Blogging from City Hall about Downtown Development.

[AshleyLauren]

Good Evening,

Today is the first of a three part series/meeting including the Rules Committee, Finance Committee, and the RCD Committee. The sole purpose of the meeting is to discuss Bills 2012-213 and 2012-364.

2012-213              ORD-MC Amend Sec 5.08, City Charter & Council Rules 3.301 & 3.305 & Create Rule 3.306 to allow for Council Apv of Certain Economic Dev Incentive Legislation after 1 or 2 Readings; Amend Sec 180.105, Ord Code (Funding of the Duval County Job Opportunity Bank) to Delete Provisions Requiring Recipients of City Economic Dev Incentives to Contribute Funds to the Job Opportunity Bank; Auth the Economic Dev Investmt Policy of the City re Economic Incentives Funded by City; Replacing Former Incentive Policy; Auth Downtown Historic Preservation & Revitalization Trust Fund Guidelines; Replacing Former Trust Fund Guidelines. (Rowland) (Req of Mayor)

2012-364              ORD-MC Repeal Sec 516.101 (Downtown Dev Agcy Boundaries), Ord Code; Create New Chapt 55 (Economic Dev), Part III (Downtown Investmt Authority) to serve as Community Redev Agcy for Downtown; Provide for Community Redev within Existing Downtown Area (the Southside & the Downtown Northbank Community Redev Areas); Create New Sec 111.640 (Redev Trust Fund of Downtown Investmt Auth); Amend Chapt 122 (Public Propty), Part 4 (Real Propty), Subpart C (Community Redev Real Propty Dispositions), Sec 122.434 (Procedure for Disposition of Community Dev Propty); Amend Chapt 500 (Community Redev - Policies & Procedures), Secs 500.102 (Definitions) & 500.104 (Exercise of Powers by JEDC); Amend Chapt 656 (Zoning Code), Part 3 (Schedule of Dist Regs), Subpart H (Downtown Overlay Zone & Downtown Dist Regs), Sec 656.361.2 (Downtown Overlay Zone & Downtown Dist Regs), Sec 656.361.2  (Downtown Overlay Zone Map & Boundaries) & Sec 656.361.3 (Definitions); Provide for Apv of Execution of a Form Redev &/or Economic Dev Agreemt; Provide for Apv of Execution of a Form Ground-Lease Agreemt; Amend Sec 17.06 (Applicability of Civil Svc Syst to Employees of Consolidated Govt) of Article 17 (Civil Svc) of City Charter, to Correct Civil Svc Exemptions. (Gabriel) (Req of Mayor)


Ultimately the conversation is entirely the need to help downtown flourish.

Thus far, it appears Lori Boyer is the key player here. Yarborough is in charge tonight and he immediately asked Ms. Boyer about the amendments/wording/ asked for an entire overview of what the bills would be changing.

**Bare with me, there are throwing a lot of numbers and background policies that I really don't know much about. I will relay what I can and if anyone else has input or knowledge please participate.

[AshleyLauren]

Crescimbeni points out the amendment is 10 pages long when the original bill was only a few pages long. Boyer seems to know the intricacies of the bill whereas the rest of the council members have only browsed the amendments and need to go through the bill first.

Boyer: entire business development plan would be subject to council approval in the amendment she has written.
Required by statute. Develop and adopt a five year plan for the development of downtown approved by the Council.

Anderson: WE can develop plans that are separate for each bank? Your amendment allows plans to be different for the Northbank, Southbank  both. This allows more flexibility, allows two separate organization for each area where as currently all plans for the CRA must be for both banks.

Boyer answers yes thats what it would do. This allows for plans to start moving if one plan is moving faster than another.

(Everyone seems a little confused as to how this will work and what they are talking about. Lots of  "just to be clear" or "just to be sure").

Crescimbeni: We've been discussing how we are dealing with this for forty minutes and we have made no progress.

[AshleyLauren]

Item 1: of the council auditor's sheet has been amended and approved. .. Business Investment Development Plan created by the DIA must now be approved by City Council as stated by the Auditor.

Item 2: Will the CEO be appointed by council for the DIA (Downtown Investment Authority)? If not, should the qualifications for the CEO at least be supported by the Council?  There are currently no qualifications set in stone.
Gulliford believes that position is so important there is no option but to have set qualifications of the person picked.
Crescimbeni: It's crazy to not have some parameters unless we want to be blamed when something major happens.
Boyer: Once the board is picked the board should come up with what criteria they think is needed for the CEO and then obtain council approval on the list and get council approval on the choice. This way the council does not have to come up with these criteria but the board would be responsible for their choice.
Gulliford: You need someone well-versed in downtown development.
Item 2: amended that the board will create the requirements and council will approve it.

Item 3 already discussed and amended.

Item 4: Requires the council to approve salary range, compensation package or any extra benefits for the CEO.
Gulliford points out members of the other three authorities are excessively paid, and we need to make wiser discussion when paying these CEO's. Gulliford suggests a decent salary and perhaps a compensation package as the DIA starts making progress and completing certain goals. (lots of references to how the library is run and i am not familiar at all with that system).
Gaffney states if were paying top dollar we better get one of the best in the country and therefore the qualifications are key and there should big stipulations for the salary.

Comparisons to Nashville, Raliegh, Houston being made in regards to our downtown. Thus far I don't really see how we can compare our downtown growth to those.

Crescimbeni points out this Item 4 also encompasses when the CEO ceases to be qualified for the position. His question, what defines "ceases to be qualified?"? Ms Sidman reveals that includes the individual moving out of the area of the city, not meeting requirements. Crescimbeni wants to know how we foresee all things that could be a reason to cease qualification.
Crescimbeni seems to be added lots of additional questions and worries to the conversation. Items that one really cannot predict. He wants something added in regards to post-employment actions for board members and the CEO. His worry what if a big deal is made and the next month a board member ends up working for the other company.

[AshleyLauren]

5,6,7 already taken care of in another committee.

Item8: Annual TIFT (??) budget approved by the board. 

Item 8's amendment is entirely about Powers and Duties of the board and the CEO. The amendments made by the LUZ committee and the Boyer amendment  basically changes that all decisions must be made/approved by City Council before the Development Plan is approved. Ultimately rendering the Board powerless prior to a plan's approval.


Now they will go through whether the council involved in every aspect of the process.
In regards to marketing plans:
Gulliford's up first and says sometimes we get too deep in the weeds, too deep in the process of everything we deal with. IF I received a marketing plan I wouldn't be the person to decide if it was good or not.
Lumb points out the atrocious plans he has heard about from some cities, and it is not inappropriate for the council to take a final look and approve it. He understands Gulliford's worry but he thinks something as important as the marketing plan is necessary.
Gulliford: We've picked these people, we put our stamp on them we should give them the trust to do the job we have given them.
Lumb: WE don't need to be involved entirely but at least a review.

They have now been going back and forth about this for 20 minutes. The compromise. These reviews/approval will go to the RCD committee.
The RCD committee is passed.

[AshleyLauren]

Next item covers where the board meets. Should it be City hall? Should it be another vacant city owned property? The auditor is concerned about the board leasing a space out of their budget.

Amended that the council approves the space.


Overall, this meeting is a back and forth about amendments for a bill to be voted upon. The bills control the DIA and the DIA will control the board/ceo in charge of bringing life to Downtown.

Right now they are just amended items of the proposed bill based on the auditor's recommendations. If they keep this rate up I do not see how it will be over in three weeks. While this discussion deserves attention at the moment it is a big debate.

I have to leave now. I was unaware the meeting would go into the evening. I will be back next Wednesday to see if the discussion has changed or become more concrete. Perhaps, everyone will be up to date at that time and ready to make educated decisions.

Yarborough just cut the conversation off, time is up. He requests an updated version of the amendments decided on tonight by the beginning of next week so members have the time to read through the material before Wednesday.

Good night.

[Debbie Thompson]

Ashley, thank you so much for covering these meetings and posting updates for us.

[AshleyLauren]

Ashley, thank you so much for covering these meetings and posting updates for us.

Thank you. This one was not my finest hour. I went in there with very little understanding about the holistic nature of the topic, so I really appreciate the kind words! Next week I hope to know more.

[AshleyLauren]

Back again,

Little late due to some technical difficulties; nevertheless, blogging from the 2nd of three special meetings between the Rules, Finance, and RCD committee meetings.

At the moment they are going over what was amended last week and what has come up this week in hindsight, and discussing what they need to do tonight.

Again, the point of these three meetings is solely to discuss the bills, 2012-213 and 2012-364. These ordinance are a compilation of everything having to do with the plan to help downtown grow.

A lot of the meeting last week was bickering of how to handle this, and skipping over things, and not really discussing certain things. I will update if something specific is decided.

[AshleyLauren]

http://media.coj.net/COJCouncil


Here is the link if anyone would like to watch. These meetings are not very long.

[AshleyLauren]

Crescembeni really is a funny guy. He just said, "You know you're not selling me on this by any stretch of the imagination?"

Silence

"do you know that?"

[AshleyLauren]

Currently arguing about whether or not the DIA should be allowed to hire their own attorneys if outside council is needed.

Bishop and Crescembeni argue that this portion of the bill is trying to fix a problem with the general council's office not a possible problem foreseen within the DIA.

Watching Yarborough keep up might be the most interesting part of these meetings. Oh, and the fact that none of them except Boyer and Gulliford seem to be decisive again this week.

[JFman00]

Hah:

"So the amendment to the amendment carries... we're back to the auditors amendment. So we're now voting on the amendment as amended. All votes in favor say aye"

[AshleyLauren]

Hah:

"So the amendment to the amendment carries... we're back to the auditors amendment. So we're now voting on the amendment as amended. All votes in favor say aye"

HA! Yes!! My favorite part was Boyer taking back her amendment,  "SO the amendment to the amendment is withdrawn from the amendment and we will stick with the original amendment."

[AshleyLauren]

Same thing as last week. They are moving through sections and choosing the auditor's amendments or CW Boyer's amendments. Moving through them without enlightening the rest of us as to what they are voting on.


The entire purpose of this bill is to create rules for the DIA. The DIA must get approval from the CC for almost every dime the spend, every person they hire, and every thought they have until a concrete plan is brought forth and approved by the CC. If approved, the DIA will then be able to take control and work towards the end result of said plan.

[AshleyLauren]

Talk about CRA accounts and Tift funds...should the CC keep tabs on the money in detail or just annually.

Worry they are becoming to granular in regards to the budget. I think the rest of the city might disagree... seems there has not been enough attention given to the budget over the years.