Below is the President of the South Palm Park Neighborhood Association's "education" of the public during the heights election. Frank Palen, former member and chair of the Planning & Zoning board was asked to give his opinion. From what I was told, no one from the YES side was asked to comment.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
Propaganda
Comment Up
Below is the President of the South Palm Park Neighborhood Association's "education" of the public during the heights election. Frank Palen, former member and chair of the Planning & Zoning board was asked to give his opinion. From what I was told, no one from the YES side was asked to comment.
Below is the President of the South Palm Park Neighborhood Association's "education" of the public during the heights election. Frank Palen, former member and chair of the Planning & Zoning board was asked to give his opinion. From what I was told, no one from the YES side was asked to comment.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
they lost and it couldn't happen to a more deserving group of people.
Lynn, why were you not there¿ I am sure if anyone in Lake Worth could have made their voice heard, it would have been You.
I make my voice heard right here, anonymous.
Thanks Lynn for giving me all the credit for asking Mr. Palen, the author of Lake Worth's Historic Preservation Ordinance, to give a talk about how the Charter amendment could affect us as a city, but it was a decision voted on by our Board of Directors.
We thought it important to get out as much information as possible so that voters could make an informed decision.
The meeting was very well attended with over 50 people participating. Anyone was able and encouraged to ask questions.
Mr. Palen came very well prepared with handouts detailing points of his discussion showing the complicated Land Development Regs proposed and how they actually go further to protect our neighborhoods than simply the height of the structure.
I have spoken to many people on the "yes" side about finishing the job of "protecting" the rest of the city by bringing the remaining Charter into compliance with our Comp Plan and Land Development Regulations.
This would effectively "lower" the maximum building heights North of 2nd ave and South of 1st ave, the rest of the city, to our almost complete LDR's.
At the same time, we could clean up some of the language dealing with requirements for our "Police Chief" and "Fire Chief" to live within the city limits, for example.
Would you support a comprehensive Charter review? Would you volunteer? Will you post this?
Chip Guthrie
Mr. Palen is one of the main causes of the Gulfstream being closed for so many years. He encouraged his client, Mr. Schlesinger to apply for permission to build a 100' annex next to the Gulfstream, and when that didn't fly, came in with another massive, inappropriate project with an insane parking scheme.
By the time a somewhat acceptable plan was on the table, Mr. Schlesinger had gone bankrupt on the former Hilton on the beach and stopped progress on redevelopment.
Bookkeeping issues are not really important as far as the police chief and fire chief living within our city. Moot at the moment. Someday in the future it might not be. But in the meantime, it is nothing to get all excited about.
Check with William Waters on your "comprehensive Charter review." You will probably find that is not too significant either. Once you find that out, you can then relax and stop worrying about all the politics.
The P&Z has been working on the LDR's and the Comp Plan for years now. Soon they will have it all in sync particularly the downtown heights issue.
Chip schooled you yet again.
LOL, that's a great one, anonymous @ 11:55.
thanks for being fair minded, chip. how did that work out for you?
Mr Palen should have been even more well prepared for presenting at the Mango Groves meeting. In my opinion, reading from a commissioner's agenda backup from a June meeting is not "well-prepared". He declared that anyone who creates an amendment is simply having an overly-emotional response to legislative action that they disagree with. When I attended the meeting, I was looking forward to a presentation about the history of the Gulfstream and a rational reason as to why height limits would prevent the hotel from re-opening. But that was not how it went. He spent most of his time belittling the PAC and low rise supporters. One person in the meeting was so disgusted with his presentation that she decided not to vote no, asked us for a sign, and gave us a contribution.
I'm sure "anyone was able to and encouraged to ask questions" at his NA meeting. Just so long as the questions were answered by someone who was in favor of voting no to height limits. Do you think it's fair-minded to invite only one side of an issue to present at a neighborhood meeting? If so, then congratulations on being so fair-minded Chip. It IS working out well for you!
What really works well for Chip, though, is to talk about the neighborhoods when the issue at hand was the downtown corridor. Or to ask why we didn't limit heights across the whole city, as if that's a smart thing to do and he would be in favor of it.
So I look forward to seeing this proposed "housekeeping" amendment to lower heights across the entire city. I think it's a dumb idea, but some people will say anything to appear "fair-minded". Sounds like he wants someone else to do it. Who are the "Yes people" he's talking to? Not me. Not anyone on the PAC.
Lynn, would you ask Laurel why if she did not feel both sides were being treated fair, why she did not agree to a the Debate at the playhouse¿¿¿¿¿ She had her chance to make sure both sides were given equal hearing of both sides.... Ask her and get back to your faithful readers.....
The NA propaganda was already set up. My point was that Mr. Guthrie never allowed the PAC Chair to make one comment during the FARCE. He obviously did not want to be the least bit fair or have anything to rain on his parade. The other FARCE that was proposed by Wes Blackman was nothing but a dog and pony show for all you height advocates. Why would anyone in his right mind debate the issue when we were winning and when everyone who would have attended the farce had already made up their minds? The City already had months and months to "educate" the people and it did with the mayor even giving her BS one day before the election (which was a failed attempt to persuade the voters) along with the lies and misinformation it wanted to aligned itself with. We have now seen how this present majority commission believes in lies, distortions, and illegal acts to get its way. We totally understand with whom they sleep.
Hope that answers it for ya.
Laurel's answer
Because no one contacted me about it.
From: Lynn Anderson
Sent: Monday, April 1, 2013 9:29 AM
To: ladecker@
Subject: FW: [Lynn's little bit of trivia--Lake Worth] New comment on Propaganda.
Post a Comment