Downtown Investment Authority

Office of Economic Development

City Hall at St. James. 1st Floor, Lynwood Roberts Room located at 117 West Duval St. Wednesday, December 12, 2012 - 2:00 p.m.

Members: Donald Harris, Chairman Oliver Barakat, Vice Chair James “Jim” Bailey, Jr., Secretary Antonio “Tony” Allegretti, Board Member Donald “Don” Shea, Board Member Kamaria “Kay” Harper, Board Member Melody S. Bishop, Board Member Paul Perez, Board Member Robert Clements, Board Member

Staff Distribution: Jason Gabriel, Office of General Counsel Paul Crawford, OED Acting ED Eric Lindstrom, DIA Staff Jack Shad, Public Parking Officer David DeCamp, Public Information Office Michelle Stephens, Recording Secretary

I.

CALL TO ORDER – Chairman Harris Pledge of Allegiance

II.

ACTION ITEMS - Chairman Harris Approval of the November 14, 2012 DIA Meeting Minutes Approval of the November 20, 2012 DIA CRA Committee Meeting Minutes Approval of the November 27, 2012 DIA Special Meeting Minutes Request for Submittal of Speaker Cards

III.

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE – Chairman Harris  ORD 2012-730, New Supervisor of Elections Bldg.  ORD 2012-703, Pope and Land  ORD 2012-680, DIA CEO Qualifications and Criteria  ORD 2012-674, Downtown Parking  ORD 2012-657, Bostwick Building

IV.

COMMITTEES DIA CEO Search Firm – Don Shea CRA Committee – Melody Bishop

V.

DIA AUTHORITY AND PROCESS – Jason Gabriel

VI.

DOWNTOWN BRIEFING– Chairman Harris Hemming Plaza – Council Member Denise Lee, Council District 8 Branding – Tony Allegretti

DIA Agenda 12/12/2012 Page 2

VII.

OLD BUSINESS - Chairman Harris

VIII.

NEW BUSINESS – Chairman Harris

IX.

PUBLIC COMMENTS – Chairman Harris

X.

ADJOURNMENT – Chairman Harris Next Scheduled Meeting: Wednesday, January 12, 2012 at 2:00 pm – Ed Ball, 8th Floor BR 851

DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2012 – 2:00 P.M.

II. ACTION ITEM APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 14, 2012 MEETING MINUTES

Office of Economic Development

Downtown Investment Authority Ed Ball Building, 214 N. Hogan St., 8th Floor Board Room 851 Hall Wednesday, November 14, 2012 – 2:00 p.m.

MEETING MINUTES Board Members Present: Chairman D. Harris, T. Allegretti, D. Shea, J. Bailey, K. Harper, M. Bishop, O. Barakat, P. Perez, and R. Clements Office of General Council: Jason Gabriel Council Members Present: Lori Boyer, District 5 Attendees: Paul Crawford, OED Acting ED; Eric Lindstrom, DIA Staff; Karen Nasrallah, OED; Michelle Stephens, Recording Secretary; Jack Shad, Public Parking Officer; and Sandra Platt Manager of Purchasing Services I.

CALL TO ORDER

Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at approximately 2:05 p.m. opening with the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. Jack Shad, Office of Public Parking, advised the DIA members that for meetings they can park in the city-owned parking garage attached to the Ed Ball Building in lieu of issuing meter permits. The ticket given upon entry to the garage can be brought to the meeting and validated by Michelle Stephens. If the meeting runs past 5:30 p.m., you will receive a yellow invoice on your car. Board members can email Mr. Shad or Mrs. Stephens after the meeting with their license plate number or the invoice number and the invoice will be validated and no charge will be incurred. He added that for meetings held at City Hall, validated parking is also available at the library parking garage. II.

ACTION ITEMS

APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 30, 2012 DIA CEO SEARCH COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES The October 30, 2012 DIA CEO Search Committee Meeting Minutes were approved unanimously 9-0. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 30, 2012 DIA SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES An amendment to the October 30, 2012 DIA Special Meeting Minutes was noted on page five, second paragraph first sentence to read, “Chair Harris commented that with the importance of the CRA, suggested that a CRA Committee of the DIA recommending Board Member M. Bishop as

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) November 14, 2012 Page 2 of 7

Chair to lead the DIA through the process of the development of the Redevelopment Plan, noting…” The October 30, 2012 DIA Special Meeting Minutes, as amended were approved unanimously 90. APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 5, 2012 DIA SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES The November 5, 2012 DIA Special Meeting Minutes were approved unanimously 9-0. UPDATE/SELECTION OF CEO SEARCH FIRM As follow up from the November 5, 2012 Special Meeting of the DIA; Ms. Sandra Platt, Manager of Purchasing Services, provided an update on the available options for contracting a professional search firm for the DIA CEO position. She noted the following in regards to possible contracts with independent authorities that the city could potentially piggy back. Duval County Public Schools – not an agreement that the city could piggy back because it was a one-time deal. A copy of the Requests for Proposals that was used to solicit consultants is available to use as a template. JEA - has three “Agreements for Professional Services” for executive search services with three different consultants; however it is not known what the solicited positions were for. 1. Preng & Associates LLC – Houston, TX 2. Heidrick & Struggles International Inc. – Chicago, IL 3. Mycoff, Fry & Prouse LLC – Conifer, CO She added that JTA has an agreement, but information was not available at this time. JAA did a piggy back contract from the State of Florida, specifically for an IT consultant and therefore would not be of use for the DIA CEO search. The state has nothing else available for an executive search. Ms. Pratt advised that according to the Procurement Code, the city can piggy back if something is available. The city would have to get an agreement with the consultants that are already awarded to see if they can accommodate the selection process utilizing the CEO criteria that the DIA is searching for. If there is not an open contract that the city can piggy back on, there is a solicitation process that can be done. If it is less than $50,000, it is considered an informal solicitation and would take a minimum of 10 days to solicit the responses, then they have to be reviewed and a recommendation made to award the consultant.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) November 14, 2012 Page 3 of 7

The following were relative comments from the Board: 

Asked if there was a requirement for the DIA to use one of the existing contracts if piggy backing on one of them is found to be an available option.

Ms. Pratt responded that it is not a requirement, but an option according to the Procurement Code. She added that the DIA could do their own solicitation, which may be to their advantage because they know exactly what they are looking for. 

Asked what the DIA’s role would be in the process of development of an RFP for solicitation.

Ms. Platt responded that the DIA can be very involved in the development of the technical part because they know what they are looking for as far as the position is concerned. 

Asked how to find out if the firms mentioned can help the DIA with their specific search.

Ms. Platt responded that they will need to contact each firm based on the technical information provided by the DIA, ask the firms to review the information and advise if they could do the search under the current agreement. 

Noting that the criteria for the DIA CEO has been developed, suggested that is what could be provided to the firms, in addition to asking if it can be accomplished under the $50,000 threshold.



Thought the DIA was collectively interested in the shorter process versus the longer process, suggesting Mr. Gabriel can provide the CEO criteria today and then protocol needs to be in place on how we are going to solicit the responses from the private contractors.



Noted that while the DIA wants to move as fast as possible, they also want to ensure that the right search firm is chosen, noting the four to six week advantage to one process over the other could be sacrificed for quality versus speed.

Mr. Gabriel commented that through the piggy back scenario, the process is a few weeks from beginning to end. The procurement process can take approximately one to two months from beginning to end (from getting the technical specs integrated into an RFP, give the timeframe for responses, and then go through the PSEC and Mayoral approval and contract). The difference is a few weeks vs. a couple of months. He added that there are two main requirements in the piggy back scenario that would need to be vetted as well (that the firms were competitively procured, and have a similar scope of services).

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) November 14, 2012 Page 4 of 7

Mr. Crawford advised that from what he has heard, staff will get with Procurement, go the piggy back route if found viable, and if not will write an RFP and start the longer process. 

Regarding the budget, asked Mr. Crawford how the service would be paid for. He responded from Professional Services.

ORD 2012-674 Downtown Parking Jack Shad, City of Jacksonville Public Parking Officer, provided a brief introduction to the Office of Public Parking, proceeded by an overview of the proposed ORD 2012-0674 introduced to City Council at its October 13, 2012 meeting. While overall not opposed to the parking legislation, it was the general consensus of the DIA they have not had enough opportunity to thoroughly review it to give it the support it needs. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOARD MEMBER BARAKAT AND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER SHEA TO HAVE ONE WORKING SESSION FOR THE DIA TO HAVE MORE MEANINGFUL FEEDBACK ON THE LEGISLATION. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 9/0/0. Jason Gabriel advised that if the board wanted to forward a recommendation to council for their December 3 meeting, they would need to call a special meeting prior to that, adding that a recommendation would require a quorum of six members. Tuesday, November 27, 2012, at 2 p.m. was suggested for the special meeting. Ms. Stephens will poll for a quorum and send out the public meeting notice. Board members were encouraged in their review of the legislation, to contact Mr. Shad with any questions or concerns prior to the scheduled special meeting. Pope and Land Project Mr. Crawford followed by Karen Nasrallah provided a brief history and overview of the project. (Reference Project Summary dated November 9, 2012). Also present representing the project were J.J. Conners, a local real estate developer who has been working with Pope and Land and Lynn Pappas, attorney for the project. It was asked to staff what was being asked of the DIA today. Paul Crawford responded that staff was looking for a recommendation from the DIA in the form of a resolution in support of the project so that it can move forward through the City Council process, noting that the project was introduced to City Council at its November 13, 2012 meeting.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) November 14, 2012 Page 5 of 7

A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOARD MEMBER SHEA AND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER M. BISHOP IN SUPPORT OF THE INCENTIVE PACKAGE AS OUTLINED IN ORDINANCE 2012-703 AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 9/0/0. The board had varied thoughts on the development portion of the project that is under the purview of the DDRB. Mr. Gabriel advised that the DIA is here to review the incentive package being proposed, adding that a process exists in the code of the conceptual and final review/approval responsibility of the DDRB in terms of zoning related matters, aesthetics and architectural concepts. The recommendation from the DIA is for the incentive portion of the project that is being proposed. Mr. Gabriel added that contingent on and pursuant to the enabling legislation of the DIA, once the plans (BID and CRA) are complete, the DIA would be the one that approves an incentive deal like this and it would not go to City Council, but until that is complete, the DIA will serve in a recommending capacity. Board Member Clements departed the meeting at approximately 3:44 p.m. III.

INFORMATION/DISCUSSION ITEMS

Mr. Crawford provided a brief overview related to the CRA funding documents provided that identify past revenue (2011/2012 and 2012/2013) for the Northbank and Southbank Districts. Board Member M. Bishop advised that the CRA Committee wants to meet next week to begin forming a list of things still needing clarification, steps to develop the plan and recommend a schedule of approach. Mr. Gabriel provided an update on pending legislation ORD 2012-680 and 2012-657. IV.

OLD BUSINESS

Board Member Bailey noted that in the minutes from the last meeting there were several items that were scheduled to be discussed at today’s meeting and wondered what happened to them. Board Member Bailey offered to contact Council Member Lee to provide an update on Hemming Plaza at the December meeting. Chair Harris asked Board Member Bailey to develop a list of 10 issues for the DIA’s discussion for the December 12, 2012 meeting. Board Member Bailey named Hemming Plaza, parking, homeless, CRA, courthouse, convention center, Bostwick Building, library, and the USS Adams, to name a few items that the DIA needs to discuss, follow up on, are of interest, may require action, etc. by the DIA at some point suggesting they be on the agenda somewhere until addressed/resolved.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) November 14, 2012 Page 6 of 7

Board members were encouraged to send agenda items to Michelle Stephens anytime through the month between meetings, but for an item to be on the next month’s agenda, it should be submitted no later than one week prior to the meeting date. Board Member Allegretti advised that he will provide a presentation on branding at the December meeting. Chair Harris advised that Hemming Plaza, parking, branding, CRAs, and the Bostwick Building will be on the December agenda. Board Member Bailey asked Mr. Crawford how much time they had before he needed input from the DIA on the courthouse bridge. Mr. Crawford responded that the courthouse bridge is something the Administration has taken on through the review of the courthouse project. The Courthouse Oversight Special Committee is meeting on Thursday, November 15, 2012. The project has been before the DDRB three separate times with three different designs, but as it stands now nothing has been submitted for final review and approval. Board Member Bailey asked if the DIA could override action by the DDRB. Mr. Gabriel responded that if the question was can the DIA overrule the DDRB on any item, the answer is no. The DIA could overrule the DDRB on any actions that are appealed from the DDRB to the DIA adding that exceptions, variances, and zoning related matters are appealable straight from DDRB to council. It was suggested that Don Shea and anyone else that is available attend the Council meetings relative to the qualifications and criteria of the DIA CEO legislation. Board Member Perez left the meeting at approximately 4:22 p.m. V.

NEW BUSINESS

No new business was discussed. VI.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

The floor was open for public comments and advised that their time to speak was limited to three minutes. 

Dick Jackson, 4426 Herschel St., Jacksonville, FL 32210 Mr. Jackson provided an article from the opinion section of the Wall Street Journal dated November 24, 2012 “The Business Plan for American Revival.” Ms. Stephens will scan and provide a copy to the DIA via email.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) November 14, 2012 Page 7 of 7 

John Nooney, 8356 Bascom Road, Jacksonville, FL 32216 Attended the Jacksonville Waterways Commission meeting this morning and was shocked that the Waterway Commissioners were not familiar with the 2013 FIND list. The Florida Inland Navigation District (FIND) is ad valorem property tax revenue. Board Member Bailey asked Mr. Nooney for clarification, stating that we have always requested and received money from FIND, and asked him if the request was made and the money not received or if the request was not made and funding not received. Mr. Nooney responded that we have the money, the money comes every year but it is the process by which the projects are identified. Mr. Crawford responded that he believes the defined process is driven through the Parks and Recreation Department, who identifies projects, adding that they have not reached out to him about downtown projects (not to say there were downtown projects), adding that he is not familiar with the list. He believes a list of projects for allocation of FIND funding are developed through the Mayor’s Office and vetted through City Council. Mr. Bailey suggested that if the DIA had projects in the future, they could request that they be included on the list reiterating that if FIND funding is available for downtown projects, we need to make the request. A request was made of Mr. Crawford to provide or arrange for an overview of the FIND process, application dates, funding available, etc. so that if there was a project downtown, they could submit and reach out to them ahead of time.

VII.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, Chair Harris adjourned the meeting at approximately 4:32 p.m. The next DIA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, December 12, 2012, at 2:00 p.m. Witness

Downtown Investment Authority

Donald Harris, Chairman

Print Name: Vote: In Favor: _____ Opposed: _____ Abstained: _____

DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2012 – 2:00 P.M.

II. ACTION ITEM APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 20, 2012 MEETING MINUTES

Office of Economic Development

Downtown Investment Authority City Hall at St. James 1st Floor, Don Davis Room Tuesday, November 20, 2012 – 2:00 p.m.

CRA COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES Board Members Present: Allegretti; and P. Perez

DIA Chair D. Harris; CRA Committee Chair M. Bishop; T.

Attendees: Jason Gabriel with OGC; Paul Crawford, OED Acting Executive Director; Eric Lindstrom, OED; Michelle Stephens, Recording Secretary; and Council Member Lori Boyer, Council District 5 CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair Melody Bishop called the CRA Committee meeting of the DIA to order at approximately 2:07 p.m. Chair M. Bishop commented that the meeting was officially a “pre” subcommittee meeting because the intent of this meeting was for Board Member Perez and Board Member Bishop to outline a strategy that they might present to a subcommittee and to discuss who should be on that subcommittee(s). Chair M. Bishop suggested all members of the DIA be present at the first meeting of the CRA Committee. She distributed a hand out (need for record) that outlined the following:   

Identify who might serve on the subcommittee(s) Identify the meeting outline for the first meeting The committee needs to develop a process that might include the following: 1) Identify the existing plan and what if any, parts of the existing plan do not meet current state requirements 2) Does the existing plan meet the opinions of the DIA 3) What if any, recommended changes to the plan being modified have on other existing ordinances, codes, plans, etc. 4) What other plans are out there, potentially solicit for plans. Clarifying not a call for projects but plans specifically 5) Possibly create subcommittees of the subcommittee to assist with specific subject matters related to the development of the plan

Chair M. Bishop suggested a few workshops: 1) obtain a report on the status of the current plan; 2) review resources and needs, i.e. understand the mission outlined in the DIA enabling legislation; 3) begin to identify the goals and strategies and tasks further suggesting a matrix to capture ideas.

DIA CRA Committee Meeting November 20, 2012 Page 2 of 3

She suggested that the next meeting would be to establish the mentioned workshops, what their deliverables will be during that time and as a result of that meeting, a defined schedule. Board Member Perez agreed with the workshop concept for development of the plans. Paul Crawford offered the following relative to the current plan and suggested a process for development of a new or revised plan:     

 

Current plan is outdated Vision has probably changed Plan does not have specific enough direction for the implementers of the plan to fund and prioritize projects Plan should be vetted in a context of cash flow looking out into the future recognizing that our projections identify that there will not be any money for implementation of the plan through the TIFF through 2017 Update the plan in the context of the DIA’s roles and responsibilities as designated by City Council. Currently, the DIA has a finite ability to go forward and do projects in downtown; the DIA is required to get all of those approvals approved by City Council; the DIA is allowed after they have an adopted plan to get projects done internally and they give you the ability to do that on your own without City Council approval. You have to have an adopted CRA Plan. Do you want to try and have an entire plan presented to City Council, or do you want to submit the plan in specific geographical areas to provide the DIA authority to move forward in those specific areas while considering the remainder? Community should be engaged

Mr. Gabriel referenced a few important points in the enabling legislation (ORD 2012-364-E). Council Member Boyer commented that during City Council’s debate of the legislation, the issue was that the Council was giving up decision making authority that was vested in them and in order for the Council to give up that authority they wanted clear direction from the DIA. The DIA would be very explicit in what they were doing in which case the Council would then grant the authority so long as they are following the plan approved by Council and the DIA is doing what they told Council they would do in that plan, and then they can proceed. But, if the DIA for example wants to do an out of the box project that was not in the plan, it’s not that it cannot be done it just has to come before Council separately. The whole idea is that there would be some sort of priority list not necessarily by project, but a clear statement of what the DIA wants to do with the authority granted by the Council and how they want to implement it so that the Council in their delegation can make a decision they feel is a responsible decision in granting said authority to the DIA. She suggested inviting someone from the state’s Office of Economic Development or the Florida Redevelopment Association to one of the workshops. Mr. Gabriel distributed a copy of a memo on CRA’s that was provided to the DIA at their October 30, 2012 meeting.

DIA CRA Committee Meeting November 20, 2012 Page 3 of 3

Mr. Crawford commented that in the development of the plans, if the committee decides to use other sources in lieu of or in addition to, staff noted the timeframe needed to allow time for the RFP process. Chair Harris suggested that while not knowing which route the committee may take, obtaining an estimated cost of what the RFP process may be. The committee agreed that workshops would be the best method to proceed, educate, etc. on the development of the plans referenced in ORD 2012-364-E. At the December 12, 2012 DIA meeting, the CRA Committee will update the DIA on today’s meeting and decide at that meeting on subcommittees, workshop dates, etc. PUBLIC COMMENTS The floor was open for public comments and advised that their time to speak was limited to three minutes.  

John Nooney, 8356 Bascom Road, Jacksonville, FL 32216 Steve Lovett, 12782 Jebb Island Circle S., Jacksonville, FL 32224

ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, or public speakers, Committee Chair M. Bishop adjourned the meeting at approximately 3:16 p.m. Witness

Downtown Investment Authority

Donald Harris, Chairman

Print Name:

Vote: In Favor: _____ Opposed: _____ Abstained: _____

DOWNTOWN INVESTMENT AUTHORITY WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2012 – 2:00 P.M.

II. ACTION ITEM APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 27, 2012 MEETING MINUTES

Downtown Investment Authority

Office of Economic Development

SPECIAL MEETING Ed Ball Building, 214 N. Hogan St., 8th Floor Board Room 851 Hall Tuesday, November 27, 2012 – 2:00 p.m.

MEETING MINUTES Board Members Present: Chairman D. Harris, T. Allegretti, D. Shea, J. Bailey, K. Harper, M. Bishop, O. Barakat, and P. Perez Board Member Not Present: R. Clements Office of General Council: Jason Gabriel and Dylan Reingold Attendees: Paul Crawford, OED Acting ED; Eric Lindstrom, DIA Staff; Michelle Stephens, Recording Secretary; Jack Shad, Public Parking Officer; Heather Reber, Council Auditors Office; Chris Hand, Mayor’s Administration; and Mia Jones, Mayor’s Administration Council Members Present: Lori Boyer, District 5 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Harris called the meeting to order at approximately 2:08 p.m., opening with the Pledge of Allegiance. The purpose of the special meeting of the DIA was to review and potentially forward a recommendation of approval to City Council for ORD 2012-674. The legislation was presented to the DIA at their November 14, 2012 meeting where it was the consensus of the board that they needed more time to review the legislation. The board agreed to hold a special meeting the week of November 26, to review the legislation again as a board. ACTION ITEM ORDINANCE 2012-674 To help put the legislation in better context; Jack Shad provided an overview of how the parking legislation was developed, current rules and the big picture of what they want to be able to do once the legislation is approved. The following were relative comments from the board:  

Great to have flexibility for parking rates as a tool. Suggested that parking not be thought of as a profit center for the city but as an amenity of downtown in order to make downtown more competitive with other locations in the area for office, retail, etc.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) Special Meeting November 27, 2012 Page 2 of 5  





  

Cautioned in developing flexibility, important that we do not position the on-street parking network or the city-owned or operated off-street facilities so they compete economically with the private garage operators. Noting that the legislation was drafted prior to the existence of the DIA, concerned with repeated reference to the OED Executive Director, adding that it also says the OED will develop goals for downtown revitalization, emphasizing that is the role of the DIA. The DIA is responsible for developing a plan for downtown and that plan would presumably include parking related to downtown. The DIA needs to be responsible for defining the guidelines; policies and objectives related to parking downtown and they need to be tied to something. An investor is not going to come downtown when someone has the ability and power to increase and change prices. We finally have a new authority (DIA) and are in the process of recruiting an executive director; we need to give them the confidence that they are going to have say over day-today parking incentives and day-to-day parking management decisions related to downtown, not the individual that is responsible for economic development in the rest of the county. Noted that in the Mayor’s press conference announcing the new Office of Economic Development, it would cover everything except downtown. Suggested a subcommittee for parking to look at the legislation and separate the downtown district matters from the remainder of the county-related parking matters. Questioned the need for the legislation to move forward so rapidly. Would like clarification of other issues (ADA, interpretation of four- hour parking permit, to name a few) within the legislation in addition to the authority reference of the OED and DIA.

Regarding the timing issue, Mr. Shad commented that he is required by law since the Water Street Garage is 110 percent occupied, to discontinue the promotional rate which will almost double the rates for the customers currently there. 

Concerned that the reason for the legislation to move forward without delay appears to be based on one issue (the Water Street Garage).

Mr. Shad replied that he has other issues. He has pay and display devices that are paid for that he wants to install, which will give a 24-hour payment ability at some lots. Until he drops the hourly rate from $1.07 to $1.00 he cannot use those devices. He added that there are a host of other minor operational issues that the legislation will help with. Generally, the DIA did not object to the legislation over all with the exception of the repeated reference in the legislation to the Office of Economic Development Executive Director having the sole decision making authority related to parking policy, rates, etc. for downtown. The DIA needs to be involved and responsible in the setting of policies and objectives related to parking in downtown. Board Member Shea suggested that the DIA support the legislation with an amendment.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) Special Meeting November 27, 2012 Page 3 of 5

A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOARD MEMBER D. SHEA AND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER M. BISHOP TO APPROVE ORD 2012-674 WITH AMENDMENT, “THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALL POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR MUNICIPAL PARKING RESOURCES WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DIA. UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE DIA HAS AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SAID RESPONSIBILITY SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE OED. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 80-0. The following were relative comments of the board: 

Suggested adding to the motion that during the interim period of an Executive Director of the DIA being hired, development of downtown parking policies and practices being considered by the OED would require review and approval of the DIA.

Chair Harris commented that the suggested amendments be included in the motion made by Board Member D. Shea. Board Member Shea’s amendment now reads, “THE DEVELOPMENT OF ALL POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR MUNICIPAL PARKING RESOURCES WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN AREA SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DIA. UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE DIA HAS AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR SAID RESPONSIBILITY SHALL BE GRANTED TO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE OED IN CONCERT WITH THE DIA.” In reference to a suggestion that the language in the bill replace reference to OED with DIA, conversation about reporting structure of the Public Parking Officer and functions of the Office of Public Parking were discussed. It was clarified that the issue was not who the Public Parking Officer or the functions of the Office of Public Parking report to, the issue is with the DIA not being involved in parking-related matters as they relate to the jurisdiction of the DIA. The DIA is not interested in being involved with the operations of the Office of Public Parking, but needs knowledge in advance of what is going on policy wise, economic development incentive wise, etc. for downtown parking. The issue is not who enforces parking; the issue is the DIA needs to be involved with setting the objectives and policies related to parking downtown. Entering the conversation midstream, Chis Hand was present and referring to the lengthy reform process last year, he advised that the Administration is open to a lot of ideas and happy to meet with the DIA individually or as a group to talk about any issues they have prior to moving forward on recommending policy changes that the Administration and City Council worked on last year. Board Member Shea commented that it sounds like more discussion is needed. In deference to recoup the comments made by C. Hand, and if it will clear the air, offered to withdraw his motion because the recommendation has been made that they not make a motion right now.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) Special Meeting November 27, 2012 Page 4 of 5

Chair Harris asked for a motion to approve and a motion was not made or seconded. Being no motion was made, Chair Harris suggested the board’s stance was to defer. Mr. Gabriel advised that the board has four options: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Recommend approval Recommend denial Recommend approval with amendments Defer

Chis Hand, Mayor’s Chief of Staff, commented regarding the subject of where parking should be located within the city’s organizational structure, that the Administration is willing and committed to have that conversation with the DIA, adding that for a number of reasons the Administration and City Council introduced the parking bill and are eager to see it move forward. He suggested that the DIA could move forward with the underlying legislation reiterating that the Administration is open for discussion with the DIA regarding where parking should be situated in the city’s organizational structure. Board Member Shea commented that the DIA is not focused on where the Office of Public Parking should be within the city’s organizational structure and does not desire to manage the parking system, adding that he thinks it is where it should. He clarified that they were talking about the DIA’s responsibility to set parking policy for the downtown portion of the city. Having that responsibility in the current legislation with the OED sets cross purposes to one of the underlying principles of a downtown plan, which the DIA is responsible to form. The DIA should have some meaningful say in how parking policy for downtown is created. Board Member Shea departed the meeting at approximately 3:09 pm. Motion made by Melody Bishop: Board Member M. Bishop suggested that an amendment could be made saying that the DIA supports the underlying legislation but reserve as Don was saying, “the development of all practices and policies should be by the DIA and said responsibility shall be granted to the OED until such time as the DIA ED has been hired.” Mr. Gabriel commented that he was hearing the following motion, “A recommendation of approval of 2012-674 that the parking policies as set forth in 2012-674 with respect to the downtown boundaries would be done in consultation with the DIA. Board Member Harper suggested they stick more with Board Member Shea’s withdrawn motion and Board Member M. Bishop’s previously existing motion. She commented that the “in consultation with” was too vague and should be clearer until structural issues, etc. are resolved. She prefers to stick with the concept of OED manages parking but that any policy changes or incentive packages have to be approved by the DIA until the ED of the DIA is in place and those powers will then flow to him or her.

Downtown Investment Authority (DIA) Special Meeting November 27, 2012 Page 5 of 5

Board Member Barakat suggested that the motion include “During the interim period of an ED of the DIA being hired, any policy, and incentive packages, level changes shall require approval of the DIA.” Because the board went back and forth with several similar amendments to the legislation, Mr. Gabriel restated the motion made by Board Member M. Bishop and seconded by Board Member Barakat to include Board Member Harper’s suggestion. “A recommendation of approval of 2012-674 with an amendment that any policy matters of 2012-674 with respect to downtown continue to be done by the OED Director with review and approval of the DIA. A MOTION WAS MADE BY BOARD MEMBER M. BISHOP AND SECONDED BY BOARD MEMBER O. BARAKAT RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF 2012-674 WITH AN AMENDMENT THAT ANY POLICY MATTERS OF 2012-674 WITH RESPECT TO DOWNTOWN CONTINUE TO BE DONE BY THE OED WITH REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE DIA. THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY 7/0/0. PUBLIC COMMENTS The floor was open for public comments and advised that their time to speak was limited to three minutes. 

John Nooney, 8356 Bascom Road, Jacksonville, FL 32216

There being no further business, Chair Harris adjourned the meeting at approximately 3:43 p.m. The next DIA meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 2:00 p.m. Witness

Downtown Investment Authority

Donald Harris, Chairman

Print Name: Vote: In Favor: _____ Opposed: _____ Abstained: _____