Submitted by Eric Bartelt
August 20, 2014 10:00 pm.
After hearing from the public about Items Not On The Agenda, the Fernandina Beach City Commission continued their August 19th meeting with discussion of various Resolutions, including:
- A Budget Amendment, transfering $875,000 from the Police and Fire Pension Fund Reserve account to the Police and Fire Pension Retiree Benefits account due to higher than budgeted retiree benefits.
- Two agreements accepting grants from the FAA and FDOT for an update to the Airport Master Plan. These grants are not matching grants and therefore are at no cost to the City.
- An agreement that accepts a $60,000 grant from FDOT to fix a drainage problem near some of the hangers at the airport. This is also not a matching grant and incurs no cost to the city.
- An agreement for a FRDAP grant (FL Recreation Development Assistance Program) in the amount of $50,000 to renovate the city’s tennis courts. There is also no city match for this grant.
- Awarding a bid for $150,000 to add bathrooms to the MLK Center.
- Approving the settlement of a lawsuit against the City by Citizens Awareness Foundation. The suit involved an alleged public records violation. Since the suit involved Westrec, they will pay the $5,000 settlement, with the City paying a $2,500 insurance deductible.
A final Resolution on the agenda pertained to whether the City should include three Straw Poll questions on the November ballot. Straw Poll questions are different from Referendum questions in that Straw Poll questions are not binding, whereas Referendum questions are.
The three questions asked:
- whether the City could borrow up to $10 million to complete Front St. and waterfront park improvements.
- whether the City could borrow up to $8 million to build a downtown parking garage.
- whether the City should investigate changing the zoning for the municipal golf course to allow for possible future sale of all or part of the golf course.
As discussion began on these three questions, Commissioner Corbett asked to make an amendment regarding the golf course zoning. He asked that the question be deleted because the Golf Course management company (Billy Casper Golf) still has a year left on their management contract, and also the City is considering extending and/or renewing their contract.
Commissioner Miller pointed out that the question is being asked only to gain information and to “take the temperature” of the electorate before expending more staff time on the possibility.
Before voting on Commissioner Corbett’s request, Mayor Boner opened the floor to public comment.
First to speak was George Sheffield, owner of the Palace Saloon and Amelia River Golf Course. He shared with the Commission and audience his own experience with the Amelia River course and that he feels there are serious challenges facing the golfing industry. He did not think, however, that the City should sell the municipal course, with the possible exception of the north 9 holes because there is no longer a need for 27 holes. He also thought the City should not accept the $50,000 offer from Billy Casper Golf as part of their request for a 5-year contract extension.
Sam Lane then spoke, saying the issue wasn’t about selling the golf course, but rather about putting it on the ballot. He suggested that putting the question on the ballot was risky and unnecessary – if the Commission wanted to find out if the voters were interested in selling some or all of the course, they should ask them, but in the form of a survey instead of a ballot question. “Take it off the ballot!” he said.
Following Mr. Lane to the lectern was Pat Foster Turley. Ms. Turley pointed out that the golf course is recreation land, and that the City should not be getting rid of any of its recreational lands. She cited a golf course on Ft. George Island near Kingsley Plantation, part of which had closed and reverted back to native wildlife. She said that to sell the course to build more private houses, the City would be giving up a valuable community asset.
Next up was Doug Bailey. He agreed with Commissioner Corbett, saying the golf course question should be taken off the ballot. He mentioned the success the Golf Course Advisory group had had in the past with a survey, and that that would be a better option than a ballot question.
Robin Lentz then spoke, expressing concern about the Straw Poll questions and whether they should be on the ballot. She asked the Commission what they would do to educate the voters before the Nov. election about the waterfront and parking garage, since the limited amount of explanation that is allowed on the ballot would not adequately inform the voters about what was included in the two questions. With a figure of “up to $10 million” for Front St. and the waterfront, and “up to $8 million” for a parking garage, she thought the voters would want to know more about what was included in those amounts. She cited the Greenway and the enormous education effort that went into informing voters before they voted on that, and concluded by saying she didn’t think there was enough time to adequately inform the voters about these proposed ballot questions.
Mike Pikula echoed Sam Lane’s concern about the risk associated with putting the Straw Poll questions on the ballot. Like Mr. Lane, he favored a survey rather than the ballot to assess the voters interest in selling some or all of the golf course. He felt the very act of putting the golf course question on the ballot implied the Commissioners wanted to act, and that in doing so they show that they “may not value the resources we have.” He said the property is “too rare on this island and we are limited in what we have.” He added that it would clearly be a mistake to sell it. “Don’t sell it or give it away. Do something better with it.” If the golf course is too much of a drain on the City’s finances, he said, turn it into the next best use – conservation.
The final speaker was Tony Crawford, who said he did not understand why the Commission wanted the voters to decide about the waterfront when the voters don’t know what the plan is for it.
He also questioned the need for a parking garage, at one point turning to the audience and asking for a show of hands from anyone who thought a parking garage was needed. No hands were raised. He concluded by saying the City needs to sell the citizens on the idea, not just putting it on the ballot.
Commission Miller then addressed why he had originally proposed putting the golf course question on the ballot. Citing the continuing expense the course incurs, the relatively few members, and the number of other courses on Amelia Island, he questioned whether it was the best use of general fund money to support a “bleeding golf course.” And if that wasn’t the best use for the money, what should be done with it, what other uses for it are there? He reasoned that there is demand for newer houses on the island and they add to the tax base, but he wasn’t sure new houses would encourage families or more retired people to move here. He asked the City Manager to research the issue but, because of staff time constraints, the City Manager recommended putting the question on the ballot. Miller concluded by saying he would prefer to retain an 18 hole course, with the remaining nine holes becoming a nature preserve.
After some confusion about exactly what they were voting on, the Commissioners approved removing the golf course question from the ballot. They then voted 3-2 to remove the remaining two questions. Commissioners Pelican and Gass voted to keep the questions on the ballot, with Mayor Boner and Commissioners Miller and Corbett voting to delete them.
Editor’s Note: Eric Bartelt retired as a corporate design consultant and moved to Fernandina Beach in 2004. His previously lived in Wisconsin. Since Eric’s arrival in Fernandina Beach, he spends his time volunteering, and playing soccer. We thank Eric for his contributions to the Fernandina Observer.
Well reported Eric! Thank you!
Given this Commission’s inability to articulate any clear vision for the city it is inappropriate to go forward with any straw poll questions. And there is absolutely no need for a parking garage. None.
Ok, the 8 mil for the parking garage is not in the straw pole. The question that Pat Gass was addressing still remains and is a valid question. How do we improve parking downtown. The fact that most don’t want to spend 8 million on a garage at this time doesn’t mean that we can’t improve downtown parking. The question now that should be addressed by the Commission is how we can do it at a reasonable cost, and make downtown parking more friendly to business. tourists and residents? What can be done at a local level to make parking easier on all? This is something I feel must be addressed by the Commission. If it is important enough to discuss the outlay of 8 million dollars, just because we aren’t going to spend that money now, it should also be important enough to do what we can to improve it now. I would suggest that a meeting should be held with local business leaders, police and fire representatives, and the City Manager to come up with a plan. Would improvements on the City Hall lot work with respect to better lighting at night and resurfacing the existing lot and laying out a better spacing method work? Would better street markings work? Would looking into making side streets more parking friendly work? Would a change in local parking rules and hours work? Would better signage directing visitors away from Center Street onto side streets and other parking lots such as City Hall work? Honestly I don’t know the answers to these questions, but I am sure their are many department heads we can go to for suggestions. If these ideas have already been researched than it may be time to re-think them and put some into effect now that it is going into off season. Lets not let this die. This is something that can be easily be done, improvements can be made at minimal cost and we all can benefit from it. I am not saying by any means we use outside consultants, form a committee, or beat this to death. Lets look to our local officials who know how to handle parking, and road safety, and just get it done.
The fact is the present commissioners do not have any solid ideas to deal with these problems. The fact is several commissioners had some of these solutions – but were rejected. The straw question should be off ballot, we need to explain the plans (including the one already approved) about the waterfront park. The second straw was what to do about a garage – solve that problem as suggested. The third of course is a major question, the golf course – efforts should be made to continue improving the present course, make a good study of what is needed and expected. Take the old Golf Advisory Board back and mesh perhaps a few of the newer members and let them all put their ideas there to help. Doug and his group were very good and had a better understanding of the problems and what could be done. If some of the new members can help – so be it.
The last question: definite NO to another year added, if the voters make mistakes in electing commissioners, what will they for four years. It is up to the Voters to correct their mistakes, and of course the Commissioners elected to make better decisions during their 3 year terms. If they do, they can and will be re-elected.