07302026 CM Peluso Noticed Meeting RE Preservation Legislation

07302026 CM Peluso Noticed Meeting RE Preservation Legislation — Jul 30, 2026

>> Thank you all for coming today. It's 10 o'clock protocol. This mean the order? I believe we'll have a few other council members kind of kind of come in. But I feel like it's going to we're going to take up the full hour with with some good discussion, I believe on this on this particular topic. Thank you all for coming. This is really important piece of legislation, I believe in something that's been discussed in and some of our neighborhoods for a very long time. So so very grateful for those who showed up today, we're going to go around the room. Just had 2 quick introductions Ashonti might starting us off. >> Okay. Looking for green, Shannon Blankenship with represent but no preservation Halyna Pearl. And with the director of the Planning Department in this sense, you could bar can I get there? >> Good morning. Okay. I'm sorry about that as well. As with planning Department Karla's Cell Office of General Counsel encourage a large group or 2 includes a city Council District 7 Ron Salem group. 2 at large. Joe Carlucci District. 5 100 Public Works. Real Estate Division, one half. >> Vice chair of the HPC and chair of the demolition by neglect Test Forest. >> I can ask in Springfield, Preservation and revitalization. >> Thank you all so much for being here. We also have a few of the folks from from from auditors office and from the plane department due to want it is just as well. Why you're here in case we Drag u N. >> And the River County Auditor's Office Suzann Kelly Planning Department. Excellent. >> Point being is we got all the right people in the room. I believe so. This is a very important issue throughout a lot of our older neighborhoods. Yes, earnest. I see it here. Also tucked away what might as well use here, a man's written more books on the history of the city and probably anyone else in living memory. We've got a great group of folks in here. So over the past several years, we've seen a number of issues throughout many of our neighborhoods, but it took our historic neighborhoods. A lot of properties are falling apart week. It's known as demolition by neglect. The Historic Preservation Commission did a great job a couple years ago putting together a task force to address this issue, seen lessons learned from other cities. How do we ensure that these historic properties which have a lot of value and you could you can't build more historic properties, how we help preserve them and ensure that they can remain in circulation. And also as we have the housing issue that we do naval ourselves to build more housing for more families are more young families to come to these communities. I asked Michelle to drop this piece of legislation based on some of the recommendations from the task force. We have a number of folks here who are on the task force and folks in the historic preservation world that are going to speak to different issues that they're seeing on the ground. We also the number of developers who have worked in the space as well, seen terror licensing, both city. And so we've got some folks who understand what it takes to help get these properties up to the standard that we need Michelle team and kind of giving us a quick high-level overview of the bill. Sure. Thank you. >> So Councilmember police asked me to draft this bill to address a number of things. The task force had recommended this bill touches on a number of places in our ordinance code with the ultimate purpose of trying to prevent some of these historic structures from being deteriorated to the point of loss. So we have incorporated the Jacksonville, Historic Preservation Commission in the first part, having them for annually, create a list of homes that essentially homes that are in danger of demolition by neglect. And with that, the administration can take actions as they see fit to to address that. And and then later on in the bill, we touch in different parts of the ordinance code that deal with surplus property. So once the city owns a property, how we dispose of it and it creates a separate category for these historic properties to ensure that they are rehabilitated and get back into use instead of being obviously demolition is the the thing we really want to avoid so that that's what it does that real high-level happy to answer any questions about specifics. >> Thank you, Michelle. So the point being is a number of these properties for many, many years and sometimes decades. A lot of these homes just sit there, accruing Wiens and fines from the city. So the city has been, you know, putting upwards of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars worth of fines and liens magistrate judges, you know, play some of these fines on there as well. Point being is we know that these are properties that have property owners are just sitting on them. Some cases. The expectation is the property falls into disarray and gets demolished, that they now have a blank slate to build a property. They can make some dollars on. And you know, it's it's it's blighted. It's harmful to the to the historic integrity, the neighborhood and some of these properties have decades of liens on them. So why why not take a more active approach on trying to make sure that it gets into the hands of people that can actively work on these properties? Sometimes people just don't have the capability to handle him and handle repairs that are needed. So as the task force has kind of put together, you know, their thoughts and their perspective on things kind of kind of struck me. And I want to make sure that we took some action during our time in office. Bill, do you kind of want to give a little bit of it kind of discussion about what what the task force was looking to do and where their heads are at? >> Sure. So the the task force came about because we wore receiving numerous requests for demolition and many of these properties. >> Had been in a >> notably poor state for a very long time. So we took about a year to do not only incorporating information from northeast Florida, but around the U.S.. We came up with that. How many about the doesn't ish recommendations, but but 5 priority recommendations, which are mostly addressed within this legislation. So we were lucky enough to have many people with expertise that we're willing to can. 2 can tribute to the task force and the final. And so I think this BC, C's, this as a helpful tool, it's not a silver bullet that will solve all of the issues, but it will be helpful to address certain situations. >> And and I think that there is wide support in our older neighborhoods. >> For this type of of the oversight and opportunity to resolve these issues that have been, again, in some cases going on for a very, very, very long time. Thank you. Believe that coaches question the not so much I froze for us tonight. That's percent sure. >> Very quickly, how many properties do we think we have that are non city-owned that fall into this category just to get it some idea of the universe? >> I think that code compliance could prepare official list, but we would estimate it's between about 7100 and Springfield in Springfield, specifically Riverside Avondale. How many do we have in that area? >> During the demolition by neglect hearings, we were able to hear at several different points from code enforcement about some of these estimates. But they really felt like they needed to spend more time going through some of the code violations in order to get a really accurate number 4. So I don't have a a number on properties in the neighborhood with code enforcement violations that might reach particular level. >> Can you can estimate for me? >> I'm not. I would say in the last 5 years that I've been with rap, we've had one property actually be demolished due to neglect. So I think this would be a small number of properties that were really looking to target. And and, of course, the ultimate goal would be to never reached the potential for neck. Lax are set for demolition and to approach properties earlier on before we get to that question. >> And how many do we have that or city owned? And I assume we're focusing on Springfield in Riverside Avondale that we have a feel for that. Does anybody know >> that or city owned the reasons for properties? Yes. So one of the one of the problems in the past, I think in previous administrations were trying to do everything we could to offload some of these properties to different nonprofits, that enough capacity. So a number of these properties that probably would cat would have normally been maybe Stone City control. We're giving to nonprofits a couple different seed CDC's groups that did not have any real funding or means to repair them in especially as they were just work because they are historic properties. Some of those some of those nonprofits and now gone away, there's gonna languishing. >> And so I see we did have clawed back some of those properties, correct, which this this legislation that attempts to work. So what would have to happen in maybe one of our attorneys can kind of jump in and correct me on this. So for any of those properties, the city wanted to take those properties back. They would have to go through court filing and actually go through education, go to a judge, everything else magistrate in doing so that would be tens of thousands of dollars which is not worth the value of the properties. So now it's just kind of this weird catch. 22, okay. Last question very quickly, who is requesting demolition of these properties at that? You mentioned so in some cases and we can talk about that. Neighbors said the city, some of the properties are condemned by the city because of code compliance. So yes, neighbors that are cold calling code compliance. They show up to see that the back half of the homes following a part of the roof is caving in and many cases neighbors will say, listen, this has been happening for a decade is time and we're only just now calling it in some sometimes homeless people going there light a fire now, the whole house on fire. We've seen those in the past couple years as well. I mean, we just had to fall apart in Springfield this year and the city had to show up in the last because of a because the fact they were dangerous and a risk to lead to safety. Just trying to get it. I feel for the problem. Thank you and thank you chair. You're very welcome. And to that end, I mean that this is meant to be this is not meant to be some massive citywide program. This is meant to be concentrated controlled. We have HPC a board that we have appointments on this board is made up of professionals. It's properly staffed. And so the so the idea was, well, okay, let's let's have them create this list of properties that feasibly could be foreclosed upon by the city, something that the city has power to do right now. But there's really no process to get it done. And then the mayor's office, this Mayor future airs in the next 2050, 30, you know, 100 years that Mayor administration will say, OK of these 10 properties that HPC is looking at potentially foreclose on? Well, we think that we can handle 5 or 6 of them this year will foreclose on this 5 or 6 white, the liens. And then one of these nonprofits with historic preservation as a part of their mission, as well as as well as finance, as well as actual having a bank account. If one of them doesn't want to turn, it would go out to bid to a contractor who also has historic preservation as a part of their repertoire has shown that they can do is for preservation because that's a problem that we see in the city a lot. A lot of contractors take a property because they know the property value could be could one day. But then they don't know how to do anything historical. They got upset because of the windows because of the trust is because of everything else. We've got some good developers here who's city, we know how to work in the historic space. So the bill requires of the dual class. So that way no one could just get on it. They would actually have to take the wherewithal to take a class. And it's gonna be a two-hour class of historic preservation is going to do. And then if a bet on the property and they get it, they get it for relatively cheap that way. They're not going to spend a ton on that property. They have to spend $200,000 to get a property. It's falling apart and then put another. We got developers here to tell us 3 to 4 to 500,000 into it. They're never gonna make their money back. Now we want the private sector to be able to do this. So so that's kind of logic is a look at it a bit on it. They're going for relatively cheaper than you normally would see that they would work on the property. We have to fix it up and get a co you stupid of Occupancy Co stupid documents. He within 2 years. If it's not done within 2 years we have the clawback. They have one more year of an extension. If HPC season doing actual work, maybe economies had a downturn. Whatever else get an extension of to one more year up to 3 years. And if they don't get that COO than property goes back to the city and they will last that money. >> Question for miss. So if I'm a priest, could you clarify if this would also apply to landmarks as well or or not? >> It does generally, yes. So any locally there's some different parts of the bill, but locally or nationally does needed landmark or property with an historic district. >> Thank you. To that end, how much more does that broadens that also include parts of San Marco? I think Durkeeville or 3rd Durkee gardens as a historic district. There's a there's a smaller group to make sure that's correct. So we have around 200 landmarks and dispersed throughout the city, sir and the national districts and council probably should you have comment some questions that this is a good time is good morning, everybody. So one thing people here, Bill, thanks for your work and the task force working and everybody hears work in Jimmy Years. Councilman Palou. So so these these properties could be owned by the city that could be owned by individuals, correct. And we're talking about homes, residential homes for the purpose of this program. These are these are and in the private sector by a nonprofit that are languishing and have all these fines and liens that the city would think in possession of after foreclosure. Can I clarify that is okay. So. >> The first part that talks about the he's the Historic Preservation Commission compiling a list of endangered homes. Those would be generally things that are not owned by the city and the purpose of which is to identify structures that have city leans in fines on them. That could potentially that the city could potentially initiate foreclosure action as and also we could offer, you know, grants or other things, I suppose, but identifying the structures that we want to focus resources on more or less. But then later in the bill and are talking about disposing of property, those are all city-owned assets at that point. This city always has the ability to enforce their liens at any time. But this creates a pathway once should the city for clothes. And let me clarify, that does not necessarily mean the city ends up with the property foreclosures just for sale for an unpaid debt. So in theory, someone else could been on these properties and then this wouldn't apply. But should the city be left with this? The dilapidated residential historic structure. This creates a path for how to get it to entities that can properly rehabilitated. >> Okay. In the city's I can be of a person, a family or does have to be a not for profit. >> So it it. How we have structured is that its offer to non profit not-for-profit organizations that have at their mission rehabilitation of a pound. If if there are none that qualify and want the property, I've structured it so that it could open to be committed competitive bidding process, which is required under Florida law, competitive bidding among state amongst anyone who wants to bed and meets the criteria most. The question are you. So let me put that paint. There's a two-hour I think educational course of the planning department will offer. >> And I'm just looking for some retail, a lot of details, retail. >> And that they would demonstrate that adequate financial resources and experience in historic preservation to carry out a successful rehabilitation. And that would be at the discretion of the real estate division to determine what adequate resources look like for any given property, right, because this is the case by case basis. >> And some of these properties would be in foreclosure. >> No. So we're talking about city-owned assets at this point. City-owned real a state that is a historic. >> Historic properties start residential structure. So it's a really talking a city-owned property, correct? Okay. Okay. We're time out any any property out there. But we're just talking a city owned property and how long it's some of the leaves been on these properties for years and years and years. And yeah, some decades and decades. And how often do we actually collect anything on these lanes? We often do every now and then sometimes Mina, I recall. >> I recall from the demolition by neglect Task force that they collect a very small percentage. Okay. >> So we're not exactly a revenue generator. So so so what this would and this is is, is make these available these properties available to organizations that have the ability to restore them and they have an interest in restoring them and what they did put him back out on the market. You know, that's correct. Okay. And is there any city funding available to like for a private public private partnership parents for something like this? >> Like rehab besides rehab program that that Stone Lee Grant program that we have, we have a tax exemption program Lee's that we offer to the planning Department but the rehab program that will be the only thing. Okay. We have is just for commercial properties, correct? And that is correct. So it's a good point. So it has to be income producing so and not properly. Not for profit as well. Yeah. Okay. So. >> I like this bill a lot. And and I'd like my name be listen. If it isn't already, it isn't. And I would support this. and just a little side note and I don't want to I don't want to get onto this because I'd like this to go on through. I think there's an opportunity that I like to talk with all of these folks and anybody else here to maybe find a way to have some type of partnership that would allow some kind of funding to help with this. And perhaps when the property sells, the money could go back to the city. The city you can help with in that fund could be somewhat of a revolving fund and in some permanent. So I want to have this. I will put together some meetings on that. I've been looking at that for about the last 3 weeks and would love to have you helped. That's a side note. Not sure it's possible, but I that's something that I've had an interest in. But I like the bill and I appreciate you putting this together and everybody who's done work on this. Thank you. Thank you for them. >> Councilman Carlucci and that that was my initial design to was like, alright, will create this pond will do all these things. It was just a matter of where where the council's mindset was on spending. When we spoke with some of the developers we have this meeting several months ago, they come up and said, look, we can fix these prof these properties. We just can't buy them for $150,000 will never make our money back. So this is meant to ensure that we get get the properties in the hands of folks that can do the work and then be able to make a profit on it. You know, I've done this is where the private sector can be of massive value. Add to us if we could do more grants later on down the road, I would love to involve a revolving fund to it would refund itself. But anyway, I went to sir. I'm I'm I'm all about that. That is if we're all surviving after November, the 4th. That's right. Council vice President Kamala, should you have something you want to add? Yeah, thanks, Lisa. >> So just just to make sure I'm understanding the whole process here. Yeah. And I heard something earlier like these are not city-owned properties. Just to clear the deck there heard that it's this is not what we're talking about. So step or so. Here's kind of the timeline. The process from from seeing this for the first time you identify neglected him to see that right, whoever that has leans in fines and that it also has to be historically designated with a local, historic or a national historic whatever. Then it continues to meet the criteria to trigger these. Thanks next step the city for closes on that property. >> That the list is provided to the administration. The administration decides if they want to move forward on that list or take a few off the list. >> Yeah, we're not saying it's going to be a blank slate. All these were foreclosing on these. The city could decide if they want to foreclose or not in the city gets the property. So that point now the city has the property. Then it goes to our surplus, folks and they distribute it to first. They offer it to nonprofits, nonprofits with this specific mission of historic preservation, not historic restoration. That was said earlier, historic preservation, correct? That's what it says. The bill. So yes, okay. And I wanted a probably making a a slight amendment when it comes out to as a marker preservation, along with other preservation society is in there. And so then it goes first. First, kids goes to all the historic preservation societies from our surplus. People as hundreds chop. If none of them take it, then it goes to auction. Yes, okay. And then it's kind of off to the races. They actually get to get the property at a lower value, renovated a benefit re had it. And then it's back on the property tax rolls. Yes, that's the that's the whole kind of think. Yes, cool. And what comes from accolades he was saying and I was thinking this and then he said it. I mean, I think the money from that auction that could go into the rehab or whatever historic trust fund or whatever we have right now that is there is that in the bill are now no, but I love that idea. Yeah, I mean, I think that's that's sort of your solution for the resolve, the or the revolving, you know, funding of that program because I know in our district in my district, it's it's the rehab program is super popular and it's very beneficial and it only makes the communities better. And, you know, doing any type of work on these historic buildings, whether it's commercial or residential, it's very expensive and it's very expensive. So, yeah, that's kind of I thought I just want to make sure I was running through it correctly. Does. Does this bill last question, does this bill only apply to residential or is a commercial, too? >> For this particular bill, its residential and one of the recommendations that we expanded up to quadruplets is because they sit just single-family rental homes. I just didn't want to over. I mean, commercial property is an immense amount of money. And frankly, the properties that have fallen apart the most recent years as residential ones, this this is meant to be a first step is this is us taking a really active role in this process and then I'm sure the bill and the legislation can evolve in the years to come. Okay. That was my initial 10 yet. >> I'm curious about the commercial aspect of it but obviously don't want to overburden the bill because this is taking a long time is a big is a big piece of legislation. I can identify that. But OK, cool, fundamental questions. >> And just to verify believe the question was was asked about so the dollars in the auction could go to this potential of loving fun is a recommendation or making sure? >> Well, I think it would be considered a result, a revolving fund. But the rehab