The path forward on budget and revenue challenges

Commentary

Paid parking is the beginning of a broader debate on meeting the budget and revenue challenges facing Fernandina Beach. Along with the fierce opposition to paid parking, many residents are offering alternative pathways to address city budget and revenue issues.  

The path forward will not be quick or easy and requires the level of citizen engagement displayed in the battle over the proposed ethanol plant.

An essential first step is a  joint effort by the city staff and commissioners to identify appropriate spending cuts combined with an update of city impact fees and permits issued by the city for short term rental properties and various concessions serving tourists.  

Many of these permits have not been updated for years while revenue from these concessions has increased substantially.

A 360 review of the budget should also include an updated list of current and near-term budget challenges. City commission meetings on the budget should include discussion of the historical record of “kicking the can” on deferred maintenance and infrastructure projects. Recent examples include failure to set aside funds to deal with the Brett’s project, closure/removal of beach walkways due to lack of maintenance and tapping reserves to enable a partial tax rollback rate  for re-election campaigns. Budgetary belt-tightening is essential in securing support for potential new revenue sources.

City Commissioners should establish a citizen working group to explore changes in the collection and distribution of the “bed tax” and the operations of the Amelia Island Tourism Development Council. This would require a multi-year effort to obtain changes in state law and buy-in from Nassau County.

Given the scope of upcoming projects requiring funding, the groundwork should be laid for a bond issue that is likely to be needed to fund key projects.  This is also a multi-year endeavor that will not generate immediate funding.

Finally, as a community we need to reach some accord on city assets important to some but not utilized by others. The boating community would maintain that the city needs to continue spending $800,000 per year to dredge the river (maintenance of the city marina is yet another cost). Non-boating neighbors may label this a want rather than a need.

The same split may occur with the golf course and other city amenities.  While I do not utilize either the marina or the golf course I support my tax dollars funding these assets because they enhance our community. That said, the boating community, golfers and others need to offer ideas and funding streams from their respective  groups to partially, if not fully, offset city expenditures for their sources of enjoyment.

The current budget and revenue situation is the result of years of past decisions and inactions. The current City Commission is trying its best to navigate some rough waters. Criticism, as long as it is based on facts and doesn’t assign blame to those not responsible for previous decisions is fair game.

No one benefits if paid parking proposals are rejected and our city reverts back to the “kick the can” mentality of deferred maintenance and capital investments.

City property taxpayers can no longer finance the operational and infrastructure burden of 1.2 million annual visitors.  Working constructively as a community with our city staff and commissioners on solutions to our budget and revenue challenges is imperative.  

We can do this.

Previous generations gifted us a waterfront, parks and recreation facilities, an historic downtown and other assets. It is up to us to meet our parents standard of creating a better place for future generations to enjoy.