>
Roots of paid parking: How Bean-era budget cuts created the current funding crisis
Commentary
It did not begin when this City Commission approved a parking contractor.
And it did not begin when the commission ultimately imposed it.
The origins of paid parking were spawned years earlier, during the 2023-24 City Commission led by then-Mayor Bradley Bean, and then financial problems continued into the 2024-25 budget.
While Bean and Commissioners Darron Ayscue and David Sturges didn’t erect the parking signs, they created the funding crisis that manifested its need.
And that’s where paid parking saga eventually took root.
Over two key budget cycles, Bean's administration repeatedly confronted the same uncomfortable equation: The city had more infrastructure funding needs and operating expenses than available revenue.
Yet Bean, Ayscue and Sturges made decisions that reduced city revenue and limited its growth.
They lowered the property-tax millage rate despite warnings about the consequences for capital improvements.
They cut capital spending to make the lower tax rate work.
They did so while the city already knew major bills were coming, including the future of the deteriorating Brett’s Waterway Cafe building and the city marina, along with streets, sidewalks, recreation facilities, beach walkovers, downtown infrastructure and other projects.
And while those commissioners were cutting capital spending in the name of fiscal restraint, they increased their own salaries by 50%.
Then, when presented with a new professional study showing that the city should be collecting substantially more - $1 million or more annually - from new construction to pay for future water and sewer capacity, Bean, Ayscue and Sturges went in the opposite direction and lowered that fee.
They dragged their feet on acquiring the Ybor Alvarez soccer fields for $3.4 million - half to be paid for by Nassau County. That bill is now approaching almost $8 million with no county funding.
None of those decisions alone created paid parking.
But taken collectively, and compounded by another difficult budget the following year, they helped create the fiscal conditions that made paid parking as the lone alternative when the succeeding commission went looking for money.
The story begins in the summer of 2023.
City officials had warned commissioners what adopting the rollback property-tax rate would mean. Keeping the previous year's millage rate would have generated roughly $2.2 million more in property-tax revenue.
But Bean, Ayscue and Sturges voted to lose the $2.2 million and lower taxes.
However, the city couldn’t simply eliminate $2.2 million in potential revenue without consequences. City operating expenses were increasing, resulting in much of the reduction having to come from capital spending.
That meant projects involving streets, sidewalks, recreation facilities, beach walkovers, downtown improvements and other city infrastructure were placed on the chopping block.
At the same time, Bean's commission could look just a few blocks from City Hall and see another major financial obligation looming on the waterfront: Brett’s Waterway Cafe.
The city-owned building had been the subject of structural concerns and years of debate about its future. Whatever solution commissioners ultimately chose, the waterfront problem wasn’t going to solve itself for free.
These weren’t hypothetical needs dreamed up by a future commission. They were problems sitting in front of Bean, Ayscue and Sturges while they were deciding how much revenue the city should collect.
Nevertheless, the commission voted 3-2 to move forward with the rollback rate of 4.8298 mills.
“Going back to the rollback for the first time in over a decade.”
The previous operating millage rate had been 5.3330 mills. The rollback decision represented a 9.4% reduction in the tax rate.
But it was deliberately choosing to collect substantially less than it would have received by maintaining the existing millage rate.
Then came a decision that made the commission’s priorities particularly difficult to reconcile.
Whatever argument could be made that commissioners deserved higher compensation, the timing matters.
The marina wasn’t fixing itself.
The capital bills weren’t disappearing.
Antun said that if commissioners adopted the rollback, they needed to become serious about finding “other potential revenue opportunities.”
Paid parking.
Years before the parking signs appeared downtown, the connection had already been made.
The seed had been planted.
Consider what happened with water and sewer capacity fees.
Fernandina Beach’s existing fee was based on a study dating to 2015.
At the time, the city charged $3,280 for a newly constructed home.
The Northeast Florida Builders Association vigorously opposed the increase.
It could adopt the updated $10,040 fee and generate more than $1 million annually.
It could leave the existing $3,280 charge in place.
Think about that. That vote has cost the city an estimated $3 million.
But they illustrate the choices the commission was making as costs continued to climb.
Cut capital improvements.
Lower the capacity fee charged to new construction despite a new study supporting a dramatically higher amount.
Then confront those same needs with less revenue available to address them.
Cutting a capital project doesn’t eliminate the need for the project.
And lowering the millage didn’t make Brett’s disappear from the waterfront.
If anyone believed the previous year’s cuts had solved the city’s financial problem, the next budget quickly demonstrated otherwise.
It was also an election year. Bean and Vice Mayor David Sturges were seeking another term on the commission, putting another property-tax decision before commissioners just months before voters went to the polls.
Even the modified rollback proposal represented another 3% reduction in the millage rate from the previous year and was projected to generate $19.4 million.
There was $955,000 for streets and sidewalks.
There was $2 million for the waterfront seawall, supported by a state grant.
There was $125,000 for City Hall improvements.
And there was $935,288 for police and fire radios.
Street resurfacing was falling further behind.
“We need to address how we’re going to pave those,” Glisson told commissioners.
“This is something we need to talk about,” Glisson said. “There was commission support to fund the increase in public safety. This budget does not have this money for the firemen.”
Maintenance expenses for city buildings and property were increasing.
Personnel costs were projected to increase 9.8% for the city’s 296 full-time employees.
The municipal golf course was budgeted to receive an $890,000 subsidy.
The marina required another $686,000 transfer.
That was money unavailable for other general-fund needs.
The commission could reduce the tax rate.
It could use reserves.
Again, they chose less revenue.
Those four words tell much of this story:
“Overdue capital improvement projects.”
The very category of spending that had taken the brunt of the 2023 rollback decision — and remained under pressure during the 2024-25 budget — was now being cited as a reason the city needed another source of revenue.
Paid parking offered one.
The political proposition was straightforward: Rather than obtain all the money through property taxes, make visitors and downtown users help finance downtown and waterfront improvements by paying to park.
And eventually the connection between those old capital obligations and paid parking became tangible.
Paid-parking revenue was committed to the demolition of Brett’s and the reconfiguration of the city marina.
That matters because Brett’s did not suddenly become a problem when paid parking arrived. The project has doubled in scope - from $6 million to $12 million - the most costly project in the city's history.
The city knew years earlier that the building and waterfront represented a major financial obligation.
Bean’s commission knew it.
And, government decisions don’t occur in isolation.
The city had spent two budget cycles postponing critical financial obligations.
And eventually, the road reached a downtown paid parking program.
Paid parking became one of the most divisive issues Fernandina Beach has seen in years.
Residents organized against it.
The following day, the City Commission voted 4-1 to terminate the program.
That is why the history matters.
It is that municipal finance has consequences.
You can lower fees.
You can celebrate each of those decisions individually.
Eventually somebody has to pay and now it's on the backs of city taxpayers.
Comments
10 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Jtrick
I wish you had put forward this commentary during the campaign to end paid parking and before the voters weighed in on August 18th. It would have been helpful for city taxpayers to know all of this while so many citizens were trashing the commissioners for their attempt to resolve the acute budget issues!
Monday, August 31 Report this
Bob121
Or..... maybe it began with a quarter million dollar city manager with TWO deputies? Perhaps it was the 10% increase in City staff over the last 5 years? Maybe it is the fact that the City uses multiple people to manage downtown alone, PLUS the Main Street manager (the City pays over $30,000 annually to sponsor MS)
The issue Might be the city finds it easier to hire more people to do the same work that fewer did recently. This is just the natural progression of government, small or large..... to grow. Although our population doesn't grow by that much as our city is quite small.
Consolidate the police and fire departments with the county (we are already partially there), cut city staff, I think you'll find plenty of money then
Monday, August 31 Report this
Gspfan00
Thank you for the insightful review of the history of commissioner decisions made over the last few years. This article would have been substantially more beneficial if published BEFORE the vote on paid parking. Will it calm some of the noise that’s now being heard around the proposed mileage rate increase? Who knows…
Monday, August 31 Report this
DouglasM
Just curious....the 2 years you were Mayor that immediately preceded this period you talk about......what was your record before your defeat by Antun (53%-46%) in 2022? Did you increase taxes? Roll them back? I honestly can't remember much of your tenure. Chip Ross seemed to be the lone voice of reason with the vision to see looming problems. I always thought you had one finger up testing the wind of public sentiment.
Granted, Covid was an issue that slowed things down (I believe we were the last bastion of closed beaches in Northeast Florida after the Governor decided he had seen enough and we needed to get back to living). I think the Commission under your leadership overreacted just a bit too much....but that's my opinion.
Monday, August 31 Report this
FunnyGirl4615
History really is the best teacher. Unfortunately some folks who have not lived here for very long, do not know all of this. Spot on, Mike! Now they cannot claim ignorance. Thank you for the recap.
Monday, August 31 Report this
GDecker
The real lesson learned here is simply this:
The City rolls out a list of high-dollar projects, which the commissioners endorse, and decide to implement a highly unpopular service on the grounds that it will save taxpayers money. Residents object, fully realising that now it is "on us", and the service is cancelled. Perhaps what citizens are saying is the projects themselves are the problem, so much so that even an odious "free" way to finance them is unacceptable.
As a 20-year city taxpayer, my experience is that the projects that need doing get done, the "nice to have" get pushed down the road.
Monday, August 31 Report this
Libdru1
Thank you for breaking down the history and necessity of Paid Parking. It truly demonstrates the past commission “passed the buck” to the present commission! They were aware of the cost of infrastructure repairs, the demolition of Brett’s and lack of revenue. They then cut the millage rate and raised their salaries by 50%. We do not want to allow any of these gentlemen back as city commissioners. They embody corruption and malfeasance. Kudos to the present commission to try to address budget shortfalls. You might not agree with all the solutions they are trying, paid parking being one, but at least, they are trying to address the real budgetary issues our community faces.
Monday, August 31 Report this
AcurtNA63
The problem was not lack of income, but an excess of outgo!. Cut the budget and stretch out or cancel projects.
Monday, August 31 Report this
warrenmatt
The latest Fernandina Observer article on "The roots of Paid Parking" is truly a MUST read for every Fernandina Beach resident!
Paid Parking is surely just a tip of the iceberg - of the financial decisions our recent and present City Commissioners - have placed our community in the financial mess it is now in.
It so clearly and thoroughly spells out how we got into the financial mess our tax payers must face.
I can only hope it makes our present City Commissioners face up to why we're in this predicament and make some decisions - like increasing "water and sewer capacity fees"!
There is such concern over the tremendous over building threatening our quality of life, as those lowered rates have only exasperated the problem!
Our present City Commissioners have shown such massive disrespect for the residents of Fernandina Beach - shown by their failure to wait for the town vote on Paid Parking.
And their inability to be fully aware of the consequences of their votes - shown by their unawareness of the consequences of terminating the Paid Parking contract.
Changes are surely needed - one might be how a Mayor is chosen.
Monday, August 31 Report this
DanGroth
This article clearly demonstrates the cost of whiners complaining about tourists and out-of-city residents paying a few parking bucks for supporting services they so enormously consume. For example, do you know how much trash is collected off our beaches? 50 TONS a year!! Somebody has to be paid to pick that stuff up and get rid of it...or would you rather just "tighten the belt" and let the garbage pile up? This city runs pretty efficiently despite all the uninformed one-line commentary and name-calling. The bill for all this populist tax and parking fee rollback and project deferral is coming due and the city taxpayers are going to pay for it, whether we like it or not. I support what our commissioners, employees and many many volunteers do for the city residents. The rest of you should just shut up and sit down.
Tuesday, September 1 Report this