Comment Up
Now and then I get a lot of BS from some people in this city...usually it is the self-serving ones or those trying to grab an asset or two and who are aligned with developers. This is the latest comment:
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Hudson Holdings just won't Quit":
As usual you are making your assumptions, and leading everyone towards the LIES. Until you hear what is said IN YOUR MIND it must be bad for EVERYONE. Do EVERYONE a favor and just GO AWAY. I do not know anyone that as is HEARTLESS< MEAN< OR ANGRY as you. My question is did you not get enough when you where younger?????????????????????????
...............
Of course, they accuse me of lying but never identify the lie. They are always anonymous cowards. Then they get into personal, ugly attacks. If you don't agree with them, you are vile, old, fat or whatever other insulting comment they can dream up. You can't have a different opinion--oh no. It all shows how desperate they are.
The truth of the matter is, we just redeveloped our beach and spent $13 million dollars. Why should we hand it over to Hudson Holdings on a long-term lease that could be up to 99 years? Didn't we just get rid of Greater Bay a few years back that wanted to do the same thing? Don't new city managers ever understand history, the charettes we had back then and what the people wanted? Do you honestly feel that the tide has changed in just a few short years because no one knows how to manage anything?
So, is the poster above on Hudson Holding's payroll like John Szerdi who lost his election on this issue and Wes Blackman who now admits working for Hudson or will he/she benefit from Hudson in some way?
29 comments:
What has HH promised these people who are pushing this so hard? What about the really naive like JKelly? There are some people really fooled. Take Retha Lowe. What is she getting out of this? Or are people just stupid?
I can't really figure this out at all. They say that you have to follow the money but in this case????? It is the same group of people who want to give away our utility to FPL. It is the same ones who want us to spend millions at the park of commerce in order to attract developers. Hudson plans on taking out a mortgage for ruining our beach and some people think this is cool?
We have the best beach ever and it is ours. let's keep it that way.
HANDS OFF OUR BEACH.
You have to wonder ,like poster above asked, just what have these people been promised? Hudson Holdings has done so well with the Gulfsteam- oh wait,, Hudson Holdings has done nothing with the Gulfstream but let it rot.And we are supposed to turn over our beach to them ??? 'The people of Lake Worth will never allow this.As Lynn pointed out ,we just re-did our beach to the tune of 13 million. It was a plan put forward by the people of Lake Worth after numerous public input meetings.John Szerdi got kicked out of office because of his dealings with Hudson Holdings.Pay attention Scot , Pam and Andy.
Lynn, I know you put up with a lot of shit. Thanks for your blog. I read it every day. In fact, it's the first thing I do. Let's save our beach from these people and the city mgr.
Once you've sold your soul to Hudson Holdings, there's plenty of room in there for the devil to take hold. This comment just shows the desperation and ugliness of those people in this city who are determined to give away our beach. Wonder how much they got for their souls...what does a soul go for nowadays??
that's a John Szerdi comment. We know wher he's comign from. he wants to worry about whether yu got laid enough when yu were yunger? What a total pig.
Has Hudson Holdings (one of about 20 companies Steven Michael fronts for) given or promised Michael Bornstein, Andy Amoroso, Scott Maxwell, and Pam Triolo enough for them to ignore what has not happened at the Gulfstream and what the citizens recently expressed they want at the beach-what's there- so that these 2014 un-elected officials are willing to cave to this out-of-town speculator?
To all of the above:
HANDS OFF OUR BEACH!!!
Thank Lynn for sharing this and the truth about this HH. They sounds like monsters. You know I used to think that what happened on tv or a soap opera was all just on tv, it didn't happen in real life. I have changed my mind, I would not put it past this company to come after you or anyone against them, watch you back. They sound like they could kill to get what they want. They sound very evil. Too, what have done with the Gulfstream Hotel up to this point? Nothing, it is now years with them, but looks like hell. Why aren't they doing what they are supposed to do with this building? I don't trust them, nor want them to have anything to do with our beach and casino. We need to vote out all these bums that want dealings with HH, Lynn please be careful with this group, they sound nasty.
I agree, we need to fight for our beach. You know so many cities have sold out their beaches to developers, look at Pompano, Lauderdale by the Sea, etc, they sold parts of their beach to then have high rise condos built there, just to get some money for the city, but selling their souls to the devil. HH is the devil, they are very dangerous, we need to keep our beach for the citizens, no selling or turning over not even one square inch of our beach to NO ONE. We need to stand strong against anything with HH, they are evil. We need to fight and protest them right the hell out of this city.
Pam, andy, and Scott, do you think anyone will ever vote for any of you ever again? We do not trust you now. If you run again, you will lose, you are losers now, you cannot pull the wool over our eyes. We will never vote for you again, your time is soon up! Get the hell out of our city.
if hh gets the contract that just further backs up the accusations of Lw being corrupt, Back off our beach!
I sincerely don't know what's best for us or not, but I would love to hear the answer to this question:
How would privatizing part of the beach, affect all of us public beach-goers?
@10:17--is that a SERIOUS question? This is our public beach. Lake Worth OWNS it. You think some private entity should make money off of our property? Really? Do you have any idea that this property is worth and this city puts out an ITN to literally GIVE IT AWAY to someone who will make all the money?
Most people focus on HH's ownership of the Gulfstream and their efforts to obtain control of the beach, but they also own a ton of property up and down Federal. They are a huge property owner in this City and so the elected officials listen to them. I'm sure they've made all kinds of promises about cleaning up South Federal, adding to the tax base, etc.
Most city officials love developers, no matter the city, b/c they bring campaign contributions to them and they bring tax dollars. Realtors love developers and so called city planner/architects do too. If you look at who supports HH most of them are in that crowd (realtor, contractor, architect, etc.). They support HH b/c they see money for them.
Aren't the businesses up at the beach making money off of our property now?
Lynn, I'm confused...
Why can't we lease the space to at least cover the expense of up keeping the entire beach complex? Perhaps we should close down all the businesses up there and let the homeless and bohemians take up our ocean front property - it is public space, and don't we all have the right to occupy public space. I suppose I should also be allows to stroll into Mulligans and use their washroom to bath myself and shave. It is public space... And I don't have to pay for the air conditioning or water! Win win for me! (At the very least, I'll smell better than that guy last night at the commission meeting who was complaining about supposed harassment by PBSO's enforcement of ordinances and Bryant Park hours of operations.)
This is all pretzel logic.
Greg, you're never confused but you do enjoy confusing. I'm not going to answer this as it doesn't deserve one.
How is a simple question confusing? Are the businesses operating at our beach making money off the beach or not?
Take the under performing asset, the pool, and in it's place provide resident parking, two levels, one at the bottom of the pool and one at deck level. Level the pool building and erect beach related shops. Move the water feature to the center of town, West of the tracks and make it fun for the whole family with a splash park for small children, lap pool for adults. Easier access for walkers, bike riders. Less costly to maintain with much less water.
Two levels of parking could possibly net 100 spaces. Half covered. Half for pay. 50 x $16.00 per day = $800.00 per day $24,000.00 per month.
More than cover the cost of the building and new pool, splash park.
Yes, the casino is rented out just like it's been rented out since it was originally built in 1922. We are the landlord just like landlords in our downtown or anywhere else. They rent space out per our terms and conditions, business come in and try to make a profit. Normal capitalism. We don't want any more retail than what's in this square footage of this building whether it be 5 stores or 10. Get it yet? No more development at our beach. no more buildings. No more pools, etc. Let Anderson & Carr work out a deal to rent the upstairs space minus our ballroom. Leave our pool alone. No long-term leases of our entire beach complex.
Tell the city, Scott, to hire someone to be on staff who can manage this building and our beach property.
HANDS OFF OUR BEACH.
Get it?
Hudson Holdings at 12:29. I guess I don't have to attend your PR BS on Monday. Don't yu realize you aren't wanted here?
Of course there is a big difference between businesses that lease our public space and are open to the public and a developer who wants to lease our land for many, many years to open a private club.
The main difference is Mulligan's I can go in and eat, private club I have to pay big bucks for a membership (if I want to enter) and the public is excluded. I'd assume that the memberships will also be limited. So even if they offer discounted memberships to city residents (which I assume will be part of their offer) they probably will only offer a few (say 50-100) and keep most memberships full price. Otherwise their business model makes no sense, frankly the business model proposed doesn't make any sense any way I look at it unless they expect this to go to litigation and they no we are an easy mark and will gladly hand over millions in a settlement. They promise all kinds of money to the City, they pay millions for a building that we get to own, plus they profit. Where does all that money come from???
"The main difference is Mulligan's I can go in and eat, private club I have to pay big bucks for a membership (if I want to enter) and the public is excluded."
When you go to Muligans or most restaurants you have to pay for the food and service
Who is going to benefit by Hudson Holdings at our beach? It's not LW. We are only going to get $500,000 for 19 years and 364 days. We lose all our parking income. We lose all our ballroom income, we lose our pool, we lose our rights for decades with their options to renew.
Not a good deal. Sort of like Iran. Sort of like Cuba. It's idiotic.
Private club you have to pay to eat too. You pay to get membership and then you pay for your services, they aren't included.
These private club people are idiotic. If you want to join a private beach club there are plenty to choose from, stay away from our beach.
I thought they denied it was going to be a private club at the meeting. Right now, we have a "public" golf course. You can buy a membership which gives you certain amenities or you can just go there to pay for the day.
That is my impression of what HH is proposing for the beach complex they want to build. Characterizing it as a "private" club, like Mara Lago or Palm Beach Bath and Tennis is what I think of when you say "Private".
Public will still be invited and welcome.
Am I wrong?
That's the problem, It's what they want to build. Well, we don't want them to build anything. Why is that not sinking it?
My point was the mis-characterization of the term "private club". While I don't have a problem with their design, I too don't think we need more development at the beach. We need to restore more parking and mass transit back to the beach. The current lighting situation there bites. The pool building bites even worse. The pool is our only underperforming asset there and there is no reason to have a fresh water pool in that location. Especially one so huge.
I learned to swim in the original pool. It was salt water and located behind where Mulligans is now. So for the historical aspect of the pool, that horse left the barn when this one was built back when Dorsey was Mayor. The building reflects the "municipal" look that eventually took over the demolished casino building that we were able to "save".
Now we have a cheaply built Disney-esque building with unusable space that has so far been a white elephant. Possibly, if there were parking where the pool is now, the space would be more accessible and the parking would bring more revenue.
Well, having an opinion on something is fine and dandy but you are wrong on Dennis Dorsey.
This pool was built in 1971. He became a commissioner in 1972 and later Mayor around 1977. He had nothing to do in the decision making of building this wonderful Olympic Pool.
So, how about knocking it off and getting your attacks at least correct?
There is nothing Disney-esque" about our casino. If it is a "white elephant"(which it's not) as you say, then let's get some management in place that can do their jobs.
Since you are related to him, I have to stand corrected. I thought he had a lot to do with the "new" pool.
Just thinking back to the good ole days, with Dennis Dorsey, Joe Martin and Andy Andrews. Back when there was no turmoil in Lake Worth politics.
Post a Comment