Pier Vote Struck Down by Council
The City Council voted 6-2 to reject a proposal for a citywide vote on the future of the Pier. The process to build a replacement called the 'Lens' will continue.
The public will not get a chance to vote on whether to keep the St. Petersburg Pier.
By a 6-2 vote Thursday, the City Council rejected a plan to place a Pier petition on the November ballot.
The Council agreed to continue with the $50 million proposal to develop a futuristic-looking pier titled the "Lens" to replace the existing inverted pyramid.
Council members Charlie Gerdes, Leslie Curran, Steve Kornell, Bill Dudley, Jeff Danner and Jim Kennedy voted against taking the Pier's future to a citywide vote.
Gerdes, who voted two weeks ago and on Monday to explore putting a question on the ballot, said he could not support rebuilding the Pier or saving it, because of the high subsidies the city pays for the current operation.
"When I look at the business plan for the existing Pier, it has a consistent history of drawing $1.2 to 1.3 million out of our treasury that could be used for a lot of other things," Gerdes said. "I don’t think we can ignore that consistent subsidy ... I couldn’t vote for a referendum question, if passed, I would find fiscally irresponsible despite the fact it was supported by 20,000 signatures."
Kennedy said that ignoring the process would be bad for business in St. Pete.
"This decision doesn’t only affect the Pier, it affects our city’s reputation in how we do business," Kennedy said.
Mayor Bill Foster, who did not get a vote on the matter, joined Council members Wengay Newton and Karl Nurse in supporting a Pier referendum.
"I’ve been consistent in supporting this petition process and putting a referendum question on the ballot," Foster said. "Not because I agree with the question, it's (because) I agree with the charter. I do believe the Vote On The Pier efforts should be rewarded with a question."
Foster said the Pier petition language does not legally require the city to place something on the ballot. But he said that in the spirit of the charter that the people should have a vote.
Council Chair Curran argued against the citywide vote. She said that Foster's argument does not hold water, which she said is proven by the lack of consensus during the public input Thursday.
While dozens voiced their opinion in support of a ballot question, many wanted to save and rebuild the existing Pier. Others said that the Pier could not be saved that the "Lens" design proposal itself is the problem.
For Newton, Thursday was an end to a difficult 20 months of fighting for a pier referendum. He was the first person to sign a VoteOnthePier.com petition.
"Twenty months ago, I made a motion that we have a public hearing (about the pier) and it died for lack of a second," Newton said. "I also made a motion to put something on a ballot ... (this) whole process has been flawed from the beginning."
"I think frankly 23,000 signatures is an awful lot," Nurse said. "A lot of people in the community are uncomfortable with where we are. (We) need to engage the public (to) allow more back and forth."
On Aug. 16 the city will hold a workshop to decide the next steps on the public input process for the design refinement of the "Lens."
Brian Longstreth
1:01 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
It was the right decision! move forward to a NEW PIER!
Michael F Brennan
1:07 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Preposterous! The Council continues to dig its own grave.
Red
1:30 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
I told you the FIX was in. There was never a chance for any other path. Now let's talk RECALL!!
Jeannie Cline
1:40 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Brain L....it's not over yet, trust me!!!
JW
4:44 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
It's over. More protesting at this point only serves to divide the community more. There's no legal precedent to continue a fight. If you want to be helpful give the new pier a fair shake and contribute to the process.
Dennis Roberts
2:05 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Let's see ... currently costing about 1.3 mill a year from the City coffers ... how many years would it take to add up to $50,000,000 that they have set aside? There have to be creative ways to lower the cost to the city per year ... I guess the Council just can't figure any out.
S. Ripley
2:09 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
This started back in 2005 – the time to rally the troops and call to arms was over a long time ago. Let this be a lesson to all of us: once big money is allocated to something, that is the time to get involved; not years later when you realize it is going to be spent on something you don’t like.
Jason Lintner
2:17 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment. We need to move forward, and if you got in late in the game - that's your bad, not the city councils.
Jason Lintner
2:13 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
This has been years in the planning and feedback stage. Citizens have had input throughout the entire process. I believe this is a project that will bring thousands to our fine city, increase revenue and help us grow to be better than ever. Have a wonderful day and thank you for listening to my opinion.
Catherine
6:44 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
A lot of our input all along was that this decision should be brought to a citizen's vote; once again our input was ignored and continues to be as thus.
Edith
2:22 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Wengay Newton may be the only person reelected, although Karl Nurse is clinging to his coattails.
Jeannie Cline
3:30 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
There is a movement to resurrect the mediterranean style of the Million Dollar Pier with a Pikes Street Marketplace (like Seattle's waterfront gem) into a public transit station that houses a municipal water taxi and streetcar ....and in terms of subsidies with a pier, let's take a long look at the other subsidies in town and then rank them. You may be surprised at what we are paying for, especially the structures in which many millionaires are attending events in......also, Jason L, the process for the pier issue has been flawed, otherwise the aforementioned option would have been included with the 3 avant garde styles. It was contrived and controlled from the start and it is no surprise that there is such an outrage and this just isn't due to the arrogant opinion of those who claim that "people just have trouble with change" No way. The process was flawed and this is the result, a very contentious debate that is not solved with these political games.
Tom Tito
9:23 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
There is a public transit station in the downtown TIF budget but it has zero dollars. All of the money is being wasted on the Lens. If this leads to new faces on council that is the only good to come out of this mess.
Leonard Schmiege
4:29 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Thanks for covering these issues
JW
4:36 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
We need to move ahead. We've had five piers...all different. The only thing constant is that they change. The city won't fall apart this time either. Every dollar we reduce in subsidies is a dollar that can be used throughout the city.
Red
4:51 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Jennie, The old Million dollar pier style & market will "fit" our city. We need to be who we are not what an elitist few dream of. Worth remembering is the children's story of the orange that envied a beautiful apple. Try as he could, red paint, extra gloss he always looked like a 2nd rate apple. Finally, the orange did find happiness after accepting who and what he was. Becoming the best orange he could be. Let's do what we do best: Be what we are.
Jeannie Cline
5:43 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
JW this Lens proposal is a total break of tradition of the St Pete Pier. It will NOT be a community gathering place and it will not put handicap accessibility on par with the active crowd that the promoters believe will flock to it. The Lens is, actually, a traditional pier with loops. The tradition of the Pier as a community gathering space in St Pete has been a trademark of this nice city and with total disregard to this, the "process" ensued and not once was a pier in the tradition of St Pete considered as a finalist. It is a "smoke and mirrors" situation in which the promoters are shoving this through under the guise of a cutting edge concept. The Lens is a traditional pier, the former piers in St Pete are uniquely St Pete
Catherine
6:06 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
We have been hijacked by the city council and I for one will not stand for this; will vote them all out come our next election! Preposterous that the citizens of this city who will be using - or not - The Lens, should most certainly had the opportunity to vote upon this design. I am absolutely furious and my pride in this city has just been kicked down to a notch near the bottom.
Gregory Wood
8:07 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
we did not have a vote on the dome either... but we are paying for it time to vote everyone off the council that voted against the democratic process. I am a lifelong resident and I am ashamed of the government in the dark in St. petersburg..Greg Wood
Howard Johnston
10:35 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Sorry...I hit POST before I finished. I meant to say that "it's a courageous and absolutely proper decision by the Council. Hooray! Yet another blow struck against democracy!" The Lens does NOTHING to promote business or tourism in St. Pete. Iconic? Maybe. Interesting? Certainly. But will it generate admiration, tourism or business? Probably not.
Robert Thompson
11:48 pm on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Thank goodness. This process has been open to the public since the beginning 3 yrs ago. No referendum is needed.
Jeannie Cline
1:28 am on Friday, August 3, 2012
If this process was so open, then why wasn't any other style of pier replacement presented? All three finalists were contemporary, avant garde styles. Why wasn't there an inclusion of the opportunity to vote on refurbishment of this pier or even for a resurrection of the mediterranean style of the past one? This process was steered toward the contemporary style, trust me, I was at the meetings and there were many pleas to be heard about diversity, in every public meeting. The main figure in this process is a fan of avant garde design and the influence in the process shows. We have sent a signal to our youth that there is no way to voice displeasure with a decision made by our council and that petitions are at the mercy of them. This is a terrible and seriously wrong message to send the youth in these troubled times. Doesn't anyone "get" that?
Red
8:35 am on Friday, August 3, 2012
Yeah, they get it. They just don't care. After all the "Hey look what we built" they'll probably move to the Cayman Islands and start clipping coupons.
Jeannie Cline
10:04 am on Friday, August 3, 2012
LOVE IT RED!!!! SO TRUE!!!!
HANI F MATTA
1:39 pm on Friday, August 3, 2012
the lens project process is like ordering eggs for breakfast .......they serve you the empty shell.......it is a shell void of the egg .....a body void of the soul......a form void of a function.......like buying a car without the motor.......it is just a big hole in our logic and budget, that will cost an arm and a leg in construction cost then in maintenance
matta
architect