Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council introduces PACE program ordinance; developers and realtors urge delay for stakeholder review
Summary
A proposal to allow residential Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing in Jacksonville prompted a contentious public hearing. Realtors, property managers and neighborhood groups urged the council to pause and consult stakeholders; providers asked for more time to engage and clarify safeguards established in recent state law.
Council members opened a public hearing on proposed ordinance 2025-286 to authorize a residential PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) program in Jacksonville. The proposal drew extended public testimony from real estate and property-management representatives and from PACE providers.
Opponents included the Northeast Florida Association of Realtors, the First Coast Apartment Association and other speakers who warned PACE can create long-term tax liens that take priority over existing mortgages, complicate refinancing and, they said, have produced consumer complaints in other jurisdictions. Speakers cited cases in other areas where homeowners — including seniors and first-time buyers — were surprised by PACE liens and by difficulties selling or refinancing homes because of the liens. Several speakers said the program, as structured in other places, had enabled misleading contractor sales practices and could be predatory for vulnerable homeowners.
Representatives of four registered PACE providers — including Fortify Financial, Home Run Financing and Ygrene Energy Fund — told council members they support local adoption but asked the sponsor to pull the ordinance and allow time for stakeholder meetings. Providers said they would meet with realtors, developers and city staff to address concerns and to explain how the 2024 state legislation (SB 770) has changed underwriting and consumer protections.
Councilmember Arias, who introduced the bill for consideration, said his intent was to provide an option for homeowners who otherwise cannot access conventional financing to make storm-hardening, energy efficiency or septic-to-sewer conversions. He said he had scheduled stakeholder meetings before committee consideration.
Councilmember Amaro cautioned against advancing the ordinance while litigation over PACE activity is pending and suggested the council should not move forward until legal issues are resolved.
Outcome: The ordinance was introduced and placed on the committee calendar; several council members asked for additional stakeholder meetings before the item advances to committee. The sponsor said he has meetings scheduled and may pull or amend the ordinance depending on feedback.
