Saturday, May 1, 2010


Go placidly amid the noise and the haste,
and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible, without surrender,
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others,
even to the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons;
they are vexatious to the spirit.
If you compare yourself with others,
you may become vain or bitter,
for always there will be greater and lesser persons than yourself.
Enjoy your achievements as well as your plans.
Keep interested in your own career, however humble;
it is a real possession in the changing fortunes of time.
Exercise caution in your business affairs,
for the world is full of trickery.
But let this not blind you to what virtue there is;
many persons strive for high ideals,
and everywhere life is full of heroism.
Be yourself. Especially do not feign affection.
Neither be cynical about love,
for in the face of all aridity and disenchantment,
it is as perennial as the grass.
Take kindly the counsel of the years,
gracefully surrendering the things of youth.
Nurture strength of spirit to shield you in sudden misfortune.
But do not distress yourself with dark imaginings.
Many fears are born of fatigue and loneliness.
Beyond a wholesome discipline,
be gentle with yourself.
You are a child of the universe
no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.
Therefore be at peace with God,
whatever you conceive that to be.
And whatever your labors and aspirations,
in the noisy confusion of life,
keep peace in your soul.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams,
it is still a beautiful world.
Be cheerful. Strive to be happy.

Friday, April 30, 2010

This is a comment that was left under "Another thought regarding appointed boards and incumbency:"

Wes-- just to set the record straight on those CRA interviews--It was Jeff Clemens who canceled them at the last minute. It was his decision totally.

Next, as far as totalitarianism on the dais, I can't see where anything is cut in stone these days. Golden has voted against Jennings and Mulvehill on many issues this year, voting with Maxwell and Varela. We can no longer count on a 3 to 2 in any particular favor.

As far as litmus tests, I am glad that they have some standards particularly when it comes to the FAB. There is only one Board in need of a lot of help that can't seem to get its act together--ever, other than the chair complaining all of the time.

P&Z complaining about doing all of that work and then ignored...too bad. We want height restrictions and for some reason certain members of the the P&Z just did not want to get that.

So, we all do look at things through our own rose colored glasses. One faction in this city is determined to build high and another says low and small town charm. Put it to a vote. That's always my answer to everything.  -Lynn Anderson

I always like to point out that in 1996, the voters approved the following addition to the City Charter:
It's fairly straight-forward language.  It says that buildings can be up to six stories east of Dixie Hwy. and ten stories west of Dixie Hwy.  The people spoke through their ballots.  So, those that profess that land use decisions should be decided "by the people" support this decision.  Instead, they - including those that voted for the three story uniform height limitation in our Comprehensive Plan - conveniently forget that this vote was taken.  

And if you think about it, what happens if Amendment 4 passes which will mandate voter approval of changes to Comprehensive Plans?  It is entirely possible that there may be contradictory votes over a period of time.  When it is politically convenient, some may just be forgotten or over-looked as part of the natural human tendency for selective enforcement when faced with a Comprehensive Plan or a City Charter/Code of Ordinances that total 1,000 plus pages.  I hope the courts are ready for the onslaught.

Dr. John Eliot from Overachievement

"History, though, shows us that the people who end up changing the world--the great political, social, scientific, technological, artistic, even sports revolutionaries--are always nuts, until they're right, and then they're geniuses."

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Commissioner Cara Jennings and her link to the oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico

Here is our Empress showing off her new clothes by offering a proclamation against oil drilling in Florida's territorial waters.  It was passed with a unanimous vote by the Commission and Mayor and joined many other communities in doing so.

This is good on the surface, but what does it really do?

Well, for one thing, this is great window dressing for her upcoming campaign.  But what has she done to support and encourage effective mass transit in Lake Worth and find ways to minimize the importance of the single occupancy automobile in our transit patterns.  Beyond what she does personally with riding a bike and driving a car that burns bio-diesel, not much.  Her actions actually contribute to everyone being more reliant on oil, gasoline and increased carbon emissions.

A house or a building built in Lake Worth is a house or building that is not built in the sprawling areas of Palm Beach County.  It is also one that is not built in the environmentally sensitive areas of our state.  Can we stipulate that, as one of the oldest municipalities in Palm Beach County, that we are actually an urban area.  We are a city.  Our land has already been adulterated from what it was before settlers arrived on the scene.  It is therefore the most environmentally responsible land to redevelop.  It is near infrastructure to support it and already along transit and rail lines.  Suburban development or greenfield development is neither.  But by eliminating the possibility for redevelopment in Lake Worth, you do nothing to make the world less oil make it worse.  If you like Cara Jennings as a Commissioner, you better like your car seat just as much.

This is not to suggest that we "build to the sky," but it should tell us that a three story model for redevelopment is not realistic.  By insisting on that model, we increase the demand for oil and related products.  Three weeks ago, I had to physically go outside the City Limits of Lake Worth to buy underware and socks.  I would hope you agree that these are wardrobe staples for the vast majority of humans.  Due to the lack of buildings housing clothing retailers, I saddled up my five cylinder fossil fuel burning vehicle and headed to where I could find these things.  This is repeated day after day after by anyone living in Lake Worth.  Think of the amount of gasoline that could be saved, tons of carbon not emitted if we didn't have to go elsewhere for our basic staples.

A "no growth" policy is a political panacea - it panders to the electorate, but it really is a false promise of saving the environment.  Responsible, sustainable redevelopment is what is needed not signs at our borders saying "Developers Go-Away."  It also has a cost that most assuredly will come, but unfortunately it comes only after a few election cycles.

Did I mention that we have lost about half of our taxable property value in the City of Lake Worth over the past five years?

Does someone care to show me where over-development exists in Lake Worth?

The above set of pictures was taken in July of 2008.  No need to update them as the conditions are still the same. (You may have to flip through these manually)

This is a tour of vacant land along South Federal taken in February of this year.

Here is an e-mail message sent to our Commissioners as post on another local blog (highlighting added):
Dear Commissioners. You have a huge responsibility and an opportunity to bring our city out of this financial morass. You need to undo some of what past administrations misguidedly enacted and you need to do something proactive and creative in this dreadful economy. I don't have all the solutions but propose a couple.

The paper this morning had an article detailing how the housing market here has crashed lower than any other place in the area. It doesn't take a PhD in city planning to notice that overbuilding made this inevitable. Just a drive past dozens and dozens of unoccupied brand new townhouses on Federal Highway is evidence enough. Putting a stop to any further new construction is one action long over due.
Another is give the unions a choice - good faith binding arbitration or face the fact that jobs will be eliminated. You can't get blood from a rock. If it's not there, it's not there. Hang tough. (And this comes from a died-in-the-wool, pro labor union member.)
Best wishes to you all,
Lisa Stewart
1232 North L Street
Does anyone believe that Lake Worth is an island and not part of the United States or world economies? Have we all read the accounts of the worst recession since the Great Depression? The boom that led to the real estate bust was not a local phenomenon.  And you shouldn't have to be a PhD in Economics to understand that.

Regionally we experienced more of the first wave of the bust, but that is consistent with our history as a "boom and bust" economy.  In many of the same ways, Florida was the leading edge of the downturn, just as in the 1920s.  When I moved here in 1989, we had just gone through the Savings and Loan Debacle and there was a glut of office and commercial space that had to be absorbed into the market.  This was taking place all around the country and not just in Palm Beach County and Lake Worth.  With few exceptions, the redevelopment we experienced here in Lake Worth (residential townhomes) was on land that was already zoned and had the land use designations to support it.  The number of units that was added to the supply of housing in Lake Worth is small in comparison to other cities.  Where there was redevelopment generally happened in places that needed physical improvement or blight removal anyway.  If you would like me to show you those areas, I'd be happy to.

At one point, right after the election of Marc Drautz as Mayor, there was a call for a moratorium on all development in Lake Worth.  We have had a de facto moratorium ever since this crew got on the Commission.  Be that as it may now be, we, sitting on the Planning and Zoning Board back then, put together a "zoning-in-progress" that halted speculation in the areas of the city we really needed to protect the character of - those historic districts around the downtown.  At the time, an urban planner colleague of mine had 19 potential townhouse projects that he was getting ready to submit.  Our work on the "zoning-in-progress" stopped those from going forward.  You don't hear about those since that doesn't fit the "boogieman developer" narrative of the Commissioners Jennings, Mulvehill and Golden, along with their ardent supporters.

Don't forget our over million dollar Master Planning effort that was on-going during this time period.  The reason for that was to find a redevelopment model that worked for Lake Worth.  The only material thing we have to show for that effort is a Comprehensive Plan that limits height to three stories.  When is the majority on the dais going to show us what we can do with these vacant lots?  Anything built upon them would represent change.  How are our "leaders" going to lead us to where we are responsibly using our land resources and provide a stable, sustainable tax base for the city so that existing residents aren't left with the tab?

You can only run on a "no growth" campaign for so long.  Pretty soon, the lawsuits springing from saying "no" to the wrong things or doing it the wrong way all cost money in the form of costly financial settlements levied by the Court system to pay for the lost rights of property owners.

Let's see what our millage rate will be once the budget is approved for FY 2010-2011.  How will that be used in the November campaigns?

So, we are living in a town that lost almost half of its property tax value over the past five years, not due to overbuilding, but due to the effects of the overall economy, our continued negative public image as it relates to our electric utility and lack of attention to our existing housing stock in terms of code enforcement - relative to the other municipalities in Palm Beach County.  We also have a Commission that thinks it is there to stop all investment and redevelopment in the city and that is what is the biggest contributor to the financial morass in which we find ourselves.

Bring it on!  Perhaps the real over-development applies to the imaginations of those who support the current majority on the dais.

City Website is Still Sending People to Businesses Outside the City Limits

Randomly click around this interactive map from Dolph's.  You are lucky if you land in the City of Lake Worth - odds are the business you click on will be outside of 33460 or 33461 -  the Zip Codes for the City of Lake Worth.  This happens even though the website says it is an "interactive map of businesses located in the city."  So the city is unknowingly sending people to businesses outside the city.  This came before the City Commission, after it was already installed on the city's website, to approve the arrangement between Dolph's and the City.  Universal concern was raised about making sure that this would only be for City of Lake Worth businesses.

Oh well.

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

Please be patient. There are many comments that are waiting to be published. They will be when I return to my computer. Thanks and keep commenting!

Click here for link to Gail Shepherd's New Times article on Cara Jennings' Ethics Violation

Preview of what we will be hearing from now until the November election.  You can't tell too easily from the article, but Cara Jennings will be running against Carla Blockson - not against Lisa Maxwell.

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Another thought regarding appointed boards and incumbents...

Since the two incumbents running for re-election this November, Commissioner Cara Jennings and Commissioner Suzanne Mulvehill, have been on the Commission, there has been a not too hidden contempt for appointed boards.  Look at how the last round of CRA applicants were treated - lining up for their interviews only to be turned away and told that the Commission may be eliminating the CRA anyway.  "We'll call you when we know what we are doing."  Then we had the Planning and Zoning board's multi-year review of the Comprehensive Plan.  Ignoring the large number of hours and opportunities for meaningful public input - including opportunities for elected officials to inject their views and comments, the Commission ignored it's advisory recommendations on height.  In one swift unilateral action, the Commission chopped property rights throughout the city.  We have yet to experience the unintended consequences of that action.  I remember a long time member of the Planning Board saying that he felt that all of his time in volunteering his efforts in review of the Comprehensive Plan weren't appreciated by the Commission due to their hasty action.

So, why does it surprise some people that an issue is being made of someone on a board who is running for office?  It shouldn't.  I can hear the chatter at the doors now, past and future campaigns.  Something like this, "Hi, I am Ms. Incumbent and I'm running for re-election." Resident "Oh, I have heard of you before.  Who are you running against?" "Oh, that would be Ms. X," hand to side of mouth as if telling secret, "Yes, she was on one of our boards but had to resign."  Resident, "Oh, really, well, that's too bad.  Don't worry, you have my vote then."

The moral of the story here is that we should utilize our appointed advisory boards better than we do.  We should allow them to do the research and solicit public input so that they can provide good advice to the Commission.  Right now, instead of having boards that represent a broad cross-section of opinions, we are getting cherry-picked appointees that are able to pass certain litmus tests.  That way, there are no surprises beyond the already scripted agenda of the majority on the dais and we continue down the road of totalitarianism.  Original thought and representing reality is not appreciated the way it needs to be in order to have effective government.  But, then maybe certain people don't want government to be effective and to represent the people - they want the actions to represent their own narrow views.

Looking back - Property Tax Value Decrease from 2006 to 2010 - ALARMING!

Well, amid all the recent bad news coming from our fair City, let's look at a little bit of some positive news. According to the Palm Beach Post article of July 1, 2006, the City's taxable value went from $1,528.6 billion to $2,016.1 billion. This is an increase of 32%! At the May 3, 2006 budget workshop, Mr. Boyer estimated a 15% increase in taxable value. I am sure this was meant to be a conservative estimate but raised much concern as the estimated budget deficit with that 15% increase was $4,797,500.
This is a portion of a post that comes from July 2, 2006. Clearly, these were the "salad days" in Lake Worth, but it shows what redevelopment can do and what effect it has the budget's bottom line.  Compare the total taxable value from 2006 of $2,016,100,000 to the 2010 estimated taxable value of $1,106,000,000.  Percentage-wise, from 2006 to 2010, the city of Lake Worth has lost 45% of its taxable property value.
Anyone care to do the math and determine the impact that additional value would have to our general fund balance?
Tying this post to the previous regarding incumbency, it's interesting to point out the last line of the Ministry of Information's endorsement of Jo-Ann Golden:
" If Ms. Golden can be too anti-business, Mr. Blackman can be too pro-development. That kind of tie goes to the incumbent."

Monday, April 26, 2010

Incumbency: Pluses and Minuses

This coming November 2010 election will have two incumbents running for re-election in each of the two districts, #2 and #4.  As of now, it looks like it will be Commissioner Jennings in District #2 running against Carla Blockson and Commissioner Mulvehill running against Lisa Maxwell.

Interestingly, my tracking software indicates that one of the most popular of recent blog posts in one that has my resignation letter from the Lake Worth Community Redevelopment Agency.  In it, I quote the section of the City Code of Ordinances shown above.  It is relatively new, adopted in 1999, and was in reaction to abuse of one's appointed position on a board and running for office.  

What is the effect of this ordinance?  Well, I can speak from experience in that I was on two boards each of the times I was considering running for a Commission seat.  The first time, I was on the Planning and Zoning Board and at the time of qualifying I had one year left in my appointment.  So, do you  run for an elected office, losing your appointed post and, if you lose, then you are sidelined for a while?  If you do lose, your successful opponent isn't going to be too anxious to appoint you to any other board - at least that's been my experience.  In the final analysis, you are betting that you win. I am sure others have made the choice to stay on the board and not risk running for office.

By the way, the question of whether you write a letter or not when you qualify is moot. I was told that if I didn't submit a resignation letter, it would be done automatically upon qualifying.  The position would be declared vacant.

There are some other unintended consequences of this ordinance and it weighs in favor of any elected incumbent.  One is that they can continue to campaign from the dais all the way up to election day!  We'll continue to see the "jumping in front of parades" and "Official Proclamations" - all in the process of building up the incumbents' "bullet points" for their flashy campaign materials.  

This has come more to the fore now in that one of the potential opponents of an incumbent is on an appointed city board.  People are calling for this person to "follow the spirit of the law" and resign since it is widely accepted that they are campaigning now.  That's not what that section of the ordinance says though.  Talking this way only enforces the strength of the incumbent's hand.  More time out of the "limelight" for the challenger, meanwhile the incumbent can be getting fluff pieces through the Ministry of Information (aka PBP.)  What if the incumbent had to resign to run?  

What other ways does an incumbent benefit?  Name recognition is a key one as is the ability to appear before just about every neighborhood association or civic meeting at a drop of the hat.  That also relates to access - sort of like having the "keys to the King/Queendom."  And, regardless of what you think, they have well-healed supporters that can network and get the funds for campaign coming in regular flows.  There are also those in the community that may benefit and have a good rapport with the incumbent, but may have basic philosophical differences with the incumbent.  While they may actually vote for the opponent based upon their beliefs, they will be reluctant to show public support in terms of yard sign or contribution.  That can make a difference in a close election.  Likewise, there is a bandwagon mentality to go with the "winner" - the person that has proven they can win in a campaign.  They are the likely "bet" that may pay off in the future.  They've also had the benefit of meeting many citizens in the regular day-to-day duties of their elected position.

So, in many ways, instead of adhering to some unwritten "spirit" of the law, if anything, I would like to eliminate the requirement to resign from an appointed board - period.  I think we would get better qualified candidates and it would help level the playing field.  But how likely is that when you have sitting commissioners that will be running again in control of the dais.

In the last election, I was the only one that ran against an incumbent.  I am not suggesting that was the reason for the outcome - there were many, but it did play a part.  And don't discount the importance of the Ministry of Information's (aka PBP) endorsement - even they tilted toward the incumbent.  One of the reasons cited was that she was the incumbent.  Brilliant thinking.

Of course, the negative aspect to being an incumbent, especially in our angry local and national political climate, is that there is a motivation for change.  People are fed up with government as usual and are willing to "throw the bums out" as one candidate kept saying during our last election.  It is also negative for an incumbent to have a poor voting record, but sometimes that depends on the voter's point of view.  But, and this happened to me, if you start talking about your opponent's record, you are immediately charged by their supporters as being negative. Their supporters immediately will take that "information' around to everyone who will listen about how negative their opponent is being.  

Regardless, it is still better to be an incumbent - unless there is some EGREGIOUS (one of the banned words) act that so resonates negatively with the public image of the incumbent.  

Just my opinion, I'd like to hear yours.

Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization re: Bicycle Public Survey

Click title for link to survey.  These have to be returned via e-mail or by hand by May 7, 2010.  You can also save and e-mail the form back to the MPO by that date.  To do this and save the information on the form, you will need this freeware program CutePDF.  You can download that program by clicking here.  You will also need to refer to this chart to fill out information in the survey.  Filling this out will help determine the need for bicycle facilities and help in funding decisions.

My Most Favorite Country Music Star!

Narrow Political Focus?

Ha!  That is the claim of another local blogger, something she thinks I possess, I guess.  It was she that called out two of her most highly favored Commissioners, but this of course was not being "political."  From one of her latest entries:

When the forensic study report came in and it was professionally determined that the building was structurally sound, the vote came in to restore on a 4 to 1. The past Commission made this decision. It was with the hope of obtaining an historical designation. Costs estimates that were given showed that it would be cheaper to build with certain elements still standing such as the fondation.

First of all, there was nothing "forensic" about the structural engineering report.  No crimes were committed, at least not yet, in the structural condition of our beloved Casino building.  All the report said is that the building didn't need to be "red tagged" - but there were still structural issues that needed to be addressed. If the blogger could provide the meeting minutes of when this item was decided upon, it would be extremely appreciated by me and many of my loyal readers.  Likewise, if she could produce the "forensic" cost estimates that show it would be "cheaper to build with certain elements still standing such as the fondation(SIC)", that would be most welcome as well.

Lest she becomes known as someone who does not adequately report realities.


Google Model Your Town Competition

Click title for link.  These 3-D simulations were done by using Google Sketch-up.  One of the finalists happens to be our neighbor to the north - West Palm Beach.  Others cities/individuals are in the running too.  You can vote for your favorites and view other YouTube videos of the entries.  Makes me want to learn how to do this for our fair city.  This can be a great urban planning tool.

Warning to those that are sensitive to building height.  Some of the buildings you will see are over three (3) stories tall.

2010 Lake Worth Lagoon Initiative Speaker Series

Dear Friend of the Lake Worth Lagoon,

The Lake Worth Lagoon Initiative’s Public Outreach Working Group is pleased to announce the Lake Worth Lagoon 2010 Speaker Series. We are highlighting one presentation each month that relates to the Lagoon. View the brochure (PDF file) at
or go to news and events at

The next presentation in the Lake Worth Lagoon Speaker Series is:
Date: May 1 (Saturday)
9:30 AM - 10:30 AM
Presented by Bill Schall, Horticulture Extension Agent, at the UF/IFAS Palm Beach County Cooperative Extension Service, Clayton Hutcheson Building,
Exhibit Hall A, 559 N. Military Trail, West Palm Beach.
Questions? Call (561) 233-1725.
Learn how to protect the Lagoon and other water resources while creating and maintaining a beautiful yard.

Please share with others who may be interested.

All the best,


Alyssa Dodd
Environmental Analyst, Public Outreach

Lake Worth's 2010 Taxable Property Value - Expected to be greatest percentage drop in valuation of all 38 Palm Beach County municipalities:

This is in the latest City Manager's report (4/23).  Last fiscal year we were the second highest decrease - second only to Loxahatchee Groves.  This has implications for our general fund budget, of course.  There is talk about going with the "roll up" rate, rather than the "roll back" rate.  The "roll up" rate would allow the same revenue generation from property taxes as the current fiscal year - which means the millage rate would increase.  Keeping the same millage rate, the "roll back" rate, would generate less revenue based on the lower property tax valuation.

We need to ask serious questions about why, with our prime location as a coastal community in the middle of Palm Beach County, we continue to experience the largest declines compared with other Palm Beach County municipalities.

See related Palm Beach Post article:  Appraiser: Lake Worth prop values fall 23 percent; county average down 12 percent - also check out the comments.

A local blogger with a twisted view of reality...

"Soon we will be moving forward with restoring the Lake Worth Casino. Our citizens "lucked out" (or was it sheer brilliance from the dais by two commissioners, Jennings and Mulvehill?) when the "favorite" architect became REG, as he, with his design, will help with historical designation, getting financing, obtaining grants and incorporate green features. We never would have been able to get valuable historical designation in an art deco design. Preserving our past is very important. Historical designation is a distinction that will give this building world appeal."
The above was posted by another Lake Worth blogger. It contained so many half-truths, I couldn't let it pass without some correction.  I am not sure how or when "sheer brilliance" played out on the dais.  The city was lucky to get the sorts of responses from a number of highly-qualified architectural teams.  REG was in my top group, but they were not the team that received my "first choice" status.  My favorite happened to be Beilinson/Gomez - the only firm that expended the extra effort to get word from the state of Florida Historic Preservation Office about the preferred approach in the rehabilitation of this building.  The letter confirmed that the preferred restoration project would be the existing "International Style" design - misidentified above as "art deco."  There is no guarantee that REG's design will achieve success in a National historic designation and that alone will not give the building "world appeal."  Other key members of the team, just as if not more important than the architect, are a construction manager at-risk, a quality contractor and knowledgeable oversight on the part of the city.  This will be a very complicated project.

We, the residents, also never received an adequate cost/benefit analysis of what a new building versus a rehabilitated old building would cost.  We, as a community, also have to go through the charrette process to determine the ultimate design.

If you purport to supply information to the public, let's at least try to be close to reality.

Sunday, April 25, 2010

An e-mail received from a loyal reader...

At the risk of pouring gasoline on the fire, here it is.  This is without editing on my part, including the colored highlights.  Ms. Hayes is a property owner in the southwest part of Lake Worth and has tried unsuccessfully rezone her property. She is an intervenor with DCA regarding the finding of our Comprehensive Plan being found "in compliance."  She is now of the radar screen of those who have an interest in making sure the Comprehensive Plan stays "as is" - with draconian height restrictions and returning the Sunset property to a County land use designation.  Also, at the City Commission meeting this week, under Public Comment on Un-Agendaed Items, a property owner adjacent to the cemetery said that she has tried to get the city to fence the area around the private homes that border the cemetery.  Just last week she was burglarized again and the perpetrators came from the cemetery.  At the end of her comment, the One High Vice Mayor, Commissioner Golden yelled at her, "And it costs $_____" I couldn't hear the amount she blurted out.

South Pine Street Saga - Part One

Whee, Lynn is "out there" too assumptive and speaks on issues she has no knowledge of.  Loves to use me as her example.  She did NOT attend any of my meetings with the city...neither did Katie...

BTW, my neighbors signed more than one petition, in support of the requested zoning change and attended Creation of Master Plan , Stk. Holder, SAC Meetings & Submitted Residential Input.  Both on S. Pine st. and neighboring Ridge St.  I think on Royal Palm too, if my memory serves me correctly.  Also, one of my neighbors requested me to insert apartments into the Petition.  So, I did.. The City Did invite all residents living with in 400 ft. of my property, to attend a meeting and express Any comments.  NOT one person who attended voiced they Didn't Want the zoning change.  They WANTED or were OK with the change!

For the record: I request to make the re-zoning of S. Pine St. MF20 (not mixed use), I requested to, make my project condo-town homes (single family residential) - reality, just attached together SF 7 etc..) I also, offered/requested for my property to be 100 per cent owner occupied w/ a clause for No renters/sublet for min 5 years or longer at the cities leisure... and language to be in the change, inserted for the rest of S. Pine St. to reflect in essence the similar manner.

She misquoted me, re: including "B" St. in the zoning change.  At one time, few yrs. ago; I wanted, to include "A" St. because; of Commercial Type Uses' at either end of Pine Crest Cem.. A Nursing Home on Royal Palm and a Trailer Park on 12th Avenue S.  Also, there was an interest by a large developer to purchase all of "A" and S. Pine ( they wanted to redevelop the whole area and create a beautiful, asticily pleasing, safe area ) All this within walking distance to a State Park and Barton Elem., Lake Worth High, Tri-Rai, L.W. Trolley and a Publix w/in a 1 1/2 mile either direction.
Also, at one time during the creation of the Master Plan (map); all of the Barton Rd. area was ear marked SF TF 14.  Some how it is not reflected now.  I missed the part where it disappeared..didn't get the memo on that one (he he).

My statement in re: to Commish. Mtgs, Crirminal Activity in the area needs to be clarified (was clarified w/ city @ meetings)

A majority of the the CRIMINALS lived/live in Single Family Residential Units (HOUSES). NOT duplexes, apartments, condos or town homes inthe S. Pine St. area.  In the 600 blk of S. Pine was/are HOUSES THAT ARE RENTAL UNITS, Property Appr. refects  owner occupied re; homestead.  But, the owners Rent the (Houses) out and claim/ed homestead.  This where most of the Drug Dealing, Crime and Criminal Activity came/comes from. that, affected owner occupied residents.

Another area for that type of activity came from the UNPROTECTED Cemetery ( Needs a Dam* Fence!).  It has been used for many rs. for all kinds of criminal acts including (MURDER).  All but, one of the  homes on the cemetery are (owner occ.) 1 is a duplex,(not included), have been robbed multiple times.  Guess what; the robber who was aventually caught lived in S.F. 7 Residence ( HOUSE) on "B" St.  We also, suspect he was the same person who STRONG ARM ROBBED my neighbors wife behind my property.  Lets not forget My eldest son found and picked up the Gun used in the S/A Robbery, while helping a neighbor clean up their lawn. (they live on the cemetery). So, the robber robbed the property behind me and ran past my yard across S. Pine through the cemetery and then home to "B" St. after ditching the Gun on my neighbors property.

There is one particular house on S. Pine (problem property) has been used a distribution point for (Drugs and "Criminal Hang Out") for years ( the responsible owner, attempting to clean up the area & wanted to redevelop it ) but, incurred the same problems, I have w/ the city.  He eventually sold the property to Church People.  The wanted to build a Church there, but, same thing; no cooperation w/ city.

Saga to be continued...

Wes, Please feel free to  republish if you feel it warrants.

Thank You
Ms. Hayes

From Reef Rescue: Gulf oil spill could threaten Florida’s reefs and beaches

Click title for link to Reef Rescue blog.