Monday, June 2, 2008
To get fired up for the Commission Meeting...
Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death
Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775.
No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves and the House. Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us: they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!
They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.
It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!
Tomorrow Night's City Commission Meeting - Agenda Highlights
Some of the items of interest on the City Commission agenda are highlighted below. Click here for direct access to agenda on City's website. The City's website has been slow all day, so you might have to be patient while the .pdfs load.
On the Consent agenda, Item F is a conceptual design of the Snook Islands Public Use Facilities and authorization of the City to execute County permit applications. I'll post the design concepts in the next post.
Consent Item J is the creation of a Centennial Steering Committee to develop and plan for the City's 100th Anniversary celebration. This is a great idea, but I am asking myself why you have to be a graduate of the Lake Worth Municipal Institute to be appointed to that Committee. The program hasn't been in existence for at least two years. By limiting membership on the Committee to that group, they exclude a pool of people that have a lot of knowledge about things Lake Worth. For example, I never went through the program. Unless that is the intent, to exclude and not include people.
Under Unfinished Business, big item in reaction to the crime wave we are perceiving - a transfer of $100,000 to the Police Overtime account to expand police presence and address hot spots. This would be to the end of the current fiscal year. I'm not sure how much that amount is going to help. I wonder if we will find out about the status of the Sheriff's negotiations? The jury is still out with me whether or not that is a good idea or not, but we need to have some way to objectively assess the pluses and minuses.
The very next item relates to public comment and revisions to the current policy. Here is wording from a portion of the back-up related to this item:
The Mid year budget review should be interesting - note that there is no public comment allowed under City Manager's report.
On the Consent agenda, Item F is a conceptual design of the Snook Islands Public Use Facilities and authorization of the City to execute County permit applications. I'll post the design concepts in the next post.
Consent Item J is the creation of a Centennial Steering Committee to develop and plan for the City's 100th Anniversary celebration. This is a great idea, but I am asking myself why you have to be a graduate of the Lake Worth Municipal Institute to be appointed to that Committee. The program hasn't been in existence for at least two years. By limiting membership on the Committee to that group, they exclude a pool of people that have a lot of knowledge about things Lake Worth. For example, I never went through the program. Unless that is the intent, to exclude and not include people.
Under Unfinished Business, big item in reaction to the crime wave we are perceiving - a transfer of $100,000 to the Police Overtime account to expand police presence and address hot spots. This would be to the end of the current fiscal year. I'm not sure how much that amount is going to help. I wonder if we will find out about the status of the Sheriff's negotiations? The jury is still out with me whether or not that is a good idea or not, but we need to have some way to objectively assess the pluses and minuses.
The very next item relates to public comment and revisions to the current policy. Here is wording from a portion of the back-up related to this item:
On May 20, 2008, the City Commission rescheduled discussion of theI have a real problem with the last one as that would be tought for anyone who comes late for a meeting. Couldn't we get rid of the cards altogether?
procedure, placement and order of public comment concerning agenda items
and the minute allowance for public input on all items. Comments made by the
City Commission during the discussion included the following:
place public comments after Commission comments;
limit public comments to two minutes; and
allow public comments only during Public Participation on Non-
Agendaed Items, Public Hearings, and New Business.
In addition to the comments already made, below are additional items for
discussion:
limit each Commissioners comment on agenda items, including
Presentations, to 10 minutes;
create a procedure to bring back an agenda item at a future meeting by
the prevailing side;
Presentations items be placed on an agenda only at the request of a
member of the Commission; and
accept public comment cards until the Commission meeting begins.
The Mid year budget review should be interesting - note that there is no public comment allowed under City Manager's report.
Slideshow: Twilight Intracoastal/Lake Worth Lagoon Cruise
Last Saturday, I had the pleasure of accompanying the Stafford family on their recently acquired pontoon boat. We charted a course north from Lake Worth and we out for about 3 hours or so. It had been long time since I had been out on the Intracoastal and couldn't remember ever being out while the sun was setting. We great time and managed to get some good pics, which I'll share with you here.
It reminded me how much beauty there is the world and how much we take for granted. We are situated along a very unique body of water - the Lake Worth Lagoon. Enjoy!
Click picture for full screen slideshow.
It reminded me how much beauty there is the world and how much we take for granted. We are situated along a very unique body of water - the Lake Worth Lagoon. Enjoy!
Click picture for full screen slideshow.
Florida Red and Blue - No on 2
Subject: FACT CHECK: John Stemberger
Well, they are at it again.
The main sponsor of Amendment 2, John Stemberger, graced readers of yesterday's South Florida Sun-Sentinel with another tired and misleading opinion article about Amendment 2.
If you have the stomach for it, you can read his latest diatribe here, but here are a few highlights:
What he said:
“Our campaign opponents are trying to cover up their real motive — to advance special rights for gay-identified persons by dishonestly scaring senior citizens using tortured arguments that ‘benefits’ will be taken away.”
The truth:
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled this month that their “marriage protection” amendment does take away shared health benefits from unmarried couples.
The Michigan language is similar to Florida’s – both have vague and undefined language such as “substantial equivalent” of marriage, “treated as marriage” or “similar to” marriage. These ambiguous phrases have already blocked rights in Michigan and Kentucky and it could very easily happen here.
To see how Amendment 2 could hurt seniors, read about Wayne and Helene – unmarried seniors in Broward County by clicking here.
What he says:
Gay activists “want to redefine marriage and then force that definition upon the rest of society largely through unelected, unaccountable activist judges acting outside the scope of their limited role. This is precisely what occurred in California.”
The truth:
What happened in California has no impact at all on Florida. To illustrate that point, we’d like to quote Mr. Stemberger to Mr. Stemberger.
When the Michigan court used a “marriage amendment” to take away rights and benefits (as we mentioned above), Mr. Stemberger issued a press release saying “Michigan is not Florida – and any state law decision it makes will have absolutely no effect upon Florida law.” Read his press release here.
As Mr. Stemberger neglects to tell readers in his column, “same-sex marriage” is already prohibited in Florida. Because it’s already the law in Florida, neither California courts nor Amendment 2 will change that.
Even the conservative Florida Times-Union editorialized against Amendment 2 just yesterday and noted that, “…Florida is not California…” and “Frankly, marriage does not appear all that threatened in this state.”
We could go on with this forever, but we think it’s more important for you to be armed with truth in this debate. Here’s what we know:
· The question isn’t, “Will Florida follow California?” The question is, “Will Florida follow Michigan, Ohio and Kentucky?” Those states passed marriage amendments which, like Amendment 2, were vague and unrestricted. The results: a real loss of protections, rights and benefits.
· The language of Amendment 2 doesn’t “protect marriage.” It blocks our state from recognizing any relationship that is not marriage – putting at risk any rights, benefits and protections for every unmarried Floridian. Read the whole amendment here.
· Amendment sponsors in Michigan insisted their amendment would not take away benefits – just as Mr. Stemberger and the Florida sponsors are doing now. Here’s a great article on the Michigan bait and switch.
· Every major newspaper in Florida is opposed to Amendment 2, including the most conservative papers in the state – the Florida Times-Union (Jacksonville), the Northwest Florida Daily Times (Fort Walton Beach) and the Tampa Tribune.
More information on Amendment 2 is on our website, www.SayNo2.com.
To stop the backers of Amendment 2 from changing the subject and spreading their nonsense, forward this email to friend using the button at the bottom, join the fight, or make a contribution today.
The SayNo2/Florida Red and Blue Team
More Future Visions from the past...
Another re-post, this time it seems that Mr. Disney was drinking from the same GM well.
This is from 1958, Disney's "Magic Highway USA"
And also from 1958. This exerpt is from the well known educational documentary "Unchained Goddess" produced by Frank Capra for Bell Labs for their television program "The Bell Telephone Hour."
Hmmmmm.
This is from 1958, Disney's "Magic Highway USA"
And also from 1958. This exerpt is from the well known educational documentary "Unchained Goddess" produced by Frank Capra for Bell Labs for their television program "The Bell Telephone Hour."
Hmmmmm.
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Saturday, May 31, 2008
Structural Report Out on Casino Building. But, what is wrong with this picture?
First, let me say that I am glad we finally have a new version, preceded by many previous versions (the last one being from 2001), of a structural engineer's report on the status of the Casino building at the beach. You have seen the pictures in previous posts of the spalling concrete, exposed rebar and other obvious deficiencies in the building as it exists today.
The report is included under "City Manager's Report" in the upcoming City Commission meeting agenda Tuesday night. This is the transmittal memorandum as penned by the City Manager. If you would like to read or review the entire report, click here and it will take you directly to its location on the City's website.
No surprise that there are serious problems with the building that need to be addressed. The next step will be to test the strength of the concrete, as indicated in the memo and the report. If it doesn't test out a a minimum of 3,000 psi, along with other performance measures, then there may be a need to close the entire building.
Why is it important that we acknowledge these facts? One reason is because it is a fact that we can't run away from. Another reason is that public safety is at stake. It also will push something to happen at the beach that will be different from the status quo. If the building is unsafe to be in, then we have to do something different regarding the tenants there. We'll either have to discontinue their leases and they will have to fend for themselves elsewhere. Or we'll be in a position where they realize the only alternative they have if they want to stay at the beach is to be part of the redevelopment project currently underway. At that point, those people that are holding up the current project at the beach through lawsuits and possible referendum will be seen as blocking progress - at least from the point of view of the tenants.
Now let's say the lawsuit prevails regarding the referendum on the beach land use plan change and rezoning. And let's say that referendum is not successful and the public turns down the army unleashed by those against the redevelopment beach. At that point we are already further along and perhaps don't have a building there period. Then it may just end up being a passive park. But, at least at that point it is off our agenda as a community and we can get on with more the more important issues that we face on the mainland - by focusing on crime, blight, declining property values, our image as a City, etc.
The thing that I can't understand is that I brought this up under public comment on unagendaed items at the last Commission Meeting - May 20th. It came up later in the meeting when Commissioner Golden asked about it during the discussion on the land use designation on the beach. At that time staff (Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Kroll, and confirmed by the Mayor) had indicated, in sort of "deer in headlights" way, that a structural study had been started but the engineer dropped the ball and couldn't be found or some such nonsense.
Then, in the very next Commission meeting agenda packet, we have a full structural report on the Casino building - dated May 2! Did they just make this public since I made an issue of it and have been sitting on it for all this time? It's easy enough to change a date in a report. What if I hadn't said anything, would these facts still be waiting to be publicly substantiated? Anyway, here's a little song for staff since I don't think they were being truthful about the status of the report - but at least we have it now!
The report is included under "City Manager's Report" in the upcoming City Commission meeting agenda Tuesday night. This is the transmittal memorandum as penned by the City Manager. If you would like to read or review the entire report, click here and it will take you directly to its location on the City's website.
No surprise that there are serious problems with the building that need to be addressed. The next step will be to test the strength of the concrete, as indicated in the memo and the report. If it doesn't test out a a minimum of 3,000 psi, along with other performance measures, then there may be a need to close the entire building.Why is it important that we acknowledge these facts? One reason is because it is a fact that we can't run away from. Another reason is that public safety is at stake. It also will push something to happen at the beach that will be different from the status quo. If the building is unsafe to be in, then we have to do something different regarding the tenants there. We'll either have to discontinue their leases and they will have to fend for themselves elsewhere. Or we'll be in a position where they realize the only alternative they have if they want to stay at the beach is to be part of the redevelopment project currently underway. At that point, those people that are holding up the current project at the beach through lawsuits and possible referendum will be seen as blocking progress - at least from the point of view of the tenants.
Now let's say the lawsuit prevails regarding the referendum on the beach land use plan change and rezoning. And let's say that referendum is not successful and the public turns down the army unleashed by those against the redevelopment beach. At that point we are already further along and perhaps don't have a building there period. Then it may just end up being a passive park. But, at least at that point it is off our agenda as a community and we can get on with more the more important issues that we face on the mainland - by focusing on crime, blight, declining property values, our image as a City, etc.
The thing that I can't understand is that I brought this up under public comment on unagendaed items at the last Commission Meeting - May 20th. It came up later in the meeting when Commissioner Golden asked about it during the discussion on the land use designation on the beach. At that time staff (Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Kroll, and confirmed by the Mayor) had indicated, in sort of "deer in headlights" way, that a structural study had been started but the engineer dropped the ball and couldn't be found or some such nonsense.
Then, in the very next Commission meeting agenda packet, we have a full structural report on the Casino building - dated May 2! Did they just make this public since I made an issue of it and have been sitting on it for all this time? It's easy enough to change a date in a report. What if I hadn't said anything, would these facts still be waiting to be publicly substantiated? Anyway, here's a little song for staff since I don't think they were being truthful about the status of the report - but at least we have it now!
Florida Statutes - Conflict of Interest Laws re Lake Worth CDC Request for $300,000 from CRA and Commisison Takeover of CRA
Click title for link.
Commissioner Jo Ann Golden is retained by the Lake Worth CDC as a project manager. Her name is peppered throughout the "loan" application (actually a "grant or forgivable loan" application). Did she know that this "Project 6/E "was in need of $300,000 when she went after control of the CRA's duties? That was only two months ago. The application shows multiple other financing commitments in place, so someone close to the project would have to know about the project shortfall when those negotiations were going on.
If so, Commissioner Jo-Ann Golden couldn't even "participate" - see below - in the discussion let alone vote on the matter.
Commissioner Jo Ann Golden is retained by the Lake Worth CDC as a project manager. Her name is peppered throughout the "loan" application (actually a "grant or forgivable loan" application). Did she know that this "Project 6/E "was in need of $300,000 when she went after control of the CRA's duties? That was only two months ago. The application shows multiple other financing commitments in place, so someone close to the project would have to know about the project shortfall when those negotiations were going on.
If so, Commissioner Jo-Ann Golden couldn't even "participate" - see below - in the discussion let alone vote on the matter.
Information from Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations on Lake Worth Community Development Corporation
| Detail by Entity Name | ||||||||||||||||
| Florida Non Profit Corporation | ||||||||||||||||
| LAKE WORTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION | ||||||||||||||||
| Filing Information | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
| Principal Address | ||||||||||||||||
| 1701 WINGFIELD STREET LAKE WORTH FL 33460 | ||||||||||||||||
| Changed 04/03/2002 | ||||||||||||||||
| Mailing Address | ||||||||||||||||
| P O BOX 147 LAKE WORTH FL 33460 | ||||||||||||||||
| Changed 01/29/2000 | ||||||||||||||||
| Registered Agent Name & Address | ||||||||||||||||
| MOE, RODERICK C CPA, PA 3199 LAKE WORTH ROAD LAKE WORTH FL 33461 US | ||||||||||||||||
| Name Changed: 04/28/2003 | ||||||||||||||||
| Address Changed: 03/21/2006 | ||||||||||||||||
| Officer/Director Detail | ||||||||||||||||
| Name & Address | ||||||||||||||||
| Title PD | ||||||||||||||||
| GRIMM, EDWARD 624 18TH AVENUE NORTH LAKE WORTH FL 33460 | ||||||||||||||||
| Title VD | ||||||||||||||||
| GRIMES, HAROLD 1722 CARSON AVENUE LAKE WORTH FL 33460 | ||||||||||||||||
| Title TD | ||||||||||||||||
| SABATER, ROSA 502 SW LAKE MANATEE WAY PORT SAINT LUCIE FL 34986 | ||||||||||||||||
| Title SD | ||||||||||||||||
| GAITAN, MARIA 8501 ELAINE DRIVE BOYNTON BEACH FL 33472 | ||||||||||||||||
| Annual Reports | ||||||||||||||||
|
Link to State of Florida website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![Dr. W. H. Cotton’s ode: “Oh, My Lake Worth, Florida!” [circa 1920].](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUL75cv6zJQFjX15ojOIIz9AjnbqH4asHJTYSDhnGnYr7rJZRha1NcNTirj2xPcId158vkz5Hw-wXgOfrlztj8Zr8jLFFCfuEN6PyV44ZlpMRmJ68xbtFL9vzxNiG7xDs_HJvm/s1600/LakeWorthPioneers.JPG)
