Letters: Zoning Board unfair to common citizens on Jacksonville development

A few weeks ago, my wife and I joined several other residents of the Cedar Point area to attend a Zoning Board hearing. This concerned a zoning exception request to build a community center on Cedar Point Road.

The exception asked to build on 2 acres of land when zoning required twice that amount. About eight residents spoke against this based on several valid points, including the fact that the property is located on wetlands and would impact a sensitive area near a creek.

Cedar Point Road is almost completely residential, except for one small church about 2 miles away that has been there for over 80 years. Other objections concerned the existing two-lane road with narrow dirt shoulders, the 55-mph speed limit in the area and increasing traffic due to growth in Cedar Point.

The board heard our arguments, but rather than deferring a vote to further investigate our concerns, they voted unanimously to approve the exception to allow this request by the property owners. I asked what remedy those against this had and was told that the board's decision was final but could be appealed to the Jacksonville City Council — for a fee of about $1,100.

It seems this process is set up to discourage the average citizen’s right to appeal and is unfair. The board appears to be a rubber stamp for its own investigation findings. Plus, land size requirements for building are arbitrary when the board can reduce it by half. I could understand if the landowner had just 3.8 acres, instead of the 4 acres required, but not when they only have half.

In addition, we discovered that one of the board members who investigated the request is also involved in the establishment of the community center. Interesting.

Our system needs to be fixed. I emailed several city council members about this — none responded.

Terry Weaver, Jacksonville

NAACP right on boycott stance

In his March 24 letter, Calvin Johnson echoes the standard right wing cultural appropriation of Martin Luther King Jr. to demean the NAACP’s response to political attacks on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. He reduces King’s dream that his children will live in America judged by their character rather than skin color — a goal wholly acceptable to the right — as the entirety of his message.

There’s much more King said in that speech. In his more substantive 1963 “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” King eloquently responds to being chastised by several clergymen. They accepted the presence of social injustice, and he forcefully repudiated them for arguing that the battle for Black civil rights should be fought patiently in the courts instead of by protest.

I’m sure King would protest termination of DEI programs.

Worse, Johnson dog-whistles that the NAACP, rather than attacking the abolition of DEI, should instead focus on “merit, character and morality.” The pernicious implication here seems to be that non-white, non-heterosexual people are intrinsically deficient in those qualities.

He doubles down on that troubling notion, claiming DEI “promotes racial prejudice, inequity to those who have worked hard and immorality that undermines society.” It’s clear to me which racial group the writer believes is being prejudiced against, and who those promoting immorality are.

The NAACP is right.

Michael Miller, Ponte Vedra Beach

Some attorney ads have no shame

As someone who worked extensively in advertising and marketing, I realize the value of promotion for professionals. I helped launch many local law firms into advertising when The Florida Bar first permitted it.

This not only helped many attorneys build their practices, but it also helped the public by educating people on how to pick the right firm to address their problems.

Most advertising was done in good taste and still is today.

However, there are some firms that make me shake my head. These are personal injury law firms who appeal to simple greed, rather than assisting people whose lives have been damaged pr destroyed by someone else. The one that really galls me the most has a man state he “heard a bump.” Really? How does that warrant a judgment?

Others merely state they were hit or rear-ended. That’s happened to me several times, once on the Mathews Bridge by a police officer. I’ve even had cars totaled because of somebody’s carelessness, yet I never felt the need to sue.

Interestingly, none of these people claim or display any signs of injury.

Many ads brag about the ease of filing a lawsuit. They often don’t meet personally with their attorney and one man didn’t even receive a check; he was paid by direct deposit.

All these people seem healthy, active and pain-free. Not a wheelchair, neck brace, cane or crutch among them. Were they really injured? I thought that’s what personal injury law is meant to address.

So, if your automobile insurance keeps going up, you can thank some of these people for the increases. They’ll be the ones laughing all the way to the bank (unless their money is direct deposited).

Chip Kirkpatrick, Yulee

This article originally appeared on Florida Times-Union: Community center planned on Cedar Point Road raises ire of residents