LIVE BLOG: MOBILITY FEE MORATORIUM: Rules&Finance Committee

[Cheshire Cat]

The public is exactly who should not burden the cost of fees at this time.  Remember all these developers and builders will still be looking for other "incentives".  The fee moratorium sweetens the pot for them.  However the council is there to represent the entire community and not just builders and developers.

[TheCat]

Boyer defines infill per MP. Infill is not just riverside, avondale, san marco...etc. Infill means reuse. The vacant strip malls all over town qualify.

[Cheshire Cat]

Seriously everyone.  Let's hope Lori runs for her council seat again and if she doesn't that she runs for Mayor.  We need this type of leadership and once here to retain it.  Facts and more facts will show that this moratorium is not needed.

[thelakelander]

Robin Lumb tells the crowd that he's willing to risk taxpayer dollars for the hope of spurring construction jobs. Lumb calls the moratorium a short term compromise.

[TheCat]

Boyer:

Supported the first waiver. Did not see the first waiver produce. She has a problem with the way this bill is written. But that's not even her issue. She has a real problem for the general public shouldering the costs of new development.

[jcjohnpaint]

because we were in a building bubble.  The jobs are not going to come back... get over it... move on!

[thelakelander]

Lumb is squarely in the pocket of the developers. He's still quoting sources that have already been proven wrong.

[TheCat]

Lumb is fighting for his "faith" in the moratorium. When his assumptions are addressed he defaults with " I just have to believe that the moratorium will work."

[thelakelander]

The Mayor only wanted a one year moratorium. Now he's waiting to hear the council debates before taking a position.

[jcjohnpaint]

Sounds like the mayor does not support the moratorium

[Bridges]

Sounds like the mayor does not support the moratorium

He shouldn't.  Especially with his support of Jax 2025, and it's survey results.

[Cheshire Cat]

Mr. Lumb is not interested in looking out for the people but rather pats on the back from those in this community he feels hold the greatest influence be it religious or political.  What Lumb does not see is that this posturing for insiders and for the moratorium are another nail in his political coffin.  He may run for office again, but with the JFRD, JSO targeting him for removal from office and average citizens realizing that their tax dollars are something Lumb will readily play with or sacrifice, well that tells us all we need to know about him with regard to city finances and what his priorities are.  We already know the ugly side of his views on equality and race.  None of this bodes well for him politically or otherwise.

[TheCat]

Reading between the lines a statement from the mayor's office says "I didn't see the moratorium going any longer than a year but I'm open to hearing your perspective."

Crescimbeni says the only way he can support another moratorium is if we have concrete numbers of what we can expect to happen as a result of the moratorium. He's not happy with the results of the first moratorium which was supposed to "jump start the economy."

[Cheshire Cat]

Crescimbeni is right on regarding this.  Show us the numbers and prove them out with documentation and facts.  The facts are not there to support this moratorium and that has been made plenty clear by now.

[TheCat]

Anderson:

Thinks the first moratorium had mixed results, at best. There were benefits. People were employed. We also have to consider that infrastructure improvements create jobs as well. Reminds CIty Council that they have a good record on "jobs." On a recent trip to downtown he noticed all of the broken infrastructure and wondered what is the perception to our city's visitors. He wants to see the bill reworked so that it is fair for the entire community.