Fernandina Commissioners Move to Rewrite Paid Parking Law Just 7 Weeks After Voters Approved It

FERNANDINA BEACH - The City Commission voted 4-1 Tuesday to advance an ordinance that would repeal and replace the citizen paid parking initiative approved by 75% of city voters in August, reigniting disagreements over paid parking and whether commissioners should rewrite a measure adopted by the electorate.

The vote came just seven weeks after voters approved the initiative by a margin of 4,175 to 1,398. The measure requires a public referendum before the city can implement paid parking.

Vice Mayor Darron Ayscue cast the lone dissenting vote, arguing that commissioners should leave the voter-approved ordinance intact rather than repeal and replace it without another public vote.

"If you want to codify it, codify it in the charter. Send it back out to a vote," Ayscue said. "Let the citizens vote on what you propose or want to have changed. But I think the citizens spoke loud and clear."

The commission voted Aug. 19 to terminate its contract with One Parking following the referendum. That decision was separate from the ballot measure itself, which established a requirement for voter approval of paid parking rather than expressly ordering the immediate shutdown of the existing program.

The ordinance specifically excludes the current downtown paid parking program from its exemptions.

"This is simply to take the Ordinance Number 2025-11 and place it in Chapter 78 of the code," Prince said.

Another provision expressly requires a four-vote supermajority to amend or repeal the referendum requirement or its exemptions. The city charter already provides supermajority protections for voter-approved citizen initiatives, but the replacement ordinance would spell out that requirement in the parking code.

"Almost verbatim, the city attorney has taken over from the old ordinance to the new ordinance the exact intent of the Citizens Initiative," Tuten said.

The replacement uses the legal term "qualified electors" instead of "registered city voters" and establishes specific procedures for placing a proposed paid parking area on the ballot.

"Do I want this ordinance? No, I don't want this ordinance," Tuten said. "I want paid parking. I want $1 million for the city that doesn't come out of resident pockets, that comes out of the million tourists who come here in their pockets."

Ayscue questioned why the commission was taking action now when it had previous opportunities to incorporate the citizen initiative into the city code.

He said the original ordinance should remain in place unless voters approve changes.

Commissioner Tim Poynter defended the replacement, arguing that the referendum was intended to give residents control over future paid parking decisions, not permanently prohibit parking fees.

Poynter said he expects paid parking to return eventually because of the growing costs of maintaining city services used by visitors.

Paul Lore, who identified himself as the original author of the initiative, told commissioners he was concerned that rewriting the measure could undermine what voters had approved.

"The intent of that referendum was really simple," Lore said. "It was to give the citizens the right to vote."

Lore acknowledged that residents might eventually approve paid parking again, but said that decision should remain with the electorate.

Resident Jack Imber was more critical of the proposed replacement.

He questioned whether commissioners were attempting to create an opportunity to bring back paid parking despite the referendum results.

The discussion also exposed continuing disagreements over the financial consequences of ending the downtown parking program.

Martin said the program generated approximately $1.1 million in revenue during the previous six months, against roughly $600,000 in expenses, leaving about $500,000.

Martin said the city should consider the effects of paid parking on downtown businesses and the divisions it created among residents.

The financial figures cited by Martin were not independently verified during the commission discussion. His estimate of approximately $880,000 in annual net revenue also differs from a straightforward annualization of the rounded six-month figures he presented.

Poynter defended the parking program, saying its financial performance would have improved over time.

He argued that residents should not have to shoulder the full cost of maintaining a city that attracts large numbers of visitors.

The commission has not yet completed the ordinance's adoption process. A second reading and public hearing must be held, and at least four commissioners must again vote in favor for the replacement ordinance to take effect Nov. 19.