Special Noticed Meeting on Win Dixie Closure and Economic Development Agreement

The Jacksonville City Council held a special noticed meeting on May 8, 2026, to discuss the proposed closure of the Win Dixie store at 201 West 48th Street and an amendment to Ordinance 2026-0326 and the associated economic development agreement. The meeting was called by Councilwoman Jacqui Pittman (District 10) after a finance committee meeting on May 5 revealed the planned closure. Council members, administration officials, Win Dixie representatives, and community members participated. The discussion focused on retaining the store, ensuring long-term commitments, and addressing food deserts, but no final vote was taken.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Lydia Bell (Brentwood resident, address on file) expressed frustration that the store's closure was considered despite its profitability and support from the community. She asked for a definite timeline for the store's operation and a guarantee of a replacement if it closes.
• Denise Scott (address on file) criticized the incentive package as extortion, arguing taxpayer money should not go to a profitable company. She urged the council not to rush the decision.
• Cornell Oliver (address on file) opposed the deal, calling it extortion, and suggested using $8 million to support a community-managed grocery store instead. He advocated for lineage-based incentive packages for Black Americans.
• James Matchett (address on file) acknowledged the council's efforts but questioned the benefit of 200 high-paying corporate jobs that the community may not qualify for. He noted Win Dixie's $9 billion annual revenue and argued the city should leverage the deal to address food deserts.
• Dr. Teresa Gamble (address on file) highlighted Win Dixie's history of financial instability and bankruptcy, and argued that incentives should go to hourly workers, not corporate jobs. She called for an audit of the company.
• Reverend Aaron Flag (address on file) thanked Win Dixie for past community contributions and urged the council to keep the store open, cautioning against overcomplicating the deal.
• Dr. Gundy (address on file) praised the meeting but raised concerns about the vague term “commercially reasonable efforts.” He suggested adding a pharmacy to the store as a pilot program and asked for a clear definition of the term.
• Denise Hunt (address on file) spoke against subsidizing any business with taxpayer dollars, arguing it transfers wealth to corporations while residents struggle. She called for addressing the root cause of disinvestment in the area.
• Nancy Stat (address on file) questioned the logic of increasing corporate jobs by 40% while planning to close stores, and argued the $12 million incentive should be tied directly to keeping all stores open and maintaining full service.
• Rosalyn Van Narsted (address on file) criticized the process as backward, noting that community input came after the proposal. She called for urban planning for grocery stores on the north side and clearer definitions in the agreement.
• Vanessa Cullins Hopkins (address on file) echoed the need for better planning and concrete definitions, and suggested using incentives to attract stores to Main Street.
• An unnamed speaker (addressed as “Mr. Pool” or “Mr. Feez”) briefly spoke about historical disenfranchisement and the need to focus on all forms of it.

Discussion Items

• Councilwoman Pittman opened the meeting, stating the goal was to keep the Win Dixie store open and stabilize the community. She expressed appreciation for the company's commitment to remain open.
• Andre Wallace (President of Jackson State Partnership) presented the deal structure: retain corporate headquarters at 550 Edgewood Court for 15 years, retain 500 jobs, create 200 new jobs at $100,000 average salary, invest $17 million in the headquarters and $48 million in 13 Duval County stores (total $65 million). The amendment would also keep the 48th Street store open.
• Ed Randolph (OED) added that the agreement includes a requirement that if a store in an economically distressed area closes, the company must open a replacement within 18 months within a quarter-mile of the original location.
• Councilman Arias objected to the 18-month timeline, calling it too long, and expressed concern that the council has no control after three years. He also wanted a community meeting requirement and a clause ensuring the store remains fully stocked until closure.
• Councilman Salem requested language defining a “full-service” store (including fresh produce, meat, and groceries). He opposed discharging the bill to full council on Tuesday, preferring to send it back to the finance committee.
• Councilman Howland supported the bill with the amendment, emphasizing the need to preserve 550 jobs and the $65 million investment. He pushed for a Tuesday vote to give certainty to employees.
• Councilman Carlucci sought clarification on “commercially reasonable efforts” and the 18-month provision. He warned against adding too many constraints that might cause Win Dixie to cut employees or leave.
• Councilman Peluso suggested a separate amendment to offer additional incentives (up to $2 million) for Win Dixie to open new stores in the 32209 zip code to address food deserts. Several colleagues, including Councilman Salem, opposed this as complicating the current deal.
• Josh Aaron Fellow (attorney for Win Dixie) explained that “commercially reasonable efforts” means the company will do everything possible to obtain a new lease or location before their current lease expires in 2029. He also stated that restocking of the 48th Street store had already begun after Tuesday's commitment.
• Councilwoman Pittman urged the council to stay focused on keeping the store open and to avoid adding unrelated measures. She expressed confidence that the store would be restocked and improved.

Key Outcomes

• No formal vote was taken on the amendment or the bill.
• Council members broadly agreed that the bill needs more work and should return to the finance committee for further refinement rather than being discharged to full council on Tuesday, May 12.
• Councilman Salem and Councilman Arias strongly opposed a Tuesday vote, citing unresolved issues such as the 18-month relocation period, vague language on “commercially reasonable efforts,” and definitions for full-service and fully stocked stores.
• Councilwoman Pittman committed to continuing discussions and keeping the community informed. The next steps will involve drafting clearer language and potentially reconvening in committee within two weeks.