http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2012-01-25/story/city-looks-trim-4-million-new-duval-courthouse
Here we go, quibbling about chicken feed when the original multi=million price escalated from $190 million to over $350 million. Where were the gate watchers way back when? I see where they (judges) threw out a bone - agreeing that reusing the furniture from the old courthouse was a good idea. I'd like to have that contract to build or buy a big bucks conference table.
The powers that be can't even figure out how to get the jurors to the courthouse but the State Attorney has to have a covered walkway to cross the street. How did they deal with security and the weather in the old days?
Monroe St., the section between Hemming Plaza and the courthouse, should become a walking trail along with a dedicated 3 block trolley shuttle to bring City Hall, the Courthouse and the Skyway and the various patrons of both from outlying parking to work or duty. Someone could even open a restaurant or two to handle the lunch crowd.
If the poor thin-skinned attorneys are being threatened,why don't they do something about it rather than just report it to SA Corey?
She came across as desperate last night on Ch4 ::)
Oh yes. "Tax Payers..please fund this walkway for my safety...to protect me from YOU."
To be fair it's kind of arbitrary that the stuff that's getting cut now is just the stuff that happens to be last in the line. Its not necessaily the stuff that makes the least sense, it just happens to have been put off until the term of a mayor who's serious about financial discipline for the first time in eight years. I don't know that the bridge is such a bad idea (especially when compared to tossing out $60 million in completed work).
Its the way of building or manufacturing. If you nearing completion of a project and your overbudget or need to reduce the cost, you don't have a way-back machine, so you have to cut stuff in front of you.
^Yes, absolutely, and good on Brown and co. for finding savings. But it's not entirely fair to say things like the pedestrian bridge are bad or wasteful ideas; the true bad ideas and waste have already occurred.
Quote from: Ernest Street on January 26, 2012, 10:20:29 PM
If the poor thin-skinned attorneys are being threatened,why don't they do something about it rather than just report it to SA Corey?
I'm confused. What do you expect them to do about it? The state attorneys are not paid a fortune and have a job that puts them in the direct line of fire from some pretty dangerous felons. Its a job that's vital to our community. I see no problem in trying to protect them from the crooks they are trying to put away.
But back to the ridiculous statement you made. What do you expect them o do about it. They cannot arm themselves as weapons are not allowed in the court. You expect them to train as ninjas?
Where is security? They are witness's. Report threats to JSO. Get descriptions of your antagonist.
Quote from: Ernest Street on January 27, 2012, 12:25:46 PM
Where is security? They are witness's. Report threats to JSO. Get descriptions of your antagonist.
Threats? They are not concerned with threats. They are concerned with outright physical violence. And what witnesses are you talking about??? I'm talking about an assistant state attorney walking from their office to court to prosecute some scumbag.
Maybe i missed it, but i dont think that there's currently a rash of felon on state-attorney violence that needs to be corrected...by a walkway. Stated another way, there's no walkway to the courthouse now and the doorway isn't lined with bodies...its not like the SA's wear a nametag identifying themselves as such. Further, if we're going the throw-them-a-bone route, why not provide a walkway or comparable amenity to the public defenders, who not only operate as the last line of defense for our constitutional liberties (and, in fact, largely define those liberties by making them available to everyone regardless of income), but also do so for less compensation than the state-attorneys. Just sayin.
Rumblefish is right. These young prosecutors ARE threatened on a regular basis. Just google "prosecutor attacked" to see some of the stories. There is no outside security at the old or new courthouse and JSO has no funding for additional Bailiffs (and will be quite shorthanded at the new courthouse). I'm OK with having the public defender rent space in the old federal courthouse so they can use the walkway as well, but they have made no such request. (Less compensation than ASA's? Really?). The largest waste of our money has already occurred in building this monstrosity. I'm all for saving money but the SA is right on this one.
Quote from: Rumblefish on January 27, 2012, 12:06:52 PM
Quote from: Ernest Street on January 26, 2012, 10:20:29 PM
If the poor thin-skinned attorneys are being threatened,why don't they do something about it rather than just report it to SA Corey?
I'm confused. What do you expect them to do about it? The state attorneys are not paid a fortune and have a job that puts them in the direct line of fire from some pretty dangerous felons. Its a job that's vital to our community. I see no problem in trying to protect them from the crooks they are trying to put away.
But back to the ridiculous statement you made. What do you expect them o do about it. They cannot arm themselves as weapons are not allowed in the court. You expect them to train as ninjas?
Not to sound callous, but the removal of those in power from any interaction with those they have power over is the first step to the breakdown of a democracy. I'm against the bridge on general principle.
Quote from: NotNow on January 27, 2012, 05:11:50 PM
Rumblefish is right. These young prosecutors ARE threatened on a regular basis. Just google "prosecutor attacked" to see some of the stories. There is no outside security at the old or new courthouse and JSO has no funding for additional Bailiffs (and will be quite shorthanded at the new courthouse). I'm OK with having the public defender rent space in the old federal courthouse so they can use the walkway as well, but they have made no such request. (Less compensation than ASA's? Really?). The largest waste of our money has already occurred in building this monstrosity. I'm all for saving money but the SA is right on this one.
You can google just about any word and "got shot" and get more results. Google "redneck gets shot" as an example.
They, like you, knew the risks when they took the job. They're free to work elsewhere if they don't accept the risk.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on January 29, 2012, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: NotNow on January 27, 2012, 05:11:50 PM
Rumblefish is right. These young prosecutors ARE threatened on a regular basis. Just google "prosecutor attacked" to see some of the stories. There is no outside security at the old or new courthouse and JSO has no funding for additional Bailiffs (and will be quite shorthanded at the new courthouse). I'm OK with having the public defender rent space in the old federal courthouse so they can use the walkway as well, but they have made no such request. (Less compensation than ASA's? Really?). The largest waste of our money has already occurred in building this monstrosity. I'm all for saving money but the SA is right on this one.
You can google just about any word and "got shot" and get more results. Google "redneck gets shot" as an example.
They, like you, knew the risks when they took the job. They're free to work elsewhere if they don't accept the risk.
As in any occupation, mitigating the known risk is the responsibility of administrators and all employees. We don't make those in manufacturing work without safety devices or have haz mat workers operate without personal protective equipment. "They knew the risks when they took the job" is an irresponsible and insensitive statement.
I try not to make these conversations personal. But you guys like to drag my occupation into it. Yes, I have known the risk both in the military and police work. That only intensified my efforts to insure that my equipment and tactics and those of the people I was/am responsible for were the best that I could possibly provide. There are certainly lots of ways that the government can save money. The safety of our employees is not where we want to go on the cheap.
Quote from: NotNow on January 29, 2012, 01:19:54 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on January 29, 2012, 10:52:35 AM
Quote from: NotNow on January 27, 2012, 05:11:50 PM
Rumblefish is right. These young prosecutors ARE threatened on a regular basis. Just google "prosecutor attacked" to see some of the stories. There is no outside security at the old or new courthouse and JSO has no funding for additional Bailiffs (and will be quite shorthanded at the new courthouse). I'm OK with having the public defender rent space in the old federal courthouse so they can use the walkway as well, but they have made no such request. (Less compensation than ASA's? Really?). The largest waste of our money has already occurred in building this monstrosity. I'm all for saving money but the SA is right on this one.
You can google just about any word and "got shot" and get more results. Google "redneck gets shot" as an example.
They, like you, knew the risks when they took the job. They're free to work elsewhere if they don't accept the risk.
As in any occupation, mitigating the known risk is the responsibility of administrators and all employees. We don't make those in manufacturing work without safety devices or have haz mat workers operate without personal protective equipment. "They knew the risks when they took the job" is an irresponsible and insensitive statement.
I try not to make these conversations personal. But you guys like to drag my occupation into it. Yes, I have known the risk both in the military and police work. That only intensified my efforts to insure that my equipment and tactics and those of the people I was/am responsible for were the best that I could possibly provide. There are certainly lots of ways that the government can save money. The safety of our employees is not where we want to go on the cheap.
There's quite a difference between giving police the equipment necessary to perform their jobs, and spending millions of dollars so that a mid-level local official isn't forced to *gasp* use a public street, isn't there? Really kind of apples and oranges. And what a terrible precedent. If she actually gets away with it, then we'll have proof positive that you can justify literally anything, no matter how asinine, by playing up vague "safety" concerns while being plain old pushy.
I've been in the courtroom more than a few times when a defendant has "vaguely" threatened a young ASA with their life. It is a valid concern. The "terrible precedent" is a $400M county courthouse. The walkway would cost under a million, and I'll just agree to disagree...again.
Quote from: NotNow on January 29, 2012, 03:34:45 PM
I've been in the courtroom more than a few times when a defendant has "vaguely" threatened a young ASA with their life. It is a valid concern. The "terrible precedent" is a $400M county courthouse. The walkway would cost under a million, and I'll just agree to disagree...again.
People spout off, it's human nature. At me too. Where's my million-dollar bridge? I wanna feel like a Medici too!
FWIW, if you're going to spend the money on anything, then spend it on extra security for the family division judges and attorneys. Aside from the shooting in Atlanta years ago, pretty much every time you read about someone going berserk and shooting a judge or a lawyer, it's a domestic case. That's where the real whackos are. I don't do family law, so I wouldn't benefit from it one way or the other. Just saying, the stupid sky bridge for Angela Corey is unnecessary. You cops face 1000X more danger, we resolve that by giving you vests and guns. Although, admittedly, I do think your little air-force and the tank is a bit over the top. But this bridge is just absurd.
The price is grossly disproportionate to the minimal level of risk, the money could be much better spent.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on January 29, 2012, 04:10:06 PM
FWIW, if you're going to spend the money on anything, then spend it on extra security for the family division judges and attorneys. Aside from the shooting in Atlanta years ago, pretty much every time you read about someone going berserk and shooting a judge or a lawyer, it's a domestic case. That's where the real whackos are. I don't do family law, so I wouldn't benefit from it one way or the other. Just saying, the stupid sky bridge for Angela Corey is unnecessary. You cops face 1000X more danger, we resolve that by giving you vests and guns. Although, admittedly, I do think your little air-force and the tank is a bit over the top. But this bridge is just absurd.
Truer words have not been spoken. My mother, aunt, uncle, cousin, and sister are all do family law in Jax. Their clients, bar none, are the craziest people I've ever come across. Once the state starts 'messing' with families, kids, child support, husband/wife disputes, things go a bit wild.
As for criminal law (I've worked on that side too), I highly, and I mean HIGHLY doubt the State Attorney's need the protection Corey is requesting. Borderline laughable. Only in a Scott Turow novel would someone actually be going after a SA. Furthermore, I love how Corey says she needs to walkway for "Transporting evidence"...LOL...the biggest problem with transporting evidence doesn't come from whacko rogue thieves or criminal defendants, but the attorney's themselves.
If we give her a covered walkway to stay safe, do we also have to give her an armored car to get home?
so the state attorney needs a bridge to connect the buildings, but the Public Defender attonryes have no significant concerns walking several blocks from their building....Angela, please explain
Um...prosecutors try to put the criminals in jail, PD's try to keep them out. The criminals don't like the ones who are trying to put them away. Ms. Corey can correct me if I have that wrong. (I tend to think of the criminals as "the real whackos", not the poor folks going through the pain of divorce.)
The enhanced security for the Judges has been built into the courthouse.
JSO doesn't own a "tank". It owns two armored vehicles. They have many uses in police work. As do helicopters. Both are proven tools in common use in police forces across the world.
and victims of crimes are often unhappy with defense attorneys who get "criminals" off
Thus the terms "criminals" and "victims". Look, I get that you guys don't want to provide this crossover. It is silly for me to have to argue that criminals are more dangerous than the rest of us. I have better things to do tonight than bicker over this.
Quote from: NotNow on January 29, 2012, 06:36:36 PM
Um...prosecutors try to put the criminals in jail, PD's try to keep them out. The criminals don't like the ones who are trying to put them away. Ms. Corey can correct me if I have that wrong. (I tend to think of the criminals as "the real whackos", not the poor folks going through the pain of divorce.)
The enhanced security for the Judges has been built into the courthouse.
JSO doesn't own a "tank". It owns two armored vehicles. They have many uses in police work. As do helicopters. Both are proven tools in common use in police forces across the world.
Call it what you wish, I think my point stands.
(http://www.firstcoastnews.com/slideshows/SWAT%20Callout%20Near%20Regency%20Square/SWAT%20callout%20on%20Holland%20Street%20near%20Regency%20Square%20(108).jpg)
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v101/He219/militaryphotosnet/17f36d6d.jpg)
(http://www.joinjso.com/images/police_big_03.jpg)
(http://www.patchgallery.com/main/albums/userpics/10001/normal_Jacksonville-Sheriffs-Office-Airhawk-Police-Aviation-Unit-Patch-Florida-Patches-FLSr.jpg)
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2642/4104914834_df92057256_z.jpg)
I mean, come on, this militarization of the police is already getting well out of hand. Now special $2mm bridges?
I'm sure it must be fun playing with your tanks and commandos, and your air force and navy to go along with it, but at some point for the rest of us who actually have to pay for this bullshit, it starts getting to be a bit much. And frankly, no, I don't feel a lick safer knowing that JSO could invade Panama if it wanted to. I just think its $&@?ing ridiculous and outrageous.
I'm surprised for someone with such strong feelings about the constitution and individual liberties, that you would be comfortable with this militarization of domestic police forces.
Armored vehicles, Jet Ranger helos, and Boston Whaler boats do not make for "militarization". Just because you do not understand the equipment and how it is used does not make that equipment "bullshit". Those of us in law enforcement and the State Attorney's Office are also taxpayers, and have just as much say as anyone else on this forum.
I'm surprised that someone with your education believes that the Constitution (we capitalize it where I come from) makes any reference to local or state police equipment. (It does not.) What individual liberties do you feel are being abridged by JSO being prepared to (as safely as possible) respond to barricaded and armed suspects, respond to waterborn incidents (in a county that has 145 square miles of water), and to search for lost persons, escapees or fugitives, and safely follow fleeing vehicles from the air?
By the way, the nice SWAT Sgt. in your picture is holding a less lethal weapon. The armored vehicle might allow SWAT to approach a rifle wielding suspect and incapacitate him/her so that suspect can live to see our nice, new $400M courthouse.
Well obviously there is no defending the courthouse, at $400mm. And that's AFTER they cut the budget and eliminated the dome that was bigger than the capitol. I am at the current one a lot and it's never overcrowded, I am unsure of why they couldn't renovate the current one. Well actually I think we all know why, they already had a convention center boondoggle in the works to enrich all the usual suspects. But that's a story for another time.
Anyway, with all that said, Angela Corey can make do without her private ponte vecchio. And I stand by what I said. The militarization of domestic police forces is out of control. Why can't you guys make do with, I dunno, maybe just one helicopter instead of three? You can't make do with just one tank? Excuse me, "armored personnel carriers." And my sincere heartfelt apologies that you have to suffer riding around in $100k boston whalers.
I mean, think of how much safer the children would be if you had this;
(http://www.allamericanblogger.com/wp-content/uploads/Battleship_USS_Iowa_firing_broadside.jpg)
King of the Hill made an episode about this nonsensical cyclical logic, "Bond Measure Ssssss"
I agree with you on the courthouse. I still support the walkway.
It is my understanding that the maintenance schedule and operational hours dictate the number of helicopters. The Patriot armored vehicle that you pictured was obtained cost free from the Air Force (the US one, not the JSO one) and is quite old. My understanding is that it is one of the few still running. The other armored vehicle was obtained at no cost to the city as well via Federal grant. The Boston Whalers were also obtained via grant and cost the taxpayers nothing.
Something that most citizens don't realize is that grant money and other income to the JSO is not shown on budget. All of that goes to the city general fund. The JSO budget then appears larger than it actually is because grant items are shown as expenses on the JSO budget. This is also true for a good bit of the overtime that is actually reimbursed by the feds. The money goes straight to the City, but shows as an expense on the JSO budget.
And I WOULD like the big guns, if you wouldn't mind paying the operating expenses. :)
We built the courthouse because the state required it. It had to be big because we're a big damn county and a big damn circuit. Case in point the Orange or Dade County courthouses. It got built the WAY it is because our previous mayor mismanaged the project catastrophically, and our current mayor is left to try and cut what little amount of costs he can manage.
In other words, the bridge was axed to save money out of Peyton's debacle, not because that one element is particularly wasteful or a bad idea in and of itself. Im not saying it's necessarily a good idea either - just that this is simply a cost cutting measure.
Until there is a cannon turret on the "tank", torpedos on the boat or an auto cannon mounted on the helo, then they can't be accused of being military. They're just transports carrying dudes somewhere they need to go.
I really wish an armored carrier was not ever necessary in Jax but when the barricaded bad guys have firearms (especially long guns) then that armor plating is worth it's weight in gold.
I did not see the tv blurb that is in question.... I am under the impression that one reason the bridge is desired is that it can also be used to transport witnesses in violent felony cases (often agg. domestic violence cases) back and forth from court in a safe and protected manner. Considering how hard it is to overcome the "stop snitching' attitude and peoples fears of revenge, it makes sense to me.
Quote from: stephendare on January 30, 2012, 08:08:18 AM
Quote from: AKIRA on January 30, 2012, 02:14:06 AM
Until there is a cannon turret on the "tank", torpedos on the boat or an auto cannon mounted on the helo, then they can't be accused of being military. They're just transports carrying dudes somewhere they need to go.
I really wish an armored carrier was not ever necessary in Jax but when the barricaded bad guys have firearms (especially long guns) then that armor plating is worth it's weight in gold.
I did not see the tv blurb that is in question.... I am under the impression that one reason the bridge is desired is that it can also be used to transport witnesses in violent felony cases (often agg. domestic violence cases) back and forth from court in a safe and protected manner. Considering how hard it is to overcome the "stop snitching' attitude and peoples fears of revenge, it makes sense to me.
So the revolutionary armies of George Washington weren't 'military'?
Or Alexander the Great's?
This is pure hogwash.
Cmon AKIRA... of course they can be "accused" of being military. It is up to us to decide if the accusation is valid... Hmmm...
Quote from: stephendare on January 30, 2012, 08:08:18 AM
Quote from: AKIRA on January 30, 2012, 02:14:06 AM
Until there is a cannon turret on the "tank", torpedos on the boat or an auto cannon mounted on the helo, then they can't be accused of being military. They're just transports carrying dudes somewhere they need to go.
I really wish an armored carrier was not ever necessary in Jax but when the barricaded bad guys have firearms (especially long guns) then that armor plating is worth it's weight in gold.
I did not see the tv blurb that is in question.... I am under the impression that one reason the bridge is desired is that it can also be used to transport witnesses in violent felony cases (often agg. domestic violence cases) back and forth from court in a safe and protected manner. Considering how hard it is to overcome the "stop snitching' attitude and peoples fears of revenge, it makes sense to me.
So the revolutionary armies of George Washington weren't 'military'?
Or Alexander the Great's?
This is pure hogwash.
Huh? Your statement makes no sense. Please explain.
Ok, you or anybody else can buy the exact same boat, helo, or armored car that the JSO uses. None of the vehicles are restricted to civilians. As AKIRA pointed out, they are not armed. There is no decision to make, these are not military vehicles.
Police tactics are also completely different from military tactics, and although SWAT Officers might appear "military" to the untrained eye, the mission, policies, procedures, and tactics of Police teams is completely different from military squads operating in war.
How absurd this thread has become...
Has sort of went off the rails
Quote from: ben says on January 30, 2012, 02:08:11 PM
How absurd this thread has become...
Has went off the rails hasn't it
BT, you are absolutely correct. My bad communication.