Editing Community Maritime Park

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 12: Line 12:
 
|mapcode=
 
|mapcode=
 
}}
 
}}
The '''Vince Whibbs Sr. Community Maritime Park''' (often abbreviated to '''Community Maritime Park''' or '''CMP''') is a public-private development that is planned to occupy the [[City of Pensacola|City]]-owned, 27.5-acre [[Trillium property]]. It will include a 3,200-seat "multi-use" stadium, a [[maritime museum]], a conference/education center with [[University of West Florida]] classrooms, a variety of mixed-use development and a large public park along the waterfront.
+
The '''Vince Whibbs Sr. Community Maritime Park''' (often abbreviated to '''Community Maritime Park''' or '''CMP''') is a public-private development that is planned to occupy the [[City of Pensacola|City]]-owned, 27.5-acre [[Trillium property]]. It will include a 3,500-seat "multi-use" stadium, a [[maritime museum]], a conference/education center with [[University of West Florida]] classrooms, a variety of mixed-use development and a large public park along the waterfront.
  
 
The project was conceived and promoted by a group of prominent citizens including Admiral [[Jack Fetterman]], businessman [[Quint Studer]] and [[UWF]] President [[John Cavanaugh]]. An initial layout was refined in public focus groups by urban planner [[Ray Gindroz]], and the revised conceptual plan was approved by the [[Pensacola City Council]] in [[2005]]. A grassroots ad hoc group called [[Save Our City]] attempted to overturn the council's decision and forced a [[Community Maritime Park referendum|special referendum]], but the project was affirmed by city voters on [[September 5]], [[2006]].
 
The project was conceived and promoted by a group of prominent citizens including Admiral [[Jack Fetterman]], businessman [[Quint Studer]] and [[UWF]] President [[John Cavanaugh]]. An initial layout was refined in public focus groups by urban planner [[Ray Gindroz]], and the revised conceptual plan was approved by the [[Pensacola City Council]] in [[2005]]. A grassroots ad hoc group called [[Save Our City]] attempted to overturn the council's decision and forced a [[Community Maritime Park referendum|special referendum]], but the project was affirmed by city voters on [[September 5]], [[2006]].
Line 72: Line 72:
 
In the remaining months before the referendum, both sides — Save Our City and a pro-park group called [[Friends of the Waterfront Park]] — engaged in a hard-hitting campaign that often resorted to personal attacks and accusations. The Friends political group, funded largely by [[Quint Studer]], mounted a campaign portraying critics of the plan as curmudgeonly naysayers, embodied by a pair of cartoon characters named [[Chuckie and Donno]].<ref>Wayne A. Stewart. "Letter to the Editor: Insulting cartoon." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 5, 2006.</ref> Save Our City depicted Studer as a scheming carpetbagger who was getting a "$100 million ballpark" (a figure derived from the bond, interest and an estimated value of the property) for only [[#Ownership & administration|$1 a year]].<ref>Michael Stewart. "Project opponents say funds from CRA would serve better purpose elsewhere." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 20, 2006.</ref>
 
In the remaining months before the referendum, both sides — Save Our City and a pro-park group called [[Friends of the Waterfront Park]] — engaged in a hard-hitting campaign that often resorted to personal attacks and accusations. The Friends political group, funded largely by [[Quint Studer]], mounted a campaign portraying critics of the plan as curmudgeonly naysayers, embodied by a pair of cartoon characters named [[Chuckie and Donno]].<ref>Wayne A. Stewart. "Letter to the Editor: Insulting cartoon." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 5, 2006.</ref> Save Our City depicted Studer as a scheming carpetbagger who was getting a "$100 million ballpark" (a figure derived from the bond, interest and an estimated value of the property) for only [[#Ownership & administration|$1 a year]].<ref>Michael Stewart. "Project opponents say funds from CRA would serve better purpose elsewhere." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 20, 2006.</ref>
  
Fairchild also produced a series of emails from marketing firm [[E. W. Bullock Associates]], obtained through a public records request to university and city administrators, which he claimed showed an inappropriate back-room attempt "to push their plan on the council and the people of Pensacola" and represented a conflict of interest on the part of the firm, which frequently did work for the [[City of Pensacola]].<ref name="criesfoul">Michael Stewart. "Opponent of park cries foul." ''Pensacola News Journal'', June 23, 2006.</ref> In one email, dated [[January 19]], [[2005]], public relations specialist [[Raad Cawthon]] offered a reading of the council members' predispositions and boasted of at least "five votes in our pocket."<ref name="criesfoul"/> However, both Bullock and the council insisted Cawthon was just "counting votes" and denied any impropriety: "No one from the maritime park has so much as bought me a Diet Coke," said Councilman [[P. C. Wu]]. "If I'm in their pocket, they got me very cheap."<ref name="denywrongdoing"/> Just days before the referendum, local activist [[Tom Garner]] filed a complaint with the state attorney's office, citing the emails as evidence of possible [[Sunshine Law]] violations.<ref>Michael Stewart. "Activist files park complaint." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 30, 2006.</ref> The state attorney's office quickly dismissed the complaint, determining there were "insufficient facts to establish that any violation of the Sunshine Law occurred."<ref>Michael Stewart. "Office dismisses park plan complaint." ''Pensacola News Journal'', September 2, 2006.</ref><ref>[http://routzen.files.wordpress.com/2006/09/state-attorneys-response-to-garner-complaint.pdf State Attorney's response to Garner complaint]</ref>
+
Fairchild also produced a series of emails from marketing firm [[E. W. Bullock Associates]], obtained through a public records request to university and city administrators, which he claimed showed an inappropriate back-room attempt "to push their plan on the council and the people of Pensacola" and represented a conflict of interest on the part of the firm, which frequently did work for the [[City of Pensacola]].<ref name="criesfoul">Michael Stewart. "Opponent of park cries foul." ''Pensacola News Journal'', June 23, 2006.</ref> In one email, dated [[January 19], [[2005]], public relations specialist [[Raad Cawthon]] offered a reading of the council members' predispositions and boasted of at least "five votes in our pocket."<ref name="criesfoul"/> However, both Bullock and the council insisted Cawthon was just "counting votes" and denied any impropriety: "No one from the maritime park has so much as bought me a Diet Coke," said Councilman [[P. C. Wu]]. "If I'm in their pocket, they got me very cheap."<ref name="denywrongdoing"/> Just days before the referendum, local activist [[Tom Garner]] filed a complaint with the state attorney's office, citing the emails as evidence of possible [[Sunshine Law]] violations.<ref>Michael Stewart. "Activist files park complaint." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 30, 2006.</ref> The state attorney's office quickly dismissed the complaint, determining there were "insufficient facts to establish that any violation of the Sunshine Law occurred."<ref>Michael Stewart. "Office dismisses park plan complaint." ''Pensacola News Journal'', September 2, 2006.</ref><ref>[http://routzen.files.wordpress.com/2006/09/state-attorneys-response-to-garner-complaint.pdf State Attorney's response to Garner complaint]</ref>
  
 
In the end, the park project received endorsements by the [[Pensacola Bay Area Chamber of Commerce]],<ref>"Pensacola Chamber endorsing project." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 22, 2006.</ref> the [[Gulf Breeze Chamber of Commerce]],<ref>Sean Dugas. "Park friends, foes plan last-minute events." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 25, 2006.</ref> the [[UWF]] Board of Trustees,<ref>Sheila Ingram. "Votes, grants, endorsements propel park plan." ''Pensacola News Journal'', June 25, 2006.</ref> media outlets including the ''[[Pensacola News Journal]]''<ref>"Our view: Voters should approve Maritime Park." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 27, 2006.</ref> and ''[[Independent News]]'',<ref>Rick Outzen. "[http://routzen.wordpress.com/2006/09/05/if-undecided-on-the-waterfront-park/ If undecided on the Waterfront Park.]" ''Rick's Blog'', September 5, 2006.</ref> and a myriad of professional groups, businesses and prominent individuals. The [[Friends of the Waterfront Park]] spent nearly $600,000 to promote the project, most of it donated by Studer and his company, compared to the $68,700 raised by [[Save Our City]].<ref>Mark O'Brien. "Money, young people help bring a new look to Pensacola politics." ''Pensacola News Journal'', September 6, 2006.</ref>
 
In the end, the park project received endorsements by the [[Pensacola Bay Area Chamber of Commerce]],<ref>"Pensacola Chamber endorsing project." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 22, 2006.</ref> the [[Gulf Breeze Chamber of Commerce]],<ref>Sean Dugas. "Park friends, foes plan last-minute events." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 25, 2006.</ref> the [[UWF]] Board of Trustees,<ref>Sheila Ingram. "Votes, grants, endorsements propel park plan." ''Pensacola News Journal'', June 25, 2006.</ref> media outlets including the ''[[Pensacola News Journal]]''<ref>"Our view: Voters should approve Maritime Park." ''Pensacola News Journal'', August 27, 2006.</ref> and ''[[Independent News]]'',<ref>Rick Outzen. "[http://routzen.wordpress.com/2006/09/05/if-undecided-on-the-waterfront-park/ If undecided on the Waterfront Park.]" ''Rick's Blog'', September 5, 2006.</ref> and a myriad of professional groups, businesses and prominent individuals. The [[Friends of the Waterfront Park]] spent nearly $600,000 to promote the project, most of it donated by Studer and his company, compared to the $68,700 raised by [[Save Our City]].<ref>Mark O'Brien. "Money, young people help bring a new look to Pensacola politics." ''Pensacola News Journal'', September 6, 2006.</ref>

Please note that all contributions to Pensapedia, the Pensacola encyclopedia are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License 1.2 (see Pensapedia:Copyrights for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource. Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To edit this page, please answer the question that appears below (more info):

Cancel Editing help (opens in new window)