A.G. Gancarski
On Tuesday, Jacksonville City Council’s Finance Committee debated giving Council members three terms.
The Matt Schellenberg bill, which was controversial last year when it was introduced, is still occasioning hesitation and pushback from key quarters.
Council VP Lori Boyer urged caution, as the citizens need to be sold on the bill, and figuring out the appropriate ballot for the referendum is a challenge.
Boyer and Aaron Bowman both talked about the importance of continuity, and the “disruptive” nature of turnover.
Bowman asked Schellenberg the cost of putting this on the ballot.
Schellenberg, Jacksonville’s emissary to the Florida Leagues of Cities and Counties both, said that it wouldn’t cost taxpayers much money because it would be on an extant ballot.
Schellenberg expected “all 19 members” of Council to sell this as they would the 1/2 cent sales tax.
“We are the principal people behind these things. We understand why it’s done,” and “if you extend from two to three, it will actually save the city money” and be more “efficient.”
Schellenberg then gave Ron Littlepage props for his proposal of “unlimited terms,” saying that “it’s always possible to unelect somebody” in a succeeding election.
John Crescimbeni, running against Schellenberg for Council VP, said that “I’m not prepared to deal with this issue today,” bringing up the possibility of a Constitutional Officer making the same argument, then asking “what’s so magical about three terms?”
Crescimbeni proposed putting this on the ballot as a straw ballot, citing how in 1990 people were intent on term limits, and the “marketing effort for this [bill] would have to be extra special.”
Crescimbeni then talked about other costs, including getting a committee together. And unforeseen consequences, such as larding an even longer ballot, and increasing the printing costs.
Reggie Gaffney also indicated opposition, saying “the most important issue is this pension,” and that he might support a bill in the future.
Schellenberg then lauded Crescimbeni’s “institutional knowledge” as an argument for the bill, before pivoting to a discussion of Eight Is Enough, saying that that TV show title bred a thirst for term limits on the national level, but it doesn’t work on the local level.
Regrettably, a deeper dive into the Dick Van Patten oeuvre was not in the cards.
“We have to wait 7 years for a whole new generation of people,” Schellenberg said, if the bill doesn’t include current Council members.
“There might be some people who want to stay going forward,” Schellenberg added, promising to bring Ron Littlepage to Rules to make his case, and then citing Joe Riley‘s 40 years as Charleston Mayor as an example of institutional knowledge.
The bill will be deferred until February 9.
But not before Crescimbeni paralleled the discussion of Eight Is Enough with 19 Kids and Counting.
Finance Chair Bill Gulliford channeled Bill Bishop, former Council President in the crowd for another issue, saying “you can’t make this stuff up.”
***
Also discussed, the Cure Bill resolving the budget night appropriation of $330,799 from drainage rehab for Fire and Rescue Safety Officers.
This appropriation, and the way by which it was arrived, occasioned a lawsuit for texting between Council members and the Fire Union Chief last fall.
Boyer noted that this money would lead to $250,000 in pension costs, and that this money would recur “ad infinitum.”
Promotions would, she said, have a perpetual bump in pension costs, not defrayed by the affected parties paying in, which impacts the Unfunded Liability that you may have heard of.
Crescimbeni brought up “redlining” the positions; Boyer noted there was difficulty in figuring out which positions should be redlined, and the Administration urged her to “just make it a budget bill.”
“I want to try to let the bill move. I don’t want to get into the management of the department,” said Boyer, who also wanted to give the administration flexibility in collective bargaining.
Counsel noted that the “promise of the settlement was to vote.”
Kurtis Wilson, representing the Fire Department, noted that the department’s “overtime rate has been horrendous,” limiting its flexibility if the money is taken away from the budget.
Aaron Bowman pushed for deferral. Danny Becton, who was animated on this subject after the Finance agenda meeting wrapped, noted ruefully that if this keeps getting pushed back, we’ll be at the end of the year.
Considerable discussion followed. RCDPHS discussed it at great length before deferring on January 5.
Wilson, with justifiable exasperation in his voice, noted that “full demotions” could follow if the bill failed. Counsel noted that Fire could address the loss of revenue with cuts in other areas.
Last year, JFRD’s plan was to hold vacancies to defray costs. Crescimbeni wondered why the capacity asserted months ago still isn’t there.
[If only Bed Tax could apply to this….]
The longer this issue goes unresolved, the greater the chance that the plaintiffs might grow restless and renew legal action.
Gulliford, urging deferral to “get the facts,” asserted that the plaintiffs would support this action.
Gaffney noted that Council has been debating this issue for a few months, and he’d like to see movement.
***
In light of the plans to build a new amphitheater at EverBank Field, the need for a Metropolitan Park amphitheater is in question. $169,801 being transferred into the Metro Park fund got pushback from Councilman Gaffney. It was noted that “there’s a lot more to Metro Park than just the amphitheater.”
Gaffney was the no vote in a 6 to 1 approval.
***
There will be a One Spark festival at some point. Maybe. But who knows when.
2015-841, regarding a Festival overlay zone for One Spark, was positioned for withdrawal from the mayor’s office. Representing the mayor, Ali Korman Shelton noted that there likely will be a festival, maybe in the fall.
Bill was withdrawn.
***
2016-15, which called for a supplemental share plan and was part of the 2015 pension reform bill, would allow the Police and Fire Pension Fund to distribute funds uniformly.
“Ordinance 2015-304-E involved the creation of a “supplemental share plan retirement benefit”, individual accounts for each active police officer and firefighter to be funded by the proceeds of state insurance premium taxes levied under Chapters 175 and 185 of the Florida Statutes. This bill deletes language regarding separate distribution of the “chapter funds” to police officers and firefighters,” said the bill summary, pooling the money.
The bill was on Emergency Cycle because this is supposed to go into effect January 31, said Beth McCague of the PFPF.
McCague noted that the pension reform package gives the trustees discretion on distribution, in response to a question from Lori Boyer.
Boyer’s response, worth filing away.
“I would have hoped that the trustees would have had the same concern about the Unfunded Liability as we do,” Boyer said, adding “apparently not.”
