Lori Boyer's response about the Fee Reductionatorium vote

[JeffreyS]

I would like to start by thanking Councilwoman Boyer for getting back to me so quickly and thoughtfully. Her response and my original email follow.

Jeff,

Let me first say that I have not changed my mind and I do not believe that even a partial mobility waiver is necessary or desirable. I voted for the ultimate compromise bill because both proponents and opponents of the original bill testified that they were in support of the compromise and asked us to support it. As a practical matter, because the bill passed unanimously out of three committees Monday, it was apparent that my advocacy in opposition would not change the outcome, especially in light of the support from former opponents of the bill. At least it got reduced on the floor to 18 months from its effective date- no retroactivity and no 3 month ramp-up. I would have preferred to win the battle on its merits, but the Crescimbeni compromise and the support of ââ,¬Å"both sidesââ,¬Â made that impossible. I know I received several emails opposing the compromise bill, but there were only a few and no large turnout at public comment Tuesday, creating the appearance at least that most agreed with Mr. Skiles, Saylor, Tocknell, and Shaw.

You should take a look at the Monday video however and the question I raised. It may provide food for thought.


Lori N. Boyer
City Council Member, District 5
O 904.630.1382
lboyer@coj.net

From: Jeff Sutton
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 10:38 PM
To: Boyer, Lori
Subject: Your Vote

Councilwoman Boyer, why did you vote for the 18 month reduction schedule to the Mobility Fee?

Disclaimer: I will post any response on MetroJacksonville.com as a quote. Thank you.

Jeff Sutton

[Cheshire Cat]

I would like to start by thanking Councilwoman Boyer for getting back to me so quickly and thoughtfully. Her response and my original email follow.

Jeff,

Let me first say that I have not changed my mind and I do not believe that even a partial mobility waiver is necessary or desirable. I voted for the ultimate compromise bill because both proponents and opponents of the original bill testified that they were in support of the compromise and asked us to support it. As a practical matter, because the bill passed unanimously out of three committees Monday, it was apparent that my advocacy in opposition would not change the outcome, especially in light of the support from former opponents of the bill. At least it got reduced on the floor to 18 months from its effective date- no retroactivity and no 3 month ramp-up. I would have preferred to win the battle on its merits, but the Crescimbeni compromise and the support of ââ,¬Å"both sidesââ,¬Â made that impossible. I know I received several emails opposing the compromise bill, but there were only a few and no large turnout at public comment Tuesday, creating the appearance at least that most agreed with Mr. Skiles, Saylor, Tocknell, and Shaw.

You should take a look at the Monday video however and the question I raised. It may provide food for thought.


Lori N. Boyer
City Council Member, District 5
O 904.630.1382
lboyer@coj.net

From: Jeff Sutton
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 10:38 PM
To: Boyer, Lori
Subject: Your Vote

Councilwoman Boyer, why did you vote for the 18 month reduction schedule to the Mobility Fee?

Disclaimer: I will post any response on MetroJacksonville.com as a quote. Thank you.

Jeff Sutton

Glad she affirmed her position has not changed.  Her response seems right inline with what many of us thought may have been the reasoning behind her final vote.  Good of her to answer your query so quickly. 

[fieldafm]

One day, Lori Boyer deserves a monument like Tillie Fowler's.

I truly believe that.


She is also 100% correct about what the next options are.  That is one thing that the developers have NOT been able to prove, and I can assure you they are nervous about how this will play out. 

[tufsu1]

umm Stephen...I love Lori, but she is 1 vote our of 19....plus, in the end, she voted yes on the bill (that's called compromise).

and all I've said cfrom the beginning (reiterated by Doug, Field, Lake, and others) is that we had about 0% chance of the development communityu not getting something...so compromise was necessary....many of us thought it might be a sliding-scale for 3 years, so 18 months could be viewed as a small vistory

[strider]

In reading Lori's e-mail, one can't help notice that she was indeed looking for those masses of t-shirts saying "Power to the Mobility Fee!" OK, I'm sure someone better than I would have come up with a better T-shirt, but you get the point.  Everyone assumes it would have been one against 18 if we had but the fact of the matter is she didn't believe that.  She believed a better organized and vocal cry would have resulted in a few that I suspect she knew were on the fence to come on over and given us a chance.  At the very least, the fight seemed like it would have been worth it to her then.

Writing this e-mail at this point served her one purpose.  To let us know that if we do a better job next time, she can too.

[ChriswUfGator]

umm Stephen...I love Lori, but she is 1 vote our of 19....plus, in the end, she voted yes on the bill (that's called compromise).

and all I've said cfrom the beginning (reiterated by Doug, Field, Lake, and others) is that we had about 0% chance of the development communityu not getting something...so compromise was necessary....many of us thought it might be a sliding-scale for 3 years, so 18 months could be viewed as a small vistory

It's no victory at all. Surely you must see that in 18 months, they'll simply be back for another moratorium. I don't care if the compromise is better than whatever the worst doomsday scenario the armchair quarterbacks want to claim could have happened to make the 18 months somehow look better, the net result is that we've accomplished little or nothing besides kicking the can down the road for 18 months.

[JeffreyS]

They will be back in 9 months.

[Cheshire Cat]

Does anyone have a guesstimate idea of what we are talking will be lost during that period (18 mo's) in dollars?  I think that is an important thing to consider in this case and to take into account when deciding how to react to the outcome of this particular legislative tussle. 

The can may have been kicked down the road for 18 month's but a lot can be done in that amount of time to raise public awareness about the issue, organize and go after this bill again showing first that it is "not" about jobs and secondly making the public aware of the dollars that are going uncollected via this extension or further waivers for that matter.

Guys, this skirmish did not turn out the way everyone who opposed the bill would have liked but it was a single battle.  The war was not lost via this action so please put that thinking aside, buck up and move forward.  This is the way it goes when your fight legislation proposed by a group with the influence and power to lobby.

That old saying "it ain't over till it's over" comes to mind.  Don't feel defeated, just organize and plan your next step.  Perhaps Lori would be willing to put up another piece of legislation in a few month's that would change this.  With the right amount of support from you guys and some folks like Joost on the council changes can be made.  Don't let a bump in the road cause you to lose control.  Keep driving.

[thelakelander]

^No one has any idea of what the net result will be because it's already been factually proven that these things don't stimulate job growth.  All we really know is based off last year's giveaway and the easily identifiable projects already in the works (ex. 7-Eleven's national expansion, the rise in multifamily housing, etc.), the loss will be in the tens to hundreds of millions, depending on the return of the economy. 

We also know they'll come back with the same flawed data that they had last time.....that no one really believed.  However, political relationships played a stronger role in the council's decision than what was best for the community or making special interests prove that the last moratorium created true job growth. We have to be a stronger counterbalance to this.

In the case of the recent mobility fee issue the facts expressed by sites like this helped grow and energize the public opposition mounted, which is what ultimately got this thing down to a staggered 18 months instead of a free ride for 36 months (and free for eternity for some land speculation projects). Strategically speaking, it isn't really productive to go toss blame back and forth on what's already been done.  Every naysayer out there who's criticizing the few individuals who got pulled into this "compromise" had an opportunity to do more and be more effective themselves.  For those who think Metro Jacksonville should have done more, just remember, everyone participating in these forums, makes up the Metro Jacksonville community and anyone can post information on community issues just as easy as the couple of guys donating energy to keep the site up and running.

Nevertheless, the reality is this thing isn't over by a long shot. Council has already proven it's open to special interest at the expense of taxpayers.  From the mobility plan/fee to lease deals with the SOE, Metropolitan Parking Solutions and the Pension Fund, the precedence is established. We need to learn from this event and find ways to become a more formidable opponent, so when the next battle kicks in, we're better prepared.  In terms of battles, it's already been mentioned that there will be an election before this 18 month give-a-way ends.

[Cheshire Cat]

^No one has any idea of what the net result will be because it's already been factually proven that these things don't stimulate job growth.  The facts and the public opposition mounted as a response is what got this thing down to a staggered 18 months instead of a free ride for 36 months (and free for eternity for some land speculation projects). It isn't really productive to go back and forth or what's already been done.  This thing isn't over by a long shot.  We need to learn from this event and find ways to become a more formidable opponent, so when the next battle kicks in, we're better prepared.  In terms of battles, it's already been mentioned that there will be an election before this 18 month give-a-way ends.

Agree Ennis.  The only positive value in discussing this issue further is deciding how to move forward from this point and if this is battle that everyone wishes to continue.  I completely agree about the upcoming election period but would point out that it would be helpful if there was a decision going forward regarding to what degree politically the Metrojacksonville Forum leadership want's to involve itself when it comes to changing the Jacksonville power structure.  From my point of view it is one of the only ways to make the changes and create the growth that is often discussed on this board.  It's as if this latest skirmish is forcing the issue in a way. 

I know some suggested that those wishing to continue to stand up for better legislation and sensible city policies when it comes to planning and growth should start their own group.  The fact of the matter is that the Metrojacksonville site is what will allow an effort to succeed or fail.  You have grown to the point of having a broad reach and the ability to make public via blogging etc what is happening in city hall.  Trying to recreate the social media venue again in order to provide leverage in policy making would be an iffy challenge with no guaranty that it would draw enough engaged and informed individuals to make the difference required.

So the question I think is whether or not Metrojacksonville is poised to take the step into politics?

[thelakelander]

I was revising my post when you replied.  I'll say, I think there's a difference in discussing this issue verses focusing on passing the blame to other residents.

So the question I think is whether or not Metrojacksonville is poised to take the step into politics?

Depends on what that next step is.  I'm not sure this site as constructed should become a political organization.  However, this doesn't mean that many individuals participating here (leadership and others included) should not.  Should this media source (as currently configured) grow to provide more in depth coverage of local politics or take more effort in holding officials publicly accountable? Yes, that's something I do believe.  However, to do so, we've got to take a look at its financial structure and expansion possibilities because that requires more time then most of us are already donating.

[Cheshire Cat]

I was revising my post when you replied.  I'll say, I think there's a difference in discussing this issue verses focusing on passing the blame to other residents.

So the question I think is whether or not Metrojacksonville is poised to take the step into politics?

Depends on what that next step is.  I'm not sure this site as constructed should become a political organization.  However, this doesn't mean that many individuals participating here (leadership and others included) should not.  Should this media source (as currently configured) grow to provide more in depth coverage of local politics or take more effort in holding officials publicly accountable? Yes, that's something I do believe.  However, to do so, we've got to take a look at its financial structure and expansion possibilities because that requires more time then most of us are already donating.

Ennis:  I was revising my post when you replied.  I'll say, I think there's a difference in discussing this issue verses focusing on passing the blame to other resident

In a way there is and in another there isn't.  Let me explain what I mean by this.  If there are no clear parameters of who is expected to do what in a situation like the moratorium issue, where a group of folks (in this case for the most part linked through Metrojacksonville) come together to fight a legislative or other battle, it will generally end up with someone being disappointed as to how things were handled. It has to do with expectations which may differ from one person to the next. In this case many "assumptions" were made about who was responsible for what, which is often the case when a situation like this comes up.  For instance, in this case it seemed as if a good percentage on the members of council were understanding and in agreement with many of the facts presented opposed to a moratorium issue, only to see some unexpected fast maneuvers that changed things quickly.  Doug ended up being the de facto leader for those in the public who were opposing a moratorium extension and in many ways this site became the de facto social voice opposing the issue.  It is my guess there was never any real and formal consensus about what was to be considered a "win" in this case on the part of all those who opposed the extension.  For some it was completely ending the moratorium and for others it was finding a way to mitigate what was going to be the likely outcome in this case.  In any case at this point placing blame does nothing to change the outcome or foster the unity needed for a future win on this issue.

So in that way going forward it may be helpful for Metrojacksonville to decide where it want's to go when it comes to fighting for planning, growth and positive legislation supporting these things.  It can be done by sharing ideas and remaining hopeful that the powers that be listen to them and act or it can be a unified effort to address a series of issues by working to change the political landscape via the Metrojacksonville voice.

You are oh so correct about the time and effort expanding political involvement would mean to the principals of this site in tandem with the reality that politics can be a very divisive and often destructive issue.  It has been my experience that without real political inroads into city hall, getting things accomplished can be all the more difficult.  As has already been discussed, the people on the site and most of the posters have full time employment and their interest is one born of community spirit, responsibility and love of our city.  The folks at city hall from the position of mayor through council and city departments are paid to do what they do.  While all elected officials will claim their involvement is because they care, the reality is they "are being paid to care".   Simply put, it is their job. 

Citizens who step forward must work in their efforts around personal lives while using their own time and finances to take an issue forward in City Hall. Mind you they do all of this while paying the taxes that go toward paying elected officials who often ignore them once in office.  The same goes for the well established power players and structure in Jacksonville who can "pay" lobbyists to hammer officials for them with flattery, lunches and the potential financial favor and backing of their employers in future political endeavors.  Most citizens can't do this, so their voice and leverage needs to be coming from strength in another form.  In this case public awareness through media.

The difference that Metrojacksonville brings to this equation in my view has never before been felt in this city which is a group of people educated as to the issues of positive growth, history etc along with the powerful voice of social media and a well followed website.  That in and of itself presents a challenge to the status quo in this city never experienced quite this way before. 

[Ocklawaha]

They will be back in 9 months.

YES, and we'll be expected to cave again!

[Ocklawaha]

How do I see this Cheshire Cat?  First, I don't see it as "OVER", not in 18 months, 12 months, or today, there is a crack in the door that will allow both sides to push for "further adjustments," and you can bet they'll be leaning on the council and the council members purse strings to make things to happen in their favor.

Politically I think the next logical step is to educate the builders on the huge mistake they've made by throwing the streetcar out with the fee. I will be talking to the builders and should perhaps have a core group attend with me for Q AND A about the benefits of streetcar on their developments. We can also touch on Skyway and Commuter Rail, but NOTHING will move this city's real estate developers from old south suburban tracts, to high dollar urban properties like streetcars will. They (the builders) literally begged, borrowed, lobbied and paid to eliminate the Mobility Plan that stands to make many of them millionaires.

We need a short MJ film, or slide show, or Power Point presentation to explain the benefits of the Mobility Plans fixed mass transit projects. The numbers are strong enough that we don't need to sell it, merely expose it and I'm confident they'll realize the opportunity that is passing them by.

We also need to gather a small group and go talk to Mr. Khan. WE DON'T WANT TO ASK FOR MONEY, BUT HIS SUPPORT IN THE FORM OF A FEW PHONE CALLS OR A LETTER WOULD MOVE MOUNTAINS. Certainly Mr. Khan would immediately see the benefit of Everbank Field being accessible via, car, bus, BRT, streetcar, boat, rope cable cars and monorail. There isn't another stadium probably in the world that would come close to this.

Imagine world wide TV broadcast of Super Bowl LXXXI - live from JACKSONVILLE. "Wow, what a transit system! What an amazing city, I don't recall ever seeing a city sporting event with such a diverse network, this is simply incredible..." CHA-CHING!!!!!

[thelakelander]

In a way there is and in another there isn't.  Let me explain what I mean by this.  If there are no clear parameters of who is expected to do what in a situation like the moratorium issue, where a group of folks (in this case for the most part linked through Metrojacksonville) come together to fight a legislative or other battle, it will generally end up with someone being disappointed as to how things were handled. It has to do with expectations which may differ from one person to the next. In this case many "assumptions" were made about who was responsible for what, which is often the case when a situation like this comes up.

Unfortunately, making assumptions is always a bad way to operate. No matter the subject, operating off assumptions typically results in a disappointing ending for the person making the assumptions.  I agree that an organized advocacy group to help here.  However, when you're trying to rally everyone in the entire community at the last minute to fight things done in the dark, in the bowels of city hall, this can be a challenge. Ultimately, depending on the issue, we could be talking about multiple organized advocacy groups being needed. 

For instance, in this case it seemed as if a good percentage on the members of council were understanding and in agreement with many of the facts presented opposed to a moratorium issue, only to see some unexpected fast maneuvers that changed things quickly.

Personally speaking, from what I came up against, this was not the case.  From the start, you had one or two as solid no's, a few more desiring a "compromise" (reduced fee for a period lower than Clark's requested 36 months) and a slight majority that was yes to 36 months at all cost.  One of the councilmembers that I thought was a solid no (Crescimbeni) is the guy who ended up keeping the thing from dying during the first joint committee meeting and the one who came up with the "compromise."

Doug ended up being the de facto leader for those in the public who were opposing a moratorium extension and in many ways this site became the de facto social voice opposing the issue.

Truth is, someone from the BPAC contacted me via email when Clark's bill originally surfaced and asked me to utilize Metro Jacksonville to shed light on what was going on. There were also several other groups such as the Sierra Club, various CPAC leaders, etc. at the early table and involved dating back to last summer.  The Resident also had pretty good early coverage that I used for research. Personally, I attempted to utilize this site to keep our readers informed, get them engaged and to encourage additional media outlets (ex. FTU, Bix Journal, etc.) to follow suit. So in essence, MJ was a de facto leader for our followers but the grass roots effort was much larger, stringing together groups that don't necessarily follow MJ on a day-to-day basis.

It is my guess there was never any real and formal consensus about what was to be considered a "win" in this case on the part of all those who opposed the extension.  For some it was completely ending the moratorium and for others it was finding a way to mitigate what was going to be the likely outcome in this case.  In any case at this point placing blame does nothing to change the outcome or foster the unity needed for a future win on this issue.

There was nothing formal because there was no organized group fighting city hall.  Just a bunch of passionate residents from across the city and various organizations fighting for what they thought was right.  It just happened that Doug, Mike Saylor, and Steve Tocknell were the three Crescimbeni invited along with a couple of paid representatives from the other side to announce his alternative bill too.

So in that way going forward it may be helpful for Metrojacksonville to decide where it want's to go when it comes to fighting for planning, growth and positive legislation supporting these things.  It can be done by sharing ideas and remaining hopeful that the powers that be listen to them and act or it can be a unified effort to address a series of issues by working to change the political landscape via the Metrojacksonville voice.

Internally, I believe we've already decided we want to grow MJ as a hyper local media site and one that empowers individual residents to engage in tactical urbanism.  That is to utilize the site's reach to launch your own individual advocacy groups to improve the city without relying on city hall to make the first move.  Examples of this, include Preservation SOS, Jax Truckies, Transform Jax and individual advocacy efforts such as what Doug Skiles has been doing. By our nature of being a media site, we're not always going to have a seat at the table.  I've come up against this several times in the past on things I've advocated for, including this particular issue.  It's imperative that residents from all walks of life and professions get engaged and advocate within their various networks and working relationships.

So for anyone desiring a political entity to fight for certain issues, please don't sit on the couch and wait for the few people operating MJ to make the first move.  We simply don't have the manpower to take up every cause impacting the community head on.

You are oh so correct about the time and effort expanding political involvement would mean to the principals of this site in tandem with the reality that politics can be a very divisive and often destructive issue.  It has been my experience that without real political inroads into city hall, getting things accomplished can be all the more difficult.  As has already been discussed, the people on the site and most of the posters have full time employment and their interest is one born of community spirit, responsibility and love of our city.  The folks at city hall from the position of mayor through council and city departments are paid to do what they do.  While all elected officials will claim their involvement is because they care, the reality is they "are being paid to care".   Simply put, it is their job. 

Citizens who step forward must work in their efforts around personal lives while using their own time and finances to take an issue forward in City Hall. Mind you they do all of this while paying the taxes that go toward paying elected officials who often ignore them once in office.  The same goes for the well established power players and structure in Jacksonville who can "pay" lobbyists to hammer officials for them with flattery, lunches and the potential financial favor and backing of their employers in future political endeavors.  Most citizens can't do this, so their voice and leverage needs to be coming from strength in another form.  In this case public awareness through media.

To me, this is where MJ can become a stronger force and where the site's core focus should remain for the time being.  However, this doesn't mean that individuals involved with MJ can't form or be involved with a variety of advocacy groups.

The difference that Metrojacksonville brings to this equation in my view has never before been felt in this city which is a group of people educated as to the issues of positive growth, history etc along with the powerful voice of social media and a well followed website.  That in and of itself presents a challenge to the status quo in this city never experienced quite this way before.

I agree.  The community interacting here is one of the most knowledgeable I've ever engaged in my professional career.  I'm hoping that these discussions encourage more individual residents to fight for a better overall community.