The YMCA’s executive committee on Thursday unanimously recommended dropping the ambitious effort to construct a new $10 million facility along the waterfront at the Community Maritime Park.
The decision follows more than a week of acrimony within Pensacola’s city bureaucracy that Maritime Y supporters had hoped to pass through swiftly, buoyed by strong vocal and financial support from civic and business leaders and elected officials.
"In the past month the Y has tried to navigate the process of negotiating a sublease for a parcel on the Community Maritime Park. Based on two city council meetings, one CMPA Audit and Operations meeting, two CMPA meetings and multiple meetings with city administration, it’s clear to us that the process is broken, if one exists at all,” said Steve Williams, the YMCA board chairman, in a statement.
A final decision won’t be made until the Y’s full board of directors meeting Monday.
The announcement came after the Community Maritime Park Association board’s 6-4 decision during a confusing and contentious five-hour meeting Wednesday to ask the Y to consider two other parcels at the park, neither of which front Pensacola Bay.
The waterfront parcel west of the stadium that Y advocates had been pursuing, known as parcel 8, was deliberately left out of the CMPA’s motion.
The City Council had already endorsed, in concept, placing the Y on parcel 8, putting the two bodies at odds and thrusting the issue into uncertain territory.
“We would like to thank the City Council for their vote of support, but we are saddened that the CMPA failed to follow their directive, and that our city government as a whole is unable to establish a workable negotiation process,” Williams said.
The extent to which CMPA’s vote represented an outright rejection of the YMCA’s plans is a matter of some debate.
But it sparked controversy, and by Thursday morning it was clear that Y members were frustrated with the process and considering dropping their bid.
Page
From: Charles Bare
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:19 PM
To: Ashton Hayward
Subject: RE: YMCA Lease
Mr. Mayor:
I strongly encourage you to go back and watch the video of the committee of the whole meeting during which Councilwoman Pratt made her motion and explained that “the CMPA can redline the whole thing out and start afresh if that’s what they need to do.” I believe that the CMPA acted accordingly as our agent and as the lease holder for the property at the maritime park. I respect their decision and look forward to their report back to us once a workable lease for parcels 5 or 6 is reached.
If this process had followed the proper procedure, the CMPA acting as our agent (and not the Mayor’s office) would have brought us a lease. You are directly responsible for the failure of this process. I look forward to working with the CMPA to identify a proper procedure to avoid such embarrassing situations like this in the future.
Charles Bare
Pensacola City Council, At-Large B
The decision follows more than a week of acrimony within Pensacola’s city bureaucracy that Maritime Y supporters had hoped to pass through swiftly, buoyed by strong vocal and financial support from civic and business leaders and elected officials.
"In the past month the Y has tried to navigate the process of negotiating a sublease for a parcel on the Community Maritime Park. Based on two city council meetings, one CMPA Audit and Operations meeting, two CMPA meetings and multiple meetings with city administration, it’s clear to us that the process is broken, if one exists at all,” said Steve Williams, the YMCA board chairman, in a statement.
A final decision won’t be made until the Y’s full board of directors meeting Monday.
The announcement came after the Community Maritime Park Association board’s 6-4 decision during a confusing and contentious five-hour meeting Wednesday to ask the Y to consider two other parcels at the park, neither of which front Pensacola Bay.
The waterfront parcel west of the stadium that Y advocates had been pursuing, known as parcel 8, was deliberately left out of the CMPA’s motion.
The City Council had already endorsed, in concept, placing the Y on parcel 8, putting the two bodies at odds and thrusting the issue into uncertain territory.
“We would like to thank the City Council for their vote of support, but we are saddened that the CMPA failed to follow their directive, and that our city government as a whole is unable to establish a workable negotiation process,” Williams said.
The extent to which CMPA’s vote represented an outright rejection of the YMCA’s plans is a matter of some debate.
But it sparked controversy, and by Thursday morning it was clear that Y members were frustrated with the process and considering dropping their bid.
Page
From: Charles Bare
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 5:19 PM
To: Ashton Hayward
Subject: RE: YMCA Lease
Mr. Mayor:
I strongly encourage you to go back and watch the video of the committee of the whole meeting during which Councilwoman Pratt made her motion and explained that “the CMPA can redline the whole thing out and start afresh if that’s what they need to do.” I believe that the CMPA acted accordingly as our agent and as the lease holder for the property at the maritime park. I respect their decision and look forward to their report back to us once a workable lease for parcels 5 or 6 is reached.
If this process had followed the proper procedure, the CMPA acting as our agent (and not the Mayor’s office) would have brought us a lease. You are directly responsible for the failure of this process. I look forward to working with the CMPA to identify a proper procedure to avoid such embarrassing situations like this in the future.
Charles Bare
Pensacola City Council, At-Large B