Mr. Blaylock,

Thank you for including me in the dissemination of your response to Councilman Bishop in connection with the $72 million identified by the Council Auditor's Office as unencumbered and unrestricted funds.

Given my recollection that many shelters (inclusive of a concrete pad) had cost approximately $5k (in recent years) with 80% ($4k) of the capital costs sometimes coming from federal funds and 20% ($1k) from JTA, even one-tenth of the $72 million ($72,000k) reserves figure would be a stunning revelation. I realize that there is an anticipated maintenance cost per shelter of $1k per year to which Mr. Miller often makes reference, but the $72,000k figure is certainly one that caught the eye of Councilman Bishop.

As you know, for more than two decades the City of Jacksonville has not allowed commercial advertising in its right-of-way. Other cities such as Houston, Texas and Arlington, Virginia have taken the same path as Jacksonville, while other communities have chosen to clutter their landscapes with ever increasing commercial signs in the public right-of-way.

Commercializing the public space would be a step backwards for Jacksonville. Moreover, there is a real risk that such an exemption will lead to unanticipated and unwanted consequences not to mention litigation that may cost millions to defend. I know that you are now more aware than before of the expensive and ongoing litigation faced by the City of Los Angeles and the City of New York. The Ninth Circuit case involving the City of Los Angeles has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and the City of New York case as been appealed by Clear Channel Outdoor and other billboard plaintiffs to the U.S. Second Circuit.
JTA should be commended for the steady expansion of bus shelters to its routes over the years. During the past seven years alone the JTA has added more than 150 shelters to the system. There are now more than 400 shelters.

During the next fiscal year starting in two weeks, you recently advised Councilman Bishop and others that the JTA has plans to continue to add more shelters and your office circulated a list of 31 shelters that will be added to the system. These shelters, like the current 400+ shelters, will not display advertising for commercial products directed to passing motorists. This is the best of both worlds - more transit shelters but without commercial advertising directed to passing motorists.

At our August 14 meeting, you confirmed that JTA intends to continue to add shelters to its system without regard to the passage of proposed Ord. 2009-401.

This was indeed very good news. In other words, the number of shelters will continue to grow, as has been the trend over the years.

There had previously been some misinformation suggesting that bus shelters were not a priority for JTA or that no more shelters would be built unless the City Council passed an exemption to allow for outdoor advertising on the sides of bus shelters. To some people, this suggestion appeared to be hyperbole or a threat.

Fortunately, you personally set the record straight at the August 14 meeting and confirmed that JTA will continue to add shelters to the system even if Ord. 2009-401 does not pass.

As it now stands Ord. 2009-401 would amend the Jacksonville Sign Ordinance to provide an exemption for commercial advertising on bus shelters. JTA's current position, as I understand it, is that this ordinance would allow the agency to increase the build-out of the overall number of shelters more rapidly through arrangements with a billboard company, perhaps one currently suing one or more cities to strike down their sign regulations.

If the JTA is continuing to add shelters to the system at a rate of approximately 30 shelters a year, and if we are truly talking about increasing that build-out rate by another 20 shelters per year, there should be no need to carve out an exemption in the sign ordinance. This is especially true when the type of exemption is one that has helped to fuel major federal lawsuits against cities from coast to coast. From a business point of view, when you combine the fiscal interests of both the JTA and the City, it really makes no sense to proceed with a risky exemption.

Ord. 2009-402, on the other hand, helps to protect the City of Jacksonville from costly litigation.

I accept your premise that a good portion of the $72 million needs to stay in the "reserve" category, but what is the dollar amount needed to increase the build out rate by another 20 shelters per year (going from 30 shelters to 50 shelters per year). I believe the JTA Board, the Planning Commission, the City Council, and the Mayor's Office should look at that dollar amount, with confirmation from the City Auditor's Office to give everyone comfort that the amount is a solid number. I am certain that this number will be a fraction of JTA's $72 million and will not come anywhere close to putting the JTA at any financial risk and will actually remove a financial risk to the City of Jacksonville.

My continuing concern is that this has become a controversy that may be solved by the JTA Board making a moderate adjustment in funding priorities. Sometimes the small amenities of transportation systems fall victim to the high price items of road construction. Some transit agencies and cities have avoided unnecessary conflict by simple adjustments to their spending priorities.

I hope we can work together to avoid conflict and continue to have the best of both worlds - more shelters every year (with an increase in the build-out rate) and but without advertising in the public space oriented to distract drivers and clutter the landscape with more ads. An adjustment by the JTA Board in this priority would be welcome news to all nineteen Council members and the public.

- Bill Brinton