1. Votes by the Commissioners for the plan were NOT votes by the Commissioners for consolidation. Rather that they felt that the commission had met it’s charge from the legislature – to study consolidation and prepare draft legislation. Several Commissioners specifically expressed this point – that while they may well be personally opposed to consolidation – that the plan was a solid document and that it should go forward, PER OUR CHARGE FROM TALLAHASSEE.

2. RE: the ballpark – The Florida Constitution does allow for an expansion of taxes HOWEVER the Charter specifically prohibits it and therefore has precedence. A point that was clarified to Mr. Wells satisfaction last night. As a side note – Mr. Cunningham was very upfront in SUCCESSFULLY advocating that the strongest possible language be drafted insuring that the CMP debt not be imposed on non-city residents.

3. ESP/City Pensions – ESP is a revenue generating enterprise worth between $90 and $115 million dollars. The unfunded pension liability is about $85 million. The language above – which I advocated for – accomplishes three things…

- It insures that non-city residents don’t see their ad volorum taxes used to pay the pension obligation.
- Compensates city residents for turning over ESP to the new consolidated government.
- Provides a guaranteed funding source for pensioners.

It has been my honor and privilage to serve with Mr Scott, Mr. Tanner and Mr. Cunningham. I would hope that posters here would have greater appreciation for the time and energy (not to mention miles of driving) they have put into this effort.

Uninformed and inconsiderate comments are not productive. I would hope that all of you will take the time to better understand the Study Commission’s process and end product before rejecting it and the thousands of hours of volunteer work that went into it out of hand.

Reasonable people can disagree over the merits of the plan and I think it is a conversation this county needs to have. Consolidation may ro may not be for you and it may or may not be the answer to the challenges this community faces.

However: “I don’t know what it says or what it does. I just know I’m against it and anyone who’s been within 100 feet of it” is most certainly NOT the answer. It is instead a perfect example of the mindset that has led this community to consistently be bypassed by our neighbors.

I don’t know the man, so I can’t get personal. I do feel that I can disagree with his vote and his position on this matter; and I do, as a matter of fact.

Hopefully, disagreeing with somone is not an attack. I would think that an attack on someone would begin if it got personal, i.e., family, reputation, etc.

Okay, maybe riding them out on a rail is a bit much; but that still is not an ‘attack’, surely.

Cunningham might be mistaken in his opinion, but this IS a complex issue and rational people will certainly come to differing conclusions based on the objective facts. I mean, really… if this were just an open-and-shut case of the City wanting to screw the County, then why did Pensacola vote it down today?

All I’m saying is that there’s more involved than just what’s on the surface, and to slander someone like Cunningham without taking the time to understand all the ins and outs of the commission’s report isn’t a good idea.

It’s nice that you can defend Cunningham, but why did he sell us out? Cunningham could have voted no, but sadly he didn’t do that and in the process he lost a lot of respect in and around the community.

This is pure taxation without representation. Stop the park project now. If it is so ‘great’, let a private developer risk his own money – not the tax payers.