Jacksonville's Future Needs Your Support
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2193139995_2mVvd39-M.jpg)
Where will you be on Monday, March 11, 2013 at 4:00pm when the Jacksonville City Council discussions placing a three year moratorium on the mobility fee to subsidize new development at your expense? If you're a struggling taxpayer who's had enough, City Hall will be a great place to visit. We don't claim to be Miss Cleo, but we have a feeling those who desire to increase their profit margins at your expense will be out the support the paid lobbyist that have been working behind closed doors on their behalf.
Full Article
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-mar-jacksonvilles-future-needs-your-support
Thank you for bringing the needed information to the fore and shedding light on the details as to exactly WHY each and every one of us who happen to care about improving where we live should make every effort to be in attendance March 11, 4pm, City Hall at St.James building on Hemming Park!
This moratorium is NOT helping to make our city a better, safer place to live, work, or play!
There is always a cost to conducting business, and there exists NO proof that the Mobility Plan is discouraging good healthy growth.
LET THE MOBILITY PLAN FUNCTION FOR AT LEAST 5-10 YEARS BEFORE RE-VISITING ANY IDEA OF A MORATORIUM.
So with the new jobs numbers out we can see that the construction added 48,000 jobs in Febuary about double what they did in January. This is an industry recovering on its own right now we don't have to race to the bottom and give away the farm here in Jacksonville. We are in a very advantageous situation with 7-Eleven happening to timeout a no compete clause so they are radically expanding in our area. We do not need to waste this growth. For a couple of good old boys with their hands out.
There's really no reason for us to give away the house. The economy appears to be coming back.
U.S. added 236,000 jobs in February, crushing analysts expectations
full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/03/08/us-added-236000-jobs-in-february.html
Except for this,
The state's "labor-force participation rate" â€" the percentage of working-age Floridians in a job or looking for one â€" has slipped from 64.2 percent in 2007 to 61.1 percent in 2010 and 60.2 percent in December 2012. Florida's average labor-force participation rate for all of 2012 was 60.4 percent, the lowest annual level since 1985.
The declining rate is important because it artificially amplifies progress on unemployment. With fewer people in the labor pool, it is mathematically easier to drive down the jobless rate. In Florida's case, the impact is significant, said Rollins College economist William Seyfried.
The unemployment rate fell from a high of 11.4 percent in February 2010 to 8 percent in December 2012. But if the labor-force participation rate had remained constant, December's jobless rate would have been more than 2 percentage points higher, Seyfried said
Quote from: thelakelander on March 08, 2013, 10:15:12 AM
There's really no reason for us to give away the house. The economy appears to be coming back.
I liked the stats posted yesterday for our area....I would use those as direct ammunition to the NEFBA argument
^What stats were those, tufsu1?
(http://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/jobs-by-sector-feb13.png?w=1024&h=1394)
Check out second from the top this is the market segment we have to pay extra taxes to subsidize??????
Quote from: bill on March 08, 2013, 10:43:09 AM
Except for this,
The state's "labor-force participation rate" â€" the percentage of working-age Floridians in a job or looking for one â€" has slipped from 64.2 percent in 2007 to 61.1 percent in 2010 and 60.2 percent in December 2012. Florida's average labor-force participation rate for all of 2012 was 60.4 percent, the lowest annual level since 1985.
The declining rate is important because it artificially amplifies progress on unemployment. With fewer people in the labor pool, it is mathematically easier to drive down the jobless rate. In Florida's case, the impact is significant, said Rollins College economist William Seyfried.
The unemployment rate fell from a high of 11.4 percent in February 2010 to 8 percent in December 2012. But if the labor-force participation rate had remained constant, December's jobless rate would have been more than 2 percentage points higher, Seyfried said
This requires more explanation. Why are people dropping out of the labor pool? What are they doing to survive and keep the lights on? Is a certain percentage going into small business for themselves? Is a certain percentage retooling their education to move into industries where job growth is predicted? Or are they moving to Hemming Plaza or under a bridge? Just wondering. In my case, I went into business for myself.
^In Florida it means they are retiring. Even if the jobs numbers aren't as good as they look certainly the construction segment seems to be almost booming. I like to look at the raw number of jobs added as opposed to rate. Remember Mitt Romeny's bold prediction on jobs was 12 million or 250k per month. It certainly looks as if Obama's second term will see those numbers and raise.
Quote from: thelakelander on March 08, 2013, 10:57:21 AM
^What stats were those, tufsu1?
the ones you posted yesterday in another thread
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/472000/roger-bull/2013-03-07/building-permits-continue-upswing
Thanks for the reminder. More single family home building permits have been issued this year (so far) than any since 2008.
QuoteAll four counties showed increases. The totals for Jan./Feb. 2013 and Jan./Feb. 2012:
Clay - 150, 64
Duval - 262, 151
Nassau - 50, 32
St. Johns - 379, 266
Quote from: JeffreyS on March 08, 2013, 11:21:26 AM
^In Florida it means they are retiring. Even if the jobs numbers aren't as good as they look certainly the construction segment seems to be almost booming. I like to look at the raw number of jobs added as opposed to rate. Remember Mitt Romeny's bold prediction on jobs was 12 million or 250k per month. It certainly looks as if Obama's second term will see those numbers and raise.
I would say that retirements are up nationwide. I saw an article (Federal Times, I think) that OPM has a huge backlog of pending federal retirements due to an unusually high number initiated in February.
The participation rate for the nation has not been this low for this long since the 1970s.
There was a backlog of people waiting to retire when the market crashed. Now that the market has literally gone through the roof we are clearing the backlog. Thus lowering the participation rate.
Indeed I agree with Bill- the U-3 is gamed to appear a lot better than the reality while the bigger picture(year over year) is one of continuing stagnation. By the unadjusted BLS data the broadest measure of unemployment(U-6) barely moved over the past year and sits at 15.4%. To give perspective there were only three years - the three worst years of the Great Depression - which had higher unemployment. You can see the numbers from Michael Darby on page three Table 1 in the link below for reference.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/meltzer/maremp93.pdf
It is almost a certainty that the economy is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. What is lost on almost all politicians and people in general is that there is no known historical precedent for growing out of the level of debt we have in the US. The most extreme example I know of was in the 1800s when the United Kingdom was able to grow out of a debt of around 260% of their GDP. (The Industrial Revolution helped) In our case if we include off balance sheet liabilities we're well over 500%. Pimco's Bill Gross believes that number to be much higher though I haven't found his numbers. I would also add that GDP is a lousy measure of growth since a large component is driven by debt. Thus at some point the US must face a restructuring. Some debt will need to be written off, some will be paid and a some of it will be inflated away. Debt never matters until it is the only thing that matters. It's an old tale.
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain
Best,
P
Quote from: bill on March 08, 2013, 10:43:09 AM
Except for this,
The state's "labor-force participation rate" â€" the percentage of working-age Floridians in a job or looking for one â€" has slipped from 64.2 percent in 2007 to 61.1 percent in 2010 and 60.2 percent in December 2012. Florida's average labor-force participation rate for all of 2012 was 60.4 percent, the lowest annual level since 1985.
The declining rate is important because it artificially amplifies progress on unemployment. With fewer people in the labor pool, it is mathematically easier to drive down the jobless rate. In Florida's case, the impact is significant, said Rollins College economist William Seyfried.
The unemployment rate fell from a high of 11.4 percent in February 2010 to 8 percent in December 2012. But if the labor-force participation rate had remained constant, December's jobless rate would have been more than 2 percentage points higher, Seyfried said
QuoteIt is almost a certainty that the economy is going to get a lot worse before it gets better. What is lost on almost all politicians and people in general is that there is no known historical precedent for growing out of the level of debt we have in the US.
Not to comment on what is going on at the federal government level.. but at the local level this is exactly why we should not place a moratorium on Mobility Fees. The banking fund (which is a cute word for 'debt') has already grown quite a bit over the last 4 years in order to fund transportation needs.
Additionally, ad valorum taxes simply DO NOT cover the cost of services needed in the future. The only local option outside of Mobility Fees to pay for current and future transportation needs would be to either take on bond debt (for example, the City took on almost $300 million for the infrastructure required to build a strip mall on the Northside- River City Marketplace, and the ad valorum revenue brought in doesnt even service the interest payments) or raise the general sales tax rate.
So in the absence of the revenue generated by Mobility, COJ will either ask voters to approve a sales tax increase or (MORE LIKELY) just keep whipping out the old credit card.
Is that what fiscal conservatism is all about? If so, I've been going by a completely different definition all these years.
Don't you think a $442k mobility fee on a 7-11 project valued at $500k seems a little odd?
There is no denying that adjustments can and should be made to how the fee is calculated. But that doesn't mean we have to throw out the entire system. The only way people will be motivated to fix it is if they have to pay it.
We had an entire year to evaluate these results, and nobody said anything until AFTER the moratorium expired.
Quote from: Overstreet on March 08, 2013, 04:07:10 PM
Don't you think a $442k mobility fee on a 7-11 project valued at $500k seems a little odd?
Yes. 7-11 cost a lot more than $500k to build. That's another ploy of the spreadsheet. It compares the full mobility fee with a portion of the true project's cost. For example, it lists the $950k job cost for McDonald's/Family Dollar on Market Street, which makes the $300k mobility fee look totally out of wack. However, the true cost of the McDonald's/Family Dollar project is $3.7 million.
Those who spend a lot of time in the industry can smell a rat when it pops up pretty easily. However, to the average person who doesn't know how much it actually costs to build some of these projects, the fee can look excessive. Yet, when you waive these guys from paying anything, it means the $2 billion Outer Beltway or $40 million overpass at Kernan & Atlantic comes out of your pocket. In the meantime, that pack of gummy bears at 7-11 is going to cost you the same regardless of if they pay a local impact fee or not.
Btw, with all of that said, that $442k mobility fee on 7-11 probably needs to be higher for them to cover their real cost on public infrastructure. Full fledged gas stations and drive thru fast food restaurants are some offenders of auto trip generation.
Quote from: Overstreet on March 08, 2013, 04:07:10 PM
Don't you think a $442k mobility fee on a 7-11 project valued at $500k seems a little odd?
I don't have the numbers on the Kernan 7-11 in front of me, but I can very vividly recall the cost of the Lane Ave 7-11 which was actually $1.3mm. The $500k job cost number is just a ploy to make the percentages look inflated by only counting a
portion of the cost. Most mobility fees for non-drive through businesses around 3-10% of the cost of the project. For a convenience store that generates quite a few auto trips, the fees are generally higher by design b/c the very nature of the store is one that generates a high number of quick auto trips. That's true in any locale in anytown, USA.
That $325k went to subsidize a store that generates an average annual payroll of $90k ($90,000!!!!). That money could have been used to fund needed transportation projects in a neighborhood (Riverside/Avondale) that has quite a bit of projects it SORELY needs AND to fund a street redesign in Murray Hill (where that same developer owns property) that could revitalize Edgewood Avenue in the same way King Street and Hendricks Ave have been revitalized in the last three years!
So, in the end your tax dollars subsidized minimum wage jobs for a company that identified North Florida as a (and this is a direct quote) 'high growth area' and who is aggressively expanding now that their non-compete with Gate has expired. Is it any surprise then, that the developer that signed the master area development agreement (that was being negotiated WELL before the Mobilty Plan was even on paper) with this multi-billion company is the one that has spearheaded this moratorium?
Should we subsidize a large multi-year development agreement for the SOLE reason to increase the developer's profits from 28% to 34% in the guise of 'creating jobs' which are nothing more than minimum wage service jobs in areas that may never collect enough ad valorum taxes (in yours or my lifetime) to cover the costs of the infrastructure needed to support these new parcels?
Quote from: dougskiles on March 08, 2013, 04:16:15 PM
There is no denying that adjustments can and should be made to how the fee is calculated. But that doesn't mean we have to throw out the entire system. The only way people will be motivated to fix it is if they have to pay it.
We had an entire year to evaluate these results, and nobody said anything until AFTER the moratorium expired.
Because that's how they work. They don't want it fixed. They want it gone. So they wait until the last minute and pull a fast one.
I'll be there.
I will be there.
Just heard First Coast Connect Rewind. Lake, your presentation/ interview was great. I love how you ended your defense by explaining there is facts that back up the MF and no facts (or find the facts) that state the contrary- also based on the rest of the country. The gentleman states that nobody understands capitalism. Right. I wonder if he knows the definition of special interest. Great for calling him on it!
I'll be there tonight too.
When profit is the sole driver, anything that impact this in a negative way is bad in the minds of the NEFBA. This town has been run, and in some cases ruined by the building industry for a long time.
They profit, and the citizens take it on the back for many years. By all means approve more houses without regard to infrastructure, schools, police, fire, traffic, and other things.
Not all development is bad, some is detrimental, some is good and others are irresponsible. This all reminds me of the Tree Ordinance years ago, that was never enforced, only to be re-written by developers with no teeth. The original was fine. The builders approved the Mobility fee, they need to live by it and be a responsible part of the community.