Nice mailer suggesting that Lake Worth needs a new face for commissioner with the background of our new fresh faced casino, a building in which Mr. Jerome had no involvement..
Thanks for the reminder, Mr. Jerome, but it was two termed Commissioner Chris McVoy who is running again for re-election who was instrumental in the final development of this beautiful building, built in the footprint of our old casino. His Political Action Committee helped save the beach from the flim flam artist who was going to commercialize the beach and build a building where the upper level parking is now located. It was through his hard work and in spite of the City of Lake Worth filing suit against him personally and his PAC, that we have a fabulous beach today.
Looks like Serge raised a few bucks.
ReplyDeleteAnd he will raise a few eyebrows...
ReplyDeleteHe already has with his unfair personal attacks. That's his entire campaign. Hope lightening doesn't strike while he's at church.
ReplyDeleteEx ghetto guy--Now don't tell me you are still harboring a grudge about that remark that was said in jest. Come on, Manny. Jo-Ann Golden is a wonderful person with no mean streak in her body. She is all about love, not hate.
ReplyDeleteAnd this Serge Jerome has the audacity to imply that he had something to do with the re-creation of the beautiful 1921 Casino by putting his picture in front of it.
ReplyDeleteI heard he was pushing anger at the Golf Course and now he sends out a liar flyer.
A candidate with no experience and no vision put up to run by Lake Worth's gravy train passengers
Was Commissioner McVoy also instrumental in the failed business plan for the beach complex? I believe he gets credit for that too, as he was involved with the project as you stated.
ReplyDeleteI also think he had something to do with not choosing to properly do the foundation of the building to protect against the impacts of see level rise and other adverse environmental conditions, but expounds himself as Captain Sea Level Rise.
Please give ALL credit, where credit is due. You need to stop picking and choosing.
the Business Plan was approved by the finance board. It was presented by John Pickett, a/k/a/a Johnny. The final plan was presented and approved by Steve Carr, then Finance Director. So, McVoy had nothing to do with that...are you nuts? Grasping at straws as usual.The location of the casino was confirmed by engineers that it was the place to be. It was built by people who had the expertise in developing buildings on the coast, like the Omphoy. Kimley-Horn--A-ok. Morganti--a-Okay. REG- A-Okay. Commissioner McVoy had nothing to do with this decision...are you nuts?
ReplyDeleteWhat you need to do is stop the lies and get educated. God, I hope you're not a present commissioner.
Business plan was pressed by then City Manager Susan Stanton. I remember fully her presenting a worst case, best case and what we think will happen scenario. McVoy's PAC was formed to prohibit the change of zoning of the beach, which was for "parks and recreation only" and what we have there today could not be built, um, I mean renovated, under the then current code. The zoning was changed to BAC Beach and Casino, to allow for the present renovated building, with McVoy fighting it all the way.
ReplyDeleteSomehow that makes him the champion of the casino complex?
No, Wes. No one said he was the champion of it but he was AGAINST it becoming a commercial enterprise and against the zoning change from PROS to BAC in order to accommodate Greater Bay. His PAC, We Love Lake Worth Political Action Committee, had its petitions certified by the Supervisor of Elections on July 19, 2007. Why did this PAC form in the first place? Why did the citizens help the PAC to gather these signatures? It was to overturn three Ordinances voted on by 3 out of 5 City Commissioners to
ReplyDelete1) change our Comprehensive Plan to create a new Land Use District 2007-09,
2) change the future Land Use Map designation from Public Recreation and Open Space to BAC 2007-10
3) rezoning the beach from PROS to BAC 2007-20.
Steve Carr presented the Best case, Worst case scenario which was the correct thing to do.
To the mean-spirited person who just attempted to post here, I will NOT post comments of that nature and you know what I am talking about. Pretty soon it will be a crime to be gay in this city if you and your friends have anything to do with it.
ReplyDeleteBut I will say this--you don't know what in hell you're talking about. You have NO clue as to the reason why Johnny Longboats was denied. Stop the BS.
PROS Stands for Parks, Recreation, Open Space.
ReplyDeleteWhat was determined early on is that the commercial activity that was already there and had been for decades was not zoned correctly.
That means John G's, the T-shirt and even Benny's were not allowed in that zone. The zoning needed to be changed to allow commercial activity.
BAC Stands for Beach and Casino zone and is specific to our beach to allow the type of activity that is there now and has been for decades.
The zoning would have needed to be changed even for this historical landmark to be saved as it has now been with just the minor renovation.
So McVoy voted against any change in the zoning which have preventing any improvement keeping it an eyesore. Or the only other option would have been to tear it down and leave it Park, Recreation and Open Space.
Any of this jog your memory?
There has been no "failed business plan" at the beach. I no longer have the spreadsheet with the projections, but I would be surprised if the finances are vastly different than what was projected with a few exceptions:
ReplyDelete1. The projections included a tenant above Mulligans. That's a commission failure, not the plan.
2. The projections did not accurately capture the common area costs. Sometimes that happens with projections. That's why they're called Projections and not Assured Outcomes. The leases should have allowed for first year adjustments to the common area costs, but I don't recall. If not, shame on us.
3. The project expenses were projected to exceed revenue for three years, I think. This was pretty common knowledge. Revenues were projected to exceed expenses sometime in 2014-2015, as I recall.
If you are parroting what others say, I would caution you. If I am wrong about what I have presented above, then I would welcome correction, along with accurate financial information to support the correction :) not more parroting.
I know of people who park at the beach regularly and don't pay for parking and have never been ticketed. The bulk of the beach revenue was projected to come from parking, and it was a very, very conservative projection. If you fail to EXECUTE a perfectly legitimate business plan, then it won't work, now will it?