Back in the Fall of 2010, Scott Maxwell was giving a series of city town hall meetings in order to "educate" the voters on the high cost of our electricity, or so he said. Not only was he "educating" the people, he was also promoting his favored candidates for city office by distributing a brochure to all attendees. It said, "You can exercise your power by helping me gain the two supporting votes from the commission that are necessary to lower the amount of your utility bills."
Not only did he take advantage of Calvary United Methodist Church but also those who attended the forum where he used city staff for supposed "education" on our electric utility. But the real reason wasn't coming from power from a utility pole. It was to knock McVoy and Mulvehill out of power. As such, Susan Stanton, former city manager, said "no staff will attend Maxwell's future community meetings including two planned right before the election."
This put the icing on the political Maxwell grudge and like an elephant that never forgets, when he got the opportunity he fired reformer Susan Stanton as city manager.
And that's the rest of the story.
19 comments:
I remember that. now he is reducing our elec rates and we cna't fill in the pot holes.
Maxwell is doing his political stint today, marching for MLK
Scott doesn't give a crap what you or the people think. He has his band of supporters and doesn't need you. pretty soon he will start looking like Retha Lowe.
Lynn, don't you think you give this guy way to much power? I mean really, he needs at least two other votes just to adjourn a meeting, doesn't he?
Maxwell is a bully. Thank god he got rid of Stanton.
Hot dogs for everybody ,if you live in the right neighborhood, that is!!
Dear God in heaven, can't Lake Worth just get a "normal" city manager? We've had crooks, tyranny's and pirates! Enough!
He has power. He can be the most charming person in the world. No one in his district will even run against him. He is Pres of the PB County League of Cities. But no one needs a bully and his mind is made up even when you present facts that dispute...that's stubborn and bullheaded. A reformer, such as Susan Stanton, was exactly what we needed. Too bad he had so much power to swing that firing vote his way. He always said he would fire her (he couldn't control her)but Triolo and Amoroso both said that they would give her a chance to see for themselves...they didn't. Who is worse? The guy who does what he says he will do or people who make promises and don't keep them? He has the power of persuasiveness and has loyal supporters who hang on to his every word even giving huge campaign contributions to keep the, shhhhhhhh anarchists from coming back into power. What a joke. Scott and I have an understanding. We don't necessarily agree on local issues but we agree on national ones.
That's what is puzzling (concerning) about you Lynn. You are conservative on National issues but ultra liberal on local issues.
Aren't ALL politics local?
I am also a conservative on local issues. It is surprising to me that you don't see that. What should be a "concern" to you, is figuring out why a conservative (you have more than one on the dais) makes the decisions he does in this city and has no reservations of committing the folks to a hundred million worth of debt. Tax and spend is definitely not a conservative philosophy.
Lynn, we listen to most of the meetings and we have never heard maxwell or any elected commit to a hundred million on anything.
To tell you the truth, it is maxwell that consistently cautions the staff and elected to NOT use any numbers with regard to infrastructure programs until the issue has been completely vetted and potential funding identified.
This approach certainly falls into the conservative definition, doesn't it?
Thanks for reading, Lynn.
True. But doing the work government SHOULD do is. Things like repairing the infrastructure that is always deteriorating and has been neglected by many of the past administrations. At some point, you must address the problem (deteriorating piping, asphalt and concrete)and not just the symptom(pot holes and cracks).
With the exception of county and state maintained roads within the city, almost nothing has been done.
The adults in the room are now at least addressing the entirety of the situation. I believe they know the $100 million is a far reach, but that IS what it would take to totally redo what needs to be redone.
Some of the icing will necessarily need to come off the top, we are a poor city. But that doesn't eliminate the need to do it.
Yes, he did say to be cautious in mentioning any numbers. However, and this is a BIG HOWEVER, the city manager was quoted in the PBPost as saying it could be up to $115 million. I guess he had better inform his hand-picked CM. Scott Maxwell voted for this roads infrastructure program and most assuredly wants the development of the Park of Commerce using tax dollars of $11 million to do that--all to attract developers.
Wrong. It is to attract business and commercial. Remember, you have stated that the commercial and industrial tax base is what we need. Unfortunately, business has to be "developed" in other words, it won't get built by itself.
You just have a negative mindset that anything a developer does is evil. It comes through in just about everything you write.
You live in a development. The developer made money by developing your community. Does that make him evil?
This is where you do not appear conservative.
NO development in any way shape or form.Oh, excuse me, only development that loses money is good. Or maybe developing a park is ok.
Back in 1966, the developer paid for the infrastructure in my area. They also made a profit. People bought paying a fair market price that was established by the developer. Developers need to pay for infrastructure as the cost of doing business. The city needs to pay for it when they own the property.
Not every development is "evil" as you accuse me of believing. There are good projects and there are bad. Attracting more poor is not exactly what we need in our city whether they are paying a couple of bucks in ad valorem or not.
The city, in its quest for development of industrial and commercial (even though the majority of ad-valorem comes from residential homeowners) approved a residential rental complex to be built at the industrial Park of Commerce that will attract workforce housing (affordable rentals). I would like to see development that will actually improve our city, not bring it down and not have a commission whoring LW for a few bucks.
You speak of "poor" like it's a disease. We are a poor city. Just who do you think CAN be attracted here? How do you attract the rich?
You don't make any sense.
I'll take working class families who OWN their home over section 8 any day of the week.
Working class families who OWN their own home are one step up the ladder to becoming middle class and beyond if they work really hard and are lucky.
What do you propose to infill our neighborhoods with? High end housing?????
Poor is not a disease. It is an epidemic. We are building for the poor. You want tax base. Good luck. You are on a wishful thinking exercise. Getting money from the government to subsidize housing for poor people. Are you totally nuts?
I guess I am nuts. What do YOU suggest?
Well, I will offer one suggestion--clean up the slum, the blight which will rid us of a lot of crime. We then might be able to actually attract the middle-class. All we are doing now is attracting more poor and slumlords. Why would any city want to do that? Don't give me your standard CRA answer now. If we continue to go along the same route we have, we will always have poor and more of them. We have a huge percentage of poor that will never allow us to raise the standards in our city. We will always have low cost housing as no one else will be attracted here. Find some more Huletts who want to build expensive houses.
Post a Comment