You may have seen the “Mayor’s Question of the Week” at the PNJ. It’s a way for the Mayor’s Urban Redevelopment Advisory Committee (URAC) to get candid public input about a specific aspect of downtown redevelopment. To expand the amount of feedback, they’ve asked to include these questions on Pensacola Digest in advance of the Friday URAC meetings.
Committee Chairman Brian Hooper has this to say:
We as a committee were very appreciative of the informed, thoughtful, and creative responses we received to our last Question of the Week, which was about the future of downtown Pensacola. Before we are able to implement a vision for the future, we as a committee would like to hear from you about your current impressions of downtown Pensacola. What is good? What needs to be improved? Tell us what you think of today’s downtown Pensacola.
Please post your responses here and include whether you live in the city, the county or outside the area, and how often you visit / work / play in downtown Pensacola.
7 comments
Pete Evers says:
Mar 22, 2012
This is a short-term recommendation that would provide additional revenues.
The Blue Wahoos will NOT be hosting home games on April 21th and April 22nd of 2012 at the CMP multi-use stadium. However, the UWF baseball team will be playing the University of West Georgia Wolves in Pensacola on those days. I suggest that the CMPA offer UWF a deal they can’t refuse. Why not have the UWF baseball team play at the multi-use stadium on these dates? This is a “no-brainer”! The large college crowd would provide a boost to downtown businesses. CMPA and UWF would both benefit. A win-win proposition for all involved.
If this is a multi-use stadium, let’s let others use it.
Pete Evers
Dale Parker says:
Mar 22, 2012
Did you get a response that they declined to allow them to play?
pete evers says:
Mar 22, 2012
No. Was it brought up for a vote? What multi-use stadium?
pete evers says:
Mar 22, 2012
I agree with Johnny D.
Here is the overall problem with the CRA, it is bankrupted. In fact, with the fall in property values it cannot even cover the debt service on the Baseball Stadium and ECUA Loans. I contend that it was totally irresponsible for the city to obligate ALL the funds to serve these 2 debts. In fact, what they have done is told everyone in the CRA areas, your must now live in blight so we can play baseball on the waterfront. It was selfish and irresponsible.
SO, now here we are attempting to make the CRA relevant again. Except now, the CRA is broke. Now I am sure that they sat up there with plenty of pretty pictures waving them around saying look at what we want to do. We want to make our city pretty and all. Hey I am all for it, however, HOW WILL YOU FUND IT! Remember, YOU ARE BROKE!!!
So what is left to do, well we can call upon Private Development with incentives and this is where I feel it is going to get dicey. Do we just hand our city lands over to developers so that they can build upon it? What do we get for this. Our City is strapped too and believe me when that stadium cranks up, the City will feel the pinch because the numbers do not add up. (Of course they would all know this if they had not fudged / lied about an Economic Viability Study, but that is the past right).
So, the cross roads how much do we give away now because we bankrupted the CRA for a baseball park? You see, that is the problem with over extending credit, this is the lesson we try to teach our children. DO NOT borrow borrow borrow because you have to pay it back. AND, if you are obligated then you have little money to do anything else. Well, that is what our city did … the total sum of principle and interest on those loan will probably top 140,000,000 dollars.
Think about it, how much could we have accomplished with that kind of capital? In payoff, what would have been better; the improvements enjoyed by the entire community or a baseball stadium which comparatively a few attend.
Pete Evers says:
Mar 22, 2012
I also agree with CJ:
As Jerralds pointed out a few City Council meetings ago, the Charter is not worth the paper upon worth it is printed and Hayward views the City Council as little more than rubber stamps for his implementation of plans designed by people like Tessier for Hayward’s patrons like Studer.
The Charter is pretty clear for those well-versed in English, “Unless otherwise provided by law, City Council shall establish and terminate by ordinance, such boards, commissions and authorities as it may deem advisable from time to time.” The mere act of creating this new committee is a violation of the Charter Hayward is sworn to uphold and defend but abuses at will because the City Council won’t defend the Charter or people. We do know this committee wasn’t created by the City Council because they first read about it in the daily newspaper.
With newbie City Attorney James Messer in-place, respect for the law is at an all-time low. Today he was asked to state the State law authorizing three City Council/CRA Members (Johnson, Spencer, Pratt) to serve on the CMPA. The Charter is pretty clear, “No elected City official shall hold any appointive City office, City board membership, or City employement while in office, except as may be provided by State law.” Messer couldn’t cite any law but said it was his person, i.e. non-legal opinion, that it was OK. The Council’s closet intellectual Larry Johnson said that he believes everything Messer tells him.
I think the next logical step is for Hayward to propose amending the Charter so he can appoint his own City Council/CRA Board without pesky limitations like city residency requirements, etc. Two of the people on the new Shadow CRA don’t even live in the city. One is in business with Larry Johnson and Brian Spencer. What a twisted web.
The smarter path ahead for those of us who do not live in the two square mile Urban Core CRA would be if the whole CRA mess was just abolished. Any five City Council Members can pass an ordinance abolishing it at any time. Then the emphasis could shift north of Cervantes Street to citywide redevelopment at the expense of taxpayer subsidized downtown waterfront boondoggle projects. Maybe this will happen if we elect a few new City Council Members in November with brains and backbones.
Squint Ruder says:
Mar 22, 2012
Whew! Pete Evers/CJ Lewis (same person) are on a roll!
What a way to run a CRA says:
Mar 23, 2012
It appears Pete was quoting CJ
The city could have made basic improvements to streetscapes, lighting and sidewalks in the beginning which would have encouraged growth and investment in the CRA.
Instead after 32 years, and only after realizing A street was a route to the magnificent baseball stadium, were street trees planted to improve this blighted boundary street of the CRA.
No plan here, Stan.