Dear Mr. Outzen,
I’m sorry to disappoint you, but I wrote that viewpoint in todays News Journal (8/20). While I did consult with Charlie Fairchild, CC Elebash, and many others involved in Save Our City, I can write editorials all by myself. You may not have noticed that I have, in fact, been writing Letters to the Editor for the past year or so in regards to the CMP. I am very passionate about the fact that we need other plans for the property and I am proud to be working with them on this campaign.
I understand full well that you do not agree with my point of view, and that is fine, I accept that, but please realize that a great many of us who oppose it have made up our own minds and not been swayed by talk on either side. I respect your opinions and your point of view, but I have to disagree.
It’s really too bad about this project, I’d like to see a full, beautiful maritime museum. I simply take issue with most of the rest of the project.
So, in closing, I wanted to inform you of the truth on the matter in a respectful way. Just because we disagree on most of this issue doesn’t mean we need to be any different.
The museum that you desire will be built because Studer, Fetterman and Cavanaugh had the wisdom to make it part of the downtown campus for UWF. Every dollar donated is matched by the state – thereby it can be built without any local tax dollars ( $1 million maritime museum gift). Downtown baseball parks have been lynch-pins in revitalizing communities all over the country (read Field of Dreams).
The current Pelicans are in a successful independent league – which you and Elebash have for some reason labeled ‘fringe’. However, to attract a Double A affiliated team, you have to have multi-use stadium like the one proposed. Yes, the Mobile team has territorial rights but that can be negotiated – a Double A team would have natural close rivals – Mobile, Montgomery and Jacksonville.
Realize I’m preaching to a made up mind, but I’m curious what “facts” did you base your opinion on.