Not sure the timing is right, but the idea is good
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-05/story/jta-ask-council-gas-tax-increase-and-extension
This is the kind of funding we will need to raise the local $ necessary to implement rail transit....and before folks start griping about taxes being too high already, I recommend comparing local gas taxes in Duval County with our neighboring counties and other similar areas in Florida.
TU, I read the story with the same hope, but then in the middle of the story saw the statement that "there are $500 million in unfunded ROAD projects in the country."
If only there was a way to reserve ALL of the tax increase for rail transit in the county, then I would be an enthusiastic supporter. Otherwise, meh.
I'd be hesitant to support a tax increase to maintain status quo. The article only refers to maintaining the current bus system and building more roads. If that's all their bringing to the table, I'd be against such an increase. If this increase will also be used to implement commuter rail and streetcars then my position would change.
I tend to agree with you Lake.
I agree with the general line of thought! Timing stinks for sure, but like everyone one else, I could care less about funding more concrete and maintaining the current bus system! I would atleast consider an increase if it were slated to rail,whether its Light Rail or a Trolly, but this appears to me at first blush an effort to fund existing road projects and since we can't even get shelters out there, no way am I for this!
Some of this is based on the fact that the FDOT is recommending decreases in funding of large highways projects in NE Florida. This was created due to a large shift in priorities to the Orlando Metro area which has significant congestion issues.
In the last 10 years, Jacksonville has had many of its major projects funded and backed by the state. TBJP helped push things along by bringing extra dollars to the table that JTA could leverage.
The I-295 "ring" is complete. 9B will be finished to Phillips Highway. The I-10/I-95 interchange will be finished in another 2 years and the Cecil Feeder was finished as well. The major emphasis for highways will be moving away for awhile.
With the cost of materials dropping rapidly due to less competition with China, no doubt JTA would like to take advantage of the situation and sell more bonds to rectify some area dysfunction (JTB/I-95 comes to mind). The Matthews Replacement and 9B to Race Track are all unfunded.
However, IMHO, there should not be any tax increases approved until a legitimate regional transportation authority is established to coordinate and manage public transportation throughout the First Coast. Typically any RTA requires an incremental tax to fund itself and it operations. If JTA were to perform a tax "grab" just before an RTA attempts one, it would be a total disaster as the voters would see it as double taxation and one would lose.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 06, 2010, 09:25:40 AM
This is the kind of funding we will need to raise the local $ necessary to implement rail transit....
Tufsu, are we reading the same article? (For the record, I quote the article below.)
Other than to maintain more than "minimal bus service" (gee, I thought we have minimal bus service now - you mean we have more?), not one word about mass transit of any kind. This appears to be just another JTA blackmail and extortion attempt, just like the bus shelter ads were: "Give us exactly what we propose or we just won't do anything."Here is the real essence of the request: QuoteThe gas tax makes up about one-third of the agency's operating revenue, he said
JTA has to protect those fat JTA salaries and benefits. And have an excuse to keep everyone (i.e. mostly road builders) on the payroll.
Note this tax was supposed to last 10 years at 6 cents. It was extended to 20 years. Now, JTA wants to extend it to 50 years at 11 cents. Talk about bait and switch.
I want Stephen, Lake, Ock, Tufsu, and other JTA apologists to tell us again about JTA's new found commitment to mass transit.
QuoteJTA to ask council for gas tax increase and extension
Source URL: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-05/story/jta-ask-council-gas-tax-increase-and-extension
By Larry Hannan
The Jacksonville Transportation Authority will ask the City Council in the next few months to extend the local 6-cent gasoline tax that is set to expire in 2016 so it will be in place for another 30 years.
JTA will also ask the council to approve an additional 5-cent gas tax that should generate about $25 million a year over 30 years.
If approved, every motorist who buys gas in Duval County could have an 11-cent local surcharge on a gallon of gasoline.
JTA gets about $30 million a year currently from the local gas tax and says it will have to significantly scale back operations if that money dries up.
In 1986, the City Council approved the tax for 10 years only, but later extended it for 20 more years.
Council President-elect Jack Webb, a lawyer who counts JTA among his former clients, said he's inclined to support both requests - extending the tax again and raising it.
It's not so much a tax, Webb says, as it is a user fee.
"It's almost an invisible user fee," he said. "If we didn't renew the gas tax, do you really think people would see a drop in their gas prices?"
Instead, Webb said, extending and increasing the gas tax would benefit the local economy.
"We're sitting on $500 million in unfunded road projects,and if this can help get those projects going I'm inclined to support it," he said. "We've got contractors out there who are laying people off and this can help get people back to work."
Other council members expressed doubt about the idea. And none of those contacted called it a user fee.
"We're in one of the biggest recessions this city has faced in most of our lifetimes," said Councilman Art Graham. "It's really not a good time to be asking for more money."
Councilman Daniel Davis said he was surprised at JTA.
"The timing couldn't be worse," he said. "I think it's very difficult to ask for a tax increase right now, and I don't see how I can support it."
Councilman Don Redman said he couldn't support a tax increase.
"The city's going to have to make spending cuts, and it would be hard to justify a tax increase to JTA at the same time," he said.
Councilman Warren Jones said he was open to extending the existing gas tax. But he was dubious of creating another one.
"We do need to the meet the needs of this community and I don't want to see our bus service reduced," said Jones. "But JTA's going to have to make a strong argument to get anyone to consider a new tax."
Better Jacksonville road projects are funded by a local sales tax approved by Duval County voters. But last week, JTA said all of that revenue will be bonded out by the end of 2011, which means it can't borrow any more money because all the sales tax is already committed to paying back previous loans.
"If we don't get the gas tax money, we'll have minimal bus service and no road construction," said Blair Fishburn, JTA chief financial officer and deputy executive director.
The gas tax makes up about one-third of the agency's operating revenue, he said.
Fishburn said extending the gas tax will allow bus service to continue, and the new gas tax will allow JTA to move forward with planned construction projects like a $100 million improvement to the intersection of Butler Boulevard and Interstate 95 that includes multiple flyovers.
"We think it's important to deal with the gas tax issue now so we'll have a dedicated source of revenue going forward," said JTA Executive Director Michael Blaylock.
JTA has not yet approached any council members about this. But Blaylock said he wanted to explain the issue to the public first.
"We're hoping to sell the success of what has been accomplished," said Blaylock, referring to JTA's work building Better Jacksonville projects like the Wonderwood Connector, the new bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway on Beach Boulevard and the new flyover on Kernan Boulevard over Beach Boulevard.
While we are at it, the last financial report for JTA posted on their web site is September, 2008. It is now June, 2010, and no September, 2009, yet? Wonder why?
See: http://www.jtafla.com/AboutJTA/showPage.aspx?Sel=32
Lol, me a JTA apologist. To come to such a conclusion you must ignore nearly every post and article i've written about transit in Jax. If anything, I'm a realist. I've already expressed my viewpoint with this most recent request. I'm not a fan of extending or raising the gas tax just to build more roads and maintain the bus system we have today. I'd like to see such a request include a financial commitment to implementing commuter rail and streetcars.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 06, 2010, 06:16:26 PM
Lol, me a JTA apologist.
Lake, maybe it's the "company you are keeping" ;)
My referral varies by degrees. Considerations I am taking into account include those who think JTA (1) has a cost effective plan to make the Skyway work (2) has the best plan for bus shelters by soliciting ads (3) is ready (any day now) to lead the way to cost and community effective mass transit and away from road building (4) is doing work in the best interests of the total community, not just special interests and GOB's, and (5) can be counted on more times than not to be reliable, transparent, creative, visionary, flexible, trustworthy and competent in planning, representing and executing projects.
If you or anyone else wish to self-exclude yourself from the JTA camp, I will gladly remove you from the list and offer you my apologies for putting you on it.
If the new gas tax pays for some new road projects, then more of the existng 6 cents can be used for transit service (better bus headways for example)...and/or restructuring the bus system to feed into commuter rail....if so, I'm ok with that.
Quote from: spuwho on June 06, 2010, 02:51:53 PM
However, IMHO, there should not be any tax increases approved until a legitimate regional transportation authority is established to coordinate and manage public transportation throughout the First Coast. Typically any RTA requires an incremental tax to fund itself and it operations. If JTA were to perform a tax "grab" just before an RTA attempts one, it would be a total disaster as the voters would see it as double taxation and one would lose.
JTA is the one conducting the RTA study...and is the most likely entity to meld into an RTA (as was done w/ TriRail).
If that's the case, they need a better sales pitch and marketing plan.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 06, 2010, 07:15:11 PM
If that's the case, they need a better sales pitch and marketing plan.
well, few people ever credit JTA w/ good PR!
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 06, 2010, 07:09:06 PM
If the new gas tax pays for some new road projects, then more of the existng 6 cents can be used for transit service (better bus headways for example)...and/or restructuring the bus system to feed into commuter rail....if so, I'm ok with that.
Clearly, I had Tufsu pegged right. ;D
Tufsu, do you really think that JTA is capable of, or would do, what they promised according to your plan? After failing to do almost anything in the past right or as they said it would be done? This was supposed to be a 6 cent tax for 10 years. Now JTA wants to morph it into 50 years and add another 5 cent tax for 30 years with no mention of doing anything more for mass transit than maintain the low level bus system we have now.
This behavior follows the pattern used for justifying the Skyway's existence and previous expansion. I expect, in due course, to see it duplicated with the bus shelters and the intermodal transit center.
Having been grossly misled, how can you follow JTA off the cliff so readily?
By the way, anyone ever find what happened to the $100 million Better Jax Plan money for mass transit?
Like Lake, I would only consider supporting this if mass transit was absolutely and legally required to be covered. I would demand no less than 75% of it for mass transit with specific projects required and sequenced up front [i.e. must do buses, streetcars and commuter rail and, if and only if, the Skyway, assuming it isn't already abandoned, achieves certain substantial ridership levels based on Ock's interconnectivity model, could any money be considered for the Skyway (needless to say, I have serious doubts about this)]. I don't trust JTA to use its own judgment or want to give them any wiggle room based on their past behavior. We have done enough road building. The emphasis going forward needs to be mass transit.
QuoteBy the way, anyone ever find what happened to the $100 million Better Jax Plan money for mass transit?
^The courthouse. That's my guess.
stjr.............I am with you on this one! I have had more than enough with JTA and the lack of planning, vision and funding! JTA has a proven lack of any thinking and an extension would just be funding those golden offices and salaries JTA is infamous for! Gee ......nothing like paying double for a lack of talent or expertise! I am against any gas tax extension or increase............period! Really good point lake and quite possible........that money had to come from come from somewhere unless Johnny got Herb to write a check!
Quote from: stjr on June 06, 2010, 09:14:58 PM
Tufsu, do you really think that JTA is capable of, or would do, what they promised according to your plan? After failing to do almost anything in the past right or as they said it would be done? This was supposed to be a 6 cent tax for 10 years. Now JTA wants to morph it into 50 years and add another 5 cent tax for 30 year years with no mention of doing anything more for mass transit than maintain the low level bus system we have now.
JTA and every other transportation agency around the country then....fact is, transportation projects cost more than they used to (for many valid reasons)...and we haven't raised the Federal gas tax since 1993...which given that it isn't inflation adjusted, it has actually been a tax decrease...and guess what, same with our local 6-cent tax.
btw...JTA is preparing to spend upwards of $500,000 of their money (matched with another $500k of Fed dollars) on the next phase of commuter rail studies...which counts as planning, visioning, and funding CS...I suppose you and stjr are opposed to this as well?
tufsu...........one small problem..........its not JTA's money! It's mine and your tax dollars just like the Federal matching money is in the same category! It is possible to over consult and form more investigating committee's than is necessary, I mean how many transportation studies have been done over the last 10 years? I have been to two and I know there is more than that! Maybe it is over regulation or maybe its just consulting firms padding the table in their favor or expertise............I offer CUTR as an example! Plenty of study has taken place so I have to ask .............surely there are "studies" that already offer this information?
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 06, 2010, 09:54:15 PM
JTA and every other transportation agency around the country then....fact is, transportation projects cost more than they used to (for many valid reasons)...and we haven't raised the Federal gas tax since 1993...which given that it isn't inflation adjusted, it has actually been a tax decrease...and guess what, same with our local 6-cent tax.
btw...JTA is preparing to spend upwards of $500,000 of their money (matched with another $500k of Fed dollars) on the next phase of commuter rail studies...which counts as planning, visioning, and funding CS...I suppose you and stjr are opposed to this as well?
Tufsu, again you are turning a blind eye. This isn't about raising money, it's about how it is spent. IF taxpayers saw JTA spend the money appropriately, efficiently, and with results, they would be supportive. But, JTA grossly overestimates results and grossly underestimates costs, especially on the front end when they are seeking approvals from others. Then, they play games to obscure their incompetence. This undermines any support for whatever they put their name to.
I would gladly support paying taxes for projects... but not roads for developers, mishandled fiascoes like the Skyway or the still-to-come poorly planned intermodal center or the salaries of personnel that don't seem to be able to manage projects and resources to best outcomes.
Clearly, I am not against JTA pursuing mass transit. But, that seems to be all they do... APPEAR to pursue it. Where are the tangible results? Buses and the Skyway aren't cutting it.
That study, by the way, wasn't paid with JTA's money, that was paid with taxpayer's money - either city, state, or federal. JTA has no money of its own unless they derive it from transit revenues. Since all those revenues are more than offset by the costs of transit, JTA is a taxpayer subsidized agency.
Quote from: stjr on June 06, 2010, 10:16:55 PM
That study, by the way, wasn't paid with JTA's money, that was paid with taxpayer's money - either city, state, or federal. JTA has no money of its own unless they derive it from transit revenues. Since all those revenues are more than offset by the costs of transit, JTA is a taxpayer subsidized agency.[/b]
I thought you might say that...which is why I didn't say "their own money"...either way, it would seem they now want to spend some money on projects you deem worthy.
as for the tax funding "bad" road projects....I wasn't aware that the 95/JTB interchange was for developers...and I'm pretty sure the Woinderwood Connector was built with the goal of maintaining/enhacing NS Mayport..does the nuclear carrier wring a bell?
Finally, I don't blindly support JTA...in fact, much of what they have done in the past (and continue to do) boggles my mind...which is what makes me using my 4000th post defending them especially meaningful.
JTA needs some independent investigating. Turn over the rocks and let's see how well it spends its money. Do we really need a 100 million overpass at Butler/95, right now? This group lives in fantasyland.
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 06, 2010, 10:37:37 PM
JTA needs some independent investigating. Turn over the rocks and let's see how well it spends its money. Do we really need a 100 million overpass at Butler/95, right now? This group lives in fantasyland.
Or, 9B? Or, the Outer Beltway? JTA will consider more gas tax money an endorsement of these projects it supports.
Gee tufsu..........I thought that "Advertsing" was the panacea that JTA has been wanting all this time? It takes advertising to get bus shelters, so it would follow advertising should take care of a nuclear carrier also right? Wonderwood Connector does nothing for my world, so I guess you could say I don't have much belief in what JTA has to say about much if anything with their penchant for cooking numbers and the books!
Quote from: stjr on June 07, 2010, 06:31:37 PM
Or, 9B? Or, the Outer Beltway? JTA will consider more gas tax money an endorsement of these projects it supports.
nice try...but neither 9B or the Outer Beltway are to be funded by JTA...or the 6-cent local gas tax for that matter!
Quote from: CS Foltz on June 07, 2010, 09:50:14 PM
Wonderwood Connector does nothing for my world, so I guess you could say I don't have much belief in what JTA has to say about much if anything with their penchant for cooking numbers and the books!
I HATE this argument....let me try this spin out on you....I have no direct benefit from local schools, so why should I pay school taxes?
If this increase is passed, I'll make a point of driving to St. Johns County to fill up.
I cannot see a fairer way to tax for transportation infrastructure. The tax is minimally invasive, and in perspective is a non-issue. A tax on gasoline is a tax on transportation.
Tolls? Sucks when you have no cash. Use property taxes? a burden on non drivers.
sales tax? It already is, in a sense. Just applied where it is most fitting.
Automobile tax? What about the hundreds of thousands of used cars? 20 year old guzzling polluters?
Nahhh... A couple cents per gallon increase is the right way to go if further funding is truly needed.
Quote from: JMac on June 08, 2010, 09:28:30 AM
If this increase is passed, I'll make a point of driving to St. Johns County to fill up.
Your savings will be wiped out by the extra drive, not to mention ST Johns County will become the beneficiary of your business. Do you really drive out of your way to save a couple cents per gallon every time you gas up? I settle for convenience most o the time. I do like to fill up when I am at a cheaper location.
One can drive to GA and save 10 cents per gallon... Worth it?.....nahhh, not even from Yulee.
Quote from: CS Foltz on June 07, 2010, 09:50:14 PM
Wonderwood Connector does nothing for my world, so I guess you could say I don't have much belief in what JTA has to say about much if anything with their penchant for cooking numbers and the books!
CS- Weren't you the one who was vehemently defending the Mayport citizens and their fight against the cruise terminal?? You said that we have no place to talk about Mayport because we don't live there. Do you only care about and advocate projects that you are a stakeholder in?? Are you actually Clay Yarborough?? If not, sounds like you should run for office in Jax!
I think a gas tax is a great way to raise funds, but if JTA took a fair and balanced approach when considering transit options. Their view is so skewed towards road building and buses that they'll spend billions trying to road build their way out of the current mess.
If I had the power, I'd let them starve a little so that they would have to be more innovative in their thinking and consider lower cost alternatives, which would undoubtedly bring them to the conclusion of rail.
Quote from: tufsu1 on June 08, 2010, 08:55:29 AM
Quote from: stjr on June 07, 2010, 06:31:37 PM
Or, 9B? Or, the Outer Beltway? JTA will consider more gas tax money an endorsement of these projects it supports.
nice try...but neither 9B or the Outer Beltway are to be funded by JTA...or the 6-cent local gas tax for that matter!
I know that Tufsu. But, JTA is an active partner in supporting these projects. More taxes for roads just encourages them to push for projects like this so JTA can perpetuate it's current incarnation to build more roads to connect to these. It's a "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" with FDOT. They feed off of each other. A road building fraternity - not unlike the Moose or Elks.
[qoute] A road building fraternity - not unlike the Moose or Elks.[qoute]......too true stjr! The part about "scratching backs" is really the heart of the matter!
JTA is the lead agency on the RTA being studied as they are the largest entity in NE Florida.
My hope is that they would get an RTA in place where JTA maintains it authority in Duval, but no further. Any regional projects have to be approved by the regional transit board, of which JTA participates in, but cannot completely control. ie: 7 of 12 board seats, but 9 votes needed to pass spending on projects.
Larger taxation area, but more accountability and less provincialism. JTA has a voice, larger since they serve a bigger area, but they can't dominate it and would need to work with others well to get programs passed.
spuwho.......I agree! JTA can not manage Jacksonville and I can not see them controling a larger area than they already do! As to "more accountability", there appears to be little accountability now and some one somewhere stepping up would be nice, but it has not happened yet and don't see anything on the horizen to change that view!
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-21/story/jta-will-not-ask-jacksonville-city-council-more-tax-revenue (http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-21/story/jta-will-not-ask-jacksonville-city-council-more-tax-revenue)
QuoteBlaylock said he floated the idea to generate discussion and determine if the political will existed to do something. He’s decided that now is not the right time.
I guess I can continue filling up in Duval.
Here is the full article for the record.
By the way, it seems strange that a PERMANENT mass transit system would be funded by a TEMPORARY gas tax. Is that correct? What kind of funding scheme is that?QuoteJTA will not ask for gas tax hike
Source URL: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-21/story/jta-will-not-ask-jacksonville-city-council-more-tax-revenue
By Larry Hannan
Weeks after floating the idea of asking Jacksonville’s City Council for an additional 5-cent gasoline tax, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority is tabling the idea.
JTA Executive Director Michael Blaylock said Monday he will not ask for the new tax this year. It would have added a nickel to every gallon of gasoline sold in Duval County and been used for road construction projects.
Blaylock said he floated the idea to generate discussion and determine if the political will existed to do something. He decided that now is not the right time.
“With the JEA rate increase, and the recession,†he said, “we need to be really sensitive to the needs of our community.â€
Most members of the City Council were somewhere between skeptical and outright opposed to the idea when contacted this month by The Times-Union.
“I’m glad to see that idea is being dropped,†Councilman Don Redman said. “It was never going to get through council.â€
Blaylock said he has not abandoned the plan, which would generate about $25 million a year in extra revenue for JTA.
“After we get through [this year’s] budget process we’ll start to talk about it again,†he said while conceding that the economy will have to get better before action occurs.
Blaylock will ask the council to approve an extension of JTA’s existing 6-cent gas tax, which is scheduled to expire in 2016.
“I think extending the gas tax is more realistic than a new tax,†said Councilman Warren Jones. “But this is going to be a brutal budget year, and we’re going to have to look at what the impact of extending the gas tax would be.â€
City services are going to be cut, and JTA shouldn’t assume that a gas tax extension will sail through the council, Jones said.
Councilman Stephen Joost said he wanted to go over JTA’s spending and long-term expansion plans before approving an extension.
Joost said he also had concerns about gas taxes as a long-term source of revenue because people are driving less than they used to, generating less revenue for agencies like JTA.
He also wants to talk to JTA about looking into new, green technologies that might help cut costs.
Councilman John Crescimbeni said he would vote against an extension. JTA should go before the voters and let them, not the council, decide, he said.
“The public was told this would only be for 10 years†in 1986, Crescimbeni said, “and then it was extended for 20 more years.â€
The tax generates about $30 million a year for JTA.
The agency said it needs the extension to pay for existing operations like the bus service, Skyway and paratransit service.
If the tax expires, those transportation services would have to be cut back, said Blair Fishburn, JTA chief financial officer and deputy executive director.
Blaylock declined to discuss exactly what those cutbacks might involve.
The gas tax extension will be discussed during budget hearings the council will hold later this summer. JTA usually presents its budget to the city each year even though the council doesn’t have to approve it, because JTA is a state agency.
If it is any consolation, Councilman Joost (CFO of Firehouse Subs) says he would like to see JTA's finance's before reviewing any taxes for them. I agree.
JTA is "bonded out" right now. This means that they can no longer sell construction bonds to build roads as they no longer have any tax revenue (beyond what they get today) to pay the debt service.
Since most of these bonds are of the 30 year kind, I would like to see which ones are paying off first when the initial taxes were approved.
Also, most people forget that the original road tax (Hazouri) was passed to eliminate the toll bridges. They had to refinance the toll based bonds with tax revenue bonds to do that. If I am correct, there were 10 years left on those bonds when they were refinanced.
One thing JTA needs to make clear, there are tax revenues for operations (buses, Skyway), and tax revenues for bond debt service (construction). I don't like how they throw out numbers without a good explanation.
People like seeing taxes for specific purposes (ie: TBJP) that foster results. Nebulous tax requests like JTA's will always fall flat.
I would like to see these numbers in greater detail as well. I think now is a critical period for JTA in general. They need to publicly prove their worth before this city approves the extension of anything.
Quote from: thelakelander on June 22, 2010, 11:16:41 PM
I would like to see these numbers in greater detail as well. I think now is a critical period for JTA in general. They need to publicly prove their worth before this city approves the extension of anything.
Quote from: spuwho on June 22, 2010, 11:10:54 PM
If it is any consolation, Councilman Joost (CFO of Firehouse Subs) says he would like to see JTA's finance's before reviewing any taxes for them. I agree.
You can tell JTA has something to hide when they haven't publicly posted their financials in over a year and a half on their web site: http://www.jtafla.com/AboutJTA/showPage.aspx?Sel=32
Why not? Are they embarrassed about what they will reveal? Is this just another manifestation of the JTA culture regarding information transparency?
Councilman Joost and friends should also look at JTA salaries and benefits, especially pensions, and compare them to City employees and the marketplace at large.
Isn't JTA a state agency? If so, then their employees are on the State Retirement System.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 23, 2010, 04:45:29 PM
Isn't JTA a state agency? If so, then their employees are on the State Retirement System.
I don't know. If they are, maybe that should be re-examined as well. For-profit companies are abandoning pension plans in droves as they are finding out that managing savings for employees and making guaranteed lifetime promises decades in advance is a very risky and difficult proposition. Government should take heed and consider doing the same. If people want financial security, employees should do their own S-A-V-ING and investing (see 401K). And, don't count on others to do it for you.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on June 23, 2010, 04:45:29 PM
Isn't JTA a state agency? If so, then their employees are on the State Retirement System.
yes