible for a project that was started 2 years before 2 of them decided to run and King Maxwell was in the minority.
ReplyDeleteI want to read more about how the cost overruns are the "visionaries" fault when the recently fired Ms. Margoles, with the recently fired Susan Stanton's blessings was over seeing the entire project.
Revisionist history is a wonderful thing when you're sinking in quicksand.
The beach and the redo of the casino and the beach property has been a thorn in all of our sides for years. I can't tell you how many meetings and planning groups and open houses I've been to over the 12 years I've lived here. I'm sure many of you can relate.
ReplyDeleteI'm not surprised as to the cost over-runs, and I also don't think the current commission had much choice but to approve them since the projects were already underway.
I would love to see an all in price for the beach at some point, to include all the planning meetings, the Greater Bay fiasco, the litigation related to the beach and the beach redo, the actual construction of the casino and the beach property redo. I don't believe that the project as a whole or even in part has come in under budget, but the Post article certainly is a nice read.
But in the end I am hopeful we will have a good result and the beach property will serve as an anchor for the City going forward. I hope people will go out of their way to visit our beach, spend money at the beach, come across the bridge, spend money in the down town, enjoy the festivals and events down town and at Bryant Park and purchase a house or condo. I have noticed that the houses that are on the market in my part of LW are selling at what seems like record pace.