DIA wants the Landing to start with a park

[Ken_FSU]

To me what it shows is none of this is rocket science. There was no innate failing of Jacksonville that kept us back, and it certainly wasn't a lack of support from the public or business community. The issue has always been a lack of leadership, vision and followthrough. When you don't have that, you get craters in place of buildings and a bunch of social media parrots telling you it's progress. But when you do, we're pulling off some incredibly cool things.

She got dragged a lot during her time leading the DIA, including by me, so I think it's worth giving credit where it's due. We owe Lori Boyer a lot of credit for what we're seeing happening right now on the riverfront. The "node" concept that we're starting to see take shape at RiversEdge, Friendship Park, Riverfront Plaza, and soon to be Shipyards West was her idea.

That's not correct. She knew a good idea when she saw it.

Scenic Jacksonville, a legacy quality of life advocacy organization, spearheaded the creation Riverfront Parks Now, an advocacy coalition of 14 different non-profits, focused on ensuring high quality public greenspace be a key part of our Downtown riverfront's near future. There was a unique opportunity and triggering events: https://www.riverfrontparksnow.org/about-us/

Met with two Mayoral administrations, DIA, Jags, Jax Chamber, Jax Civic Council, duPont, etc to share the opportunity and grow support. And it worked. Importantly, duPont became a key early torch bearer (and still is) to give it credibility and momentum. When it became clear there was buy in, the Riverfront Parks Conservancy was spun off from Riverfront Parks Now: https://riverparkjax.org/

The Conservancy's mission was to prepare to care for these future high profile parks. Surprisingly, or not, an enhanced level of maintenance for these spaces (vs a random Jax park) wasn't part of the city's original budgeting plan. The Conservancy had a MOU with COJ to move forward in this manner and raised hundreds of thousands of dollars, but wasn't fully embraced by city leadership. City leadership came around to embracing the need for a conservancy, and the organization willingly handed over the keys, recently rebranded and revamped into the Jax Riverfront Alliance, shepparded by duPont, with a mostly new board. It received millions in the most recent COJ budget and has an active job opening now for CEO: https://www.conservationjobboard.com/job-listing-chief-executive-officer-jacksonville-florida/4364752195

Scenic Jacksonville is still working, not necessarily focused on riverfront issues. Riverfront Parks Now has succeeded enormously, seeing each of its main objectives completed - lots of public green space on the river (check), high level design (check), well funded (check). It's still operating low key, now pushing for a timely plan to finish the northbank riverwalk (there is no real time line). And the Jax Riverfront Alliance is set to formally announce itself any time now, though it's existence is already in the ether of public knowledge. It will be vitally important for that entity to succeed and have massive buy in for these show piece public spaces to thrive.

Savy, engaged members of public and non-profit leadership working together are the reason, ultimately, these public spaces are coming alive, and aren't The Berkman 2 or whatever else semi-good highrise development may or may not have gotten out of ground by now. The Deagan administration deserves a lot of credit for prioritizing these projects and staying focused on completion and quality. Looking forward to more of these ribbon cuttings.

While there's certainly a lot of validity to what you're saying here (I've worked with some of these very organizations), I also don't think our statements are mutually exclusive. I've also been in many City Council and Visit Jax meetings over the years where Lori Boyer was almost single-handedly championing and looking for funding for spaces like Musical Heritage Park and St. Johns Park, and others where she was negotiationg park space for The District. Takes a village, and all parties deserve credit for what we're seeing on the ground in 2025.

To me what it shows is none of this is rocket science. There was no innate failing of Jacksonville that kept us back, and it certainly wasn't a lack of support from the public or business community. The issue has always been a lack of leadership, vision and followthrough. When you don't have that, you get craters in place of buildings and a bunch of social media parrots telling you it's progress. But when you do, we're pulling off some incredibly cool things.

She got dragged a lot during her time leading the DIA, including by me, so I think it's worth giving credit where it's due. We owe Lori Boyer a lot of credit for what we're seeing happening right now on the riverfront. The "node" concept that we're starting to see take shape at RiversEdge, Friendship Park, Riverfront Plaza, and soon to be Shipyards West was her idea. Four Seasons doesn't come out of the ground without the solid development agreement they orchestrated and a very difficult land swap. Still think we missed out on the biggest opportunity we might ever see during the post-pandemic economic and immigration boom, but it's clearly night and day in terms of what the DIA has been able to accomplish alongside great city leadership vs. the previous administration.

For real. Something I realized, having gone from writing about this stuff on the outside to being in a position to see where all the levers and brakes are, is that the criticisms have been valid but sometimes directed at the wrong place. DIA could make deals, offer certain incentives and make plans, but execution relied on a lot of other factors they didn't have control over. And those other factors were typically where things failed.

The riverfront parks is a perfect example. DIA would have moved on all that years ago, and has consistently worked through the planning and design as much as funding has allowed, but the actual execution is the purview of the mayoral administration. And frankly they just dropped the ball left and right. Same deal with things like two-way street conversions, the Park Street road diet, etc. Combine that with the admin forcing through bad projects like the LaVilla gas station and the Lot J deal, and it was kind of a perfect storm.

What we're seeing now is what the DIA and city has always been capable of. Lori deserves a LOT of credit for us getting this far, and ensuring we're not just starting from scratch every time there's a new mayor and City Council class.

^ Just providing more justification of how bad the Curry administration was.  There agenda was about anything other than what was best for the City.  I will leave it to your imagination who they really were serving.

Friendship Fountain/Park is a great example of this. The DIA put together a great plan and a great design for this space. And for like FOUR YEARS, it sat closed and abandoned, gathering dust. And I personally said, many times, that it was a failure of the DIA and DIA leadership to let this happen. And I think there's nothing lamer in the world than being unwilling to admit when you were wrong about something. Project wasn't stonewalled because of a lack of follow-through from the DIA. It was stonewalled because of petty political grudges against Leanna Cumber. In the same way that redevelopment of the Landing in cooperation with Tony Sleiman was stonewalled because of his endorsement of Alvin Brown.

Lenny said we wouldn't recognize the riverfront by the end of his run, and the riverfront went backwards.

Donna, meanwhile, has just quietly put forth milestones, hit her dates, and moved on to the next.

By not making it about her, and just focusing on what's best for Jax, it's the best, most effective leadership we've seen since Delaney, IMO.

[fsu813]

Takes a village, and all parties deserve credit for what we're seeing on the ground in 2025.

This is correct.

Which is different than what was asserted before, when the new park spaces were attributed to being Boyer"s idea.

Definitely weren't her idea, but she was an important leader in seeing these spaces come to fruition.

[Jankelope]

I'm not trying to be blindly partisan or something. I'm not some massive fan of "democrats" or anything lol. I'm not affiliated with a party.

That being said, Donna Deegan is EXACTLY the kind of figure we need in local, state, and national roles. I have been so impressed with her focus and leadership and not getting sidetracked on dumb things that don't impact people's day to day lives.

She is a great mayor and when you go and look at negative comments about her, it is clear they are grasping at straws.

[Jax_Developer]

I'm not trying to be blindly partisan or something. I'm not some massive fan of "democrats" or anything lol. I'm not affiliated with a party.

That being said, Donna Deegan is EXACTLY the kind of figure we need in local, state, and national roles. I have been so impressed with her focus and leadership and not getting sidetracked on dumb things that don't impact people's day to day lives.

She is a great mayor and when you go and look at negative comments about her, it is clear they are grasping at straws.

No, not really. She has done both good & bad things. The issue is that her two "bad things" are the U2C and the Jags Agreement.. both unfortunently are much more significant than most of the other good deeds on her behalf.

[Tacachale]

I'm not trying to be blindly partisan or something. I'm not some massive fan of "democrats" or anything lol. I'm not affiliated with a party.

That being said, Donna Deegan is EXACTLY the kind of figure we need in local, state, and national roles. I have been so impressed with her focus and leadership and not getting sidetracked on dumb things that don't impact people's day to day lives.

She is a great mayor and when you go and look at negative comments about her, it is clear they are grasping at straws.

I am blindly partisan, but I've been watching this stuff for a long time, and I agree! Right person at the right time.

[heights unknown]

I'm not trying to be blindly partisan or something. I'm not some massive fan of "democrats" or anything lol. I'm not affiliated with a party.

That being said, Donna Deegan is EXACTLY the kind of figure we need in local, state, and national roles. I have been so impressed with her focus and leadership and not getting sidetracked on dumb things that don't impact people's day to day lives.

She is a great mayor and when you go and look at negative comments about her, it is clear they are grasping at straws.

I am blindly partisan, but I've been watching this stuff for a long time, and I agree! Right person at the right time.

I agree as well; right person, right time, focused, and overall she is right on track and things are humming right along, regardless whether some agree or not; much better than the previous administrations and Mayors IMO.

[Ken_FSU]

The issue is that her two "bad things" are the U2C and the Jags Agreement.. both unfortunently are much more significant than most of the other good deeds on her behalf.

Just curious, why the Jags agreement? Without ignoring the fact that the NFL is an ugly monopoly exploiting nearly every city it's in (and in particular, smaller markets), I don't know how we could have possibly gotten a better deal if we wanted to keep our NFL franchise. The Jags could have demanded a new stadium, but pushed for a more city-friendly rebuild. I think it's totally fair that the city picked up the tab for deferred maintenance of back repairs. The 50/50 split on construction ($625 million each, with the Jags covering cost overruns) feels very fair, by NFL standards, for a stadium that will never be a cash cow for the Jags like SoFi or MetLife. The $300 million CBA has funded four new riverfront parks that the city was already planning, and the Eastside should benefit greatly. And, to top it all off, the Jags agreed to a 30-year lease extension off a refurb, rather than a rebuild. By NFL standards, it's a solid deal.

[Jax_Developer]

The issue is that her two "bad things" are the U2C and the Jags Agreement.. both unfortunently are much more significant than most of the other good deeds on her behalf.

Just curious, why the Jags agreement? Without ignoring the fact that the NFL is an ugly monopoly exploiting nearly every city it's in (and in particular, smaller markets), I don't know how we could have possibly gotten a better deal if we wanted to keep our NFL franchise. The Jags could have demanded a new stadium, but pushed for a more city-friendly rebuild. I think it's totally fair that the city picked up the tab for deferred maintenance of back repairs. The 50/50 split on construction ($625 million each, with the Jags covering cost overruns) feels very fair, by NFL standards, for a stadium that will never be a cash cow for the Jags like SoFi or MetLife. The $300 million CBA has funded four new riverfront parks that the city was already planning, and the Eastside should benefit greatly. And, to top it all off, the Jags agreed to a 30-year lease extension off a refurb, rather than a rebuild. By NFL standards, it's a solid deal.

Parking Agreement. The Mayor or her office won't acknowledge it because they didn't (or still don't) realize the error there. You won't find another agreement in any stadium deal in the US with 50+ acres given away for game-day parking. In our case, it just so happens to be the land around $1b+ of public investment in our downtown overlay.

Pretty much as stupid as it gets.

[Tacachale]

The issue is that her two "bad things" are the U2C and the Jags Agreement.. both unfortunently are much more significant than most of the other good deeds on her behalf.

Just curious, why the Jags agreement? Without ignoring the fact that the NFL is an ugly monopoly exploiting nearly every city it's in (and in particular, smaller markets), I don't know how we could have possibly gotten a better deal if we wanted to keep our NFL franchise. The Jags could have demanded a new stadium, but pushed for a more city-friendly rebuild. I think it's totally fair that the city picked up the tab for deferred maintenance of back repairs. The 50/50 split on construction ($625 million each, with the Jags covering cost overruns) feels very fair, by NFL standards, for a stadium that will never be a cash cow for the Jags like SoFi or MetLife. The $300 million CBA has funded four new riverfront parks that the city was already planning, and the Eastside should benefit greatly. And, to top it all off, the Jags agreed to a 30-year lease extension off a refurb, rather than a rebuild. By NFL standards, it's a solid deal.

Parking Agreement. The Mayor or her office won't acknowledge it because they didn't (or still don't) realize the error there. You won't find another agreement in any stadium deal in the US with 50+ acres given away for game-day parking. In our case, it just so happens to be the land around $1b+ of public investment in our downtown overlay.

Pretty much as stupid as it gets.

If there were a problem we'd acknowledge and fix it, you're just wrong.

[Jankelope]

I think it's interesting to me because there's no way that a Daniel Davis administration wouldn't also include a Jaguars Stadium deal. I think that has to be acknowledged as something that was going to happen no matter what unless someone wanted to be the mayor that lost the Jaguars.

I think of it more as $21 million a year for 30 years to stay an NFL franchise. We have given developers $21 million to sit around and do nothing for 5 years before. Think about all the things we have wasted $21 million a year on over the Curry years.

Additionally, we used the opportunity to get big investment in these transformational parks and infrastructure investments. The stadium deal is one piece of all of that.

You have to start from the starting point of "The cost of being an NFL city is to subsidize a billionaire for a stadium"

If you compare our deal to just about any NFL city in the last 5 years doing these stadium deals, I think we got the best deal. Now...if you genuinely think the right thing to do was to give up being an NFL city and have an abandoned stadium downtown to save 1.5% of the annual budget...I think you would have a hard time finding the person who could win that election.

Deegan has over a 60% approval. That is actually quite astounding in Jacksonville in THIS political environment. It's hard for me to imagine her losing next year, especially if the strategy is just "everything sucks, we're wasting money on everything, radical leftist, blah blah blah" because that is just absolutely NOT Deegan. She has been remarkably un-partisan and has increased all kinds of transparency measures.

[Jankelope]

Also U2C is a disaster. I was hoping Deegan would come in and derail that. I am not sure what the issues are with doing that. That half cent sales tax could literally fully fund MOSH, emerald trail, etc.

[Ken_FSU]

I think it's interesting to me because there's no way that a Daniel Davis administration wouldn't also include a Jaguars Stadium deal. I think that has to be acknowledged as something that was going to happen no matter what unless someone wanted to be the mayor that lost the Jaguars.

Totally fair point. Very few mayors were going to lose the Jags on their watch. I don't think that a Davis Administration would have approached it the same way though. I think the CBA was much more important to the Deegan administration than it would have been to Davis. The parks are clearly more important to this administration than they were to Curry. And I'm not sure we'd be going the pay-go route under a different administration. So, while the stadium agreement may have happened either way, I think the impact of that stadium agreement and how it's felt across the community and budget will be fairly night and day in the long run.

Also, even though the doomers hate them and find them a scourge on the city, you've gotta give the Jags a ton of credit too for how they responded to the Lot J meltdown. They could have been bitter. But they learned from it, actively engaged the community for two straight years leading up to negotiations through Town Halls and FirstTouchDownJax, and made things as simply and transparent as possible. I think they learned a lot from the clandestine meetings with Curry & Brian Hughes and where that led, and (though I can't speak for them), I'd guess that they respect and enjoy doing business with Deegan far more than the three-ring circus they got caught up in previously.

[Jax_Developer]

The issue is that her two "bad things" are the U2C and the Jags Agreement.. both unfortunently are much more significant than most of the other good deeds on her behalf.

Just curious, why the Jags agreement? Without ignoring the fact that the NFL is an ugly monopoly exploiting nearly every city it's in (and in particular, smaller markets), I don't know how we could have possibly gotten a better deal if we wanted to keep our NFL franchise. The Jags could have demanded a new stadium, but pushed for a more city-friendly rebuild. I think it's totally fair that the city picked up the tab for deferred maintenance of back repairs. The 50/50 split on construction ($625 million each, with the Jags covering cost overruns) feels very fair, by NFL standards, for a stadium that will never be a cash cow for the Jags like SoFi or MetLife. The $300 million CBA has funded four new riverfront parks that the city was already planning, and the Eastside should benefit greatly. And, to top it all off, the Jags agreed to a 30-year lease extension off a refurb, rather than a rebuild. By NFL standards, it's a solid deal.

Parking Agreement. The Mayor or her office won't acknowledge it because they didn't (or still don't) realize the error there. You won't find another agreement in any stadium deal in the US with 50+ acres given away for game-day parking. In our case, it just so happens to be the land around $1b+ of public investment in our downtown overlay.

Pretty much as stupid as it gets.

If there were a problem we'd acknowledge and fix it, you're just wrong.

Articulate response there. Guess you haven't read the agreement. It's in black & white. LOL.

[Jax_Developer]

I think it's interesting to me because there's no way that a Daniel Davis administration wouldn't also include a Jaguars Stadium deal. I think that has to be acknowledged as something that was going to happen no matter what unless someone wanted to be the mayor that lost the Jaguars.

I think of it more as $21 million a year for 30 years to stay an NFL franchise. We have given developers $21 million to sit around and do nothing for 5 years before. Think about all the things we have wasted $21 million a year on over the Curry years.

Additionally, we used the opportunity to get big investment in these transformational parks and infrastructure investments. The stadium deal is one piece of all of that.

You have to start from the starting point of "The cost of being an NFL city is to subsidize a billionaire for a stadium"

If you compare our deal to just about any NFL city in the last 5 years doing these stadium deals, I think we got the best deal. Now...if you genuinely think the right thing to do was to give up being an NFL city and have an abandoned stadium downtown to save 1.5% of the annual budget...I think you would have a hard time finding the person who could win that election.

Deegan has over a 60% approval. That is actually quite astounding in Jacksonville in THIS political environment. It's hard for me to imagine her losing next year, especially if the strategy is just "everything sucks, we're wasting money on everything, radical leftist, blah blah blah" because that is just absolutely NOT Deegan. She has been remarkably un-partisan and has increased all kinds of transparency measures.

I agree with a lot of your points & I think other than a few critical errors it has been a smooth ship. Although, like I said, the mayor's office won't acknowledge the parking agreement error. It'll probably take until 2027 to really feel the burn there when the MOSH & shipyards are unable to provide the legal mandate and the city (legally) will need to acknowledge this.

[tufsu1]

Also U2C is a disaster. I was hoping Deegan would come in and derail that. I am not sure what the issues are with doing that. That half cent sales tax could literally fully fund MOSH, emerald trail, etc.

U2C isn't being funded through sales tax. JTA gets funds through the local option gas tax - money that can be (and is being) used for Emerald Trail - but not for something like MOSH.