By now, most of Planfield have been buzzing about the PILOT controversy and the City Council. If you haven’t, please read all the other local bloggers’ coverages, opinions and comments of why the PILOT was not approved. The majority vote on the City Council claim they were not included in the particulars of the 30-year tax break for the developer of the Gateway luxury project which was just sprung on them at the last minute, as mentioned in Bernice’s post. The council members that voted against the PILOT have expressed they were never against the long-awaited development project itself, just the PILOT that was being sneaked in at the last minute.
Well, here’s a comparison review. Has anyone noticed the split in the City Council when it comes to the majority of city events? They don’t seem to be inviting each other to which ever public event they back/support/organize. Events where our Mayor frequents, you will only see Councilman Storch, Councilman Williams and even their Councilman-elect Barry Goode only. All the rest of the Council are missing the majority of the time. Is this the same thing that happens when imperative development/council issues need to be discussed in detail? We know there is claim that Deputy City Administrator in charge of Economic Development, Carlos Sanchez emailed (date?) the details of PILOT to the council members who rejected it. What do we do when we want someone to come out to an event or get their vote/support/backing on an important initiative? We do go out of our way to involve them. We insist, we respectfully push. We call them, we invite them, we patiently insist on their attendance, we leave them thorough messages, but we don’t rely on just email communication or a one-time communication attempt. Don’t these intelligent people know, in the realm of communications, we have to adapt to the preference of communication to the person we are trying to reach? They will not always conform to our form of preferred communication, unfortunately. Especially when so much was at stake with such a large development of this scale. Then one would wonder why the developer not include the particulars of the 30-year tax break they wanted until two weeks before the measure went up for vote before the City Council and after their years’ worth of presentations. Why didn’t they present the 30-year tax break they needed in the earlier stages of proposal?
On a final note, as much as those that have supported luxury development to make room for the millennials, and as much as the rest of Plainfield has been criticized for all the dollar stores that are in every corner, it’s hard to fathom why they didn’t mind one opening in their front steps. In the meantime, if this development deal does go through, maybe it will model in further development as we see with the completed and fully-occupied ‘luxury’ Netherwood Pointe project. Are the millennials enjoying the thought of having a new Dollar Store as their neighbor? Where luxury meets ghetto and they live in perfect harmony.