John Hawley
Sep 20, 2026
The Influence Network- Part III
One board membership doesn't necessarily create a concentration of influence. But when the same people begin appearing across two, three, four or more organizations involved in developing ideas, advocating policy, planning Downtown, reviewing projects, overseeing public authorities and interacting with elected government, something different begins to emerge: institutional concentration.
Part III of The Influence Network maps those overlaps—not to suggest that serving on multiple boards is improper, but to answer a measurable question: How concentrated is Jacksonville's civic-development network among a relatively small pool of business and civic leaders?
Jacksonville Civic Council Members Extend Across the City’s Institutional Network
The Jacksonville Civic Council provides a logical starting point because it openly describes itself as a network of more than 90 business and civic leaders. The organization says it leverages its members' combined resources, experience and influence to accomplish things that individual organizations could not accomplish alone.
Its model also extends beyond discussion. The Civic Council describes its work as research, advocacy and execution, with government relations and public-policy engagement incorporated into advocacy and 90-day “Sprints” designed to turn research-backed ideas into action.
The question, then, is what happens when members of that private civic network also appear throughout other private organizations and public decision-making bodies.
JEA Shows What Institutional Concentration Can Look Like
The clearest example uncovered in our initial board-by-board review is JEA.
The Civic Council's current membership roster includes John D. Baker II, Worth McArthur and Ricardo Morales III. Current JEA records also list Baker, McArthur and Morales on the utility's governing board.
That means three members of the same private civic organization currently occupy seats on JEA's seven-member governing board.
The finding does not demonstrate that those members vote together or represent the Civic Council while serving JEA. It does demonstrate a measurable concentration: roughly 43% of the seven JEA board seats are currently held by people who also belong to the Jacksonville Civic Council.
The JEA Connection Has Continued Across Board Turnover
The overlap becomes more interesting when viewed over time.
McArthur joined the JEA board in March 2025, replacing Bobby Stein. City Council records confirm McArthur's appointment and identify Stein as the member he replaced.
Stein also appears on the Civic Council's current membership roster.
So one Civic Council member didn't simply leave JEA and reduce the overlap. Another Civic Council member succeeded him.
That doesn't establish coordination between the Civic Council and the appointment process. But it makes the JEA relationship more than a one-time snapshot and gives us a reason to examine appointments historically.
Public Boards Matter Differently Than Private Civic Boards
A seat on the Civic Council, Chamber or Build Up Downtown is fundamentally different from a seat on JEA, JTA, JAA or JAXPORT.
The latter are public authorities exercising governmental responsibilities over electricity and water, transportation, airports and the seaport. JAXPORT, for example, describes itself as an independent City authority empowered to operate publicly owned port facilities, issue bonds and conduct procurement.
That is why this analysis separates private-network overlap from public-authority overlap.
The issue isn't merely how many organizations someone's biography contains. It is whether private civic leadership repeatedly intersects with institutions exercising public authority.
JTA Reveals a Different Kind of Influence Network
The Jacksonville Transportation Authority demonstrates that Civic Council membership isn't the only way into the network.
Current JTA board member Madelen Salter is also senior vice president of external affairs for W.W. Gay and serves on the JAX Chamber board, JAXUSA Partnership Policy Council and Build Up Downtown board. JTA's own biography documents those overlapping roles.
That creates a documented institutional pathway:
JTA → JAX Chamber → JAXUSA → Build Up Downtown
Salter doesn't need to belong to the Civic Council for that overlap to matter. It demonstrates why the analysis eventually must extend beyond Civic Council members to what might be called second-degree connectors—people who link several institutions already connected to Civic Council members.
Downtown Vision Brings Public and Private Leadership to the Same Table
Downtown Vision provides one of the clearest examples of public-private institutional overlap.
Its published board includes executives representing Haskell, Miller Electric, CBRE, PNC, Seacoast Bank, Regency Centers, VyStar, PETRA, Ash Properties, Gateway Jax and Pinnacle Financial Partners.
But that same board also includes JTA CEO Nathaniel Ford, DIA CEO Colin Tarbert, JAXUSA President Aundra Wallace and representatives of Jacksonville City Council and the Sheriff's Office.
This isn't a hidden relationship. Downtown Vision describes itself as representing Downtown stakeholders and collaborating with the City, property owners, the Sheriff's Office and others.
What matters for this investigation is that Downtown Vision functions as one place where private property interests, development interests and public institutions intersect organizationally.
Downtown Vision’s Overlap Has Changed, But the Pattern Is Not New
Board composition changes, which is why historical snapshots matter.
Downtown Vision's FY2023 board included Gateway Jax CEO Bryan Moll, Civic Council member Alex Sifakis, DIA leadership, JTA CEO Nathaniel Ford, JAXUSA President Aundra Wallace and representatives of JEA and City Council.
The current published roster lists Gateway Jax through Head of Development Eric Shullman rather than Moll, while DIA, JTA and JAXUSA representation remains.
That suggests the more meaningful measurement isn't whether one individual remains indefinitely. It is whether the same organizations and sectors repeatedly occupy seats as individual representatives rotate.
Build Up Downtown Adds Another Development Advocacy Layer
Build Up Downtown describes itself as a privately funded nonprofit that supports the Downtown Investment Authority and Downtown Vision.
Its published leadership includes JWB Real Estate Capital President Alex Sifakis as board chair, JAX Chamber policy and advocacy representation, VyStar government affairs, Downtown Vision leadership and other development-related organizations.
This adds another layer to the Downtown network:
Civic Council → Chamber/JAXUSA → Build Up Downtown → Downtown Vision → DIA
Those arrows shouldn't be interpreted as a chain of command. They represent documented organizational relationships and overlapping participation.
The Downtown Development Review Board Institutionalizes Some Overlap
The Downtown Development Review Board is particularly important because some of its overlap isn't incidental—it exists by design.
The DDRB has nine voting members and 11 ex-officio members. Its ex-officio positions include the DIA CEO, City Council president, Downtown Vision chairman, JTA director, First Coast Transportation Planning Organization chairman and several other governmental positions.
DDRB also has substantive governmental responsibilities. DIA describes it essentially as the Planning Commission for Jacksonville's Downtown Overlay Zone, reviewing Downtown development and redevelopment under applicable zoning and design standards.
That means some institutional concentration in Downtown development review is structurally created by ordinance, rather than resulting from private board appointments.
That distinction matters.
DIA Connects Private-Sector Expertise Directly to Downtown Public Policy
The Downtown Investment Authority provides another type of intersection.
Its nine-member board currently includes professionals from Goldman Sachs, TradeWinds Wealth Partners, Cushman & Wakefield, Rimrock Companies, Regency Centers, the Jessie Ball duPont Fund, Balch & Bingham and Hoefer Welker. Five members are appointed by Jacksonville's mayor and four by the City Council president, with all nine confirmed by Council.
The board's composition intentionally brings private-sector expertise into a governmental redevelopment authority.
That can provide expertise to government. It also means that understanding Downtown policy requires understanding the professional and institutional affiliations of the people appointed to make those decisions.
The Civic Council Has a Historical Connection to DIA’s Creation
The Civic Council itself identifies participation in the 2014 formation of the Downtown Investment Authority among its major policy accomplishments.
That doesn't mean today's Civic Council controls DIA, nor does it establish that Civic Council members determine individual DIA incentive decisions.
It does establish something historically relevant: a private civic organization whose members remain active throughout Jacksonville's development ecosystem says it helped advocate for the creation of one of the principal public institutions now responsible for Downtown redevelopment.
Developers Appear Across Multiple Parts of the Network
Development provides another measurable overlap.
Civic Council members Bryan Moll and Alex Sifakis are prominent examples. Moll leads Gateway Jax, while Sifakis leads JWB Real Estate Capital; Gateway Jax says its development platform was sponsored by JWB and DLP Capital.
Gateway Jax's Pearl Square development has also received major public support. City Council approved a $98.58 million incentive package for the first phase of what was then called the Pearl Street District.
The relevant point isn't that developers participate in development organizations. That is unsurprising.
The question is how often the same development interests also appear within the civic organizations advocating broader Downtown policy.
The JAX Chamber Adds Another Major Overlap
The JAX Chamber provides one of the broadest connections to the Civic Council membership.
Current Chamber leadership includes Abel Harding, Paul Jones, Mike Zaffaroni and Chamber President and CEO Daniel Davis, all of whom also appear on the Civic Council roster. Harding is chair-elect, Jones currently chairs JAXUSA, Zaffaroni chairs Government Affairs and Davis leads the Chamber.
That leadership is evolving. On Sept. 18, the Chamber announced Jones as its 2027 chair-elect, working with Harding as 2027 chair and Davis as CEO.
The overlap therefore reaches beyond ordinary membership into leadership of Jacksonville's principal business advocacy and regional economic-development organization.
JAXPORT Shows Why We Need to Look Beyond the Civic Council
JAXPORT's current seven-member board demonstrates another form of cross-network representation.
Vice Chair Soo Gilvarry is a Downtown real-estate developer who also serves on the JAX Chamber and Downtown Vision boards, according to JAXPORT's official biography.
JAXPORT itself has significant governmental powers, including management of public port facilities, procurement and bonding authority. Its seven directors are divided between four mayoral appointments and three gubernatorial appointments.
That means Part III can't simply count Civic Council members.
We also need to identify people who bridge multiple adjacent organizations, even if they aren't members of the Civic Council itself.
JAA Gives Us a Natural Appointment Comparison
The Jacksonville Aviation Authority provides another useful case because its appointment structure is clearly documented.
Its seven-member board currently includes four gubernatorial appointees and three mayoral appointees. The authority publishes both the appointing authority and appointment date for each member.
That makes JAA valuable for a later question: Do governors and Jacksonville mayors independently draw board members from the same business and civic networks?
For Part III, however, we should resist assuming an overlap before establishing it person by person.
Appointment Power May Be the Next Layer of the Story
The pattern becomes even more interesting when we reverse the analysis.
Instead of asking only, “Where does this Civic Council member serve?” we can ask: Who appointed the people serving on Jacksonville's most powerful public boards?
JAXPORT uses a four-mayor/three-governor structure. JAA uses four gubernatorial and three mayoral appointments. DIA divides appointments between the mayor and City Council president.
Those different structures create an opportunity to examine whether different elected officials repeatedly select candidates from the same relatively small civic and business population.
That deserves its own investigation rather than being forced into this one.
Institutional Concentration Can Occur Without Coordination
This is an important limitation of the analysis.
If someone serves on three boards, that doesn't establish that the three organizations coordinate their decisions. If three Civic Council members serve on JEA, that doesn't establish that they vote as a bloc or act on instructions from the Civic Council.
Likewise, a developer's participation in a Downtown advocacy organization doesn't establish that the organization secured an incentive for that developer.
Overlap demonstrates connectivity. It does not, by itself, demonstrate control.
The concentration question is different: How frequently does Jacksonville draw leadership from the same pool of people and organizations?
Influence Can Multiply When the Same People Appear at Different Stages
Consider the development process conceptually.
One organization may research a problem.
Another advocates a policy response.
Another promotes Downtown investment.
A developer proposes a project.
DDRB reviews its design.
DIA negotiates or recommends incentives.
City Council approves legislation or appropriations.
An independent authority may control transportation, utilities or infrastructure affecting the project.
When entirely different people populate each stage, influence is broadly dispersed.
When some of the same people and organizations repeatedly appear across those stages, the network becomes more concentrated.
There Are Two Types of Concentration to Measure
The first is individual concentration.
How many institutions does one person connect?
The second is institutional concentration.
How much of one public board is populated by people who share membership in another organization?
JEA provides a concrete example of the second measure: three of seven current directors also appear on the Civic Council roster.
Neither measurement tells us whether decisions are good or bad.
It tells us how the decision-making ecosystem is structured.
A Third Measure Is Institutional Recurrence
There is another measurement that may ultimately prove just as important.
Downtown Vision illustrates it.
Bryan Moll no longer needs to sit personally on its board for Gateway Jax to remain represented; the current board instead includes Gateway's Eric Shullman. Likewise, individual City, DIA, JTA or JAXUSA representatives can change while those institutions remain represented.
That means we should measure not only recurring people, but recurring organizations.
A network can remain concentrated institutionally even while individual names change.
Jacksonville’s Influence Network Is Better Understood as Interlocking Circles
The research increasingly suggests that Jacksonville's civic-development system isn't best represented as a straight line.
It is a series of overlapping circles:
Jacksonville Civic Council
JAX Chamber / JAXUSA
Build Up Downtown
Downtown Vision
Major developers and property owners
DIA / DDRB
JEA / JTA / JAA / JAXPORT
City Council / Mayor / Governor
The important question is where those circles intersect—and how frequently the same people or organizations occupy the intersections.
The Civic Council’s Own Model Makes Those Connections Relevant
None of this requires treating influence as something hidden.
The Civic Council openly says it combines members' resources, experience and influence.
It openly describes government relations and public-policy engagement as components of its advocacy strategy.
And its execution program says it works to align partners, secure resources and turn research-backed ideas into action.
Those are legitimate activities of a private civic organization.
They also make understanding the organization's connections to other Jacksonville institutions a legitimate matter of public interest.
The Question Isn’t Whether Jacksonville Has an Influence Network
Every major city has networks of business leaders, elected officials, developers, universities, financial institutions, civic organizations and public agencies.
Jacksonville is no exception.
The more useful question is how concentrated that network becomes when the same people and institutions repeatedly occupy positions across it.
Our initial analysis already establishes that the overlap is real.
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
