After Amendment 3, Gateway Jax Has Another $105 Million in Downtown Incentives Before City Council

John Hawley

Nov 9, 2026

The Development Divide: Part 24

Jacksonville voters have barely finished casting their ballots on Amendment 3, and City Council is already facing another major decision about spending public money on private development. On Tuesday, November 10, members are scheduled to vote on nearly $50 million in incentives for Gateway Jax's proposed Pearl Square apartment tower and Publix grocery store.

But that isn't the only Gateway-related development on the agenda. A separate ordinance, 2026-0921, is being introduced for a luxury hotel and residential tower beside Riverfront Plaza. That project carries another $55.4 million in proposed public incentives.

Together, the two proposals total approximately $105.06 million in potential taxpayer-supported incentives, including $48.25 million in cash completion grants. The projects are at different stages, and the entire amount isn't being voted on Tuesday. Still, the timing raises an obvious question: Why is Jacksonville continuing to expand its development incentive pipeline immediately after voters approved a measure expected to reduce city revenue by hundreds of millions of dollars?

Two Projects, $105 Million in Proposed Incentives

Both developments involve Gateway Jax, the partnership pursuing the larger Pearl Square redevelopment and the Riverfront Plaza Hotel & Residences. Both are designed to bring new commercial activity, residents and visitors Downtown. And both rely on substantial public financial assistance.

The proposals differ in size, location and funding structure, but their combined value deserves attention.

Proposed incentives	Pearl Square N7	Riverfront Plaza Pad B
Cash completion grant	$28.250M	$20.000M
Future property-tax rebates	$21.412M	$35.397M
Total public incentives	$49.662M	$55.397M
Project development cost	Approx. $140.2M	$271.5M
November 10 status	Scheduled Council vote	Ordinance introduction

The combined incentives amount to $105.059 million. Of that total, $48.25 million consists of proposed cash completion grants, while approximately $56.81 million represents property-tax rebates spread over future years.

These figures should not be confused with money being paid immediately. Completion grants are generally tied to construction milestones, and property-tax rebates depend on qualifying increases in assessed value. But approval creates financial commitments that Jacksonville must account for in its long-term budget.

Tuesday's Immediate Decision: $28.25 Million in Cash for Pearl Square

Ordinance 2026-0541 concerns Gateway Jax's Block N7 project at 119 W. Beaver Street, the former First Baptist Church auditorium site. The proposed 15-story development would include approximately 259 apartments and 37,000 square feet of ground-floor retail space, anchored by a Publix grocery store.

The incentive package includes $21.412 million in property-tax rebates over 17 years and a $28.25 million cash completion grant. Under the legislation, the completion grant would be paid in two installments after construction, with funding appropriated through subsequent legislation.

Gateway Jax argues that the project cannot proceed without the assistance. The developer points to the higher construction costs associated with combining a full-service grocery store, structured parking and residential units in a Downtown tower.

Supporters believe Publix would fill a longstanding gap in Downtown's retail offerings and encourage additional residential development. But the financial question remains whether those benefits justify nearly $50 million in public incentives, particularly when Jacksonville is preparing for substantial revenue losses.

A Second Gateway Project Enters the Pipeline

The new proposal concerns Riverfront Plaza Pad B, a development site beside the city's waterfront park on the former Jacksonville Landing property. Gateway Jax plans a 20-story hotel and residential tower with restaurants, commercial space and a publicly accessible terrace overlooking the St. Johns River.

The Downtown Investment Authority lists the project's estimated development cost at $271.5 million. The proposal includes 130 to 170 hotel rooms and residential accommodations, with the Council ordinance allowing 50 to 150 residential units.

Under Ordinance 2026-0921, the developer, 801 Bay St., LLC, would receive up to $35.397 million in property-tax rebates over 20 years, along with a proposed $20 million completion grant. The ordinance also establishes a minimum capital investment requirement of $210 million.

The project received conceptual design approval in September, but final design and other development approvals remain outstanding. The November 10 Council action is an introduction, not a final vote approving the incentives.

The Riverfront Proposal Didn't Begin After the Election

Gateway Jax's riverfront incentive request was already public in September. At that time, the proposed package totaled approximately $59.4 million, including a $20 million completion grant and nearly $39.4 million in future property-tax rebates.

The package now entering City Council totals $55.397 million, approximately $4 million less than the earlier proposal. The cash completion grant remains $20 million, while the proposed property-tax rebate has been reduced.

That distinction matters. The Riverfront Plaza project wasn't suddenly created after Amendment 3 passed, but its legislative consideration is now proceeding under a different financial outlook. Jacksonville's elected officials know the city faces substantial future revenue losses, yet another major incentive proposal is moving forward.

The question is whether that changed outlook should alter the standards applied to pending projects.

Gateway Jax Said the Publix Grant Would Be Its Last From the General Fund

At an October 22 public meeting, Gateway Jax CEO Bryan Moll told council members that the $28.25 million Pearl Square completion grant would be the company's last request of that kind from Jacksonville's General Fund.

That statement becomes particularly interesting alongside the Riverfront Plaza proposal. The separate riverfront project includes another $20 million completion grant, although the funding is proposed to come from the Downtown Northbank Redevelopment Trust Fund rather than the city's General Fund.

Technically, those are different funding sources. Moll's statement specifically concerned General Fund completion grants, so the Riverfront Plaza request doesn't necessarily contradict it. But the distinction may mean little to residents trying to understand how much public money is being committed to private development. For opponents of the cash completion grants it like playing wacamole to find where the next cash payout for private investment will come.

The larger issue isn't simply which government account pays the grant. It's whether Jacksonville can continue supporting large cash subsidies while warning residents that property-tax relief may require reductions in public services.

Amendment 3 Changes the Financial Equation

Florida voters approved Amendment 3 on November 3, expanding homestead exemptions for non-school property taxes. The Jacksonville Council Auditor's estimates indicate the city could lose approximately $200 million in annual revenue during the first year, with the impact growing to approximately $300 million the following year.

Mayor Donna Deegan warned before the election that those losses could affect public safety, libraries, parks, roads and other municipal services. Those warnings were central to the administration's opposition to the amendment.

Now the city must reconcile those concerns with its continuing development commitments. If Jacksonville faces a major reduction in recurring revenue, every new expenditure deserves closer scrutiny, particularly commitments that may extend years into the future.

The city doesn't have to abandon Downtown redevelopment. But it should explain why the financial assumptions supporting these incentives remain appropriate after voters fundamentally changed Jacksonville's property-tax outlook.

The Finance Committee Already Raised the Alarm

The Pearl Square incentive proposal reached the Finance Committee on November 4, one day after Amendment 3 passed. The committee split 3–3, leaving the legislation without a favorable recommendation.

Council members Michael Boylan, Rahman Johnson and Randy White supported advancing the incentives. Finance Committee Chair Will Lahnen joined Rory Diamond and Mike Gay in opposing the proposal. Chris Miller was absent.

Lahnen warned that Jacksonville already had substantial unfunded completion-grant obligations before considering another major award. He argued that approving Pearl Square could bring the city's unbudgeted cash completion grants back toward $100 million.

Council President Nick Howland subsequently discharged the legislation from committee, allowing a full Council vote on November 10. Howland has indicated he will oppose the proposal in its current form.

The committee's division reflects a larger disagreement about Jacksonville's priorities. Supporters see the project as an investment in future commercial tax revenue, while opponents question whether the city can afford another large commitment.

What About the $525 Million Jacksonville Already Had in Reserves?

The incentive debate also follows City Council's decision earlier this year to direct accumulated public funds toward previously approved development obligations. Jacksonville reported approximately $525.2 million in combined operating and emergency reserves, a substantial financial cushion built over many years.

In August, Council approved transferring approximately $33.958 million from accumulated General Fund balances into a contingency account for previously approved, unfunded developer commitments. That decision demonstrated the city's willingness to use available financial capacity to support development agreements.

Those funds are separate from the proposed Pearl Square and Riverfront Plaza incentive packages. The earlier reserve transfer should not be counted as money available for either new project without specific legal authorization.

But the policy question remains. Jacksonville has accumulated substantial reserves, established mechanisms to finance developer commitments and continued considering additional incentives. Meanwhile, the administration warns that Amendment 3 may require reductions in services residents already receive.

If City Hall can identify financial resources for development obligations, residents have reason to ask whether comparable attention has been given to reducing future tax burdens and protecting essential services.

The Public Has Already Invested in Riverfront Plaza

The Riverfront Plaza project introduces another dimension to the debate. The proposed hotel and residential tower would sit beside a major public park created through substantial taxpayer investment.

The city has committed significant resources to rebuilding the former Jacksonville Landing site into a public waterfront destination. New restaurants, hospitality facilities and residences could benefit from that investment by attracting visitors and residents to an already improved public setting.

Supporters argue that private development would help activate the waterfront, attract additional spending and strengthen Downtown's tax base. Those benefits are possible, but they should be measured against the value of the public land, infrastructure and financial incentives involved.

The developer obtained the Pad B site through a land exchange involving the former Interline Brands building, which the city acquired for the University of Florida's Jacksonville graduate campus. That transaction is separate from the proposed incentive package, but it belongs in a complete accounting of the public resources supporting the development.

Jacksonville should evaluate the entire public contribution, not just the newest grant request.

Are Downtown Incentives Becoming a Permanent Business Model?

Jacksonville's incentive programs were designed to help overcome the challenges of Downtown redevelopment. Developers often cite higher construction costs, structured parking requirements, infrastructure expenses and financing gaps that make urban projects more difficult than suburban development.

Those challenges are real. But they also raise a broader question about whether repeated public subsidies are becoming an expected part of the financial model for major Downtown projects.

Gateway Jax's Pearl Square development has already benefited from approved incentives for earlier phases. The company is now requesting another $49.66 million for N7, while a separate riverfront development enters Council review seeking $55.4 million.

At what point should the private market be expected to support additional development without continuing cash assistance? And how should Jacksonville measure whether earlier incentives have produced enough economic activity to justify new commitments?

Those questions become more important as property-tax revenue declines.

The Argument for Incentives Deserves a Financial Test

Supporters of the Pearl Square proposal argue that the project will generate commercial property-tax revenue that becomes more valuable after Amendment 3. Because the amendment expands homestead exemptions, commercial property becomes a more important source of local revenue.

That's a legitimate consideration. A new grocery store, hotel, restaurants and other commercial properties could expand Jacksonville's tax base over time.

But the financial return must be measured against the full cost of the incentives. Future property-tax rebates mean the city would return a portion of the additional revenue generated by the developments, while completion grants require separate cash funding.

Council should require updated financial projections reflecting Amendment 3's effects on tax collections, operating expenses and future development assumptions. An incentive approved under one revenue forecast should not automatically remain justified when the city's financial outlook changes.

November 10 Is About More Than One Publix

Tuesday's meeting presents two different stages of Jacksonville's development incentive process. Council is scheduled to decide whether to approve the existing Pearl Square package, while the Riverfront Plaza ordinance begins its legislative review.

The Riverfront Plaza proposal will require additional committee consideration and subsequent Council action before any final incentive approval. It should not be presented as another $55 million award being approved Tuesday.

But introducing another major incentive package while voting on Pearl Square creates an opportunity for Council to examine the broader pipeline. Members should know the total value of approved but unpaid completion grants, future property-tax rebates and additional proposals awaiting consideration.

They should also know how those obligations interact with the city's reserve policies and projected Amendment 3 revenue losses.

Without that consolidated accounting, Council risks evaluating each development separately while overlooking the cumulative financial commitments.

The Bottom Line: Which Financial Priorities Will Council Defend?

Jacksonville's Downtown redevelopment has attracted significant private investment, and projects like Pearl Square and Riverfront Plaza could contribute to the city's long-term economic growth. The benefits deserve consideration, but so do the costs.

After Amendment 3, Jacksonville faces difficult budget decisions. The administration has warned about necessary service reductions, while Council members have questioned the affordability of additional developer subsidies.

Now the same developer group has two major projects representing more than $105 million in proposed incentives moving through City Hall. Nearly half that amount consists of cash completion grants, although the projects have different funding sources and approval schedules.

The issue isn't whether Jacksonville should welcome private development. It's whether taxpayers should continue underwriting projects on this scale while being told the city may no longer have enough revenue to maintain essential services.

On November 10, Council members will put their priorities on the record. The vote on Pearl Square will show whether Jacksonville intends to reconsider its incentive policies after Amendment 3—or continue approving major commitments while postponing the harder conversation about what the city can actually afford.

outdoor living 101