Fernandina Commissioners Move to Rewrite Paid Parking Law Just 7 Weeks After Voters Approved It
By Mike Lednovich/Editor
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.
The replacement, Ordinance 2026-16, would preserve that requirement but incorporate it into the city's existing parking regulations, clarify how future referendums would be conducted and establish exemptions for parking fees at the municipal airport, golf course and special events.
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 ordinance must pass a second reading by at least four votes before becoming law. If approved, it would take effect Nov. 19, the day after the city's current downtown paid parking program is scheduled to end.
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.
Under the proposed ordinance, any future commission seeking to establish paid parking would first have to adopt a resolution identifying the proposed parking area. The question would then go before city voters, who would have to approve it by a majority of those voting before the commission could enact a paid parking ordinance.
The ordinance specifically excludes the current downtown paid parking program from its exemptions.
City Attorney Teresa Prince told commissioners the new ordinance was intended to place the citizen initiative, Ordinance 2025-11, into Chapter 78 of the city code while clarifying its provisions.
"This is simply to take the Ordinance Number 2025-11 and place it in Chapter 78 of the code," Prince said.
The ordinance also exempts certain existing parking fees at the municipal airport and golf course. Those facilities do not appear to operate general paid parking programs. City fee schedules provide for long-term vehicle parking charges at the airport and overnight parking fees at the golf course. The exemptions would allow those limited charges to continue without a referendum.
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.
Commissioner Joyce Tuten, who supports paid parking as a revenue source, defended the changes as necessary to clarify the original ordinance and protect the referendum requirement from future commissions.
"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.
She said the original ordinance's definition of paid parking could unintentionally interfere with activities such as high school students charging visitors to park during the annual Shrimp Festival.
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.
Tuten said the ordinance also makes clear that future commissioners cannot repeal the referendum requirement with a simple 3-2 vote.
"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."
Despite her support for paid parking, Tuten said the overwhelming referendum vote persuaded her to support the replacement ordinance.
Ayscue questioned why the commission was taking action now when it had previous opportunities to incorporate the citizen initiative into the city code.
"This commission could have put it in before they put paid parking in," Ayscue said. "Codifying the ordinance could have happened many, many times over if that's what this commission wanted to do, and it didn't."
He said the original ordinance should remain in place unless voters approve changes.
"I'm not in favor of repealing this. It should stay as it is," Ayscue said.
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.
"So, any future commission, if they want paid parking, would simply have to go to the voters before they implement paid parking," Poynter said. "That's very clear."
Poynter said he expects paid parking to return eventually because of the growing costs of maintaining city services used by visitors.
The proposed changes drew objections from residents involved in the citizen initiative campaign that led to the August referendum.
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.
"I don't trust y'all with paid parking. I've lost a significant amount of trust," Lore said.
He emphasized that the petition drive was intended to give residents the final say over paid parking, not permanently prohibit it.
"The intent of that referendum was really simple," Lore said. "It was to give the citizens the right to vote."
The citizen initiative followed months of opposition to the downtown parking program, including a petition campaign that placed the question before voters.
Lore acknowledged that residents might eventually approve paid parking again, but said that decision should remain with the electorate.
"There's still a generation that's here that doesn't want it," Lore said. "But I think somewhere along the line, it will be."
Resident Jack Imber was more critical of the proposed replacement.
"This codify is nothing more than negating the vote that the citizens of Fernandina Beach plainly made," Imber said.
He questioned whether commissioners were attempting to create an opportunity to bring back paid parking despite the referendum results.
"We just don't want paid parking at all," Imber said.
The discussion also exposed continuing disagreements over the financial consequences of ending the downtown parking program.
Resident Roger Martin challenged a $1.2 million fiscal impact figure referenced in the commission materials, arguing that the actual financial return from paid parking was considerably smaller once operating expenses were deducted.
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.
He also cited August figures of approximately $120,000 in revenue and $71,000 in expenses, leaving about $49,000.
Martin said the city should consider the effects of paid parking on downtown businesses and the divisions it created among residents.
"What damage have we done amongst the citizens that we're fighting?" Martin asked. "What damage have we done to the retail and the businesses that are downtown?"
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.
The City's website reported net revenue of $622,628 as of August.
Poynter defended the parking program, saying its financial performance would have improved over time.
"Paid parking really worked downtown," Poynter said.
He argued that residents should not have to shoulder the full cost of maintaining a city that attracts large numbers of visitors.
The replacement ordinance does not authorize the city to restart downtown paid parking when the current program expires Nov. 18. Under its provisions, a new program would require a separate public referendum approving the proposed parking area.
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.
Comments