Weinstein bill would halt impact fees; faces fire from local governments QuoteCities and counties would be barred from enacting transportation or school impact fees until mid-2015 under a measure filed Tuesday by a Jacksonville Republican.
Sponsored by Rep. Mike Weinstein, R-Jacksonville, the bill (HB 603) would prevent the levying of concurrency fees for roads and schools for development permitted before July 1, 2015 and completed before July 1 2016.
"I'm trying to help find ways to motivate potential projects and developments to get them off the starting line," said Weinstein, adding that he intends to get a Senate sponsor within the next several days.
Weinstein said the measure would help jump start a moribund construction sector and, spurring development during tough economic times, without completely taking control away from city and county officials. The bill allows local officials to override the moratorium by a two-thirds majority vote of the local governing body.
"If there is a project or a compelling need, local officials won't have their hands tied," Weinstein said. "It's a balanced approach to initiate development."
Representatives of local governments, however, say now is not the time, if ever, to further restrict the ability of cash strapped local cities and counties from using impact fees to pay for the infrastructure needed to accommodate growth.
"It is an egregious assault on home rule," said Cragin Mosteller, spokeswoman for the Florida Association of Counties.
Weinstein's measure is among a handful of proposals filed so far in an effort to reduce costs and permitting hurdles for developers - but also one of several that could cost local governments revenue.
Another measure (SB 760) would repeal the Local Business Tax Act, which gives cities and counties the ability to charge local companies for the right to do business in their communities. The repealer is sponsored by Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla.
Earlier this year, lawmakers passed a proposed constitutional amendment, HJR 381, which seeks to prohibit increases in assessed value when the market value of a property falls. If approved by voters, the measure would take effect in 2013.
The measure also caps increases on non-homestead property at 5 percent and provides additional benefits to first-time home buyers. State economists say the measure will cost local governments more than $500 million a year in lost revenue.
Weinstein's proposal comes less than six months after Gov. Rick Scott signed into law a growth management bill that gave local governments more discretion in how their communities develop. The bill (HB 7207) re-enacted portions of a previously approved growth management bill (SB 360) passed by lawmakers in 2009 that was until recently tied up in court.
The 349-page bill reduced state oversight on development approvals, giving cities and counties more control over development decisions and whether to charge developers for roads, parks and schools. Backers say the state will continue to maintain oversight over projects that have significant regional impacts.
Mosteller said Weinstein's bill appears to fly in the face of that earlier initiative.
"Earlier this year, lawmakers seemed to say that growth management was a local issue," Mosteller said. "So why would why you now tie their hands."
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/matt-dixon/2011-11-08/weinstein-bill-would-halt-impact-fees-faces-fire-local (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/matt-dixon/2011-11-08/weinstein-bill-would-halt-impact-fees-faces-fire-local)
What Weinstein is proposing is simply fiscally irresponsible. Especially since it appears that our economy is changing into a quality-of-life based one as opposed to growth. While Jacksonville has already temporarily rolled over on this, I'm confident that more progressive and influential municipalities in the State will fight to keep this from becoming a reality.
I sure hope hope so. And to think I supported his candidacy for Mayor several years back. SMH.
Is there a shortage of residential, commercial, or industrial space anywhere in Florida?
Unbelievable.
Creating a false demand for construction would be like deliberately poisoning the water supply so that hospitals can improve their bottom line.
It is no secret what groups are behind this. And unless we want to be forever controlled by them, people better start showing up to voice a more intelligent broad reaching point of view.
Cragin Mosteller (spokeswoman for the Florida Association of Counties) can be reached by email at:
cmosteller@fl-counties.com
or by phone at 850-922-4300.
We need to support their efforts. If anyone knows of other groups who will be organizing opposition to this bill, please post it for us.
Quote from: stephendare on November 09, 2011, 09:41:50 AM
Quote from: dougskiles on November 09, 2011, 09:38:20 AM
Unbelievable.
Creating a false demand for construction would be like deliberately poisoning the water supply so that hospitals can improve their bottom line.
It is no secret what groups are behind this. And unless we want to be forever controlled by them, people better start showing up to voice a more intelligent broad reaching point of view.
In some ways, Peyton was a bullet dodge as well. The problem with Mike is that he is totally smart enough to know better.
That's what makes this sooooo disgusting!
For Republicans, politics is just a game. They don't care about the consequences of their actions.
Faye, take the blinders off. Our entire government is one big game. Republican or democrat, they're all guilty.
If you ask me the state needs to butt out of local politics. I hope this guy's bill go nowhere fast.
Quote from: acme54321 on November 09, 2011, 05:57:59 PM
If you ask me the state needs to butt out of local politics. I hope this guy's bill go nowhere fast.
I can't think of a single legitimate reason the state has for getting involved in this.
The state legislators complain frequently about the Feds being too involved in state matters, yet they routinely overstep their bounds with local matters.
The End of Inevitable Growth has arrived.
No worries! Having realized decades old Growth dreams we now enjoy a population in the MILLIONS.If this is not Enough.....Then What??
The Most Important Citizen no longer The Next One.
Next compelling need,dream is to retain Recreation Lands present and backlogged needs,Working Ag,Timber and Ranch Lands,water resource,neighborhood and all manner Place under fire.
Onward.
Quote from: dougskiles on November 09, 2011, 06:37:37 PM
I can't think of a single legitimate reason the state has for getting involved in this.
I can think of about 5k-10k reasons that each representative probably gets for getting involved....
The part that I don't get is that in order for these developments to be profitable, they need to sell/lease the properties and with the saturation of both commercial & residential properties available, not to mention the uncertainness of both the commercial and residential markets..... I don't see why anyone would even propose to build any new projects.
Quote from: north miami on November 09, 2011, 08:02:56 PM
The End of Inevitable Growth has arrived.
No worries! Having realized decades old Growth dreams we now enjoy a population in the MILLIONS.If this is not Enough.....Then What??
The Most Important Citizen no longer The Next One.
Next compelling need,dream is to retain Recreation Lands present and backlogged needs,Working Ag,Timber and Ranch Lands,water resource,neighborhood and all manner Place under fire.
Onward OUTWARD.
I made one small adjustment to your quote. I hope you don't mind.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on November 09, 2011, 10:14:58 PM
The part that I don't get is that in order for these developments to be profitable, they need to sell/lease the properties and with the saturation of both commercial & residential properties available, not to mention the uncertainness of both the commercial and residential markets..... I don't see why anyone would even propose to build any new projects.
It is puzzling to me too. There must be a mindset of some that they have given up on their vacant buildings (and in some cases may have turned them back to the bank) and are looking for new opportunities. That kind of unsustainable attitude is largely to blame for the economic mess we are in.
Then you have the home building industry that only cares about swinging more hammers. It would be great if they spent more time training their members to do something different (like restoration or making buildings more energy efficient) instead of lobbying the government for more subsidies.
The major homebuilders have largely pulled out of Jacksonville. Toney Sleiman is now technically the largest developer left in this town and he is a sad excuse for a big city developer.
What will happen is that with the end of this impact fee, idiots trying to make a quick buck will put 100 homes/units here and 50 homes/units there and 30,000 SF of retail here and there, trying to make a quick buck. The only thing stopping them will be financing, but the banks around here haven't exactly been the smartest with their construction/commercial loans now have they?
Jacksonville continues to go the opposite route of Austin, Charlotte, and Nashville. By the way, those cities are all exploding with infill construction...more construction than pretty much any markets aside from NYC, Chicago, DC, and Boston.
If Jacksonville's real estate development game were run by more sophisticated people, we would not be in this quandary. There aren't very any Penn/MIT grads running the show in this city, to put it lightly. They would be more ambitious, more progressive, tied to higher levels of capital, more connected, and more sensitive to forming the direction of the city rather than putting a finger in the wind and guessing which direction the city is kind of headed. The last part is the ultimate difference between what separates the winners and the losers.
The mentality in Jacksonville with everything is always "redneck". I.E. pretty soon we'll be hearing how liberal and "business-unfriendly" Nashville and Charlotte are from folks in town. They'll be in the bad "big city" league. "We don't want to be like them." We'll look at the Asian car manufacturing plants who have gone to Alabama and think, "now they know exactly what they're doing."
What I don't understand is how developers can keep making something there is not a demand for. Developers are going to build houses if there is people looking for new houses. They are going to build if there is demand/ not build if there is not demand. At the time there is no demand (bad economy or whatever), so maybe we should not be building houses. The fee makes perfect sense and is appropriate. These politicians talk about balancing the budget, but turn down strategies such as the fee. Stop feeding me shit and calling it pudding!
believe me, there are plenty of developers around the state who think the same way and have much more power than Toney Sleiman
Weinstein isn't alone...check the recent history...look at Senators Bennett, J.D. Alexander, etc.
also check out the legislative platform of organizations like the Association of Florida Community Developers (AFCD)
QuoteCragin Mosteller (spokeswoman for the Florida Association of Counties) can be reached by email at:
cmosteller@fl-counties.com
or by phone at 850-922-4300.
We need to support their efforts. If anyone knows of other groups who will be organizing opposition to this bill, please post it for us
Agree 100%
QuoteToney Sleiman is now technically the largest developer left in this town and he is a sad excuse for a big city developer.
Technically second largest commercial developer, nothing to do with being a homebuilder.
QuoteThis has the unmistakable fingerprints of Toney Sleiman all over it.
He did not contribute to Mike's 2010 election(did in 2008, for $500 personally-no other Sleiman-owned subsidiries did, in the case of full disclosure). BUT, Weinstein gets a huge chunk of his campaing contributions from the real estate industry. His contribution list is a who's who in Florida real estate.
Perhaps we should be focusing on killing this deal(which is going to be hard considering the support he has) instead of pointing fingers, haphazardly I might add.
I am 100% against this bill, but the state legislature body largely isn't.
From Representative Weinstein's re-election website (he's up in 2012):
http://www.electmikeweinstein.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=55:despite-rough-spots-mike-weinstein-poised-to-win-2nd-florida-house-term&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=53 (http://www.electmikeweinstein.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=55:despite-rough-spots-mike-weinstein-poised-to-win-2nd-florida-house-term&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=53)
QuoteTwo Democrats have emerged to challenge Weinstein. Matt Brackett, who did graduate work in history and has run for other House seats, has formed a campaign committee. Larry Jones, an army veteran who currently works in the Duval County School District, has launched a campaign focusing on increased transparency, reforming the composition of water districts and restoring trade and magnet schools. Neither has done much in terms of fund-raising. Both had raised under $1,000 at the end of the first quarter of 2010.
I couldn't find anything about Matt Brackett, but Larry Jones has a website:
http://electlarryjones.com/ (http://electlarryjones.com/)
QuoteLarry is married with four children and a granddaughter. His is a middle class family that lives the issues and concerns facing Floridians every day.
Currently employed with the Duval County School Board as a Computer Specialist, Larry is a disabled Veteran, retired from 23 years of service in the Army and Army Reserves, including service in Desert Shield, Desert Storm, and Iraqi Freedom.
Whether it is the state of the economy, healthcare, or education, Larry understands the issues that face our families. If you are concerned about the military, technology, or the environment, then Larry is your candidate.
You can contact Larry at:
LarryJones@electlarryjones.com
Link to the HB 7207 "glitch" bill filed by Sen. Bennett
http://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2012/0842/BillText/Filed/PDF
It is time we focused some energy on getting a new legislature. 2012 will be a great year for 'House' cleaning.
Quotehowever, the impetus for the legislation (according to another source) was local.
It was(sort of), and it is wasn't the person you named. But pinning this down on one person GROSSLY underestimates the size and scope of support this bill has statewide. Every major person that has anything to do with real estate is standing behind this legislation.
Remember when Mike was a decent man?? How different would Jax be if Mike didn't sell his soul to get his state seat?? He used to be a family friend and we contributed heavily to his mayoral campaign. I doubt we'd toss him anything these days.
There are ripe development opportunities in town, but not in the areas that these guys will build. If you talk to any of the tens of thousands of 23-28 year olds in town, they all would love to live closer to the city center, but it doesn't meet their needs. They see it as only for the rich, lacking in ammentities, and unsafe. Affordable infill on the north and south banks and in the Brooklyn area would address all of these problems. Believe it or not most of them would not like to live on the southside, but it is the only part of town that addresses their needs. I have converted many people into moving to Riverside, but it still is not very well known and lacks some of the things that this age bracket requires.
For the record, I'm talking about multi-family rental development. For the younger generation there is more mobility and they are drawn to areas that address their basic social and daily needs. While the market may not be expanding in general, there are opportunities to draw from developments that are currently the best available, but inferior to a development more in line with the needs of the day. It's a zero sum game, but I'm fine with many of the developments off of Baymeadows and 9A failing.
As far as condo's go, we've got nothing. That housing stock is too overbuilt and lenders are too tight gripped.
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 10, 2011, 09:41:01 AM
Remember when Mike was a decent man?? How different would Jax be if Mike didn't sell his soul to get his state seat?? He used to be a family friend and we contributed heavily to his mayoral campaign. I doubt we'd toss him anything these days.
There are ripe development opportunities in town, but not in the areas that these guys will build. If you talk to any of the tens of thousands of 23-28 year olds in town, they all would love to live closer to the city center, but it doesn't meet their needs. They see it as only for the rich, lacking in ammentities, and unsafe. Affordable infill on the north and south banks and in the Brooklyn area would address all of these problems. Believe it or not most of them would not like to live on the southside, but it is the only part of town that addresses their needs. I have converted many people into moving to Riverside, but it still is not very well known and lacks some of the things that this age bracket requires.
That has been my experience as well. Unfortunately southside has been "infilling" with the kinds of things 20-something professionals who work there need more than the core has. But it will never offer the infrastructure, walkability, culture, and urban living that the core has, for all its faults. I sense these things are really what people of that bracket are looking for in a city of this size. Some of them just don't even seem to know there's an alternative to the southside in jax until you drag them out to the core.
And too many developers are even more blind to it.
The rental market is the only thing that is strong right now.
In fact, two major apartment complexes are going to be built this year locally... both would have been built with or without the mobility fee.
QuoteFor the younger generation there is more mobility and they are drawn to areas that address their basic social and daily needs. While the market may not be expanding in general, there are opportunities to draw from developments that are currently the best available, but inferior to a development more in line with the needs of the day. It's a zero sum game
I would heavily throw my weight in support of these statements.
QuoteSource was very specific. With lots of details. Toney plus five others locally, w/ toney leading the bandwagon.
We'll agree to disagree. My source (who I am currently staring at) paints a different picture.
Regardless, I think it will be very difficult to kill this moratorium. Which is interesting considering public opinion about growth management in this state(which heavily favors a position to NOT put a moratorium on such fees).
QuoteThat has been my experience as well. Unfortunately southside has been "infilling" with the kinds of things 20-something professionals who work there need more than the core has. But it will never offer the infrastructure, walkability, culture, and urban living that the core has, for all its faults. I sense these things are really what people of that bracket are looking for in a city of this size. Some of them just don't even seem to know there's an alternative to the southside in jax until you drag them out to the core.
Zoning needs to be altered to encourage high density infill on the Southside. It does not at the moment. For the record, I think the city as a whole will benefit if the Southside has more of the type of high-density infill like a Tapestry Park offers. Tapestry Park had to get so many PUDs it wasn't even funny.
One thing to consider, there will be three large developments in this area of town breaking ground this year. That money would have funded much-needed projects in this mobility zone(one of which would have been a multi-use bike/pedestrian path along Southside BLVD, similar to what Kernan has now).
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 10, 2011, 09:41:01 AM
Remember when Mike was a decent man?? How different would Jax be if Mike didn't sell his soul to get his state seat?? He used to be a family friend and we contributed heavily to his mayoral campaign. I doubt we'd toss him anything these days.
There are ripe development opportunities in town, but not in the areas that these guys will build. If you talk to any of the tens of thousands of 23-28 year olds in town, they all would love to live closer to the city center, but it doesn't meet their needs. They see it as only for the rich, lacking in ammentities, and unsafe. Affordable infill on the north and south banks and in the Brooklyn area would address all of these problems. Believe it or not most of them would not like to live on the southside, but it is the only part of town that addresses their needs. I have converted many people into moving to Riverside, but it still is not very well known and lacks some of the things that this age bracket requires.
I'm 34 but you just described my situation. When I came to town I wanted a row or townhouse in an area within walking or biking distance of the Northbank with good parks, schools (I have kids), etc. What I found was a core with limited in urban residential building types, price ranges, bad public schools, poorly maintained parks, horrible mass transit and a sleepy downtown environment. Basically, it lacked in the basic urban characteristics one would expect and I simply wasn't going to pay the asking prices/sf for what was available at the time and unfortunately ended up on the Southside.
Quote from: fieldafm on November 10, 2011, 10:09:48 AMZoning needs to be altered to encourage high density infill on the Southside. It does not at the moment. For the record, I think the city as a whole will benefit if the Southside has more of the type of high-density infill like a Tapestry Park offers. Tapestry Park had to get so many PUDs it wasn't even funny.
One thing to consider, there will be three large developments in this area of town breaking ground this year. That money would have funded much-needed projects in this mobility zone(one of which would have been a multi-use bike/pedestrian path along Southside BLVD, similar to what Kernan has now).
I agree 100%. I'm actually of the opinion that this area of the Southside would naturally densify if it were not for Jacksonville's autocentric zoning regulations. National trends favor new mixed use development such as Tapestry Park. However, in Jacksonville its much easily to put up something with a sprawling asphalt lot that's disconnected from adjacent developments than it is to do the opposite (which is what most prefer).
Quote from: stephendare on November 10, 2011, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: simms3 on November 10, 2011, 07:33:32 AM
The major homebuilders have largely pulled out of Jacksonville. Toney Sleiman is now technically the largest developer left in this town and he is a sad excuse for a big city developer.
What will happen is that with the end of this impact fee, idiots trying to make a quick buck will put 100 homes/units here and 50 homes/units there and 30,000 SF of retail here and there, trying to make a quick buck. The only thing stopping them will be financing, but the banks around here haven't exactly been the smartest with their construction/commercial loans now have they?
Jacksonville continues to go the opposite route of Austin, Charlotte, and Nashville. By the way, those cities are all exploding with infill construction...more construction than pretty much any markets aside from NYC, Chicago, DC, and Boston.
If Jacksonville's real estate development game were run by more sophisticated people, we would not be in this quandary. There aren't very any Penn/MIT grads running the show in this city, to put it lightly. They would be more ambitious, more progressive, tied to higher levels of capital, more connected, and more sensitive to forming the direction of the city rather than putting a finger in the wind and guessing which direction the city is kind of headed. The last part is the ultimate difference between what separates the winners and the losers.
The mentality in Jacksonville with everything is always "redneck". I.E. pretty soon we'll be hearing how liberal and "business-unfriendly" Nashville and Charlotte are from folks in town. They'll be in the bad "big city" league. "We don't want to be like them." We'll look at the Asian car manufacturing plants who have gone to Alabama and think, "now they know exactly what they're doing."
Simms, you were one of those people just two years ago.
What made you change your perceptions?
Huh? I was one of what people? I was in college 2 years ago and I am young so my perceptions change every day.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 10, 2011, 10:03:06 AM
Quote from: Captain Zissou on November 10, 2011, 09:41:01 AM
Remember when Mike was a decent man?? How different would Jax be if Mike didn't sell his soul to get his state seat?? He used to be a family friend and we contributed heavily to his mayoral campaign. I doubt we'd toss him anything these days.
There are ripe development opportunities in town, but not in the areas that these guys will build. If you talk to any of the tens of thousands of 23-28 year olds in town, they all would love to live closer to the city center, but it doesn't meet their needs. They see it as only for the rich, lacking in ammentities, and unsafe. Affordable infill on the north and south banks and in the Brooklyn area would address all of these problems. Believe it or not most of them would not like to live on the southside, but it is the only part of town that addresses their needs. I have converted many people into moving to Riverside, but it still is not very well known and lacks some of the things that this age bracket requires.
That has been my experience as well. Unfortunately southside has been "infilling" with the kinds of things 20-something professionals who work there need more than the core has. But it will never offer the infrastructure, walkability, culture, and urban living that the core has, for all its faults. I sense these things are really what people of that bracket are looking for in a city of this size. Some of them just don't even seem to know there's an alternative to the southside in jax until you drag them out to the core.
And too many developers are even more blind to it.
I agree. The area was built so hodgepodge. I live on Hodges and cannot stand how empty this area feels. Every neighborhood is so disconnected. If you walk or drive into one of these (developments) you are looked at like an outsider.
stephen, as much as I appreciate you pointing out how we might want to replace Mike Weinstein in a next election.............it's never going to happen for the following reason (see bolded quote):
Lead Letter: Who are the 99 percent?
Posted: November 13, 2011 - 12:08am | Updated: November 13, 2011 - 1:20amLetters from Readers
November 13, 2011 - 12:08am
If you set your alarm to awaken and commute to work, you are part of the 99 percent
If you made your children lunch, put them on a bus and wished them a great day at school, you are.
If you look at the bills piling up, while you work your fingers to the bone, and wonder who gets paid and who has to wait, you are.
If you worry about affording a college education, you are.
If you wonder what has happened to those who work hard, play by the rules, pay taxes and protect and provide for their love ones, you are.
If you truly think that the way to become the 1 percent is to vote the way they vote, then you are a chicken that befriends the colonel.
The 99 percent, the Occupy Wall Street crowd, is not about disorder, anarchy, class warfare, handouts, giveaways, assistance, rebel rousing, distraction, destruction or delusion.
It is about the human spirit, a kindness to others and a restoration of fairness and conscience to the American marketplace.
It is about self-preservation and compassion to one’s fellow man and the global neighborhood.
It is about working hard, pursuing the American dream and not being punished and hindered by a fraction so well connected, so well heeled, that enough is never enough.
It is not about battle lines and division of assets, it is about respect for all people and all those that are economically demoted because their income does not allow them to buy a voice.
When a significant percentage of people are removed from the democratic process because they can not afford to be heard, that their voice of reason is drowned out by the voice of money, then it is not about occupying a street but being heard.
When the nation’s highest court rules that a corporation is a person, then the system is indeed broken.
I will not believe that a corporation is a person until Texas executes one.
The 99 percent is the voice of every American who does not have the cash to be heard.
The 99 percent is you.
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/opinion/letters-readers/2011-11-13/story/lead-letter-who-are-99-percent#ixzz1dbYviYUs
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2011, 12:00:54 PM
that went right over my head, faye.
What do you mean?
Sorry, I didn't mean to be so cryptic. Just that most Republicans continue to vote party-line (in other words, with the 1%) no matter how destructive their candidate is.
QuoteIf you truly think that the way to become the 1 percent is to vote the way they vote, then you are a chicken that befriends the colonel.
And since the Republicans far outnumber the Democrats in Mike Weinstein's district, there is no way to remove him...............
Which is why 95% of incumbents get re-elected...........many like Mica spend relatively little campaign money, just roll it over to the next election...........since they are assured of blind support by having far more Republicans (who vote with the 1%) than Democrats in their districts, as well as independents generally being Republican friendly in this area.
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2011, 01:18:20 PM
I think the republicans are about to replay 1937 and be swept from power for another three generations.
Ah, you mean it's possible for me to step in and run against Weinstein? ;)
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2011, 01:18:20 PM
Quote from: FayeforCure on November 13, 2011, 01:11:58 PM
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2011, 12:00:54 PM
that went right over my head, faye.
What do you mean?
Sorry, I didn't mean to be so cryptic. Just that there are Republicans who continue to vote party-line (in other words, with the 1%) no matter how destructive their candidate is.
And since the Republicans far outnumber the Democrats in Mike Weinstein's district, there is no way to remove him...............
Which is why 95% of incumbents get re-elected...........many like Mica spend relatively little campaign money, just roll it over to the next election...........since they are assured of blind support by having far more Republicans (who vote with the 1%) than Democrats in their districts, as well as independents generally being Republican friendly in this area.
I think these next two election cycles are going to change that Faye.
The majority of the 99ers just ran out of unemployment money about a month ago.
First we need to get the Republicans to identify with the 99ers rather than be the foot soldiers for the 1%.
Maybe this video will help them understand how the 1% is screwing them too:
http://www.youtube.com/v/GVQPo62x3UI?
Quote from: stephendare on November 13, 2011, 03:18:07 PM
The environment is right for change.
I agree 100%. I have been a life long Republican and can't stomach any more of the garbage these guys are pushing. Although, I have to say, I am not too excited about the Dem's plans either right now.
But, if they (Democratic Party) made a serious push in NE Florida with some respectable candidates, I believe they would see some success. It's just that right now, we have very few choices. The last several elections I have pretty much been making decisions based on what I feel are the lesser of two evils.
Quote from: Bridges on November 09, 2011, 09:22:41 AM
Weinstein bill would halt impact fees; faces fire from local governments
QuoteCities and counties would be barred from enacting transportation or school impact fees until mid-2015 under a measure filed Tuesday by a Jacksonville Republican.
Sponsored by Rep. Mike Weinstein, R-Jacksonville, the bill (HB 603) would prevent the levying of concurrency fees for roads and schools for development permitted before July 1, 2015 and completed before July 1 2016.
"I'm trying to help find ways to motivate potential projects and developments to get them off the starting line," said Weinstein, adding that he intends to get a Senate sponsor within the next several days.
Weinstein said the measure would help jump start a moribund construction sector and, spurring development during tough economic times, without completely taking control away from city and county officials. The bill allows local officials to override the moratorium by a two-thirds majority vote of the local governing body.
"If there is a project or a compelling need, local officials won't have their hands tied," Weinstein said. "It's a balanced approach to initiate development."
Representatives of local governments, however, say now is not the time, if ever, to further restrict the ability of cash strapped local cities and counties from using impact fees to pay for the infrastructure needed to accommodate growth.
"It is an egregious assault on home rule," said Cragin Mosteller, spokeswoman for the Florida Association of Counties.
Weinstein's measure is among a handful of proposals filed so far in an effort to reduce costs and permitting hurdles for developers - but also one of several that could cost local governments revenue.
Another measure (SB 760) would repeal the Local Business Tax Act, which gives cities and counties the ability to charge local companies for the right to do business in their communities. The repealer is sponsored by Sen. Alan Hays, R-Umatilla.
Earlier this year, lawmakers passed a proposed constitutional amendment, HJR 381, which seeks to prohibit increases in assessed value when the market value of a property falls. If approved by voters, the measure would take effect in 2013.
The measure also caps increases on non-homestead property at 5 percent and provides additional benefits to first-time home buyers. State economists say the measure will cost local governments more than $500 million a year in lost revenue.
Weinstein's proposal comes less than six months after Gov. Rick Scott signed into law a growth management bill that gave local governments more discretion in how their communities develop. The bill (HB 7207) re-enacted portions of a previously approved growth management bill (SB 360) passed by lawmakers in 2009 that was until recently tied up in court.
The 349-page bill reduced state oversight on development approvals, giving cities and counties more control over development decisions and whether to charge developers for roads, parks and schools. Backers say the state will continue to maintain oversight over projects that have significant regional impacts.
Mosteller said Weinstein's bill appears to fly in the face of that earlier initiative.
"Earlier this year, lawmakers seemed to say that growth management was a local issue," Mosteller said. "So why would why you now tie their hands."
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/matt-dixon/2011-11-08/weinstein-bill-would-halt-impact-fees-faces-fire-local (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/403455/matt-dixon/2011-11-08/weinstein-bill-would-halt-impact-fees-faces-fire-local)
Isn't Weinstein the one who proposed a law that would stiffen penalites for aggression against JEA workers instead of passing a low on behalf of the consumer, such as putting a cap on how much JEA can charge?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think JEA workers should be assaulted just for doing their jobs. There should be charges filed against hostile customers, but to treat utility workers like police, fire and rescue, NO! They aren't heroes, they're drones for an evil empire doing evil bittings. Protect the consumer first! We have no other choice but to deal with JEA, Work for us instead!
And if he is that same guy, let's get rid of him during the next election!