If you can get past the law suits we are exposed to by Cooper’s master plan (the Comprehensive Plan) you may wish to consider the tone and substance of the plan and how it will impact our relationship with those who may consider investing in our city. Remember that Cooper is running for a seat on our City Commission based on her authorship and support for this plan, and that Tom McMacken has pledged his allegiance to this plan.
The Cooper and McMacken plan, also embraced by Commissioner Beth Dillaha, prohibits almost everything and encourages almost nothing. It is this obsession with control (and with blocking changes to this plan, see Amendment #10) that opens our city to law suits, deters reinvestment, and obstructs our ability to adapt to inevitable changes.
Peter Gottfried (candidate for City Commission Seat 4 versus Tom McMacken) did a little research to see how other cities view the role of prohibitions and encouragement in their planning documents. Here is what he found:
USE OF THE WORDS PROHIBIT AND ENCOURAGE IN CITY MASTER PLANS*
|Santa Fe, NM||3||35|
|San Diego (L.A. Jolla), CA||0||6|
* Numbers taken from the Future Land Use section of the Florida Comprehensive Plans for Winter Park, Orlando, Sanford, DeLand, Maitland, Coral Gables. Numbers for Altamonte Springs are for their entire Comprehensive Plan. Numbers for other cities taken from what they refer to in their states as the “General Plan” or “Community Plan.”
Are we going to encourage compatible redevelopment or prohibit it?
Are we going to consider possibilities or fear consequences?
Are we going to pursue opportunities or obstruct change?
What kind of city do YOU want?
I am voting FOR David Lamm, FOR Peter Gottfried, and NO on Charter Amendment #10.