Comment Up
View from the North West
Plans signed off on March 20, 2013
In spite of the public meetings on our shuffleboard property and the people letting the city know that we wanted to fix up the building and retain the courts, the outcome last night on our shuffleboard court property was no surprise--the entire commission voted to turn over our property on a 10 year lease, (they changed it from a 15 year lease with an option to renew for 5 years or less, we are not sure) to the CRA to virtually use it for artists.
Once the property is rehabilitated and converted, both the CRA and the city will meet to discuss the shared use of the property with arts and cultural programming having the priority over all other uses. The backup showed the shuffleboard courts all removed. The grant writer said he made a mistake by including the drawings with the courts removed--it was just the building they were talking about. The Lease, however, says that the CRA will rehab and convert the existing Shuffleboard Courts Community Center to a new community cultural facility. They can remove them by agreement with the city.
The Grant is $150,000. Either the city or the CRA must come up with matching funds. We were not told, nor did the commission ask, who would be paying but as the city is paying the CRA $37,500 for the CRA's design work, one can only imagine. And if it is the city, then they had the money to keep the property and do the work themselves.
Back in April 2012, there was public consensus to use the CDBG funds for the shuffleboard
courts as it was the highest priority. The City, at that time, only mentioned the one
proposal to retain one-half of the courts at the shuffleboard court
building and demolish the remaining 14. Why did they not give all of the facts? Because they didn't want any to remain...too much trouble...too much money...Seniors don't matter.
At the first public meeting there were many residents there. Some voted on what they wanted at our Shuffleboard Court building. The vote was 14 to 12 FOR retaining
only 14 courts. Two people in my community had already left for their
own meeting and did not stay for this tally. They would have voted to
retain ALL 28 courts. At the second public meeting, 11 people out of 13 who bothered to vote wanted ALL of the courts to remain. Of course the commission likes to make you feel guilty and express their disapproval by saying that few people show up for these community outreaches. "It's always the same people who show up," they bemoan.
Realizing that this is just a small percentage of people who spoke out about saving our courts, our history, it is better than what the city gave us last night. The outcome of our property was all predetermined. There was a partial day notice to the public and thrown on the agenda at the last minute. Even the commission was unaware of what was going on behind closed doors--signing away legal rights to our property to the CRA. The commission even gave the lame excuse that the courts were never at that location originally as an excuse to diss them.
No one ever asked me if I wanted this city to become an artist's destination. They did, however, ask me about our shuffleboard courts.
The commission is under the impression that shuffleboarding is passe and that old people don't even shuffleboard anymore, not realizing that this is a family sport, not just one for old people. "Gee, I never see anyone playing at the Lake Worth Towers," as an example from commissioner Amoroso, a former member of the CRA.
They didn't listen last night-- they all did what they wanted and took the easy way out, allowing the city manager to steer them all in his direction. Unaccountable to the people they serve--their last priority-- the commission didn't seem to care very much that all of this had been decided behind their backs. The commissioners, who are the bosses, were not kept in the loop. The public certainly wasn't either; we did not matter.