The Section 8 Interview: John Peyton
August 30, 2004; City Hall, Jacksonville, FL.
by Shelton Hull
SDH: Who are you voting for?
JP: I’m voting for George Bush.
SDH: Why?
JP: I think George Bush has the conservative values that are in alignment with my values. I think he’s a pro-business President. His taxing policy is good for business– which, in turn, is good for Jacksonville. I think he provides decisive leadership in a time of uncertainty, with the War on Terror, and that decisiveness is important at this particular time, so that’s why he’s got my vote.
SDH: Do you feel that northeast Florida suffers, in terms of how it’s represented in the national press, because of this sort of imagined connection with Bush, considering that we have a Republican governor, and all the things people have said about 2000?
JP: Oh, you mean the election debacle?
SDH: Yes.
JP: Well, I think the entire state suffered, not just northeast Florida. It was a really unfortunate situation where there’s a lack of confidence in the voting systems here, but I think we have gotten a remedy. My voting place, they have better technology where I go, to vote, and I think we’ve learned from that experience. That’s certainly not the kind of thing you want to be known for.
SDH: What kind of issues should the people of Jacksonville be thinking about as they cast their votes this fall?
JP: Well, I think people have to select candidates that best portray their core value systems. It’s really about aligning your core values with the candidate, so it’s a personal decision. It’s what you think the government’s role is in business, taxing policy, military spending, policies on, you know, general economic policies.
My view is, the Republican Party does a pretty good job of identifying what it’s for, and it is for lower taxes and a stronger economy. Where I come from– I’m a private sector guy, worked in business most of my life– I think government should get out of the way when it can and allow the free enterprise system to work, and minimize the tax burden. I think individuals and businesses can spend the money more effectively than government can, in most instances. So naturally I look for candidates that reflect that ideology, and I think every person should do that.
SDH: Do you feel that you’ve gotten a fair shake from the media during the time you’ve been Mayor?
JP: I think, all in all– the media– well, that’s, you know [laughs]. There have been a few stories that jump out that I think have been, that were, a little, uh, a little– had a bias to them.
There was an early story about supporters that were displeased, in the Times-Union. I thought there was a story there, but they missed it, and the story was that this Mayor is going to lead without said supporters telling us how we’re going to run the Mayor’s office. The story was: this is an independent Mayor who makes independent decisions, is not cowtowing to anybody, in spite of their level of giving to a political campaign. To me, there are two types of supporters: there are supporters who think you’ll do a good job, and there are supporters who think they will do a good job. And we had a parting of the ways with certain supporters who thought they would, you know, basically be running this office. That’s not going to happen.
SDH: Do you think it’s appropriate for Republicans to publicly contradict their leaders’ position? For example, some of the things Judge Moran has said about the Courthouse project– and not him, but others. Democrats are going to say what they say, but do you think things like that make it harder–
JP: I don’t think that’s a partisan issue. I think a person’s opinions on the Courthouse, or a person’s opinion on Better Jacksonville spending, or Super Bowl spending– those are not partisan issues, they’re community issues. The fact of the matter is, we have limited resources and tremendous needs. There should be healthy debate about how we’re going to arrive at an answer. I don’t consider dissention partisan– maybe just a disagreement about how we spend our limited resources. That’s Democracy. That’s part of the process, and I think it’s healthy to have dissention. It forces us to really exasperate all the alternatives before we line up or come down on a particular issue. Truth is, dissention may actually help us create a better decision, through different perspectives and different imputs. While it’s not a lot of fun to experience such criticism or ridicule, it’s a part of the system, and I think we should encourage lively debate.
SDH: Prices of steel and concrete have risen dramatically over the last few years. Do you think there was any way for the precious Administration to have known that prices were going to do what they’ve done?
JP: Actually, most of the increases were incurred during my term, and it’s something you don’t really forecast for. You build in a contingency. Every project has a contingency for unforeseen escalations or project scope changes, but you don’t anticipate that kind of dramatic increase– you really don’t.
One thing I’ve observed is that there’s an intolerance in the public’s eye for public officials changing their mind, which is really a double standard, because most people change their mind all the time. [laughs] That’s everyone’s perogative, but there’s a lot more scrutiny in the public eye for not changing your mind. In this instance, to me, it was about doing the right thing. The environment changed. The environment changed. The scope of the work we wanted to do could not be accomplished, in large part because construction costs went up. Steel and concrete have gone off the charts. I can’t be held accountable for China’s strong economy [laughs]. China’s strong economy is putting a squeeze on cement, a squeeze on steel. In addition to that, fuel costs are going up and impacting, plywood’s gone up– all construction materials have gone up. So, you have to be nimble to a degree, to accommodate a changing world, and that’s what I think we’ve done. The Courthouse project has been an unpleasant project, but 10, 20 years from now, we’ll look back and see we made the right decision.
SDH: Is there a contingency in place to account for future increases in prices?
JP: What we’ve done with this new budget– the 267.9 [million], which is the new number– we have triple contingency, just so we make sure that we don’t run the risk of undermining the taxpayers’ confidence even more by going over budget…. I said: “Look, we’re going to go up on the budget, we’re going to go up on the contingency, to make sure that we don’t have another episode where the public confidence is at risk.”
SDH: Do you think the taxpayers have really noticed what’s happened with currency devaluation over the last five years? This process really started around 1998–
JP: With the international markets.
SDH: Yeah. Does that affect us here?
JP: I think it depends on what business you’re in. If you’re in trade, you certainly notice it. We’re trying to grow our international business here, so I would like to think that there were more people aware of that. I don’t think the local businessman, who doesn’t have much international interaction, would be experiencing that.
SDH: The young people of America, generally, and specifically Jacksonville, have not done a good job of participating in the political process. Part of that is that they feel that their leaders are not really accountable to their interests. Is there anything you’d say to the under-30 population of this city, as far as what they can do to help you?
JP: One of the things that was unique about our campaign was that we tapped into that group that had not been tapped before. The election committee was made up of some four or five hundred young people, most of whom had never participated in a political campaign and, quite frankly, had a very positive experience that fortunately, that we won, was even more positive, and now they’re being invited to be a part of the process here. My observation is that young people don’t lack ability, they lack opportunity, and by having a younger Mayor and a younger administration– this floor is pretty youthful– I think it opens more opportunity for young people, and I think that’s good for Jacksonville, to have that youthful involvement.
SDH: During the campaign, how did the input you received from that group differ from input you were getting from people who were a little more seasoned in the process?
JP: Their issues and concerns were different. The younger person was more interested in what we’re going to do to attract higher-paying jobs for people out of college. Jacksonville’s a difficult town for someone right out of college to find work, unless you’re a lawyer or a doctor, a track like that.
There was also a lot of interest in housing. There’s a desire for our downtown to be a vibrant place for our young people to get together, to function very much like a neighborhood– a place where you can live, you can work, recreate, socialize and do all those things that young people enjoy doing. We’ve had a real focus on that here: What can we do to make it a more fun city for young people? Housing, I think, is the first step. We’ve got 11 E. Forsyth, which has 96, 97% occupancy. I had four people at one time on my staff living there, which is great. The new facility here, the old Roosevelt that used to be the Carlington [?], it’s going to be another hip, loft-style, studio-style place to live.
Having a place for young people to live is a start, because I think a lot of the employers follow people. Wherever the people are living, that’s where the employers go. That’s certainly the case with southside development. I think we’re making great strides in that direction, making sure we’re encouraging more housing downtown. My ideal number is 10,000 units– that’s what I’d like to see. We’ve got about 2,000 either on-line or coming on-line soon, but I think ten is where you start getting the critical mass to really make things work, to make your nightlife function more like your day-life, and your retail starts to flourish. That’s one issue with the Landing. In my mind, the challenge of the Landing is that the business model doesn’t work with this number of residents. It’s not a matter of aesthetically fixing up the building, it’s creating a business model that’s more effective– and part of that is having people living here, versus just coming here to work. The goal is nightlife that’s equivalent to daylife, and we want to see it grow.
So, that’s how they differ: their interests and priorities were different. I think your more seasoned political supporter was concerned about having a business-friendly government, where permitting is consistent and time-sensitive, where the taxing policy was less burdensome and government was responsive. We’ve listened to both those issues, and tried to respond.
SDH: Clear Channel Communications owns a number of radio and television station in the city. Have their contributions to the city, in your opinion, outweighed the effect of the downward pressure they exert on local culture?
JP: All I can say is that Clear Channel has been a very willing and enthusiastic supporter of my literacy program. Everything I’ve asked them to do, they’ve done. They’re actually our media sponsor for our effort to improve literacy in Jacksonville, and that’s a very big commitment on their part.
SDH: That’s a good thing.
JP: It’s a great thing. It’s important. Of all the things we’re doing, I think our efforts to improve literacy could be the most long-lasting and important things we do. Improving the lives of individuals, but also making sure our workforce is competitive in a knowledge-based economy. To attract the kind of jobs we want to see here, to raise the per-capita income, we need to have a workforce that can learn, and that can re-learn, who can think critically and can think creatively.
Literacy is the first place where all that begins. We’re targeting four year-olds, as a starting point. We’re basically creating a standard by which we can measure literacy in this community, which we think can be a national model. We’re actually reaching four year-olds through the daycare providers. It’s hard to change parenting, but you can reach the daycare providers, especially the ones that are on voucher systems that come through city funds. We’re putting in reading coaches and encouraging more reading aloud, raising awareness and measuring, measuring the progress we’re making, to see what’s working and what’s not working. We have got a very ambitious program.
We’ve never invested in a major way in a learning component like this. Education is the number one concern among Jacksonville citizens, as it should be, and this is a way I think I can help improve it– to improve the early-reading skills of some of our community’s youngest members, improving with them and hopefully introducing it to the school system and more prepared students, who can hopefully succeed.
SDH: What can the private sector do to help that effort along?
JP: A lot of things. One of the goals is to give away a million books to four year-olds, and we’re raising money to do that. Volunteer readers: we’re actually creating these “rally teams,” where we have people that are trained to train, train the trainer and just reading aloud…. We’ve got the book club. We’re signing up four year-olds– they get a backpack and a blanket, and we’re publishing a book every month– a book that is written for Jacksonville children. Talks about Jacksonville geography, places to see. I’m in character form. We’re really trying to build up enthusiasm for reading. It’s one of those things that, obviously, there’s dollars involved, and any kind of private fundraising is appreciated, but also just active involvement. We have a volunteer coordinator at the Children’s Commission. We provide a how-to guide– you don’t just send someone out there to read, you make sure they have the basic skills and know the things you do and the things you don’t do.
It’s an elaborate, sophisticated program, but we think it has the potential to be a national model, quite frankly, because there are very few communities, if any, that have been able to radically improve literacy in their communities. And we’re making a valiant effort to do that. My feeling is, it’ll be hard to measure, it’s a long-term commitment, but it’s worth it. And we’re going to do some things that don’t work, but it’s worth the risk, because we’re going to do some things that do work. I think, of all the things we do, we’ll build a lot of buildings and pave a lot of roads, but this will have the most long-lasting impact on the community of anything we do.
SDH: Were you aware of the challenges that lay ahead when you decided to run for Mayor, and were you enthusiastic about them?
JP: I never anticipated a Courthouse that was a troubled as this one is. This has been a very poorly-managed project from inception, and it’s taken longer than it should have to get it back on track, but we’re on track now. Jacksonville is a dynamic city, at a very exciting part of its history. When a community is going through this kind of metamorphosis, it’s reasonable to think that there are going to be challenges. We haven’t seen anything we haven’t been able to address. Naturally, I anticipated this being a challenging job. I did not anticipate the Courthouse to be the mess that it is, but we’re working through that. Everything else is about as expected.
This is an exciting time here. There are a lot of great things happening. To be here, in this office, on the ground floor of all the great things that are happening in this city, is a great honor and great privilege for me, and I take it very seriously. We try each day to list all the angles, all the alternatives, and make the best long-term decisions–not the decisions that are politically expedient, but decisions that are in the best interests of the Jacksonville economy and the Jacksonville community. I ran on that. I said “Look, I’m going to do what’s right, not what’s expedient.”
The Courthouse is a good example of that. The politically popular thing would have been to build the wrong building for 232 [million] and shift the cost to future administrations. The right thing to do is to increase the budget, build it right, and appreciate it 20 years from now.
SDH: There’s been a lot of speculation about Florida’s connection to 9/11, as far as hijackers, where they’d been, where Bush was the day before etc. Some of this has been on the big screen recently. Do you think it’s reckless for people who don’t have any connection to Florida and don’t know what’s going on in Florida to openly speculate about these things, especially in regard to terrorism?
JP: All I know is what I’ve read. There was activity in Florida among some of the people that hijacked those planes and flew them into the World Trade Center. That’s the extent of my knowledge. I’m sure they moved around a great deal through the country. To say there’s a link to Florida, I think, is a stretch, but I think there is evidence that there was traffic in and around Florida among some of these hijackers. I don’t buy into any of the conspiracy theories. It’s ironic that the President was here the day before. I don’t think there’s any connection there to speak of.
SDH: Are you satisfied with the way you’re kept in the loop about national security issues, relative to this area?
JP: I’ve been to Washington, DC with Sheriff Rutherford twice. We’ve been working with Homeland Security to make sure Jacksonville gets its fair share of homeland security dollars. We’ve discovered there’s a flaw in the formula by which they distribute homeland security dollars. They have several criteria– one of the most important is population density. Well, because we’re a consolidated government, they take our population and divide it over the land, which here is 800 square miles, give or take. It makes us look like a rural area; the density is very, very low. There are a few other city/counties that are consolidated and are suffering the same consequence, but we are the 13th largest city in America. 50 cities have been getting distribution of homeland security dollars, and we’ve got none. 50, most of which are smaller than us; significantly smaller, in some cases. So we’re working with them to revisit the formula, so that we don’t get excluded. They have shown a willingness to change the formula, which is great; it tells us our trips have been worthwhile.
Also, coordinating with the federal agencies on Super Bowl security. As you know, we made an appeal to the state for funding for security, to the tune of seven, eight million dollars in state assistance for security reasons. This is a big event for Jacksonville. The Governor vetoed that request, so we are now making our appeal to the federal level to assistance. What we’ve discovered is a huge willingness to help– not necessarily by writing a check, but in providing the people, the equipment, the dogs, all the technology necessary to keep this city safe during the event, which is, obviously, the most widely-watched in the world.
SDH: John Kerry has made it clear that whether he wins or loses, he intends to attend the Super Bowl next year. Have you spoken with the Kerry people about that? I’d assume that he’d be sitting in the box with you.
JP: Don’t assume that. [laughs] I’m sure he won’t have a problem getting a ticket, but I’m not aware of his plans to attend. I hope George Bush attends, though, and he’ll be welcome to sit in my box.
SDH: Do you intend to run for a second term in 2007?
JP: Yeah, I think what we’re doing here is important, and it’s easier to get things done in eight years than in four years. Four years, in the scope of things, is not very long. We’re talking about raising per-capita income– that’s a long-term experience. Some of the initiatives we’ve launched, either raising per-capita income or improving literacy or going from the biggest park system to the best park system– I think our impact on those initiatives is more profound over an eight-year period, versus a four-year period. But that’s up to the voters, not me, and it’ll be up to them to decide if they want me or not.
SDH: Who’s your enforcer?
JP: Enforcer?
SDH: Who’s the person who, when you really need to get people on your side, like in an 11th-hour type of situation, who brings them together?
JP: Well, well, give me a hard and concrete example, so I know what you’re talking about, because I’m not sure if I understand.
SDH: To take an example from national politics, when George Bush [41] was President, his strategist Lee Atwater was photographed with his pants down– it was a publicity shot– and Bush wanted him set straight, so he had W. do it.
JP: All I can say to that is that we have a staff up there of several chiefs; we have a pretty flat organizational structure. Chief Operating Officer is Dan Clinton, Chief of Staff is Scott Teagle, Chief of Policy is Steve Diebenow, Chief of Community is Pete Jackson, Chief of Communications is Susie Wiles, and I would say that everyone does the heavy lifting to get things done.
We work in a team environment. It’s not a hierarchical structure, it’s a flat structure. Everyone has their areas of responsibility, so I think it’s almost issue-specific. Whatever the issue is, obviously there’s someone there who knows more that than the other person, and they would take the lead, not only in gathering the facts, but also making the recommendations of where we go in the future. So I would say that we all do heavy lifting in a team-type setting, but I would venture to say there’s no one central place. The Chief of Staff, of course, is responsible for the staff, making sure we’re all pointed in the right direction and are on the same page. The Chief of Policy is dealing more with public policy– you know, passing legislation through the City Council, and seeing where that goes. So it really depends on the issue. I wouldn’t say there’s any one person who gets all the bad jobs.
SDH: I don’t know if you read Folio–
JP: I do read Folio.
SDH: Is there anything that you’ve seen in recent Folios that you’d like to contradict, because I notice there’s usually not much from your office that appears.
JP: What I’ve noticed is that probably they’ve been spending a lot of time in the outlying areas. The focus has been St. Johns County, Clay County, even Baker, which is probably good. I think there’s probably a need for that. There’s probably an opportunity for coverage there. But I have noticed that there hasn’t been a lot of focus to speak of on core Jacksonville, so there really hasn’t been much to comment on…. So, there’s a heavy St. Johns County presence in the paper– but there’s a lot going on in St. Johns County. It’s one of the fastest-growing counties in the state right now, and there are a lot of conflicts over direction and development, growth management. I guess you could say St. Johns County is a target-rich environment for news coverage.
SDH: Who’s your favorite musician?
JP: I really like Dave Matthews. I enjoy Sting, James Taylor, but I really have a huge variety of music tastes. I really listen to the full range. I enjoy classical, I enjoy some rap– it just goes back and forth.
SDH: What do you drink?
JP: I don’t drink much. I enjoy beer, maybe a Heineken, and Crown and Coke. I try to stay in shape and exercise whenever I can, and I feel better when I just don’t drink. I try not to make things any more difficult than they have to be.
