Live Blogging: Hemming Plaza Committee - Banning Game Playing and furniture

[strider]

Thanks to all who could and did go.  What I saw from what was posted was three council members who could care less what the public wants, they will take this onward to council of that is the next step.  Redman doesn't care about anyone that isn't "his kind of person", Lee doesn't care about anyone but herself, and Gulliford always just seems a bit lost to me.  Is this a prime item for an "emergency"?  Do these few "council people" have enough support among their peers to do it?

[coredumped]

Thanks to everyone who attended and took notes for us who couldn't be there. In the future would it be possible to film it or take so some photos? I assume yes since it's public record.

[dougskiles]

Thanks to everyone who attended and took notes for us who couldn't be there. In the future would it be possible to film it or take so some photos? I assume yes since it's public record.

Noone took some photos which I imagine he will post.  I was standing at the door, amused by the sight of stephendare, thecat and fieldafm seated at the far end of the long conference table from councilman, focusing down typing furiously at their computers/tablets.  I can only imagine what the CMs were thinking... "Who are these guys?" "What are they writing?" "Will I win the best dressed award?"

[Ocklawaha]

FROM CHANNEL 4 NEWS

Opinions mixed on Hemming Plaza changes
Many want card playing banned, benches removed; others don't want changes

Published On: Oct 23 2012 05:27:35 AM EDT  Updated On: Oct 23 2012 10:08:17 PM EDT

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -
Members of the Hemming Plaza committee met Tuesday to draft an ordinance on the push to ban card playing and remove benches from the popular downtown park.

Quick Clicks
No more games in Hemming Plaza?
It would change the look of the plaza in front of City Hall for good and move the homeless to another location.

Though many want the homeless gone, some business owners are actually defending them.

"People always talk about the negative parts of it, but to me it's real life out there," business owner Rob Chamblin said.

Downtown bookstore and cafe owner Chamblin doesn't see this as a major problem that calls for a permanent fix in the form of a city law.

At the meeting, more than a dozen residents showed up to voice their concerns, arguing that the suggested restrictions are a violation of human rights.

Committee members disagree, but said they're open to other ideas.

"We have to put some restrictions in this public park so that the rest of the public can use it, not just the people that are hanging out here," City Councilman Don Redman said.

Committee members said they want card playing in Hemming Plaza banned. They also want to remove the benches, trim the trees and allocate money to repair the flower beds.

"If you take the tables out, the benches, it will make the park not a park," Chamblin said. "Not enjoyable by anybody. They should leave the ability to play games."

"I want to know where the litmus test is going to fall. Are we going to take a chart out here and gauge it by how many baths a week somebody takes, maybe the shade of their skin color?" said Robert Mann, who opposes changes to the park. "Who is acceptable and who isn't, who gets to decide?"

But not everyone agrees with Chamblin and Mann.

"They don't just show up and leave," resident Bob Pallais said. "They show up and stay, and that can be a problem."

Pallais sees the issue with the homeless just hanging out. He said some people don't feel safe bringing their families to the park.

"Honestly, what they've got to do is make the downtown area a more comfortable place to visit," Pallais said.

Committee members are hoping the City Council signs off on the law, but some locals say that won't happen without a fight.

"Taking away the chair and tables is totally stupid," resident John Fletcher said. "Homeless people exist. We should be doing something to fix the problem. Thank God we have a decent mayor now that's for the people."

The chair of the committee designed to re-energize Hemming Plaza didn't show up to the meeting. So after some discussion, members decided to schedule another meeting at a later date. It's unclear when that will be, but it will be open to the public.

Robert Mann, publisher of MetroJacksonville.com, said he is up in arms over the proposal.

"It’s part of our city. It's part of our culture and heritage. I feel like its part of me," Mann said. "I can remember being here as a toddler and to tell me suddenly that you’re going to exclude this group or you’re going to exclude that group...is it shade of skin color, is it income, is it how many baths a week they take or maybe a month? And who gets the clip board to go around and check?"

SOURCE: http://www.news4jax.com/morning-show/Opinions-mixed-on-Hemming-Plaza-changes/-/1875838/17093504/-/9jqimaz/-/index.html

[simms3]

So Councilman Redman believes that he must actively engage in making the park accessible and usable to others beside the homeless, and in his mind taking the homeless away makes that happen.  Why would I go to the park as it is now?  There is nothing for me there, and with or without homeless it is not a pleasant park to sit in and hang out at.  It's 1 small city block, mostly paved, poorly landscaped, with very few activators in/around it.

If I am a non-homeless person, resident of DT, young prof, etc and I feel like hanging out in public space downtown, it's going to be the Riverwalk, Chamblin's to read/coffee and sit on porch, or maybe even the Landing courtyard to watch the boats and have a drink.  They could make Hemming pristine and beautiful with no homeless and there would still be no reason for me to go there.  3 out of 4 sides are governmental non-uses, and I can stay on the sidewalk by the library/MOCA to enter those places.

If the City could activate the Riverfront more and the Klutho parks and spaces around it, and create a nice walkable connection between the two, then Hemming would naturally become a stopping point (but there are still no uses around it).  City officials are so agenda oriented and filled with personal goals that have nothing to do with the city or the public.  If they could devote as much time to improving the actual city as they do to embarking on their personal, often religious or politically motivated/discriminatory missions, then Jacksonville would be booming.  PWC's annual "Emerging Trends" publication came out and there is not one positive thing said or noted about Jax...just like past 5 years it is only a few places ahead of Detroit/Cleveland.  Surely public officials realize that their priorities are all personal and misguided and are leading the city down a really bad path.

[thelakelander]

Wow.  I certainly don't like the start of the article.  It flat out assumes that removing benches, tables, and banning games will make a certain group leave and another group come.  However, there's no truth in that position.  Where has making a space unsuitable for human habitation worked in causing additional humans to show up?

[thelakelander]

So Councilman Redman believes that he must actively engage in making the park accessible and usable to others beside the homeless, and in his mind taking the homeless away makes that happen.  Why would I go to the park as it is now?  There is nothing for me there, and with or without homeless it is not a pleasant park to sit in and hang out at.  It's 1 small city block, mostly paved, poorly landscaped, with very few activators in/around it.

If I am a non-homeless person, resident of DT, young prof, etc and I feel like hanging out in public space downtown, it's going to be the Riverwalk, Chamblin's to read/coffee and sit on porch, or maybe even the Landing courtyard to watch the boats and have a drink.  They could make Hemming pristine and beautiful with no homeless and there would still be no reason for me to go there.  3 out of 4 sides are governmental non-uses, and I can stay on the sidewalk by the library/MOCA to enter those places.

If the City could activate the Riverfront more and the Klutho parks and spaces around it, and create a nice walkable connection between the two, then Hemming would naturally become a stopping point (but there are still no uses around it).  City officials are so agenda oriented and filled with personal goals that have nothing to do with the city or the public.  If they could devote as much time to improving the actual city as they do to embarking on their personal, often religious or politically motivated/discriminatory missions, then Jacksonville would be booming.  PWC's annual "Emerging Trends" publication came out and there is not one positive thing said or noted about Jax...just like past 5 years it is only a few places ahead of Detroit/Cleveland.  Surely public officials realize that their priorities are all personal and misguided and are leading the city down a really bad path.

In this case, it appears the committee is being led by three councilmembers with no professional background or experience in urban design, downtown development, or planning.  Do these members even frequent this space on a regular basis?  Also, at what point does public participation, opinion, and desire enter the picture.  What's been discussed in this ordinance is completely the opposite of the survey this committee conducted.  Was that all for show?

[Ocklawaha]

Prior to the meeting I spent an hour walking from group to group, covering virtually 100% of everyone in the park, with my MAC BOOK PRO swinging in my hand. ONE PERSON approached me uninvited, he said, 'Sir, do you have the time?' I did. After the TV interviews I went back through the park and informed everyone that we were about to hold a meeting to discuss throwing them out. The heat quickly rose, and of course it was only right that I informed them that they could have a chance to speak. I crossed the street with maybe 30 people from the park, and we were looking for a fight if that's what it would take.

One of the reporters asked me if we shouldn't try and move the 'homeless people' out of the park. What a strange thought. I stopped her and said, 'The key word is P E O P L E,' not homeless, not rich, not tourists, not poor, not anyone that you can label, just 'people'. She seemed taken aback, "We are the people, this is the public, and we want to be heard," were my parting shots.

HOPEFULLY, we did some good. Agree though that this caught them completely off balance.

[Debbie Thompson]

They didn't expect opposition.  Then when they found out there is, they tried to discourage people from showing up.  When Hemming Plaza is devoid of tables, devoid of benches, and devoid of trees, who will show up then?

[Steve_Lovett]

So Councilman Redman believes that he must actively engage in making the park accessible and usable to others beside the homeless, and in his mind taking the homeless away makes that happen.  Why would I go to the park as it is now?  There is nothing for me there, and with or without homeless it is not a pleasant park to sit in and hang out at.  It's 1 small city block, mostly paved, poorly landscaped, with very few activators in/around it.

If I am a non-homeless person, resident of DT, young prof, etc and I feel like hanging out in public space downtown, it's going to be the Riverwalk, Chamblin's to read/coffee and sit on porch, or maybe even the Landing courtyard to watch the boats and have a drink.  They could make Hemming pristine and beautiful with no homeless and there would still be no reason for me to go there.  3 out of 4 sides are governmental non-uses, and I can stay on the sidewalk by the library/MOCA to enter those places.

If the City could activate the Riverfront more and the Klutho parks and spaces around it, and create a nice walkable connection between the two, then Hemming would naturally become a stopping point (but there are still no uses around it).  City officials are so agenda oriented and filled with personal goals that have nothing to do with the city or the public.  If they could devote as much time to improving the actual city as they do to embarking on their personal, often religious or politically motivated/discriminatory missions, then Jacksonville would be booming.  PWC's annual "Emerging Trends" publication came out and there is not one positive thing said or noted about Jax...just like past 5 years it is only a few places ahead of Detroit/Cleveland.  Surely public officials realize that their priorities are all personal and misguided and are leading the city down a really bad path.

In this case, it appears the committee is being led by three councilmembers with no professional background or experience in urban design, downtown development, or planning.  Do these members even frequent this space on a regular basis?  Also, at what point does public participation, opinion, and desire enter the picture.  What's been discussed in this ordinance is completely the opposite of the survey this committee conducted.  Was that all for show?

Ennis,

Public participation is where is should start - and public input should be what informs decisions. Most great cities have a strong culture of public participation and involvement. Somehow it seems that elected officials have forgotten that they are elected by and work for the public.

The idea of tearing what's left of the soul of Jacksonville's greatest Town Square through a form of social engineering is shameful. Hemming Park should be the crown jewel of Jacksonville's urban parks and one of the most important civic spaces in the city, populated by people of all kind. It makes me sick that these discussions are occurring as they are - intentionally.

- Steve

[TheCat]

Repeated phrases from the meeting.

"it's not a homeless issue it's a conduct issue."

--So, Gulliford did his best to paint the current picture of people in the park as aggressive. He told a story of a man who aggressively panhandled a first time visiter to the core. "It's not a recored crime" he said, "but it's an internalized perception of our downtown that won't be forgotten."

I feel bad for not sharing the story of the homeless man who escorted me from my car to the entrance of a downtown church for a wedding under the cover of his umbrella to shield me from the rain. Even after I insisted, "dude, I don't have any cash. Sorry." He said, "that's okay, man. You shouldn't get wet all dressed up."

We need to grow up. There is this fascination with and embellishment of the homeless/poor man "archetype." We love to tell stories of how the poor man looked at us like he was going to "beat me up." Or, as someone wrote on our facebook page "we're afraid for our lives [when we walk through hemming park]." T

The truth is most people just feel awkward. That's what we're dealing with, awkwardness.

"It's about how we are being perceived. Hemming is an extension of city hall. It reflects poorly on us to have people with "bad conduct" at our front door."

-They should be more concerned about the perception they are creating as our legislators. It's our city council and governing authorities that make us "look bad" not the people with "bad conduct" in hemming park.

-The zone commander for JSO said at the meeting that downtown crime is low. Downtown is relatively safe. We have a perception issue. That may be true. I think many people perceive Jacksonville's downtown to be something out a 1980s comic book about New York. We don't have a gotham. I remember looking up crime stats in our urban core. It hardly exist. I'm never concerned walking through downtown, at anytime. It's probably one of the safest places to be unless you are at the landing (the one managed property), at night...that's where my fight or flight instincts are all tingly. 

"Look, we have a problem, the solution may not be to remove the games and furniture but something has to be done. We're open to ideas. We don't know everything."

- Gulliford said this repeatedly. Though, you don't get the feeling that they are open to ideas. In any other world, I would expect legislators to propose legislation that they feel confident will solve a problem. I don't feel confidence coming from them. I think they sit around and talk about the people in the park like they are 5 year old kids,  "when we take away their games they'll listen to us."

"We need to send a message."


-This was from Redman. They are sending a message just not the one that they think they are sending. What are you trying to prove to the three people who are loud? That you can write laws? Good job council. The other message you have sent: Council does not know what they are doing and is not trying to actually figure out how to make Hemming Plaza better for the community. 

[ronchamblin]

Insomnia again.  You make good sense Lake.  Surely most of the points you make are valid.  The fact of continued apparent avoidance by the significant decision makers to recognize the truth of what you’ve said, and what others have said concerning the lack of progress toward core development, and to act upon them, is interesting, especially when it makes good sense.

We know  some of the dynamics of the causes of decline in the core, and most realize that nobody actually intended the decline to the current state of core abandonment.  The current state of abandonment, and lack of vibrancy, is a natural consequence of the explosive rush to the suburbs, and the loss of critical industries in the core, a condition as experienced by many American cities.

What is most interesting to me is the fact of stagnation, the fact of a city being unable to solve a problem, when the problem has been set over decades clearly for all to see. 

To most, problems are fun, as they offer opportunities to exercise the most wonderful qualities of the mind, that of searching for solutions, of making right, what has been wrong.  Given the problem of core revitalization, of its existence over so long a time without solution, why has there been no solution? 

You have stated what must be done, and your ideas make sense to me.  You and others have mentioned the idea that city council members are not city planners by occupation, so they are not the best individuals to rely upon to consistently make the right decisions which would encourage or force revitalization. 

Our local history has shown that even when a new group or committee is established, with the objective of revitalization set before them, the group or committee fails to make solid progress toward vibrancy and core infill.  Why is this failure repeated over and over?

The period of relative stagnation has been over decades.  Who or what is to blame?  During this period we’ve had several mayors.  We’ve had different council members.  We’ve had both good and bad economies.  We’ve had different groups or committees who’ve been assigned the task of achieving vibrancy and infill.  If we cannot blame any of these entities for holding up real progress, what or who can we blame?

We still, for the most part, have an abandoned downtown core.  Is the new authority going to succeed in forcing significant progress toward vibrancy?  After a period of perhaps one year, we will have a sense of probable success or failure. 

So, to my earlier point, on another discussion, is there something hidden, something fundamental to the achievement of success, which lies beneath the radar, and is causing the failure of all efforts to achieve real progress toward vibrancy?  Does the hidden entity which might be responsible for failure consist of individuals, or does it consist of some characteristic in the environment we’ve missed?  Are there influential individuals or groups who, by their existence and needs or agendas, preventing, without any intention of doing so, progress toward vibrancy?   

Surely nobody intentionally desires to obstruct downtown revitalization.  However, something must be obstructing it.  Whatever it is, it is not obvious.  Again, it doesn’t have to be individuals directly and intentionally active, only perhaps a byproduct of their agendas, actions, or positions.  But it does have to be something.
I sense that the answer is a combination of strong public input and energy in the way of investment, strong leadership by the mayor, and the creative and determined input from whatever group has been given the task of guiding the revitalization.    By these measures, perhaps the “hidden” impediments to vibrancy, whatever they have been over decades, can be overcome.   
     
     

[Bativac]

I was not able to make the meeting but by the sound of it, to put it bluntly, our City Council sucks.

Has the Mayor weighed in on this or does he have nothing to do with it? What about the new Downtown authority?

[sheclown]

Thank you all who attended. I love the thought of Bob rounding up the locals. 

Awkwardness does sum it up.  Good point.

"We're not afraid, we're uncomfortable."  That should be their stance. 

[thelakelander]

Repeated phrases from the meeting.

"it's not a homeless issue it's a conduct issue."

--So, Gulliford did his best to paint the current picture of people in the park as aggressive. He told a story of a man who aggressively panhandled a first time visiter to the core. "It's not a recored crime" he said, "but it's an internalized perception of our downtown that won't be forgotten."

To be honest, you're more likely to get hit up for change on an isolated random street.  What are they planning for that? Besides, isn't panhandling against the law?  What's keeping us from enforcing the law?

"It's about how we are being perceived. Hemming is an extension of city hall. It reflects poorly on us to have people with "bad conduct" at our front door."

-They should be more concerned about the perception they are creating as our legislators. It's our city council and governing authorities that make us "look bad" not the people with "bad conduct" in hemming park.

-The zone commander for JSO said at the meeting that downtown crime is low. Downtown is relatively safe. We have a perception issue. That may be true. I think many people perceive Jacksonville's downtown to be something out a 1980s comic book about New York. We don't have a gotham. I remember looking up crime stats in our urban core. It hardly exist. I'm never concerned walking through downtown, at anytime. It's probably one of the safest places to be unless you are at the landing (the one managed property), at night...that's where my fight or flight instincts are all tingly.

Enforcing the law should take care of people with bad conduct.  Programming and better utilizing the spaces around the park will take care of the rest.  Removing amenities does nothing.

"Look, we have a problem, the solution may not be to remove the games and furniture but something has to be done. We're open to ideas. We don't know everything."

- Gulliford said this repeatedly. Though, you don't get the feeling that they are open to ideas. In any other world, I would expect legislators to propose legislation that they feel confident will solve a problem. I don't feel confidence coming from them. I think they sit around and talk about the people in the park like they are 5 year old kids,  "when we take away their games they'll listen to us."

A combination of programming the space, adding to the amenities, integrating surrounding uses with the space, and opening a day center should be considered.

"We need to send a message."


-This was from Redman. They are sending a message just not the one that they think they are sending. What are you trying to prove to the three people who are loud? That you can write laws? Good job council. The other message you have sent: Council does not know what they are doing and is not trying to actually figure out how to make Hemming Plaza better for the community.

You'll send a strong message by doing the right thing.  Banning games and removing benches, chairs, and trees only sends the message that you refuse to listen to the public and that you don't know what you're doing.