Mayor Lenny Curry, the "fiscal conservative" is poised to walk hand and hand with Khan on this idea. I am not surprised at any level. The question is why do we keep funneling millions upon millions into this stadium? I am not down with this at all.
(http://i.imgur.com/rgYPkU4.jpg)
The Jacksonville Jaguars and Mayor Lenny Curry want to move forward with an ambitious makeover to EverBank Field that includes building an amphitheater next to the stadium — and calls for taxpayers to cover half of the $90 million cost.
The plan is outlined in a proposed agreement that Curry introduced late Wednesday to the City Council.
Few details about the amphitheater were included in the agreement.
For full story click link to Times Union article.
http://jacksonville.com/news/2015-11-05/story/amphitheater-part-proposed-90-million-improvement-plan-everbank-field-city
Do we really need three threads about this?
Additionally, as the article makes clear, not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
...not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
That apparently will duplicate the multi-use practice facility and amphitheater proposed for the Shipyards.
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:02:08 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
...not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
That apparently will duplicate the multi-use practice facility and amphitheater proposed for the Shipyards.
As was already explained in one of the two other threads on this same story, it's not likely that they'll pursue that project on top of this one.
I'm totally fine with this..so whatever...
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
Do we really need three threads about this?
Additionally, as the article makes clear, not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
My bad. I did not check for other threads on this topic after being away a while. Perhaps site moderators will merge the threads. :)
Same here - I do want to understand the economics of the Amphitheater, but aside from that I think this is great.
Quote from: Steve on November 05, 2015, 01:15:03 PM
Same here - I do want to understand the economics of the Amphitheater, but aside from that I think this is great.
Exacty Steve. This is why I am not down with the entire proposal at this point. Is this really the best use of these funds. I am not convinced until as you say we see the total package economics.
Personally I think the Amphitheater is the best part of the entire proposal. Given the size, it could draw a ton of great concerts to the core, some of which might have skipped Jax given the St. Augustine amphitheater. And please people, don't play dumb. If this proposal goes through, there won't be one at the Shipyards. Honestly, this one makes much more sense anyways.
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:02:08 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
...not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
That apparently will duplicate the multi-use practice facility and amphitheater proposed for the Shipyards.
Do you really believe there will be two practice facilities across the street from each other?
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:05:21 PM
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:02:08 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
...not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
That apparently will duplicate the multi-use practice facility and amphitheater proposed for the Shipyards.
As was already explained in one of the two other threads on this same story, it's not likely that they'll pursue that project on top of this one.
Uh, no, nothing was "explained". There was however, some speculation on some commenters part on why the same things that were proposed for the Shipyards were being proposed again for Everbank Field, but it was just that, speculation.
Quote from: copperfiend on November 05, 2015, 01:30:10 PM
Do you really believe there will be two practice facilities across the street from each other?
If you can get the taxpayers to foot the bill, why not?
I am pretty sure a month or so back when the Jags said they were going to build a practice facility at this particular site they said they were moving in that direction as they knew at that point with the contamination results back on the Shipyard site that would be too far off to wait.
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:31:37 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:05:21 PM
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:02:08 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 12:56:05 PM
...not all the money is for the stadium, but for a new practice multi-use practice facility and an amphitheater adjacent to the stadium.
That apparently will duplicate the multi-use practice facility and amphitheater proposed for the Shipyards.
As was already explained in one of the two other threads on this same story, it's not likely that they'll pursue that project on top of this one.
Uh, no, nothing was "explained". There was however, some speculation on some commenters part on why the same things that were proposed for the Shipyards were being proposed again for Everbank Field, but it was just that, speculation.
Connecting rather obvious dots isn't speculation.
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:33:46 PM
Quote from: copperfiend on November 05, 2015, 01:30:10 PM
Do you really believe there will be two practice facilities across the street from each other?
If you can get the taxpayers to foot the bill, why not?
So that is a yes?
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:33:46 PM
Quote from: copperfiend on November 05, 2015, 01:30:10 PM
Do you really believe there will be two practice facilities across the street from each other?
If you can get the taxpayers to foot the bill, why not?
Yes, this is the mindset that bothers me as well.
$45M for an amphitheater?! I'm sorry but that's crazy. You could subsidize the Barnnett and Laura St. Trio for that money and it would do so much more for the city. Also what about Met park? It's literally right there and hosts concerts often. Should it be upgraded and improved? Sure! But at least then it would be a public asset and not just another thing for Khan to make money off of. I like Khan and love the Jags but this is kinda crazy.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:37:01 PM
Connecting rather obvious dots isn't speculation.
That's exactly what it is:
"the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence"
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:52:53 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:37:01 PM
Connecting rather obvious dots isn't speculation.
That's exactly what it is:
"the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence"
The "firm evidence" part is what's throwing you.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:53:37 PM
The "firm evidence" part is what's throwing you.
On the contrary, it's what's throwing
you. Where is this firm evidence?
Quote from: UNFurbanist on November 05, 2015, 01:51:05 PM
$45M for an amphitheater?! I'm sorry but that's crazy. You could subsidize the Barnnett and Laura St. Trio for that money and it would do so much more for the city. Also what about Met park? It's literally right there and hosts concerts often. Should it be upgraded and improved? Sure! But at least then it would be a public asset and not just another thing for Khan to make money off of. I like Khan and love the Jags but this is kinda crazy.
This also crossed my mind. What is the best use of these funds economically and as it applies to the fabric of a vibrant downtown?
I think when a "new" idea comes up the ability to look at how it would impact existing efforts is lost in the rush to spend money. Lenny Curry is obviously enamored of sports, Shad Khan and the Jaguars which is fine except when one is supposed to be unbiased when making long term moves on behalf of "all" the citizens of Jacksonville. Khan invested in a sports team that continues to grow his personal fortune. He has invested little money beyond that in the city itself.
Quote from: UNFurbanist on November 05, 2015, 01:51:05 PM
$45M for an amphitheater?! I'm sorry but that's crazy. You could subsidize the Barnnett and Laura St. Trio for that money and it would do so much more for the city. Also what about Met park? It's literally right there and hosts concerts often. Should it be upgraded and improved? Sure! But at least then it would be a public asset and not just another thing for Khan to make money off of. I like Khan and love the Jags but this is kinda crazy.
I agree that it's absurd that the city seems to not have money for many worthwhile projects, but can shell out for this. However, on the other projects you don't have someone who can fork up the $45M (unencumbered and in cash) on the spot like Khan can. If Steve Atkins could throw down that much cash, I think the trio might already be under construction.
Does The City of jacksonville own EverBank Field? Does Khan lease it from CoJ?
This seems like a lot of money going inot a stadium that gets used by "the public" less than 15 days per year. Cannot see the amphitheater
being used much more than that as well, although you could tie in some concerts with some of the football games.
The Shipyards is DEAD. It is not going to happen as long as Lenny Curry is Mayor. He will never authorize he clean up, which is the Cities responsibility, so no one will be able to move forward on it.
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:54:56 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:53:37 PM
The "firm evidence" part is what's throwing you.
On the contrary, it's what's throwing you. Where is this firm evidence?
1. As I said, the city's CFO wasn't happy with Khan's Shipyards deal in large part because of the practice field and amphitheater elements.
2. Now Khan and the city are announcing a different practice field-and-amphitheater deal that apparently Sam *is* happy with.
3. It's the same two facilities in the same part of Downtown, right up the street
What is the more likely conclusion: (a) that the practice field/amphitheater project has shifted during the negotiations between Khan and the city, or (b) that Khan, after successfully negotiating the practice field/amphitheater deal with the city, would then continue to push for another practice field/amphitheater project that would make his own just-approved facilities redundant, and that the city has already said it doesn't like?
Quote from: UNFurbanist on November 05, 2015, 01:51:05 PM
$45M for an amphitheater?! I'm sorry but that's crazy. You could subsidize the Barnnett and Laura St. Trio for that money and it would do so much more for the city. Also what about Met park? It's literally right there and hosts concerts often. Should it be upgraded and improved? Sure! But at least then it would be a public asset and not just another thing for Khan to make money off of. I like Khan and love the Jags but this is kinda crazy.
That's a pretty decent cost for that type of facility. A good facility of that size in a good location is also one of the major amenities our city and metro area are missing. If they bring 50 or so events there a year, it would pay for itself pretty quickly, even minus the impact of thousands more people visiting Downtown. Metro Park is, unfortunately, not a competitive facility for events.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 02:19:00 PM
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:54:56 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:53:37 PM
The "firm evidence" part is what's throwing you.
On the contrary, it's what's throwing you. Where is this firm evidence?
1. As I said, the city's CFO wasn't happy with Khan's Shipyards deal in large part because of the practice field and amphitheater elements.
2. Now Khan and the city are announcing a different practice field-and-amphitheater deal that apparently Sam *is* happy with.
3. It's the same two facilities in the same part of Downtown, right up the street
What is the more likely conclusion: (a) that the practice field/amphitheater project has shifted during the negotiations between Khan and the city, or (b) that Khan, after successfully negotiating the practice field/amphitheater deal with the city, would then continue to push for another practice field/amphitheater project that would make his own just-approved facilities redundant, and that the city has already said it doesn't like?
Stop with the common sense. That usually is not part of a narrative!!
Quote from: MusicMan on November 05, 2015, 02:18:01 PM
Does The City of jacksonville own EverBank Field? Does Khan lease it from CoJ?
This seems like a lot of money going inot a stadium that gets used by "the public" less than 15 days per year. Cannot see the amphitheater
being used much more than that as well, although you could tie in some concerts with some of the football games.
The Shipyards is DEAD. It is not going to happen as long as Lenny Curry is Mayor. He will never authorize he clean up, which is the Cities responsibility, so no one will be able to move forward on it.
Yes the city owns Everbank Field. And yes the city would own the practice facility and amphitheater too.
Quote from: UNFurbanist on November 05, 2015, 01:51:05 PM
$45M for an amphitheater?! I'm sorry but that's crazy. You could subsidize the Barnnett and Laura St. Trio for that money and it would do so much more for the city.
Not from the targeted source of funds. You could apply the cash to something like a convention center, but not on the Barnett/Laura, etc.
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on November 05, 2015, 02:29:40 PM
Quote from: Rynjny on November 05, 2015, 01:06:01 PM
I'm totally fine with this..so whatever...
Then you deserve to be over-taxed and have your remaining income flushed down the toilet.
I personally do not think we are overtaxed in Jacksonville.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 05, 2015, 02:32:39 PM
Quote from: UNFurbanist on November 05, 2015, 01:51:05 PM
$45M for an amphitheater?! I'm sorry but that's crazy. You could subsidize the Barnnett and Laura St. Trio for that money and it would do so much more for the city.
Not from the targeted source of funds. You could apply the cash to something like a convention center, but not on the Barnett/Laura, etc.
Maybe we need to set up a funding mechanism for things like the trio..? Why doesn't the downtown TIF generate enough money to do a project or so like this every year?
Quote from: MusicMan on November 05, 2015, 02:18:01 PM
The Shipyards is DEAD. It is not going to happen as long as Lenny Curry is Mayor. He will never authorize he clean up, which is the Cities responsibility, so no one will be able to move forward on it.
Since when did the environmental cleanup of the Shipyards become a responsibility of the City?
Quote from: MEGATRON on November 05, 2015, 02:40:37 PM
Quote from: MusicMan on November 05, 2015, 02:18:01 PM
The Shipyards is DEAD. It is not going to happen as long as Lenny Curry is Mayor. He will never authorize he clean up, which is the Cities responsibility, so no one will be able to move forward on it.
Since when did the environmental cleanup of the Shipyards become a responsibility of the City?
Well the city owns it and it's basically unusable or sellable until it's cleaned up.
Quote from: acme54321 on November 05, 2015, 02:44:13 PM
Quote from: MEGATRON on November 05, 2015, 02:40:37 PM
Quote from: MusicMan on November 05, 2015, 02:18:01 PM
The Shipyards is DEAD. It is not going to happen as long as Lenny Curry is Mayor. He will never authorize he clean up, which is the Cities responsibility, so no one will be able to move forward on it.
Since when did the environmental cleanup of the Shipyards become a responsibility of the City?
Well the city owns it and it's basically unusable or sellable until it's cleaned up.
The City owns it only because the City foreclosed on the property. In that scenario, the City is not responsible for cleanup provided the City is trying to sell the property. A buyer will be responsible for the cleanup but that just gets factored into the purchase price.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 02:19:00 PM
What is the more likely conclusion: (a) that the practice field/amphitheater project has shifted during the negotiations between Khan and the city, or (b) that Khan, after successfully negotiating the practice field/amphitheater deal with the city, would then continue to push for another practice field/amphitheater project that would make his own just-approved facilities redundant, and that the city has already said it doesn't like?
Or (c) promise an "amenity" that looks pretty in the renderings as a ploy to get taxpayer funding whenever you present a proposal, no matter if it makes sense or how many times you've used it before.
Captain Zissou, according to a story on News4jax, The Laura Street Trio could be started as soon as December. Oh, and as far as this story goes, I'm one of the gullible idiots that thinks this is a win win situation. Replace the club section seating, add a flex space practice facility (one that looks cool too) and get a new usable (away from the complainers across the river) ampitheatre, and only pay half....good deal in my book.
Whoops, i meant to add the story.
Drones took to the sky Thursday to help perform inspections on the historic Barnett and Laura Street Trio buildings downtown.
Quick Clicks
FAA plans to require drone...
Drone rules homeowners need to know
Ceremonies, Mass honor 450th...
Corrections secretary getting...
July 27: Lonzie has right not to...
The data collected will help contractors with renovations and construction as new looks and uses for the sites are moving forward after years of talks about changes.
To keep their workers safe, Danis, a design and construction company, is using a drone for the building inspections.
VIDEO: Drone helps with inspections
"It gives a more efficient way, a safer way to perform inspections and gather information, which is a great asset to construction firms," Danis drone pilot Robert Mauro said.
The Southeast Group and Steve Atkins are making a huge investment, bringing the Barnett and the Laura Street Trio buildings back to life. They were constructed in the early 1900s, so much work will have to be put into their restoration.
"What I'm looking at is a large crack coming down the building," Mauro said. "The brick is falling away and deteriorating at a point, so this gives us a good idea of the extent of the damage."
For about three days Danis has been flying a drone around the Barnett and Bisbee buildings, and the company has uncovered some historical architectural features.
The drone was able to fly up all 18 floors of the Barnett Bank building, capturing what used to be the home of several business headquarters. The footage also shows the unique architecture outside the Laura Street Trio, which includes the Florida Life Building, the Bisbee Building and the Old Florida National Bank.
"There will be apartments. Ten or 11 floors are the current plan, finalized over the next few months. Commercial retail space and retail banking center occupying the first floor," Danis Vice President Tony Suttles said. "On the trio side will be Courtyard by Marriott, along with a couple restaurant spaces and a retail banking center."
The data collected by the drones will not only be used to spot damage but also to document history. The images will be sent to the Jacksonville Historic Preservation Society.
"Seeing how a lot of those details were accomplished and constructed because we have to recreate that, a lot of the terracotta details," Suttles said.
Danis is one of only a handful of construction companies with a commercial drone-use license from the Federal Aviation Administration. Suttles said the improving economy has helped move these projects along and residents can expect to see more revitalization downtown.
"I think there is momentum building downtown and these are going to be a huge catalyst to continue moving forward for other projects downtown," Suttles said.
Construction could begin as early December.
"Yes the city owns Everbank Field. And yes the city would own the practice facility and amphitheater too."
Yes, the city owns it but is unable to derive revenue from it. It's kind of like having to pay for upkeep and insurance on a house, but not being able to live in it or rent it out. All the pain, none of the gain.
Quote from: vicupstate on November 05, 2015, 03:26:59 PM
"Yes the city owns Everbank Field. And yes the city would own the practice facility and amphitheater too."
Yes, the city owns it but is unable to derive revenue from it. It's kind of like having to pay for upkeep and insurance on a house, but not being able to live in it or rent it out. All the pain, none of the gain.
So the city is NOT allowed to derive any revenue from the stadium. Hmmm. Good to know.
Quote from: CG7 on November 05, 2015, 03:20:14 PM
Captain Zissou, according to a story on News4jax, The Laura Street Trio could be started as soon as December. Oh, and as far as this story goes, I'm one of the gullible idiots that thinks this is a win win situation. Replace the club section seating, add a flex space practice facility (one that looks cool too) and get a new usable (away from the complainers across the river) ampitheatre, and only pay half....good deal in my book.
I mean, that would be great but I'm not going to hold my breath.
The Jaguars use the stadium for free? They do not pay a lease fee or "rent" to the COJ?
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Quote from: MusicMan on November 05, 2015, 04:12:29 PM
The Jaguars use the stadium for free? They do not pay a lease fee or "rent" to the COJ?
Of course they do. Last I recall it was in excess of $1 million per year.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Any new construction in the core is a good thing! I'm not downing the project but I am downing the fact that COJ can throw $45M easy at an already successful billion dollar entity but struggles to fix basic stuff in DT or give the DIA more cash to work with on the plethora of small projects it is working on. I just think it could be used more strategically I'm not whining and I don't make the final call just giving an opinion. If it happens, great. If not, I know a ton of other places that money could go.
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Sorry - I guess I was just "bitching and moaning" again.
Quote from: UNFurbanist on November 05, 2015, 04:52:38 PM
Any new construction in the core is a good thing! I'm not downing the project but I am downing the fact that COJ can throw $45M easy at an already successful billion dollar entity but struggles to fix basic stuff in DT or give the DIA more cash to work with on the plethora of small projects it is working on. I just think it could be used more strategically I'm not whining and I don't make the final call just giving an opinion. If it happens, great. If not, I know a ton of other places that money could go.
"In almost every enterprise, government has provided business with opportunities for private gain at public expense. Government nurtures private capital accumulation through a process of subsidies, supports, and deficit spending and an increasingly inequitable tax system. From ranchers to resort owners, from brokers to bankers, from auto makers to missile makers, there prevails a welfare for the rich of such magnitude as to make us marvel at the corporate leaders' audacity in preaching the virtues of self-reliance whenever lesser forms of public assistance threaten to reach hands other than their own."
-- Michael Parenti
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Sorry - I guess I was just "bitching and moaning" again.
No problem, but when you visit Jax next feel free to stay in a hotel and assist in the funding.
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 05:03:00 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Sorry - I guess I was just "bitching and moaning" again.
No problem, but when you visit Jax next feel free to stay in a hotel and assist in the funding.
If I'm going to pay to stay in a hotel, it sure won't be in Jacksonville.
Edit: to be honest, I actually
did stay in a Holiday Inn Express in Baymeadows last time I was home.
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 05:07:13 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 05:03:00 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Sorry - I guess I was just "bitching and moaning" again.
No problem, but when you visit Jax next feel free to stay in a hotel and assist in the funding.
If I'm going to pay to stay in a hotel, it sure won't be in Jacksonville.
Well good to know. So I should value your love and input on Jax based upon?
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 05:09:49 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 05:07:13 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 05:03:00 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Sorry - I guess I was just "bitching and moaning" again.
No problem, but when you visit Jax next feel free to stay in a hotel and assist in the funding.
If I'm going to pay to stay in a hotel, it sure won't be in Jacksonville.
Well good to know. So I should value your love and input on Jax based upon?
I don't understand your question - I'm not even sure that qualifies as a sentence. Care to rephrase?
I'm always kind of amused at these threads lack of attention to the other side of the argument.
I know, I know, I know..... because Billionaire, but Khan / the Jags are putting up the other $45M for something that will still be here long after they're gone.
I realize that comment brands me as a 'corporate apologist', but I'm pretty sure I can handle that.
And to answer a non-question earlier in the thread. We don't pay nearly enough in taxes, get over it. I'm not about to 'donate' any extra money to the city, but if they ask for more, I'll write the check out like I do every year with the same moaning and groaning.
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 05:11:03 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 05:09:49 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 05:07:13 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 05:03:00 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:55:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 04:47:20 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
Wow. Fucking tough talk there. Damn
Sorry - I guess I was just "bitching and moaning" again.
No problem, but when you visit Jax next feel free to stay in a hotel and assist in the funding.
If I'm going to pay to stay in a hotel, it sure won't be in Jacksonville.
Well good to know. So I should value your love and input on Jax based upon?
I don't understand your question - I'm not even sure that qualifies as a sentence. Care to rephrase?
No. Not really.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Questioning what the economic return on a project is, along with it's costs and whether or not it is the best use of $90 million is not "bitching and moaning" it is having the good sense to ask the right financial questions before walking into a deal like this. If we had been more on the ball with the Shipyards we would not have been in the situation we are over there currently or our pension mess for that matter. Just assuming all is in good hands no longer works for our city and smart taxpayers. I also don't agree that any building in the core is a good thing. An ill planned project is never a good thing. Jacksonville needs to mature a bit when it comes to planning and the expenditure of tens of millions of dollars. :)
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 05:28:34 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Questioning what the economic return on a project is, along with it's costs and whether or not it is the best use of $90 million is not "bitching and moaning" it is having the good sense to ask the right financial questions before walking into a deal like this. If we had been more on the ball with the Shipyards we would not have been in the situation we are over there currently or our pension mess for that matter. Just assuming all is in good hands no longer works for our city and smart taxpayers. I also don't agree that any building in the core is a good thing. An ill planned project is never a good thing. Jacksonville needs to mature a bit when it comes to planning and the expenditure of tens of millions of dollars. :)
In all fairness I think some of the complaining about the bitching and moaning comes from the fact many just start when very few details are even known. So then it just can come across and bitching and moaning just for the sake of that is what some people do.
Well this thread is escalating nicely.
How many of you are outraged with the funding going to the stadium are Bernie Sanders fans? Just curious :D :D :D
Quote from: coredumped on November 05, 2015, 05:43:08 PM
Well this thread is escalating nicely.
How many of you are outraged with the funding going to the stadium are Bernie Sanders fans? Just curious :D :D :D
I'm not a Bernie Sanders "fan" per se, but if I had a vote and if he were an option for President, I'd likely vote for him.
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
Well, the number is $45 million. Let's be clear-if Khan wants to spend money then that's his business.
Another question-what's the ROI on the Arena? On the Baseball Grounds? On the Library?
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
Except that the bed tax can not be used for any of those things you mentioned.
Quote from: Steve on November 05, 2015, 05:59:25 PM
Well, the number is $45 million. Let's be clear-if Khan wants to spend money then that's his business.
Another question-what's the ROI on the Arena? On the Baseball Grounds? On the Library?
Yes, this ^
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 07:00:28 PM
Quote from: Steve on November 05, 2015, 05:59:25 PM
Well, the number is $45 million. Let's be clear-if Khan wants to spend money then that's his business.
Another question-what's the ROI on the Arena? On the Baseball Grounds? On the Library?
Yes, this ^
Well, my point was that some times as a city, you invest in something that will have its return measure in quality of life, not a dollars and cents ROI. I thought those three projects were worth it. Now, the demolition that came from some of those, I wasn't in favor of.
Why does there need to be a Jaguars practice field taking up prime downtown real estate?
Why should a brand new amphitheater be in a parking lot by the stadium instead of the riverfront park next door or somewhere closer to the core of downtown?
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
As far as that goes, this doesn't appear to be another expense just for the stadium (like big scoreboards) Leaving the actual stadium improvements aside, is $45 million an imprudent cost for a badly needed concert amphitheater and a multi-use indoor field? An amphitheater of that size could cost that much just by itself, and it's something we've been missing for 20 years. Whether rich guys stand to benefit or not, amenities like those are important.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 08:29:11 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
As far as that goes, this doesn't appear to be another expense just for the stadium (like big scoreboards) Leaving the actual stadium improvements aside, is $45 million an imprudent cost for a badly needed concert amphitheater and a multi-use indoor field? An amphitheater of that size could cost that much just by itself, and it's something we've been missing for 20 years. Whether rich guys stand to benefit or not, amenities like those are important.
So is infrastructure, education, health and the like. The problem here is the reality which is that the funding is for capital improvements which limits their use. However it does not limit discussion about what capital improvements should be made with those funds. We don't need another practice field in the core. There is nothing that says that an amphitheater must be connected to Everbank stadium either. It may be time to revisit how bed tax moneys are used and how that might change. But expecting everyone to rubber stamp this idea because the Mayor and Khan like it is not the measure to use for an expenditure like this.
Do any of you realize that the money from the bed tax will be collected regardless of if Khan is the owner and wants to use some. It's not like this is a tax increase. You all seem to want to crucify Khan for suggesting to use tax dollars, yet no one points out the fact that there is not a single other person in the city that is willing to put down that much of their own money towards making downtown a better place ($60 million in 3 years). I don't care if you don't trust his motives. At least he is trying to get things done. I agree that $25 million for an amphitheater is a steep price for a stage, seats, and a fancy roof, but if that is price it takes to have a nice amphitheater, then fine. I'm sick of seeing bands that I want to see go to St. Augustine instead because (this is just a guess) the Arena is too large. At least this is a medium size venue that is guaranteed to bring people downtown.Most of us aren't even paying for it, unless you live in a hotel in town or something.
Also, does this leave the current practice fields open for redevelopment? I personally would like to see a soccer stadium built for the Armada if the area is big enough and they are abandoning the fields. It seems a bit cramped in the baseball grounds, and a lot of extra work to convert the field each time they play and avoiding scheduling conflicts when making the schedules for the year.
I saw an article from 1998 when there was discussion of updating the current amphitheater at MetroPark and back in 1998 the price was estimated at 20 million, nearly 20 years ago.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 08:54:51 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 08:29:11 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
As far as that goes, this doesn't appear to be another expense just for the stadium (like big scoreboards) Leaving the actual stadium improvements aside, is $45 million an imprudent cost for a badly needed concert amphitheater and a multi-use indoor field? An amphitheater of that size could cost that much just by itself, and it's something we've been missing for 20 years. Whether rich guys stand to benefit or not, amenities like those are important.
So is infrastructure, education, health and the like. The problem here is the reality which is that the funding is for capital improvements which limits their use. However it does not limit discussion about what capital improvements should be made with those funds. We don't need another practice field in the core. There is nothing that says that an amphitheater must be connected to Everbank stadium either. It may be time to revisit how bed tax moneys are used and how that might change. But expecting everyone to rubber stamp this idea because the Mayor and Khan like it is not the measure to use for an expenditure like this.
Isn't what the Tourist Development Tax (bed tax) can be used for limited by state legislation??
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 08:58:55 PM
Do any of you realize that the money from the bed tax will be collected regardless of if Khan is the owner and wants to use some. It's not like this is a tax increase. You all seem to want to crucify Khan for suggesting to use tax dollars, yet no one points out the fact that there is not a single other person in the city that is willing to put down that much of their own money towards making downtown a better place ($60 million in 3 years). I don't care if you don't trust his motives. At least he is trying to get things done. I agree that $25 million for an amphitheater is a steep price for a stage, seats, and a fancy roof, but if that is price it takes to have a nice amphitheater, then fine. I'm sick of seeing bands that I want to see go to St. Augustine instead because (this is just a guess) the Arena is too large. At least this is a medium size venue that is guaranteed to bring people downtown.Most of us aren't even paying for it, unless you live in a hotel in town or something.
To question the motives of any developer or business entity when it comes to the use of "tax dollars" is not tantamount to crucifying them. While the word play is dramatic it does not represent truth at any level. Jacksonville and it's leadership is in many ways not as sophisticated and unaffected by money and power as they should be when talking mega millions on a single project. Reason goes out the window and is replace with dramatic pleas and promises. Our overblown courthouse is a prime example. The money under discussion is for capital improvement projects. There should always be discussion and debate over the best use of tax money in our city.
Quote from: stephendare on November 05, 2015, 09:57:46 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 09:53:48 PM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 08:58:55 PM
Do any of you realize that the money from the bed tax will be collected regardless of if Khan is the owner and wants to use some. It's not like this is a tax increase. You all seem to want to crucify Khan for suggesting to use tax dollars, yet no one points out the fact that there is not a single other person in the city that is willing to put down that much of their own money towards making downtown a better place ($60 million in 3 years). I don't care if you don't trust his motives. At least he is trying to get things done. I agree that $25 million for an amphitheater is a steep price for a stage, seats, and a fancy roof, but if that is price it takes to have a nice amphitheater, then fine. I'm sick of seeing bands that I want to see go to St. Augustine instead because (this is just a guess) the Arena is too large. At least this is a medium size venue that is guaranteed to bring people downtown.Most of us aren't even paying for it, unless you live in a hotel in town or something.
To question the motives of any developer or business entity when it comes to the use of "tax dollars" is not tantamount to crucifying them. While the word play is dramatic it does not represent truth at any level. Jacksonville and it's leadership is in many ways not as sophisticated and unaffected by money and power as they should be when talking mega millions on a single project. Reason goes out the window and is replace with dramatic pleas and promises. Our overblown courthouse is a prime example. The money under discussion is for capital improvement projects. There should always be discussion and debate over the best use of tax money in our city.
Amen.
Its so bizarre that not giving wealthy people tax money for their profitable ventures is considered being anti (insert name).
Absolutely agree.
(http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/lead_photo_wide/SD-Renders---reduced-9.jpg)
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately? How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville, what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city and think like adults and not sports fans. Amenities are nice, but addressing infrastructure, and most of the items above are more important because they directly impact the safety of our citizens and community. Some of this money to repair the failing infrastructure on liberty street would be a competent use.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Correct. None of the bed tax can be spent in that way. In fact, right now, the money that's presumably being tapped for this project is tied specifically to the sports district. Of the bed tax, 2% is dedicated to debt service to pay down past projects, and another 2% is committed to tourism promotion for the county as a whole. In 2009, the final 2% was committed to projects within the sports district, so barring a change in the law it's going to go either to the existing facilities or new ones built in the area.
Interesting comparison:
Quote
In 2013, the city agreed to spend $43 million in hotel bed tax money to install two jumbo scoreboards and build a 42,000-square-foot fan zone outfitted with swimming pools. Jaguars owner Shad Khan put $20 million toward the deal.
http://jacksonville.com/news/2015-11-05/story/amphitheater-part-proposed-90-million-improvement-plan-everbank-field-city
The current proposal is $45 million from the city and $45 million from Khan, and involves club seat improvements, and amphitheater, and an indoor field.
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 06:28:07 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
Except that the bed tax can not be used for any of those things you mentioned.
Of course. But as I said, it's the principle of the matter. We can "find" public money to pay a billionaire's expenses but can't seem to find ways to finance things that are actually important.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 08:29:11 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
As far as that goes, this doesn't appear to be another expense just for the stadium (like big scoreboards) Leaving the actual stadium improvements aside, is $45 million an imprudent cost for a badly needed concert amphitheater and a multi-use indoor field? An amphitheater of that size could cost that much just by itself, and it's something we've been missing for 20 years. Whether rich guys stand to benefit or not, amenities like those are important.
I guess I don't agree that those amenities are important. A lot of that stuff is just going to sit empty and underused when said billionaire decides to relocate his team in a few years' time.
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 05:07:13 PM
If I'm going to pay to stay in a hotel, it sure won't be in Jacksonville.
This truly speaks for itself. And the following quote deserves a correction:
QuoteOf course. But as I said, it's the principle of the matter. We can "find" public money to pay a billionaire's expenses but can't seem to find ways to finance things that are actually important.
No, it's *not* the principle. Your objection is that you (or those that think like you) don't get to choose to "find" public money to pay for those things you deem important. It isn't sufficient that all manner of public funds *are* spent on things you find important that a large part of the city certainly does not -- no, it is full bitch-and-moan mode right off the bat because . . . because . . . .
This is a truly embarrassing thread for those who claim to be concerned about the urban core and bringing life back to downtown Jacksonville on a more regular basis. But, of course -- as Adam White has shown -- he's too good for that. Yay, Bernie Sanders !!!
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 06, 2015, 06:56:01 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 05:07:13 PM
If I'm going to pay to stay in a hotel, it sure won't be in Jacksonville.
This truly speaks for itself. And the following quote deserves a correction:
QuoteOf course. But as I said, it's the principle of the matter. We can "find" public money to pay a billionaire's expenses but can't seem to find ways to finance things that are actually important.
No, it's *not* the principle. Your objection is that you (or those that think like you) don't get to choose to "find" public money to pay for those things you deem important. It isn't sufficient that all manner of public funds *are* spent on things you find important that a large part of the city certainly does not -- no, it is full bitch-and-moan mode right off the bat because . . . because . . . .
This is a truly embarrassing thread for those who claim to be concerned about the urban core and bringing life back to downtown Jacksonville on a more regular basis. But, of course -- as Adam White has shown -- he's too good for that. Yay, Bernie Sanders !!!
If you can't see the argument, then there's not much more I can say. You don't have to agree - that's fine - but it shouldn't be that hard to understand where I am coming from. I certainly think I understand your position - it's just that I don't agree with spending public funds in that way. It's not about money being spent on things I don't like - although there is no problem with that position anyway, as we all have opinions on how money is spent - but rather the idea of using public money to benefit private enterprise. And my opposition to that is consistent with my politics.
As far as politics are concerned, leave Bernie Sanders out of it. If you don't like Sanders, you'd hate the last person I voted for.
I don't know if this was added to the discussion or not, and I am not going back 5 pages of thread to find out, but this is a good point to remember: There are 3 NFL teams that are being courted for Los Angeles. The NFL wants a team in the 2nd largest market in the US. The Jags are not one of them, they are:
1. San Diego Charges
2. Oakland Raiders
3. St. Louis Rams
All because the local cities said they would not "burden" their local municipalities with a debt for new stadium features. I applaud Khan for not throwing Jacksonville into that mix. LA is more of a immediate threat than London.
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/8/12/9131641/nfl-los-angeles-relocation-rams-chargers-raiders (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/8/12/9131641/nfl-los-angeles-relocation-rams-chargers-raiders)
Quote from: mtraininjax on November 06, 2015, 07:50:33 AM
I don't know if this was added to the discussion or not, and I am not going back 5 pages of thread to find out, but this is a good point to remember: There are 3 NFL teams that are being courted for Los Angeles. The NFL wants a team in the 2nd largest market in the US. The Jags are not one of them, they are:
1. San Diego Charges
2. Oakland Raiders
3. St. Louis Rams
All because the local cities said they would not "burden" their local municipalities with a debt for new stadium features. I applaud Khan for not throwing Jacksonville into that mix. LA is more of a immediate threat than London.
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/8/12/9131641/nfl-los-angeles-relocation-rams-chargers-raiders (http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/8/12/9131641/nfl-los-angeles-relocation-rams-chargers-raiders)
That might be the case - and I'm not saying it isn't. But nothing is 100% secure and that list is not an "official" list of the only franchises that can move.
The Jaguars may never move - and Shahid Khan may well be a really principled person. But anything can happen and business people tend to do what's in the best interest of their bottom line. So don't get too comfortable or smug about it.
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 07:28:52 AM
If you can't see the argument, then there's not much more I can say. You don't have to agree - that's fine - but it shouldn't be that hard to understand where I am coming from. I certainly think I understand your position - it's just that I don't agree with spending public funds in that way. It's not about money being spent on things I don't like - although there is no problem with that position anyway, as we all have opinions on how money is spent - but rather the idea of using public money to benefit private enterprise. And my opposition to that is consistent with my politics.
Adam, it isn't that I can't *see* the argument. But my sight allows me to clearly see that you're insisting upon a mistaken notion to rigidly oppose this effort. To the contrary, this isn't using public money to benefit a private enterprise, this is using
private money to benefit a
public enterprise; the city will have two new assets after this transaction, two premier assets. Now you still may not like it, but lets at least be honest about that.
- The new concept, Mousa said, will cost $20 million and provide a multiuse facility owned by the city that can house concerts and other events in addition to the team's football activities.
- The facility would be tucked between the practice facility and the stadium. It could accommodate 10,000 people — 5,000 in fixed seating and 5,000 on a berm. Like the practice facility, the city would own this. However, a Jaguars subsidiary, American Thunder, would manage and operate it.
- The Jaguars will design and construct the facilities, but the city will have oversight, Mousa said. And the city's portion is capped at $45 million — the team pays any overruns. Should the projects come in under budget, the city and team would split what's left equally.
We've elected a clearly competent administration, one that has just as clearly brought people back into city government that even regulars on this board -- some of whom have embarrassed themselves in their response to this initiative -- have applauded. Our interests
are being protected as best one can tell at this incredibly early part of the process. The city is gaining two new assets.
Gaining!Please, stop with the bitching and moaning and -- even worse -- the presuming that only a certain crowd is interested in what's best for the city.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 06, 2015, 08:43:07 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 07:28:52 AM
If you can't see the argument, then there's not much more I can say. You don't have to agree - that's fine - but it shouldn't be that hard to understand where I am coming from. I certainly think I understand your position - it's just that I don't agree with spending public funds in that way. It's not about money being spent on things I don't like - although there is no problem with that position anyway, as we all have opinions on how money is spent - but rather the idea of using public money to benefit private enterprise. And my opposition to that is consistent with my politics.
Adam, it isn't that I can't *see* the argument. But my sight allows me to clearly see that you're insisting upon a mistaken notion to rigidly oppose this effort. To the contrary, this isn't using public money to benefit a private enterprise, this is using private money to benefit a public enterprise; the city will have two new assets after this transaction, two premier assets. Now you still may not like it, but lets at least be honest about that.
- The new concept, Mousa said, will cost $20 million and provide a multiuse facility owned by the city that can house concerts and other events in addition to the team's football activities.
- The facility would be tucked between the practice facility and the stadium. It could accommodate 10,000 people — 5,000 in fixed seating and 5,000 on a berm. Like the practice facility, the city would own this. However, a Jaguars subsidiary, American Thunder, would manage and operate it.
- The Jaguars will design and construct the facilities, but the city will have oversight, Mousa said. And the city's portion is capped at $45 million — the team pays any overruns. Should the projects come in under budget, the city and team would split what's left equally.
We've elected a clearly competent administration, one that has just as clearly brought people back into city government that even regulars on this board -- some of whom have embarrassed themselves in their response to this initiative -- have applauded. Our interests are being protected as best one can tell at this incredibly early part of the process. The city is gaining two new assets.
Gaining!
Please, stop with the bitching and moaning and -- even worse -- the presuming that only a certain crowd is interested in what's best for the city.
The amphitheater - I don't necessarily agree that the city needs one, but I can appreciate how this is viewed as necessary or desirable by some.
The practice field - that might be owned by the city - just like the stadium - but it's main (possibly only) use will be by the Jaguars. They should pay for it - and if they move, they can try to sell it. Hell, even if they stay, they can try to find a buyer. If it's something Jax needs so badly and if it's such a good business decision, then why isn't this being done by a private entity? Why isn't this happening already without recourse to public funding.
It's not "bitching and moaning" - it's an honest assessment and difference of opinion. Stop being such a berk.
No, Adam, it's PRIMARY business use will be for something other than practice for the Jaguars.
That thing is going to be utilized, I guarantee you, in some very creative ways. It will be a covered space, air conditioned, with all sorts of tech capabilities, downtown. Broaden your horizon, man.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 06, 2015, 09:04:45 AM
No, Adam, it's PRIMARY business use will be for something other than practice for the Jaguars.
That thing is going to be utilized, I guarantee you, in some very creative ways. It will be a covered space, air conditioned, with all sorts of tech capabilities, downtown. Broaden your horizon, man.
It will sit empty and unused most of the time. I would almost be willing to put money on it.
If all this sort of thing were true, downtown Jax would be the glittering jewel of NE Florida/South Georgia. But it's actually got worse since we landed the team in 1995. Or it hasn't got much better.
How much money should we throw at a professional sports team on the promise that it will revitalize Jax and make us a "first tier city?" I'd argue they've had plenty of chances to date and have failed to deliver.
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 01:52:52 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 06:28:07 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
Except that the bed tax can not be used for any of those things you mentioned.
Of course. But as I said, it's the principle of the matter. We can "find" public money to pay a billionaire's expenses but can't seem to find ways to finance things that are actually important.
That's a separate issue, really. Financial mismanagement and anti-tax posturing is what has usually kept us from being able to afford the "important" things recently. But we can have both necessities and quality of life, it's not necessarily a zero sum game.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 06, 2015, 09:12:55 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 01:52:52 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 06:28:07 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
Except that the bed tax can not be used for any of those things you mentioned.
Of course. But as I said, it's the principle of the matter. We can "find" public money to pay a billionaire's expenses but can't seem to find ways to finance things that are actually important.
That's a separate issue, really. Financial mismanagement and anti-tax posturing is what has usually kept us from being able to afford the "important" things recently. But we can have both necessities and quality of life, it's not necessarily a zero sum game.
I don't think it's a zero-sum game. That actually might be an example of a straw man. I never said we can't have both necessities and quality of life. I just think we should be using public money to prop up private enterprise in this sort of way.
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 09:15:46 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 06, 2015, 09:12:55 AM
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 01:52:52 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 06:28:07 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
Except that the bed tax can not be used for any of those things you mentioned.
Of course. But as I said, it's the principle of the matter. We can "find" public money to pay a billionaire's expenses but can't seem to find ways to finance things that are actually important.
That's a separate issue, really. Financial mismanagement and anti-tax posturing is what has usually kept us from being able to afford the "important" things recently. But we can have both necessities and quality of life, it's not necessarily a zero sum game.
I don't think it's a zero-sum game. That actually might be an example of a straw man. I never said we can't have both necessities and quality of life. I just think we should be using public money to prop up private enterprise in this sort of way.
Then again I ask, leaving Khan and the stadium itself aside, would $45 million be a bad price for an amphitheater and multi-use indoor field? I would say no. As I said somewhere else, after a few years of steady events those kinds of amenities (like the Arena, Baseball Grounds or the St. Augustine Amphitheater) recover their cost, or most of it, not to mention the quality of life boost.
Quote from: Adam White on November 06, 2015, 01:54:45 AM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 08:29:11 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 06:00:33 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 05:55:41 PM
Quote from: Adam White on November 05, 2015, 04:39:01 PM
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 05, 2015, 04:19:42 PM
Some of the regulars on this board . . . I mean, damn. Like CG7, it's hard to see this as something other than a win-win. And, it solves the Metropolitan Park problem.
Believe it or not, this project seriously helps the urban core -- it's going to bring some real life to downtown on a much more regular basis. The practice facility is going to have utility far beyond a practice space for the Jags.
Take a step back; give the bitching and moaning a break.
Then why don't you and your Jaguar-loving buddies pay for the fucking thing and not saddle everyone else with the bill.
See, this exact argument is made against all forms of cultural spending. Generally, the amount particular individuals pay isn't a whole lot.
You're right. But in this case, we're talking about using the public purse to finance a very profitable business owned by a billionaire. We're not talking about schools, roads, libraries, museums or trains.
Maybe the individual cost isn't very high, but the principle of the matter is what is at stake. Especially when we are having problems funding those other, far more important, things.
As far as that goes, this doesn't appear to be another expense just for the stadium (like big scoreboards) Leaving the actual stadium improvements aside, is $45 million an imprudent cost for a badly needed concert amphitheater and a multi-use indoor field? An amphitheater of that size could cost that much just by itself, and it's something we've been missing for 20 years. Whether rich guys stand to benefit or not, amenities like those are important.
I guess I don't agree that those amenities are important. A lot of that stuff is just going to sit empty and underused when said billionaire decides to relocate his team in a few years' time.
1) The team is not moving, so get that out of your head.
2) The whole point of the project is to improve the game day experience and the sports district as a whole.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 06, 2015, 09:29:17 AM
Then again I ask, leaving Khan and the stadium itself aside, would $45 million be a bad price for an amphitheater and multi-use indoor field? I would say no. As I said somewhere else, after a few years of steady events those kinds of amenities (like the Arena, Baseball Grounds or the St. Augustine Amphitheater) recover their cost, or most of it, not to mention the quality of life boost.
And that's fair enough. I'm not saying you're wrong - I'm saying I am not of the same mind.
Quote from: Downtown Osprey on November 06, 2015, 09:34:50 AM
1) The team is not moving, so get that out of your head.
2) The whole point of the project is to improve the game day experience and the sports district as a whole.
1) I'm glad you are so confident of that.
2) I don't give a crap about "improving the game day experience and the 'sports district' as a whole". Or more accurately - feel free to improve it, just don't use public money to make your already ridiculously profitable private enterprise even more profitable.
The city was quick to jump on this for two reasons - one to appease the Jags, and two to help improve our chances to land a college football playoff game in the future.
Let's see now:
1. An a 16,000 seat arena
2. A 10,000 baseball/soccer stadium
3. A 65,000 + seat football stadium
4. A 10,000 seat amphitheater
5. An indoor multi-use facility.
Sounds more like an entertainment district, You don't think Intuition and the other Bay Street venues won't benefit from this. This is a faster approach to improving the area without touching the Ship Yards which will take some time.
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Yea, I knew the answer. Just asked as I found it kind of odd that it was posted since it had really nothing to do with the issue. Agenda pushing.
Quote from: jaxjags on November 06, 2015, 09:55:21 AM
Let's see now:
1. An a 16,000 seat arena
2. A 10,000 baseball/soccer stadium
3. A 65,000 + seat football stadium
4. A 10,000 seat amphitheater
5. An indoor multi-use facility.
Sounds more like an entertainment district, You don't think Intuition and the other Bay Street venues won't benefit from this. This is a faster approach to improving the area without touching the Ship Yards which will take some time.
Precisely. And I'm very confident because it's the truth. Tell me where you get your information about the team moving. I'm dying to know.
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Reading comprehension 101, "the TDC utilizes a portion of the bed tax". A portion does not translate to all.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 10:43:49 AM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Reading comprehension 101, the TDC utilizes a portion of the bed tax. A portion does not translate to all.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 11:11:56 PM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Correct. None of the bed tax can be spent in that way. In fact, right now, the money that's presumably being tapped for this project is tied specifically to the sports district. Of the bed tax, 2% is dedicated to debt service to pay down past projects, and another 2% is committed to tourism promotion for the county as a whole. In 2009, the final 2% was committed to projects within the sports district, so barring a change in the law it's going to go either to the existing facilities or new ones built in the area.
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Yea, I knew the answer. Just asked as I found it kind of odd that it was posted since it had really nothing to do with the issue. Agenda pushing.
A portion of the bed tax is used for these items, there is no designation that it "all" must be used for these items. Secondly using the city's own criterion and web site that addresses "Capital Improvements" is not agenda pushing, it is sharing facts. Attempting to dismiss facts as agenda pushing is a weak attack on valid information and the person providing it. These are COJ facts and if those represent an agenda, that agenda is clearly that of the COJ. Honestly Ed! Here is what you and others are missing when it comes to what the city can do which is this, they can choose to interpret the uses of the funds in a much more broad fashion than anyone can imagine in order to suit a specific agenda. That is a fact and it happens all the time with legislation and deal making. Wake up kids.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 10:48:26 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Yea, I knew the answer. Just asked as I found it kind of odd that it was posted since it had really nothing to do with the issue. Agenda pushing.
A portion of the bed tax is used for these items, there is no designation that it "all" must be used for these items. Secondly using the city's own criterion and web site that addresses "Capital Improvements" is not agenda pushing, it is sharing facts. Attempting to dismiss facts as agenda pushing is a weak attack on valid information and the person providing it. These are COJ facts and if those represent and agenda, that agenda is clearly that of the COJ. Honestly Ed!
As I just said for the second time,
Quote
None of the bed tax can be spent in that way. In fact, right now, the money that's presumably being tapped for this project is tied specifically to the sports district. Of the bed tax, 2% is dedicated to debt service to pay down past projects, and another 2% is committed to tourism promotion for the county as a whole. In 2009, the final 2% was committed to projects within the sports district, so barring a change in the law it's going to go either to the existing facilities or new ones built in the area.
Quote from: spuwho on November 05, 2015, 10:08:28 PM
(http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/lead_photo_wide/SD-Renders---reduced-9.jpg)
am I the only one who has a hard time seeing 5,000 fixed seats and room for another 5,000 on the berm/lawn in these sketches of the amphitheater?
Come on, tufsu1 -- they aren't going to be slaves to this visual rendition. The finished product *is* going to deliver that.
Cheshire Cat:QuoteHere is what you and others are missing when it comes to what the city can do which is this, they can choose to interpret the uses of the funds in a much more broad fashion than anyone can imagine in order to suit a specific agenda. That is a fact and it happens all the time with legislation and deal making. Wake up kids.
Honestly, who in the heck doesn't already know this? So, how is it being missed? Public servants have made a determination this is a damn good project for the city and will have a chance to explain this in City Council before a December vote.
Why in the hell are y'all freaking out? Especially over something that appears to be a damn good project? That *is* going to be vetted ? ? ?
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 06, 2015, 11:29:52 AM
Come on, tufsu1 -- they aren't going to be slaves to this visual rendition. The finished product *is* going to deliver that.
Cheshire Cat:
QuoteHere is what you and others are missing when it comes to what the city can do which is this, they can choose to interpret the uses of the funds in a much more broad fashion than anyone can imagine in order to suit a specific agenda. That is a fact and it happens all the time with legislation and deal making. Wake up kids.
Honestly, who in the heck doesn't already know this? So, how is it being missed? Public servants have made a determination this is a damn good project for the city and will have a chance to explain this in City Council before a December vote.
Why in the hell are y'all freaking out? Especially over something that appears to be a damn good project? That *is* going to be vetted ? ? ?
No one is freaking out. Discussion and vetting of facts is not freaking out. Dramatic words do not change the facts or mitigate truth. To your comment that "public servant's" have made the decision and it should be a go from there, clearly you have not followed history or current event's. lol Those public servants are put into office by the people, they answer to us. Not to question what is done with our tax dollars when it accounts for $45 million in spending is simply ignorant. The voters did not intend to hand politicians an open checkbook with us paying the bills.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 10:48:26 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Yea, I knew the answer. Just asked as I found it kind of odd that it was posted since it had really nothing to do with the issue. Agenda pushing.
A portion of the bed tax is used for these items, there is no designation that it "all" must be used for these items. Secondly using the city's own criterion and web site that addresses "Capital Improvements" is not agenda pushing, it is sharing facts. Attempting to dismiss facts as agenda pushing is a weak attack on valid information and the person providing it. These are COJ facts and if those represent an agenda, that agenda is clearly that of the COJ. Honestly Ed! Here is what you and others are missing when it comes to what the city can do which is this, they can choose to interpret the uses of the funds in a much more broad fashion than anyone can imagine in order to suit a specific agenda. That is a fact and it happens all the time with legislation and deal making. Wake up kids.
Just because you say it does not mean it is accurate. Honestly Diane!!
Cheshire Cat, not to be disrespectful but you do appear to be freaking out and you do keep bringing up points that absolutely no one is confused about. It may come as a surprise to you, given that you keep making these points, but City Council is where this thing is going to be vetted and City Council is where you -- like everyone else -- will have a chance to submit your objections to your council member and voice your considered opinion after reading up on what is proposed.
Imagine that; politics and political process. Please, save the lessons on who answers to us. We understand all of that. In fact, we're relying on it. You? Apparently not.
By now, everyone should realize the title of this thread is entirely wrong. That $90 million is being spent on the Sports Complex Entertainment District. And that so-called "indoor practice facility" is going to be much, much more than that. The one being built in Dallas may far exceed what we will have here (maybe not) but *it* clearly envisions hosting various events, including high school football and soccer games, along with other sporting events, plus fine arts and entertainment activities. The Dallas facility will seat 12,000 people. I think it's a safe bet *all* of our discussion so far has been wildly off-base with respect to that space.
There's going to be A HELL OF A LOT MORE ACTIVITY year-round in downtown Jacksonville because of this one initiative. Not that some of you (apparently) give a damn about that.
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 11:51:05 AM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 10:48:26 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Yea, I knew the answer. Just asked as I found it kind of odd that it was posted since it had really nothing to do with the issue. Agenda pushing.
A portion of the bed tax is used for these items, there is no designation that it "all" must be used for these items. Secondly using the city's own criterion and web site that addresses "Capital Improvements" is not agenda pushing, it is sharing facts. Attempting to dismiss facts as agenda pushing is a weak attack on valid information and the person providing it. These are COJ facts and if those represent an agenda, that agenda is clearly that of the COJ. Honestly Ed! Here is what you and others are missing when it comes to what the city can do which is this, they can choose to interpret the uses of the funds in a much more broad fashion than anyone can imagine in order to suit a specific agenda. That is a fact and it happens all the time with legislation and deal making. Wake up kids.
Just because you say it does not mean it is accurate. Honestly Diane!!
My statement are backed up with facts and links to the City's own criterion Ed. Yes that information I am sharing is accurate. If you think they city's own criterion is not factual, I don't know what to tell you. lol
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 06, 2015, 11:53:59 AM
Cheshire Cat, not to be disrespectful but you do appear to be freaking out and you do keep bringing up points that absolutely no one is confused about. It may come as a surprise to you, given that you keep making these points, but City Council is where this thing is going to be vetted and City Council is where you -- like everyone else -- will have a chance to submit your objections to your council member and voice your considered opinion after reading up on what is proposed.
Imagine that; politics and political process. Please, save the lessons on who answers to us. We understand all of that. In fact, we're relying on it. You? Apparently not.
By now, everyone should realize the title of this thread is entirely wrong. That $90 million is being spent on the Sports Complex Entertainment District. And that so-called "indoor practice facility" is going to be much, much more than that. The one being built in Dallas may far exceed what we will have here (maybe not) but *it* clearly envisions hosting various events, including high school football and soccer games, along with other sporting events, plus fine arts and entertainment activities. The Dallas facility will seat 12,000 people. I think it's a safe bet *all* of our discussion so far has been wildly off-base with respect to that space.
There's going to be A HELL OF A LOT MORE ACTIVITY year-round in downtown Jacksonville because of this one initiative. Not that some of you (apparently) give a damn about that.
Not much I can say to a person who does not know the difference between a spirited discussion and freaking out. Your opinion still remains your opinion until you can back it up with solid facts. I have not seen you do that yet. Give me some solid facts and links to support your dramatic statements and then we can talk. lol
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 11:57:20 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 11:51:05 AM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 10:48:26 AM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 10:21:35 AM
Quote from: Jax-Nole on November 05, 2015, 11:07:12 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 05, 2015, 10:27:40 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 05, 2015, 10:18:37 PM
So what are the parameters of Capital improvements in Jacksonville and what qualifies? You may be surprised. Certainly there are some important and necessary items on this list. For all the information, click the link at the bottom of this post.
Again, what is the best use of this funding? Money to parks has been cut over the years, many facilities are lacking. Drainage issues in our poorest neighborhoods still have not been resolved along with flooding issues throughout Jacksonville. Public Safety structure. Has anyone been inside the Police Memorial building lately. How about the jail where sewage regularly backs up into the courtrooms and low lying areas? The main JSO hub downtown is well beyond it's life span with some areas that are absolutely run down. Road, Infrastructure, transportation etc. Hello Jacksonville what are our need as opposed to wants? We need to make better decisions for the health of this city.
Quote
Identifying Projects
Departments complete a CIP request form with information above and use a standardized matrix to score projects prior to submitting them to the Finance Department. To assist in balancing and prioritizing needs across the City, departments further identify projects by one of the following 'Program Areas'
Drainage - Project that improves drainage conditions and reduces flooding.
Environment/Quality of Life - Project that would promote or improve the environment for the citizens of Jacksonville (e.g. water treatment plants).
Government Facilities – Project designated as government facilities with primarily employee occupancy.
Parks - Project with buildings, grounds and/or recreational facilities within the park boundaries, also including the Preservation Project.
Public Facilities – Project for facilities designated for primarily citizen use and include facilities such as the county courthouse, arena, and baseball park.
Public Safety - Project relating to public safety including facilities.
Roads/Infrastructure/Transportation – Project dedicated to expanding and widening roads; interchanges, overpasses and intersection improvements; and also includes: Road resurfacing,
Sidewalks/bike paths, along with landscaping/tree planting along road improvement projects.
Targeted Economic Development – Project is used to stimulate growth and revitalization by providing grants and loans for infrastructure, public improvements, and project development.
http://www.coj.net/departments/finance/budget/capital-improvement-plans.aspx
Which items on this list can the bed tax legally be used on?
Direct from COJ.net:
"Jacksonville currently levies a six percent tourist development tax on transient accommodations in the city. In addition to its many other duties, The Tourist Development Council (TDC) utilizes a portion of this tax to fund tourism promotions and events that will generate a substantial number of visitors to Jacksonville, the Beaches and Baldwin. In doing so, the TDC has a unique opportunity to impact tourism by offering grants for those applicants that are planning a convention, special event or conference in the Jacksonville area.
The TDC reviews competitive applications and allocates funding to help pay for the operational and advertising expenses of festivals, sporting events, conferences and the like, all of which have the potential of attracting substantial numbers of visitors who will book hotel rooms, eat in area restaurants, visit attractions and shop in the city while attending the supported event."
http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx (http://www.coj.net/city-council/tourist-development-council.aspx)
To answer your question: basically only public facilities. It is possible something else could use the money from one of those categories, but most of them don't really draw the tourism that the tax is meant for.
Yea, I knew the answer. Just asked as I found it kind of odd that it was posted since it had really nothing to do with the issue. Agenda pushing.
A portion of the bed tax is used for these items, there is no designation that it "all" must be used for these items. Secondly using the city's own criterion and web site that addresses "Capital Improvements" is not agenda pushing, it is sharing facts. Attempting to dismiss facts as agenda pushing is a weak attack on valid information and the person providing it. These are COJ facts and if those represent an agenda, that agenda is clearly that of the COJ. Honestly Ed! Here is what you and others are missing when it comes to what the city can do which is this, they can choose to interpret the uses of the funds in a much more broad fashion than anyone can imagine in order to suit a specific agenda. That is a fact and it happens all the time with legislation and deal making. Wake up kids.
Just because you say it does not mean it is accurate. Honestly Diane!!
My statement are backed up with facts and links to the City's own criterion Ed. Yes that information I am sharing is accurate. If you think they city's own criterion is not factual, I don't know what to tell you. lol
Where in the link you provided does it state that bed taxes can be used for the Capital Improvements? My understanding is that Toursit Develpment taxes are set up following g state statutes. I believe the local Ordinance is 764 which outlines what the Convention Developmemt Taxes (bed taxes) can be used for, which are in compliance with state statute.
Ed, the city has historically exchanged the use of Capital funding money for projects that should have been at least partially funded by the bed tax. In 2013 it was proposed by Richard Clark that the city consider the scoreboards a Capital Improvement project. Also in 2013 the city authorized a payment back to the Jaguars for expenditures of over two million they had made to enhance the stadium without city approval. This went toward the locker room and amenities for the players and that did not impact the experience of the fans or the safety of the structure. Funding that is meant to maintain the city owned sports facilities was used in this instance, and continues to be funneled off for other uses than maintenance, as has the money for tourist promotion. The Bed tax is broken down into three pots of money and those pots of funding have been interchanged at will over the years. The city has used Capital funds over the years to broker deals that should have included bed tax money. My point is that funding can and is used to cross purposes when it comes to Bed taxes and Capital Improvements. So the question then becomes why if the city will consider using Capital funds for projects that should be funded by bed taxes, why can't we also revisit how bed tax funding is used/abused? Is anyone aware of how many repairs have been made in the stadium. In the last few years money has been taken from general funds to do what the bed tax is supposed to do for maintenance and repairs. That is the question for legislators at the local and state level. For instance, how is it that Capital Improvement funds are used for projects that should be partially funded by the bed tax but bed tax funding is not used for Capital Improvements. It's a legal word game that is open to creative interpretation. Our Stadium is owned by the citizens of Jacksonville and it was not built using only bed taxes, but rather a combination of funding which included Capital improvement monies. Consider as well that the bed tax brings in approx 4.7 to 5 million a year. How does that fund a scoreboard worth tens of millions and and new project costing $45 million? Creative financing?
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 12:34:37 PM
Ed, the city has historically exchanged the use of Capital funding money for projects that should have been at least partially funded by the bed tax. In 2013 it was proposed by Richard Clark that the city consider the scoreboards a Capital Improvement project. Also in 2013 the city authorized a payment back to the Jaguars for expenditures of over two million they had made to enhance the stadium without city approval. This went toward the locker room and amenities for the players and did not impact the experience of the fans. Funding that is meant to maintain the city owned sports facilities was used in this instance, and continues to be funneled off for other uses than maintenance, as has the money for tourist promotion. The Bed tax is broken down into three pots of money and those pots of funding have been interchanged at will over the years. The city has used Capital funds over the years to broker deals that should have included bed tax money. My point is that funding can and is used to cross purposes when it comes to Bed taxes and Capital Improvements. So the question then becomes why if the city will consider using Capital funds for projects that should be funded by bed taxes, why can't we also revisit how bet tax funding is used/abused? Is anyone aware of how many repairs have been made in the stadium. In the last few years money has been taken from general funds to do what the bed tax is supposed to do for maintenance and repairs. That is the question for legislators at the local and state level. For instance, how is it that Capital Improvement funds are used for projects that should be partially funded by the bed tax but bed tax funding is not used for Capital Improvements. It's a legal word game that is open to creative interpretation. Our Stadium is owned by the citizens of Jacksonville and it was not built using only bed taxes, but rather a combination of funding which included Capital improvement monies. Consider as well that the bed tax brings in approx 4.7 to 5 million a year. How does that fund a scoreboard worth tens of millions and and new project costing $45 million? Creative financing?
Thanks. So the web link you posted does not indicate bed taxes can be used for the Capital Improvement items you noted in your post. I understand you want them to, I get that point. Some taxes are set up to be used for specific items only while oers have more leeway. If you don't like it. Head on over to Tally as it has to start there since there is a state law addressing this tax. Knock yourself out.
Also, and this is my view of what is happening based upon past city/private high profile deals. The discussion of the Shipyard project has died out. Why? Likely because the city does not want to be saddled with the cost of toxic land clean up but my guess is that even Lenny Curry who is enamored of sports and Shad Khan figured out that the deal was a lousy one for taxpayers. Khan would have had all the improvements to the land while also excluding his own structures and improvements by an exemption that would put all of the property taxes collected back into his own pocket. My guess is that this new initiative is largely coming down the pike to keep Khan engaged and happy because the Shipyards deal is a no go.
Quote from: RattlerGator on November 06, 2015, 11:29:52 AM
Come on, tufsu1 -- they aren't going to be slaves to this visual rendition. The finished product *is* going to deliver that.
I'm not sure how they deliver that and an indoor practice field in the space between the south end zone and Gator Bowl Boulevard. Unless of course they plan to take some space from the parking lots, which means that lost revenue would need to be part of the equation.
And frankly, don't you think the plans should be pretty well done since legislation asking for $45 million in public funds has already been filed with City Council?
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 12:50:27 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 12:34:37 PM
Ed, the city has historically exchanged the use of Capital funding money for projects that should have been at least partially funded by the bed tax. In 2013 it was proposed by Richard Clark that the city consider the scoreboards a Capital Improvement project. Also in 2013 the city authorized a payment back to the Jaguars for expenditures of over two million they had made to enhance the stadium without city approval. This went toward the locker room and amenities for the players and did not impact the experience of the fans. Funding that is meant to maintain the city owned sports facilities was used in this instance, and continues to be funneled off for other uses than maintenance, as has the money for tourist promotion. The Bed tax is broken down into three pots of money and those pots of funding have been interchanged at will over the years. The city has used Capital funds over the years to broker deals that should have included bed tax money. My point is that funding can and is used to cross purposes when it comes to Bed taxes and Capital Improvements. So the question then becomes why if the city will consider using Capital funds for projects that should be funded by bed taxes, why can't we also revisit how bet tax funding is used/abused? Is anyone aware of how many repairs have been made in the stadium. In the last few years money has been taken from general funds to do what the bed tax is supposed to do for maintenance and repairs. That is the question for legislators at the local and state level. For instance, how is it that Capital Improvement funds are used for projects that should be partially funded by the bed tax but bed tax funding is not used for Capital Improvements. It's a legal word game that is open to creative interpretation. Our Stadium is owned by the citizens of Jacksonville and it was not built using only bed taxes, but rather a combination of funding which included Capital improvement monies. Consider as well that the bed tax brings in approx 4.7 to 5 million a year. How does that fund a scoreboard worth tens of millions and and new project costing $45 million? Creative financing?
Thanks. So the web link you posted does not indicate bed taxes can be used for the Capital Improvement items you noted in your post. I understand you want them to, I get that point. Some taxes are set up to be used for specific items only while oers have more leeway. If you don't like it. Head on over to Tally as it has to start there since there is a state law addressing this tax. Knock yourself out.
If you know me at all you will also know that I have taken on many serious issues head on with politicians locally and at the state level. Decades worth of first hand effort. Right now my purpose it to get people thinking about how massive amounts of money are used and sometimes abused right here in Jacksonville. This is not a fight I am going to take on first hand. This is rather about getting people to think about our financial priorities and engaged in the way this city operates. After all the city is supposed to represent us all, not dictate to us what must be done. :)
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 06, 2015, 11:58:51 AM
Not much I can say to a person who does not know the difference between a spirited discussion and freaking out. Your opinion still remains your opinion until you can back it up with solid facts. I have not seen you do that yet. Give me some solid facts and links to support your dramatic statements and then we can talk. lol
So, this is the tactic? Really? Seriously? Give *you* some solid facts? That's truly rich coming from the woman railing about a plan she knows little to nothing of but is comfortable presuming nefarious intentions by the city and the owner of the Jaguars.
Spirited discussion, my azz.
Since you're in full school marm mode, this is some backatcha. How about you cool out and learn a little bit first? How about you meet the proposers, and their proposal, halfway -- in other words, keep an open mind. That's what an educated citizenry does. I'm sure you're familiar with that concept even though you're working pretty hard not to do so. Your mind seems shut and you seem quite impressed with your ability to state opinions as facts, and then skip on down the road as if all of that bluster has settled the matter.
Sorry to break this to you, but it hasn't. You aren't doing any educating here. LOL as much as you want; hopefully it floats your boat. But I'm waiting to see what the details are, and (until proven otherwise) confident that the interests of the city have been protected.
I will leave the last words with you RattlerGator after this short post. I have said all that is worth saying on the topic for my part. Your views are your views and I am okay with that reality. :) Carry on as you please.
Sounds like if the bed taxes are used as proposed it may be approved. See comments from Boyer,Crescembeni and Anderson they would be on board. Saw in paper this morning Hazouri was sounding like a vote too as alluded it is the type of public/private investment needed.
I've been out of town for most of my time this week, so I haven't had a chance to closely follow the debate with Khan. However, I will say that it's becoming clearly evident that Khan marches to the beat of a different drum than most traditionally associated with DT Jax development. Some of the uses being proposed and the type of architecture representing them are clearly things that Jax has long lacked.
Also, this stuff changes the entire concept of what the Sports District can be. Assuming this particular project becomes reality, what's the point of Metropolitan Park? Can it be something else? If so, what? His old concept for the Shipyard also changes, since there would be no need for a waterfront indoor practice facility. Last, as the Sports District starts densifying with a mix of an around-the-clock uses/events, how does mobility (Skyway, Hogans Creek Greenway, Hart Bridge ramps, etc.) play into this?
Lots of big questions to consider for little ole Jax.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 04:55:44 PM
I've been out of town for most of my time this week, so I haven't had a chance to closely follow the debate with Khan. However, I will say that it's becoming clearly evident that Khan marches to the beat of a different drum than most traditionally associated with DT Jax development. Some of the uses being proposed and the type of architecture representing them are clearly things that Jax has long lacked.
Also, this stuff changes the entire concept of what the Sports District can be. Assuming this particular project becomes reality, what's the point of Metropolitan Park? Can it be something else? If so, what? His old concept for the Shipyard also changes, since there would be no need for a waterfront indoor practice facility. Last, as the Sports District starts densifying with a mix of an around-the-clock uses/events, how does mobility (Skyway, Hogans Creek Greenway, Hart Bridge ramps, etc.) play into this?
Lots of big questions to consider for little ole Jax.
Amen. This is a concept I hadn't thought of; doing an amphitheater in the grass area south of the stadium. They tried selling the tailgate cabanas, but they were an awful deal and few bought them.
Maybe I'm just not fiscally responsible, but I think this is a good thing. Khan's proven once that he can deliver a project in a tight timeline (north end zone/scoreboards), so I'll trust him with another.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 04:55:44 PM
I've been out of town for most of my time this week, so I haven't had a chance to closely follow the debate with Khan. However, I will say that it's becoming clearly evident that Khan marches to the beat of a different drum than most traditionally associated with DT Jax development. Some of the uses being proposed and the type of architecture representing them are clearly things that Jax has long lacked.
Also, this stuff changes the entire concept of what the Sports District can be. Assuming this particular project becomes reality, what's the point of Metropolitan Park? Can it be something else? If so, what? His old concept for the Shipyard also changes, since there would be no need for a waterfront indoor practice facility. Last, as the Sports District starts densifying with a mix of an around-the-clock uses/events, how does mobility (Skyway, Hogans Creek Greenway, Hart Bridge ramps, etc.) play into this?
Lots of big questions to consider for little ole Jax.
Agree. And if there ever was a city that needed to start marching to a different drum this is certainly the one. Removing the amphitheater from metro park would still allow for considerable green space and perhaps even using a portion on the shipyard site for development. Development that wouldn't have to wait for remediation and would be close to a growing entertainment complex.
I don't have any problem with it either. I think Khan is a smart man and he knows how to deliver and the City is smart to partner with him. Any improvements that are made around the stadium are a good thing and I see it as beneficial to the city as a whole.
Quote from: stephendare on November 06, 2015, 06:36:14 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 06:32:46 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 04:55:44 PM
I've been out of town for most of my time this week, so I haven't had a chance to closely follow the debate with Khan. However, I will say that it's becoming clearly evident that Khan marches to the beat of a different drum than most traditionally associated with DT Jax development. Some of the uses being proposed and the type of architecture representing them are clearly things that Jax has long lacked.
Also, this stuff changes the entire concept of what the Sports District can be. Assuming this particular project becomes reality, what's the point of Metropolitan Park? Can it be something else? If so, what? His old concept for the Shipyard also changes, since there would be no need for a waterfront indoor practice facility. Last, as the Sports District starts densifying with a mix of an around-the-clock uses/events, how does mobility (Skyway, Hogans Creek Greenway, Hart Bridge ramps, etc.) play into this?
Lots of big questions to consider for little ole Jax.
Agree. And if there ever was a city that needed to start marching to a different drum this is certainly the one. Removing the amphitheater from metro park would still allow for considerable green space and perhaps even using a portion on the shipyard site for development. Development that wouldn't have to wait for remediation and would be close to a growing entertainment complex.
total bs.
a 'sports district'?
Please, what even is that? A stadium used once or twice a month surrounded by practice fields and green space? there is another word for this: Dead zone.
Well, it's no giant glass needle on riverfront property, but I expect a concert amphitheater and an indoor field will draw some crowds downtown.
Quote from: stephendare on November 06, 2015, 06:36:14 PM
Quote from: edjax on November 06, 2015, 06:32:46 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 04:55:44 PM
I've been out of town for most of my time this week, so I haven't had a chance to closely follow the debate with Khan. However, I will say that it's becoming clearly evident that Khan marches to the beat of a different drum than most traditionally associated with DT Jax development. Some of the uses being proposed and the type of architecture representing them are clearly things that Jax has long lacked.
Also, this stuff changes the entire concept of what the Sports District can be. Assuming this particular project becomes reality, what's the point of Metropolitan Park? Can it be something else? If so, what? His old concept for the Shipyard also changes, since there would be no need for a waterfront indoor practice facility. Last, as the Sports District starts densifying with a mix of an around-the-clock uses/events, how does mobility (Skyway, Hogans Creek Greenway, Hart Bridge ramps, etc.) play into this?
Lots of big questions to consider for little ole Jax.
Agree. And if there ever was a city that needed to start marching to a different drum this is certainly the one. Removing the amphitheater from metro park would still allow for considerable green space and perhaps even using a portion on the shipyard site for development. Development that wouldn't have to wait for remediation and would be close to a growing entertainment complex.
total bs.
a 'sports district'?
Please, what even is that? A stadium used once or twice a month surrounded by practice fields and green space? there is another word for this: Dead zone.
Well I actually referred to it as an Entertainment District. But Sports District is ok too as there is also an arena and baseball park in the district. They play sports in those facilities too!!! Maybe not the type of sports you know of? I dunno.
I thought the area was officially called the Sports District by COJ?
I believe Khan is taking this approach so as to have an indoor practice facility now. He initial thought was that the Shipyards deal could also move this quick, but that is not going to happen. Too many hoops to jump through. So, let's build an indoor practice facility and redo the clubs ($45 million from his pocket +/-) and see if city is willing to pay for an amphitheater. He now has two items/venues on his Shipyards list, and they can be completed in less than a year and not 5 years. Also, with this plan the city will own the facilities on city property.
Quote from: stephendare on November 06, 2015, 07:10:54 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 07:00:29 PM
I thought the area was officially called the Sports District by COJ?
Its as good an idea as the 'government center' or any of their other badly executed concepts that don't take into account organic use or economics.
I wasn't debating the validity of the name. I mentioned it to highlight a certain area of the urban core where a larger discussion about its future should be taking place.
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2015, 10:30:16 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 06, 2015, 07:10:54 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 07:00:29 PM
I thought the area was officially called the Sports District by COJ?
Its as good an idea as the 'government center' or any of their other badly executed concepts that don't take into account organic use or economics.
I wasn't debating the validity of the name. I mentioned it to highlight a certain area of the urban core where a larger discussion about its future should be taking place.
I'm sure everyone else understood that.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 07, 2015, 10:39:49 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 07, 2015, 10:30:16 AM
Quote from: stephendare on November 06, 2015, 07:10:54 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on November 06, 2015, 07:00:29 PM
I thought the area was officially called the Sports District by COJ?
Its as good an idea as the 'government center' or any of their other badly executed concepts that don't take into account organic use or economics.
I wasn't debating the validity of the name. I mentioned it to highlight a certain area of the urban core where a larger discussion about its future should be taking place.
I'm sure everyone else understood that.
Well... most of us ;)
Quote from: jaxjags on November 07, 2015, 09:36:22 AM
I believe Khan is taking this approach so as to have an indoor practice facility now. He initial thought was that the Shipyards deal could also move this quick, but that is not going to happen. Too many hoops to jump through. So, let's build an indoor practice facility and redo the clubs ($45 million from his pocket +/-) and see if city is willing to pay for an amphitheater. He now has two items/venues on his Shipyards list, and they can be completed in less than a year and not 5 years. Also, with this plan the city will own the facilities on city property.
Khan's clearly from a world where making things happen doesn't move at a snail's pace or require decades of study. It's nice to see. In the world of professional sports owners, Jax is lucky. Hopefully, some of that zeal rubs off on us locally.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/jaguars-city-propose-90m-amphitheater-indoor-practice-field-stadium-improvements/36283342
Questions are being asked. While the administration seems poised to embrace the idea others who pay close attention to our city finances are asking why"
I'd like to see Metro Park gone if a new amphitheater is built. It's a pitiful disconnected spot that could be something much better.
Parking is already available, so no need for yet more garages. More revenue generation in the same city owned space.
Though I wonder how any future Shipyards residents will feel about a concert venue in their proximity. The Pritzker Pavilion in Millenium Park in Chicago created alot of negative buzz with the residents in the surrounding high rises complaining of the frequency of late night noise.
Outdoor concert pavilions need to be either in the boonies or face away from civilization. In this case, it will be neither.
Just tossing this out there....perhaps the Shipyards shouldn't have a ton of future residential uses? Maybe Metropolitan Park is in the wrong location? What are we going to do when the time comes to replace the Hart Bridge ramps? What if the market decides that the predetermined uses we've identified for a few of these sites aren't feasible?
If the structure is built to be anything like the renderings I think the noise would be directed towards the core. Obviously, there would be some sound bleeding if it's open to the air at all, but you could direct it away from the future shipyards residences. A relatively cheap solution would be to put a large, stepped, berm with foliage on top along the side facing downtown. This could be blended nicely into that rendering to make a "natural modern design". It would also give people a place to sit at an elevation if they were further away, as well as direct sound away from residences.
The current rendering shows the practice field in between the amphitheater and the river which should provide sound protection for those across the river who usually complain.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 07, 2015, 12:37:22 PM
http://www.news4jax.com/news/jaguars-city-propose-90m-amphitheater-indoor-practice-field-stadium-improvements/36283342
Questions are being asked. While the administration seems poised to embrace the idea others who pay close attention to our city finances are asking why"
From what I have seen, those most against it don't even understand the funding source.
Quote from: copperfiend on November 07, 2015, 02:19:08 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on November 07, 2015, 12:37:22 PM
http://www.news4jax.com/news/jaguars-city-propose-90m-amphitheater-indoor-practice-field-stadium-improvements/36283342
Questions are being asked. While the administration seems poised to embrace the idea others who pay close attention to our city finances are asking why"
From what I have seen, those most against it don't even understand the funding source.
Really? I certainly haven't seen that to be the case - but then again, I've only been following this on Metro Jacksonville.
Quote from: stephendare on November 06, 2015, 06:36:14 PM
total bs.
a 'sports district'?
Please, what even is that? A stadium used once or twice a month surrounded by practice fields and green space? there is another word for this: Dead zone.
well the district also includes a baseball/soccer stadium that is used about 90 times a year...and an arena used about 100 times a year.
QuoteIt's nice to see. In the world of professional sports owners, Jax is lucky.
We are and you are right, Met Park is an old dilapidated dump. It needs to be torn down and used as part of the Shipyards deal. Nothing worth saving at Met Park that a new development could not fix and/or improve.
Most of the people against the deal have no idea where the funds come from for the deal, its really a disgrace, local media gets the people all hot and bothered and does a crappy job of explaining the entire program. Its shoddy journalism and all who report half-truths should be ashamed.
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:53:37 PM
Quote from: finehoe on November 05, 2015, 01:52:53 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on November 05, 2015, 01:37:01 PM
Connecting rather obvious dots isn't speculation.
That's exactly what it is:
"the forming of a theory or conjecture without firm evidence"
The "firm evidence" part is what's throwing you.
The 11/2/15 Jacksonville Ethics Commission meeting had Carla Miller the Ethics Director calling time out. Agenda item 7. Two Discussions. First was Public Records Issues and PROPOSED LEGISLATION. Second was Discussion of Jaguar Football Ticket Distribution.
The Ethics Commission didn't meet in Oct. On the Jaguars, Carla Miller told the Commission that there is a concern about the Jacksonville city council members that attended the 10/17/15 party on Khan's yacht. Now you have active legislation that is seeking a $45,000,000 yes vote from a council member. The cost of this EC-Expensive Charter needs to be settled before legislative action should be advanced by our elected legislative representatives.
Stay Positive while the "firm evidence" is being created.
Reaction on the council has been supportive. Even one of the staunchest critics of stadium spending, Councilman John Crescimbeni, said he likes the idea because tthe money is from bed taxes not property or sales taxes.
"This money is being paid into the accounts by people staying in hotels in Duval County, probably not Jacksonville citizens -- unless I got kicked out of the house or something," Crescimbeni said. "It's very limited on what we can spend it on, and this is what it's intended to be spent on."
http://www.news4jax.com/news/city-council-votes-on-million-dollar-proposal/36359702
^ interesting that the article highlights the stadium deal and potential 2% raise for Council....but leaves just a single hanging line at the bottom about extending term limits from 8 years to 12 years...very odd
QuoteThe cables supporting the tent are falling apart, and the mayor's staff said the plan is to close the stage until repairs are made. The park itself remains open. How long repairs will take and how much they will cost is unknown, but the mayor's staff said the closure has nothing to do with the EverBank Field expansion plans.
I wonder if the people inspecting these cables are the same ones that determine if houses in Springfield in danger of falling down.
Quote from: tufsu1 on November 10, 2015, 03:15:33 PM
^ interesting that the article highlights the stadium deal and potential 2% raise for Council....but leaves just a single hanging line at the bottom about extending term limits from 8 years to 12 years...very odd
I'm all for extending term limits so that we don't keep hemorrhaging institutional knowledge every election. But are our City Council members underpaid compared to similarly-sized municipalities?
^ I leave that for others to decide....currently they are paid $44,000 for what some consider a part-time job
The devil is in the details. We all need to read the contract before deciding if this is a good deal for the taxpayers of Jax.
http://cityclts.coj.net/coj/COJbillDetail.asp?F=2015-0781\Original%20Text
^Is there a detail of concern for the Riverkeepered?
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2016/01/15/despite-met-park-concerns-planned-festivals-go-on.html
Is this a typo? They say $49 million from the city?
^Not sure about Thursday - the Jaguars' State of the Franchise Address is Friday at 11 (Available live on Jaguars.com). I have no doubt that this will come up, whatever the situation might be.
Quote from: stephendare on January 27, 2016, 01:20:53 PM
Shad Khan employing a 'bait and switch' deal for amiptheater millions?
This came via email from a reader.
QuoteI was at the Economic Roundtable Luncheon today and Mark Lamping showed a brand new video of the proposed practice field amphitheater and it looked completely different. It was a short video with lots of fancy effects but I could still tell the original design they sold to the city was much more cutting edge (expensive) utilizing a curvilinear lattice structure and what was shown today was a standard steel truss structure with some kind of fabric on top. He said they'd be officially released to the public Thursday.
I was at the same presentation. I thought the design was fantastic. Is it the same as the preliminary drawings? NO, but I never expected it to be. Regardless, I think everyone will be very impressed (although I am certain there will be plenty of MetroJax posters who will be overly critical). The video unveiled yesterday will be shown at Friday's state of the franchise address.
Well Stephen, MJ is after all a dialectic-hydraulic-interpretation press, which could press an indefinite number of meanings out of any text or municipal proposal, an apparatus for constructing fictions, and a hair-splitting machine that could divide a single hair into 999,999 equal parts and, when manipulated by our esteemed posters, could split each of these parts again into 999,999 equal parts. such debates are open to all MJ regulars and to our guests provided they drink the Lethean draught known to induce forgetfulness of terrestrial human affairs, so as to be properly programmed by our opined little band.
How many development projects end up identical to the plans? I'm sure in the agreement with the City, they were given some lattitude for the creative process.
So, Stephen, is the party sending the eMail insisting on anonymity? If not, why not name them? If so, why are they so skurred? They're bad enough to be catty and unimpressed at a $45 million gift -- let 'em step on out wit they bad self 'n stand tall, so to speak.
Quote from: RattlerGator on January 27, 2016, 04:23:24 PM
So, Stephen, is the party sending the eMail insisting on anonymity? If not, why not name them? If so, why are they so skurred? They're bad enough to be catty and unimpressed at a $45 million gift -- let 'em step on out wit they bad self 'n stand tall, so to speak.
It's possible the comment was off the record.
I hope no one thought what was released earlier in the process was the actual final rendering. How many times, even as recent as 'The District' on the Southbank have we seen something announced with preliminary design before an actual scale and scope rendering is later made available. No news here..moving right along. Some people just hate billionaires with a passion, enough to make a non-story a story.
Quote from: Marle Brando on January 27, 2016, 05:43:45 PM
I hope no one thought what was released earlier in the process was the actual final rendering. How many times, even as recent as 'The District' on the Southbank have we seen something announced with preliminary design before an actual scale and scope rendering is later made available. No news here..moving right along. Some people just hate billionaires with a passion, enough to make a non-story a story.
Exactly. Exhibit A -- stephendare. I only asked re anonymity because I seem to recall stephen questioning someone on the board (whoisjohngalt?) about anonymity.
Quote from: stephendare on January 27, 2016, 09:21:28 PM
Shad Khan employing a 'bait and switch' deal for amiptheater millions?
This came via email from a reader.
QuoteI was at the Economic Roundtable Luncheon today and Mark Lamping showed a brand new video of the proposed practice field amphitheater and it looked completely different. It was a short video with lots of fancy effects but I could still tell the original design they sold to the city was much more cutting edge (expensive) utilizing a curvilinear lattice structure and what was shown today was a standard steel truss structure with some kind of fabric on top. He said they'd be officially released to the public Thursday.
But when a poster on the site says otherwise, his observation gets dismissed.
So now were not even dealing with anonymous screennames, but have have to keep track of super-anonymous, emailed sources.
Hmmm.....
QuoteQuote from: MEGATRON on January 27, 2016, 02:10:26 PM
I was at the same presentation. I thought the design was fantastic. Is it the same as the preliminary drawings? NO, but I never expected it to be. Regardless, I think everyone will be very impressed (although I am certain there will be plenty of MetroJax posters who will be overly critical). The video unveiled yesterday will be shown at Friday's state of the franchise address.
Quote from: stephendare on January 27, 2016, 02:11:54 PM
and as usual there will probably be metrojax posters who are wildly credulous and overly uncritical. ;)
I guess this little nugget from my FB lends some obvious to the topic de jour:
http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/2016/01/27/soccer-stadium-renderings-design-changes
QuoteOften an early rendering simply exists to present a big idea. But then the "budget gets real, program requirements get real, site constraints get real, lots of new information or preferences or ideas owners might have evolve designs," Brown says....
It is now and always has been childish to act as if projects are slaves to their initial renderings. Stephen knows that. And, for context, I thought this was a very encouraging article:
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=546933
QuoteThe city and the Jaguars have not discussed specifics about funding for cleanup and other infrastructure needs at the Shipyards site and along Bay Street.
"The city's investment should be what's sufficient to make the project a go," said Lamping.
However, he doesn't want to see the city waste money.
"It's better to not go forward than to go forward and fail," he said.
Rummell said The District's negotiations with the city could pave the way for an agreement on the Shipyards.
"The paperwork is getting straightened out as we go. He's going to have a piece of cake," Rummell said.
"We've come to realize that these things don't happen overnight," said Lamping.
"It's shockingly complex," he said. "To get it right is really sort of a difficult challenge."
However, Lamping does expect the Jaguars to eventually succeed in its development plans for the Shipyards.
"We're as confident as ever," he said.
Those two projects
are complementary. The $90 million at the stadium should be seen the same way.
Quote from: stephendare on January 27, 2016, 09:21:28 PM
Shad Khan employing a 'bait and switch' deal for amiptheater millions?
This came via email from a reader.
QuoteI was at the Economic Roundtable Luncheon today and Mark Lamping showed a brand new video of the proposed practice field amphitheater and it looked completely different. It was a short video with lots of fancy effects but I could still tell the original design they sold to the city was much more cutting edge (expensive) utilizing a curvilinear lattice structure and what was shown today was a standard steel truss structure with some kind of fabric on top. He said they'd be officially released to the public Thursday.
Layout-wise, the amphitheater looks the same as the second renderings that came out last month (see here (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,25615.msg431773.html#msg431773)).
So it seems the changes your emailer saw were to the practice field. I know there were people here critical of the exterior shown in the initial renderings. I think I remember complaint about how it might not be in compliance city ordinances. The changes to the exterior seems to settle that issue.
Here's the best set of renderings I've been able to find:
http://www.news4jax.com/sports/nfl/jaguars/new-renderings-of-everbank-field-improvements
Still not entire sure what I'm looking at.
^Check out the state of the franchise presentation video on jaguars.com. Mark Lamping gave an explanation with slides as to what you are viewing in the pictures. The same set of Rene rings are also posted.
Quote from: stephendare on January 27, 2016, 09:21:28 PM
Shad Khan employing a 'bait and switch' deal for amiptheater millions?
This came via email from a reader.
QuoteI was at the Economic Roundtable Luncheon today and Mark Lamping showed a brand new video of the proposed practice field amphitheater and it looked completely different. It was a short video with lots of fancy effects but I could still tell the original design they sold to the city was much more cutting edge (expensive) utilizing a curvilinear lattice structure and what was shown today was a standard steel truss structure with some kind of fabric on top. He said they'd be officially released to the public Thursday.
The new design looks better than the original renderings, IMO.
^Just saw them - I agree. It's much more connected as one venue versus two. All of the features of the original renderings are included.
^Totally agree.
It looks better, and it seems much more functional as well.
Seems like they would need to break ground tomorrow to have it finished by August.
^ Agreed - actually looks pretty amazing at that price point. Not even sure how or what to compare it to.
Quote from: KenFSU on January 29, 2016, 01:29:06 PM
^Totally agree.
It looks better, and it seems much more functional as well.
Seems like they would need to break ground tomorrow to have it finished by August.
According to the radio, there was a bit of an oversight and they are actually having to wait until after Monster Jam to begin work.
Once construction is complete, Khan is interested in adding another high-end development just south of the stadium.
He said that he hasn't given up on the Shipyards, but it doesn't sound like he wants to sit around wasting time either.
^Any mention or speculation as to what this high end development may be?
^The Jax Business Journal mentioned restaurants, office space, or "other venues."
It almost sounds like the Shipyards concept is going to be scaled down and just moved closer to Met Park.
Also, Khan said absolutely no to another Super Bowl coming to Jax. "Won't waste time or resources on hosting." Likes the idea of using the facility to host the Draft one day though.
Also, from some of the other quotes coming up, it sounds like the Jags pretty much borrowed/stole the floor plan from Radio City :)
Thanks, sounds good. Im assuming by 'area to the south' Khan was referring to the surface lot immediately west in betweem the broadcating antennae and the new flex field. I do hope they eventually do something with more of the surface lots and force people to use the garages more often than not.
Hmmmmmm . . . where is Stephen and his unimpressed confidante ? ? ?
Quote from: Marle Brando on January 29, 2016, 02:39:38 PM
Thanks, sounds good. Im assuming by 'area to the south' Khan was referring to the surface lot immediately west in betweem the broadcating antennae and the new flex field. I do hope they eventually do something with more of the surface lots and force people to use the garages more often than not.
Could they be considering doing something really new and creative around the Channel 7 area? It *is* an area to the south of the stadium. I like that they are moving on what they can move on and seriously making a varied entertainment district on land not dependent upon environmental damage mitigation and reclamation.
It hurts to be wrong, I know. And I was pretty sure you'd say something like you're not all that impressed. Pretty telling. And if I don't have the faintest clue as to whether or not this is a good deal for the money it's even more true that you absolutely don't know that it isn't.
Hey, this poor little black boy can only afford -- like thousands of others from the region -- to be a season-ticket-holder. But I'm glad to do my part, thank ya kindly.
Quote from: JPalmer on January 29, 2016, 01:30:48 PM
According to the radio, there was a bit of an oversight and they are actually having to wait until after Monster Jam to begin work.
there may have been a few oversights on the process