For and Against: The Mobility Fee Moratorium (2013-094)

[Cheshire Cat]

^I'd have to dig a little deeper but I suspect that once you drill things down, one of the core reasons for a push for a mobility fee moratorium is about salvaging speculative land investments on the fringes during the previous real estate boom.  If this is the case, then there will be those who don't care about the mobility plan's credit adjustment system or fee elimination by redeveloping existing underutilized commercial sites.  Yes, 7-11 can select various locations that eliminate their mobility fee but that doesn't help me if it's my pre-owned lot (I want to sell them) getting tagged for higher automobile trip generation, due to it's far out location. Given the last five years, we've all seen our real estate go down the tubes, so that's understandable, but a public subsidy for all new development across the board, to make good on a personal business decision gone bad isn't right for the taxpayer either.

"Exactly"!

[JeffreyS]

^I'd have to dig a little deeper but I suspect that once you drill things down, one of the core reasons for a push for a mobility fee moratorium is about salvaging speculative land investments on the fringes during the previous real estate boom.  If this is the case, then there will be those who don't care about the mobility plan's credit adjustment system or fee elimination by redeveloping existing underutilized commercial sites.  Yes, 7-11 can select various locations that eliminate their mobility fee but that doesn't help me if it's my pre-owned lot (I want to sell them) getting tagged for higher automobile trip generation, due to it's far out location. Given the last five years, we've all seen our real estate go down the tubes, so that's understandable, but a public subsidy for all new development across the board, to make good on a personal business decision gone bad isn't right for the taxpayer either.

+ 1000

The Daily record should print that.

[thelakelander]

And to be certain, I think that this is the result of literally decades of people trying to sell downtown as a tax piggy bank for the rest of the city instead of a thing to be desired on its own.

This has been the traditional mindset of a few generations of developers.  For some reason the downtown existed to fund their expansion and the expansion had no responsibility to stand on its own.

But the goose that laid the golden egg finally ran dry, and there literally is no back up plan.

Good point.  Given the small amount of land area in comparison to the rest of county, there's most likely still an unfair balance of revenue being generated by the urban core to sustain lower density environments that surround it.  I imagine everything from downtown vibrancy to inner city neighborhoods, parks and public schools would be better off today, if each area of town had to be supported/sustained by the amount of revenue it takes in.

In essence, this falls in line with the arguments of those who believe consolidation has hurt certain areas of the city.  From that viewpoint, if you had several smaller municipalities, they'd start to compete based off quality of life.  For example, one my say they'll strive to be a city of parks, while another decides to build itself around cultural attractions or industrial development.  While there are pros and cons to this, this appears to by playing out in South Florida and compact counties with multiple municipalities like Pinellas.

[Debbie Thompson]

^I'd have to dig a little deeper but I suspect that once you drill things down, one of the core reasons for a push for a mobility fee moratorium is about salvaging speculative land investments on the fringes during the previous real estate boom.  If this is the case, then there will be those who don't care about the mobility plan's credit adjustment system or fee elimination by redeveloping existing underutilized commercial sites.  Yes, 7-11 can select various locations that eliminate their mobility fee but that doesn't help me if it's my pre-owned lot (I want to sell them) getting tagged for higher automobile trip generation, due to it's far out location. Given the last five years, we've all seen our real estate go down the tubes, so that's understandable, but a public subsidy for all new development across the board, to make good on a personal business decision gone bad isn't right for the taxpayer either.

Not to mention the opportunity to purchase outlying land at fire sale prices while the market is suppressed, apply for mobility fee waivers, and then wait until the market comes back to develop the land.  Remember, under this bill 2013-94, the waivers are not just for the moratorium period, but forever as I understand it.

[Cheshire Cat]

^I'd have to dig a little deeper but I suspect that once you drill things down, one of the core reasons for a push for a mobility fee moratorium is about salvaging speculative land investments on the fringes during the previous real estate boom.  If this is the case, then there will be those who don't care about the mobility plan's credit adjustment system or fee elimination by redeveloping existing underutilized commercial sites.  Yes, 7-11 can select various locations that eliminate their mobility fee but that doesn't help me if it's my pre-owned lot (I want to sell them) getting tagged for higher automobile trip generation, due to it's far out location. Given the last five years, we've all seen our real estate go down the tubes, so that's understandable, but a public subsidy for all new development across the board, to make good on a personal business decision gone bad isn't right for the taxpayer either.

Not to mention the opportunity to purchase outlying land at fire sale prices while the market is suppressed, apply for mobility fee waivers, and then wait until the market comes back to develop the land.  Remember, under this bill 2013-94, the waivers are not just for the moratorium period, but forever as I understand it.

And the waivers are what makes this so political as they are often handed out to a few special folks with money for lobbyists but not for fees.  Funny how that works. 

[Jumpinjack]

Not to mention the opportunity to purchase outlying land at fire sale prices while the market is suppressed, apply for mobility fee waivers, and then wait until the market comes back to develop the land.  Remember, under this bill 2013-94, the waivers are not just for the moratorium period, but forever as I understand it.

A lot of the land that is in the competition for mobility fee waivers is land that was recently tree farms, rural subdivisions replatted, or small farms. The trees burned, the paper company went to Brazil, the 2 acre ranchettes failed because nobody wanted to drive that far, and the small farmer went broke.

They are dirt cheap in the sense that there are no neighbors to complain, the lots front on a major FDOT highway, a bulldozer can drive from side to side without going around big trees. Plus, the city and state will have to come up with the money to put in more highway lanes, connect the sidewalks, build the schools, and put up a fire and police station. What a deal. 

[tufsu1]

Btw, this was an email sent to me this morning:

btw, stats on NPR this am were that ped deaths in Jax are up 39% in 2012…and bike deaths are up 80%

Sadly, the JSO answer to this is to ticket people for not crossing at a crosswalk…never mind that the nearest one might be over a half-mile away!

and in a related story from Tampa....

Haunted by the death of an 8-year-old girl, the City Council pleaded with transportation officials for a more urgent approach to making Busch Boulevard safer for pedestrians.

"I have seen too many of these," council member Frank Reddick said. "It's good to educate, but it's also good to put something in place that would prevent these tragedies from happening."  The latest was Feb. 3, when Jayla Shubbar was hit by a sport utility vehicle while trying to cross Busch Boulevard to go to a convenience store with her 12-year-old sister.

Local and state officials say they have worked to make Busch safer, filling in gaps in sidewalks, making crosswalks more visible and installing pedestrian count-down signals. But a big problem remains. Busch is a six-lane road with fast-moving traffic and stretches as long as half a mile where there are no crosswalks at all â€" so pedestrians cross in the middle of blocks.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/localgovernment/tampa-officials-say-fixing-busch-boulevard-is-urgent/1277032

[edjax]

Let's see Mr Clark ran for a state congressional seat and if he had been elected would have been required to move out of Duval County.  And most likely when his public office gravy train runs out in Duval County he will return to the county where he was raised. Yea....this guy has what is in the best interests for the taxpayers and residents of Duval county long term.

[strider]

The joining together of the three committees into one meeting is not in the best interests of those of us opposed to the moratorium. It limits the exposure.  You will still have only 3 minutes to speak except now, you only have at best three public hearings instead of five. Unless they do a Saturday thing again, like for Mellow Mushroom, the public loses and the committees members only have to listen to us once.  It  would be interesting to see if this is really even legal . Sometimes things are “interpreted” the way they want it rather than being correct.

Something else that keeps going through my mind.  If a developer is based  in Jacksonville, then will not he pursue the same development whether the fee is there or not?  Isn't that how he makes his money?  So the fee will not chase off the development.

Also, if the developer is not Jacksonville based, then common sense says that the bulk of the money earned as well as the bulk of the construction type jobs will go to where they are based out of, not remain in Duval County.  So much for repaying those tax payer “incentives” though the jobs created.  And being about bringing jobs to our residents.

Last, I wonder what it takes to get an ethics inquiry started.  Let's face it, the only reason the moratorium passes is developer money.  Not jobs, not new development and certainly not common sense.

[simms3]

Agree with you Lakelander.  For comparison's sake, a similar issue has evolved in Atlanta, which has the most lots entitled for single family construction in the entire country (somewhere around 130,000 empty, entitled lots, many of which have the utilities in and nothing more).  It was such a bubble that you had borderline clandestine foreign groups "securitizing" the future value of these lots and selling off the pieces to investors, and then raising more money by further subdividing each lot.  This also translated to spec retail development (a la Sleiman).

What's happened is a complete abandonment of development on the fringe.  There is virtually no new construction further than 15 miles out from the city center now, which is saying a lot for that metro.  Many think there will be a sweet spot of new development to fill in the gaps 10-20 miles out, but beyond that...nothing.  I can't speak to fees in these suburban counties, or lack thereof, but I think the focus of development for the past 3-4 years going forward has been on infill/redevelopment (even in the suburbs around the "town squares" in Marietta, Woodstock, Lawrenceville, etc) and I can't recall such fierce battles about what to do with all those empty lots that lost a lot of money for so many people.

Jacksonville is less dense overall and 1/4 the population.  The city should not be trying to make whole anyone who made bad decisions to buy, entitle, and/or develop lots in areas of the metro that needn't be developed at all and are too far away from anything to justify development in the first place.

[Cheshire Cat]

The joining together of the three committees into one meeting is not in the best interests of those of us opposed to the moratorium. It limits the exposure.  You will still have only 3 minutes to speak except now, you only have at best three public hearings instead of five. Unless they do a Saturday thing again, like for Mellow Mushroom, the public loses and the committees members only have to listen to us once.  It  would be interesting to see if this is really even legal . Sometimes things are “interpreted” the way they want it rather than being correct.

Something else that keeps going through my mind.  If a developer is based  in Jacksonville, then will not he pursue the same development whether the fee is there or not?  Isn't that how he makes his money?  So the fee will not chase off the development.

Also, if the developer is not Jacksonville based, then common sense says that the bulk of the money earned as well as the bulk of the construction type jobs will go to where they are based out of, not remain in Duval County.  So much for repaying those tax payer “incentives” though the jobs created.  And being about bringing jobs to our residents.

Last, I wonder what it takes to get an ethics inquiry started.  Let's face it, the only reason the moratorium passes is developer money.  Not jobs, not new development and certainly not common sense.

You can call the city's Ethics hotline or email the office directly with your concerns.  They will follow up with you and can be depended upon them to do so in all fairness.    There is also a State Ethics office but working with them means a bunch of paperwork and if pursued, trips to Tallahassee.

[simms3]

It's incredulous that anyone thinks the fee waiver over the past year is what "boosted" Jacksonville's ranking to 39th best real estate bet in the country.  It's a macro FL thing as growth and tourism have returned (key drivers of FL economy)...and it's barely trickled down to Jacksonville, which needs to learn to rely less on growth and tourism and more on a real economy.

Here's the SNAPSHOT from the ULI Emerging Trends publications...it's an insult they even quoted

Commercial Investment / Commercial Development / Homebuilding

Miami

2012:: 17 / 26 / 29 (ranked 17th overall based on investment prospects)
2013:: 11 / 11 / 16 (ranked 12th overall on all parameters)

Net change:: +6 / +15 / +13

Overall ranking:: +5


Tampa Bay

2012:: 33 / 35 / 40 (ranked 33rd overall based on investment prospects)
2013:: 25 / 29 / 29 (ranked 29th overall on all parameters)

Net change:: +8 / +6 / +11

Overall ranking:: +4

Orlando

2012:: 29 / 30 / 25 (ranked 29th overall based on investment prospects)
2013:: 26 / 28 / 27 (ranked 28th overall based on all parameters)

Net change:: +3 / +2 / +2

Overall ranking:: +1

Jacksonville

2012:: 40 / 41 / 37 (ranked 40th based on investment prospects)
2013:: 39 / 39 / 41 (ranked 39th based on all parameters)

Net change:: +1 / +2 / -4

Overall ranking:: +1


Now someone go back to Council and show these numbers and ask if they think the fee did much to improve Jacksonville's rankings.  Is Miami curbing fees and regulations?  Is Tampa?  Not only that, would we call Jacksonville's increases in these rankings all that impressive?  These people who make decisions in this city are all nuts.

[Cheshire Cat]

It's incredulous that anyone thinks the fee waiver over the past year is what "boosted" Jacksonville's ranking to 39th best real estate bet in the country.  It's a macro FL thing as growth and tourism have returned (key drivers of FL economy)...and it's barely trickled down to Jacksonville, which needs to learn to rely less on growth and tourism and more on a real economy.

Here's the SNAPSHOT from the ULI Emerging Trends publications...it's an insult they even quoted

Commercial Investment / Commercial Development / Homebuilding

Miami

2012:: 17 / 26 / 29 (ranked 17th overall based on investment prospects)
2013:: 11 / 11 / 16 (ranked 12th overall on all parameters)

Net change:: +6 / +15 / +13

Overall ranking:: +5


Tampa Bay

2012:: 33 / 35 / 40 (ranked 33rd overall based on investment prospects)
2013:: 25 / 29 / 29 (ranked 29th overall on all parameters)

Net change:: +8 / +6 / +11

Overall ranking:: +4

Orlando

2012:: 29 / 30 / 25 (ranked 29th overall based on investment prospects)
2013:: 26 / 28 / 27 (ranked 28th overall based on all parameters)

Net change:: +3 / +2 / +2

Overall ranking:: +1

Jacksonville

2012:: 40 / 41 / 37 (ranked 40th based on investment prospects)
2013:: 39 / 39 / 41 (ranked 39th based on all parameters)

Net change:: +1 / +2 / -4

Overall ranking:: +1



Now someone go back to Council and show these numbers and ask if they think the fee did much to improve Jacksonville's rankings.  Is Miami curbing fees and regulations?  Is Tampa?  Not only that, would we call Jacksonville's increases in these rankings all that impressive?  These people who make decisions in this city are all nuts.
 

Simms, email council members and media with this info.  That way they will have it before the next meeting

[JeffreyS]

I would sign on to a request for an ethics investigation if this thing passes.  The logic for a moratorium is just not there. Reasonable people can disagree but so can People who have an interest in promoting Jax with people who have an interest in lining their pockets or receiving election contributions.

[Fallen Buckeye]

Quick question. I noticed that a lot of pedestrian improvements are underway right now on Normandy Blvd. between Lane Ave and 295 like you were talking about in point 3. Is this being funded by the Mobility Fee?