eyes wide open

Doral "made the decision to accept the cleanup responsibility with full disclosure to the residents and with all of the information PRIOR to signing the paperwork." WE are deciding this issue with little and no accurate and timely information about the current status of pollution in the areas under consideration for annexation. DERM says they are monitoring 27 sites- what does that mean? Is DERM going to be responsible for any further cleanups needed? Even if we should annex those properties? Doral went into their situation with ALL the information and their eyes wide open, and paid a 2 million dollar price. In our case we dont have enough facts and figures from reputable sources to make an informed decision at this point. We have a BELIEF from Mr Corradino, a numbers cruncher with no environmental qualifications, that there wont be a problem out there. We have a City Manager, also without any environmental qualifications, who says there IS no problems because HE SAYS SO. And we have DERM, who says they have cleaned up a LOT of the pollution in those areas and is currently watching and monitoring the pollution sites but will NOT take responsibility for any future cleanups that may be needed. My thanks to the previous poster for shining some light on this situation and warning us of the potential problems, while also acknowledging the positive potentials. Both are real and need to be considered using the best information and guidance we can get. Dr. Mel P. Johnson

full disclosure

In the stock market, if someone is selling a stock that they stand to benefit from, they have to tell whoever they am trying to sell it to. It is called FULL DISCLOSURE, and enables the person to judge the stock on its merits, not because the salesman wants to line his pockets. There are, apparently, some residents who dont believe in FULL DISCLOSURE, or perhaps have NEVER heard of that concept. FULL DISCLOSRE is the law in the stock market, for good reason. It helps to weed out the snake oil salemen and shysters. Why wouldnt that principle apply here? If the sales pitch of a $50 stock requires FULL DISCLOSURE, why wouldnt the sales pitch of a MULTI-MILLION dollar gym? In BOTH cases the saleman wants you to buy his argument in support of his product, yet with the stock pitch, at least he has to be honest and upfront about it. Last I heard the latest estimates on the gym project were a mere FIVE YEARS to complete and a final budget of a mere 15-18 MILLION dollars, based on the city's incredible lack of performance in the CC addition and the bathrooms. Most recently we have spent OVER $414,000 on TWO bathrooms (1116 sq feet). That comes to a little less than $400 a square foot, compared to normal new construction costs of $125 a square foot (an EASY triple), and is only the costs SO FAR. Is anybody disputing those numbers? If so, on what basis? The truth shall set you free.