How important is the core?

[BridgeTroll]

My replies were not meant to offend.  If I have done so I sincerely apologize for that was not my intent.  The questions you quoted from me were not directed at you but are simply questions many of us ask as we are told we need to direct ever increasing amounts of money at this problem.  I am quite certain you and your organization do a commendable job.  I appreciate your efforts.

[zoo]

I think you need to get a "dose" of homelessness, neediness, or even get sent to a social service boot camp (if one existed) for 3 months or more catering and servicing the homeless and needy so you will understand a little better (a spanking if you will).

Again, don't justify your argument by pretending to know me or my circumstances, or to discredit my opinion with condenscension -- I don't need a spanking from you or anyone else because I choose to do my own research, draw my own conclusions based on that research and firsthand experiences, and won't be guilted by Christian-based morality into enabling others to need and accept handouts.

"A morality that holds need as a claim, holds emptiness -- non-existence -- as its standard of value; it rewards an absence, a defect: weakness, inability, incompetence, suffering, disease, disaster, the lack, the fault, the flaw -- the zero." - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged.

And here is a quote from a review:

"The most important thing to remember is not to take everything you read here as dogma. Think for yourself and apply whatever ideas make sense to you and ignore that which you don't like. Think for yourself. I think Rand would object to anyone blindly following her philosophy without actually believing in it. No one says you can't be charitable to others. Just make sure you do it of your own volition and not because it is expected of you or because you feel guilty.

I'm happy to be charitable to others, with the limiting factor being, has it resulted in an improved situation? A needy person would say, "I received food, when I had none, so my situation was improved." I say, if they feed themselves, their situation is also improved. If a social service org's goal is to "grow the help it can provide," without proof of overall social improvement for all, they won't get my support.

There are numerous other reasons why the urban core or downtown if you will is not successful, or why it is or is not successful, and homelessness and the homeless is just one of them.

I agree with this. But the social service orgs in the core is perhaps the biggest reason the core struggles to be successful, as this reason negatively affects most, if not all, of the other issues.

[civil42806]

for the city of jacksonville, the core is unimportant.  Thats basically because of consolidation  My place is on the westside I can take care of everything I need within a couple of miles. Is it walkable, no, but it doesn't need to be.When I worked downtown I enjoyed it, still catch the jaguars when I'm in town.  But truthfully is the downtown important to a significant minority in town, no it isn't.  Most can go years and not have the need or desire to go downtown.

[NotNow]

Zoo, am I correct in saying that your core argument is that ANY social service provider, public or private, should have metrics which display a reduction in the problem that they are servicing, otherwise it is a wasteful or even enabling service?  Is that right? 

If that is the case, I don't see a conflict in what Stephen Dare! proposes, which appears to be a housing and work force skills development service, so long as that service can show employment and client independence statitics which support their success.  One problem is that the "workforce" system in jails and prisons has been essentially struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court.  I don't remember name but it was a Texas case.  I don't know where Stephen Dare! got his numbers for expenses but if it is possible, then why not?  Another problem is that, in my experience, the majority of the population we are talking about (chronic homeless) will not voluntarily attend such training.  Should it be a condition of incarceration?  An alternate to incarceration?  Where will this housing and training occur?  How much will it cost?  Will funding be private, public, or a combination?  Are current training programs fully utilized and if not, why not? 

The mentally ill contingent simply must be treated, outpatient if possible, but a return to some ability to house the chronic mentally ill is a responsibility that I think we must face.

[zoo]

Am I correct in saying that your core argument is that ANY social service provider, public or private, should have metrics which display a reduction in the problem that they are servicing, otherwise it is a wasteful or even enabling service?

Imho, yes. As I said in an earlier post, no for-profit company would continue throwing money at a department that loses more and more revenue each year. So why should non-profits get to keep justifying the commitment of more dollars if their methods of addressing a particular problem doesn't show measurable results (it doesn't work). In most cases, a dept in a for-profit company that had such a situation would be forced to re-assess its approach, or be shuttered.

I indicated I realize there are some groups that are incapable of caring for themselves. But I believe there are persons who choose homelessness, just as there are persons who choose incarceration (3 squares and a bed), in an abuse of the system. I just think it needs to be monitored more closely so if we have any system based on need the resources reach REAL need. Maybe if the resources reached real need, social service orgs could show improvement rather than a backwards slide and continuing increases on their rolls.

I also don't purport to have a solution, though economic development and employment opps may get us part way there. Of course, that supposes that folks who are able to work will make the effort to be ready to work and responsible in doing it (no more cracking that Colt at 8 a.m.) Call me naive, but I'm hopeful some able folks might make an effort if other support systems weren't there?

Imho, the current approaches to solving the problems are proving to be unsuccessful, so why not try a different approach? Because the social service system is no more interested in change/hard work than those who are abusing it?

Until I see some approach with its primary focus on accountability, I won't be supporting any social service orgs, and I think Jacksonville should wake up and do the same.

We've already heard the orgs will keep spending in the same way until the money train goes dry. Seems withholding support is the only thing that will get the orgs to reconsider their approach, and try something -- anything -- else that might prove successful...

[jaxtrader]

Zoo, I  am impressed. You speak the truth.

[NotNow]

I certainly can't argue with your premise that what we are doing is not working.

[thelakelander]

for the city of jacksonville, the core is unimportant.  Thats basically because of consolidation.

I disagree on the consolidation point.  Indianapolis, Louisville, Philadelphia, San Francisco, New Orleans, Norfolk and Nashville are great examples of consolidated cities with vibrant downtown cores.  As for our core's importance, although it has been reduced over the decades, it is still the dominant epicenter of cultural, entertainment, business and governmental uses.  Outside of that and retail in the SJTC area, this city is really a collection of suburbs with a mix of uses spread around like a kicked ant hill.

My place is on the westside I can take care of everything I need within a couple of miles. Is it walkable, no, but it doesn't need to be.When I worked downtown I enjoyed it, still catch the jaguars when I'm in town.

If we can make our neighborhoods walkable, this is how it really should be.  Vibrant neighborhoods, in addition to a vibrant downtown, is what makes places like NYC, Chicago, San Francisco and Boston great urban environments. 

Anyway, to answer the thread's original question, our downtown is still the face of our community to the outside world.  This should be a major reason to strive to improve the quality of our core.

[Ocklawaha]

for the city of Jacksonville, the core is unimportant.  That's basically because of consolidation My place is on the westside I can take care of everything I need within a couple of miles. Is it walkable, no, but it doesn't need to be.When I worked downtown I enjoyed it, still catch the jaguars when I'm in town.  But truthfully is the downtown important to a significant minority in town, no it isn't.  Most can go years and not have the need or desire to go downtown.

It really doesn't matter if you think you can live the rest of your life without "downtown" or the "core" in Jacksonville. Frankly, you can't. Nobody in this region of the State can. Without the core, Jacksonville would quickly cease to exist.

WHY?

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N  !

When Isiah Hart, William Duval, and a few other pioneers settled the area, the first money making venture at "Cowford," was Harts dugout canoe FERRY. As the railroads grew to prominence, Harts little ferry grew to become a row boat, hence a steamboat, a railroad bridge (single track), then a railroad bridge double track, then a highway ACOSTA bridge, next came the Alsop (MAIN STREET) bridge, and with it the last ferry retired in the core.

Not a carload of freight moves anywhere in Florida without passing through our core and "Gateway" (railroadese for an interchange point with all manner of routes and combinations calculated into the fares and charges).  Without our core this business would shut down the rest of Florida in a matter of hours. In fact the 45 +/- railroads headquartered here could snuff out commerce and shut us down in hours is a statement completely true.

Today the FULLER WARREN, ACOSTA, ALSOP, HART, MATTHEWS, all roads lead into and out of the core of the city, at the narrows in the river. Cow's CAN SWIM, they're just not strong swimmers, so from the earliest Spanish Exploreres to the pseudo modern times our crossing is the Heartbeat of a state.

JTA has an interesting campaign running right now, "WHAT IF THE XXX HAD NEVER BEEN BUILT? JTA PART OF YOUR DAY...etc..." I'd like to ask a question of all of you naysayers. If God hadn't saw fit to give us our beautiful river, or, "What if God had never built the St. Johns River?" Folks without it, there wouldn't be a JACKSONVILLE. WITHOUT Jacksonville, the language here would still be Spanish, and Miami, Tampa, Orlando, would look more like Antioquia, Colombia, then anything any of us would recognize.

OCKLAWAHA

[civil42806]

Well I guess if you mean by driving over the bridges downtown the core is important then your right.  Actually what your saying is that the narrowest part of the river is important, says nothing about the core.  If I goe from one side of the river to the other, via matthews, fuller warren or main street, doesn't mean I visited downtown, means I went across the river.

[zoo]

Anyone who thinks the core of Jacksonville isn't important is just not thinking. Most of the nation's top think tanks on planning, urban development and a variety of other issues that affect U.S. cities have now concluded, through exhaustive research, that a region cannot succeed economically without a strong center (no matter how many of its residents in the suburbs try to deny it).

From Brookings and the Richard J. Daley Urban Forum:
Bruce Katz moderated the fifth annual Richard J. Daley Forum at the University of Illinois at Chicago. In his keynote address, Vice President Joseph Biden used Metropolitan Policy Program data to illustrate how the top 100 U.S. metropolitan areas occupy 12 percent of the nation’s land mass but generate 75 percent of the economic output, making them the fundamental drivers of recovery and long term prosperity.

Here's a tidbit from CEOs for Cities that our local politicians should pay attention to:
"Seventy-two percent of political donors strongly agree that America cannot be strong without strong cities, and they view cities as the solution for some of the country's most pressing problems, including job growth and development, according to a new survey released today by CEOs for Cities and Living Cities."

Check any of the following resources or find your own:
Urban Land Institute (uli.org)
CEOs for Cities (ceosforcities.org)
Brookings Institute (brookings.edu/metro.aspx)
The Urban Institute (urbaninstitute.org)

Suburbanites sticking their heads in the sand about the core reminds me of all of the folks in 1995 (and even through 2005!) that claimed the internet wouldn't last...