Commissioner Segrich's editorial is far more grounded in reality and fact-based than this, which is largely an appeal to emotion. Socialists are like that.
My wife and I have never had finer and more sharing and caring neighbors in our 53 years of marriage than Anthony and Cheryl. That counts, folks-we know them. Despite lots of differing views on politics we learn and share from each other. Anthony has spent enormous amounts of time on the issues facing our city and can anyone argue that he is not informed and prepared. Kim Stokes was voted out for failing to find solutions to the city's paralysis. She still has none. Just 'stoking' fear and frustration
Yea, it’s wild how all Segrich’s “facts” on the city’s budget lead to the city needing to lease its public assets for 99 years.
Then, when he argues for building a garage, he’s the one pushing for the largest, budget-busting garage because that also makes the most sense based on facts.
I don't believe the subject of garages is addressed on the ballot. Do you have a source or quote to support your charge? Do you have some ideas on how the city can fill up empty stores with places people want to go? Revenue-generatimg ideas?
Correct, the garage is not on the ballot. My point is that the same facts that prove the city is broke also seem to fund a costly garage that he wants.
Segrich has pushed for the budget-busting garage at almost every city meeting where the garage is an item on the agenda. He seems pretty responsive, so I’m sure if you emailed him he would provide you with his facts as to why it’s a good idea. He’s not shy about stating the amount of money he wants the city to spend.
My solution: Stop wasting taxpayer dollars on consultants, developers, and unnecessary elections.
The city/CRA gave away millions in land to WMODA for ten dollars and are about to spend millions more on a garage.
Your solutions "Stop wasting taxpayer dollars on consultants, developers, and unnecessary elections". Then what? Ignore the Fla. legislatures pending tax give-a-way to homeowners and its impact on the city budget? Allow city/taxpayer owned properties to become archeological sites?
Anthony is proposing limited economic development to offset the loss to our tax base (which, I note, will benefit the neighborhoods where the Hands Off OUR POOL, NO,NO,NO signs are thick. No surprise, there).
Instead of the fear mongering,why don't we hear your sides solutions?Something, maybe a little more than lets keep our "quirky" mojo.
There will be no large scale development plans brought before the residents of this "quirky" city because developers have learned that throwing huge amounts of money and time to present, plan, and move projects through the byzantine process of city delays and final approval, only to be thwarted by citizen referendums which are fought tooth and nail by activists living in the past is a game for fools. An activist minority I might add, funded by ??? and based in Boca Raton.
It must be asked, who is responsible for the relic of a swimming pool over there, crumbling for the past decade plus? A healthy , well run city would never allow that to happen. Its shameful. Its embarrassing. But ahhh, the memories.
This vote also affects properties all over LWB. Citizens should keep their right to vote, no on two and three, to retain the decision on development plans. Our situation today was guided by commissioners. The thought that three commissioners, now or future, will suddenly know what is best for the entire city is absurd. It's more likely any three commissioners will vote for a bad project than an entire city. Three commissioners could eliminate a park not in their own district, meaning residents living there didn't even elect the commissioners who change their neighborhood forever, 99 years. A full vote of the public, rather than 3 commissioners who are bombarded with developers, lobbied, campaign-donated, and even misled. Three people who may have no experience in these kinds of projects. At least with a public vote, the project is viewed openly and vetted, and the commissioners and public both win.
The option isn’t vote YES or let them degrade. A developer with a great project can bring it to the residents for a vote if they want a 99 year lease. That’s much better than relying on 3 votes from commissioners.
Residents voted to raise the height limits for the Gulfstream. We have voted in favor of large projects before and it can happen again.
Can you name a big development deal that the commission has approved where it wasn’t a robbery? The Bohemian? We’ll be paying for that empty garage forever. WMODA? They gave away millions in land for ten dollars. Bennys? Commissioners fought against raising their rent when South Florida real estate had never been more profitable. The Vanilla Ice building? It has sat empty for years after getting an extreme discount from the CRA.
So you want only your neighbor, Anthony Segrich, and two others to approve 99 year leases? I think all of our neighbors should be able to do that.
Yes, I want them to do that. I don't want to spend my spare time reading lease agreements and learning property tax law. I want a duly elected representative to do so on my behalf, and if I don't like the outcome, I will vote against that representative next time.
Nobody has a crystal ball. You have to take risks sometimes. You have to spend money sometimes. You can't just make the town better by jamming your ears in your fingers and closing your eyes and yelling no no no like a toddler.
I agree Kim. Nothing in these amendments fixes the problems these Debbie Downers see with Lake Worth Beach. They would rob the city of a profitable Golf Course and sell our beach property to developers.
Our local population seems to have reading comprehension issues. Better let them vote on complex development deals and make decisions for the city that will have ramifications for decades.
I agree with you obviously. The other thing to take into consideration is that assessments and increased property taxes are in the future because someone has to pay for the deferred maintenance and upkeep of these city amenities
Yes. "Assessments and increased property taxes are in the future because someone has to pay for....." Yes, indeed. But, for whom? The immediate result for homestead exempted homeowners will be a huge tax cut, while the folks who rent will be paying more. Long term, who knows how the city will maintain its services and amenities. Regressive taxes on renters is most probable in the current environment.
Commissioner Segrich's editorial is far more grounded in reality and fact-based than this, which is largely an appeal to emotion. Socialists are like that.
(disclosure: Anthony Segrich is my neighbor)
My wife and I have never had finer and more sharing and caring neighbors in our 53 years of marriage than Anthony and Cheryl. That counts, folks-we know them. Despite lots of differing views on politics we learn and share from each other. Anthony has spent enormous amounts of time on the issues facing our city and can anyone argue that he is not informed and prepared. Kim Stokes was voted out for failing to find solutions to the city's paralysis. She still has none. Just 'stoking' fear and frustration
Yea, it’s wild how all Segrich’s “facts” on the city’s budget lead to the city needing to lease its public assets for 99 years.
Then, when he argues for building a garage, he’s the one pushing for the largest, budget-busting garage because that also makes the most sense based on facts.
Funny how his facts work.
I don't believe the subject of garages is addressed on the ballot. Do you have a source or quote to support your charge? Do you have some ideas on how the city can fill up empty stores with places people want to go? Revenue-generatimg ideas?
Correct, the garage is not on the ballot. My point is that the same facts that prove the city is broke also seem to fund a costly garage that he wants.
Segrich has pushed for the budget-busting garage at almost every city meeting where the garage is an item on the agenda. He seems pretty responsive, so I’m sure if you emailed him he would provide you with his facts as to why it’s a good idea. He’s not shy about stating the amount of money he wants the city to spend.
My solution: Stop wasting taxpayer dollars on consultants, developers, and unnecessary elections.
The city/CRA gave away millions in land to WMODA for ten dollars and are about to spend millions more on a garage.
Your solutions "Stop wasting taxpayer dollars on consultants, developers, and unnecessary elections". Then what? Ignore the Fla. legislatures pending tax give-a-way to homeowners and its impact on the city budget? Allow city/taxpayer owned properties to become archeological sites?
Anthony is proposing limited economic development to offset the loss to our tax base (which, I note, will benefit the neighborhoods where the Hands Off OUR POOL, NO,NO,NO signs are thick. No surprise, there).
Instead of the fear mongering,why don't we hear your sides solutions?Something, maybe a little more than lets keep our "quirky" mojo.
My solution is bring good projects to the residents to vote on.
Please name some large scale development projects the commission can put on their resume to prove they have been responsible with the city’s finances?
There will be no large scale development plans brought before the residents of this "quirky" city because developers have learned that throwing huge amounts of money and time to present, plan, and move projects through the byzantine process of city delays and final approval, only to be thwarted by citizen referendums which are fought tooth and nail by activists living in the past is a game for fools. An activist minority I might add, funded by ??? and based in Boca Raton.
It must be asked, who is responsible for the relic of a swimming pool over there, crumbling for the past decade plus? A healthy , well run city would never allow that to happen. Its shameful. Its embarrassing. But ahhh, the memories.
This vote also affects properties all over LWB. Citizens should keep their right to vote, no on two and three, to retain the decision on development plans. Our situation today was guided by commissioners. The thought that three commissioners, now or future, will suddenly know what is best for the entire city is absurd. It's more likely any three commissioners will vote for a bad project than an entire city. Three commissioners could eliminate a park not in their own district, meaning residents living there didn't even elect the commissioners who change their neighborhood forever, 99 years. A full vote of the public, rather than 3 commissioners who are bombarded with developers, lobbied, campaign-donated, and even misled. Three people who may have no experience in these kinds of projects. At least with a public vote, the project is viewed openly and vetted, and the commissioners and public both win.
Lake Worth Golf Course is a mess I’m voting yes !
Don't give away our best properties away to developers.
So your ok with letting them degrade?
Developers will just let it degrade while they try to find a buyer and sell it.
The option isn’t vote YES or let them degrade. A developer with a great project can bring it to the residents for a vote if they want a 99 year lease. That’s much better than relying on 3 votes from commissioners.
Residents voted to raise the height limits for the Gulfstream. We have voted in favor of large projects before and it can happen again.
Can you name a big development deal that the commission has approved where it wasn’t a robbery? The Bohemian? We’ll be paying for that empty garage forever. WMODA? They gave away millions in land for ten dollars. Bennys? Commissioners fought against raising their rent when South Florida real estate had never been more profitable. The Vanilla Ice building? It has sat empty for years after getting an extreme discount from the CRA.
So you want only your neighbor, Anthony Segrich, and two others to approve 99 year leases? I think all of our neighbors should be able to do that.
Yes, I want them to do that. I don't want to spend my spare time reading lease agreements and learning property tax law. I want a duly elected representative to do so on my behalf, and if I don't like the outcome, I will vote against that representative next time.
Yea, you can vote them out in a couple years but the project will be there for 99 years. Commissioners come and go. Their decisions stay with us.
Nobody has a crystal ball. You have to take risks sometimes. You have to spend money sometimes. You can't just make the town better by jamming your ears in your fingers and closing your eyes and yelling no no no like a toddler.
Your petty insults really strengthens your argument.
I agree Kim. Nothing in these amendments fixes the problems these Debbie Downers see with Lake Worth Beach. They would rob the city of a profitable Golf Course and sell our beach property to developers.
Kim had her shot for fixing the problems. What are yours besides cute "Debbie Downer" put downs.
Just where does it say the golf course is being taken from the city? Or the beach from the City? None of that is true
Our local population seems to have reading comprehension issues. Better let them vote on complex development deals and make decisions for the city that will have ramifications for decades.
I agree with you obviously. The other thing to take into consideration is that assessments and increased property taxes are in the future because someone has to pay for the deferred maintenance and upkeep of these city amenities
Yes. "Assessments and increased property taxes are in the future because someone has to pay for....." Yes, indeed. But, for whom? The immediate result for homestead exempted homeowners will be a huge tax cut, while the folks who rent will be paying more. Long term, who knows how the city will maintain its services and amenities. Regressive taxes on renters is most probable in the current environment.
Where does Lake Worth for All get its funding from?
Property Taxes, which are not enough to make the repairs to the collapsing sea wall at the golf course or to repair and rebuild the beach pool
People who care about LWB.
Well that’s not Kim Stokes.