Below is the text of an email I sent to Commissioner Lim. I will let you know if he replies.
Dear Commissioner Eddie Lim,
On Tuesday of this week, as part of your speech where you expressed your hope that now the city politics would be more civil with the appointment of Richard Chervony, you also expressed your exasperation regarding what you refer to as half truths and innuendo by "other" candidates. You did not mention what these supposed "half truths and innuendo" are, which is in itself disingenuous but I believe you are referring to my application.
In my application to be considered for the commission seat, I wrote "there is grave concern over apparent ties on the commission to the developer of the proposed adult entertainment complex. It is critical to the citizens to see that an appointed interim commissioner does not carry the history, real or perceived, of financial ties to one or another side in the current controversy." I don't see either the half truth or the innuendo.
The facts are that you voted "Yes" three times for the strip club. October 7, 2010 and October 30, 2010 as a member of Planning & Zoning, then voted again in favor of the strip club as a commissioner on December 7, 2010.
That combined with your accepting the maximum legal contribution from Scott Greenwald on September 23, 2010, has led to the grave concern of which I spoke.
So, Mr. Lim, if I am wrong and these facts are untrue or if there is some evidence that you have not continually supported the strip club, say so. I will publish your response on the blog and should I have my facts wrong, will read a retraction at the next commission meeting.
Awaiting your response,
Kevin Vericker
December 2, 2011
Friday, December 2, 2011
An Open Letter to Commissioner Lim
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Kevin Vericker is again posting what he calls half truths or what are really lies. To set the record straight, Mr. Lim has never voted on the adult entertainment conditional use. He did vote to approve a site plan, with any legal use allowed, that met all legal requirements of North Bay Village. As Kevin Vericker fails to realize, Commissioners, are required to follow the laws of the City including the laws of the United States, even if they do not agree with the law. For example, former mayor Esquirosa just realized this requirement.
ReplyDeleteVericker also fails to mention that Frank Rodriquez as well as former mayor Oscar Alfonso accepted the full legal contribution from Scott Greenwald. If Vericker is a man of his word, then he will get up and read a retraction of his untrue facts at the next commission meeting.
Scott Greenwald
Mr. Greenwald adds the information that Eddie Lim's votes were for the building, not the use. I find this a distinction without a difference, since at each of the P&Z hearings, Mr. Greenwald was asked directly if he was going to build a strip club and each time answered by saying "Any legal use".
ReplyDeleteMr. Greenwald then continues to discuss the building plans as though they did meet our code. Yet there were nine major exceptions, including environmental studies and noise studies, while the plans themselves use suspect parking space numbers which only work if less than half the occupied space actually has customers.
For Mr. Greenwald to claim conformity to code is not true. These are real issues.
Now that the conditional use application is out there, it's surprising that Greenwald's surveyor did not check to see if there was a professional school or a congregation across the street, a task easily accomplished by looking at the building directory.
As re the Alfonso and Rodriguez contributions from Greenwald, okay. Alfonso is no longer in office and there was no strip club being promoted in 2008. It was 2010 when Greenwald's gifts were exclusively directed to Trujillo and Lim.
It was nice of Greenwald to reply in defense of Lim but I am still waiting for Lim's response.
Kevin Vericker