Billionaire Khan Wants $3M in Tax $$$ for Jaguars

[E_Dubya]

Everbank Field:

The city and Jacksonville Jaguars are proposing $90 million in upgrades to EverBank Field, investments that would replace the facility's club seating while building an indoor practice facility and amphitheater.

Shipyards:

featuring multilevel indoor practice fields where the Jaguars would practice, an amphitheater and a public park.

How many indoor practice facilities and amphitheaters do we need?

no shit?

Good catch, fine hoe.

Tacachale. anyone?  any reason why we need two of each, partially paid for by taxpayers?

As far as the practice facilty is concerned, we have multiple practice fields now. That's in order to prepare our team for different playing surfaces (turf, grass, etc.) The ablility to practice on a surface different from your home field makes a massive difference in away game preparation.

I don't understand Finehoe's second point. How many amphitheaters do we have downtown now? It's my understanding that the proposal for The Shipyards is scrapped for now due to the city's unwillingness to pay for necessary environmental cleanup. I think that's why the amphitheater is added into this plan.

[thelakelander]

It was mentioned in an article a few months back.

[RattlerGator]

From the renderings, it's the only thing that feels a little out of place to me, like it was designed separately and just shoved in between the practice facility and the stadium.

I like it. A small step in making the sports district more walkable in the long run.

Good for you, Ennis. Reasonableness!

[Adam White]

From the renderings, it's the only thing that feels a little out of place to me, like it was designed separately and just shoved in between the practice facility and the stadium.

I like it. A small step in making the sports district more walkable in the long run.

Good for you, Ennis. Reasonableness!

So, when are you going to start exhibiting some of this reasonableness - or is it only "reasonable" when people to agree with your opinion?

[RattlerGator]

And . . . some of these questions, honestly, are laughable because they assume stupidity on the part of those proposing but in fact exhibit stupidity on the part of those making assumptions. Two practice fields? Two amphitheaters? Why wasn't the situation obvious from the simple facts presented? Shad has clearly said they want to move forward and The Shipyards cleanup has them in stasis -- so they are jump-starting the process.

Millions of dollars in new investment downtown, and it's just bitch, bitch, bitch -- as if only those bitching are interested in asking questions or curious about public investment. Hell no, but this is a clearly stupid time to be bitching.

Adam, you show me where I've been unreasonable and I'll address it. Clearly I've upset you.

[Adam White]

And . . . some of these questions, honestly, are laughable because they assume stupidity on the part of those proposing but in fact exhibit stupidity on the part of those making assumptions. Two practice fields? Two amphitheaters? Why wasn't the situation obvious from the simple facts presented? Shad has clearly said they want to move forward and The Shipyards cleanup has them in stasis -- so they are jump-starting the process.

Millions of dollars in new investment downtown, and it's just bitch, bitch, bitch -- as if only those bitching are interested in asking questions or curious about public investment. Hell no, but this is a clearly stupid time to be bitching.

Adam, you show me where I've been unreasonable and I'll address it. Clearly I've upset you.

I think some of your language - the whole 'politburo' thing, for example - is a bit unreasonable. I can appreciate you not liking someone or not agreeing with that person's opinion, but still...

Anyway - I don't think it's unreasonable to have different principles. I'm not saying you are unreasonable for having a particular view, I'm just saying that it's not unreasonable for two people to have two different sets of values. So saying Ennis is being reasonable because you agree with him is an easy thing to say.

[BridgeTroll]

The Legislature created a new funding method for professional stadiums in 2014 in an attempt to reduce the lobbying from prior years for state money. Initially $7 million was set aside in potential sales-tax revenue that could go to stadium projects, with the annual pool of money growing to $13 million in 2016.

The law gives the Department of Economic Opportunity 60 days to determine if an application should go forward and to rank all the applications by Feb. 1, something the agency didn't do with the four proposals that were made for the 2015 legislative session.

Sounds to me the city would be stupid to pass up this process.  Some municipality is going to be awarded money for some projects... we should try for that money...

[mtraininjax]

This is a witch hunt pure and simple, the democrats, still bitter over the loss of Alvin Brown are the ones muck-raking, asking for accountability on the Jaguars and comparing what is spent for football to what could be spent for Education. When their white knight was making stupid comments about video boards that they, yes, the video boards, would take Jacksonville to the next level.

I can only hope Curry does not make such stupid comments. But I get it, its payback, but let's all hope Curry is a bit smarter with his comments than Brown was.

[RattlerGator]

And . . . some of these questions, honestly, are laughable because they assume stupidity on the part of those proposing but in fact exhibit stupidity on the part of those making assumptions. Two practice fields? Two amphitheaters? Why wasn't the situation obvious from the simple facts presented? Shad has clearly said they want to move forward and The Shipyards cleanup has them in stasis -- so they are jump-starting the process.

Millions of dollars in new investment downtown, and it's just bitch, bitch, bitch -- as if only those bitching are interested in asking questions or curious about public investment. Hell no, but this is a clearly stupid time to be bitching.

Adam, you show me where I've been unreasonable and I'll address it. Clearly I've upset you.

I think some of your language - the whole 'politburo' thing, for example - is a bit unreasonable. I can appreciate you not liking someone or not agreeing with that person's opinion, but still...

Anyway - I don't think it's unreasonable to have different principles. I'm not saying you are unreasonable for having a particular view, I'm just saying that it's not unreasonable for two people to have two different sets of values. So saying Ennis is being reasonable because you agree with him is an easy thing to say.

Understood, and I agree (I think). This is my philosophy, and I admit I may imperfectly follow it -- I don't introduce insult to the board. But I will respond to insult on the board in-kind. Why is Orange Park ugly was a very clear attempt to insult -- was it not? And the attempt, it seemed to me, emanated from a Politburo-like mindset: one aesthetic is the correct aesthetic. One way is the correct way. Beauty is what I say it is.

Stephen gladly pronounced his extreme narrowness when it comes to beauty. Having baited the conversation, he deserved whatever mild "insult" that came back at him, IMHO. And (I thought) it was all in good fun. No big deal. Maybe I was wrong (as I was when not initially seeing his gulag nonsense was in response to my Politburo nonsense).

[Adam White]

And . . . some of these questions, honestly, are laughable because they assume stupidity on the part of those proposing but in fact exhibit stupidity on the part of those making assumptions. Two practice fields? Two amphitheaters? Why wasn't the situation obvious from the simple facts presented? Shad has clearly said they want to move forward and The Shipyards cleanup has them in stasis -- so they are jump-starting the process.

Millions of dollars in new investment downtown, and it's just bitch, bitch, bitch -- as if only those bitching are interested in asking questions or curious about public investment. Hell no, but this is a clearly stupid time to be bitching.

Adam, you show me where I've been unreasonable and I'll address it. Clearly I've upset you.

I think some of your language - the whole 'politburo' thing, for example - is a bit unreasonable. I can appreciate you not liking someone or not agreeing with that person's opinion, but still...

Anyway - I don't think it's unreasonable to have different principles. I'm not saying you are unreasonable for having a particular view, I'm just saying that it's not unreasonable for two people to have two different sets of values. So saying Ennis is being reasonable because you agree with him is an easy thing to say.

Understood, and I agree (I think). This is my philosophy, and I admit I may imperfectly follow it -- I don't introduce insult to the board. But I will respond to insult on the board in-kind. Why is Orange Park ugly was a very clear attempt to insult -- was it not? And the attempt, it seemed to me, emanated from a Politburo-like mindset: one aesthetic is the correct aesthetic. One way is the correct way. Beauty is what I say it is.

Stephen gladly pronounced his extreme narrowness when it comes to beauty. Having baited the conversation, he deserved whatever mild "insult" that came back at him, IMHO. And (I thought) it was all in good fun. No big deal. Maybe I was wrong (as I was when not initially seeing his gulag nonsense was in response to my Politburo nonsense).

I didn't see that OP thread as an attempt at insult - but I'm not from OP. I grew up near Regency Mall and am not very offended by the criticism it receives.

Things can get quite heated - I know I have lowered the tone on more than one occasion. But I'd like to think we can disagree and be pretty cordial about it - with the occasional zinger thrown in for good measure.

[vicupstate]

Honestly, the same people that bitch up a storm about things like Food Stamps, see no hypocrisy or even the slightest juxtaposition. in granting full blessing on what is clearly the epitome of corporate welfare.   

The city is paying $45 million for a amphitheater that seats a fraction of what the existing coliseum 50 steps away holds. There is a huge pension problem that has yet to be resolved and truly transformative projects DT and elsewhere go without.  A partial funding source for a Convention Center (or something else for that matter) will be eliminated as well. 

This is a terrible idea.

For the record, I never supported the Scoreboards. 
   

[Tacachale]

Honestly, the same people that bitch up a storm about things like Food Stamps, see no hypocrisy or even the slightest juxtaposition. in granting full blessing on what is clearly the epitome of corporate welfare.   

The city is paying $45 million for a amphitheater that seats a fraction of what the existing coliseum 50 steps away holds. There is a huge pension problem that has yet to be resolved and truly transformative projects DT and elsewhere go without.  A partial funding source for a Convention Center (or something else for that matter) will be eliminated as well. 

This is a terrible idea.

For the record, I never supported the Scoreboards. 

As I bang on about every chance I get, an amphitheater of this size is a different beast than the Arena (the Coliseum blowed up long ago). The Arena is a large scale venue that's good for large scale events (among other things), but we miss many event opportunities because we lack in mid-sized venues (this is true across the entire metro area). It's too bad we didn't build one back in the 90s but the need is still there, as traveling acts are continuing to prefer venues of this size.

As I said elsewhere, this project doesn't take away from the opportunity to resolve the pension crisis, or anything else. It doesn't even really take away a potential funding source for a convention center, as according to the current law, the bed tax is tied to venues specifically in the stadium district.

[RattlerGator]

Vic ain't trying to hear it, Tacachale, and Vic ain't trying to understand it. Vic is trying to do apples and oranges. Because that's about all you to can do to attack this proposal.

[Tacachale]

^Vic is very bright and knowledgeable and I respect his opinion on these matters greatly, even if I disagree on this particular point.

[vicupstate]

Thank you Tacachale for defending me against a troll post. I respect your opinion as well.

I do realize it is called an Arena, but it is factual to refer to it as a coliseum. I just used a less appropriate word for understanding purposes, since Coliseum is what the old one was called.   

'the bed tax is tied to venues specifically in the stadium district.'

I don't believe this has always been the case. When was this stipulated?  With the last stadium improvements? What are the physical boundaries of the Stadium district according to the bed tax legislation? 

What is the full breakdown of this 6% tax, and how much is devoted to the Stadium/Stadium district already?  Obviously the tourism funds are not.