I posted this originally as a reply to a comment, but I think it deserves more attention:
The City of Pensacola lost Avalex because of its unresponsiveness. Thaddeus Cohen, the City’s Community Development director, could have done a better job of keeping the company in Pensacola. There is no denying this fact.
Those who want to drag the mythical and ever-changing “Good Ole Boys” and the other straw men into this issue are missing the point. The City of Pensacola blew it and the City of Gulf Breeze handled it better. The good news is that we didn’t lose Avalex and Appriver to Austin, Texas.
Until we can factually look at our problems – without creating these wild conspiracies – Pensacola will be forever behind.
The question is what is Cohen’s evaluation process? What are the goals set for him by the City Manager and the City Council? Not general goals, but measurable, objective goals that all of us can see, understand and follow.
And how are those goals weighted in order of importance? On a scale of 1 to 5, how is Cohen meeting these goals?
If Cohen had kept Avalex in Pensacola, would he have received a good evaluation? Now that the company is moving across Pensacola Bay, will his evaluation scores go down?
Same thing goes for the tree ordinance, downtown parades, etc. – how is Cohen evaluated on his handling of these issues?
People are running to support and attack Cohen and we don’t even know what he is really suppose to be doing. If he is doing a good job, what would it look like?
Come on, people. set your agendas aside and let’s be objective about this. I’ve heard praise and criticism of Cohen, but without an objective evaluation system, I can’t tell you if he’s done a good job or not.
