Live Blog: Revised Mobility Fee Moratorium

[TheCat]

Yeah, Clark makes it seem like the people who oppose the moratorium are all rich, better than though, bicyclists. Pushes for imagery of starving construction workers who just need a job. Think Feed the Children commercials. Send us your money. It's for the kids...

[Ocklawaha]

CLARK, 'are we voting on this by committee?'

Guilliford, 'Suggests shifting the 3 months to the back end'.

Motion on substitute bill, finance voted on approved substitute amendment.

Rules approved amended bill.

Anderson saying we'll now have two committees on Tuesday. Shuman is explaining rules for Tuesday.

[Ocklawaha]

Substitute bill passed as amended.

[JeffreyS]

So which version is the Council seeking to sneak through tomorrow?

[thelakelander]

After Stephen's post, I'm not sure. I thought it was the original compromise bill?

[JeffreyS]

The right thing to do would be to scrap the entire moratorium bullshit.

That would be something indeed.

[thelakelander]

Reality is either way, you're  looking at 21 months.  There's really no reason to move forward with a project over the next three months if you can afford to wait until the moratorium kicks in, in 90 days.  Like Doug mentioned at the meeting, I'd rather see them start immediately and knock off 3 months on the back end.

Oh, and yes, the right thing to do would be scrap the entire concept.  Unfortunately, this is Jax and that doesn't appear to be a realistic expectation or option at this point.

[dougskiles]

After the meeting I was talking to Wyman and Curtis Hart.  Both agreed to either go back to the original deal (18 mo that starts in 3) or support an amendment to the Love amendment that starts immediately but is shortened to 18 months.

Aside from the miracle "denial" of the entire thing, I am hoping for the 18 months that starts immediately.  Let's get this thing over with as quickly as possible.

[JeffreyS]

Yes why use the "jobs bill" to suppress 3 months of jobs.

[JeffreyS]

I wonder if the Mayor will support this he seemed to be against a full Moratorium.

[Tacachale]

After the meeting I was talking to Wyman and Curtis Hart.  Both agreed to either go back to the original deal (18 mo that starts in 3) or support an amendment to the Love amendment that starts immediately but is shortened to 18 months.

Aside from the miracle "denial" of the entire thing, I am hoping for the 18 months that starts immediately.  Let's get this thing over with as quickly as possible.

That would be good. I don't really see what the developers get out of adding so much time to the front end. If anything, it means they have to sit around and wait if they want to take advantage of the reduction.

[Cheshire Cat]

So which version is the Council seeking to sneak through tomorrow?

Tomorrow there are two bills that will have to be reconciled.

Crescimbini's Finance Committee has voted on 18 months, but TEU and Rules voted for two more years of free development for the real estate investors, thanks again to Jim Love.

The Council will have to decide what to do.

The right thing to do would be to scrap the entire moratorium bullshit.

This is what should happen.  I swear this is one of those days when up is not up but rather down. 

[jcjohnpaint]

What mayor?  Did we have a mayor?  I didn't even notice! 

[Jumpinjack]

His staff person Michelle Barth spoke to Council and repeated that the mayor was interested in hearing the debate and exchange of ideas. Say what?  I almost burst out laughing.

[strider]

One interesting thing that came out in the meeting tonight was that there was not just one meeting, but multiple meetings - at least according to what was said by the others involved.

Tonight was shameful for Jacksonville.  All the old and incorrect talking points were there -  it's for the jobs and the developments and the developers are now talking how great the bike lanes are going to be.  Doesn't that scare you?

And Clark basically asking that any fees collected to date be refunded.  Or how about Boyer talking about the major projects in her district going forward even with the fee?  Doesn't that make anyone wonder why they were there to talk about a moratorium to promote development?

And this great compromise  - it got us an additional 3 more months of waivers at 75%.  It is a toss up which bill will be picked to be heard first and the one heard first is liable to be the one passed.  No public comments in that agenda meeting is there?

And will it stop there?  It was mentioned that the mobilty fee was unfair in how it is calculated.  Is 21 months enough time for them to figure out how to gut the Mobilty Plan?