At Large City Council Candidates Respond to RAP Questionnaire

Riverside Avondale Preservation, in partnership with Springfield Preservation and Restoration, Greenscape and The City Beautiful Coalition (formerly JaxPride), sent questionnaires to all candidates seeking At Large City Council seats. The questionnaires went out last Thursday and were due back on the 16th. We are sharing the answers with our members. (The questionnaire went to all the candidates in opposed races, but not to the write-in candidates.)

The questionnaire was mailed to the following At Large candidates:

At Large Group 1: Steven Burnett, Kimberly Daniels, and David A. Taylor. Answers provided by Mr. Burnett and Mr. Taylor are posted below. At Large Group 2: John Crescimbeni, Paul Martinez, Tom Patton and Vince Serrano. None of the Group 2 candidates returned their questionnaires. At Large Group 4: Greg Anderson, Juan M. Diaz, and Jim Robinson. None of the Group 4 candidates returned their questionnaires. At Large Group 5: Fred Engness, Donald Foy, Sean Hall, Robin Lumb, Robin Rukab, and Michelle Tappouni. Answers provided by Mr. Lumb are posted below.

Question 1: What are your top three proposals to enhance the visual appearance of the City?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

1. Demand that we take care of the public properties the city controls.2. Make it easier for citizens to help. Currently the requirements for insurance and other bureaucratic demands strike me as counterproductive.3. Ask for code enforcement to ensure that they are not just responding to complaints but are proactively encouraging property owners to comply. Note that I did not say always issue a citation. They should be helpful to citizens both those with compliance issues as well as those complaining.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

A. Mandate additional landscaping requirements and encourage such for commercial development projects as part of the building, permit application, and inspection process.B. Enforce city sign ordinanceC. Go back to having our city’s parks and right of ways mowed twice monthly.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Strengthen the property code in a manner that will require a higher level
of maintenance for residential and commercial exteriors and that will discourage such practices as allowing inoperable motor vehicles to be stored indefinitely on residential property, aggressively enforce anti-littering laws and encourage additional tree plantings along the right-of-way, especially in residential neighborhoods.

Question 2: The Jacksonville Civic Council has recommended establishment of a Downtown Improvement Authority, which would focus on downtown revitalization, with powers and authority similar to other independent authorities in the City. NAIOP of Northeast Florida has made a similar recommendation. What is your position on this proposed Authority?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

I got reminded recently when I was supporting the creation of a DDA of the bureaucracy that came with the last one which lead to its doom. We must stay true to consolidation and not duplicate or layer bureaucracy. Seems Downtown Vision is not able to do it? The creation of JEDC weakened
the Tax Increment Districts that were a good solution to areas of the consolidated city having issues since they took them over and weakened the local boards that had controlled them. I think JEDC is the problem and believe the way to solve Downtown is with a tax increment district along the current boundaries proposed for DDA and ensuring that district is autonomous from JEDC. In reality we have several urban areas such as Riverside, Avondale, San Marco, the Beaches that dilute what in most cities goes to the city center, which is what we call Downtown. It is hard to force development but instead need to develop a climate where positive change can grow. I believe the tax increment district would do that better than a reincarnation of DDA. 

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

I would support such in theory.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

I would favor a properly constituted authority that had responsibility for overseeing and coordinating downtown improvements and redevelopment.

Question 3: Will you actively resist any attempts to weaken the City’s current sign regulations found in the Ordinance Code and Charter, either at the local level or by preemption legislation in the Florida Legislature?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

No. I think the sign ordnance needs to be simplified! I am a best practices sort of person. I would search for a locality that has a functional sign regulations that does essentially what we want which is prevent visual blight but so you don’t have to have an attorney as a business owner to figure out what you can do.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

No, I do not plan to.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Yes. I believe the City’s sign laws are a settled matter. Also, because I continue to be involved with the Jacksonville Jaycees Public Service Bench Project and once represented an outdoor advertising company I would recuse myself from any vote involving off-site signs in order to avoid any suggestion of a conflict.  As for any action of the Florida legislature, I would expect them to exempt Jacksonville by virtue of our having resolved the matter 20 years ago.

Question 4: In Jacksonville, enforcement of the City’s codes regarding signs, tree and landscape protection and property safety is largely complaint driven, resulting in an inefficient, haphazard enforcement, as code enforcement officers drive past violations to cite the property about which there was a complaint. Do you support a proactive, systematic method of code enforcement?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

Yes. I would like code enforcement to enforce laws and take charge of their areas without just waiting for complaints. Too many times those complaints come from people that have an “axe to grind”. Code Enforcement should issue warnings and advice before citations unless it is a real hazard requiring immediate remediation. The ideal code enforcement officer to me would ride their area and be known by its residents. Overall this is another area we do a poor job of enforcing the regulations on the books and then want to add more to solve that basic problem. A good model is the Agricultural County Rep of being helpful to citizens.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

Yes.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Yes. If necessary I would even favor the use of private code enforcement contractors properly trained and regulated – who would operate within assigned areas to proactively identify code violations. While they would be paid in part by a percentage of any fine collected, they would be prohibited from issuing a citation until first providing a written warning explaining the violation to the property owner in detail and providing a reasonable period of time for remediation and correction.

Question 5: The City's Tree Protection Ordinance protects certain trees, depending on size, species and location on the property. It also requires mitigation when protected trees are removed. There is also a Tree Protection amendment to the City's Charter, which was passed overwhelmingly by voter referendum in 2000. The City's Landscape Ordinance sets certain minimum landscape standards when property is being developed. Will you actively fight any attempts to weaken the City's Landscape and Tree Protection Ordinances?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

Yes. I believe in quality development and support efforts to encourage it such as the Tree Ordinance.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

No, but I would consider exceptions on a case by case basis.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Yes. I support the existing ordinances that protect trees and establish minimum landscape standards.

Question 6: The City's Ordinance Code and Charter require that when protected trees are removed and replacement trees cannot be planted, a contribution must be made to the City's Tree Protection Trust Fund. This fund is used to plant trees on public property to mitigate the impact of trees removed for development elsewhere. Use of the Fund monies for any other purpose could put the Fund in legal jeopardy. Will you oppose any attempts to use Tree Fund monies for any purpose other than tree planting?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

Yes. I do not like how currently mitigation money can be collected in one area of this large city and spent in another. I would like to see more equitable distribution of those funds.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

Yes.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Yes. Tree Fund monies need to be used for tree planting only.

Question 7: In designated historical districts, should City buildings and properties comply with the design and performance standards and development criteria imposed upon other buildings and properties in the district?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

Yes. The city should never exempt itself from laws it makes. Those laws need to be uniformly enforced.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

No. While it would be aesthetically pleasing to mandate such, I would not impose such on existing properties.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Yes. City owned buildings and properties inside any Historic District should comply with the same standards imposed on private property owners. For example, I thought it was a mistake when the City abandoned its practice of using the hexagonal paver pattern when pouring need sidewalks inside the Historic District.

Question 8: Do you support the 2030 Mobility Plan prepared by the City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

No. The spread in fee amounts are not enough to encourage infill - the stated goal. I would rather see impact fees that are uniform for every property owner. As for infilling we need to incentivize that with less complicated permitting of redevelopment as well as ad valorem relief for redeveloped properties to get infill to work.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

Generally, yes. However, the devil is in the details, which are still being worked out. If the numbers make sense, then yes. If they don’t make sense, then no.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

I am not familiar with the plan in detail and therefore cannot provide you with an all encompassing “yes” or “no” answer, especially with a limit of 100 words for clarification. Some of the goals of Florida’s Community Renewal Act (SB 360) are laudable, but if the expectation is for significant public spending for such items as light and fixed rail using any general revenues then I doubt we will have the funds necessary for these kinds of infrastructure projects.

Question 9: Do you support the continued funding of a position for an historical preservation code enforcement officer?
Steve Burnett (At Large Group 1):

No. I believe that roll is better filled as in Charleston SC with the Historic Preservation Society and regular Code Enforcement Officers.

David Taylor (At Large Group 1)

No, we don’t need a specialized code enforcement officer for such. All code enforcement officers should be trained in this area.

Robin Lumb (At Large Group 2)

Yes. I also support the continued funding within the Planning Department of professional planners with specialized knowledge in the area of historic preservation and the requirements of the City’s Historic Preservation ordinance.   These professionals constitute the backbone of the historic preservation effort.