John Hawley
Oct 1, 2026
The Influence Network- Part VI: Who Shapes Jacksonville and How?
Jacksonville has spent years using public incentives to attract employers, redevelop Downtown properties, preserve historic buildings and encourage developers to undertake projects City leaders consider important to economic growth.
Those incentives can take very different forms: Recapture Enhanced Value grants, completion grants, loans, headquarters-retention grants, commercial revitalization grants, retail incentives and mobility-fee credits. Jacksonville's Office of Economic Development says its Public Investment Policy is intended to provide an “objective, fact-based” framework for determining the amount and type of public investment available to qualifying companies. Jacksonville Government
But development deals can also involve negotiation, exceptions and policy changes. That makes incentives the logical next stop for The Influence Network: Who receives Jacksonville's development incentives, how are those deals structured, and where do the companies and developers seeking them intersect with the civic organizations helping shape Jacksonville's development agenda?
Jacksonville Has More Than One Development Incentive System
There isn't a single pot of money labeled “Jacksonville development incentives.”
Outside Downtown, the City's Office of Economic Development, or OED, administers programs under Jacksonville's Public Investment Policy. The City says programs can be based on location, industry, wages and other criteria, while qualifying economic-development projects generally must create what Jacksonville defines as economic-based jobs bringing new money into the local economy.
Downtown operates differently. The Downtown Investment Authority, or DIA, administers redevelopment agreements and a collection of programs covering commercial development, residential projects, historic preservation, retail, restaurants, hotels and other Downtown investment. Jacksonville DIA
What Is a Jacksonville REV Grant?
One of Jacksonville's most frequently used development tools is the Recapture Enhanced Value Grant, commonly called a REV grant.
A REV grant generally returns an agreed percentage of the increased property-tax revenue generated after a development raises a property's taxable value. Instead of writing the developer the entire incentive upfront, Jacksonville effectively shares part of the future incremental tax revenue created by the project for a specified period.
For Gateway Jax's proposed Riverfront Plaza Hotel & Residences, for example, the proposed REV would return 75% of the incremental increase in the county portion of property taxes for 20 years, up to nearly $39.4 million. Jacksonville Daily Record
A Completion Grant Is Different From a REV Grant
Completion grants have a different effect on public finances.
Unlike a REV grant tied to future incremental tax collections, a completion grant generally involves a payment after a developer reaches contractual construction and occupancy milestones. That distinction became particularly important in 2026 as some City Council members questioned Jacksonville's accumulated completion-grant commitments.
The funding source also matters. The proposed $20 million completion grant for Gateway Jax's Riverfront Plaza project, for example, would come from the Downtown Northbank Redevelopment Trust Fund rather than Jacksonville's general fund.
Gateway Jax Provides the Largest Current Case Study
Few developments illustrate Jacksonville's incentive system better than Gateway Jax.
In August 2024, City Council approved a $98.58 million incentive package for the first phase of Gateway's Pearl Square development. DIA records break that package into a maximum $59.628 million in REV grants and $38.946 million in completion grants supporting four projects with a combined development budget of approximately $419.3 million. Jacksonville DIA
Gateway Jax CEO Bryan Moll also appears on the Jacksonville Civic Council membership roster examined earlier in this series. The connection does not establish that Civic Council membership played any role in the City's approval of Gateway incentives, but it provides a documented intersection between Jacksonville's private civic-policy network and one of its largest Downtown incentive recipients.
Gateway Jax Is Now Seeking Another Major Jacksonville Incentive Package
The relationship between Gateway Jax and public incentives didn't end with the original Pearl Square agreement.
On Sept. 16, 2026, the DIA board endorsed nearly $59.4 million in incentives for Gateway's proposed Riverfront Plaza Hotel & Residences on the former Jacksonville Landing site. The package includes nearly $39.4 million in REV funding and a $20 million completion grant for a project estimated to cost $271.5 million. Jacksonville Daily Record
DIA's recommendation still requires City Council action. That distinction matters: a DIA recommendation is not the same as final City approval.
Another Gateway Jax Incentive Package Has Faced City Council Resistance
Gateway's proposed Publix-anchored Pearl Square tower provides another side of the story.
DIA approved a proposed package containing a $21.41 million REV grant and $28.25 million completion grant for the project. By August 2026, however, Council consideration of the package had been deferred as members questioned the size and structure of the cash completion grant. Jacksonville Daily Record
Gateway and City officials subsequently discussed alternatives that could reduce the completion grant while relying more heavily on REV funding or other mechanisms. That episode demonstrates that being recommended for incentives does not guarantee approval on the original terms. Jacksonville Daily Record
Jacksonville City Council Is Becoming Part of the Incentive Debate
The Gateway dispute reveals an important institutional check within Jacksonville's development system.
DIA can negotiate and recommend major development agreements, but sufficiently large or specially structured packages frequently require City Council authorization. In the Publix project, Finance Committee Chair Will Lahnen publicly questioned the reliance on a large cash completion grant and called for restructuring the package. Jacksonville Daily Record
That creates another layer of The Influence Network. The story isn't simply developer-to-DIA; it can involve developers, DIA staff and board members, the mayoral administration, Council committees and ultimately the full Council.
Developers Have Also Helped Shape Jacksonville’s Incentive Policies
Perhaps the most significant connection isn't an individual incentive award at all.
When DIA was developing its Core Residential Program, its meeting records show Gateway Jax CEO Bryan Moll and Corner Lot's Billy Zeits among people providing comments on the proposed program. DIA subsequently reported that the maximum completion-grant amount was increased by $5,000 per unit in each tier following further developer input, specifically identifying Moll and Zeits among those who participated. Jacksonville DIA
That doesn't establish anything improper. Public agencies routinely seek input from industries affected by their policies, but it does demonstrate something important for this series: developers aren't necessarily interacting with Jacksonville government only when applying for incentives; they can also participate in discussions about how incentive programs themselves should be structured.
That Creates a Different Influence Question
There is an important difference between receiving an incentive available under an established policy and participating in discussions about how that policy should operate.
The first asks whether a project qualifies. The second involves the rules that determine what future projects may receive.
That is why the next layer of this investigation should distinguish policy participation from project participation. When the same development community participates in both, the public should be able to see each role clearly.
JWB Real Estate Capital Provides a Smaller Example
Large Gateway packages can obscure the fact that Jacksonville's incentive system operates at many different scales.
In February 2026, DIA approved a Commercial Revitalization Program grant for JWB Real Estate Capital tied to its relocation into leased office space at 200 N. Laura St. The DIA resolution states that staff reviewed the application and found it consistent with program guidelines and Downtown's redevelopment plans. Jacksonville DIA
JWB President Alex Sifakis is also a Jacksonville Civic Council member and has appeared elsewhere in the Downtown civic-development network examined in this series. As with Gateway, the affiliation provides context; it does not establish that the connection caused or influenced the award.
The Jacksonville Civic Council Has a Documented Connection to Development Policy
The Jacksonville Civic Council makes its policy role explicit.
The organization says its advocacy involves government relations, public-policy engagement and strategic communications. Among the accomplishments it lists is participating in the formation of the Downtown Investment Authority in 2014. Jacksonville Civic Council
That history makes Civic Council membership relevant when mapping Jacksonville's development ecosystem. It does not establish that the organization participates in individual DIA incentive negotiations, and individual members' development projects should not automatically be treated as Civic Council projects.
The JAX Chamber and JAXUSA Belong on the Map Too
Jacksonville's economic-development network extends beyond the Civic Council.
JAXUSA Partnership, the economic-development arm associated with the JAX Chamber, works to recruit and retain companies across Northeast Florida. The Office of Economic Development performs a related public-sector role when Jacksonville considers City incentives for qualifying projects.
Part VI therefore needs to distinguish business recruitment, civic advocacy, incentive negotiation and government approval rather than combining them into a single concept called influence.
Downtown Incentives Extend Far Beyond Gateway Jax
DIA's incentive menu illustrates just how broad the system has become.
Its commercial programs include the Commercial Revitalization Program, Code Compliance Support Program and Sale-Leaseback Incentive. Retail and restaurant programs include Retail Enhancement, Food & Beverage Retail Enhancement, Waterfront Restaurant and Sidewalk Enhancement grants, while separate programs exist for hotels and historic preservation. Jacksonville DIA
DIA can also allocate mobility-fee credits. Its current mobility-fee credit agreement with the City totals approximately $32.83 million, with credits available under specified conditions for Downtown development.
Not Every Incentive Requires the Same Level of Political Approval
This distinction is easy to miss.
Some incentive programs can be administered or finally approved within DIA's existing authority, while larger redevelopment agreements and certain other commitments require City Council action. In December 2024, for example, DIA approved a roughly $2.1 million package connected with incorporating a grocery store into Gateway's Block N7 project, and DIA reported that Council approval was not required for that particular package.
Understanding who has final approval authority therefore matters almost as much as knowing the dollar amount.
Jacksonville’s Public Investment Policy Is Supposed to Create Consistency
Outside the Downtown system, Jacksonville's Public Investment Policy provides the baseline against which economic-development deals can be evaluated.
OED describes it as an objective and fact-based tool designed to approach public investment in a consistent, judicious and accountable manner. Different programs carry different requirements involving factors such as industry, location and wages. Jacksonville Government
That gives taxpayers something valuable: a standard against which individual deals can be compared.
But Jacksonville Can Waive Its Own Investment Policy
The policy isn't absolute.
In May 2026, City Council approved an economic-development agreement with Winn-Dixie supporting its Jacksonville headquarters and renovations at 14 stores. The package authorized a maximum $5.5 million REV grant plus a $6.5 million headquarters-retention grant, payable over five years. Jacksonville Government
The legislation specifically waived Jacksonville's Public Investment Policy to authorize the headquarters grant. That doesn't mean the deal was improper—the waiver itself went through the legislative process—but it shows why exceptions deserve to be identified separately from incentives that conform to the City's standard policy.
Other 2026 Deals Followed the Standard Policy
The comparison is instructive.
Jacksonville approved an economic-development agreement with Johnson & Johnson Vision Care in April 2026 that included REV grants of up to $10.5 million for its Centurion Parkway facility and $1.5 million for another facility. The legislation explicitly affirmed that the project complied with Jacksonville's Public Investment Policy.
Another pending 2026 project, identified publicly as Project Apollo, proposes a REV grant not to exceed $475,000 and likewise states that the project complies with the policy.
Those comparisons are important because they allow us to separate standardized incentives from negotiated exceptions.
The Key Question Isn’t Simply “Who Got Money?”
A list of Jacksonville incentive recipients would tell only part of the story.
A stronger analysis asks: What did the City receive in return? That means examining promised private investment, jobs, wages, taxable value, public amenities, redevelopment of blighted property, historic preservation and other contractual requirements.
It also means checking what happened afterward. A projected return when Council approves an agreement is different from documented jobs, investment and tax revenue several years later.
Jacksonville Already Tracks Incentive Compliance
OED maintains a public investment compliance section containing active projects, annual reporting information and job-reporting materials. The City says the policy exists not merely to determine incentives but to administer public investment consistently and accountably.
That gives The Influence Network another dataset to build.
Instead of stopping at “How much did Jacksonville approve?”, we can eventually ask “How much was actually paid, what obligations were fulfilled, and what return did Jacksonville receive?”
Approved Incentives Are Not the Same as Money Already Paid
This distinction should accompany every large dollar figure in the series.
A $50 million incentive authorization does not necessarily mean Jacksonville immediately writes a $50 million check. REV grants can be paid over many years and depend on incremental tax revenue, while completion grants generally depend on construction milestones and contractual conditions.
Some projects change, fail to meet requirements or are renegotiated. For that reason, authorized, committed, earned and paid should be treated as four different categories whenever records allow.
The Influence Network Needs a Public-Money Matrix
Parts II through V mapped people and organizations. Part VI should begin mapping projects.
For each significant Jacksonville development incentive, we can record the developer or company, project, total private investment, incentive type, maximum public commitment, approval authority, approval vote, policy compliance or waiver, promised jobs or development, actual payments and compliance status.
Then we can add a separate network layer: Civic Council membership, JAX Chamber/JAXUSA, Build Up Downtown, Downtown Vision, lobbying or government-relations representation and other documented relationships.
Connections Should Never Be Substituted for Evidence
That separation is essential.
A developer's membership in the Jacksonville Civic Council doesn't establish that the organization helped obtain an incentive. A Chamber affiliation doesn't demonstrate preferential treatment, and participation in a DIA policy meeting doesn't establish that the participant controlled the outcome.
But those connections are legitimate public context when organizations and individuals simultaneously participate in Jacksonville's civic-policy discussions, development community and public incentive system.
The Better Test Is Whether the Rules Were Applied Consistently
That gives Part VI a more useful standard than simply asking whether a recipient was “connected.”
For projects operating under established programs, we can examine whether the published criteria were met. For negotiated agreements, we can compare public investment with the City's stated return, contractual protections and comparable projects.
And when Jacksonville waives its normal policy, the waiver can be examined separately: who requested it, why City officials recommended it, what Council approved and what Jacksonville received in exchange.
Who Shapes the Rules—and Who Later Uses Them?
That may be the most consequential question emerging from this installment.
Private-sector expertise can help government understand whether development policies work in the real world. Developers also have an obvious financial interest in the availability and structure of incentives.
Those two facts can exist simultaneously. The transparency question is whether Jacksonville residents can clearly see who participated in shaping a policy, how the policy changed and who later benefited from the resulting program.
From Influence to Investment
The first five installments of The Influence Network followed Jacksonville's civic leadership from private organizations into policy debates and appointed government boards.
Part VI follows another path: from civic influence into public investment.
The objective isn't to argue that Jacksonville shouldn't offer development incentives or that recipients shouldn't participate in civic organizations. It is to determine whether Jacksonville's system is transparent enough to show who receives incentives, which rules apply, when those rules change or are waived, who participates in shaping them, and what taxpayers ultimately receive in return.
Because the dollar amount announced when a deal is approved is only the beginning of the story.
The more important question is whether Jacksonville can follow the public investment all the way from policy—to approval—to payment—to results.
We Welcome Your Thoughts.
The Influence Network- Part VI: Who Shapes Jacksonville and How?
The Influence Network- Part V: Who Shapes Jacksonville and How?
The Influence Network- Part IV: Who has a stake in the property tax debate?
The Influence Network- Part III: How board overlap can concentrate civic power
Who Makes Up the Jacksonville Civic Council? Inside the Network of CEOs and Civic Leaders
