City Council prepares to Halt Mobility Fee

[Captain Zissou]

We are going to have to dig in.  The hogs around here are used to being fed no questions asked.  They don't expect this in St. Johns county but here they want the trough kept full or squealing is epic.

What kills me is that the money is just as easily made by doing it in a way that doesnt screw over the tax payer.  If these guys would just take a moment and educated themselves on the new ethos that the country is moving in, they would realize how childish all this is.

I would say more money can be made in a dense urban environment.  The only reason there hasn't been a landslide of OUT OF TOWN developers building up DT and the core neighborhoods is the closer you get to downtown the more hoops you have to jump through.  The local boys will never get it and the out of town boys have pretty much written us off as a place to get a decent ROI.

[JeffreyS]

+1

[tufsu1]

I know what the policy says....(check my statement in post #119)....but what are the exact credits a development can get?

From what I understood, the potential credits had not been determined in May (when the plan was adopted) as the study based on URBEMIS was still underway.

[thelakelander]

Maybe I'm confused but how is wanting privately financed development to cover its cost 100% considered liberal?  The mobility plan's concept of discouraging this guy's desire to suckle on the teet of the taxpayer for his personal profiting is about as conservative as it gets.  It appears we have those in our community who don't know what the true definition of fiscal conservativism and responsibility.  Just in case, he or someone who knows him, reads this (which I'm sure will happen), here is the definition of fiscal conservatism:

Fiscal conservatism - is a political term used to describe a fiscal policy that advocates avoiding deficit spending. Fiscal conservatives often consider reduction of overall government spending and national debt as well as ensuring balanced budget of paramount importance.

Considering our annual budget issues, it appears our decades old growth-based economic model doesn't work.  If all the development that has taken place over the last 30 years paid for itself, then we should be swimming in money.  The fact that the public budget went into the red so quick when the market dried up, suggests we've been doing something wrong and need to modify our policies of the past. The mobility plan and fee does just that for those who have the ability to look at things from a holistic level.

The mobility fee is basically a fiscal policy that helps local government (really you & me, the taxpayer) avoid long term deficit spending (think extra schools, roads, fire/police, utility maintenance, etc.) needed to support development that doesn't truly pay for itself.

I consider myself to be a fiscal conservative.  I already have kids I have to raise and financial burdens to handle.  I prefer not to have my tax dollars going to support this guy's leeching lifestyle outlook at the fiscal expense of my community's quality-of-life.  Yes, I'll be the bad guy and admit, I'd prefer my tax dollars used to keep libraries open, school facilities up to date and parks maintained over subsidizing a few short term jobs and additional strip malls to the overbuilt supply we already can't fill.  With that said, I'm as pro-development as they come.  Just have a little personal responsibility and foot your own bill.

[vicupstate]

Using the label 'liberal' is just a way to smear the opposition, and turn the discussion away from merits and into simpleton diatribes and jargon. 

BTW, ANYTIME the government charges a fee or levies a tax, for any purpose, it is 'liberal'.  Therefore the Tea Party is not in support of that.   

That is why the Tea Party had no issue with the moratorium.   Their agenda is to get to the point where no taxes or fees are levied for any reason.   Everyone just does there own thing without 'interference' from the government.

Sprawl is just the free market working it's 'magic'.  If people didn't want to live in the suburbs, builders would not build there.

[thelakelander]

I'd actually okay with it becoming a free market, in the form of the government not building or providing infrastructure subsidies with a bad long term ROI.  If you want to build 20 miles out on a rural two lane road, feel free.  Just don't come asking for police/fire protection, facilities/vehicles needed to support them or roadway infrastructure needed to efficiently connect your project to the rest of the world or equal to areas where these services can be efficiently operated and maintained.  Let a little personal responsibility play into things and we'll really find out what the free market is and will support.

[vicupstate]

Indeed the appropriate response to the moratorium is to say that since no fees are being collected, no additional infrastructure will be built.

As the new development causes congestion, simply let it get congested, and provide no relief. 

Essentially that is what Atlanta did.  Once the suburbs got hopelessly congested, such that nothing brought relief, people started returning to the core in droves.   

[JeffreyS]

Indeed the appropriate response to the moratorium is to say that since no fees are being collected, no additional infrastructure will be built.

As the new development causes congestion, simply let it get congested, and provide no relief. 

Essentially that is what Atlanta did.  Once the suburbs got hopelessly congested, such that nothing brought relief, people started returning to the core in droves.   

We do the opposite see Collins road.

The mobility fee is basically a fiscal policy that helps local government (really you & me, the taxpayer) avoid long term deficit spending (think extra schools, roads, fire/police, utility maintenance, etc.) needed to support development that doesn't truly pay for itself.

At least one of my reply's from the council indicated the increased ad valorem  taxes would help pay for things like the schools in the city.  They just believe any growth is good and there ore no impacts.  They look at tax revenue only from what may come in and just believe pixies are going to take care of the cost.

[thelakelander]

At least one of my reply's from the council indicated the increased ad valorem  taxes would help pay for things like the schools in the city.  They just believe any growth is good and there ore no impacts.  They look at tax revenue only from what may come in and just believe pixies are going to take care of the cost.

Let's talk taxes and schools.  Yes, increased tax revenue by any development would add to the pot for schools.  However, if the increased tax revenue doesn't match the increased expenses associated with providing more schools, staff, facilities, etc. for new development, then you're at a net loss.

[ChriswUfGator]

I know what the policy says....(check my statement in post #119)....but what are the exact credits a development can get?

From what I understood, the potential credits had not been determined in May (when the plan was adopted) as the study based on URBEMIS was still underway.

[tufsu1]

backpedalling from something I wrote the other night?

[thelakelander]

The FTU finally has an article up on this subject....

Jacksonville developers get city fee waiver to boost construction jobs

Hoping to get construction crews working, Jacksonville’s City Council has approved a one-year waiver on fees the city charges developers to pay for road improvements.

“It’s totally a jobs bill,” said Curtis Hart, a developer who encouraged the legislation. “Five or six months from now, I think you’ll see more work going on.”

It’s not clear how much money the city could be giving up.

Jacksonville collected about $3.7 million in 2010 through a system known as fair-share fees, and another $650,000 that year from development agreements that can span several years. But the city recently approved a different system, called mobility fees, which measure costs differently.

Those fees are expected frequently to be less on each development than they would be under the fair-share system, but they would be collected on many more projects â€" so a waiver’s effect could be wider.

“This bill’s purpose is to stimulate jobs and get projects under way,” Councilwoman Lori Boyer emphasized at a committee debate, saying she didn’t want businesses “just pulling a permit and sitting on it for two years.”
To avoid that, she pitched a one-year limit from the permit date for projects worth less than $1 million to be completed. Projects worth more have to be finished within three years of the bill taking effect.

Councilman Bill Bishop had 11 co-sponsors for his bill by time it passed Tuesday night, but the plan took some shots from critics who said taxpayers are picking up the cost.

“You’re basically just handing a public credit card to the developers,” local writer Stephen Dare told council members during a hearing.

“And we are on the hook for as long as people live out there. … The few jobs that may be created by this one year of a moratorium are simply not worth the costs you will incur for the next two generations [the buildings are in place].”

Hart said the waiver decision will matter most to small commercial projects, where construction costs of less than $1 million can be paired with hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees. Although the fees are often higher in large projects like big-box stores, they’re smaller piece of the total construction cost.

“For the small commercial projects … it will be a great spur,” he said.

Hart said the city will benefit in the long run because the construction will be followed by new businesses with new employees. A small restaurant like Wendy’s can employ 80 people, he said.

“You’ve got people going to work. … You’ve got people to build the buildings and then the Wendy’s turns around and pays ad valorem taxes,” Hart said. “It keeps on paying.”

full article: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2011-10-12/story/jacksonville-developers-get-city-fee-waiver-boost-construction-jobs

[thelakelander]

“For the small commercial projects … it will be a great spur,” he said.

Hart said the city will benefit in the long run because the construction will be followed by new businesses with new employees. A small restaurant like Wendy’s can employ 80 people, he said.

“You’ve got people going to work. … You’ve got people to build the buildings and then the Wendy’s turns around and pays ad valorem taxes,” Hart said. “It keeps on paying.”

I hate to say it but this is pretty pathetic.  Wendy's?  Seriously?  Wendy's?  We're whoring our community out for the hope of a few extra Wendy's fast food style restaurants and small strip malls to blight our landscape?  Jacksonville, this is a new low.  Btw, Mr. Hart should know that the cost of the mobility fee is flexible depending on where and how each project is constructed.  He was a member of the mobility plan taskforce.  It's almost disingenuous to say a mobility fee numbers into the hundreds of thousands for a project that costs less than $1 million and not even mention of the credit system for development that lowers the amount of vehicle trips it generates.  If you have a development where a mobility fee costs you something like 15-20% of your total project price, there must be something seriously wrong with your proposed project. 


Anybody tell you that I missed Wendy's... If, If, if a Coach say I missed Wendy's, and y'all hear it, then that's that.
I mean, I might have missed one Wendy's this year but if, if somebody say he doesn't come to Wendy's, it could be one Wendy's...

Nevertheless, we're talking about a Wendy's?  Man look, I hear you... it's funny to me too, I mean it's strange... it's strange to me too, but we're talking about Wendy's man, we're not even talking about the SJTC or RCM... the actual mega strip centers this city loves, when it matters... We're talking about Wendy's ...

Detroit goes Urban Ag and LRT.  Charlotte goes LRT, Streetcar and Complete Streets.  Miami implements Form-Based Zoning Codes for sustainable development.  Orlando goes Sunrail.  Atlanta goes Beltline.  Jax one ups everyone by going Wendy's.  Houston, we have a problem.


Our economic savior?  Coming soon to an outparcel two blocks from your existing neighborhood fast food joint.

[JeffreyS]

You know Jax if it has a drive thru it gets what it wants.

[peestandingup]

Maybe we can base our entire economy on hamburgers. Wimpy would certainly approve.