It's a circus @ the council tonight!

[Lunican]

Statement from Mayor Peyton:

“The budget deliberations of the Jacksonville City Council reflected the tough choices that elected officials must make in today’s challenging financial climate.

The debate over the last 24 hours also reflects the most transparent and robust budgeting process in this city’s history. This included more than a dozen town hall meetings and/or community budget workshops that began six months before the budget was proposed.

I appreciate the work of the Jacksonville City Council and the Finance Committee during the last three months to exercise their own due diligence, review the proposed budget and identify additional savings and cost reductions. The collective efforts of the legislative and executive branches this year has resulted in an even better product for our community.

I am also appreciative of the citizens who have taken the time to express their thoughts and concerns about the city’s budget and services. This included those who participated in the budget workshops, town hall meetings, Finance Committee budget hearings and at City Council meetings.

Together, the administration and the City Council identified approximately $26 million in operating cost reductions and approximately $20 million in reduced employee-related expenses.  It also allows the city to continue to provide the services that the citizens expressed their support of through our budget workshop and engagement process.

In addition, the decision made on the millage rate this year, will help to ensure that Jacksonville is able to continue on a path to a more secure and financially-stable future.”   

[uptowngirl]

If the city is so desperate why did they give 4MM back to the Jags for a Ruth Chris dinner?

best guess without doing that, there would have been no deal...and the City wouldn't have seen $ anyway

btw...it seems like some people don't make the connection regarding government $ finding its way back into the economy....so let me make this simple....

5% pay cuts for city employees (local citizens) means they spend 5% less in the community....which in turn leads to more businesses (retail and services primarily) closing....which leads to less tax revenue generated....which leads to more cuts....

how does this accomplish anything good?

Take my money in the form of taxes,along with thousands of others, who are already getting paycuts and layoffs in the corporate workd, and hike JEA bills by 50% and your economy really goes down the drain.

[fieldafm]

For instance, the city thinks that the largest houses on the river in Ortega and San Marco would sell on the open market for $2-3.5 million at most.

Well, the assessed value is not a straight market value based on comparables like an appraisal for a loan... the assessed value is subject to certain homestead exemptions, classified useage exemptions, and yearly caps on assesments.  So, that's a little too narrow of a view.

California could mint money if they repealed Prop 13, but that isn't going to make a lot of elderly people who have owned their homes 30 years very happy.... and elderly people tend to vote

[simms3]

simms3..........think its hard now.........what do you think will happen if Amendment 4 is passed?

Amendment 4 passes and I officially give up all interests in the state of Florida.  I will not even mention Florida, Jacksonville, or anything related in a sentence.  FL pulls that stunt and it will essentially kill itself (until 4 is repealed).

[simms3]

Well, the assessed value is not a straight market value based on comparables like an appraisal for a loan... the assessed value is subject to certain homestead exemptions, classified useage exemptions, and yearly caps on assesments.  So, that's a little too narrow of a view.

Good reminder.  Forgot to take all of this into consideration.  I still think overall values all across the urban core board can be increased leading to increased tax revenues if the city focuses its investment on the inner core.  It's never going to pull in the same kind of revenue from sprawly suburbs and it's going to cost the city more to keep them up.

[ChriswUfGator]

Not that I'm necessarily in favor if amendment 4, but handing the state over to developers and following laissez faire right off the cliff certainly work out so well either, did it? Has to be some balance.

simms3..........think its hard now.........what do you think will happen if Amendment 4 is passed?

Amendment 4 passes and I officially give up all interests in the state of Florida.  I will not even mention Florida, Jacksonville, or anything related in a sentence.  FL pulls that stunt and it will essentially kill itself (until 4 is repealed).

[CS Foltz]

Chris..........initially I was all for #4 and think it has merit, but am having second thoughts! There needs to be some balance but I don't think another "Agency for Oversight" is the way of the future. I look at what has taken place to this point, developers running amok buying land so they can build the township of the future.....the only thing that has slowed that up has been the economy! I have no problem with anyone enjoying the fruits of their labors but when we all are effected by those actions......something is just not right!

[simms3]

Proper zoning and land use regulations can easily solve the problem of developers coming in and building 10 Nocatees.  I think the current system of zoning/land use regulations works, we just need to make sure we elect people who will appoint good people to be in charge of said regulations and who know what they are doing.

Amendment 4 will screw the state.

[CS Foltz]

simms3......that is a possibility, but then I see someone like Paul Harden in action and say "WTF"! Accountabilty is a possibility, but that would take something as mundane as Ethics! I tend to think it boils down to the individuals themselves.........all of the regulations in the world could be circumvented in the blink of an eye with the wrong individual in the wrong spot at the right time.

[ChriswUfGator]

Except it didn't work. There are macro factors, but we are probably up with Cali for the hardest hit state in the union, and it really flows from unchecked development. Personally I'm livid at all the existing tax base that was lost to create vacant lots for condos that never happened. We really do need some process for ensuring sound development practices, currently its a crapshoot. A blanket prohibition on anything short of a referendum as is currently proposed in amendment 4 is probably not the best solution, but you also can't rely on incumbents To manage things appropriately since they wind up in bed with the developers. This isn't speculation, it's what happened. We tried it that way already and it didn't work. Like i said there has got to be some kind of middle ground on this. We need there to be.

Proper zoning and land use regulations can easily solve the problem of developers coming in and building 10 Nocatees.  I think the current system of zoning/land use regulations works, we just need to make sure we elect people who will appoint good people to be in charge of said regulations and who know what they are doing.

Amendment 4 will screw the state.

Edited to add: Sorry for the poor typing, writing on a touchscreen keyboard is tough.

[simms3]

Yea all regular people are ethical!  Ok    There are certainly unethical people in power, but by golly there are plenty of unethical people in the unwashed masses.  Amendment 4 does not really solve that issue.  It just holds up any kind of process that takes place.  Besides, I tend to trust a well educated, well traveled planner/politician more than the average person when it comes to knowing what is probably best for the city or how to run a city.  Despite what we all think on MetroJax, there are so many people in the Jax metro who actually like strip mall developments and Nocatees and who oppose investing in downtown or in public transportation.  Even though we have to really battle many of our city leaders and JTA, we probably do better by them than if we had to battle the general public in this town.  If you have ever read the average post on the FTU website, that is what we would be up against if Amendment 4 passed.  The FTU blogosphere/comment section would become daily life.

[ChriswUfGator]

It's not about ethics. It's about reality. And progress for the sake of progress is rarely a good thing.

The point is that there needs to be a mechanism by which residents of a community can decide what course of development to pursue, rather than relying on disconnected elected officials to safeguard their interests. It never works out. And you're forcing me into the unenviable position of defending amendment 4, which I don't actually support. So let's not shoot the messenger, I'm just saying, there really should be some kind of constraints designed to ensure wiser development moving forward. 

Yea all regular people are ethical!  Ok    There are certainly unethical people in power, but by golly there are plenty of unethical people in the unwashed masses.  Amendment 4 does not really solve that issue.  It just holds up any kind of process that takes place.  Besides, I tend to trust a well educated, well traveled planner/politician more than the average person when it comes to knowing what is probably best for the city or how to run a city.  Despite what we all think on MetroJax, there are so many people in the Jax metro who actually like strip mall developments and Nocatees and who oppose investing in downtown or in public transportation.  Even though we have to really battle many of our city leaders and JTA, we probably do better by them than if we had to battle the general public in this town.  If you have ever read the average post on the FTU website, that is what we would be up against if Amendment 4 passed.  The FTU blogosphere/comment section would become daily life.

[ChriswUfGator]

Oh and I agree with you in news4 and the TU's comments section there is no defending those idiots...

[fieldafm]

Proper zoning and land use regulations can easily solve the problem of developers coming in and building 10 Nocatees.

In the late 70's/early 80's, there was a growth management plan in Jax called the 2005 Comprehensive Plan(mandated by a state law for localities to have comprehensive growth plans).  The majority of people in the city at the time were pro-growth and developers saw a huge opportunity among vast expanses of cheap land.  As such, the 2005 Comprehensive Plan was rarely followed and never had anyone dedicated to enforce it.  Ever wonder how Baymeadows/Mandarin experienced such growth?  Well, mostly due to lax enforcement of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan and having NO impact fees during this time.  Fellow named Dale Joyner kind of took a stand against what was going on at the time.... but in the end, the developers won out.  Sound familiar?  Hell, I can think of a certain developer getting impact fees waived on a certain Argyle development project as the most recently perfect example of this.

The problems behind why Amendment 4 came about are very real... but to me, the key is to refine and actually enforce growth management plans.  Amendment 4 will not solve the problem.  History has shown us, you can buy votes quite easily.  What is needed is good leadership and courage.

Besides, if Amendment 4 was in place 25 years ago do you think the explosive growth around Baymeadows wouldn't have happened?  You're fooling yourself if you do.

[thelakelander]

I believe the 2030 Mobility Plan land use policies have already been approved at the state level.  If so, Amendment 4 may not have as much of a significant impact on Jacksonville.