Entitled to Answers
Many of us who have been following the battle between the City Council and Terry Nash over the last several weeks have been left bewildered and frustrated by the amount of unanswered questions and unresolved issues that have been raised. So far, we have resigned ourselves to trying to understand an administration whose mode of communication seems to be “say as little as possible and be sure it makes no sense.”
Now that the council has voted to spend our money to condemn Nash’s property, however, we feel entitled to a few answers. They must be out there somewhere:
Why was Nash permitted to purchase the land and proceed with his plans only to be told he had wasted time and money?
Why pay for a Centre City Development Corp. and a Planning Commission if you are not intending to endorse their recommendations?
Who told Uvaldo Martinez we would rather have another ugly high-rise downtown than an attractive building we could be proud of?
Did the city think Nash was going to make paper dolls out of the building permit it issued him?
We are shocked to think that the only sense in this otherwise absurd situation lies in the response to our final question:
Whose interests are really being served by the council’s decision?
If we are jumping to conclusions, then please set the record straight. But until we get some reasonable answers, some of us will continue to speculate to our hearts’ content; and we won’t be the ones dancing around on top of the Meridian on Election Day!