Rather than rely on "revised" history, let's review some "actual" history...

This is a copy of an e-mail that I sent to the then sitting City Commission regarding the Casino financing plan from August 16th of 2010.  It lists my concerns, which were many - and it was still at a time when the Commission was awash in talk of "saving" the existing building.  It could also have been an opportunity to cost a new building in an entirely new location, but that was not done.  The most remarkable part of this e-mail is that it was only responded to by former City Manager Susan Stanton.  All she could utter is "Wow..." Click or hover over image to see larger version:

This was also a blog post from the same date.

This is another earlier e-mail regarding the Micheal Singer Group site plan and various proposals for traffic circulation.  It was sent to the City Commission on April 11th of 2009 and was also a blog post made on the same date.  This is the time when many of the site traffic circulation problems could have been dealt with and, instead of clinging to the myth that "we could save the building" - we could have realistically looked at alternatives to the location of the casino building and managed traffic circulation and parking in a more sensible way.  Notice that I bring up providing for "deliveries." .  By the way, building a new building in the "footprint" of the old building has nothing to do with historic preservation and certainly does not qualify as "saving" the building.  The building that exists there today is 96% NEW.

There were no responses to this e-mail.

Click here for the famous PowerPoint presentation made by then Commissioner Cara Jennings at the June 5th City Commission Meeting of 2007.  This was after the city had entered into the development agreement with Greater Bay and the land use/zoning were still in the balance for the beach property - the Beach and Casino zoning district and land use designation.  Both were subject to a petition drive to repeal both - since it allowed for the over-commercialization of the beach.  It still exists today as the land use and zoning district for the beach and was needed for the new project we are looking at today.

In her presentation, she points out the setback being too close to the seawall and argues for a "managed retreat" from the ocean and cites all sorts of examples of crumbling seawalls and the washing away of beaches as reasons to locate the building farther away from the Atlantic Ocean - definitely farther away than the footprint of the existing building.  It turns out that this would have been a smart move and allow for a more appropriate location for a NEW casino building - which is what we ended up with anyway.