Latest in a series of posts on the Gadfly Forum
Yep, it’s development week on Gadfly.
Even the post on the affordable housing meeting fits in. And additional posts on that meeting will follow soon.
But the Mayoral forum on development brought in what Gadfly thinks are two other good prompts.
As I said in the post on Addendum #1, the candidates have done their assigned homework, but they (even the Council candidates) should feel free to weigh in on these subjects.
At the very least, these are good points, points that we should keep in mind as we think about development in the city.
— The examples in Gadfly’s prompt to the mayoral candidates about development were all, I think, in regard to the Southside. Let’s not lose sight of the fact that there is a long unresolved issue on the Northside that the candidates should speak to. Commercial Airbnb operations continue to operate there in the Historic District several years after initial citation of violations. [See Airbnb and Short term lodging links under Topics on the Gadfly sidebar for context.] The same issue of the tension between dollars and history operates there, and the candidates should be asked if they see it as a problem, and, if so, how they will move to resolve it.
— Gadfly’s prompt on development focuses on the role and responsibility of the mayor. But the volunteer historic boards, the Planning Commission, and the Zoning Hearing Board all play key roles and arguably have not always served us well. How do the candidates see themselves vis-a-vis these entities? They are making recommendations and decisions that affect the whole city. In your view, how well have they been functioning? Are you comfortable with the current staffing of those entities? What will you be looking for when it comes to staffing these entities?
What questions or comments do you have on the subject of development? Gadfly would be pleased to have some feedback on both the mayoral and council candidate responses Friday. What have they made you think about?