Support grows for possible cut to $247 million for Skyway conversion

[thelakelander]

A growing number of Jacksonville City Council members say it's time to reopen an agreement struck in 2021 that commits $247 million in local gas tax money for overhauling the downtown Skyway's elevated structure so self-driving transit shuttles can travel on it.

If a review of the agreement between the city and the Jacksonville Transportation Authority ends up shifting some or all of the $247 million to other purposes, it would deal a blow to expanding the NAVI system that started last year along east Bay Street and has been slow to attract passengers.

City Council member Rory Diamond said based on his talks with JTA board members and feedback from City Council members, he thinks JTA and the city would be willing to renegotiate the contract that can only be changed by mutual agreement.

"It's not going to be fun," Diamond said Aug. 21 during a meeting of the City Council Finance Committee. "It might get a little rodeo-crazy, but I think at the end of the day we'll have a better product than what we locked into from 2021."

The $247 million for converting the elevated Skyway structure so rubber-tired autonomous transit shuttles can run on it is the single biggest item in a list of 17 projects the city authorized JTA to carry out using proceeds from doubling the local gas tax.

The next-biggest item is $132 million for the Emerald Trail network that will connect neighborhoods with 30 miles of paths for walking and bicycling from downtown into surrounding areas.

Nat Ford's departure from JTA removes NAVI champion from debate
The JTA board intends to picks someone from within JTA this month to be interim CEO and then launch a national search for a permanent CEO.

Employees who applied by the Aug. 14 deadline for the interim CEO job are Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer Cleveland Ferguson, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Jeff Smith and Senior Vice President and Chief Infrastructure and Development Officer Greer Gillis.

Also applying are JTA administrator Richard Clark, who served on the Jacksonville City Council from 2005 to 2015, Controller Russell Caffey, and former chief financial officer Raj Srinath.

JTA could hire a permanent CEO by the end of the year replacing Ford who is moving on to become CEO of Dallas Area Rapid Transit.

Ford worked with then-mayor Lenny Curry and City Council in 2021 to forge a long list of more than $900 million of road, transit and drainage projects financed by the local gas tax. JTA initially sought $379 million to convert the Skyway for autonomous transit shuttles and also extend those shuttle routes into surrounding neighborhoods.

City Council reduced JTA's request by $132 million and put that money instead into construction of the Emerald Trail network, leaving $247 million for the Skway conversion in downtown.

Diamond, who voted against the local gas tax increase, said Ford's impending departure has opened the way to reconsidering the gas tax list. Ford was the driving force behind JTA becoming the first transit agency in the nation to have autonomous transit shuttles as part of its regular fare-paying system.

"I don't get any pleasure in saying this, but with Nat Ford leaving, there isn't a face to this anymore that people are afraid to criticize," Diamond said. "People like Nat. They didn't want to criticize him. They'd hope he was right about all this. Now that's he's leaving, they can see the facts for themselves without all the politics in the way."

Full article: https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2026/08/24/jacksonville-might-reopen-agreement-with-money-for-downtown-skyway/91407080007/

[jaxlongtimer]

^ First time I ever agreed with Rory Diamond on something important  .  His call out of the reluctance to criticize Nat Ford is spot on.  I hope the Mayor's office takes the hint and comes around too.  This project is radioactive for anyone left supporting it.  A no-brainer to drop it like a hot potato. 

Imagine what $247 million could do for the Emerald Trail and so many more deserving infrastructure projects.  We can't afford to blow those dollars on a boondoggle, certain-to-fail project like NAVI-Skyway that serves so few vs. endless numbers of projects that can serve so many.  Heck, a drop-in-the bucket sidewalk project on a busy street in a part of town without them would serve more people than the NAVI and the Skyway, combined.

[marcuscnelson]

I certainly understand the need to change tact on the U2C program, I've been a proponent of that myself.

That said, I am wary of the desires by some in how that might take shape. Regardless of the poor decisions made over the last 5 years, Jacksonville does need to invest in mass transit, and it would be many pounds foolish to do so through totally throwing out what it has already invested in.

I've ridden the Skyway recently, and people do ride it. More might if it were in better shape, especially with all the new development actively rising around it. NAVI, on the other hand, is clearly not so fortunate, and that was predicted by many beforehand.

As I've said before, it is probably possible to get the Skyway into a state of good repair for less than a quarter-billion dollars. JTA should make that investment, and put the difference into badly needed improvements to the bus system so many others depend on. There is already $132 million of the gas tax going into the Emerald Trail, and nothing should be taken from that, but I don't see a pressing need to add even more to it right now when there are other needs. There is money bursting from every seam for road projects which include sidewalk projects, and those sources should continue to be tapped before taking money for transit.

Per the TPO, over the next four years more than three billion dollars will be spent on transportation infrastructure in North Florida. Almost all of that is for road projects, with some for trails & sidewalks and even less for transit. The worst thing we can do right now is take a bad choice with U2C and punish even more people for it by leaving all transit out to dry.

[MakeDTjaxGre@tAgain]

The Jacksonville Song

Thought it was funny so figured Id share.

[jaxlongtimer]

I certainly understand the need to change tact on the U2C program, I've been a proponent of that myself.

That said, I am wary of the desires by some in how that might take shape. Regardless of the poor decisions made over the last 5 years, Jacksonville does need to invest in mass transit, and it would be many pounds foolish to do so through totally throwing out what it has already invested in.

I've ridden the Skyway recently, and people do ride it. More might if it were in better shape, especially with all the new development actively rising around it. NAVI, on the other hand, is clearly not so fortunate, and that was predicted by many beforehand.

As I've said before, it is probably possible to get the Skyway into a state of good repair for less than a quarter-billion dollars. JTA should make that investment, and put the difference into badly needed improvements to the bus system so many others depend on. There is already $132 million of the gas tax going into the Emerald Trail, and nothing should be taken from that, but I don't see a pressing need to add even more to it right now when there are other needs. There is money bursting from every seam for road projects which include sidewalk projects, and those sources should continue to be tapped before taking money for transit.

Per the TPO, over the next four years more than three billion dollars will be spent on transportation infrastructure in North Florida. Almost all of that is for road projects, with some for trails & sidewalks and even less for transit. The worst thing we can do right now is take a bad choice with U2C and punish even more people for it by leaving all transit out to dry.

A few comments to add:

I would rather see $247 million invested in the bus system and other mass transit solutions than the money-pit Skyway.  Why?  To serve far more riders/users than the Skyway ever will.  It's all about ROI.  If one can serve so many more with one or other solutions, why pour those limited funds in something that will serve many fewer.

Just because the existing Skyway represents an in-ground investment isn't a reason to save it, necessarily.  It is about comparing the continuing future investment ROI vs. that of other options.  I might add most entities would have fully, or near fully, depreciated, over the decades, the Skyway's original investment. Per IRS guidelines (which are usually far longer than actual lives) max depreciation lives are usually 39 years. So one can't say we haven't extracted full use from what is there now based on typical useful lives. 

To summarize, this needs to be a business decision and the Skyway is far down the list vs. other ways to better spend limited dollars.

As to the TPO, my experience is that most of the $3 billion cited will be spent on the interstates as that is their #1 priority/ranking.  Proportionally, not much will be left for other projects, especially trails and sidewalks, which, if done on any level, are likely to be along State roads.  Not City ones, which are usually the ones most in need of addressing.

[thelakelander]

I'd be interested to see the ROI. I would not be surprised if the Skyway (when maintained and running properly) has an equal or better ROI per passenger than most of JTA's bus routes. Back in 2015 or so, it was JTA's highest ridership route by far. I'm also interested in how one would determine what their definition is for ROI.

[jaxlongtimer]

I'd be interested to see the ROI. I would not be surprised if the Skyway (when maintained and running properly) has an equal or better ROI per passenger than most of JTA's bus routes. Back in 2015 or so, it was JTA's highest ridership route by far. I'm also interested in how one would determine what their definition is for ROI.

I would suggest an ROI should be net operating costs (revenue less maintenance, depreciation, labor, overhead, etc.) per passenger mile traveled of each system in its entirety. 

I would expect that $247 million would easily pay for first class infrastructure/investments supporting dozens or more properly operated/added/enhanced/expanded/affordable bus routes covering the entire county/region. 

In total, clearly, the bus system would carry far more passengers far more miles in an 800+ square mile county with a million residents/workers than the 1 or 2 mile Skyway in the core of a Downtown with a few thousand, at best, residents and workers.  Given the mismanagement (cancelled routes, no shows, unreliable schedules, reduced frequency, poor marketing, rising fares, poor routing, bus stops not fully upgraded, poor connections/transfer support, etc.) of the bus system, one could imagine proper improvements would multiply current ridership many times.

If any dollars are left, put it toward the Amtrak move Downtown and/or sidewalks/trails/bike paths and/or laying the groundwork for a rail system to the outlying areas and/or street cars that can reach into the surrounding urban core.  All of these would be projects that should rank way ahead of the Skyway that, after 4 decades of promises, hasn't come close to meeting any of them and will, forever, be a money pit (changing and proprietary technology holding us hostage, aging track and cars, declining stations, etc.).  It's comparable to Lucy moving the football every time Charlie Brown goes to kick it.  At some point, we need to concede that repeating the same thing isn't going to move the ball forward.

Here is a thought:  If the Skyway wasn't already there, could anyone justify building it today vs. other uses of mass transit dollars?  I know some here think its worth spending good money after bad to "save" the Skyway, but that's like investing in the Edsel.  Admit failure, eat it, and use limited resources to move on to something far better.

[marcuscnelson]

I'd be interested to see the ROI. I would not be surprised if the Skyway (when maintained and running properly) has an equal or better ROI per passenger than most of JTA's bus routes. Back in 2015 or so, it was JTA's highest ridership route by far. I'm also interested in how one would determine what their definition is for ROI.

I would suggest an ROI should be net operating costs (revenue less maintenance, depreciation, labor, overhead, etc.) per passenger mile traveled of each system in its entirety.

By this standard of determining ROI, basically any transportation infrastructure for people is deep in the red. Moving people is incredibly expensive, between both the cost of the infrastructure to move them at all (whether that's with a bus or train or them buying their own car) and then maintaining and rebuilding it over time. That's why the federal highway trust fund has been continually refilled from the general fund for decades now, and the state legislature constantly agrees to backfill the cost of building or rebuilding or expanding roads, and why we quietly accept the costs of highway patrols and parking spaces. Going off of that would also quickly conclude that things like the Ferry and Demand-Response services are bad values.

That's why transit ROI is meant to look at the bigger picture, of what that system can do for the region, especially while being at the heart of it. The Skyway is in that sense emblematic of the city abandoning Downtown in favor of the suburbs, and it should say something that it's only now we're finally getting a lot of growth Downtown where people would be able to use it and developments could be willing to take the chance on building true TOD just as JTA became obsessed with turning it into complete vaporware and half-abandoning it by neglect in the process.

I would expect that $247 million would easily pay for first class infrastructure/investments supporting dozens or more properly operated/added/enhanced/expanded/affordable bus routes covering the entire county/region. 

Like... what? I'm on the record noting the funding that's already come out of the LOGT for bus infrastructure, if you're suggesting dedicating even more funding to that I think there's got to be something you can point to using that for that wouldn't be blocked by FDOT and isn't already the Emerald Trail. And remember that this is one-time capital funding, it would do little good to attempt using it as a short-term shot in the arm for operations that then needs to be replaced by something else later.

Here is a thought:  If the Skyway wasn't already there, could anyone justify building it today vs. other uses of mass transit dollars?  I know some here think its worth spending good money after bad to "save" the Skyway, but that's like investing in the Edsel.  Admit failure, eat it, and use limited resources to move on to something far better.

Unfortunately, we don't get to work in vacuums when others have already worked in concrete. I think you'd certainly want to build it differently today (steel wheels over rubber tires like Vancouver) but the bigger reality is that it'd probably prove a tragedy to be unable to build a fully grade-separated transit system today in a state where that means your system will never be able to perform to its potential, because for reasons that are out of the direct decision-makers' control, private automobile traffic will be prioritized over transit as a matter of policy.

[jaxlongtimer]

I'd be interested to see the ROI. I would not be surprised if the Skyway (when maintained and running properly) has an equal or better ROI per passenger than most of JTA's bus routes. Back in 2015 or so, it was JTA's highest ridership route by far. I'm also interested in how one would determine what their definition is for ROI.

I would suggest an ROI should be net operating costs (revenue less maintenance, depreciation, labor, overhead, etc.) per passenger mile traveled of each system in its entirety.

By this standard of determining ROI, basically any transportation infrastructure for people is deep in the red. Moving people is incredibly expensive, between both the cost of the infrastructure to move them at all (whether that's with a bus or train or them buying their own car) and then maintaining and rebuilding it over time. That's why the federal highway trust fund has been continually refilled from the general fund for decades now, and the state legislature constantly agrees to backfill the cost of building or rebuilding or expanding roads, and why we quietly accept the costs of highway patrols and parking spaces. Going off of that would also quickly conclude that things like the Ferry and Demand-Response services are bad values.

That's why transit ROI is meant to look at the bigger picture, of what that system can do for the region, especially while being at the heart of it. The Skyway is in that sense emblematic of the city abandoning Downtown in favor of the suburbs, and it should say something that it's only now we're finally getting a lot of growth Downtown where people would be able to use it and developments could be willing to take the chance on building true TOD just as JTA became obsessed with turning it into complete vaporware and half-abandoning it by neglect in the process.

Marcus, you seem to be confusing my suggested ROI with actually making a profit.  Not so fast.  ROI can mean a lower net COSTS/LOSS per passenger mile than other options.  This is about relative bang for the buck, not making a profit.

Downtown growth supporting the Skyway and vice versa has been a 4 decade promise.  Sorry, I don't see that promise as coming to fruition anymore today, than before.  In my lifetime, I have actually seen the Skyway kill businesses Downtown and, in its beginning, the developer of the Sears block (Marriott/Omni/Enterprise Center) fought losing land to the Skyway back in the day.  I don't see the Pearl being dependent on it either.  Or the Four Seasons, Rivers Edge, Related or Brooklyn.  Developers seem fine moving forward without any promises of the Skyway being around in the future.  The Skyway is an inefficient people mover as it is and conflating it with the future or image of Downtown doesn't connect.  Most people I know think the Skyway is an example of the failures of our Downtown, not something to glorify it.  I don't think many in Jax would mourn its demise.

I would expect that $247 million would easily pay for first class infrastructure/investments supporting dozens or more properly operated/added/enhanced/expanded/affordable bus routes covering the entire county/region. 

Like... what? I'm on the record noting the funding that's already come out of the LOGT for bus infrastructure, if you're suggesting dedicating even more funding to that I think there's got to be something you can point to using that for that wouldn't be blocked by FDOT and isn't already the Emerald Trail. And remember that this is one-time capital funding, it would do little good to attempt using it as a short-term shot in the arm for operations that then needs to be replaced by something else later.

Why would FDOT block any use of the gas tax?  I agree this is for capex but I am suggesting that capex prioritization needs to be ranked based on usage and ongoing costs following the capex investment.  Using those metrics, the Skyway falls far short when ranked against other options.  I also allowed that if the bus system couldn't use all the funds, there were other projects more deserving than the Skyway for the balance. 

Your last quote about using it as a short-term shot in the arm that needs to be replaced later applies big time, and more than to anything else, to the Skyway!  Thanks for making my point here  .  Even JTA shows the Skyway would only benefit for another 10 or 12 years (if JTA can be trusted. Based on their record, it might not last for half that time!).  Not long or worthwhile for a 1/4 billion dollar investment given its history.

Here is a thought:  If the Skyway wasn't already there, could anyone justify building it today vs. other uses of mass transit dollars?  I know some here think its worth spending good money after bad to "save" the Skyway, but that's like investing in the Edsel.  Admit failure, eat it, and use limited resources to move on to something far better.

Unfortunately, we don't get to work in vacuums when others have already worked in concrete. I think you'd certainly want to build it differently today (steel wheels over rubber tires like Vancouver) but the bigger reality is that it'd probably prove a tragedy to be unable to build a fully grade-separated transit system today in a state where that means your system will never be able to perform to its potential, because for reasons that are out of the direct decision-makers' control, private automobile traffic will be prioritized over transit as a matter of policy.

I am not sure I follow your thinking here.  Working in a vacuum is ignoring the fact that the Skyway, no matter its configuration, is an inferior investment vs. many other options that are better.  What is the ratio of cities that are building new grade separated systems vs. ground level rail or other options?  I don't see a compelling need to be grade separated although I understand its appeal.  Jacksonville doesn't have anywhere near the street level congestion to justify this as a necessary option.

Any prioritization of autos over mass transit is a foundational issue that applies to all options.  It's not unique to the Skyway. I have noted before, if anything, the Skyway has given mass transit projects in Jacksonville a black eye.  It's contributing to this issue, not being hurt by it.

[thelakelander]

I know you hate the Skyway, in general, but the big black hole here is NAVI. These fake estimates and random overpriced alternatives, some completely unrealistic (like turning the Skyway into a pedestrian trail) are nothing more than attempts to keep NAVI alive. The Skyway/streetcar stuff is just a side piece that keeps NAVI from permanently having its head chopped off.

[marcuscnelson]

I am not sure I follow your thinking here.  Working in a vacuum is ignoring the fact that the Skyway, no matter its configuration, is an inferior investment vs. many other options that are better.  What is the ratio of cities that are building new grade separated systems vs. ground level rail or other options?  I don't see a compelling need to be grade separated although I understand its appeal.  Jacksonville doesn't have anywhere near the street level congestion to justify this as a necessary option.

Any prioritization of autos over mass transit is a foundational issue that applies to all options.  It's not unique to the Skyway. I have noted before, if anything, the Skyway has given mass transit projects in Jacksonville a black eye.  It's contributing to this issue, not being hurt by it.

Wait, is your contention here that it's not even clearly a good thing to have grade-separated transit? Seriously?

[Charles Hunter]

I can guarantee that FDOT would not allow a capital investment in transit - whether BRT or some form or in-street rail, to take over or remove an existing automobile lane. You will note that the existing BRT's exclusive bus lanes are [a.] not very long, and [b.] not very exclusive (only during certain hours, and probably not enforced even then). And, most are on city streets, not state roads - the only exception being along Kings Avenue (SR 5 / US 1) between Manning Street and the Kings Avenue Parking Garage (Nira St), about one-tenth mile.

Heck, FDOT gets really antsy when you talk about narrowing travel lanes to squeeze in a bike lane, or upgrade a minimal 4' bike lane to a Separated Bike Lane by adding a physical or painted buffer.

[jaxlongtimer]

I am not sure I follow your thinking here.  Working in a vacuum is ignoring the fact that the Skyway, no matter its configuration, is an inferior investment vs. many other options that are better.  What is the ratio of cities that are building new grade separated systems vs. ground level rail or other options?  I don't see a compelling need to be grade separated although I understand its appeal.  Jacksonville doesn't have anywhere near the street level congestion to justify this as a necessary option.

Any prioritization of autos over mass transit is a foundational issue that applies to all options.  It's not unique to the Skyway. I have noted before, if anything, the Skyway has given mass transit projects in Jacksonville a black eye.  It's contributing to this issue, not being hurt by it.

Wait, is your contention here that it's not even clearly a good thing to have grade-separated transit? Seriously?

Marcus, did you read my post?  I said I understand the appeal of grade separation.  Once again you are conflating my comments.  My point is that it is not a necessary or an appropriate solution for Downtown Jacksonville given its attributes and dynamics.  Please do not put words in my mouth.  Thank you.

I can guarantee that FDOT would not allow a capital investment in transit - whether BRT or some form or in-street rail, to take over or remove an existing automobile lane.

Charles, I did not specify the location of alternative projects.  I am fine with them being on City streets or elsewhere, if it is feasible and makes sense in other respects.  I note that FDOT seems to be OK with narrowing US 90/Beaver Street, a State road, around the Pearl development so not sure you can blanket that they never give up auto lanes.

I know you hate the Skyway, in general, but the big black hole here is NAVI. These fake estimates and random overpriced alternatives, some completely unrealistic (like turning the Skyway into a pedestrian trail) are nothing more than attempts to keep NAVI alive. The Skyway/streetcar stuff is just a side piece that keeps NAVI from permanently having its head chopped off.

Ennis, we agree: NAVI is a black hole (maybe even in the astronomical sense of the term, i.e. it is sucking up "matter" from everything around it ) and JTA is a grossly mismanaged agency with no credibility whatsoever under current management and with a rubber stamp board. 

As to the Skyway, I am just trying to pick the best option of those available.  No need to convert it to a trail if we tear it down or just let it sit there as an eyesore.  I just don't want to put more money in keeping it running when there are far better uses for such funds.

[Steve]

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2026/aug/27/jta-interim-ceo-everything-is-on-the-table-regarding-u2c-gas-tax-plans/

I still believe we need to look external at the leader here. That said, if this isn't just lip service, then it's a step in the right direction.

[thelakelander]

I can guarantee that FDOT would not allow a capital investment in transit - whether BRT or some form or in-street rail, to take over or remove an existing automobile lane. You will note that the existing BRT's exclusive bus lanes are [a.] not very long, and [b.] not very exclusive (only during certain hours, and probably not enforced even then). And, most are on city streets, not state roads - the only exception being along Kings Avenue (SR 5 / US 1) between Manning Street and the Kings Avenue Parking Garage (Nira St), about one-tenth mile.

Heck, FDOT gets really antsy when you talk about narrowing travel lanes to squeeze in a bike lane, or upgrade a minimal 4' bike lane to a Separated Bike Lane by adding a physical or painted buffer.

More reason to not take much of this stuff seriously locally. Years ago, I shared this with JTA and talked about the need for them to evaluate routes for dedicated lanes on local maintained streets. I feel that anyone in the industry that has done a limited amount of coordination or work with FDOT would know this.