OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL

 

CHERYL L. BROWN                                                                                                                    117 WEST DUVAL STREET, SUITE 425

            DIRECTOR                                                                                                                                                                                                 4TH FLOOR, CITY HALL

   OFFICE (904) 630-1452                                                                                                                                                                                  JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA  32202

     FAX (904) 630-2906                                                                                                                                                                                                                

  E-MAIL: CLBROWN@coj.net

 

JOINT RULES/FINANCE/RCD COMMITTEE ON

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILLS 2012-212, 2012-213 and 2012-364

MEETING MINUTES

July 18, 2012

5:00 p.m.

 

Location:  City Council Chamber, 1st floor, City Hall – St. James Building; 117 West Duval Street

    

In attendance: 

Rules Committee Members Clay Yarborough (Chair), Ray Holt, Lori Boyer (arr. 5:08), John Crescimbeni, Jim Love, Robin Lumb    

Finance Committee Members John Crescimbeni (Chair), Greg Anderson, Lori Boyer (arr. 5:08), Johnny Gaffney, Bill Gulliford and Clay Yarborough

RCD Committee Members Doyle Carter (Chair), Johnny Gaffney and Don Redman

 

Also:  Kirk Sherman, Janice Billy and Heather Reber – Council Auditor’s Office; Peggy Sidman and Jason Gabriel  – Office of General Counsel; Jessica Deal – Mayor’s Office; Ronnie Belton – CFPO; Paul Crawford and Jorina Jolly – Office of Economic Development; Marilyn Allen – Legislative Services Division; Steve Cassada – Council Staff Services; Jeff Clements – City Council Research Division; Terry Lorrince – Downtown Vision Inc.;  Don Shea – Jacksonville Civic Council; Chris Quinn – Chamber of Commerce; Tony Bates – Concerned Taxpayers of Duval County; Steve Chapman – Florida Times-Union; Kevin Meerschaert – WJCT; BeLinda Peeples and Donna Barrow - ECAs

 

Meeting Convened: 5:06 p.m.

 

Rules Chairman Clay Yarborough convened the meeting.  Lacking a quorum from the RCD Committee, the group decided that votes would be taken by the group as a whole rather than by individual committees for this meeting.

 

Council Member Boyer distributed an amendment that she had presented to the LUZ Committee yesterday and which the committee voted to approve.  She explained that the amendment dealt with the downtown Business Investment and Development Plan, the community redevelopment plans for the two downtown CRAs, and what powers the DIA could exercise before and after the CRA plans are adopted by City Council.  The LUZ Committee intended to leave matters of organization, staffing, funding, and operation of the DIA to the joint committees to review and make recommendations, and only to deal with land use and planning-related issues.

 

After some discussion on how best to proceed given the multiple documents, the joint committee opted to allow the Council Auditor’s staff to present their list of questions/issues/concerns, and to interweave the LUZ amendment into the debate as issues arose that were covered by that amendment.

 

Page and line number references from this point refer to Ordinance 2012-364 – Council Auditor’s Office Cross-Reference version labeled “Draft (as amd by Joint Fin/Rules)”.

 

1)      On pp. 5-6, lines 30-2, would the City Council approve the Business Investment and Development Plan?  The Boyer amendment addresses this issue by arranging the powers of the DIA into two categories – those which it may exercise from its effective date and those which it may exercise only after City Council approval of the plan(s).

Motion (Boyer): recommend approval of the LUZ amendment subheading (2) to Ordinance Code Sec. 55.306 regarding the definition of a Business Investment and Development Plan, including a further amendment that the plan must be approved by City Council – approved.

 

2)      On p. 6, lines 14-15, will the appointment of the CEO of the DIA be confirmed by City Council?  Will Council establish qualifications for the position? 

Motion (Boyer): recommend amending Sec. 55.308(a) to state that prior to hiring a CEO, the DIA board will develop and obtain City Council approval of job criteria for the position – approved.

 

3)      On pp. 8-9, lines 22-13, should members of the DIA board have specific qualifications or experience?  Amendment approved at 6.20.12 joint committee meeting.

 

4)      On pp. 11-12, lines 24 – 2, who will establish the DIA CEO’s compensation package?  Should City Council establish a salary range and/or other limits on compensation and benefits?

The committees discussed ways of determining appropriate compensation, including surveying the salaries of downtown development directors in other comparable cities.  Don Shea of the Jacksonville Civic Council is a past board member of the Downtown Development Association, a national organization for downtown development authorities and said that the organization does a bi-annual survey of its members regarding compensation packages.  He will obtain the most recent survey information for the City’s consideration.

Motion (Crescimbeni): amend Sec. 55.309 to require that the DIA board members and CEO must file a limited financial disclosure (Form 1) annually as required by state law.

 

5)      On p. 12, 9-24, should Council approval be required for development/redevelopment agreements?

Amendment approved at 6.20.12 joint committee meeting and clarified further in the Boyer/LUZ amendment.

 

6)      On p. 12, lines 12-15, what does it mean for the DIA to “provide funding” to promote economic development and revitalization?

Amendment approved at 6.20.12 joint committee meeting.

 

7)      On p. 12, lines 16-17, what does it mean for the DIA to approve ground leases?

Amendment approved at 6.20.12 joint committee meeting.

 

8)      On p. 12, lines 25-26, add a statement clarifying that the DIA manages tax increment finances only after City Council approves the TIF budget.  Council Member Boyer stated that the LUZ amendment gave the DIA board the power to administer the TIF budget without further Council approval, which conflicts with the Auditor’s suggestion.

Motion: approve an amendment to include City Council approval of the TIF budget – approved.

Motion (Boyer): adopt LUZ amendment subsection (3) – Powers and Duties.  The Auditor’s Office indicated disagreement with several of the provisions in the LUZ amendment.  No vote was taken.

 

9)      On p. 12, line 27, should City Council approval of the downtown marketing plan be required?  Committee members expressed various opinions about whether Council approval was merited or not.  Jessica Deal of the Mayor’s office noted that various other items are reported to the City Council or to a Council committee for review and/or a general stamp of approval, not by means of formal legislation, and suggested that as a review mechanism.

Motion (Lumb): amend Sec. 55.308(e) to require that the DIA’s downtown marketing plan be reviewed by the RCD Committee pursuant to Council Rule 2.213 – approved 8-3.

 

10)   On pp. 12-13, lines 28-2, should City Council approve the Downtown Master Plan?  Council approval is already required by state law; no action needed.

 

11)   On p. 13, lines 12-13, should the section be amended to require that the receipt and administration of grants comply with Ordinance Code grant requirements?

Motion (Gulliford): amend Sec. 55.308(i) to confirm that DIA must comply with Ordinance Code requirements concerning receipt and expenditure of grants – approved.

 

12)   On p. 13, lines 14-17, should the section be amended to specify that DIA’s record retention practices must comply with City ordinance and state law?

Motion (Boyer): amend Sec. 55.308(j) to require the DIA to maintain its records in accordance with applicable City ordinances and State law – approved.

 

13)   On p. 13, lines 18-19, should the DIA be required to obtain City Council approval before leasing office space for itself?  Janice Billy explained that the primary concern was that the DIA should not lease private office space without Council approval if vacant city-owned space is available that would serve the purpose.  The administration would be responsible for assigning office space to the DIA as it would for any other City agency.

Motion (Boyer): amend Sec. 55.308(k) to provide that if the DIA wants to lease space in a non-City owned facility, City Council approval must be obtained – approved.

 

14)   On p. 13, lines 20-24, should the section be amended to require that the Office of General Counsel and City Council must review and approve all contracts before DIA execution?  Should the section be amended to require that the Office of General Counsel retain copies of all DIA contracts?

Motion (Anderson): amend Sec. 55.308(l) to require that the Office of General Counsel retain copies of all DIA contracts – approved.

 

15)   Skipped temporarily (establishment, operation, lease and license of downtown public facilities).

 

16)   On p. 14, lines 5-9, should the section be amended to limit the ability of the DIA to hire outside counsel?  Jason Gabriel of the General Counsel’s Office noted the existence of language in the Ordinance Code (Chapter 108) that already sets out procedures for any City agency to request the use of specialized temporary outside counsel.  The committee asked the Council Auditor in conjunction with the Office of General Counsel to bring back suggested amendment language to the next meeting making such use of outside counsel temporary or limited in scope.

 

The committees will reconvene next Wednesday at 5:00 p.m.

 

Meeting adjourned:  7:03 p.m.

 

Minutes:            Jeff Clements, Council Research Division

             7.19.12     Posted: 3:00 p.m.

 

Tape:                Joint Committee meeting 7.18.12

                        Legislative Services Division

 

Attachments:     Ordinance 2012-364 – Council Auditor’s Office Cross Reference Draft

                        7.18.12