FBCC to voters: Will you pay to play?

Submitted by Suanne Z. Thamm
Reporter – News Analyst
June 2, 2014 1:00 a.m.

The Fernandina Beach City Commission (FBCC) met in special session at 10:00 a.m., Friday, May 30, 2014, at the request of City Attorney Tammi Bach.  Friday morning FBCC meetings are highly unusual.   The call for this meeting, which came during a holiday week, could only round up four commissioners, since Commissioner Johnny Miller was unavailable due to previously made travel plans.  This left only four commissioners to give direction to both Bach and City Manager Joe Gerrity on the important matter of proceeding with a referendum for the November 2014 election on financing the Amelia waterfront park and other capital improvements.

View of Parking Lot B from Welcome Center north.
View of Parking Lot B from Welcome Center north.

Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican had surfaced the idea of a voter referendum at the May 20, 2014 regular FBCC meeting.  At that meeting, she acknowledged that while there is a considerable push from many members of the community to move forward with plans to build a waterfront park, there is no ready money in the city’s budget available for major capital projects at this time.  While she supported the idea of moving forward with constructing park elements in what is known as Parking Lot B, she could not justify spending tax money to do so if by moving forward to complete the park plan in the future, that portion would need to be torn up and rebuilt.  She wondered if perhaps the way out of this dilemma was to ask the voters via referendum if they were willing to go into debt in order to construct the entire park – estimated at $5-6M.  Commissioner Gass had suggested adding a question about building a parking garage downtown, and Commissioner Miller said that there were also projects needed to complete the Main Beach master plan.  Commissioners asked Bach to draft language for a November voter referendum and bring it back for discussion in a timely manner, so that deadlines set by the Supervisor of Election for receipt of ballot language could be met.

After an hour of discussion and public input at the special meeting, it appeared that the FBCC wanted to proceed with work on developing the part of the waterfront park plan known as Parking Lot B, independent of any voter initiative.  However, other commissioners, led by Commissioner Charlie Corbett, wanted to continue to explore a November ballot question that would ask voters whether they wanted to finance the remaining parts of the proposed waterfront park and possibly other capital improvements.  Bach agreed to bring back information for further discussion at the June 17 meeting.

Fernandina Beach City Attorney Tammi Bach
Fernandina Beach City Attorney Tammi Bach

In attempting to address commissioner concerns raised at the May 20 regular meeting regarding ways to pay for the waterfront park and other projects, Bach explained that the city could issue a Revenue Bond or a General Obligation Bond (GOB).  The Revenue Bond would not require a vote, and would generally be used for a single project.  It can be repaid with fees, as opposed to the GOB, which is paid back by adding an additional property tax fee to ad valorem taxes.  Previous commissions have used revenue bonds to pay for a variety of projects, including the new police station on Lime Street.  But since the FBCC had expressed interest in finding a way to fund a wide variety of projects, she said that the FBCC might consider a GOB.  Bach informed commissioners that if they wanted to proceed to ask the voters to approve various projects via a GOB, each project financed by the bond needed to be specific, costs and the amount to be borrowed for each needed to be quantified and the interest rate for the debt needed to be specified.  Pelican added that there would be “lots more oversight” with a GOB, because the voters would have given clear direction as to how they expected the money to be spent.

Bach and City Manager Joe Gerrity discussed whether such a referendum could be authorized by resolution, as it had in 2001 for the Greenway Project, or whether the FBCC would need to approve it via ordinance.  Bach agreed to research the question but said she felt more comfortable with an ordinance, which would require at least two public readings and public input.

Commissioner Pat Gass asked, “Do we want to put it on the ballot?  I want to know what the people are willing to go into debt for.”  Gass said that she knows that the people who show up at FBCC meetings are strongly in favor of moving forward as soon as possible on the riverfront park, but that there are thousands of residents who are busy with their daily lives and do not understand the issues or would not necessarily support such a project with their tax dollars.

In the plan, current Parking Lot B spaces would be moved to be parallel to the rail tracks, requiring a slight adjustment to Front Street.
In the plan, current Parking Lot B spaces would be moved to be perpendicular to the rail tracks, requiring a slight adjustment to Front Street.  Plan proponents stress that parking spaces will not be lost in the relocation.

Vice Mayor Pelican said that in reading Commissioner Miller’s Facebook page she could see that there is lots of interest in making improvements at Main Beach, too.  She also cited the city’s need to complete important storm water projects and referred to Gass’ oft-cited call for a downtown parking garage.

Bach said that for these items to go on the ballot as part of a proposed GOB request, the city would need to quickly obtain detail and estimates on the cost of each project.  Alternatively, she suggested that the FBCC might want to consider just asking a general question on the November ballot, such as “Are you interested in borrowing money to do the following (list each project separately) if an increase in millage would result?”

Fernandina Beach Mayor Ed Boner
Fernandina Beach Mayor Ed Boner

Mayor Boner expressed concerns that the specificity of a GOB could work against the city if a potential developer were to come in within 6 months and the city might need to rearrange the order of the projects.  He said that the creation of a Quiet Zone, opening Alachua Street, and landscaping Front Street might be essential to a developer’s willingness to begin work on projects within the Community Redevelopment Area along Front Street that would bring lots of new tax revenues into the area.  Those tax revenues, which would flow into the CRA Tax Increment Fund, could then be used to finance park construction and improvements.

Pelican and Corbett agreed that the work on creating a Quiet Zone, which would eliminate the need for trains to blow horns or whistles in the downtown area, is “pretty much done.”  Corbett said that the railroad meets the requirement that rail traffic not exceed a speed of 40 mph, and Pelican said that only the appropriate crossing signals and equipment need to be added at the cross streets.

Park plans for the Welcome Center would add a deck (FIND grant request) so that the building could serve as a small performance venue.
Park plans for the Welcome Center would add a deck (FIND grant request) so that the building could serve as a small performance venue.

Boner said that without specific numbers on costs of the various projects, he would not vote to approve a bond.  He said that since the city is currently pursuing grants that would offset the need for loans, he felt the money to be borrowed could not be defined at this time.  Pelican said that the city is pursuing grants for waterfront park items via St. John’s Water Management District (SJWMD) and Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND), but that it is wrong to count on any grant monies until they are actually awarded.

Commissioner Pat Gass
Commissioner Pat Gass

Gass said, “There are 2-3,000 people who want to do [the waterfront park].  But we don’t hear from the other 8,000 who don’t get involved and need to have their voices heard.”  She said that a GOB “keeps us honest.”  If the people vote for it, “We or future commissions can’t change their minds or move the money to other projects.”

City Manager Joe Gerrity piggybacked on Bach’s suggestion that a more general question about incurring indebtedness be placed on the ballot, which the commissioners could view as a straw poll.  He expressed concerns that he would not want a negative vote on a GOB to be interpreted that the people wanted nothing to be done.  He felt that such a vote could discourage private developers.

Boner said that he was concerned that funding projects via a GOB would lock the commission into those projects.  Commissioners laughed and said, “That’s the idea.”  Corbett added that a referendum is a “no brainer,” while Pelican said that as stewards of taxpayer dollars, she could not go forward with a short term project such as Parking Lot B, if that work would need to be torn up to complete the entire approved plan a few years down the road.  She said that in essence the FBCC would be asking the voters if they wanted the city to borrow money to do the entire park faster or whether they wanted to go slower and build it on more of a pay as you go approach.

Commissioner Charlie Corbett and Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican
Commissioner Charlie Corbett and Vice Mayor Sarah Pelican

Corbett questioned whether a private developer would have any involvement with the waterfront park.  He and Pelican stressed that they were only talking about the waterfront park, not CRA development in a larger sense.  Corbett said, “All I heard was ‘I want a waterfront park and I want it right now,’” pounding the desk for emphasis.  He added that the entire park should be put on the ballot, using the Zev Cohen estimates.  Pelican added, “If the enthusiasm is still there [for the park] we can then determine from the referendum how to proceed.”

Corbett tried to clarify the sense of the commission.  “No one is saying we will stop [park improvements to] Parking Lot B.  That can be started with impact fees.  But if [the park advocates] want the entire park now, [to avoid] kicking the can down the road, there needs to be a referendum.”

Lynn Williams
Lynn Williams

Mayor Boner opened the discussion to public input, and waterfront park advocate Lynn Williams was the first to speak.  He said, “There are a number of us who oppose a referendum, because what the people hear you asking is ‘Do you want us to raise taxes?’”  He said that Fernandina Beach is a city of factions, and that by making a GOB referendum large enough to support the projects advanced by each faction, the voters will vote against it because they do not want to pay more taxes for many projects that they don’t support.  He said that the people elected the commissioners to make these decisions.  He suggested that it will take less than $200K to complete the Parking Lot B park portion, and that the city could go out on bids and have the project done by October.  “You should be leading the charge,” Williams told the commissioners.  “Avoid the referendum.”

Lou Goldman
Lou Goldman

CRA Advisory Board Member and downtown resident Lou Goldman spoke next.  He suggested that the FBCC address one project at a time and spoke about the various ways to finance projects.  He also reminded commissioners how the waterfront park in St. Marys was financed by one man, Howard Gilman.  He suggested that perhaps they needed to look for a “Howard Gilman” in Fernandina Beach.  Building on the previous speaker’s arguments, he said, “We’ve already done the referendum.  We elected you to do the best thing for the city.  Do it and get on with it.”

 

Andy Curtin
Andy Curtin

Andy Curtin, another CRA Advisory Board member, told commissioners that while he understood representative government, he also believed that if the city wanted to borrow as much as $10M, such a question should go before the voters.  He said that the 2011 city commission elections had turned on the failure of the commission to put borrowing money for Forward Fernandina ($1.889M) on the ballot.  He said that if the voters consider decisions to borrow money “high handed”, commissioners making such decisions would pay at the polls.

Mike Zaffaroni
Mike Zaffaroni

Mike Zaffaroni, CRA Advisory Board Chairman, spoke last.  He agreed with previous speakers.  He said that the danger of putting an all-encompassing GOB referendum on the ballot was that the commission would be asking the public to vote yes or no on something they know little about.  He said, “Unless you can answer questions in detail, like ‘What will this project do for me?’ or ‘How much more will I pay in taxes?’ people will say no because they do not understand.”  He told commissioners, “You are responsible stewards, and you have proven that over two years.”  He said he had understood the reason for the special meeting was to focus on how to fund the waterfront park.  Any deals with developers on CRA matters should be handled on an individual basis, he said.

Fernandina Beach City Commissioner Pat Gass
Fernandina Beach City Commissioner Pat Gass

Commissioner Gass said, “I don’t think we need to vote on $200K for the park, but the bigger issues need a [referendum].”  She agreed that the city would need to educate the public on what is being proposed and why it is good for the citizens.  “We must explain,” she said.  “Spending taxpayer money affects them.”

Boner said that he feared a knee-jerk negative reaction from the public as a reaction against borrowing money more than against the projects.  Pelican recapped her fears that doing the park piecemeal would cause money spent on improvements today to prove to be wasted if all that work would need to be torn up when the city moved to complete the total park plan.  Corbett continued to press for a public vote on financing parts A, C, and D of the park plan, while he was in favor of immediately authorizing the start of work on Parking Lot B.

City Manager Joe Gerrity
City Manager Joe Gerrity

City Manager Gerrity, who had remained silent through the discussion, spoke up.  “The funding is not in place to do Parking Lot B,” he said.  Gerrity reminded commissioners that the city would have spent over $1.1M to fix golf course and marina issues over a 2-year period.  Those loans from the General Fund, he said, “have tied our hands.”  He said that some of the money needed to complete the Parking Lot B area could come from Parks and Recreation Impact fees, but not all.  He emphasized that he would rely on the City Attorney, Deputy City Manager and City Comptroller for a final ruling on appropriate use of impact fees for this project.

Gerrity added that he is comfortable in seeking assistance via a FIND grant for the deck to the marina welcome center, but that he needs to find an additional $100-150K to finish the work on Parking Lot B.  In response to a question from the mayor, he said he did not know about private money.  He said he would hate not to make a $200-400K improvement, but as of yet he has not found money in the budget to do so.

Attorney Bach reminded commissioners that since the FY2014-15 Budget will have been adopted before the November election, even a positive vote on a GOB referendum would not be reflected until the FY2015-16 Budget.  Commissioner Corbett said, “We need to start somewhere.”  Bach said that she would wait for the commissioners to tell her if they wanted any form of referendum on the November ballot.  She reminded them that a decision must be made by July 1, and that specific costs, projects and interest rates would be required for a GOB.

Eric Bartelt
Eric Bartelt

WAG proponent Erik Bartelt sought and received permission to address the commission.  He suggested that a referendum for this fall might be premature.  He felt that if the people were able to see progress on the Parking Lot B area, they might be more receptive to completing the park along the waterfront.  He said, “Let the B portion convince people that this is a good thing.”

Mayor Boner asked about engineering estimates for Parking Lot B work.  Gerrity replied that he had not had time to work on that.  Corbett asked, “Can we get on that right away?”

Bach agreed to bring back the matter for further discussion at the June 17 Regular Meeting.

Suanne ThammEditor’s Note: Suanne Z. Thamm is a native of Chautauqua County, NY, who moved to Fernandina Beach from Alexandria,VA, in 1994. As a long time city resident and city watcher, she provides interesting insight into the many issues that impact our city. We are grateful for Suanne’s many contributions to the Fernandina Observer.

6 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Dave Lott
Dave Lott(@dave-l)
9 years ago

Eric Bartelt can confirm this but my understanding is that the WAG2 plan will NOT entail any teardown of Lot B improvements when the rest of the plan encompassing lots C&D are completed. The boat ramp serves as a divider at this point and while I think the true benefit of the park will come in the Lot C & D area with the restrooms, splash fountain, playground, etc. getting started will show the potential for this valuable area. Should the CC want to do a referendum, there should be individual ballot questions for each project and not lump them together otherwise it is sure to fail. I fear Commissioners are woefully understating the requirements for the quiet zone. Regulations require that there be gated signaling on both side of the track which would require additional signaling at a cost of about $150,000 per side and the question about the “unimproved crossing access” for the Salty Pelican handicapped parking space and the maintenance access right of way behind the Marina Restaurant also have to be addressed. In other words, like most everything else down at the waterfront, there is no simple answer.
Definately go forward with Lot B and watch the momentum surge. While I understand the interest at Main Beach it is a matter of priorities. There is NO playground or restrooms at the waterfront park while these facilities already exist at Main Beach.

Eric Bartelt
Eric Bartelt(@ericbarteltgmail-com)
9 years ago
Reply to  Dave Lott

Dave Lott is correct that when Parking Lots C&D are built, none of the the Lot B improvements would need to be torn up or changed. C&D are separated from B by the Welcome Center, the boat ramp and Atlantic Seafood. From a construction and utilities standpoint, they are really two separate parks.

Eric Bartelt
Eric Bartelt(@ericbarteltgmail-com)
9 years ago

Just a point of clarification, in the caption under the photo of Front St., you say the parking in Lot B would be moved to be parallel with the railroad tracks. In the modified plan approved by the City Commission the parking spaces would be perpendicular to the tracks, not parallel. Additionally, the number of parking spaces that are currently in Lot B would be retained. They would just be reconfigured to allow space for the park.

Catherine
Catherine (@guest_19602)
9 years ago

If you wait for City government to do something, you’ll wait for the rest of your lives. It’s time for an intervention. Take back your public space. Check out what other cities have done with tactical urbanism. http://www.streetplans.org

Betsie Huben
Betsie Huben(@betsie-huben)
9 years ago

Did I miss something or did I just read that per Mr. Gerrity there is no funding to do the Parking Lot B work at this time? If so – how about we give the citizens who will be paying for this the two choices – WAG/WAG2 which has no funding structure established (with an additional concern that the Cohen $$ estimates are now outdated) and the AWP/Rice Plans which was structured to be completed via private funding? Contrary to Mr. Williams, who would avoid a referendum, if you are going to spend 10M and the taxpayers are expexted to foot the bill it seems reasonable to let the voters decide which park and which funding option they prefer. Or are we going to do Forward Fernandina 2 – the legend continues…