City unveils Jaguars stadium plan

[Ken_FSU]

The cost of milling and resurfacing Lot J will be an estimated $933,000 and Lot D will have a $453,000 cost. The estimated expense of cleaning 1,500 feet of drainage pipe along the south side of the stadium and across the top portion of Lot J will be $81,000, Perry said.

https://www.jacksonville.com/story/news/local/2024/06/04/jacksonville-stadium-agreement-with-jaguars-would-repave-parking-lots/73968379007/

Aren't we still expecting an entertainment district deal for Lot J, or is the location expected to change? Not sure why'd we spend this money resurfacing a lot that may not exist in the near-term.

Weird. Though, with no parking solution currently in place for the full Shipyards project under construction, and expected parking impacts from construction, I wonder if it wouldn't make more sense to keep Lot J as surface parking in near-term and start building the entertainment district on the lots above it like (P, N, M, etc.) or even considering the Fairgrounds given that UF seems to be leaning toward other sites. Would be very, very expensive to replace Lot J with structured parking.

Also, somewhat related side question. Has anyone heard any more details of what is being considered in terms of the $9 million conversion of the Daily's Place into "Expo Space." Very curious what that looks like in practice, how it fits into overall event strategy, and whether the benefits and frequency of use outweigh keeping it as a community football field.

[Joey Mackey]

Here it is, in all of its glory, https://jaxcityc.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6722014&GUID=DF4D576E-275C-4D4D-A3F2-28235A51A483&Options=ID You will need to click on 2024-904 On File.pdf hyperlink and download the 336 page document.

I will be updating this comment periodically as I get through it, but the first thing I wanted to check out is the "London" situation. The bulk of that agreement appears to be on page 197. Starting point, all home games must be played in the renovated stadium. Now for the exceptions: During a 17-game regular season (current schedule) the Jags are entitled to play one home game offsite each year.  (Presumably that's the annual home game at Wembley Stadium in London). Additionally, the Jags are entitled to play an additional home (for a total of two) once every four years. (I have no clue where that second home game would be played, but I'd guess somewhere in London). So in a four-year period under the 17-game season, the Jags would play in Jacksonville a total of 29 games. If the NFL ever approves an 18 game season (which can't happen until at least 2030 with a new CBA) the Jags are still entitled to play one home game offsite each year and they can play an additional home game offsite twice every four years, with a caveat that the additional offsite home game can't happen in back-to-back years. So in a four-year period under the 18-game season, the Jags would play in Jacksonville for a total of 30 games. For context, under the 16 game season, the Jags played a total of 28 home games in Jacksonville in any four year period.

[Ken_FSU]

Looking forward to digging into all the documents, thanks for sharing.

Bummed to see the CBA potentially being negotiated separately/after the stadium.

It's the best thing about the deal, and I'd hate to see it get tied up in political hell.

[thelakelander]

Stadium only deals always result in the taxpayer being on the super short end of the stick. CBAs are normally something cities want included in stadium deals. Only in Jax would we strip out the best part of the deal over local politics. Hopefully, the council doesn't screw the pooch with this one. Politics aside, its okay for Jaxsons to win once in a while.

[jaxlongtimer]

Think about this... the U2C will cost local taxpayers more than double the amount of the City's portion of the CBA.  Yet, City leaders don't question that wasteful project but beat the heck out of the CBA.  This is just crazy!

[thelakelander]

Totally crazy indeed.

[marcuscnelson]

Daily Record coverage on the clock starting on the deal.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2024/jun/11/legislation-for-proposed-stadium-of-the-future-meets-deadline-for-potential-council-vote-june-25/

Thought this bit from Salem was interesting:

He said he also had concerns about plans to include $1 million for each of the 14 Council districts to spend on parks.

“We allocated $100 million for parks at the end of the last year or two, and much of that money has not even been spent yet,” he said. “So we have a lot of money going towards parks, and we have so many critical needs around this committee that I’d like to see that further debated.”

[Joey Mackey]

Reading through the Community Benefits Agreement (pgs 305-310), I do have some questions that maybe someone here can answer.

For the Eastside neighborhood (the agreement includes a convenient map of its boundaries on pg 319), the deal is basically the City will commit $30,000,000 dollars to the Eastside Strategic Focus which will be disbursed within two years after the Stadium Lease is signed. The Jags will commit $2,500,000 dollars to the Eastside Strategic Focus every year for 30 years (for a total of $75,000,000). A quick injection of cash and then a steady stream of supporting cash, I think that's a pretty good idea.

My question is what is this money actually going to be spent on? The Eastside Strategic Focus is defined in the agreement pretty broadly. It reads "shall mean economic development, affordable housing, and the mitigation of homelessness in the Eastside." That all sounds good on paper, but how is that actually accomplished? Is the City going to build a new homeless shelter in the Eastside to mitigate homelessness? Is the City going to subsidize the construction of affordable housing the Eastside? Is the City going to give cash grants to local restaurants and retail in the Eastside to stimulate economic development? I'd imagine the worst thing that could happen is that this money is used to pay people's exorbitant salaries to conduct "studies" to figure out how the money should be spent. I have a similar question about the Countywide Strategic Focus program, but the answer should apply to both. I appreciate any insight.

[thelakelander]

From my understanding, a nonprofit entity independent of the city with Eastside stakeholders playing a leadership role, will be established. There's actually a public meeting in the Eastside this afternoon/evening to provide in greater detail on what the Eastside's project plans are. I know that tangible investment in APR, it's infrastructure, businesses and buildings are one of the focuses. 

The goal for APR is for it to be as vibrant as Five Points or San Marco Square but retaining the neighborhood culture and local business characteristics.

Additional investment in ongoing successful homeownership and affordable housing programs could be other areas of focus. I'll follow-up and add the time and location info.

[Joey Mackey]

I think that is a great idea, if actual Eastside residents (or people connected to the neighborhood) are in charge of spending the money, they will be incentivized to actually improve their neighborhood. I really hope APR becomes something like Five Points or San Marco Square. It would be a great place to stop before and after Shrimp/Iceman/Jags games.

[jaxlongtimer]

I think that is a great idea, if actual Eastside residents (or people connected to the neighborhood) are in charge of spending the money, they will be incentivized to actually improve their neighborhood. I really hope APR becomes something like Five Points or San Marco Square. It would be a great place to stop before and after Shrimp/Iceman/Jags games.

I have no problem with residents prioritizing how to spend the money but do have concerns about oversight.  Most people are not skilled in managing such large amounts of money and tend to overspend or just throw money at things without making sure they get the value they are paying for.  Kind of like lottery winners or athletes coming into a lot of money and thinking it will last forever.  The process needs to ensure judicious spending or people are going to be disappointed with the results.  This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and residents can't afford to blow it.

[Joey Mackey]

I am sure there are at least a handful of Eastside residents who have experience in overseeing large amounts of money to ensure that the money is wisely spent that can serve on the board. I would be worried that the more "oversight" from people who have nothing to do with the Eastside neighborhood would actually cause inefficiencies because they have no working knowledge of how the neighborhood actually operates on the ground level. (e.g. the "oversight" person demanding a new trendy taco restaurant be built, because, you know, everyone loves tacos, instead of a restaurant that reflects the actual neighborhood. Maybe it is tacos, idk) Projects could be incorrectly implemented, and both residents and potential future visiting customers (i.e. me) would lose out on the benefits.

[thelakelander]

I gave a high level overview but this isn't giving people a free check or something that doesn't have proper fiscal checks and balances. However, it's well known that the fastest path to really wasting public money and not achieving the intended results, is not having adequate community representation at the decision making table.

[jaxlongtimer]

I gave a high level overview but this isn't giving people a free check or something that doesn't have proper fiscal checks and balances. However, it's well known that the fastest path to really wasting public money and not achieving the intended results, is not having adequate community representation at the decision making table.

To be clarify, I don't think Eastside residents would benefit on spending millions to bring U2C or the Oreleck to their neighborhood.  They, too, should want checks and balances on such project ideas.  That is my point mainly.  Don't go chasing frivolous, non-sustainable or sexy projects just because you have deep pockets.  We have enough of that in the City at large.  The main caution, is unlike the City at large that manages to somehow refill its coffers with dollars for wasteful projects, the Eastside might not have that luxury.

[thelakelander]

The Eastside has a plan and has already been implementing things on a smaller scale, given the resources at hand. The CBA allows them to scale up that work up. Pretty exciting if council doesn't kill it.