Staff bloggers

All the votes have been counted, and W.C. Gentry will face Jack Daniels in a runoff election on Nov. 4 to represent Southside schools. Here are the results of the other elections in Duval County:

State Attorney-Fourth Judicial Circuit

Angela Corey- 64.42 percent

Jay Plotkin- 35.58 percent

City Council- At Large Group 2

John Crescimbeni- 25.93 percent

Dick Brown- 24.56 percent

Theresa Graham- 19.55 percent

Circuit Judge C4, G11

Adrian G. Soud- 52.57 percent

Mark Hulsey- 47.43 percent

Circuit Judge, C4, G28

Virginia Norton- 63.49 percent

Rick Buttner- 36.51 percent

For more primary election results, visit jacksonville.activote.com.

All-

For the latest Fay coverage, visit Jacksonville.com

We will post news here on MySouthsideSun.com as we get it in, but Jacksonville.com will have the most current news. If you're a Twitter user, check out our Jaxdotcom Twitter feed. 

As always, let us know if you have any questions or comments. 

The FCAT grades for all of the area schools have just been released. Here's are the grades for Southside schools:

Click here for the full list of schools.

Elementary

Alimacani Elementary-A

Bank of America Learning Academy-A

Brookview Elementary-A

Chet's Creek Elementary-A

Englewood Elementary-A

Greenfield Elementary-B

Hogan-Spring Glen Elementary-C

Holiday Hill Elementary-A

Kernan Trail Elementary-A

Kings Trail Elementary-A

Love Grove Elementary-A

Pine Forest Elementary-A

San Jose Elementary-A

Southside Estates Elementary-C

Spring Park Elementary-C

Twin Lakes Academy Elementary-A

Windy Hill Elementary-B

Middle

Alfred I. Dupont Middle-A

Julia E. Landon Middle-C

Kernan Middle-A

Twin Lakes Middle-A

High

Douglas Anderson School for the Performing Arts-A

Englewood High-D

Sandalwood High-D

Samuel W. Wolfson High-C

Hey users, let's hit this one out of the park: 

We want to know how you feel about the parks in your part of Jacksonville. Are there enough? Are they big enough? Is there enough to do in them, or do they need more programs and equipment? What about maintenance and cleanliness? Be specific about what's needed and where.

Give us your thoughts and let's get some real feedback and ideas generated that might help where help is needed - and give a shout-out where one is needed as well.

Terra Herzberger of the YMCA of Florida's First Coast tell us that MRSA, an antibiotics-resistant form of staph infection, has shown up haphazardly around Northeast Florida and that this winter the YMCA of Florida’s First Coast is taking no risks with its threat.
She writes: "YMCA members will start seeing hand sanitizer dispensers in all the YMCA public areas, like on the wellness floors, in the lobby and in the Kids Zone. Many people overlook their hand sanitizers assuming that it will kill all germs.  What they don’t know is that they are not protected against MRSA unless the sanitizer is proven to kill Staphylococcus Aureus. “We chose this specific sanitizer because it was proven to prevent MRSA and because it was alcohol free, which is safest for our children,” said Christine Colemer, Purchasing Director for the YMCA. The First Coast YMCA is also acquiring in new fitness spray for all exercise equipment which has been proven to kill the MRSA causing bacteria."

This question was recently posed to the Times-Union editorial e-mail group:

We would like your comments on the constitutional amendment up for a
vote on Jan. 29. If passed, the constitutional amendment on property taxes will double
the personal homestead exemption and save the average homestead property
owner about $225 a year. Supporters say government is fat and needs
to be forced to cut spending. Opponents say this approach for cutting taxes is all wrong and that the
potential damage to local government services isn't worth the annual
savings. What is your view and why? Your comments may be used as letters to the editor in either the main
paper or our community sections. If you don't want to be quoted, please say
so.

The comments that follow are all from Southside residents who responded. If you have thoughts on this topic, feel free to create a username and post a comment.

I don't like the system as it is now (two people
living next door in identical houses of equal value
but pay different amounts because on moved in 20 years
ago and the other 10 years ago) and the new law would
not address that as you could have two people living
next door in identical houses bought at the same time
but paying different amounts because one had "better"
portability."  People living next door get same
services and benefits from living in the community and
therefore, in my opinion, ought to be paying the same
property tax.
Fred Hoener

I am very opposed to this amendment, because:
    •    Government at every level  should be accountable to the electorate for taxes and fees they levy and funds  they spend.  This is not possible if State government is  controlling the income and expenditures of local governments.  An  amendment to the Florida Constitution was passed in 1990 to limit the power of  the State to dictate expenditures at the local level.  The currently  proposed amendment would limit the ability of local governments to set local  priorities and spending limits;  this would seriously erode the  accountability of local governments to their citizens.  I have every  confidence in the voters that if local officials are taxing or spending  unwisely, voters can and will take care of that at the ballot box.
    •    The proposed amendment puts  a one-size-fits all solution on the perceived problem.  While it  is certainly true that some Florida cities and counties need to rein in their  taxing and spending, it is equally true that some have been very responsible  and frugal in collecting and spending taxpayers dollars.  There are over  400 cities, counties and school boards in Florida, with huge variations in  size, population density, urban or rural qualities, income levels, priorities,  and other variables.  No matter how high or low the State would set  spending limits, it could not possibly be right for all local  governments. Local decisions should be made at the local  level.
    •    If State officials are so  concerned about Florida citizens being overtaxed, they can do one of 2  things: reduce State taxes and  spending accordingly; or reduce the  burden of State mandates on local governments so that they can afford  to lower their tax rates.  Most would be delighted to do so!   In all fairness, State government is burdened by federal mandates in  the same way that local governments are burdened by State mandates and  restrictions.  It is easy to "pass the buck" under the present system by  mandating how someone else must tax and spend, yet never having to be  accountable for this.  The proposed amendment would exacerbate this  problem.
I would like to have my tax bill reduced as much as the next person.  At the same time, I want a tax system that is fair and equitable and enables accountability at all levels.  The proposed amendment will do none of these things, and will have many unintended negative consequences.
Brenda B. Pollak

I disagree with the homestead deduction increase, because it will not force the government to spend better, it will just push them to find other avenues and fees to impose to pay the way.
This is already in evidence in the city budgets and spending from last year.
Peter A. Lesley

The admendment should be passed as well as recent new taxes should be repealed. I have everyone Names down when they run again for reelection.. The city is very fat and without leadership from Council or the Mayors office Many of us are retired and new taxes, gas prices etc are ruining our savings  We can change things.
Curtis Carter Jr.

I am for the admendment!
There is no other way to get the governments attention to
change or reorganize how we do things , which we have
been doing the same way for the last 50 years. The only answer we get
is we need 'more' money. We never hear about a change in
the " way " we do things.
There are no new ideas, no inovation, no doing more with
less people. Its always " We need more "Money "
Now is the only chance we will ever get to have true
leadership. This will be the last chance to  force them to do
more with less.
If this doesn't pass, it will be another 50 years of the status quo !
AND the need for MORE money every year forever!
Albert Rabassa

I believe that the amendment process should be difficult enough to ensure that only issues of universal importance and application would be considered for voters' approval.   For example, whether property taxes should be allowed at all.   Since that issue appears to be settled, it's up to the legislature to determine specific rates and exemptions.     Every amendment for special interest or single issue zealots (remember the smoking ban?) dilutes the purpose of the constitution as a framework for our republican system of government.   As much as I'd like to see all taxes reduced, this is not the way to do it.   I am forced to vote against the amendment.   OUCH !
Jon Dehner

In my opinion, local government has lost a tremendous amount of credibility.
We have a mayor who is a pathetic failure as a leader; he has not been able
to get a courthouse built after five-plus years of trying, his cronies have
gotten contracts with the city that have been proved to be illegal, and he
cannot get his facts straight about whether to support any number of issues
he campaigned on.  The City Council is no better - they seem interested only
in feathering their own nest at the expense of the voters and are dominated
by developers wishing to pave the entire county.  No wonder there's strong
sentiment for mandated property tax cuts.
But is the proposed constitutional amendment the answer?  Not necessarily,
although the proposed portability of accrued tax savings appeals to me.
Cutting tax revenues to the city will only mean that the politicians and
bureaucrats will find another way to pry the necessary funding out of their
constituents' pockets; witness the ease with which Peyton rammed through the
recent fees for garbage collection and stormwater management expenses.  The
public hardly made a whimper.
The real solution is for local governments to be forced to do a realistic
self-examination and be honest with the taxpayers about the need for all the
layers of government.  I am personally appalled at the number of folks who
are drawing six-figure salaries for what seems to be mediocre performance in
their positions.  I think that government needs to re-evaluate every single
program and justify each of them every year - zero-based budgeting with
realistic proposals for decrements in services should be the norm, not the
exception.  And no portion of city government should be exempt from the
process - especially the sheriff's department.
The proposed constitutional amendment is not necessarily the best answer to
the problem, but it may be the only way that local governments can be forced
to develop realistic budgets and goals.  And voters just might approve it.
David Leedy

I really have a mixed bag of feelings about this.  On one hand, we get the scary threats of laying off police and firemen and closing libraries, etc., etc., etc.  On the other hand, I do believe it is true that City government can trim  spending.  That's what our family has to do when money gets tight--and I can look around this city and see a number of ways to reduce the operating budget.  For those who say it isn't worth a measly $225 annual savings--hey, that really is OUR money, isn't it?
Pat Bloebaum

I really worry that this is a payback to builders and developers rather than a move to save the average homeowner any real money.  The cuts to education alone could be staggering.  We have heard fro months that education would not be affected, how is this possible?  Whenever Tallahassee needs money they do two things first.  1) Raise tuition at universities and then 2) cut education spending.  Schools would be forced to make hard choices next year if not sooner.  A school that is already financially strapped may cut out a music teacher to afford a Kindergarten teacher or just to have money just in case.  Even the schools that are not struggling may see cut backs to good programs.  It is horrible to think that our schools, fire fighters and police department would be forced to cut loose good people or cut back services so that I can save $225.00.  Wake up Florida and don't let this happen!
Kevin Tapee

I say vote NO.  Government has no reserve and too many services have been cut or will be cut.  We need to keep our libraries open.  We need to have more "arts" in our public schools.  We need more police and fire personnel to protect people and property.   We need some financial reserve for natural disasters.  We do not need to cut taxes - we need to improve services and learn to be more efficient.
Maybe we could cut legislators and the governor's salaries if there's a need for money.
Wendy Honigman

THE PROPERTY TAX AND THE RETAIL SALES TAX ARE BOTH VERY
REGRESSIVE BY DEFINITION. TO TRY TO MODIFY THE REGRESSIVENESS
CREATES OTHER INEQUITIES. THE SOLUTION IS FOR FLORIDA TO JOIN
THE REAL WORLD WITH A STATE INCOME TAX. THAT IS THE ONLY SOLUTION.
MORE REVCENUE IS CERTAINLY NEEDED FOR CITIES LIKE JACKSONVILLE
WHICH IS SLIDING DOWNWARD.
Domenick A. Bottini III

I plan to vote NO for this Constitutional Amendment to lower property taxes. The average amount by which our taxes would be reduced is insignificant, not enough to warrant the resulting decrease in our city services. I DO, however, believe that all areas of government can and should cut spending. It's no different than running a business....if the money isn't there, you reduce/amend the budget, thus cut spending.
Lina Ingraham

This constitutional amendment should not be passed.
I agree that government spending should be reduced, where possible.
To flip a switch (pass the amendment) and instantly change the tax base
and expect it to work without unintentional negative consequences that
could have a detrimental effect to the health, safety and welfare of our
community does not make sense to me.
I would be inclined to support a gradual reduction in taxes to allow our
government to make an orderly transition.
Jerome Bernstein

"Property tax is an interesting concept.  When property values rise and tax
assessors are diligent, then new construction and resale homes are taxed at
the current value.  Those taxpayers carry the burden at the assessed value
in today's dollars.  People who bought homes years or decades ago and held
on may live right next door to someone with a home that is truly worth about
the same yet be taxed substantially less.  What is really interesting is
that for the last few years, as property values skyrocketed, property taxes
on new homes and resales significantly moved up.  As the real estate market
goes through this painful correction, the reverse process (reducing assessed
value) doesn't always work quickly.  Consequently, homeowners seek tax
relief.  I don't think $225 a year approaches the break that homeowners
really need but any relief is better than no relief.
Here's the bottom line, true for all levels of government.  Elected
officials will find a way to spend however much they have available from
whatever sources they have.  Can anyone remember a government agency turning
back unused funding?  No one wants to cut essential services but likewise,
no one wants to pay in money to something (government) that forever needs
more, no matter how much it receives.  People want to see some demonstration
of sound financial management before they back off.  Right now, voting for
this constitutional amendment will tell local government to spend wisely
because endless funding is not a given.
Too bad we can't get a similar referendum on federal spending.  Talk about
disastrous fiscal management."
Louis Rose

Taxpayers will not save money if this passes.  They will pay somewhere else not knowing where that will be.
Before you vote on the constitutional amendment to reduce your real estate taxes, ask yourself a few questions. Is the government going to spend less money? If no, where is the new money to come from? Utility fees? Garbage fees? Sales taxes? Apartment properties, requiring higher rents? Business property, requiring higher prices? Sales taxes on groceries? Sales taxes on medicine? What else? No, the government is not going to spend less money. You KNOW that. So , look out when the government says it is coming to help you. LOOK OUT!!!
Charles Krueger

I am opposed to the constitutional amendment and feel it would be
detrimental to all of us. While the idea of reduced taxes may be appealing,
I think of the shortfall this amendment would create for so many important
agencies would not only be hurtful -- it would simply open up new avenues
for making necessary collections. Already the mayor and powers that be have
implemented fees, and I feel that would be just the beginning.
For once, it seems to me, Jacksonville has had its house in order, and this
amendment undermines a system that has been working very well!
Frank Dunahoe

My vote will be a firm "NO"; the proposed solution is worse than the current situation. Not against it because of anything coming from the Mayor's office, my reasoning is entirely different.
First off: it is impossible for any "expert" to assess the value of any commerical or residential property as ANY value they may put on it is a "guess". The only way to determine the true value of any real estate is "what someone is willing to pay" i.e. the assessment could be most anywhere in the "mix" high, low or wherever. Thus any property assessment system is bogus and unfair.
Sorta like, if you think your services are worth say $50,000. to a propective employer and he/she offers $45,000. you have two options remain unemployed, or accept the offer. If you accept, what are your services worth? Market price, of course.
Solution: the Fair Tax concept, i.e. you spend money you pay. In other words increase the "use tax" and in exchange eliminate property taxes. Everyone, including renters(eliminate built in property taxes of landlord) would benefit.
Probably would produce more revenue, and certainly would be cheaper to administrate.
Currently, we pay taxes on non income, including vacant commerical, producing real estate. Penalizing wealth which is most people's biggest asset is unfair from the git go.
Don Renninger

I am generally against all constitutional amendments.  Most are excuses for
being unable to pass the legislation in the House and Senate.  If the tax is so
important it should be debated in both chambers of the legislature so that
the public though it's elected officials have the opportunity to alter or amend
the Governors request.
Bob Schellenberg

Do people actually think this Amendment will really save them money?
All it will do is pass the costs on to businesses in increases in their
property taxes, which in turn will pass those costs on to the consumer
in higher prices.  As a rule, I object to the vast majority of
Constitutional Amendments because they go far above what the
Constitution should be, and that is a  framework for government and not
a way to pass various laws.  This amendment fits that definition, we are
positioning our state with these amendments that if there is a real need
to raise funds, the state won't be able to raise them  At the most, this
should be passed as a statute instead of a constitutional amendment.
Brian Murphy

I would not like to see the Constitutional Amendment passed by the citizens of the State of Florida.  The loss of revenue in Duval County has already caused a great deal of loss to the "social services" in our City & County.  If more revenue is lost because of this state amendment, the loss to our local community will greatly affect the quality of life in Jacksonville.  The approximate cost of $225 per year in property tax is a small price to pay for the services it represents to the citizens of Jacksonville.
Barbara Hall

I must tell you that I am totally against the amendment.  Government is careless and sloppy with our tax dollars sure, but this amendment will affect our schools, public libraries, parks and other services.  The $225 dollars it saves is penny wise and pound foolish.
The loss of services the amendment will cause will affect the lower and middle class in a negative manner while it gives a huge tax savings to the rich.  No matter what, our city government will respond with ways to finance their greed and incompetence at the cost of the citizen.
People should be very afraid of what this amendment will do.  They are selling us the same bill of goods they did when they said the lottery would enhance education.  Instead it took money from the general funds meant for schools and replaced it lottery dollars with strict restrictions on its use.
I urge every voter to to get out and vote NO on this "sham" of an amendment.
Vincent J. Pellegrino

I believe that the constitutional amendment is a huge mistake.  Those who championed it have not done the residents of Florida a favor.  We are already a low tax state compared with others, with some of the worst schools in the nation.  (I know this is supposed to not affect schools, but it will.  Look at the lottery!)
The legislators have passed the buck.  They knew that the average voter pays little attention and will vote for anything that lowers taxes.  The amendment will pass, al;though those of us who pay the highest taxes know that it is a mistake.  As high tax payers, we would rather go ahead and pay them than see services curtailed.
The Save Our Homes is a huge disservice to homeowners.  If my home is worth as much as my neighbors, why should I pay fewer taxes because I have lived there longer.  (I am a beneficiary of this law.)  And to make it portable just compounds the inequities.
Although seniors do have a problem with expenses and these laws are tailored to help them out, the inequities are such that other people with needs suffer too much.
Nancy Edwards

I strongly recommend the people of Florida approve amendment 1, increasing the homestead exemption and several other benefits. The amendment will decrease their taxes and allow them to put more money into their pockets and the retail economy, which will help everyone.
It’s time taxpayers stood up for themselves.  We have depended on our elected officials to do the "right thing" and have been let down almost every time.  The old “trust me “ has been abused too long and it should now fall on deaf ears.
We have a proposed courthouse whose cost has gone from $200 million to $400 million.  We have new “fees” (taxes by another name) which haven’t even taken effect and there’s already talk of required increases which have nothing to do with amendment 1.
There are threats of a decrease in police and fire protection, but no mention of a sincere budget cutting effort. We have blatant flaunting of our “sunshine laws” and then lame childish excuses for the abuses when caught.  We even have to pay extra for a nanny to watch our politicians to ensure they obey the laws.
The runway extension at Craig field is another example of trust me gone wrong.
We could replace the politicians in the next election, but the next bunch will be no better.  They all owe their positions to someone.
Take control taxpayers! Research what and whom you are asked to vote for. Don’t get your information from just the TV ads. That’s what happened when the Florida voters restricted their own right to change the state constitution.
Wake up Jacksonville!
Tom Winn
 

Hello! Welcome to your new site at MySouthSun.com. This is the place to go to 24/7 for the latest updates on news, happenings, entertainment and lifestyle activities in the Southside area. We'll be working to help spur a conversation with you, and also hope to get you conversing with each other.

That's chiefly what this new effort is all about: helping you help us and the community, by being the eyes and ears of the area. Let other users know what's going on with your organization, on your block, in your school, in your church or in your home.

And give us your opinions on the Southside and the topics important to it. That's what "hyper-local" is all about! So what are you waiting for? Start filling us all in.

Welcome to MySouthsideSun.com!

Everyone here at the office is excited to finally have this Web site up and running. We are even more excited about the opportunities MySouthsideSun.com give us - the ability to interact with you. We will keep you updated, using blogs and photos, on what's happening in your community.

All we ask in return your praise and attention :)

My job is the "Community Publishing Coordinator," which is a big word for "call me if you have any questions." If you have trouble registering, writing a blog, uploading a photo or finding some news article, feel free to give me a call (or comment to this blog).

I'm also the person to call if you want to get involved in MySouthsideSun.com. For example, if you're a high school journalism teacher reading this, give me a call and I'd be happy to come speak to your class about the online publishing world. If you're a member of the Chamber of Commerce, I'll come out to a Chamber event and talk about the abilities of MySouthsideSun.com and how we hope to change the way our First Coast interacts. If you have dirty windows, call this guy

I look forward to hearing from you.