Response from me to a concerned citizen on a number of topics - mostly related to yesterday's 10 a.m. special meeting...

That was one of the more frustrating meetings. First of all, having a "public" meeting at 10 a.m. on a weekday is not a good policy - period. Did they ever vote on anything? I was back and forth from the audio stream doing work and didn't catch 100% of it - so I might have missed a vote, but it seemed like they accomplished nothing.

Casino Building Condition:

The City has at least 5 or more structural studies, done over the past 10 years, documenting that the building has structural problems. One of the worst areas in along the eastern side of the building where there is a high volume of pedestrian activity. Our last building official - who is now gone - was the first one that recognized the danger to the public and acted to close the building by March 31st. In his opinion, it was in that bad a condition. Of course, this didn't go over well with the tenants. Then we had the election where Mulvehill won with heavy financial and other support from those tenants on a platform to save and "restore" the building. The building official stood firm on the March 31st date and would only allow it to stay open if some work was done immediately to make the building safer for the public. That is when they approved the drawing up of a "shoring plan" by a structural engineer for $20,000. At this meeting yesterday, they put out an invitation for contractors to bid based on those plans. What happens when they open up the building and find that there is little "good" steel/rebar? Then what?

I haven't seen those shoring plans but it seems to me that there might be some major interruption to tenants while this work is being done. They expect anywhere from $40,000 to $70,000 to do that work. I think that is a very low range. I think anyone bidding on this will need much more money to do the job - still lots of unforeseen conditions. See below.

In my opinion, this is the only work that will be done on the building. My crystal ball says that Greater Bay will eventually file their lawsuit and will win an injunction against anyone else doing work at the beach. It might even be a race to see what is done first - the shoring or the injunction. Retha was right: she thinks this is the only thing that will be done at the beach. It will give the city an excuse that, assuming the work can be completed before an injunction, the building is sound - for a few years.

Estimating costs for rehabilitating the Casino building:

This building was built in 1922. There are no plans showing how it was built. It was damaged by every major hurricane that came through here from then until now. It was essentially destroyed by a 1947 hurricane. The version we see now was a lot bigger than the original. How was the new slab tied into the old? That isn't easy to determine without doing some fairly major demolition and that can't be done if you don't want to disturb the tenants. What about the electric service tie-in and wiring throughout the building - what condition is that in? Air conditioning? Plumbing? Handicapped access - a requirement? Are you going to carve into every store's bathroom and make them accessible to contemporary standards? - Doing that would double or triple the size of bathrooms in the building and take away from leasable space. Because the value of the work would be way above the threshold for bringing the whole building up to code, you are also have to meet the 140 mph windload standard for the building and any opening - doors and windows. Since it is seaward of the coastal construction line, if they touch the slab that the building sits on, they either have to drive or drill pilings to support the existing building so that if the sand beneath the building washes away, the building will still be standing.

Given all these unknowns, let alone the city's reputation, I don't know any contractor that would be comfortable giving a fixed price. The $10 million is a round figure that comes across as not breaking the bank - but in my opinion it's low.

Also, is the building in the place where we want it on the property? How can we be paying $20,000 to Michael Singer Studios for them to do a "visioning" exercise without knowing whether we are keeping the building where it is now or whether we are building somewhere else on the 19 acres. The best approach is to look at the property as a clean slate and put things where they make sense based on current conditions.

Cara on the phone for meetings - or anyone for that matter:

We shouldn't allow this. How do we know she is acting independently? What is her condition? Can she really hear all the dialog? What about things that are passed out during the meeting? Yesterday, the Mayor had to read her the information from a table that had three different scenarios over multiple years. How meaningful was that?

86% water increase over five years:

This is insidious! They are financing the construction of an RO plant totally on the backs of rate payers. For anyone concerned about gentrification, you are we going to get to move to Lake Worth if we have the highest electric rates and water rates compared to anywhere else in Florida. Under this plan, we would only use the pipeline that is being built for multi-millions of dollars for two years - then an RO plant would come on line. This is probably the most seriously bad thing they are likely to do.

Golf Course:

It's too expensive to play and not in as good condition as other courses in the area. They need to get someone in that knows what they are doing and has been successful other places in Florida. Option #2 was a "piggyback" on another city's (WPB) contract - to go with option #1 and #3, they would have to waive bidding which they didn't want to do. No one really knew what was going on with the staff back-up and, as a result, nothing happened.

If you can educate some people about the damage that is being done, that would greatly help the cause! Right now people are demoralized and are just sitting back and watching the circus.