I received this email from Tim Eagan:
I totally support the construction of Pensacola’s Maritime Park but I have had very serious reservations about the way the project is currently being carried out. My reservations are as follows:
1. I believe the residents of the city should have full and honest disclosure about the funding package and how it might impact city finances in the future. If the city is going to be responsible for the bond obligations and not the CRA as the early Studder indicated, I think the people should be fully informed.
2. I believe this project will have it’s best chance for success if it is undertaken in the broader context of a fully developed, comprehensive and thoroughly integrated economic plan that encompasses the entire community and would potentially provide for sustained and powerful economic growth. Consequently far greater economic opportunities would be created for the population of the area, especially young people who might like to stay and make their permanent home in Pensacola.
3. I believe that the park itself should be developed in such a way as to maximize potential for the local community to utilize the park, and there should be as many opportunities as possible for a broad range of citizens to set up shop as vendors of every type. Every effort should be made to attract as many people as possible to visit and participate in the activities associated with the park. It should be a “peoples park” not at all like the end of Palafox which turned into a showcase for the local wealthy and influential class of Pensacola. Later putting exclusive ordinance and restrictions on the Plaza Ferdinand.
This email seems to be inconsistent with letter Eagan issued last week (Read) in which he wants the bonds to be released at once. Is Eagan writing these statements?