"The Gym"; I offer the follwing recent Q&A; It is not an easy job. [Archive]

AHS

04-17-2006, 07:54 PM

Dear [name deleted],

I normally do not respond to such inflammatory correspondence but I do sense a level of sincerity in your frustration.

For the record I voted in favor of the funding. That is the record. It is a public record. I am simply a District Council Member and I fight day and night for the needs of District 5 that I represent. I do so at the sacrifice of time with my family and time at my "real" job because . . . I truly love this city.

When an issue like this has the support of the Mayor, Council President, Council Vice-President, and Chair of the Finance Committee, let me assure you that my vote is, and was, meaningless.

I chose to spend my political capital in ways that best serve the District I was elected to represent. I am sorry I lost your votes, but I know that I serve my District and this City with distinction. I am very proud of my record. I can be reached during business hours at 313-6852 or on my cell at 613-7289 to discuss this item further.

Most Sincerely,

Art Shad
Council Member District 5

[from constituent, name deleted]

I haven't been this STEAMED in a long time. The funding you people approved for a gym at First Timothy Baptist Church should be criminal. I'm to the point where I absolutely dread all government meetings--from the U. S. Congress to the City Council--because of the harm you do. I don't know how you voted. If you voted to approve this travesty, you'll NEVER receive a vote for anything from my husband and me. I think ALL of you need to call it quits; most citizens of Jacksonville would be far better off--the exception being those who attend First Timothy. I just can't tell you how angry I am--the City Council seems to be afraid of Patricia Locket-Felder and votes (lack thereof) from the black community. Too bad you're all such wimps. Why won't you obey the rules? If you simply voted against it, why didn't you fight the appropriation? I would love an explanation.

JaxInvestor

04-17-2006, 08:11 PM

AHS,

First, let me say that when your constituent all-capped the word "steamed" it made me think of a Hook and Ladder at Firehouse Subs.

Second, my response to your reply to the constituent would be that your vote was not, and never will be, meaningless as long as you sit on the Council. Those of us in District 5 elected you to do what the right thing regardless of whatever the Mayor or Council President or the Janitor is doing - or whose district a proposed legislation may be affecting. Think of the saying that every mother tells their child, "If your best friend was jumping off a cliff, would you do that too?" To suggest such a thing is surprising (your vote was meaningless). It makes no difference if you were the only Council Member voting against the legislation or even abstaining, it would have meant much more than being "meaningless".

I do recognize and admire you though for your constitent manner in responding to your constituents - and for participating in a public forum such as this one.

Regardless, hopefully it is a moot point and the OGC will get started investigating the legality of the ordinance. Better yet, you could be that lone ranger councilman who does what is right regardless of the political pressure - and propose an ordinance before the council that at least questions puts a temporary hold on this thing while the legality of it is determined.

I would concur though--it doesn't seem to be an easy job.

Sharklove

AHS

04-17-2006, 08:45 PM

Sharklove ... Kevin ... Mr. Connor?

We will (I hate to even say it) have to agree to disagree, on how I can best serve my District and this City. It is a blissful utopia that websites like this live in (and obviously I approve because I am participating). I am sorry to poke at the Utopian bubble but guess what, there is politics in politics. I am wandering a bit ... back on track.

There is a great line from a movie that talks about a situation similar to this and it goes like: "If I hung my hat on every issue that ruffled my feathers I would be a very popular civilian, oh and by the way, doing no good for anyone who elected me in the future."

I wish you could at least, PLEASE, acknowledge the grey area surrounding isolated votes on medium sized issues such as this. Potentially, you could acknowledge the higher goals that can be achieved when not fighting to the death on a certain losing battle. It ain't always pretty.

You know ... when you are just aching to roast Jacksonville's elected officials, just browse the metro sections of some other counties in Florida. For the most, we have a bunch of hard working, honest, caring, and smart individuals on the Council and, YES, in the Mayor's office as well.

In closing: Sharklove. Is there anything I can do to get you to change your logo? At least turn off the blinking. Seriously ... $50? $100?

All the Best,
Art

Gone North

04-17-2006, 08:45 PM

AHS

04-17-2006, 08:57 PM

A District Councilman cannot hide behind fighting only for the needs of his district and not for what is in the best interest of the whole.

If he is only interested in his district, he should give up his seat. He is elected to make policy for the Consolidated City of Jacksonville. The best thing he can do for his district is to vote his conscience.

Do these people get any kind of education in government before they are allowed to vote as a council member?

A responsible elected official always votes what he believest to be the truth and in the best interest of the people in whose name he holds office.

Good grief ... Either I don't get it or you don't get it. I know that you posted this before reading my last post. I hope you do read it but I feel certain we will still disagree.

For the record, no, there are no classes on government prior to taking office (maybe there should be). Why do I think you already knew that?

Someone please give me a reason to think that this site is not just a bunch of disgruntled, opinionated, singleminded do gooders.

Any takers, or does my online slaughter continue?

Art

pearlstone

04-17-2006, 09:00 PM

What did you mean when you said, "grey area surrounding isolated votes"?

Please be gentle AHS, as this is still so new for me. ha ha

thelakelander

04-17-2006, 09:08 PM

I'm not going to give you any grief, AHS, I'm just happy to see you correspond with the public in this manner. Just dealing with the Landing issue has shown me that the level of politics being played in the city is far more than most of us would ever expect, especially me. As for everyone else, I believe what's done has been done and crucifying council members isn't going to make Timothy Baptist give the money back. Instead the road to change should focus on measures that can be implemented now to get the ruling overturned.

Joe

04-17-2006, 09:33 PM

Someone please give me a reason to think that this site is not just a bunch of disgruntled, opinionated, singleminded do gooders.

Any takers, or does my online slaughter continue?

Art

Well, I have no dog in this fight whatsoever. I don't think I've commented too much on the gym situation, and I actually agree that certain memebers of this webforum have extremely grating and dogmatic opinions on city government.

But all I know is that someone purporting to be Councilman Art Shad is making posts on this site, and is coming off like an immature jerk. And I am stunned. I've actually met you in person and you seemed so nice. As a Republican voter, I'm a bit disheartened. I'm not used to being called a "disgruntled, opinionated, singleminded do gooder" by my elected representatives. Let alone being called that simply by association.

fsujax

04-17-2006, 09:51 PM

AHS, please do not think of those of us on this board as disgruntled or singleminded. Some of us may be opinionated, but that is because we care deeply about our city and only want to make it a better place to live, work and play. I applaud your involvement on this board. I look forward to reading all posts from any of our elected offcials.

JaxInvestor

04-17-2006, 10:15 PM

In closing: Sharklove. Is there anything I can do to get you to change your logo? At least turn off the blinking. Seriously ... $50? $100?

All the Best,
Art

LOL...umm...after thinking about it, yes, there are 2 ways to get me to change the avatar.

1) Make a check out for $1.1 million - paid from City funds - to "Sharklove" and leave it with Ms. Delgado. A man in sunglasses & a dark overcoat will pick it up sometime later this week.

or

2) Write an editorial to the Times-Union telling them that you voted for the 1st Timothy issue to preserve political power.

I'm only half-kidding with you Art. We would be remiss to go off only on you...there were almost 20 other elected representatives who did the exact same thing.

---------------------------

Welcome to our little Utopia! btw...you mentioned us "roasting" you...I think "roasting" is also sometimes used in a positive manner (such as at a party). I would suggest that is the manner in which we are currently roasting you. :) Glad you are here.

JaxInvestor

04-17-2006, 10:18 PM

btw...you are quite popular...there was no fanfare like this when I joined up!

RADIO TALK SHOW HOST

04-17-2006, 10:38 PM

Welcome Councilman Shad, thank you for your comments,I hope we continue to hear from you I very much appreciate the creditability your participation brings to this website. One day soon I Expect (particularily from you) that the overall attitude the media has now regarding honesty and accountabilty will soon change because of sites like this and people like you (that just want to do a good job and be recognized for it) that demand more information so people can make an intellegent decision when they cast their ballot.
for the record if you haven't heard I would support any city councilman (or woman) for Mayor, except L. Self
see you Tuesday

Jim

04-17-2006, 10:39 PM

Welcome to the community, Art.

Reaching out to the citizens by posting on sites like this and admitting their is 'politics' in politics are noble in todays age. We merely request that you put as much faith in your vote as we do. If your vote counts for so little, imagine how we feel when voting ourselves.

It's the principle that matters. It's not whether your vote actually made the difference but that you tried. The citizens know you tried. They understand it can be hard to be the lone ranger but you aren't there to support 18 other council people but 822,000 other citizens.

Again, we simply ask that you put more faith in your own power even in the face of obvious adversity. If the council sees you as not 'playing ball' well then you let the people know about it and they'll voice their frustrations at the poll.

Now we must explore the avenues available to possibly reverse the outcome and prevent the situation from happening again.

pearlstone

04-17-2006, 10:39 PM

AHS, I really do want to understand what you meant by "grey area surrounding isolated votes".

I care very deeply about this city and everyone in it. In an attempt to better educate myself in order to help others as a common citizen, I need to learn about the overall process itself.

I have no idea what an average day must be like for you in such a demanding public position, and I am really grateful that you chose to join the forum. With your assistance, I can learn and that means SO much to me!

RADIO TALK SHOW HOST

04-17-2006, 10:40 PM

what are you doing Saturday at 2 or 3pm am1530wecan@yahoo.com

AHS

04-18-2006, 07:53 AM

Ok, the "I'm not going to fall on my sword for every issue I happen to not be in complete agreement with" angle isn't being received very well. How about this:

This Nation, State, and City blur the separation issue daily. Here is an actual current example: In my District we are currently improving Hendricks Avenue (FYI, currently on time and on budget). As part of those improvements we are leasing for $1 per year a 50 car parking lot from a church. This parking is very much needed for the area. As part of the lease we made about $10,000 - $20,000 in improvements to the church's parking lot.

Compare and contrast that example to "The Gym" and let me know what you think.

Pearlstone,
I'll get to your question soon.

Thanks - Art

TheITSteve

04-18-2006, 08:04 AM

Good grief ... Either I don't get it or you don't get it. I know that you posted this before reading my last post. I hope you do read it but I feel certain we will still disagree.

For the record, no, there are no classes on government prior to taking office (maybe there should be). Why do I think you already knew that?

Someone please give me a reason to think that this site is not just a bunch of disgruntled, opinionated, singleminded do gooders.

Any takers, or does my online slaughter continue?

Art

I would agree that there are grey areas in some votes, however, I'd respectfully disagree on this particular issue. The separation of Church and State is something that I believe in very strongly, and by giving money to a church IMO directly violates this. I think money changing hands between a church and a government is a bad practice in general, and should be avoided.

Some have brought up the point that this will help a struggling neighborhood by providing a place for kids to go after school and on weekends. I would agree that these things are needed, but then let's build a city-owned community center.

Finally, I think that you shouldn't base you opinions of this site off of any one individual, but the concept of Jacksonville people discussing Jacksonville issues. Each person has their own views (some I agree with, some I don't), and that's why I spend so much time on this site. Actually, I think your voting record is pretty good, I just feel like we differ on this issue (and that's ok).

Gone North

04-18-2006, 08:28 AM

LORD ACTON'S GREAT QUOTED COMMENT WAS THAT ALL POWER CORRUPTS AND THAT ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY.

Councilman Shad you need to ask yourself the following, as should all council members- "Do I vote my conscience, do I vote based on facts?"

You were not elected to support only your friends, only your district. You are part of the total consolidated government. Your directive is to do what is best for the total city not just for your district. Certainly, you should have the district's interest and consider this interest in every vote. But to mealy mouth whine about the "gym" vote and then get called to task by me or anyone else and react the way you did is not leadership or responsible representation on the city council.

Do your job, vote your conscience, vote your beliefs.

You have access to and should understand the legislative intent of the NW Quadrant Economic Development Trust fund. Did you look it up or do any research, where does it discuss Recreation facilities? How many jobs does this produce?

I was told that you were rude and reacted strongly when someone disagreed with you. I was told you had a habit of hanging up on people and that you only looked out for your friends. Maybe this is not true.

Your reasoning or lack of it for your vote on this and then your response is an interesting indicator.

fsujax

04-18-2006, 09:48 AM

Where exactly is this Church? What road is that? It doesn't not look like a poor neighborhood to me. There are much worse than this. Even Springfield looks worse than those pics.

Suzanne Jenkins

04-18-2006, 10:19 AM

I agree with GovWonk's post! I like this forum and read it because of all the different opinions on the issues. The posts can be informative, funny, thought provoking and passionate. When there are passionate posts on issues, I try to understand the person's passion on the issue. That doesn't mean I will agree with it, I just try to see it from their point of view. It helps me round out the issues as I think about them. The First Timothy gym issue has ignited the passions in people on many levels.

My colleague Art Shad is a very smart man who never shies from debate especially when challenged. I have personally experienced this in committee and on council night meetings. I applaud him for responding to the emails and entering the debate on this issue, which is more than I have done. I would say his initial response regarding his vote, pretty much applies across the board. Whenever an idividual member decides to go against the vote of a district council member, the leadership of the council (pres & vp) and the mayor, it will be most likely be in vain and could cost you in the future regarding something in your district. Just as you each make judgement calls in your business and personal life and then justify them, no one is exempt. You weigh the issue against the outcome and live with the result.

If there are legalities surrounding the issue, the general counsel's office will weigh in if asked by a councilmember, which I understand through posts on here that CM Johnson has done. If there are those who want to pursue a court challenge, it has occurred on votes we have taken in the past, usually on land use and zoning issues, then there are avenues that are available to them.

The system is working like it should. If there are those unhappy with our votes, the things that are happening now will determine the final outcome of our action as a council. We are not perfect, just ordinary citizen's serving as a public servant trying to do the best for our district and the city as a whole.

AHS

04-18-2006, 10:59 AM

I think that in a case where we are getting something in return, I have no problem giving a little too. If they are leasing land to the city for construction purposes as a discounted rate ($1 seems discounted) and we are leaving them with a nice parkinglot... That doesnt bother me. If we were leaving them with a new building worth 1.1 million bucks, that would bother me.

Thank you for the response. Some are arguing that we are in fact getting something in return for the gym funding. Are the parking spaces in my actual example anymore important than a place for youngsters to congregate? Is it a dollar issue with $20,000 being Ok, but $1.1 million being too much?

I simply and sincerely put this out for consideration.

Oh yeah, GovWonk, You seem to be a particularly angry and rude person. Just an observation.

Art

fsujax

04-18-2006, 12:05 PM

Don't feel left out Downtownparks, I have called her (PLF) twice and never a response back.

AHS

04-18-2006, 12:30 PM

""This is a no-brainier when it comes to fiscal responsibility. We are actually probably making out like bandits considering how much the church could have made had they chosen to just rent the spots out themselves, or had they declined, the taxes lost by those area business going out of business.""

""But you bring up a great point about benifits to the city. Please tell us the benifits of using city funds to build this gym. How is the city making out? ""

Thanks for the feedback. I imagine if the church turned the parking lot into a profit making entity they would lose their tax free status on that parcel, so you would need to calculate that into your numbers. But, I was really trying to get feedback on the lease/improvements from the separation of church and state angle. Fiscally I certainly have no problem with the Hendricks/church lease.

As for the benefits of a gym to the city, I was simply recognizing that some will, and have, argued that it could be considered to provide a benefit by keeping youngsters off the street, etc. etc. Much the way some will argue that parking provides a benefit to the City thus justifying the improvements to church property near Hendricks.

Thanks again - Art

thelakelander

04-18-2006, 12:58 PM

As for the benefits of a gym to the city, I was simply recognizing that some will, and have, argued that it could be considered to provide a benefit by keeping youngsters off the street, etc. etc. Much the way some will argue that parking provides a benefit to the City thus justifying the improvements to church property near Hendricks.

Thanks again - Art

I'd love to hear that argument. It would definately hold more water if the church would not have the right to charge the public and the intended neighborhood was a struggling one, like Durkeeville, Brentwood, New Springfield, Arlington or East Jax. In the aerials I've seen, the Biscayne area appears to be vibrant and growing suburban section of town. Does anyone know if bus service will be implemented to provide access for the needy kids who live inside planning district 6?

Keith726

04-18-2006, 02:07 PM

Welcome AHS good to see you here.

The Voice

04-18-2006, 04:21 PM

Dear [name deleted],

When an issue like this has the support of the Mayor, Council President, Council Vice-President, and Chair of the Finance Committee, let me assure you that my vote is, and was, meaningless.

I chose to spend my political capital in ways that best serve the District I was elected to represent. I am sorry I lost your votes, but I know that I serve my District and this City with distinction. I am very proud of my record. I can be reached during business hours at 313-6852 or on my cell at 613-7289 to discuss this item further.

Let me begin by saying I have had my differences with CM Shad. Substantial and real issues regarding the cavilier way that he has managed his Chairmanship of the LUZ Committee. However, his point regarding this particular issue is spot on and his reasoning solid.

What he is saying is, that this thing was going to happen with or without him and there was absolutly no reason to piss off PLF, The Mayor or the leadership of the coucil when he certainly would need their help on other issues in the future. I applaud him for reading the landscape and understanding what no one here seems to.

Keith726

04-18-2006, 04:31 PM

You mean some of the people here.

RADIO TALK SHOW HOST

04-18-2006, 08:14 PM

I am really curious how others feel about Glorious Johnson's apology and is there any difference that she is an at large City councilperson. Did the system fail us because the "at large" should have pointed out that this wasn't a poor neighborhood, IT IS THEIR DISTRICT

The Voice

04-18-2006, 08:58 PM

So you support a 1.1 million dollar gift to the church? How do you justify it?

I dont think anyone here is saying the CM Shad, Jenkins, or anyone else wasnt being politically smart about thier desicion. From what I understand charges of racism came with any questions about the deal, so they no doubt saved themselves from being put in an uncomfortable postion from that angle too.

Regardless of poltical manuvering, this is still an outrageous use of city money. PLF should be hauled before a grand jury.

In a word, no.

Jimmy

04-18-2006, 09:32 PM

Councilwoman Johnson's apology is meaningless without further action. Councilwoman Felder should not be brought before a Grand Jury. She did what she thought was right. That doesn't make it right. The city could be facing a very expensive legal battle. Before that happens, someone in the Council needs to reverse course before it's too late, if it's not already.

RiversideGator

04-18-2006, 10:39 PM

Well, personally I think the "separation of church and state" is a concept completely foreign to the US Constitution. It is a phrase often bandied about by people but it is not rooted in the Constitution or the thinking of its framers. It is found nowhere in the Constitution and actually comes from a letter from Jefferson to a church years after the writing of the Constitution. The problem: Jefferson did not write the Constitution and was in fact in Paris at the time of its drafting.

My point is that the Constitution's 1st Amendment ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof") was designed to prohibit the FEDERAL Govt from establishing a national religion, like the Church Of England in the old country. This is a local government deciding to give some money to a church to set up a gym for the people in the adjacent neighborhoods. Is the church well connected? I am sure. Does this seem on the surface a little shady? Maybe. But, I personally dont see the problem with it as long as the gym is open the general public (although I agree the price seems a little steep). Just because a church and government intersect doesnt mean there is a Constitutional violation either.

JaxInvestor

04-18-2006, 10:54 PM

RADIO TALK SHOW HOST

04-18-2006, 10:58 PM

[QUOTE=Suzanne Jenkins].
If there are legalities surrounding the issue, the general counsel's office will weigh in if asked by a councilmember, which I understand through posts on here that CM Johnson has done. If there are those who want to pursue a court challenge, it has occurred on votes we have taken in the past, usually on land use and zoning issues, then there are avenues that are available to them.

The system is working like it should. QUOTE]
I very respectfully disagree with Suzanne Jenkins here. It is General councils' job to decide whether or not things are legal when these bills are drafted
AND
RICK MULLANEY is king in his own mind (in my humble opinion)anyway. The general councils office can't have it both ways. It can't reverse a school board decision about bussing and bus contracts against the will of the board standing up for the legalities of the decision, Then say its not their fault when legally this seems wrong, and let people act like its only general councils job to do whats right when its convienent for Rick the soon to be unemployed ___ick (HOPEFULLY)
Vote for anyone for Mayor who you believe is going to fire RICK
REMEMBER SHIPYARDS
The decision not to sue the contractor who screwed up Mathews bridge
promising THE SAME advertising dollar to two different people (Jags, FL-Ga)
The decision not to sue Balfour Beatty (fuller warren)
Better in Better jax plan voter summary (for it or not laws where written with intent to stop this)
The decision to proclaim Gen. Frier as ethical (now working for company paid millions to)
NOW THIS
MORE NOT LISTED. UNFORTUNATLY AT LEAST ONE EVERY MONTH
when my daughters started speaking at city council meetings 2years ago they spoke for an entire summer why general council should be elected

Lunican

04-18-2006, 11:33 PM

RiversideGator: Doesn't it violate the Florida Constitution?

pearlstone

04-19-2006, 07:17 AM

My issue has never been the church/state issue. I think that at a time when the city government is poor mouthing everything, 1.1 mil to a church in a good neighborhood is ludicris.

That pretty much sums it up in my book.

Jimmy

04-19-2006, 08:07 AM

Even if the US constitution is wishy-washy when it comes to how far the establishment clause goes to protect citizens from church/state collusion, the Florida constitution is not wishy-washy at all.

SECTION 3. Religious freedom.--There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

This couldn't be written more clearly. The City of Jacksonville is a political subdivision of the State of Florida. Our elected officials are bound by the Florida constitution. Anytime the State gives money to a church, we have to exercise a great deal of oversight to be certain that the public money is being used by the church for a public purpose. This is why we have an Office of Faith and Community-Based Initiatives. To keep an eye on the programs within religious institutions that are getting public money. If the gym deal were under the scrutiny of Pete Jackson and his Office, I would feel a little better about it.

This is a multi-faceted debate. There are so many nooks and crannies where people of good conscience can disagree. One is the separation issue. Another is the political fire-storm that surrounds Councilwoman Felder (which encompasses race, class, and other factors). There's a legalistic issue concerning the council breaking its own rules and ram-rodding this through without sufficient public notice. Questions linger about the land-sale a few years ago.

In the scheme of things, it's just $1.1M. It's a drop in the bucket. What concerns me is that if we (the City) were going to build a public gym, we should have had an RFP process to seek other bids. Maybe another church would have been a better location? Maybe an abandoned building closer to the urban core would have been a better place? The problem is, we never gave anyone else a chance to bid on the RFP because there never was such a process.

The church I grew up in needs a new roof. The people who go there are raising the money for it. Sometimes the community meets in the church to talk about local issues of concern. Scout troops meet there. For all intents and purposes, the building has both public and religious uses. Should my little church get a new roof at public expense? And why not? Because it would be unconstitutional.

I think that people of faith can do the work of government -- they've been doing it more or less successfully for over 200 years in this country. I do believe that people of God can do the work of the people. Oversight is needed, though, to make sure public money goes to support a public purpose anytime there is a transfer from the public treasury to the coffers of any church, temple, or mosque. Where is the oversight in this deal?

Springfieldian

04-19-2006, 09:38 AM

When I look at the purpose given for the funds, I wonder if there's already an an organization (http://www.bgcnf.org/) whose mission is "To inspire and enable all young people, especially those from disadvantaged circumstances, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens." and whom nobody would have complained about getting these funds to build a gym in the same area. Boy, wouldn't that be great.

Jimmy

04-19-2006, 09:49 AM

It occurs to me that the YMCA runs gyms as part of their Christian ministry. They're very good at it. Maybe the YMCA should have entered talks with 1st Timothy to install and run a gym in that location.

Springfieldian

04-19-2006, 09:57 AM

Downtownparks,
There are plenty of underserviced and underserved children in the 32218 zip code and the Boys' and Girls' Clubs runs van service. The closest B&G facility to the Northside is the one we have at 10th and Liberty in Springfield (where the B&G Clubs first entered Jacksonville in 1962).

RiversideGator

04-19-2006, 10:21 AM

i would want to make sure you would feel the same way if it was the Islamic Center of Northeast Florida or the Hindu Society of NE Florida that were getting the taxpayer dollars?

I would be hesitant to support this as I am a Christian. However, none of this money should be used for the purposes of proselytizing people anyway, no matter who gets it.

RiversideGator: Doesn't it violate the Florida Constitution?

Possibly. To be honest, I forgot completely about the FL Constitution about 20 minutes after I finished the Bar Exam.

Even if the US constitution is wishy-washy when it comes to how far the establishment clause goes to protect citizens from church/state collusion, the Florida constitution is not wishy-washy at all.

SECTION 3. Religious freedom.--There shall be no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting or penalizing the free exercise thereof. Religious freedom shall not justify practices inconsistent with public morals, peace or safety. No revenue of the state or any political subdivision or agency thereof shall ever be taken from the public treasury directly or indirectly in aid of any church, sect, or religious denomination or in aid of any sectarian institution.

This couldn't be written more clearly. The City of Jacksonville is a political subdivision of the State of Florida. Our elected officials are bound by the Florida constitution. Anytime the State gives money to a church, we have to exercise a great deal of oversight to be certain that the public money is being used by the church for a public purpose.

The key phrase here is "in aid of any church". Is this money being used to aid the church or is it being used to create a community center/gym which happens to be on church grounds? This is the question. Again, I think this appears a bit shady and this neighborhood looks pretty nice, but I am just saying that it may not be illegal. Bad idea maybe, illegal maybe not.

Jimmy

04-19-2006, 10:25 AM

I love debating issues with other lawyers. There are at least as many "right" answers as there are lawyers in the conversation. It may well not be illegal at all. I guess it all depends on who holds the title to the gym. Well-built gyms will last a long time. If the construction of same adds value to the church's holdings, then I think it's in aid of the church.

Can I go work out there at 11:00 a.m. on Sunday? I can use other public park facilities at that time, so I would think I should be able to use this public gym then, too. (If I weren't already busy at that time on Sundays... it's all a hypothetical.)

Timkin

04-19-2006, 03:59 PM

Councilman Shad....

Welcome to Metro E-mpire Jax! We probably are opinionated and do-gooders and all that. I for one am glad you decided to become a part of this forum.
I know you know where my main topic of interest is ....Public School Number Four, which in my opinion , if not for you, would likely be being demolished as we speak. So here is one do-gooder , opinionated person who appreciates your efforts.

BTW I was hoping Investor's shark had actually bitten Mayors head off...seems now his head is blinking....sort of reminds me of Pac Man or something...hehe gives me a headache !!! J/K Investor!!! :D

Again.....Welcome Councilman Shad. We are glad to have you with us.

Charleston native

04-19-2006, 06:19 PM

Guys (and ladies :D ), I have to say this has been a fascinating debate. From after reading Riverside's and Jimmy's remarks in the last page, I have to say that the final consensus on the gym issue is a toss-up for me, but I'm still leaning to the church's side. The Florida Constitution is indeed clear on the state or any sub-government level of the state giving "aid" to a church, but as said before, this is a question of whether this qualifies as aid or not.

Since this is such a shady deal, it probably was not the correct thing to do, even if it is not illegal. It raises too many questions from multiple angles. However, you could read into this gym as being "indirect aid" for the church. The church is going to have a new, state-of-the-art facility which will boost its property value, increase its exposure and affluence in the community, and provide the potential for new members. It's a stretch, I know, but it is a legal exercise which could be demonstrated in any court. Personally Riverside, as a fellow Christian, I agree with you. I don't see an immediate problem with this situation, but it definitely wasn't handled correctly, and it is indeed shady.

Gone North

04-19-2006, 07:02 PM

For a grant from the city, are they going to have to provide an annual audit or a project audit showing how the funds from the Recreation account are spent?

What about the grant from the Trust Fund, are they going to have to show how many jobs they are producing.

And of the money that is charged for use of the facility, are they going to comingle it with Church Funds, how are they going to pay for any repairs that are needed, will there be a maintenance account.

If they take in more than they need to operate or maintain, will the excess funds revert to the city?

Who is going to write up the contract and who is going to maintain and enforce the provisions. Remember what happened at the Shipyards?

This project has pork barrel written all over it.

Has anyone asked the general counsel for a legal opinion on this? Do they need to, doesnt his staff draw up all the bills that go through City Council?
Dont they advise the council on the legality of a requested bill?

How does the Mayor, the Pres of City Council, or the City Attorney respond when asked these questions.

Oh well, could be worse. Could be taking all the cities's social service program funds to distribute books to four year olds.

I am beginning to think that I live in an alternative universe!

whitey

04-19-2006, 08:25 PM

"When an issue like this has the support of the Mayor, Council President, Council Vice-President, and Chair of the Finance Committee, let me assure you that my vote is, and was, meaningless."

So basically, since other people were for it, you are for it. No reason to think for yourself on how you should vote on this particular issue or what would your constituents want you to do? This is truly pathetic, an elected official telling us that his vote wouldn't matter.

I hope everyone who would vote for you in the next election takes the same attitude and says

"You know I was going to vote for Art today but the neighbors voted this morning for his opponent, so our votes are meaningless, we'll just vote for his opponent also."

I don't see how any council member can honestly vote for this project, regardless of whether it's built on a church property or anywhere else for that matter. Half of the money is from the NW Development fund, I have yet to see how this project meets the criteria to be eligible for funds from that particular program.

As for Pat Locket Felder, my mother says if you can't say anything nice...

Off topic, I hope that Lakelander's commuter rail idea somehow gets adopted, and soon, because $60 in gas for 3/4 of a tank sucks.

02Roadking

04-20-2006, 12:24 AM

My 2 cents:
Wonks Pork Barrel terminology sums it up pretty well. This really is just one of the many things that go on in all levels of government all the time. Good or bad, wrong or right, its become commonplace. Yeah, it is sad, but its how things get done. Give me this now and i'll give you something you want later. When you read about the multi millions in pork barrel projects at the national level it can make your head spin, and this process trickles right on down to our local level. Sit down sometime and read a City Council agenda. Always seems to have a few items that make you want to Hmmmmmm.
If and when PLF makes it to her higher office aspirations, I hope she will see fit to move some state and federal money back to this district for the good of her people...

02Roadking

04-21-2006, 10:26 AM

From the Jaxdailyrecord.com this morning:

• Council member Daniel Davis laid out a pretty convincing argument in response to a citizen’s complaint about City money helping pay to build a gym at First Timothy Baptist Church. Complaints have centered around the City’s possible interference in the private marketplace and possible church-and-state-separation issues. But Davis explained his support for the gym as follows: “Children in these poor neighborhoods don’t care if they are playing basketball in a gym on City property or on private property. They are just glad to be in a good environment... A good thing is happening in their community. I’d vote for it again.”

JaxInvestor

04-21-2006, 10:32 AM

a lack of investigative journalism on the part of JaxDailyRecord...this gym is not proposed for a poor neighborhood. and no matter how many times Davis says this, it wouldn't be true. not convincing at all Daniel Davis.

Lunican

04-21-2006, 11:05 AM

He is right, the kids don't care, but that is why they haven't been elected to lead and manage the city.

Jimmy

04-21-2006, 11:45 AM

I would pause to cosider Davis's point, if it was genuine. He knows as well as we do that most people in this city won't actually look up where the gym is being built. He's counting on ignorance to make himself look good to all the "poor little black children" on the northside. And more importantly, to their parents. This, along with the Cecil issue, are the opening notes of his 2011 mayoral campaign -- mark my words.

TheITSteve

04-21-2006, 12:57 PM

This, along with the Cecil issue, are the opening notes of his 2011 mayoral campaign -- mark my words.

I don't think we will have to worry about a 2011 campaign, as long as Peyton is not reelected. Frankly if someone like Weinstein is elected, I truly believe we can have a good period of prosperity and fiscal responsibility.

Jimmy

04-21-2006, 12:59 PM

From your fingers to God's eyes...

The Voice

04-21-2006, 01:10 PM

I don't think we will have to worry about a 2011 campaign, as long as Peyton is not reelected. Frankly if someone like Weinstein is elected, I truly believe we can have a good period of prosperity and fiscal responsibility.

Jimmy has a good read on this. CM Davis has already made stements in the FTU and elsewhere that he is looking at running for Mayor. Despite his age, were he to think Peyton beatable he certainly would be making the moves to run.

He currently is not doing so.

Weinstein is, but is getting a lukewarm, at best, reception from all but a handfull of the funders he would need to become viable. Face it folks no matter how we feel, unless Herb gets sick, its Mayor John for another five years.

TheITSteve

04-21-2006, 02:36 PM

Jimmy has a good read on this. CM Davis has already made stements in the FTU and elsewhere that he is looking at running for Mayor. Despite his age, were he to think Peyton beatable he certainly would be making the moves to run.

He currently is not doing so.

Weinstein is, but is getting a lukewarm, at best, reception from all but a handfull of the funders he would need to become viable. Face it folks no matter how we feel, unless Herb gets sick, its Mayor John for another five years.

I don't know if I agree with that. Weinstein said that he would not run unless he thought he has a realistic shot at willing, and for that, he has said that he would need $1 million, which in recent conversations I've had with him, he seems to believe that he can get.

Let's be honest, while Hightower is still very behind Peyton, much of the big republican donors are not (Toney Sleiman is one of those donors)

The Voice

04-21-2006, 03:42 PM

I don't know if I agree with that. Weinstein said that he would not run unless he thought he has a realistic shot at willing, and for that, he has said that he would need $1 million, which in recent conversations I've had with him, he seems to believe that he can get.

Let's be honest, while Hightower is still very behind Peyton, much of the big republican donors are not (Toney Sleiman is one of those donors)

Peyton has already raised $1.1 m and could triple that before election day. He also has a net worth of over $15 m. and can legally loan his campaign as much of that as he chooses.

Just check Peyton's campaign finance report (http://www.voterfocus.com/ws/wscand/candidate_pr.php?op=rp_all&e=3&c=duval&ca=20&cname=John%20Peyton&coffice=Mayor&rellevel=4) and you will see 95% of the major Republican donors and half of the Democrats.

While money alone will not win this thing, Mike will be at a significant disadvantge in that area. Also, Peyton will have the support of the local party apparatus, which is formidible. Just ask Glover.

Finally, Mike has since his last run for Mayor conducted "listening tours" to test if anyone was interested in backing him for State Rep., State Senator, Public Defender and State Attorney. He would have received all the help he needed for the last two and chose not to run. Most folks that have been down this path with him are just flat worn out by these "What do you think" sessions with him and just wish that he would make up his mind. and do something.

Anything.

So my hope is that Mike does run. He will lose and we all will have a lot more time to do what we really want to.

RiversideGator

04-21-2006, 03:51 PM

Another problem with Weinstein is that he is being so wishy washy. Who is going to want to donate to someone who may or may not run?? I made this mistake by donating to Giuliani to run against Hilary in NY and Giuliani backed out and, needless to say, did not return the campaign donations. Weinstein needs to fish or cut bait. No one likes a vacillator.

TheITSteve

04-21-2006, 03:54 PM

However, with money in a campaign, there come a point of dimishing returns - you can only spend so much money in a campaign season. Peyton in the end will probably raise more money, but like you said, it really doesn't matter, as long as you get the name out there.

I guess we will have to agree to disagre on this - personally I think Weinstein has a very good chance at winning. If you think about all of the things that people have been pissed with Peyton about, they all touch a different demographic (Courthouse, Cecil Field, Jaguars, Shipyards, and let's not forget the most important one: The Budget). He a ruined a very healthy budget, and trust me, the truth will come out about it.

TheITSteve

04-21-2006, 03:55 PM

Gone North

04-21-2006, 07:13 PM

This web site is full of people who understand Jacksonville City Government and its current dysfunctioning under Peyton. So Weinstein or whomever would run next year would get a fair hearing from people who read this web site.

The greater public is not aware of the continuous foul ups. The TU does not report city news in depth, they dont have any staff other then Littlepage who have an institutional history on city government.

Weinstein would make a great Mayor, but how does he reach the people who are not aware of what is going on in city government.

vicupstate

04-23-2006, 09:16 PM

The difference is, Giuliani said he would run, and then he didn't. Weinstein NEVER said he would run, just that he has been thinking about it.

Correct indeed, Steve. A very important difference. Your point about dimishing returns is dead-on as well. How many direct mails will someone get from Peyton before they just ignore them? A lot less than 2 million ddollars can buy,- that's how many.

If Weinstein was so busy testing the waters for all those offices, it never made it to print or broadcast media to speak of, so the public at large is not aware of it. Thus, no real damage.

Folks, I realize we are all eager for a new mayor, but it is entirely TOO early to declare for Mayor. The minute Weinstein or anyone else declares officially, they open themselves up for arrows from Peyton. The 2006 elections are still months away. Weinstein can't wait forever, but he can still wait awhile yet.

It's good to know Peyton has a $15mm net worth, that's about half the deficit he has created.

It amazes me that no one in this forum thinks Peyton is doing a good or even FAIR job, yet some seem to think his money alone will save him. How cynical can you be.

The mayor's race is not 50 states, or even all of Florida, it is one county. As for asking Glover, all Weinstein has to do is get all of Glover's votes and 5 percentage points from Peyton, and Peyton is an ex-mayor. Not an unsurmountable task by any means.