Challengers in the 2015 Council Races

[Charles Hunter]

On what basis would you sue Clay Yarborough?  Being a religious zealot?  And he will be Council President starting in July.

[jaxequality]

The GOP U.S. House has introduced legislation about 50 times (literally) to repeal Obamacare since they took back the majority.

I don't think it has accomplished a damn thing for either party.  Everybody knows Democrats support it by in large and Republicans don't.  It is all political theater/grandstanding that hasn't changed anyone's mind or moved either side toward the other. 

Politics, which is what this is no matter how noble the cause, it about picking your battles, including the timing of those battles.  Biding your time until your troops are refreshed, and the circumstances have evolved (hopefully to your favor) is  all part of the process of getting to ultimate victory.           

Bad advice.

This isn't politics, it's civil rights.

+1 that's what I thought I did above

[jaxequality]

On what basis would you sue Clay Yarborough?  Being a religious zealot?  And he will be Council President starting in July.

Clay accused Jimmy of trying to bribe him for his vote on the HRO. A total crock of shart, but that's Clay for you. Something tells me that one is going to end up like Matt Shirk one day.

[vicupstate]

The GOP U.S. House has introduced legislation about 50 times (literally) to repeal Obamacare since they took back the majority.

I don't think it has accomplished a damn thing for either party.  Everybody knows Democrats support it by in large and Republicans don't.  It is all political theater/grandstanding that hasn't changed anyone's mind or moved either side toward the other. 

Politics, which is what this is no matter how noble the cause, it about picking your battles, including the timing of those battles.  Biding your time until your troops are refreshed, and the circumstances have evolved (hopefully to your favor) is  all part of the process of getting to ultimate victory.           

Bad advice.

This isn't politics, it's civil rights.

The Civil Rights movement was as big a political issue than anything you can name during the last 150 years.  But for LBJ and a few others, there would still be  'colored' restrooms in Dixie today.  Thanks for proving my point.

[ChriswUfGator]

The GOP U.S. House has introduced legislation about 50 times (literally) to repeal Obamacare since they took back the majority.

I don't think it has accomplished a damn thing for either party.  Everybody knows Democrats support it by in large and Republicans don't.  It is all political theater/grandstanding that hasn't changed anyone's mind or moved either side toward the other. 

Politics, which is what this is no matter how noble the cause, it about picking your battles, including the timing of those battles.  Biding your time until your troops are refreshed, and the circumstances have evolved (hopefully to your favor) is  all part of the process of getting to ultimate victory.           

Bad advice.

This isn't politics, it's civil rights.

The Civil Rights movement was as big a political issue than anything you can name during the last 150 years.  But for LBJ and a few others, there would still be  'colored' restrooms in Dixie today.  Thanks for proving my point.

You're confusing it with a political issue merely because a politician ended the dispute. Logic fail.

LBJ's actions during the civil rights era were unpopular everywhere but the northern states and in large part contributed (together with the bogged down Vietnam war) to his poor performance in the primaries and having to drop out of the race for reelection. Despite contributing to his being unelectable he still did the right thing. The fact that he was a politician has nothing to do with the underlying issue, nor did he act like a politician costing himself a second term to do what he felt was right. If Lincoln and LBJ followed your logic we'd still have slavery.

[Cheshire Cat]

The Jacksonville Daily Record recently gave us this update on the status of candidates and funding in the upcoming 2015 City Council races in February.  Here is what they had to share.

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=542261

Interesting patterns emerging in City Council races


Monday, February 17, 3:37 PM EST
By David Chapman, Staff Writer

The only certainty of the 2015 City Council elections is that there will be several new faces in the group.
How many will be determined over the next several months, leading to the first election in March.

While still more than a year out, all 19 seats have drawn candidates. As of this morning, 40 to be exact.

Three currently sitting in the seats already have drawn opposition. Three other incumbents haven't filed for their seats — or anything at all. There are three familiar faces who have served eight years each and seek a return. And there's another three trying to secure their first seat after coming up short in 2011.

Nineteen seats, 19 stories being drafted — but the first chapter has been written.

Facing early competition

The majority of council members who can run again have filed to do so. Only three have drawn opposition.

Kimberly Daniels is one of them.

The At-Large Group 1 representative has drawn a couple of opponents, but said Friday she welcomes the competition.

"Everybody is a part of it. I love the process ... it's part of the liberty we have," she said.

Her race so far also is one of the higher-funded.

In the past several months, Daniels has picked up $51,000, mainly through a $50,000 self-loan. Her closest opponent is local businesswoman Anna Brosche, who raised $40,000 in January — her first month of reporting.

"Money doesn't win a race," Daniels said. "Dollars don't count, votes count."

She said she is concentrating on her role with council, specifically public health and safety issues, and hasn't begun to raise money.

"If you worry about it, it will run away from you," she said. "If you do your job, it will come to you."

Her At-Large Group 5 colleague Robin Lumb also has drawn multiple challengers, but said his only surprise was how early people have entered his race.

"I think what would surprise me is if I didn't draw opponents," he said.

In District 14, incumbent Jim Love also has drawn early opposition. He expected the challenge, given the rarity of council races that are unopposed.

Only At-Large Group 3 representative Stephen Joost was unopposed in 2011.

Love, like Lumb, said he was "a little surprised" at how early candidates have filed but he expected competition. He said he expects one or two more people to eventually enter the race, but that he's been here before.

"I have already done it the hard way, running against five others (in 2011)," he said.

Love said he'll be better prepared this time, but the trade-off is that a re-election campaign effectively will be a third job — the others being his business and council.

Council members Matt Schellenberg, Doyle Carter, Bill Gulliford and Greg Anderson are other incumbents who have filed for re-election, but none are yet opposed.

In or out?

Three current council members eligible to again run aren't opposed or unopposed — they haven't filed to receive those distinctions.

One will be in soon, though.

"My intention is to file the first week of March," said Lori Boyer, District 5 representative.

The timing isn't to her liking, though.

"Frankly, I'd like to wait another six months," she said.

Boyer said once she files she then becomes a candidate who will have to fundraise and have certain restrictions placed on her. She said she'd rather focus on her council work and put off campaigning, but has received pressure to file "sooner rather than later."

District 5 has one candidate so far, but Boyer said she wouldn't be surprised if others emerged from the San Marco area that "often has a lot of candidates."

Council members Reggie Brown and John Crescimbeni also have not filed.

Both have been on council for more than one term but are eligible for another after winning elections in 2008 to replace others.

Neither returned phone calls seeking their intentions.

Hoping to return

The list of candidates across the races has many new names, but there are some familiar faces, as well. Three, in particular.

Terry Fields and Pat Lockett-Felder both have council experience after serving eight years apiece. Fields served District 7 from 1991-99 before being elected to the Florida House of Representatives.

When he left, Lockett-Felder was elected to the district and served from 1999-2007.

Now, the two are squaring off to succeed term-limited Denise Lee in District 8.

Fields said Friday he has spent most of his adult life in public service and "loves" the role. A return to council would mean he can push for economic development and Downtown revitalization, he said.

"I still believe there is so much to do," he said. "I'd like to continue that work."

Lockett-Felder did not return a call for comment.

The two are among five candidates running for the office.

Elsewhere, Glorious Johnson is seeking a return to council after four years away. She's trying to replace term-limited Warren Jones in District 9.

Johnson previously served At-Large Group 5 from 2003-11. A call seeking comment was not returned.

If elected, Fields or Lockett-Felder along with Johnson would be serving their third term.

Others are again trying for their first after coming up short in 2011.

Trying another time

Danny Becton is a Southside guy looking to lead what will be a Southside-only district starting in 2015.

In 2011, when what will be District 11 contained the Beaches, Becton came up short against Gulliford.

This time, he said he thinks he's more prepared.

"It never hurts to have done this before," Becton said. "That was the first toe in the water for a process of which I was a novice. ... I didn't like it (the results) but always learned to take a negative and turn it into a positive, and that's what I have done."

After the defeat, Becton said he helped lead a group that pushed for changes when council went through a once-a-decade redistricting plan in 2011.

He also became more involved in organizations within the area and learned the leadership of the city, all with an eye toward 2015 and the possibility of becoming the first representative of the new district.

"I wouldn't be here if I hadn't done this three years ago," he said.

Lindsey Brock was another who came up short in 2011, falling to Clay Yarborough in District 1 in a runoff. He's trying again for 2015, this time in a reshaped District 2 for an open seat.

"I still believe Jacksonville needs solution-based leadership. That's why I ran last time," Brock said.

District 2 now crosses the St. Johns River, but Brock said he doesn't think the reconfiguration changes much in his goal — he has ties to the Northside and the Fort Caroline area, where he lives.

An attorney with a master's degree in maritime law, Brock also said having Blount Island in the newly shaped district will be key for growth and development.

He said he learned during his 2011 run that "there are a lot of good people in Jacksonville that care about their city and neighborhood." Now, he said he wants to tap into that passion for his current run.

Like Brock, Marc McCullough will not have to worry about an incumbent this time around.

He was the lone challenger against then-incumbent Johnny Gaffney in 2011, who won by a 72-28 percent margin. Gaffney is term-limited.

Though there is no sitting council member, McCullough will have challengers — District 7 has seven candidates, the most of any council race.

Filling blank chapters

The term "early" was a common refrain from many candidates about fundraising or even the races themselves.

Lumb said he knows of at least another 10 people who are "very serious" about making a run.

Boyer said seats across the county could have more candidates as interest groups, such as those pushing for a human rights ordinance or tax decreases, are recruiting candidates.

As the months unfold, more characters will enter, crowding some races. Other candidates will bow out.

The story of early 2014 won't be the same as early 2015 — but many of those in now will be a part of the tale.

dchapman@baileypub.com

[Cheshire Cat]

As indicated in the article above, there are some new names vying for political office and some old ones as well.  While we think about the political atmosphere we most desire after the next round of elections is finished we need to keep some important factors in mind. 

First if Mayor Alvin Brown is re-elected next time around, it will be more important than ever to have a clear thinking, strong and well organized city council in place.

Secondly, while passions will be inflamed behind various candidates, you individually as a registered voter will only be able to vote for one district council person and one person for the at large council seats.  So while many have impassioned views about who they like or don't like, the only concrete power you or any of us have in elections is your vote. 

I know the last elections cycle there was a lot of debate about individual candidates but to my view when it comes to this forum, special focus should be on District one and the at large seat that impacts downtown as well as District 7 and who holds that at large seat.  Something to remember is that many of those on the forum who are most passionate about town can personally vote for neither of the candidates that have the most impact there.  So my suggestion is that you thoroughly know your own district candidates and clear their opinions about downtown issues, Springfield etc and see where they stand.  Don't take anyone at their word, but rather look at their own records of employment, public service etc to see where they have come down on important issues in the past. Focus for everyone should be on the at large seats.  As far as my district 14, Jim Love will win that seat without a problem.  I know some don't like that but it is what it is. 

The dreamers, creators and lovers of Jacksonville often despise the very fact that everyone of their dreams and aspirations for downtown will in the end turn on who is in office and what our city finances are.  Too often it is about charisma and personalities as opposed to what the candidate brings to the table when it comes to skills and political capital.  Politics drives every aspect of revitalization and social impact in this town in some way.  That is a fact.  Get used to that reality.

Several seats have folks vying for positions who have held office before.  While the sentiment is often held that re-electing folks who have held office before is a bad idea, one should look at the record of that person before deciding who is the best candidate.  If their previous time in office has seen them supporting issues that are important to you weigh that in your decision making.

It's also important to understand who the voters are in the various districts when deciding who might get the most support when it comes to winning any particular seat.

Just some early thoughts on the process. 

[Cheshire Cat]

Rumors abound that more than one lobbyist is considering a run for council.  One name that comes up is Jim Catlett.  I have not confirmed that yet.  Not a fan of lobbyists on the council myself. 

[Cheshire Cat]

There is a very good chance that Kim Daniels will lose her seat in the next election.  That is going to be a heated race.  Her opponent businesswoman Anna Brosche is coming in with some sound financial backing.  My vote would be with Brosche.

Learn about her here.  http://voteannabrosche.com/

[Cheshire Cat]

Note for District 7 Voters.  Just say no to Pat-Lockett Felder.  Her past time in office was riddled with questions from everything to corruption to using tax dollars to put up a monument to herself.   I don't think that is what Springfield needs.  The one to beat in this race will be Terry Fields who has been immersed in local politics for decades.  He may not be the best candidate in the race however, but he will be the one to beat.  The ballot for this district is heavily loaded with names so it will be challenging to separate a viable worthwhile platform from one filled with promises and hype.   I don't envy District 7 that task.  I do however expect the number of candidates to drop over the next few months. 

[Charles Hunter]

CC, you can vote in the Kim Daniels race, it is At-Large, which means county-wide.  The "district" is only for where the candidates have to live. 

And a hearty "hear hear" on keeping Locket-Felder out of office again.

[Cheshire Cat]

So, perhaps I stand corrected on this Charles.  Are you saying everyone can vote in all of the district races or that my district falls within hers?  If so, you know what my vote will be. 

[Cheshire Cat]

From Wiki.  Now let me verify who votes the at large seats.  Stand by. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacksonville_City_Council

The Jacksonville City Council is composed of nineteen members who are elected for a four-year term and serve as part-time legislators. In May of each year, the Council elects a President and Vice President to serve one-year terms beginning the first of July.

The nineteen members are not all elected in the same manner; some are elected from districts, and others are elected at large. However, once elected, there is no distinction between council members elected at-large and from regular districts. Both have equal rights and responsibilities.

Regular districts[edit]
The city is divided into 14 districts; each of these districts elects a single council member who resides in the district. Like virtually all legislative districts at all levels in United States, these districts are redrawn every ten years following the decennial census. In Jacksonville, since reapportionment of the 1990s, four of these districts have been gerrymandered to increase the likelihood of electing an African-American council person.

At-large groups[edit]
In the early 1990s, voters approved an unusual residency requirement for "at-large" members. The county was divided into five special districts unrelated to any other districts, solely for the purpose of providing better representation for all geographical areas of Jacksonville. This was done because a trend had developed in which all five "at large" councilmembers actually resided in one small area of town. So under the current structure, at-large council members must reside in the special district for which they are running, but are elected by the voters of the county as a whole.

One at-large seat was vacated in 2007 because of a violation of this residency requirement; "Jay" Jabour was elected as the at-large councilman from the 2nd special district, but evidence later arose indicating that he actually lived in the 3rd special district. A judge subsequently invalidated the election, and the seat became vacant.[1]

[Tacachale]

Everyone votes in the at-large races. The candidates just have to live within the at-large districts so we don't get 5 people from Mandarin or whatever. You also vote for your own district councilperson.

[Cheshire Cat]

Thanks for the clarification Tacachale.  I truly suffered a brain blip on the at large voting criterion.  What confused in further is the fact that a map exists for at large districts showing the areas that the at large seats are supposedly attached to.  But you and Charles are both correct in that the maps simply point out where the candidate pools are located.  Here is the map.  http://www.coj.net/city-council/council-district-maps/redistricting-map-city-council-at-large.aspx