Today in its print edition, the News Journal profiles the Pensacola City Council runoff between incumbent Ann Hill and Allison Patton. The article covers how both candidates are trying to attract third-place finisher Mo Padden’s voters.
The reporter must have turned in his story last Thursday or Friday because Padden announced on Facebook on Sunday that she is endorsing Patton.
“I spent some time with Allison Patton this weekend and we discussed a myriad of issues from homelessness, haphazard development, affordable housing, parking, support of the Veterans’ Park and efforts to place a permanent restroom at that site,” wrote Padden.
“Following our discussions, I have decided to endorse her in her bid for City Council in the Fall general election as I was convinced that her vision for these issues was consistent with mine. I believe she is ready to do the hard work and research necessary to find solutions to the many problems facing our city and that she will listen to all opinions in her quest for solutions.”
As a cautionary note here is what Patton wrote in response to a question from the Chamber of Commerce, “Pensacola has numerous public parks, some of what are not used by residents or only partially used. Parks which fall into this category, and don’t have solid public support should be reviewed for other uses to alleviate the maintenance burden and create more desired features for the community.” Padden’s view is similar, “I do believe that we need to do an inventory of the number of parks that we have, how often they are utilized and if they could be repurposed.” Someone should ask both of them to list the top three parks in District 6 that they would like to see bulldozed to make way for low income/affordable/workforce housing. In stark contrast Hill told the Chamber, “I do not believe we have too many parks in Pensacola and do not favor selling them.” I’m with Hill on this issue. If I were Hill, I would ensure that all District 6 voters know that she would defend their parks but Patton would want to sell some off (though presumably none near her own home). In District 2, Charles Bare and Charletha Powell both seem like big fans of city parks who believe that this is a decision for citizens not politicians. All that said, Patton’s views make sense when you look at who is bankrolling her campaign. She’s a darling of the real estate development community. They’re in for the quick buck. Real estate developer and former Mayor Ashton Hayward does not even live in District 6 but even he donated $500 to Patton’s campaign. Hayward is Mayor-elect D.C. Reeves top political mentor. Reeves is no fan of city parks and has said that he wants to “thicken the city” by converting green space into dense redevelopment. My guess is that his vision will not get far once city residents find out about his ambition that includes also moving the city’s commercial center from Uptown to Downtown. This “park” issue is not new. I first heard Councilman Mike DeSorbo raise it in 2008. Hayward raised it as a candidate in 2010. In 2017, Parks & Recreation Director Brian Cooper explained that he intentionally ignored park maintenance issues because he and Hayward wanted to try to identify parks that could be sold off to real estate developers. Cooper told the Scenic Heights Neighborhood Association that the City Council did not properly fund his department for park maintenance. I pushed back and got him to admit that the City Council always funded 100% of what was requested in the budget. Cooper admitted that the problem was Hayward who did not care about park maintenance, except Bayview Park (now in District 6) right next to his home – “Hayward House” next to the park but still in District 4. Cooper’s predecessor David Flaherty left the city government frustrated that the City Council would budget money to properly maintain all city parks and then Hayward would redirect the money to his pet projects.