Tuesday, August 18, 2015
A NIGHT OF INFAMY
What an outrageous calamity last night’s Council meeting turned out to be. Fortunately Bernice has insomnia and is about a generation younger than I so she was able to post her report about 2 am. I am sure most of you have already read it and the 20+ comments to date. I would call your attention to Bo Vastine’s comment and hope you remember him in November.
I reiterate my comment at the public session before the Council took up the agenda when I urged them to reconsider the PILOT Ordinance. “You are approving the first reading and you have a month before the final action of the second reading”. That was to give time to answer any questions against the PILOT especially the only one I thought valid; the duration of the PILOT.
Council President Rivers as her prerogative as controller of the meeting cut City Administrator short when just before the usual meeting ending Public Commentary period, he started to request that the Council reintroduce the Ordinance.
However she did permit not only Council discussion but the opportunity for the developer to make an appeal before the meeting adjourned.
The Council’s motivation was most clearly revealed during Gloria Taylor's long tirade which was noteworthy for the repeated use of the word “us” us us. Yes she finally said “it was political” and had nothing to do with the merit s of the project. She blamed the Mayor for keeping the Council (and her) out of the discussions on I surmise the PILOT terms.
Taylor noted that “she knew how to play the game” and made an insinuation that although she had no evidence, somebody was
She accused the Administration of treating the Council as being inferior to him. She seemed to resent not being made a participant in the negotiations and development process.
The question of the impact on the school district if the residents of the development had children had been raised during the public commentary and used by Rivers as a reason not to reconsider the Ordinance that night. No one seems to take into consideration that this development’s 102 one bedroom apartment and 110 two bedroom apartments were not designed to accommodate families with children, but rather the childless working millennium generation.
Tolliver of course talked about her expertises and wanted to know about the “blueprint” (small print) of the agreement.
It is a sad sad sad state of affairs when this Council while claiming to look after the interests of the city is openly playing politics even to the point of trying what appears to be Blackmailing Administration. As Taylor said, the Administration could make it a “Win Win situation”.
My other concern about the Dudley House lease assignment became moot when the resolution as tabled at administration’s request since the AAC/Sunrise deal had not been completed. No one remarked about the absence of a lease renewal document to replace the one that expired 12/31/2014.