Consolidation supporters to hold informational meeting
Tags: City-County consolidation / Consolidation Study Commission
Supporters of the consolidation plan developed by the Escambia County Consolidation Study Commission (ECCSC) plan have organised an “informational meeting” to be held later this month.
The event is billed as “presented by” the ECCSC, Home Builders Association of West Florida, the Pensacola News Journal, WEAR-TV, and the Pensacola Young Professionals.
The meeting is set for 5:30-7:00 PM on Wednesday, February 17, at New World Landing, 600 South Palafox Street. Attendees are asked to RSVP to (850) 476-3294 by February 15.
Note: Pensacola Young Professionals chair Leslie Ingram told Progressive Pensacola today that, despite the billing in the flyer below, PYP has not endorsed the currently proposed consolidation plan.
Download Consolidation-Meeting.pdf (PDF, 337.08KB)
Subscribe to our feed
Get updates via email
Follow us on Twitter
How does the Consolidation Commission meet, plan,advertise, and “present” a campaign function when they have supposedly “dissolved”???
Not surprising that the News Journal is an advocate instead of independent journalist:
Minutes of the January 12, 2010 Meeting of the
Escambia County Consolidation Study Commission
“Mr. Wilkes, Commissioner Harper and Chairman Bell met with the Pensacola News Journal editorial board before the meeting and answered questions about the charter.”
Let us know
1 what the city will gain from this deal and
2 what will be consolidated besides the city’s cash into the county’s bank account.
How could a rewrite of a government structure ever be written without a budget??
Peacock and friends plan ……bring on the urban taxing district tax add that to the DIB tax and the extra city tax.
County residents want city services for their golf course homes, but hope we don’t mind if they exempt themselves to save taxes.
What a joke!
Mike, over the past several months I have read many of your comments. I have noticed one item that is consistently missing from your comments. Your suggestions on how to make the community better. I have never claimed to have all the best ideas or the only ideas and welcome the debate from others. Just saying NO without offering an alternative is not helpful. Your understanding of the consolidation concept is a little skewed (especially item 2 above). Many of us have stated our opinion on why this is beneficial for the city and the county. You are most welcome to agree or disagree. What would be more helpful in the debate would be additional suggestions instead of just asking the same question over and over. Would love to have you roll up your shirt sleeves and work with others to help the economic condition of our entire community.
Mr. Peacock:
Did the Commisssion ever vote to dissolve?
Do you communicate with other Commisssion members?
Mr. Peacock:
Has your commmittee met to draft the fianl report as the Commission minutes state?
“Chairman Bell asked Mr. Goldschmidt to proceed with drafting the report and
to contact the commissioners if he had any questions, and designated Commissioners Lewis,Peacock and Stone to work with Mr. Goldschmidt on the initial draft of the final report.”
Lindastan,
Thanks for your questions.
The ECCSC did vote to dissolve. I have had limited contact with other commission members since the last meeting. I have not heard from Mr. Goldschmidt on the status of the final report.
Actually, the city has more to gain from consolidation than the county because it will be able to shed its debt onto the entire county tax base. I live in the county and I don’t want what the city has to offer. Not its gas, trash, parks, police, or fire department. Neither do I want the city’s higher tax rates which will surly follow to bail out its maritime boondoggle and soon to be bankrupt pension fund.
Mr. Peacock:
I have listened to the meeting audio recording. I did not hear any such motion approved. I invite you to also listen and correct me if I am mistaken.
Good try Peacock. That line’s been used during the sales pitch for the ballpark. The citizens didn’t come up with a plan for the waterfront so the first person that did, we should jump on it. Remember we’re needy and desperate here in Pensacola. $1.00 and a name looks good to our council.
Well Mr. Peacock. Mr. Cummings has been talking about the plan for the pension and what can be done for years . Nobody listening, the pension is out of control.
Here’s my suggestion. Try to consolidate one thing, anything, and see how it goes before you rewrite an entire government structure without even having a budget. What nonsense. Remind me again, what exactly is being consolidated?
Where are the savings in taxdollars by switching to the plan? I don’t see them.
Better hurry Mr. Peacock. You guys are about to lose the “accountability” claim. Bad news brewing I hear for one of your most ardent supporters. Illegal actions realting to a politician? We shall see.
Lindastan, this is from the final minutes from the 1/14 meeting
X. Discussion of Adjournment and Dissolution of the Commission
It was moved and approved to dissolve the commission effective January 19, 2010 at 5 p.m.
I understand, however the minutes are false, please listen to the actual audio.
John, this wouldn’t be scheduled unless someone in the delegation has agreed to send the bill forward…who is it? You guys are persistent with this BAD PLAN.
Bad for the City
Bad for the COunty
Good for the Downtown Crowd
I bet channel 3 will put together a nice video with “interviews” from the propagandists. It will have aerial shots of Jacksonville. And Ill bet it actually claims the Jaguars went to Jacksonville just because of consolidation.
Escambia County…if you approve this plan we will get an NFL team!!
The PNJ will lead up with some “editorials” and the marketers will write everyones viewpoints for them to distribution to the PNJ
Hold on for the “spin Cycle”
Jeff, you are much better when you argue facts. It is irresponsible to say that it is good for the downtown crowd!! Really Jeff! Tell me who this benefits and how. I am for this because I think the concept is great for the city and county. You don’t agree. I get that. Let the voters decide. To make slanderous comments and infer that there is some conspiracy theory is ridiculous! The same argument was used by the opposition in the charter campaign. Argue facts not innuendo. Better yet offer a better plan. Both governments are facing huge shortfalls and don’t expect that to get better anytime soon. Revenue down, services down. What’s your plan big boy!!
Mr. Peacock:
Please let us all know after you have listened to the meeting audio.
Mr. Peacock,
I give you creeds!!! You and your team know the apathetic voter turn out we have here in both the City and County.
You say “Let the voters decide.” sounds like a slam dunk!
Then when Tax Payers wake up arms flailing over the NEW DEAL!!! The come back is “The Voters Decided” Is this not the mantra for the Baseball Park and Strong Mayor?
Mr. Peacock
Do you ever answer a question? You’ve been asked several and I have 2 more.
1) Did you listen to the audio????
2) Exactly how can I apply to be part of the exemption areas so that I am not affected by some additional urban service district tax or increases.
What a grand concept to exempt certain areas and taxpayers from increases for services in your grand ALL FOR ONE plan
Again. Exempted areas?
What a joke.
Mr. Peacock:
After you respond to Mike, can you tell us if any other members of the delegation are “under control”?
OK John. Fair assessment of my post. It just blows me away that the PNJ and WEAR are sponsoring a one sided presentation not a debate of good and bad. I honestly have never seen them do that before.
Facts only from here on out!
But please anwer the question if you know…this wouldn’t be scheduled unless someone in the delegation has agreed to send the bill forward…who is it?
The politics in the panhandle was bad enough, then came those from Mississippi who run interferrence and now we are Western Mississippi.
Bueller?? Bueller?? John??? When will you answer the question?
John Peacock, we know you read this board. Pleasse show some intellectual strength and answer the question.
Ronald, exactly which question would you like me to answer?
Did I listen to the audio? No. I was there and recall a lengthy discussion about dissolving the ECCSC. I believe there was a vote. The minutes reflect that. At the end of the day I am not sure if that matters. Not sure a vote is required to dissolve. The chairman can probably do that without a vote.
The exempt areas discussion is ridiculous. If this applied at all it would be to only an area that provided all services themselves. I am unaware of any areas.
Ronnie boy, I have a question for you? What’s your plan? If you don’t like the suggestions for change. Permission granted to man up and offer some of your own. Hiding behind a blog and throwing insults at others doesn’t warrant priority discussion from me. Jeff Deweese is a friend. He and I disagree on this topic. We both however are willing to own and debate our opinions. We both have the best interest of this community in mind. We just differ on how to get there. Would welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues with any and all that want to own their opinion.
Oh my gosh, and you handle people’s money? You’re the one who flat out stated the commission voted to dissolve and now you won’t listen to the audio. Well I guess it doesn’t matter to you that the minutes are false.
You really think that a chairman can dissolve a public body without a vote of that body??? Really??? Are you serious??
Come on man, have some intellectual integrity, just a little!
“Did I listen to the audio? No. I was there and recall a lengthy discussion about dissolving the ECCSC. I believe there was a vote. The minutes reflect that. At the end of the day I am not sure if that matters. Not sure a vote is required to dissolve. The chairman can probably do that without a vote.”
Having followed Mr. Peacock while he was a member of the SRIA Board, the one thing that was clear was that he was simply a shill for Julian MacQueen. Whatever the issue, Mr. Peacock was apparently guided simply by what was best Julian’s hotels, and not necessarily what was best for Pensacola Beach. Even more intersting is that although Mr. Peacock apparently did not know Julian before he joined the SRIA (or at least he did not know him well), soon after joining the SRIA Mr. Peacock suddenly found himself a new client — Julian MacQueen (or one or more of his hotel companies). Yet, we never heard Mr. Peacock declare his conflict of interest when it came time for the SRIA to vote on something that affected MacQueen’s interests. Then come stories of Julian wining and dining Mr. Peacock, including taking him flying on his plane. Again, we never heard anything publicly disclosed of those gifts.
So, when I read above comments from Mr. Peacock to the effect of trust me, I know what was said and the minutes are correct, or someone else’s concept of consolidation is skewed, I ask myself “who do I believe?”
Mr. Peacock, since this thread is turning into a question of who we the public should trust, perhaps you would like to address these matters of you and the SRIA. After all the allegations of possible Sunshine law wrongdoings by you and the other Consolidation panel members, wouldn’t you agree that the public deserves to know which officials are on the up and up, and who it should trust.
Lila,
It is interesting that when someone in a political position happens to agree with someone else they immediately become a “shill” for that person. Your allegations regarding favors for becoming a client etc are simply untrue. There was never a conflict to declare as much as you would like to believe that. There were friends on both sides of many issues that I voted on while serving on the SRIA. To anonymously attack someones integrity because you don’t agree with their position is pretty small. I did fly in MacQueen’s plane to view the island. I paid for the fuel. I have dined with many of the business interests on the beach and either shared the cost or alternated paying. I have not been accused of Sunshine law violations. I said I recall a discuss about dissolving the ECCSC and recall voting on that. Whether we officially dissolved or not is the least of my concerns. Working towards a better community has been and always will be may main objective. If the folks posting here anonymously have all the integrity then PLEASE come forward and PLEASE fix our community. I would be more than happy to step aside. Let me know when you are ready
Next time try a new fangled thing called google earth, not a developer’s plane. How much was the fuel??
Mr Peacock, let me get this straight. First, from your response you essentially acknowledge that julian MacQueen is a client of yours. How can it be that on various issues that came before the SRIA which directly affected julian’s financial interests you never declared a conflict of interest and abstained from voting. Quite to the contrary, as I sat in the audience for many of those meetings, not only did you fail to declare your conflict but you were the strongest advocate for Julian. Did your actions violate Florida’s ethics laws for public officials? Did you get legal advise from the same people who told your Consolidation panel that it was okay for you to discuss Consolidation matters in private?
Second, I take it that you paid for the fuel because you were required to do so by the same ethics rules. Well, how about the plane ride itself? Wasn’t that a GIFT? So, haven’t you again admitted another violation?
These things make me further question who the public trust on this Consolidation matter. i suppose that you will respond by saying that you have the Ethics Commission “UNDER CONTROL.”
Lila, nothing in the response indicated who is or is not a client. I don’t discuss those issues with anyone. That being said, if there was a conflict of interest I would have recused myself. Draw any conclusions you would like. Funny how you don’t seem to think my strong support for the Portofino’s beach improvement project was okay. Was that because you wanted that but were opposed to some of my other votes. I made decisions and voted for the thing I felt were in the best interests of the beach and Escambia County, regardless of who supported them. At times I was at odds with both of the “sides” of the beach. I remain respectful associates of all involved. It is a shame that you can only see the truth in the issues that you support. I thought better of you than that. I am done with this silly conversation publicly. If you wish to discuss further than I would be more than happy to meet with you face to face to discuss.
Hey Peacock, I’ve been watching your comments, but your last one is sooo fake that I want to puke. First, your daddy, MacQueen, wanted what you called “Portofino’e beach improvement plan,” so you were in favor of it — at least until Robertson kicked you off the SRIA. Second, everyone on the Beach wanted the Island improvements — residents and businesses alike — not just the developers of Portofino. Third, it wasn’t a plan to improve Portofino, it was a plan to beautify the island and NONE of the improvements will be at Portofino. It helps your boy MacQueen more than anybody — but doesn’t cost him a dime.
Finally, since you brought up Portofino, word on the street is that while you were on the SRIA you solicited the Portofino developers to be a client of yours. You want to deny that? Rumors around were that you implied that your vote could be helpful for their efforts.
Come on Johnny, come clean. Stop beating around the bush. You say no more “silly’ public conversation, but as a public official don’t you think the public has a right to hear your responses to these questions? I mean, don’t you think that the public’s trust in their representatives is important and would affect how they think about the Consolidation plan?
My preference is that John Peacock not comment on these or any other public message boards. It is obvious that every time he posts something, he is hurting the Consolidation effort. John, please leave the public commentary to those who have credibility such as Judge Bell or Rick Harper.
Although the Consolidation effort started as a good possibility to enhance our community, the ill-prepared plan has actually worked against the effort. Because of the numerous shortsighted concepts in the plan, the three governmental bodies have withdrawn their support — effectively killing the chances for Legislative approval. What slim hopes remain are dependent upon effective public presentation of the issues. John Peacock, clearly a polarizing figure while on the SRIA, should be told to keep his mouth shut.
One thing is clear — the public does not want to hear from him.
Mr. Peacock:
As a friend of Julian’s I respectfully request that you not speak for him or represent his actions.
I don’t think he appreciates you dragging his name into your blog posts.