Incumbents always have an easier time raising money. One of the reasons is that this side ALWAYS has the money. These are your property managers, Realtors, investors, general contractors and attorneys. Some are probably friends of Hudson Holdings for all we know. Our Commissioners and Mayor are going to town already raising thousands of dollars to ensure that they will be re-elected and some of their contributors have money to burn.
Why do they want all this aggravation especially when nothing is better? At least their vote will count unlike what they decided about our Charter Amendment--they discounted that vote with the flick of a Bic. Below is the amount they have collected to date along with a few of their top contributors:
Andy Amoroso
$3,820
Martin Welfeld--$1,000, Teresa Miller--$1,000
Scott Maxwell
$9,110.00
Friends of Mark Foley--$500, A property investor from Lantana--$500, Anthony Marotta again--$500, Florida on the Move PAC--$250, Benny's on the Beach--$1,000, Marty Welfeld--$1,000. Teresa Miller--$1,000, Lisa Maxwell--$250, McMow Glass--$250.
Mayor Pam Triolo
$7,375.00
With donations from the usual suspects: Friends of Mark Foley-$500, A neighborhood association president, Anthony Marotta--$500, (it never ceases to amaze me that someone is still getting money from a Sun Recycling company), Jetport II LLC--$500, Benny's on the Beach (friend of Hudson Holdings)--$1,000, and Callaro Steakhouse gave an in-kind contribution of $1,000, Martin Welfeld--$1,000, Teresa Miller--$1,000.
And just think, we still have nearly three months to go until election day.
They can raise all the money in the world, but it does not mean they will get elected. Too, now most citizens here are down on these three who many now know they are all corrupt and unethical. They will all be voted out, so many are down on these three giving our city to developers. They are so out of here!
ReplyDeleteThat vote you keep talking about violated Florida Law and was thus declared null and void. To blame this on Scott, Pam and Andy is just not right. The heights in the city have been lowered as you wanted except for one small area of the city for the sole purpose of hotel. Nothing else can be built to six stories yet you attack these folks like they completely screwed the city. We need that hotel and I support what they did to accomplish giving us a low rise city and a hotel that can be profitable. I only wish you felt the same.
ReplyDeleteFor once and for all-
ReplyDeleteWhether the vote is null and void will be determined in a court of law...not by the city attorney and this trio. This commission could have honored the vote anyway--they didn't. It wasn't HH that "screwed the city." It was this commission.
You can have that hotel and this developer can build to 45 feet. The attorney for HH said that most hotels needed 120 rooms to be profitable. They will have, based on what they say they want, 54 additional rooms that they don't need for that monetary success.
People don't trust these investors and we don't trust these electeds. Sorry, but that is the case. HH has owned the property for 19 months and not ONE thing has changed other than pruning some trees.
I just hope that there are some good candidates running.
ReplyDeleteBenny's on the Beach, can we have a big damn break here?Can you believe these people?Aren't they still holding hands with Hudson Holdings hoping they get our casino so they can have that upstairs space that they want?Creeps.They could finish off that space right now if they were really sincere.What's the real story with them and Hudson?
ReplyDeleteAccepting money from Sun Recycling is disgusting and makes Triolo just a lighter shade of Retha Lowe. Why in the heck is Triolo even running for Mayor? All she does is whine about her business going down the tubes because she has sacrificed so much to be Mayor.
ReplyDeletePam ,Andy and Scott are not altruistic types. So whats in it for them? Just what are they getting in return for screwing over the people of Lake Worth?
I just want to know why Pam and Andy have all their signs up on blighted dumpy properties on Federal Hwy? They seem to align with all these slum owners and do not enforce codes and laws on them which they should. It looks bad for Pam and Andy to have their signs up on such dumpy properties, I think it really tells something about them and their character.
ReplyDeleteI've got their signs up in my yard... And I don't have a dumpy property! This trio of commissioners are the reason our code enforcement is more empowered today than it was after Susan Stanson decimating our code enforcent department. We cannot go backwards to those days when gangs ruled our streets.
ReplyDeleteGangs are still on our streets. The city is still full of slum,blight and crime. Where have you been? And if truth be known, we have about the same number of code enforcement officers as we did when Stanton was city manger who took over when we were about to belly-up. I have to wonder where you get your fairy tale info.
ReplyDeleteLynn you are trying to paint a picture of the city that is just not fair. Sure we have problems but we are not a crime ridden city full of slum and blight. I see homes selling at new record highs and new people moving here from all over. I see many homes being renovated, new construction going up on once vacant lots, and a general attitude that we are moving in the right direction. To blame this commission for the problems we still have is unfair. They have worked hard trying to get us outside money to fund needed projects and they have built relationships with local and state leaders that we really need. Fact is things are much better than they have been in years.
ReplyDeleteWell, come over to this side of town. Drive up and down all the alphabet streets. Get out of your comfy quarters on Golfview or a similar type of location. Stop isolating yourself from the real world.
ReplyDeleteNothing is "fair" to you people. Even winning an election is NOT FAIR.
The heights vote did not violate Florida law.Our charter change had nothing to do with the Gov.'s after the fact law. And just who declared it null and void? A city attorney? Three(sorry FOUR,Szerdi got booted out) Commissioners trying to curry campaign donations from their flipper con men sugar Daddies?
ReplyDeleteThis election was legally held. The heights amendment stands.Period.
This is the gang of 4--down to 3 who also bought us government out of the sunshine and seemingly would have no problem selling their own mothers for a developer's dollar. They also tried to nullify our election when they lost on the bond issue--remember that? This is the gang of we do what we want/not what the people want. If you watch Scott's emotions at meetings you can see how heavily indebted he is to developers, esp. HH. He gets positively rabid about any possibility that the beach could break even. He and HH of course will come to our rescue and take over. And us poor little dunces still don't understand that we own the grains of sand. It's as obvious as his little red face rantings that he will not be happy until HH is firmly in control of the beach. Ensuring that Bowtie will remain to do more dirty work if he isn't reelected. Rick Scott's law does not nullify a constitutional amendment, just the same way they cannot pass an ordinance to do away with elections or the city charter. Not for lack of trying. Ask yourself this: If they don't intend to keep building higher--where are they going to put all their visionary development? We are only 7 square miles. And recently put in around $100 million in new development. Why does WW have "incentives" for adding 2 additional floors? Singer Island anyone?
ReplyDeleteGangs? When your hero was CM didn't we have a mass shooting on South B St? Didn't we have a bunch of SUR 13 members wreaking havoc in and around town? Gangs are here now? PBSO did wonders indicting them under RICO. Slum and blight on the alphabet streets? That area received the highest percentage of appreciation in the county last year and is poised to repeat this year.
ReplyDeleteNot that it was because of what the majority commission did, but because they supported what the CRA did tearing down old abandoned properties and replacing with new.
And we have almost double the inspectors we had after Stanton decimated the department on orders of Cara Jennings, who incidentally lives in a dump and thinks the rest of the city should look like that. Maybe that's the slum you refer on the alphabet streets.
This commission has taken steps through the VOTE to repair our long neglected streets, sidewalks and underground pipes. The voters rejected it by a handful of votes. At least they tried. Your chosen candidates could care less about the deterioration all around us.
A lot of inaccuracies in your statement anonymous at 1:12. It's just too ridiculous to even bother with.
ReplyDeleteYou don't believe in THE VOTE. And we did reject your 34 year bond pay-back commitment. You used $50,000 of taxpayer money to defeat it and still lost. Give us an even playing field. The only people who would have benefited from this $63 million bond were the contractors (and anyone with hands under the table) as all of these streets would have had to be repaved in another 15 years and we still would be paying on the bond for 19 more years.
How many inspectors do you have, anonymous? Go ahead now...call code enforcement and find out. You have no clue.
Oh, and in case you don't pay attention, we have shootings on a regular basis here in LW. And yes, the Feds came in and got a lot of the gang bangers on RICO charges but it doesn't mean they are all gone. The CRA cleaned up the streets? You're kidding,right? They built 28 houses or something like that sprinkled across the city and it didn't do a dent on slum, blight and crime for the $23,237,500. More contractors and builders from out of town got that.
How much new construction was started West of the tracks in the ten years before the CRA applied for and obtained $23 million? None. 150 plus new housing units later and you think it is worse off than if they had never done it.
ReplyDeleteYou really see the world through poop colored glasses.
150 housing units? Send me the list.
ReplyDeleteWe still have slum, blight and crime.
So clean off your glasses...and cut the crap. This country was going through a major recession, nearly a depression so of course you had little construction going on anywhere. No one said we were worse off. I am saying we still have problems...plenty of them. And thank God for free government money, right?
For the most part I think most folks are very happy with the direction the city is moving and most could care less how high the hotel wants to build so long as they improve the property. Anything is better than what we have now, a closed hotel for 10 years.
ReplyDeleteWell, you haven't talked to the voters who said "no" to over 45 feet. You guys just aren't listening.
ReplyDeleteIt will be very interesting to see just how long past elections before we see HH make another play for the beach. If this gang gets back in that is a sure thing. Why don't we start a pool to guess a date when Gulfstream renovation will start? My guess is after they get a piece of the beach.
ReplyDeleteThe Gulfstream renovations will never start until they sell the property, if they can. They want our casino to throw that into the pie. This commission is corrupt.
ReplyDeleteI do think that the City is heading in the right direction, the disgruntled heights voters may have a say but i believe a majority of those voters have moved on and those remaining disgruntled will not sway the electorate. I like hearing and having the opposing views of Maier, McVoy but I do NOT want to give them the majority vote! JMHO
ReplyDeleteThe majority vote is winning in this city. Take the GO bond, the Heights charter Amendment and kicking out Szerdi. The majority is on a roll.
ReplyDeleteMaier has agreed with this trio more times than McVoy.
ReplyDeleteI've talked to quite a few people who generally want to preserve what's left of our quaint city by keeping the building heights low but they acknowledge that allowing an exception for a hotel only in the midst of other towering buildings to be in line with their heights is not only acceptable but in keeping with good planning and aesthetics.
ReplyDeleteAnother Lucerne or Lake Worth Towers type of new construction is what sensible people object to. No consistency with adjoining properties and stick out like a sore thumb.
I agree with the comment above that the 5 or 6 vocal "no exception" people, will not sway people from acknowledging the positive direction the city has taken since anarchy ruled and don't want the city to go backward.
Please list everything that went "backward" when anarchy ruled. Are you serious? Cara Jennings was one vote and, for the most part, was a superb commissioner.
ReplyDeleteNext, by giving Hudson Holdings an up-zoning on these MF-30 parcels, the city would then have to give it to every property owner in those few blocks. We voted in 45 feet.
You lost that vote.
And IF the city gave every other property in the zone the same zoning they gave to HH, they would still only be able to build to 45' per that zoning, with one exception, right?
ReplyDeleteI don't quite understand the question. If you give one property owner an up-zoning, any property owner who wanted to build a hotel could get that zoning per our present ordinances.
ReplyDeleteWhy should there be an exception for one property owner? Contract zoning is illegal.
You open up the flood gate, you can't change the direction of the flow.
It only takes 3 commissioners to change an ordinance on zoning. Zoning is political. How much money are they getting under the table? Any? None? Who knows? They wanted to give away our casino to Hudson. Does anyone trust them? HHoldings will not do one damn thing here with this property. They have been throwing out the carrot for way too long and you have fallen for the story. Why is it that we have to continue to fight to keep things right in our city and in the downtown. Low rise is what I voted for. Don't bother telling me that another Lucerne can't be built. All they have to do is change the damn zoning. Stop being so naive 2:18.
ReplyDeleteYou guys keep forgetting that the commission VOTED no to HH at the beach. Why do you keep blaming the majority when they did what you wanted and voted no (yes I know it was 3-2). No matter what they do, you are against it just because you can't control them like your puppets.
ReplyDeleteIs there ANYONE on your side of politics who understands anything going on? ANYONE AT ALL?
ReplyDeleteHudson Holdings dropped out of the process on 9-15-15. Every newspaper around reported this as well as this blog and Hudson sent a letter stating it--they dropped out. The Commission had NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS and did NOT vote no to them.
You are really behind the eight ball, anonymous @3:57 and you continue to invent stuff. Do you really like being uninformed or do you just lie on purpose? Hudson is waiting in the wings to see what happens in the March election.
Don't tell me that I have to start walking and campaigning again...I thought I was retired from that but you people keep me going. Truth is profound and you wouldn't know it if you tripped over it.