(12-06-2020, 02:49 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 01:13 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is it is a nice quiet southern town with an uncomfortably large portion of the population and leadership that is content on being unprogressive. Too many in this town are perfectly content to stew in their own juices of mediocrity while ignoring, and even shunning, potential.
If by 'progressive', you mean San Fran, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, etc, then umm, no thanks.
Progressive in the sense of forward looking on development, opportunity, entertainment. Maybe even another sports franchise some day. Not a tired backwater that people want to leave as soon as possible.
If the Jags stay, awesome.. If they don't, and they move, I don't care.. This organization has done that to a lot of us. Their ineptitude has driven a divide in a lot of a once faithful fanbase.. Until ownership wants to prove that they want to be here with a year to year competitive team, Mr Car Bumper and his family can go [BLEEP] themselves..
(12-06-2020, 06:28 AM)hb1148 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2020, 02:49 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]If by 'progressive', you mean San Fran, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, etc, then umm, no thanks.
Progressive in the sense of forward looking on development, opportunity, entertainment. Maybe even another sports franchise some day. Not a tired backwater that people want to leave as soon as possible.
Yes, exactly.
Everyone here is so ready for the Jags to leave Jax. I don't think there is any example of a 1-franchise city (NHL, MLB, NBA or NFL) losing that team in the last 75 years. Granted the Jags have not been the best advertisement for the city over the past 20 years, but it is better than never being in any national discussion about well anything.
Don't get me wrong, the city would need to do its best to maximize the terms and make them as solid as possible, but letting the Jags walk away out of spite will probably be regretted.
Though I'm also the one who thinks they should stop trying to do all this in and near downtown. Jax has been trying to redevelop downtown for 50 years and make it attractive to people. It won't work. People who stay and move to Jacksonville like the parks, the beach, the open spaces, etc. Stop trying to be like every other city and build up whatever positives are already there.
(12-06-2020, 02:49 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ] (12-04-2020, 01:13 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]The problem is it is a nice quiet southern town with an uncomfortably large portion of the population and leadership that is content on being unprogressive. Too many in this town are perfectly content to stew in their own juices of mediocrity while ignoring, and even shunning, potential.
If by 'progressive', you mean San Fran, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, etc, then umm, no thanks.
All those cities are well established and well known by a national audience outside of sports. Jacksonville should be looking more at places like Oklahoma City and aspiring to places to Indianapolis in regards to trying develop with more business involvement and GDP growth.
(12-06-2020, 06:29 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ]Everyone here is so ready for the Jags to leave Jax. I don't think there is any example of a 1-franchise city (NHL, MLB, NBA or NFL) losing that team in the last 75 years. Granted the Jags have not been the best advertisement for the city over the past 20 years, but it is better than never being in any national discussion about well anything.
Don't get me wrong, the city would need to do its best to maximize the terms and make them as solid as possible, but letting the Jags walk away out of spite will probably be regretted.
Though I'm also the one who thinks they should stop trying to do all this in and near downtown. Jax has been trying to redevelop downtown for 50 years and make it attractive to people. It won't work. People who stay and move to Jacksonville like the parks, the beach, the open spaces, etc. Stop trying to be like every other city and build up whatever positives are already there.
Downtown Jax has not been "redeveloped" because of the no-can-do'ers continuously shutting down any semblance of such.
The parks, beaches, and open spaces will not be going anywhere if we develop Lot J, Downtown, and/or the Shipyards.
Unless you mean you like open spaces like our currently decrepit Shipyards.
(12-06-2020, 06:40 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2020, 02:49 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]If by 'progressive', you mean San Fran, Seattle, Portland, Minneapolis, Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, etc, then umm, no thanks.
All those cities are well established and well known by a national audience outside of sports. Jacksonville should be looking more at places like Oklahoma City and aspiring to places to Indianapolis in regards to trying develop with more business involvement and GDP growth.
Also, Lot J is intending to mimic the same impact and model as the Power and Light District in Kansas City.
(12-06-2020, 06:45 PM)enigma Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2020, 06:29 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ]Everyone here is so ready for the Jags to leave Jax. I don't think there is any example of a 1-franchise city (NHL, MLB, NBA or NFL) losing that team in the last 75 years. Granted the Jags have not been the best advertisement for the city over the past 20 years, but it is better than never being in any national discussion about well anything.
Don't get me wrong, the city would need to do its best to maximize the terms and make them as solid as possible, but letting the Jags walk away out of spite will probably be regretted.
Though I'm also the one who thinks they should stop trying to do all this in and near downtown. Jax has been trying to redevelop downtown for 50 years and make it attractive to people. It won't work. People who stay and move to Jacksonville like the parks, the beach, the open spaces, etc. Stop trying to be like every other city and build up whatever positives are already there.
Downtown Jax has not been "redeveloped" because of the no-can-do'ers continuously shutting down any semblance of such.
The parks, beaches, and open spaces will not be going anywhere if we develop Lot J, Downtown, and/or the Shipyards.
Unless you mean you like open spaces like our currently decrepit Shipyards.
(12-06-2020, 06:40 PM)rpr52121 Wrote: [ -> ]All those cities are well established and well known by a national audience outside of sports. Jacksonville should be looking more at places like Oklahoma City and aspiring to places to Indianapolis in regards to trying develop with more business involvement and GDP growth.
Also, Lot J is intending to mimic the same impact and model as the Power and Light District in Kansas City.
There are different methods of redeveloping and the Lot J plan only works if they fill those 400 apartments that the rendering photos made look like a college dorm from the early 90's. I think trying to get people to move downtown right now is foolhardy, especially ones that didn't look all that appealing.
Also I'm not saying don't invest in downtown, but all those no-can-doers are also saying no because they view this as if they spend money downtown, they won't spend it on the other areas. And they think it will be a waste because they expect the Jags to leave anyways. They see it ending up like the Skyway, a money pit. If the plan was more inclusive by also suggesting plans to other parts/aspects of the city that aren't as dependent as one part of town, they may win more votes and get more approval
The city should counter with a short term stadium extension to get the deal passed. I think that a five year stadium extension would be enough to develop this project and to decide on a proposal for the stadium upgrades/renovation. IMO this deal would be a win-win for both sides.
(12-06-2020, 07:15 PM)jagsfan06 Wrote: [ -> ]The city should counter with a short term stadium extension to get the deal passed. I think that a five year stadium extension would be enough to develop this project and to decide on a proposal for the stadium upgrades/renovation. IMO this deal would be a win-win for both sides.
Doesn't the NFL owners group have to approve all stadium extensions? I thought that was the issue -- they would say no.
So apparently Jax City Council President Tommy Hazouri has unilaterally decided their will be no vote Tuesday and it will instead be in January.
The Jags and the mayor are not going to be happy at all.
(12-06-2020, 08:04 PM)HolsterHusto Wrote: [ -> ]So apparently Jax City Council President Tommy Hazouri has unilaterally decided their will be no vote Tuesday and it will instead be in January.
The Jags and the mayor are not going to be happy at all.
He's correct to do so. His points are valid when he says there is too much at risk and the details too complicated to digest and vote for on such short notice. Give the city council, and all involved in the decision making process, time to carefully and thoroughly go through the information and formulate counter proposals that may put the city less at risk.
This is a multi-year deal for development and construction. Why does it need to be settled right after a document dump and just before the holidays? It can wait a few weeks.
(12-06-2020, 08:11 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2020, 08:04 PM)HolsterHusto Wrote: [ -> ]So apparently Jax City Council President Tommy Hazouri has unilaterally decided their will be no vote Tuesday and it will instead be in January.
The Jags and the mayor are not going to be happy at all.
He's correct to do so. His points are valid when he says there is too much at risk and the details too complicated to digest and vote for on such short notice. Give the city council, and all involved in the decision making process, time to carefully and thoroughly go through the information and formulate counter proposals that may put the city less at risk.
This is a multi-year deal for development and construction. Why does it need to be settled right after a document dump and just before the holidays? It can wait a few weeks.
I haven’t really looked into this whole thing but as the news went off and “This Week in Jacksonville” came on, they had the head of legal for the Jaguars, a real estate developer, the CEO or President of DIA and a few other people on talking about this whole thing. I felt it was a good opportunity to get all sides of this and to learn more of the situation. I don’t live in Duval, so the taxes don’t affect me at all. But it did give some light to the situation. The jist from what I gathered was in fact the city trying to protect itself. Almost seemed like all parties wanted to or interested in it. Just more of a fact of whether it helped the city, would they get screwed in the long run and of course the money. I also was under the impression that “time” was needed to digest it all.
(12-06-2020, 08:54 PM)Jags Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2020, 08:11 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]He's correct to do so. His points are valid when he says there is too much at risk and the details too complicated to digest and vote for on such short notice. Give the city council, and all involved in the decision making process, time to carefully and thoroughly go through the information and formulate counter proposals that may put the city less at risk.
This is a multi-year deal for development and construction. Why does it need to be settled right after a document dump and just before the holidays? It can wait a few weeks.
I haven’t really looked into this whole thing but as the news went off and “This Week in Jacksonville” came on, they had the head of legal for the Jaguars, a real estate developer, the CEO or President of DIA and a few other people on talking about this whole thing. I felt it was a good opportunity to get all sides of this and to learn more of the situation. I don’t live in Duval, so the taxes don’t affect me at all. But it did give some light to the situation. The jist from what I gathered was in fact the city trying to protect itself. Almost seemed like all parties wanted to or interested in it. Just more of a fact of whether it helped the city, would they get screwed in the long run and of course the money. I also was under the impression that “time” was needed to digest it all.
Here Hazouri's statement. It all seems completely reasonable to me.
“Presently, the Council does not have the latest agreement with the substantial changes that were discussed at their December 4th meeting between the Council Auditor, the representatives of the Jaguars, and the Administration. This new proposal that is being prepared, which the taxpayers will be asked to fund over a quarter of a billion dollars for the Lot J development project; the Administration and the Jaguars/Developers want the City Council to vote on Tuesday, December 8th, or hold a special Council Meeting before December 11th to approve the Lot J legislation. It is asking too much for the 19 council members to fully process over 200 pages of a very complex financial, and legal document in less than 36 hours; and be prepared to take this important vote. With that, I have a created a pathway by scheduling a Committee of the Whole Meeting for Thursday, January 7th, so that the agreement can be thoroughly digested and intelligently discussed, allowing a proper vote to occur on January 12th, the next City Council meeting. This will also afford each council member to offer amendments to the bill that were not included or considered.
“This past year as you recall, the people, and City Council were being rushed in another transaction without full disclosure and transparency that ultimately took away the trust of the citizens of Jacksonville, and almost of which became a debacle. The taxpayers of Jacksonville deserve a fair agreement between the City and the Jaguars/Developers. As stewards of this community elected by our constituents, we owe this due diligence to the citizens of Jacksonville, the Jaguars, the Administration and each Council Member. As Council President, in honoring the legislative process, I will not be adding this bill to the addendum on December 8th. It is my expectation that on January 7th, we will spend the time necessary to conclude the discussion on this proposal, and this pathway, will lead us to a successful resolve to vote it up or down at the next City Council meeting.”
(12-06-2020, 09:15 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (12-06-2020, 08:54 PM)Jags Wrote: [ -> ]I haven’t really looked into this whole thing but as the news went off and “This Week in Jacksonville” came on, they had the head of legal for the Jaguars, a real estate developer, the CEO or President of DIA and a few other people on talking about this whole thing. I felt it was a good opportunity to get all sides of this and to learn more of the situation. I don’t live in Duval, so the taxes don’t affect me at all. But it did give some light to the situation. The jist from what I gathered was in fact the city trying to protect itself. Almost seemed like all parties wanted to or interested in it. Just more of a fact of whether it helped the city, would they get screwed in the long run and of course the money. I also was under the impression that “time” was needed to digest it all.
Here Hazouri's statement. It all seems completely reasonable to me.
“Presently, the Council does not have the latest agreement with the substantial changes that were discussed at their December 4th meeting between the Council Auditor, the representatives of the Jaguars, and the Administration. This new proposal that is being prepared, which the taxpayers will be asked to fund over a quarter of a billion dollars for the Lot J development project; the Administration and the Jaguars/Developers want the City Council to vote on Tuesday, December 8th, or hold a special Council Meeting before December 11th to approve the Lot J legislation. It is asking too much for the 19 council members to fully process over 200 pages of a very complex financial, and legal document in less than 36 hours; and be prepared to take this important vote. With that, I have a created a pathway by scheduling a Committee of the Whole Meeting for Thursday, January 7th, so that the agreement can be thoroughly digested and intelligently discussed, allowing a proper vote to occur on January 12th, the next City Council meeting. This will also afford each council member to offer amendments to the bill that were not included or considered.
“This past year as you recall, the people, and City Council were being rushed in another transaction without full disclosure and transparency that ultimately took away the trust of the citizens of Jacksonville, and almost of which became a debacle. The taxpayers of Jacksonville deserve a fair agreement between the City and the Jaguars/Developers. As stewards of this community elected by our constituents, we owe this due diligence to the citizens of Jacksonville, the Jaguars, the Administration and each Council Member. As Council President, in honoring the legislative process, I will not be adding this bill to the addendum on December 8th. It is my expectation that on January 7th, we will spend the time necessary to conclude the discussion on this proposal, and this pathway, will lead us to a successful resolve to vote it up or down at the next City Council meeting.”
I'm 100% for the development of Lot J and the Shipyards - and I think this delay is absolutely understandable and warranted.
Downtown Jacksonville needs to do something different. Create a giant downtown college and live off the government largesse. They can reap in all the Pell Grant and Financial Aid dollars and start an infinite cycle of development. I know there is UNF and JU but come on. College campus is cold cash when it is a public university. Heck be a remote campus for UF or something.
Here is a recent article from the Times-Union explaining how the city is essentially giving con free money. No need to repay, no collateral.
https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/...tZO_jaL6v8
Nested way at the bottom of the article, as an afterthought, the main reason why the city is having such a hard time getting this land developed.
The environmental remediation work for Lot J is projected to take 3 years, optimistically. Similar to the shipyards, which also still have years and years of remediation ahead of them.
I believe lot J is already city property. I don't know if the shipyards are.
Just my opinion, a smarter City would just put up the money to dig out all the bad soil and put in new good soil, and then sell the remediated land for the best price they can get.
they would probably spend more money cleaning the land up, than they would get selling it at the end. But it might be worth it, if it increases property values and therefore tax receipts from adjacent properties. A lot of those properties also need environmental remediation. But the private sector might be willing to do that remediation themselves, if the property value increases enough. the Jacksonville taxpayer should want to see the city trying to kick off that type of chain reaction, but doing it just as a giveaway to one set of billionaires makes no sense at all.