A.G. Gancarski
The Greater Arlington Republican Club held a forum with the two Jacksonville City Council District 3 candidates, Aaron Bowman and James Nealis, Wednesday night at the University of North Florida. The two Republican candidates agreed on more points than they disagreed, but there were enough moments of genuine contrast to give voters a real choice.
One of the questions, regarding city council members each candidate respected the most, illustrated moments of divergence. Nealis, when asked, cited the “analytical” Robin Lumb, as well as Doyle Carter, Greg Anderson, and Clay Yarborough. Currently council president, Yarborough’s approach to matters such as the public pension mess and displays in the Museum of Contemporary Art have invited bipartisan ridicule in recent months. Bowman hedged his bets by saying “all of the people on council are different, all have great attributes,” but cited Bill Gulliford, one of the more pragmatic Republicans on Council, as his choice.
The two men also diverged on extending the Human Rights Ordinance to LGBT community members. Nealis recycled Yarborough-esque arguments familiar to those following the issue the past few years, warning of unintended consequences and “red tape” that would have “small businesses … grounded in litigation.” He also cited, for whatever reason, the First Amendment; his seeming belief is that an anti-discrimination ordinance would fail to “protect freedom of religion.”
Bowman was more direct. “I can’t support any type of discrimination — period. The HRO’s intentions are aligned with my beliefs,” he said, taking a position consistent with that of the Jax Chamber, which has endorsed him.
Many on the right have proclaimed their belief that Nealis is the “true conservative” in this race, and that position seems to come down to this issue.
A real difference between the candidates seems to be the classic paradigm of youth versus experience. Nealis, a far younger man (a Paul Ryan type) with experience as a prosecutor and an aide to two council members, seems far more comfortable with quasi-ideological dogma than does Bowman, who clearly is temperamentally conservative. Bowman, though, ameliorates his rhetoric with real-world experience: He was in the Navy 28 years, a few of them spent as a base commander, experience he kept coming back to as an analogue for being a councilman.
Moderator Matthew Corrigan, a UNF professor and pundit of national stature, asked candidates what they would do to prevent a “Ferguson” type debacle from happening in Jacksonville, an interesting question given the effect reactions to that event had on the local Republican Party.
Bowman surveyed the room and stated the obvious.
“You know what’s disappointing? There’s not one African-American here tonight,” he said. “There’s no place for any discrimination” in Jacksonville.
Nealis advocated body cams on officers: “Be more inviting, more inclusive, but body cams” are needed.
It would have been interesting, along such lines, if the candidates had been asked to evaluate the performance of embattled State Attorney Angela Corey, but such a line of questioning never opened.
Another major area of divergence between the candidates seemed to be on the pension deal, which doesn’t make it to the council floor despite success in committees. Nealis seemed to suggest that he doesn’t support the current deal, though his winding answer on the subject was tough to parse. Bowman was more direct, saying that the pension situation is a “black cloud” over the city, and that he “would have been happy to see legislation pass last night.”
Despite Nealis not giving an authoritative answer when asked about the pension the first time, he made an excellent point regarding how we “spend more on retirees than current officers” while arguing that we need to “fix the pension.”
The final major point where the candidates disagreed was the city’s role in downtown investment, including plans such as the shipyards proposal. Bowman said he was “excited by Shad Khan’s” proposal and mentioned the sizable commitment the billionaire owner of the Jaguars has made to the city (“He’s committed to invest $1 billion.”). Nealis was less enthusiastic, citing concerns about the “good ol’ boys network” and how increased property tax rates invariably pad the pockets of connected developers.
“Downtown development should be a good deal for taxpayers,” he said.
Nealis is betting such statements resonate with the voters. At another point in the evening, he said that “my responsibility [if elected] is not the city as a whole; it’s District 3.” Such a position which will strike some voters as technically correct and others as a bit parochial.
