QuoteBus shelters with advertising are probably coming to Jacksonville. But it won’t be clear for months whether the advertising will lead to a lawsuit that might put the city’s sign law in jeopardy.
The City Council voted Tuesday night 10-6 to amend its existing sign law to allow advertising on bus shelters. Mayor John Peyton has not yet said if he will support or oppose the amendment; he has 10 days to decide.
If Peyton doesn’t veto the bill, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority -- which requested the amendment will be free to hire a sign company to build new bus shelters.
full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2009-10-13/story/jacksonville_sign_law_amended_to_allow_ads_at_bus_shelters
YES! YIPPIE! YES! YEAH! KUDOS COUNCIL MEMBERS! Mr. Blaylock and company, take a bow!
OCKLAWAHA
Good, because I do feel bad for those in the summer either getting baked by the sun or soaked by the storms waiting for a bus.
Will the lawyers for the billboard companies please form an orderly line to the right? Yes, under that bus shelter there.
I watched some of the debate - Cindy L, from the OGC, said her office would handle any litigation that came up, without outside help. And that defending the sign ordinance would depend on a well written contract.
Uh oh.
An image from the TU. It looks like it was taken along the Arlington Expressway or Southside Blvd.
(http://jacksonville.com/files/imagecache/meta_headline_photo/met_HighHeatFeature_.jpg)
Stephen and friends, congrats. Savor the moment (and, starting still another thread when one already existed on the subject ???). By the way, this was never about being for/against bus shelters, only how to pay for them. Let's not demonize the opposition.
I don't expect you to post a response from the other side of this so here is mine posted earlier at the original thread:Quote from: stjr on October 13, 2009, 11:33:08 PM
Bad news. And this is most disturbing:
QuoteAttorneys with both the city General Counsel’s Office and JTA expressed confidence that the amendment was legal. That seemed to be enough for the majority of the council.
Not only are the local government attorneys less expert than those attorneys in opposition, they have had a number of legal fiascoes they "assured" us wouldn't happen, including courthouse contracts, stadium deals, the shipyard disaster, public records mishandling, etc. Now, they are the best advice we have?
QuoteOpponents of the amendment accused JTA of collaborating with Clear Channel. The law firm of JTA attorney David Cohen also represents Clear Channel.
Cohen said there is no conflict of interest because he doesn’t deal with Clear Channel, and does not discuss JTA business with his law partner who does represent Clear Channel.
The JTA attorney has a clear conflict of interest. If ANYONE in his firm represents a conflicting client, ALL the attorneys in that firm should have a conflict. I know that's what my attorneys always tell me. The Bar should investigate this.
Here is what I would consider the perfect storm: We get sued by the billboard companies AND, because we poorly design a contract with a bus shelter ad company, they ALSO sue us when we try to void their contract if we lose a suit to the billboard companies. It will be a typical Jax legal train wreck and the taxpayers will pay a lot more than the ads will ever deliver. Expect litigation to be hundreds of thousands, if not millions.
By the way, JTA's promise to cough up $250,000 for legal fees could have bought about 50 new shelters or maintained about 200 of them. And, that's just their legal down payment. Funny, they have lots of money for lawyers and litigation, but none for transit. Once again, we have a gullible City Council. Hope the mayor comes through with a veto.
QuoteClear Channel, the largest sign company in Jacksonville, wouldn’t comment earlier this week about a lawsuit or whether it might bid for the shelter contract.
Taking bets on WHEN, not if, this lawsuit gets filed...
Typical Jax GOB deal. And, posters here wonder why this town is always in the backwaters.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 14, 2009, 12:06:53 AM
An image from the TU. It looks like it was taken along the Arlington Expressway or Southside Blvd.
(http://jacksonville.com/files/imagecache/meta_headline_photo/met_HighHeatFeature_.jpg)
Looks fierce.
I did not know that JTA coughed up 250K for lawyers.......well they found the 72 Million in that desk drawer just the other day and I am still confused about that one! Doesn't someone at their end balance their checkbook? Amateurs one more time in action. This has gotten me to the point where I don't believe much of anything that comes from either the OCG or any of the Independent Authorities. This will end up costing the taxpayer even more than it all ready does..............and still no additional shelters!
they didn't cough up $250k....they have just promised to pay up to $250,000 if there are legal challenges!
Can't wait to see the Gold Club ads on the side of the bus stations.
^That's cool, as long as little old ladies, like the one in the image above, aren't getting baked by the sun.
I'm guessing those that ride the bus will not care at all... now that they are sheltered from the sun and rain!
How can it be any worse than a Hooters bus rolling all over town? not that I have anything against Hooters......haha
Quote from: mtraininjax on October 14, 2009, 09:05:59 AM
Can't wait to see the Gold Club ads on the side of the bus stations.
Me too.
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 14, 2009, 08:17:07 AM
they didn't cough up $250k....they have just promised to pay up to $250,000 if there are legal challenges!
If they made a promise, one has to assume they have the money available to back it up. Why not have spent the money on shelters. Then, the promise wouldn't have been necessary.
Big fella..........last I heard JTA found $72 Million in an unused account, what are they going to do with that, spend it on the Courthouse?
$250,000 buys and installs about 18 shelters....I think their goal with the ad program is much higher!
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 14, 2009, 10:51:36 PM
$250,000 buys and installs about 18 shelters....I think their goal with the ad program is much higher!
Based on the quote below from the Times Union, it appears that the average is maybe $8,000. At that rate, 31 to 32 of them could be built for $250K. Let's stick to some facts.QuoteShelters cost $4,000 to $12,000 to build and about $1,200 a year to maintain.
stjr - I think tufsu1's point is valid. Even at your rate, I still think they want significantly more than 30 shelters. Not to mention, that 250K would only build the shelters, not maintain them.
Quote from: Steve on October 15, 2009, 12:11:41 AM
stjr - I think tufsu1's point is valid. Even at your rate, I still think they want significantly more than 30 shelters. Not to mention, that 250K would only build the shelters, not maintain them.
Steve, I didn't mean to imply this was the end of the story. Just a demonstration of JTA's ability to find substantial pockets of money that could be put to better use. This is just one "little ol' expense" being highlighted in a very large budget that likely affords many more such "opportunities". Add them up, and you might be able to build a lot of shelters AND maintain them.
The Times Union indicated a private contractor would build 70 to 80 a year. So, 31 or 32 from just one legal bill not paid would be a substantial start.
Wonder what the total legal expenses, aside from real estate acquisition, are for JTA? What other expenses could be redirected to better use? I think anyone watching a governmental bureaucracy like JTA in action would have a healthy suspicion there is plenty of poorly spent money in their budget. The ads versus shelters debate was a clever way for them to avoid the pressure of doing a more diligent financial house cleaning. Send me over there and I could probably prove it. But, on one condition: I find it, they HAVE to do it.
Given this, I think my point is the more valid one.
Below is an FYI about JTA's budget. Not sure the reporter gave (understood?) the full story as I don't see any reference to interest on bonds issued for road projects, road maintenance, road construction, federal and state grants, etc. so this may be an operations-only slice of the total budget. The reporter also fails to explain where the revenue difference comes from between the sales tax proceeds and the small City subsidy and the total expenses. Anyone know the full picture and where the rest of it, if any, can be found? Are the line item details subject to public records?
What is there is broken down by operation expenses, not by expense type (line, staff, and management wages, marketing, legal, depreciation, office, travel, lobbying, utilities, fuel, etc.) so its hard to really decipher much from it other than the wasted $7 million on the $ky-high-way (which would more than solve all the bus shelter problems).
I note a reference to the health insurance benefit being over budget. I wonder how JTA's plan compares to the private sector? What do employees contribute? Do they have a pension as well? Wouldn't be surprised to find their benefits are pretty generous in today's times but the facts are what we need to be fair. Quote8-28-2009 Jax Financial News & Daily Record:
...Overall, JTA’s proposed budget is $106.6 million. Of that, a majority (about $72.6 million) is in bus operations. The rest of the JTA budget is comprised of Skyway operation, a community free ride service (JTA’s Connexion service) and engineering.
“This is money that flows back and forth between the City and JTA,†said Kyle Billy of the Council Auditor’s Office.
Billy said JTA generates funds from two pots: about $56 million from the sales tax attached to the Better Jacksonville Plan and $1.2 million from the City to subsidize the JTA Connexion service. The BJP money includes the half-cent sales tax approved in 2000 and the local gas tax. The Finance Committee doesn’t have the authority to alter either line item and both are contingent, in part, on the economy.
“The bus operations are heavily subsidized and their main expenditures are wages and benefits,†said Billy.
Included in JTA’s proposed 2009-10 budget is a significant jump in health care expenditures. Blair Fishburn, JTA’s CFO, said rising health care costs and an under-budgeting of such costs last year add up to create the increase.
The Finance Committee suggested a 3 percent cut in the City’s contribution. However, JTA Executive Director Mike Blaylock said that would only hurt JTA’s ability to provide free transportation for those with no other means of getting around. Blaylock also said he has made major cuts already.
“Three percent of $1.2 million is $40,000. The challenge for us is we have projects budgeted, but it’s not solid,†said Blaylock, explaining the BJP revenues are tied to sales tax in Jacksonville and the gas tax is tied to the cost of fuel, both of which fluctuate. “I have already made a 9.3 percent cut, which is a huge reduction in the system.â€
Blaylock was also grilled on the Skyway, which costs JTA over $7 million annually to operate. Council President Richard Clark said his office faces the Hemming Plaza Skyway station and he maintains ridership is low.
“I am trying to figure out the end game with the Skyway,†said Clark. “Why do we continue to operate this?â€
Blaylock defended the system by saying it, as well as the Kings Avenue parking garage, were built ahead of their time.
“There were projections of 200,000 workers Downtown that never occurred,†said Blaylock, adding the idea now is to integrate the Skyway into a transportation system that sees bus routes into Downtown terminate at Skyway stations. He also thinks one day the Skyway will be beneficial. “I am crazy enough to believe Downtown will come back strong.â€...
http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=528901
If JTA can not make an informed decision based upon what they have available, then it is time to change the management of JTA. Skyway was and is a waste of resources that could be better spent else where in the City , as in shelters,hold on paying $600K for new bus's(already found one company that will provide basically the same thing for 400K),how do you misplace 72 Million Dollars which still has not be obligated towards something, and you tell me there is no waste? I beg to differ............JEA suffers from the same affliction!
They really should make the Skyway free. It is a good amenity to this city and would be thought of strictly as the public service it is instead of a venture that is supposed to make a profit. If we want more mass transit in this town. So that it can grow in coridors and have systems feed on one another we have to be committed. We should not be like the State asking for more mass transit dollars while not supporting Tri-rail. The proposed $2 statewide bed tax would support the skyway as well as Tri-rail.
Should they have built ten times the length in streetcars for the same money instead of skyway yes. I think we all know that.
Big fella.........that actually makes a lot of sense!! Never occured to me to look in that direction.......I mean if it is going to stay and cost's us $7 Million a year (that number may have gone up to 14 Million by the way) then wind it up and let it rip! Of couse it would be nice if it were extended to some where, but what do i know!
Quote from: thelakelander on October 14, 2009, 12:06:53 AM
An image from the TU. It looks like it was taken along the Arlington Expressway or Southside Blvd.
(http://jacksonville.com/files/imagecache/meta_headline_photo/met_HighHeatFeature_.jpg)
Is she dead?
Quote from: Steve on October 15, 2009, 12:11:41 AM
stjr - I think tufsu1's point is valid. Even at your rate, I still think they want significantly more than 30 shelters. Not to mention, that 250K would only build the shelters, not maintain them.
correct Steve....while it is true that most of the shelters JTA has installed around town cost about $6,000, they also cost around another $6,000 to install (sometimes they need to even construct a concrete pad)....so if the real cost for each shelter is $12,000, then $250,000 allows for the installation of 21....and as you pointed out, then there are maintenance costs.
Don't think for a minute that JTA's $250k legal fee offer is intended to be on an annual basis or all spent in one year...so let's extrpolate out 5 years....
Under the current system, JTA has installed less than 400 shelters around town and could conceivably add another 21 with the legal fee $...TOTAL = 421
Under the new ad program, up to 400 shelters would be constructed....TOTAL = 800
Seems like a no brainer to me!
One thing I see being left out of this conversation is the cost of maintaining shelters. It isn't just about building them. The revenue genrated from ad placements will also help to offset the cost of maintenance. Also, make no mistake about it that City Council does not support the Skyway under any circumstance, it is clear about by thier comments.
I'm glad this finally happened.
Its past time that someone makes logical arguments for the skyway and its role in the creation of an integrated mass transit system. While everyone may not agree in the end, it does have its benefits and they need to be argued. Especially to a council that really lacks transit knowledge but has the power to completely alter plans because of personal ill-informed opinions.
Because of a fear of really addressing the situation, it appears that San Marco will not be well integrated into the overall RTS plan in the short or long term. This is a significant problem because San Marco happens to be our most walkable urban neighborhood outside of the Northbank.
If its going to left to rot, then lets go ahead and start planning to either take it down or convert the infrastructure into an elevated streetcar system. Either way, the status quo on how we completely ignore the skyway needs to change.
Could a broader streetcar system at grade also incorporate the elevated tracks where they are now?
That would be just an enginering problem and it would be solvable but if converted over then extended to incorperate other area's for sure! Biggest problem with the current Skyway is scheduling and lack of really going to somewhere......other than that 14 Million a year to operate.