Money Wasted

Lake Worth Utilities
Waste Meter
... for an arc flash study that Mr. Reyes was qualified to do in house and at no cost to taxpayers.
... the estimated engineering cost of the express feeder which could also be done in house at no cost to taxpayers.
... wasted when insurance requirements were circumvented by the city manager and utility director.
... wasted when plant manager Dave Mulvay’s first attempt at writing a scope of work contained a defect that cost taxpayers an extra $123,098 for tainting the bidding process and giving unfair advantage to one bidder over another. - April 2009
... wasted when the Matrix organizational study to save taxpayers money was scrapped in favor of higher cost outsourcing by city manager Stanton.
... wasted engineering design cost of water piping and tanks (original county water deal) that will never be built.
... wasted when additional costs were incurred for not following insurance procedure on transformer repair.
... wasted when the commission unanimously voted to order transformers when we had equivalent replacements already in stock since the upgrade. - 15 Sep. 2009
Total Taxpayer Dollars Wasted:

LWM Menu

· Home
· Advertising
· Authors and Articles
· AvantGo
· Downloads
· Feedback
· Forums
· Groups
· HTML Newsletter
· Journal
· Recommend Us
· Search
· Statistics
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Top 10
· Topics
· Web Links

Who's Online

There are currently, 47 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

You are an Anonymous user. You can register for free by clicking here

Site Info

Your IP:

Welcome, Anonymous
· Secure Login/Registration
· Forgot Password?
Server Date/Time
27 May 2019 02:15:10 EST

  New Casino report suffers from same error
Posted on Monday, June 02, 2008 @ 11:46:07 EST by admin

Lake Worth

Latest Casino structure report - a visual inspection

Chunk jackhammered out years ago on the east support beam never repaired to improve appearance of the building

CLICK HERE FOR REPORT/also on backup material for 6.3.08 agenda

This report suffers from the same old misassumption as the 2001 report in thatthe chunks of concrete missing on the under side of the east support beam are considered the result of "spalling." Generally, when flakes and chunks of concrete break off from exterior surfaces ON THEIR OWN, it is called "spalling." But these and other chunks were jackhammered out within the past decade and never repaired. They did not fall on their own from defects in the beam or finishing stucco which raises integrity issues for the report.

It's easy to look at a previous report and make the same mistakes, but sloppy work invalidates the report's conclusions and wastes taxpayer's money.

It is not presently known how many excavations into the concrete have been made over the years and how many were misqualified by the report as "spalling." There is also mention of columns being repaired "numerous times," but how was that determined? From actual workorders from the past twenty years? Or did that become apparent by looking at the column?

Apparently some form of actual structural testing is underway. But there is no indication as to the methods being used for the testing. There are the preferred non invasive techniques such as ultrasound, radar, X-ray, and technologies that can present a 3D view of the inside of the support beam. The older conventional tests are destructive such as drilling into a beam which sometimes results in cutting through rebar and tension cables. There are also concrete aggregate tests for salts and other corrosive elements.

And questions have been raised as to why the city didn't release this new report sooner. It was dated May 2nd and only made its debut over three weeks later as a backup item on the agenda. But during the past few months, many requests were made for the report and no one in the clerks office knew about it until it appeared as a backup item on the agenda? As is often the case on controversial subjects, the information is withheld from the public until the latest possible moment.

Side note: Some of the newer non-invasive technologies for looking into concrete are commonly used to look underground at utility lines and pipes... a technology our former utility director said didn't exist when he recommended giving Mock Roos an extra $75,000 when in fact the extra cost we paid was due to an admitted engineering miscalculation which in turn resulted from not using any "potholing" firms or up to date technology to save money.

A couple of items from the net:

"Concrete spalling is a common occurence, especially on exterior surfaces that are exposed to freeze and thaw cycles. It's like scaling, but involves bigger chunks breaking loose for no apparent reason. There are many causes such as improper finishing methods and curing methods. Simple repairs can be done fill the void and prevent further deterioration."

"To solve concrete spalling, the job should be started with good concrete and ended with good finishing techniques. Deicing salts, contrary to popular belief, will not harm concrete that is made, placed and finished in the proper way. Never use fertilizers as deicers because the chemicals may attack your concrete. If you're still concerned about water messing up your surface, use a concrete sealant."

technique 3D



New Casino report suffers from same error | Login/Create an Account | 3 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.


No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register



Re: New Casino report suffers from same error (Score: 1)
by hillraiser2008 on Monday, June 02, 2008 @ 17:23:38 EST
(User Info | Send a Message)

the City is pathetic for not repairing these holes. the tenants up there are just as bad for not buying a bag of concrete and repairing them or even clenaing up the sidewalks. We already know the city does ZERO maintenance on anything.



Re: New Casino report suffers from same error (Score: 1)
by FrankS on Friday, June 06, 2008 @ 12:29:33 EST
(User Info | Send a Message)

I doubt if we will ever know the real truth of the state of this building. If the city wants to tear it down, it will happen.



Re: New Casino report suffers from same error (Score: 1)
by KatieMcG on Saturday, June 07, 2008 @ 00:35:40 EST
(User Info | Send a Message)

Jeff is trying to pull a Lois Frankel. Hurry up ,tear the building down,then when the court says let the people vote, they will have to vote to get a new building up there. WRONG !!! Due to the present stringent coastal construction laws,the idiots of Lake Worth are tearing down the only building that they will ever have up there. They better repair it,which, after years of DELIBERATE NEGLECT will cost money ,but can be done. Most people in Lake Worth don't give a hoot about a building at the beach. They want A BEACH. Most would like a match to Kreusler park.Jeff,Retha ,and Dave,you incredible trio of shortsighted miscreants,bring on the wrecking ball. Knock the stupid old eyesore down. Hello to a beautiful , passive , public beach park!


Article's Poll

What would your choice be for a Casino building?

refurb it to original two floor architecture
let Greater Bay build new at center of the dune
build a new building at the same spot
rip out beach front parking, no building, passive

[ Results | Polls ]

Votes: 13
Comments: 1

Related Links

· More about Lake Worth
· News by admin

Most read story about Lake Worth:
Of Rats and Roaches


Article Rating

Average Score: 5
Votes: 1

To rate this article please Login first



 Printer Friendly Printer Friendly


Associated Topics

Lake Worth

The comments are property of their posters, all the rest is editorial 2007 by William Coakley and unauthorized use is prohibited by law. Anybody who uses, copies or distributes this material in any manner, for commercial or personal purposes, without written permission, would be committing an infringement of copyright.
You can syndicate our news using the file backend.php or ultramode.txt

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2004 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
Page Generation: 0.17 Seconds