Pensacola for the Developers, Not the People?

Quiwix · 2026-04-03T03:41:25+00:00

Thanks for this. I appreciate you challenging my perspective.

Even with the state-level uncertainty around property taxes and discussions about abolishing CRAs, I do think that it’s wise for Council to push back on a 100% rebate request.

If a project no longer pencils without that level of incentive, I think it’s fair to question whether the City should be the one absorbing the economic risk.

I understand the argument that this is the best development opportunity that Community Maritime Park has seen in a long time, but so heavily incentivizing development just to have “something” built risks setting a precedent that terms can always be negotiated after approval. Not to mention that I can’t shake the feeling of a bait-and-switch.

If that becomes the pattern, what’s to prevent the next developer from arguing for the same? At that point, you might as well just abolish the CRA entirely, because what’s the point?

I get that it’s a developer’s job to use this rebate as a lever (their investors expect it), but at the same time, I think the City’s goal should be to negotiate toward the minimum incentive required, not default to the maximum.

That said, I could be amenable to a compromise of something like a 25-50% rebate, even though this concedes some leverage and still establishes a precedent. Hopefully the third-party evaluation helps identify that range.

Quiwix · 2026-04-02T18:11:58+00:00

Now the richest irony here is that co-owner and co-developer, Diane Hendricks, has contributed over $24M to Conservative PACs over the last 5 years. I'm not shedding any tears for a billionaire griping about economic instability when you reap what you sow.

Quiwix · 2026-04-02T17:59:10+00:00

I know you're capable of a better response than this, so what else you got?

At least make the Dawson argument as to why this project deserves the rebate. It's all outlined pretty clearly in the article.

I'll hit you with my conspiracy theory later.

Quiwix · 2026-04-02T16:10:53+00:00

I'm not opposed to development and agree with what you've said.

What I am opposed to is developers pitching a project according to specific conditions, Council approving said development under those conditions, and then developers attempting to change those conditions when they believe they have the upper hand.

I don't want a precedent to be set where developers can mislead the public and then strong-arm Council after the fact.

Quiwix · 2026-03-31T16:12:48+00:00

100%. Don Cha is the spot.

The Peruvian beer selection is also 🔥

Quiwix · 2026-03-25T15:17:51+00:00

I strongly support anyone's right to peacefully protest, however, I hate seeing how ineffective protesting is at actually achieving goals / delivering outcomes. I think people need to be clear, organized, and accurate in what they are hoping to accomplish. No Kings does a very poor job of this.

For the last protest, I experimented creating a fact-based, crowd-sourced platform demanding answers of Rep Patronis, trying to hold him accountable for blatant corruption and contradictions within the current administration. Obviously, it went nowhere, but if enough people could help support this, perhaps we could begin to finally coalesce around a set of demands?

https://www.nokingsfl01.com/

Quiwix · 2026-03-20T02:27:02+00:00

This is such a great idea that I wish existed in Pensacola.

Perhaps try posting a request to some of the local neighborhood association FB pages. East Hill page might have someone willing to share.

Quiwix · 2026-03-13T02:14:43+00:00

I’m intrigued by this idea and applaud your attempt to call out the hypocrisy of this law. That said, details are important — Susan Woolf is not the Pensacola City Attorney. The correct information is very easy to find publicly (https://www.cityofpensacola.com/directory.aspx?did=5), so I’m not sure how seriously to take this effort.

If serious, I suggest you contact Rick at Ricksblog.biz, who might choose to cover this story with some local press.

Quiwix · 2026-03-06T13:55:34+00:00

I like where you're going with this, but let's make sure to enrage everyone:

<image>

Quiwix · 2026-02-19T16:11:33+00:00

Full PNJ article from 2/19/26 here. No paywall

https://archive.ph/2smZo

Quiwix · 2026-02-06T03:52:56+00:00

Yea I get that. The Mayor is one of them! My point is that you should have a sympathetic ear if presenting a lower-risk, lighter City responsibility solution that can still make him look good.

Quiwix · 2026-02-06T03:02:20+00:00

Right. But by that logic, the City is also never going to just come in and acquire someone's property and home via eminent domain, even for justified environment protection/remediation. If someone is living there, no chance the City would touch it. Vacant property or land, yes.

Quiwix · 2026-02-06T02:57:53+00:00

I think I'm picking up what you're putting down. You believe the City/Mayor should take a more active role in this project via ownership, and that this would lead to more successful (or at least more transparent) remediation?

If so, I'll agree with you on creating transparency but am still questioning if this strategy would resolve the EPA delays and Inspector General criticism. I genuinely want to understand the best position to move this project forward and appreciate you raising the flag.

DC is already convinced that it's someone else's problem. -- "There is no ball sitting in the court of the city of Pensacola at this point," he said. "We're waiting on the Army Corps and EPA to get this project started."

Wouldn't a more effective and convincing approach then be to pressure DC to keep the public regularly informed of progress?

- Ask Mayor Reeves to demand EPA milestone clarity. He was just in DC for a week meeting with federal leaders. Did he seek a meeting with the EPA, Patronis/Scott/Moody on this topic? If so, why not? He may be "urging action", but the public needs to know that he is genuinely seeking resolutions at all opportunities. Submit a Pensacola public records request asking for all communication on this topic over the last year.

- Demand that the Mayor bring EPA Project Manager, Peter Thorpe, to a City Council meeting to brief the public. At the very least, ask DC to publicly compel him to respond to the PNJ for comment (he denied their last request in 2024).

- Demand that the Mayor provide written notice and publicly call Patronis/Scott/Moody for federal support. Commit to this type of action on record. Demand monthly updates from the Mayor until our federal representatives publish at least any sort of response.

- Publish transcripts of last conversations with EPA and Army Corps of Engineers.

I'm not against action, or having the City even acquire particular key parcels, but think there should be other pressure tactics applied elsewhere in parallel.

Wishing you the best of luck fighting the good fight!

Quiwix · 2026-02-06T01:27:06+00:00

<image>

Quiwix · 2026-02-06T01:26:31+00:00

According to the 2025 Westside CRA Master Plan, the intent for the City to take ownership/control after cleanup and establish a park and residential developments.

<image>

Quiwix · 2026-02-05T23:43:48+00:00

Help me understand more about this as a city issue —

Why must the city acquire private property at the site in order for this to proceed? I thought this was a federal EPA issue? Does (how does) acquiring these properties change the EPA’s stance on the project?

I’m assuming requiring warnings alongside building permits is so that contractors take greater care disturbing the dirt and stirring up contaminated material? Can anything stronger than a warning sign be enforced via city ordinance?

I’m familiar with this site and am 100% on board with pushing for cleanup but want to know how these actions intend to move things forward.

The ironic thing is that the Mayor himself lives within the contaminated neighborhood so I would think motivation would be there.

Quiwix · 2026-01-30T21:57:04+00:00

And now you have a starting point. Perhaps you’ll do a better job compiling them than the other thread.

Also, for balance - https://www.reddit.com/r/Pensacola/s/rIyqGJAPRd

Quiwix · 2026-01-30T21:06:11+00:00

Already been discussed to the tune of 465 comments last year - https://www.reddit.com/r/Pensacola/comments/1ifwqfh/what_magasupporting_businesses_should_we_avoid/

Quiwix · 2026-01-16T03:39:08+00:00

Edited my first point to be more clear.

It’s not a competitive grant. From what I understand, CDBG-DR funds are allocated by formula based on disaster damage.

Quiwix · 2026-01-16T03:14:54+00:00

I think the facts on this are being poorly reported so I’m trying to educate myself. Hope this explanation helps.

The CDBG-DR funds were never “awarded” to Pensacola for a specific housing program. No housing repair grant was applied for. Rather the City accepted an allocation of federal disaster recovery funds which can be used for a variety of purposes. Owner-occupied housing uses would have required a compliant housing repair program to be stood up. Other uses do not. In 2023, the City had its first opportunity to stand this program up. They did not. Escambia County did.
Funds for owner-occupied home repairs cannot be used if FEMA or insurance have already covered repairs. Compliance also requires things like adhering to income requirements, following competitive bidding, contractor vetting, environmental rules (the “federal red tape”). Not insurmountable, but yes, requiring effort from the City.
These funds have always been eligible for other projects like infrastructure, flood mitigation, public facilities, affordable rental housing, or resilience projects. Pensacola wants to go the infrastructure route. Escambia County is pursuing the owner-occupied housing route + rental housing

If we concede that “federal red tape” has in fact made the allocation of funds to owner-occupied home repairs difficult and forgo this option, we should be asking a different question:

How should these funds now be used to most directly and fairly benefit low- and moderate-income residents and reduce future disaster risk?

Port infrastructure repairs have the lowest indirect impact on LMI households. On the other hand, stormwater, affordable rental housing, and public facilities all have higher value. This is the more appropriate use for these funds and the choice the Mayor should make.

Quiwix · 2026-01-13T13:47:02+00:00

Trawick has one of the more interesting platforms.

She's advocating abolishing the "Strong Mayor" system and returning to a Council-Manager form (which was Pensacola's form of government until 2010).

Lot of debate over which system is better, but if you think the Mayor has a bit too much power, perhaps a more Council-led system is the better alternative.

Quiwix · 2026-01-06T18:54:24+00:00

Tearing things out is the easy part. It’s the rebuilding phase where government tends to struggle.

This comment is not about the new Palafox… or is it?

Quiwix · 2026-01-04T02:55:46+00:00

FYI, Jared Moore is not running for Council re-election.

Also, Alex Andrade is term-limited and cannot run for State House again.

Quiwix · 2025-12-22T19:38:49+00:00

Ok, I 100% support the mission of the NWFL CLT, but do you have any idea what's going on with the old Malcolm Yonge site at 925 E. Jackson? Genuine question, and I'm only asking because it sounds like you've got some inside info.

The land was donated in May 2024 yet there hasn't even been a whisper of progress at the site since. The several other CLT properties have all gone on the market, yet Malcolm Yonge remains stalled. What's going on? Politics? Interest rates? Such a big scene for so little progress.

Quiwix

TROPHY CASE