Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Community Redevelopment Agency
Thursday, May 14, 2009
9:00 a.m. Session

DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.

(The meeting was called to order at 9:06 a.m. by CRA
Chairman Gwen Miller.)
[Sounding gavel]
>>GWEN MILLER: Good morning!
We are going to call the CRA meeting to order.
I am going to yield to Mr. Caetano.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Good morning, everyone.
We are going to have an invocation, then we will have

the pledge of allegiance.
Ms. Shirley Foxx-Knowles, our city clerk, will give us
our prayer this morning.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Please stand and remain standing.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Good morning, CRA and
everyone.
Let us pray.
Gracious father, we thank you again for this beautiful
day that you have made.
We will rejoice and be glad in it.
We thank you also for the much-needed rain yesterday.
Father, may we continue to realize that every day is a
day for celebration because of your love for us.
May we remember in turn to be kind and love one
another as you have loved us.
Father, thank you for our great leaders, our
hardworking employees, and our wonderful citizens.
Continue to guide them and make them instruments of
your will.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve and to be of
service.

May we represent you and use our talents to your
glory, and may we remember that to whom much is given,
much is required.
We thank you for your grace and your mercy.
We ask that had you continue to protect those serving
on the front line.
We are truly grateful for their service.
And when their job is done, we ask that you bring them
back safely to their loved ones.
And now, O Lord, as we go about the worldly matters of
the city, we again say thank you for everything and
continue to bless and guide us in your way.
Let us all say amen.
(Pledge of Allegiance).
>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
>>MARY MULHERN: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
At this time we will go to Mr. Mark Huey.
[9:08 a.m.]

>>MARK HUEY: Good morning.
The first order of business before the redevelopment
agency is a report I was asked to make a couple of
months ago regarding efforts to bring solar panel
production facility or really any kind of renewable
energy investment in the East Tampa.
I can say from the city's perspective that we would
welcome any kind of renewable energy investment
anywhere in our city, and if it were in East Tampa all
the better.
I wanted to briefly share with you this morning a
number of factors which I believe are contributing to
creating an environment where there is great potential
for success for renewable energy investment in our
community.
First of all, as you know, there is an unprecedented
level of federal and state focus on renewable energy.
The new Obama administration was planning to invest
billions into these renewable energy industries over
the years.
The governor has made it a priority of his
administration.

And locally, you know of the initiatives here at the
city, and our designation as a gold green city.
All of these efforts by the public sector are being
well with recognized by the private sector, and there
is an unprecedented level of private industry interest
in renewable energy.
Secondly, is the University of South Florida.
Now, the University of South Florida has created a
clean energy research center, and it is co-directed by
Yogi Goswami, a leading researchers in the area of
solar energy, internationally known.
The center is a consortium, is bringing together top
researchers around the University of South Florida to
focus on our variety of solar, clean transportation,
biofuels, distributed power generation, a lot of areas
that are receiving a great deal of private sector
interest.
Our goal is to really make discoveries that have
commercial viability, and to try to transition the
work of the university into commercially viable
ventures.
Notably in that regard -- and the center,

incidentally, has received millions in funding so far
including almost $9 million from the state.
Notable in what they are doing is presently under
construction, the research center, USF research center
on Fowler Avenue, is an initial production facility, a
facility that is trying to see if some of Dr.
Goswami's flexible solar panels can be commercially
viable.
It's a first effort to try to provide a commercially
viable panel.
And that's occurring right now.
Beyond that, the USF has received federal stimulus
money, $43 million, to create a much larger scale
manufacturing test facility.
Again to try to bring this type of solar technology
and other clean renewable energy technology into
commercial viability.
So here we have in our community really a hotbed of
research that's being funded.
And, finally, I will tell you again, going back to the
private sector interests, that I am involved probably
two or three times a week working with business

interests in this area.
There are many plans, there are many ideas, many
activities going on.
I think most notably recently we have had TECO energy
commit to a solar electric generating plant to be
built in Polk County on a 200 to 400-acre site there,
will be one of the largest in the country.
Many entrepreneurs again are thinking about ideas.
It's really quite exciting.
And each some of our nonprofits, you might be aware
of, the commitment, the Lowry Park Zoo made to begin
to pioneer some of this technology, and MOSI is
working on an exciting plan as well.
So again with all of these ingredients the alignment
of federal, state, and local initiatives, the fact
that we are a center already, a very cutting edge
research, and the fact that there is significant
private sector interest right now, varied actors in
our community, I believe that we are going to benefit
as a community from renewable energy investment over
the years, and East Tampa as well.
So that's my report, and I would be glad to answer any

questions.
>>MARY MULHERN: I think that's great.
And we are so lucky to have Mr. Goswami here.
I'm thinking I would like to see the City of Tampa and
the committee of 100 make this a private in our
business development as we are bringing people here
and bringing investment here to make renewable energy,
but really specifically solar since we are the
sunshine state.
And I think there is a lot of opportunity right now
considering a lot of it is based in California, which
is a very expensive place to live, and could be very
attractive, I think, to businesses that are already up
and running and already starting.
So I would like to see that.
It's great to hear that all this is going on.
Thanks a lot.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
We go to item number 2.
>>MARK HUEY: We have a PowerPoint presentation we are
going to have for you and I will make some brief
introductory comments.

For a number of the past board meetings and really
over the past years, a number of you have asked me if
we could do projections of our perspective tax
incrementing revenues for the agency.
And it certainly has been a goal that we have had for
awhile.
Recently, they have been asking about the impact of
the economy on our TIF projections.
So today for the first time we are going to share with
you some five-year projections of our TIF revenue for
each of the redevelopment areas.
Our overall goal really is to do, as we do our annual
budget process going forward each year, to do it in
the context of where we think our TIF revenue
projections are going on a longer-term basis so that
the decisions we make in the short term can benefit
from that longer-term perspective.
Before Julie comes up to give the presentation, I
wanted to make just one key point.
There's only one thing I can tell you with 100 percent
certainty about the projections you are going to see,
and that is that they are wrong.

I can a sure you that we do not have a crystal ball,
that we are not magicians and cannot tell you exactly
how TIF revenues are going to unfold.
We made a lot of assumptions to create these
projections.
And our purpose is really to give you a general
direction over the next five years of where we see
things going.
Not to be unduly precise in any way.
So we present these projections for you for the very
first time, if you could just remember that that is
our purpose, to give you a general direction of the
TIF revenues.
Julie?
Come on up.
>> Julie Wisdom, City of Tampa.
Before I get to my PowerPoint presentation, I have
something that I want to show you.
Just as a refresher, I wanted to go over the concept
of TIF quickly.
What happened with TIF financing, tax increment
financing, is in the year that the CRA is established,

property values are frozen for the purpose of property
tax collection.
And then as the property values increase, the
incremental revenue increase is what goes into the TIF
trust fund which is what is shown here graphically.
So the green line is what the various taxing
authorities have agreed to continue collecting, and
then the red section is what goes exclusively into the
TIF trust funds, and that's what these projections are
based on.
If we can go to the PowerPoint now.
So the same planning approach was used for all eight
CRAs, and I had an example, a step-by-step example
of this approach that was applied to East Tampa.
I'm sure as we go through this, you are going to have
a number of questions.
And I just ask that you hold your questions until we
are done with East Tampa.
So all of our projections were based on the 2008
property values, which were then adjusted based on
property type, and those values were projected out for
the next five years.

In July, we will receive from the property appraiser
the 2009 values, and we will then update our numbers
and provide that update to you at our July session.
Those are the values that are going to be used as the
basis of our fiscal 2010 budget.
So all of our projections, the millage rate would
remain unchanged that was used in 2008, and we did not
speculate on the construction of any future projects,
only projects that have already been constructed or
everybody significantly constructed were considered in
our analysis.
There were a number of sources putting this together.
Some of which you can see listed here.
Now let's get to East Tampa.
In fiscal 2009 East Tampa had a property tax base just
over a billion dollars.
And this is how that tax base was broken out into the
major property type that I looked at.
So you can see that a lot of its tax base is in
residential and in office/retail.
And this is what that looks like in a pie chart.
So the blue and the orange sections are residential

and you can see they are combined, and they have over
half of East Tampa's tax base.
Office and retail is in yellow, which is making up
another 30%.
So then I used different growth rates for each of the
property types that you saw listed on this prior
slide.
So on this slide we can see the projected path of
homesteaded property values.
We are projecting a 15% decline in 2008 values from --
I'm sorry, 2009 values from 2008.
So what that means is a home valued at $100,000 in
2008 would be valued at 85,000 in 2009.
On the fiscal 2011 wire projecting an additional 7.5%
decline.
So that $85,000 home would now be valued at about
78,500.
Then we are projecting the home values, going to
stabilize in 2011 in time for the fiscal 2012 budget
cycle.
And then they will remain unchanged for another year
or so.

And then we'll start to see a recovery in mid 2012 in
time for the 2013 budget cycle.
So this is the same methodology that applies to the
remaining property types.
These growth rates were arrived at based on my
research and conversations with people in the real
estate industry.
East Tampa, we did not have any adjustments or large
projects that were under construction.
So here is the revenue chart, the dark blue bars are
what we have seen to date, the last dark blue bar
being fiscal 2009 and the light blue bars are where we
are expecting the revenues to go.
So the big thing to notice here is that there will be
a dip going forward.
Are there any questions?
>>GWEN MILLER: No, you did a very good job.
Thank you.
We appreciate that.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Now these are assumptions, and they
could very well be off.
>>> Yes.

And that's our hope.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Could be off either way.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
Go ahead.
>> Julie Wisdom: If we can go back to the PowerPoint.
So this is what Channel District looks like broken
down by property type.
And the remaining CRAs were in the same way that
East Tampa was.
You will notice here the Channel District is also
largely residential.
Now, Channel District revenue stream works a little
differently.
In the case of Channel District the large number of
new condo projects is helping boost its revenues
because they weren't assessed at the full market
values in fiscal 2009.
So while their taxable values have also been decreased
by 15%, their new taxable values are still higher than
what they were assessed for in fiscal 2009.
Then in fiscal 2011 it dips which reflects the
continuing reevaluation of the residential market,

which we are expecting to occur.
This is what downtown looks like.
Here you can see that downtown value is mostly in
office and retail buildings but downtown also has a
large amount of residential.
Like Channel District, downtown also had a large
number of condo units that were not fully valued in
the fiscal 2009 CRA budget.
We have looked at those condo units as well to better
reflect their likely taxable values and as seen in
Channel District this is having a positive effect on
the projected fiscal 2010 revenues in downtown as
well.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair?
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you want to break --
>> Go ahead.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: We seem to apply downtown, about
17, 18 million per year.
>>> Correct.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And remained me, Mark, if you don't
know, Julie, how much of that goes to our convention
center debt?

I know it's a sizable part of it.
>>> Yes, it's about 13 million or so.
>> So there's still a little bit above that.
>>> Yes.
>>> Unlike downtown, Drew Park is largely an
industrial area as we can see here, 61% of it is tax
base, industrial properties.
Drew Park revenues are anticipated to dip more because
in East Tampa there were no new large construction
projects to offset the established properties.
We can see here that Ybor 1 is largely nonresidential
which means it's more closely tied to what's happening
in the commercial sector.
Again, Ybor 1 did not have any large new construction
projects.
You can see it's also dipping.
Ybor CRA 2, also largely nonresidential.
Also dipping.
Here we have Tampa Heights riverfront.
You can see almost half of it is vacant land, which is
largely a factor of the planned Heights project.
The ultimate value of Tampa Heights riverfront will

largely be dependent on the development of the
Heights.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That last one is confusing to me,
and perhaps inconsistent, because when we were over
there, in meeting with the fox and the developer, it
seemed to indicate that he was going to be moving
forward on the project in Tampa Heights.
>>> He may be, but the thing to remember is if it
hasn't already been constructed, I did not include it
in the analysis.
>> So how is that a projection?
Isn't there some assumption that over the next two,
three years, things are going to pick up.
>>MARK HUEY: The Heights in Central Park aren't
particularly meaningful.
Those are going to be driven by our private partners
and their activity.
And as now the TIF revenues, they are very modest.
The revenues would be created in the Heights or
Central Park are really going to be contributing to
the redevelopment of their specific projects through
our development agreement.

So we just want to include them in the presentation so
no one would seem left out.
And to give you a feel for the tax base that's there
right now.
But in the case of the Heights, yes, Julie is
presenting to you something -- and Central Park.
You will see Central Park is shown without any TIF
revenues, and they will all be driven by what actually
happens in redevelopment.
So we will bring to you, when actual construction goes
on in the height, as an example, new TIF revenue
projections we bring to you in support of probably
some other commitment that we'll ask you to make to
support that redevelopment activity.
So the Heights and Central Park are a little
different, in that we had significant private partners
that are driving the activity there.
But again to emphasize how this relates to all the
other CRAs, the projections, we are not speculating
about any new construction in any of the CRAs.
And while I'm pretty confident about that in the next
two or three years that there isn't going to be any

big large scale, I can a sure you probably three,
four, there will be significant new construction.
So in keeping with Reverend Scott's observation that
these might turn out better, they could.
And that would be an area where we would start to see
some pickup.
What you are seeing before you is something we are
going to keep updating.
It's a tool we are giving you, a sense of how it looks
today.
In a couple of months when we get the new -- the
actual tax revenue numbers from the assessor, we'll
update these all again.
And we'll update them periodically for you to keep you
in touch with in particular as new development
activities come forward.
Does that answer your question?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, it sort of answer it is
question.
Obviously we are pretty consistent across each CRA,
and we are almost done, I guess, that you are
projecting basically flat revenues in the various TIFs

over the next four or five years.
But that's a huge assumption, that nothing is going to
be going on in any of those CRAs.
At some point you scratch your head if you aren't
going see new and exciting things happen.
>>MARK HUEY: Again we are trying to give you a sense
for the impact of the economic environment we are in
and how it's so different from the last five years.
That's why I'm saying not to be sort of unduly precise
in terms of year to year specifics, but more the trend
lines that we are showing you that is going to be
different.
So, yes, I believe we are going to do better.
But believe me, there are some economists out there
that you I'm sure are aware of who spin much different
scenarios.
So exactly how things are going to fold, we are not
sure.
>>> Julie Wisdom: Okay, so here we have the revenue
extreme for Tampa Heights riverfront.
You can see that we are expecting one large project to
come on in time for the 2011 tax roll -- I'm sorry,

2011 budget process.
Here we have Central Park, similar to Tampa Heights
riverfront, ultimate tax values, Central Park is
largely dependent upon the development of Encore.
Encore is not shown here because it has not been
constructed.
Here is all of the CRAs combined.
To summarize, a decline in TIF revenues is
approximately 10% is projected.
In fiscal 2010, the continued weak real estate market
will also have a negative impact on fiscal 2011 TIF
revenues, market stabilization is expected to occur in
2011 which will help further decline property values
and TIF revenues over the next five years will remain
below fiscal 2009 revenues.
Just as a reminder, July 1 will receive the final
assessment roll that will be used for the fiscal 2010
budget, and we will update our numbers and present
those as part of our board briefing, budget priorities
on July 23rd.
We will be getting you a draft of the budget at our
August meeting.

And then submitting the budget for approval at our
September meeting.
And that's it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions?
Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two quick questions.
The statewide association, what is that, Florida
redevelopment association?
Have they put together any comparable statewide
predictions or projections that you have seen?
>>> Julie Wisdom: I did not look on their site.
I looked on the state's Web site.
I would assume that they have, but I did not examine
those.
>> Have you seen any of those, Mark?
>>MARK HUEY: No, I'm not aware the FRA has this.
I know they have in the past.
What we have used is the governor's office what they
do statewide and for each category, and within each
county not quite in the detail we have looked at those
statewide conferencing estimates and they are similar
to the estimates we have shown you.

>> As related to Drew Park, I think it was a little
disappointing, only shows a million dollars and it's
kind of static for the next X number of years.
But I think that we saw something about potential
stimulus money that we were going to try to go for the
big stormwater project.
Do we have any hope of that?
Any notions?
>>MARK HUEY: We are hopeful on that.
And chuck Walters has been very engaged and is quite
resourceful at bringing particularly state resources,
I think more so than federal resources.
Is there any update you want to provide?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Finally I hope at some point this
morning some of our developer friends like Ken
Stoltenberger in the back might come up and let us
know if he's as barish -- bearish on Channelside.
>> We are not trying to be bearish or bullish in these
numbers because we are suggesting to you that that's
part of your decision making framework.
Believe me, I could conjure up all kinds of scenarios
of new investment that might occur, but that isn't

what we were trying to present to you.
We are really trying to present to you construction
that is known, that we will count in our numbers, but
things that are speculative, where there isn't
financing in place, permitting in place, there isn't
construction actually occurring, we have not included
those in our projections.
Is some of that going to happen over this five-year
time frame?
Absolutely.
And we'll update each time our baseline numbers for
that activity.
So, again, I'm the half full guy.
But this is a different thing that we are trying to do
for you, is really let you know based on known
information what is the trend of our current CRAs.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
[9:38 a.m.]
>>MARY MULHERN: I appreciate your conservative or
realistic, if you want to call it realistic.
It looks very probable to me, that I think your
projections look like what we can expect.

And I think that what it brings to me as far as what
our priorities are now, especially downtown, in the
Channel District, where we actually have the
residential possibilities, we just need to get them
purchased and occupied, so that I think what we should
be doing with what little revenue we are going to have
in the next few years is making those neighborhoods
where people want to live.
And I think those are smaller investments than the big
kind of projects that we are used to doing.
And I think that goes a very, very long way to having
people want to live here, getting retail, getting
businesses to want to locate in a place where people
want to live.
So I think that our focus should be on making these
neighborhoods livable.
And it really is across the board.
It's the same in East Tampa, and Drew Park, I think is
kind of a different case.
It like a little tiny mini CRA, since it is mostly
industrial and commercial.
But that's what I think that it makes sense for our

focus to be bringing and supporting the kinds of small
businesses and retail and amenities, parks, trees,
sidewalks, gardens kind of things that make a
neighborhood where people want to live, and raise
property values, and which, by the way, community
gardens always do that, when you put a community
garden in a neighborhood, the property values go up.
>>MARK HUEY: And I agree with you.
One of the ways that we think about it, maybe it's an
image that will help you, is that we all do believe
that the economic conditions are going to change, and
markets will unfreeze and we will again enjoy a cycle
of positive redevelopment.
And so particularly in these communities where the
residents who moved in are the pioneers.
Guess who is going to be our marketing agents when
that market turn occurs, and what do we want all of
those residents to be saying about their living
experience in Ybor City, in downtown and Channelside?
We want them to be excited and be our best marketers
for our redevelopment areas, a great place to come and
live.

So what are the things we need to do to make sure we
are in a position for them to be our best marketers?
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: You can do number 3 and introduce Mr.
Sam Harris.
>> Mr. Harris heads up our Central Park advisory
committee.
>> Sam Harris: Good morning, chair and board.
I'm here with the Central Park CRA.
I think we are making some headway.
We have had an opportunity to meet a number of times,
and we haven't had ability to get anything done
because of the current economic conditions.
As of last month, we were informed that the project
should be starting in October, as long as the funding
is approved in the stimulus package.
Our concerns with the CRA are the following.
We are concerned about not having enough green
technology involved in the developments.
We believe it is paramount to go into our next stage
of developing our city as a world class city with the
CRA.

We are concerned about jobs and local businesses,
having participation in this project as the
development goes on.
And last but not least, there is a community job fair
that Bank of America, the Tampa Housing Authority is
going to be putting on on June 4th and 5th.
The objective is to get people involved in the
process, what's going on with Central Park.
There should be a Web site that is currently being
developed that would allow small businesses to bid on
certain projects once things move forward.
But we are excited about where we are at.
We believe that Central Park is going to be a
highlight of the current CRAs that are out there.
Thank you.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess my question, and maybe more to
Mark, one is currently the small businesses that are
there, what is there to help them during this period?
Because there's no residents pretty much there.
That's one.
And, two, what opportunities are there in terms of
bringing other small businesses back into the area,

those that once were there, I guess the kind of
question I have.
But I just got a call this week from someone who said
they closed down, went out of business and cause
because all the residents are gone, and we are looking
for some type of assistance.
So if you can speak to that.
>>MARK HUEY: Reverend Scott, that's been one of the
more difficult issues in the unfolding of the Central
Park redevelopment area.
As you know, the plans from the relocation of
residents out of the Central Park community and the
demolition of that, and then the new construction was
intended to sequence one after another, and a
unfortunately that is not how it's occurred.
So there are a number of businesses that we were aware
of that have really folded because their market has
left.
And the city just has not been financially in a
capacity, our TIF revenues in the CRA as you know are
very modest, less than $50,000.
They don't really cover the administration of the CRA,

much less funding, some sort of program to carry
businesses for years.
So it's really been a very difficult part of our
redevelopment area there.
But I can tell you, I certainly believe, just as you
are seeing in downtown, and Ybor, as more residents
come in, more businesses come in and see viable
opportunities.
And as you are aware, a portion of the Central Park
redevelopment involves some commercial care corridors.
And opportunities for new businesses to come into the
area.
So, again, I don't think you are going to see much
improvement.
I wouldn't be straight with you if I said otherwise,
and the opportunities for small businesses in that
area right now, but certainly when you look at the
long-term, there are going to be many opportunities
for small businesses.
I think you have got a little bit of feeling for that,
even the impact of the new construction will have for
minority and small businesses when the Bank of

America, Housing Authority team presented to you, I
believe it was last month or the month before.
So better times ahead.
We just need to again hope that the stimulus
opportunity will be the funding mechanism to finally
move that redevelopment initiative forward.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess my question to Mark is the
businesses that are left, the businesses that are
still there and may be struggling, have we been able
to advise them, counsel them, help them in terms of
securing grants, maybe federal, state grants along
those lines, whatever is available, that you can
assist them or help them, has there been that kind of
opportunity?
And also about the green technology, green jobs, that
sort of thing.
I don't know if that's included in the plan.
>>MARK HUEY: On the green side, I think Bank of
America team presented to you their redevelopment is
going to incorporate a number of green initiatives in
their vertical projects, they are hoping will receive
LEED certification.

In terms of the counseling and interaction with small
business, I know there has been a lot of engagement
with Michael hatchet as part of the community efforts,
but in terms of helping to seek grants, I can't really
speak to that, and -- Michael, do you have anything to
add?
>> Michael Hatchet with Central Park.
I too get the telephone calls about the hurting
business climate in Central Park because of the
residents located outside the area.
My efforts have been primarily in being a source for
referral, to be able to understand what their issues
are and be able to point them in the direction of the
small business information center, SBA, other
business-type entities, either for creating a new
business plan, if they start into a new adventure, the
existing business might not be viable.
Some recognize that as looking for a business plan,
creation assistance credit counseling, and a number of
other opportunities that might be available to them
either to stay at their present location, or to create
a business opportunity elsewhere.

So I do try to serve as that --
Have we kept track, though, of those businesses that
were there, legitimate businesses that were operating,
functioning, and now that Central Park, we demolished
the residences, kept track of those businesses were
always where they are, and that sort of thing?
Has there been any kind of tracking?
>>> I am aware of the number of businesses that are
struggling that have advised me of that, and a I know
of some that have closed.
I have not formally created a tracking system to have
a system to know who went where and at what time.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano?
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: How large of a supermarket are we
looking for down there?
And who have we talked to?
>>MARK HUEY: You are referring to the presentation
that Bank of America made, and that they have a place
on Nebraska Avenue, that one of their sites is one
that they have targeted for grocery store opportunity.
And, yes, I know even now they are engaged with
discussions with grocers on that.

I don't want to make any representations at this point
whether that has happened.
Their focus right now is really on trying to come out
of the ground with three residential projects.
And I think if they are successful in that, I can a
sure you that that would position their grocery store
site for success.
Even if it's not immediately an opportunity.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: But that's years down the road by
the time they get that done.
And some of these landlords down there cannot sustain
that many years of --
>>> Yes.
>> Can there be a subsidy program association sort of
federal program, or the city could assist these
people?
>>> Board member Caetano, there is no sort of federal
program that helps in these situations and the city
simply doesn't have the resources.
The dedicated resources we would have would be our TIF
revenues to try to help subsidize businesses through a
transition.

But as you know those TIF revenues are quite modest at
this point.
They don't really even cover the salary of our
redevelopment manager and administrative expenses of
that TIF.
So we don't really have resources to work with at this
point.
>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: As far as residential, are people
looking to move there?
Is there activities?
>>> Well, we believe they will if we can get projects
under construction.
And again one of the very unique things about this
redevelopment effort, unlike our other redevelopment
effort, or what is particularly unique about it, and
really, I believe, unprecedented in the country, the
commitment the city has made.
This is a new 2,000-unit community that is planned.
800 are affordable housing units.
So what we are trying to do just north of our central
business district is to create eventually 800
permanently affordable residential units.

I'm not aware of any city in the country that has such
a determined initiative associated with it.
And we have not just -- we have not only committed to
the redevelopment agency to it, but as you are aware,
our housing program has been very much dedicated to
this effort.
And everyone involved is quite confident that if we
can create this community -- and it's more than
buildings.
There will be the redevelopment of the park that will
occur there, and really a whole new neighborhood
created from the ground up.
And if we can create that quality place, that
development partners envision, I believe people will
want to live there, and it will be a great community
to live in.
>> Being that I'm not that familiar with Channelside
how many residential units are available at the
present time of?
>>> We were talking about Central Park.
The Channel District, would you like to know how many
residential units?

>>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Right.
>>MARK HUEY: Bob, do you want to give a little
information about Channel District, number of units?
>>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may.
I haven't spoken.
You can see this Central Park was a thriving,
self-sustained community as many parts of the city
were and still are.
This is the one that through whatever reason, actual,
or people moving out, moving in, less income coming
in, this was a mecca of the '30s and the '40s and
the '50s and the decline started in the '60s.
But to bring it back, you are not going to have a
grocery store or an apartment store or Publix or a
private, without anyone living there.
You have to create the residents first, have the land
masses available for the development of the possible
stores that are coming in.
And that's the same problem that we face in other
areas.
If you go back in history just a few years, there
wasn't anything on MLK and Nebraska.

It was through the city's efforts that Sweetbay, then
known as Kash N' Karry, came in and put a real nice
store in with pharmacy and everything so that the
neighborhood, all the neighborhoods in that area from
East Tampa to all the way to almost West Tampa, could
come in and do purchases there.
And that's what makes development.
You just can't say I'm going to put this in and people
are going to come.
The people have to come first, and then development
occurs.
When the people move west in covered wagons, there was
nothing there.
It's the same thing we are doing here.
>>MARY MULHERN: Maybe we could start homesteading.
See, I think that we need to continue on this
conservative tack that we are in, with the reality of
our budget and what's going to really be happening.
And it strikes me -- and I have had this conversation
with the Housing Authority people, too.
But as you said, this is a huge ambitious expensive
project.

And it probably needs to be scaled back.
And I think -- I know that we are talking now about
phasing and hopefully we'll get the senior housing in
there first, and we'll get the funding for that.
But the reality is, you know, the numbers might just
be the density and the number of buildings and all
that might not be realistic.
But what strikes me as far as the businesses that
closing or likely to be closing down is that as you
said, we have got Ybor City, and we have got downtown,
and we have got Channelside, which are areas that have
new residents actually living there and need small
businesses.
Especially in Channelside.
I'm not sure, but I'm guessing these businesses in the
Central Park area are small, retail kinds of things.
And those are the kinds of businesses that we need in
the new areas, urban areas, that have housing and
don't have anywhere to take their dry cleaning or buy
a bottle of wine or whatever they need to do.
So considering that we have one CRA that's empty, and
we have others that are filling up with people, maybe

we could help those businesses, at least as a
transition, with some incentive, some retail
incentives to go into Channelside or downtown.
And just kind of makes sense to me.
It's a terrible thing.
I mean, businesses are closing down, and all the
stable neighborhoods, because nobody has money to
spend.
So I think that might be a really good solution, at
least look at who is being displaced and losing their
businesses in Central Park, and see if we can
incentivize with some rental incentives to get them
into some newly residential areas in Channelside or
downtown or Ybor City.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
[9:57 a.m.]
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just a couple of comments and a question or two.
Mark, as I recall, or maybe it was Michael, I used to
teach school there so I'm pretty familiar with Central
Park.
But some of the existing or formerly existing

businesses have now closed down along the street
there, Nebraska.
I was thinking Nebraska and then the cross street of
palm or 7th, around there.
But they are not necessarily strictly in the CRA, some
of them, right?
I mean, yes, we have had an impact, because we have
torn down Central Park Village.
But in terms of the formal boundaries of the CRA,
aren't some of these businesses we are talking about
that have been impacted really aren't even in the
formal district?
>> Most of what's I think being talked about that I am
aware of, the boundary goes up to the interstate, as
you recall.
And Ybor City.
So I think it includes this Nebraska business corridor
and palm.
>> East side and the west side?
Because I know that little strip center by the
library, I didn't think that was included.
>> Tampa park apartments, which is included in the

redevelopment area.
So that's your boundary.
>> Okay, we did include Tampa.
I was thinking we didn't because of all that
controversy.
But, anyway, I just wanted to make a comment, trying
to be a little more optimistic about all of this.
But one of the things that this community is talking
about is mass transit.
There's a rail system.
If we have a rail system there's a very good chance
it's going to come down in that Union Station
proximity, or possibly coming down Florida Avenue.
Regardless, that rail system hopefully we will build
it, and if we do, we will have a station, one or more
stations adjacent to Central Park and/or Tampa Heights
or both.
And when we do that, you know, it's going to be a
tremendous opportunity for redevelopment it will be
the place that developers and banks and other finance
folks will want to be building near.
So I want to be a little more optimistic about this.

That's just a statement.
The last thing, I had a question for Mr. Harris.
Sorry for the trip back up.
Could he elaborates a little more on the technology
that you mentioned in your remarks?
In terms of what has your discussion been on that?
>> Sam Harris: Our discussion has been when you look
at the Central Park area, and I believe it was Mr.
Miranda, it was a mecca.
In order to make this community viable, you have got
to be able to have jobs.
And we believe we have green technology, you are going
to bring in companies that may want to relocate in
that area.
So it needs to be a very viable part of what we stand
for as a city and as a community, that we include
those things into this project.
And we have had many discussions with small business
owners, with our board, and I have also been on panels
discussing green technology throughout the State of
Florida.
We have all the right resources.

We just have to make a plan of action that includes
that, so that we can do two things, save money on
energy, and create jobs for the 21st century.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thanks for that clarification.
>>> I wanted to point out while I am up here, our
other concern is we did reach out to Bank of America,
spoke with Mr. Leon with the community redevelopment,
and it has been brought to our attention that this
project is going to be converted 100 percent to
apartments.
That's a big concern if that's the case.
I'm not 100 percent sure on it but this is what was
brought to our attention and the people in the
community are concerned about it.
If this is going to be all apartments that's not the
reason why the project was initiated so we want to
make sure that we do include the housing that has been
spoke about in regard to this.
So that is one of our other concerns.
>> Maybe to provide some clarity to that.
The issue he's speaking of, you may recall that lot 7,
as it was initially envisioned was to be market rate

apartments for a number of reasons, the plan for that
lot is now affordable apartment units.
There has been no discussion with the bank in between
the city project wide.
All apartments.
But there has been a change in the planning just for
lot 7 to go from market rate apartments to affordable.
Is that helpful?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I remember from the PD that was in
front of us --
>>> It still has hotel component, affordable retail,
office, I think all still in place.
>> The mixed use is critical.
>>> The park improvements are also still part of the
package.
>>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: You mentioned something about June
4th and 5th.
>> Yes, sir, June 4th and 5th Bank of America
and Tampa Housing Authority are putting together a
community outreach function, kind of like a job fair,
and the whole purpose is to give local businesses in

the area, in the construction phase, to be aware of
the project that may be coming forward once we get the
funding but it's going to be a job fair that is
sponsored by Bank of America, and the Tampa Housing
Authority.
>> You may want to check.
And I have just been handed a note from Mr. Jerome
Ryan that there is nothing planned for Central Park on
June 4th or 5th.
So I don't know.
Do you know anything about that?
He just called and said nothing is planned for Central
Park on June 4th or 5th, unless, Michael, now
something.
>>> There had been some discussion, and I didn't know
if it had been verified or not that the events for the
June 4th and 5th that was envisioned for Perry
Harvey park converting that life participant job fair
at the park into a web-based job fair, where
potential, participants would be able to submit their
minority business application materials into the
system so that they could be paired up in job related

activities.
I didn't know if that had been confirmed or not, and
did want to raise it.
That would be my thought as to why you received that
message, and going to a web-based system.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I just wanted to clarify, because like
I said, he just called in.
So we just wanted to make sure that we give some
accurate information.
So thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: If it's going to be held June 4th
and 5th, where will it be held and how will people
be notified?
>>> Well, what I was informed was that it was going to
be at the park, the Perry Harvey park, and that they
would be putting together flyers and brochures to get
out to the community.
We are having a meeting in our CRA on June 1st, if
there is any information they can disseminate to us
that we can get out to the community.
So they were taking the lead on how it was going to
get out to the marketplace.

And that's what was informed to us.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Ms. Mulhern.
>>MARY MULHERN: I am going to it up and get in touch
with you but I have somewhere a job fair on my
calendar that I heard about so I'll figure out what it
is and let you know, and make sure that it's actually
happening.
Or not.
I wanted to say a couple of things.
John brought up a great point about the rail.
And I think that we need to keep that in mind while we
are doing our rail planning, because that's a natural,
since we are really trying to incentivize the growth,
in Tampa Heights and in Central Park, and downtown, it
really makes sense for our rail line to go up Florida
or Nebraska, one of those streets.
And I think that we need to make sure that as we are
planning that, it's going exactly where we need to
stimulate the housing growth the most.
And the jobs.
The other thing I wanted to say in relation to the

green jobs is that -- and maybe in relation to a job
fair, is that there is stimulus money going into
creating the weatherization jobs and those sorts of
things.
So if the people in Central Park that are losing their
business, or losing employment, could get in touch
with the CDC, or the center for women, or perhaps with
Cindy Miller or our housing people here, and find out
if there's an opportunity that they are going to be
doing training for weatherization, which is one of the
first sort of green job stimulus things that we are
getting money for.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Now we go to item number 4.
Mr. Mark Huey.
[10:07 a.m.]
>>MARK HUEY: You have received our monthly reports,
as you can see, it was another busy month for the
redevelopment agency.
A few highlights.
We did install new recycling containers around our
downtown and Channel District.

The ecolution event was in Cotanchobee park.
Ybor host add regional forum regarding the nighttime
economy that was attended by redevelopment
professionals from throughout our region.
In Channelside, we finished the road resurfacing of
11th, 12th and Whiting Street.
And it looks fantastic.
Working on our first Drew Park community newsletter
that will be going out shortly.
The MLK beautification project and the retention pond
continues on track to be open this summer.
The Central Park team is in high gear, in terms of all
of their structure planning.
Full construction drawings are coming into the city in
June.
Development agreement, lots of activity on Central
Park to support the federal stimulus effort.
We had our town hall meeting.
The board went into the Heights community and had the
town hall meeting this month.
And while it's not in one of our CRAs specifically I
would be remiss to not note the opening of IKEA and

the benefit that will have in Ybor City.
Interesting story in that regard.
The Hampton Inn partnered with AAA to host an IKEA
weekend special, you can come and stay in Ybor City
and enjoy the nightlife there and shop at IKEA over
the opening weekend.
So those are the kind of activities that IKEA will
bring to our area.
And I will be happy to answer any questions for you at
this point.
>>GWEN MILLER: Questions?
Item 5, please.
>>MARK HUEY: Item 5.
We have transmitted to you our quarterly report.
And Julie and the staff team do a great job each
quarter to give you current information about the
status of our TIF spending.
And that is before you to receive and file.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
We will now go to public comments.
We need a motion to receive and file.
>> So moved.

>> Second.
(Motion carried).
>>GWEN MILLER: We go to public comment.
>> Good morning, council.
Gerald White, former member of the Tampa Housing
Authority as a commissioner. I'm here to hear a
report on the CRA related to Central Park.
Very concerned about the progress of Central Park and
kind of sad that no progress has been made.
Central Park was the first assignment given to the
mayor, Pam Iorio, when she took office.
I think one of the first top assignment that the
citizens laid on her was Central Park.
And up to this date it's just not there yet.
And, you know, I'm not sure if Bank of America went
through a stress test, but if this bank can't deliver,
and I want the citizens of Tampa to hear me, council
and the mayor, and the Housing Authority.
I was involved in every major vote related to Central
Park.
If Bank of America cannot fulfill its obligations as a
partner, the Housing Authority, the City of Tampa and

the Board of County Commission needs to strongly
consider pulling out of their agreement, and allow the
federal government to redevelop that property.
We cannot allow this property to sit here for two,
three, four, five, six years vacant.
As you heard, the community is slowly being destroyed,
businesses are going out.
This is not good for our citizens or for the city.
This is not what we asked for, this is not what we
negotiated, this is not what the Board of County
Commissioners agreed to, the City Council, and the
mayor.
And this is not what I voted for as a former housing
commissioner.
If this bank cannot fulfill its obligations, then I am
asking you as a citizen to ask the Housing Authority
to pull out of this agreement, and I'm sure with the
friendly President Barack Obama who has a strong
interest in the urban core, would consider funding
moneys, bringing moneys down to redevelop that
property back into public housing.
If it's not going to work, if it's not feasible, if

you can't get the stimulus money to get this project
going, I'm asking the City Council, Chairman Scott,
you was heavily involved in this, I'm asking Mayor Pam
Iorio, this is her first assignment, I want this
assignment started -- or finished before she leave
office, before the mayor finish office. This was her
first assignment.
I want to focus on this.
I want the mind trust of the county, the city, to get
to work on this.
If this is not going to work, pull out and get it done
the way it can be done under federal control.
We know the moneys are there.
And so this is real.
This is happening.
We displaced hundreds and hundreds of citizens.
So that's my concern.
This is not what I voted for as the housing
commissioner, I know this is not what the Board of
County Commissioners wrestled over, what you fought
long and hard over, Councilman Chairman Scott. We can
do this.

But we need to do it in a way that it can be done.
And if it can't be done under this public-private
partnership, then we need to find a way to come
together as a community and pull out of Bank of
America.
Pull out if it's not going to work.
Surrender.
Surrender and say, Hey, this public-private
partnership is not going to work, Bank of America, we
have a large portion of city land that's sitting there
vacant in downtown Tampa.
So I'm asking for there to be strong consideration, if
this stimulus money does not come through.
(Bell sounds)
And let the federal government redevelop it.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
>>> Good morning.
Spencer Kass, representing 5315 North 37th Street.
We are the owners of three acres of land over in East
Tampa.
And I want to address what I guess will be item 7.

This has to do with the $1.1 million that the city is
going to use for rehabbing homes.
We discussed this a little bit in front of City
Council.
I tried to explain why you shouldn't do it.
I am going to go into a little more detail today.
But if you do do it I am going to give you a couple of
suggestions about it.
First, why you shouldn't do it.
The staff gave you their own projections for the area
that they expect over the next two years housing
prices to fall so basically the plan is going to be
you are going to buy land and your own staff expects
the value to go down.
Then you are going to turn it over to people, and
values go down.
Next you are going to set a lower base price for homes
in the area.
You are going to make it harder for the people who are
already there to refinance, because I can tell you, as
a lender, lie and see what actual sales are in the
area.

So you are going to buy things at lower prices which
is what the plan is.
And see they are lower Y.would I go and refinance
somebody now when there's less equity in the home?
Next you are going to reduce your property tax
collections because once again you are going to set a
lower level for property values.
Also you are going to add more low income people to an
already economically depressed area.
I have nothing against affordable housing.
But as your own staff has said in regard to other
areas, you need jobs in these areas.
Tampa was just rated as one of the ten worst cities to
find a job in and there seems to be very little focus
of creating new jobs and getting businesses.
I think that needs to be where the focus is.
You can take this money and employ people at ten bucks
an hour, put 30, 40 people to work.
Let them fix anything.
If you look at code violations, do something but at
least put all those people to work.
You just lost 100 more jobs at the airport the other

day.
If you are going to go through with this, let me give
you a couple of suggestions.
One, I would like to see a commitment for the city to
maintain the property.
As now the city currently does not vice-president
under the current code, Councilwoman Miller told us
the story about when the city ran their little green
initiative that they tried to do with urban gardening.
Two years to get the city to clean up their own lot.
I would like to see the city brought under the same
code that everybody else has to deal with.
Next I would like to see a commitment to pay property
taxes.
The property taxes will be.
Next I would like to hear staff stand up and say on
the record that no members of the CRA advisory or
their companies are going to be allowed to take funds
from this program.
I have nothing against the people who sit on the
board.
But I think it looks bad when we constantly pass

programs and then those own people benefit for us.
Finally, as was suggested last week, I would like to
be 100 percent severely financed on its own.
There isn't enough money to pay for police out of the
general fund.
So I would like to see 100 percent of this paid for
out of the CRA money.
You know, the city tends not to take 100 percent of
the money.
To be safe, we don't take everything, all the CRA
expenses out of the CRA.
Let's make this 100 -- let's try this as our first
trial project for something to be 100 percent.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
[10:17 a.m.]
>> Ken Stoltenberg.
My office is at 1101 Channelside Drive.
And with regards to the projections that you have just
seen on the Channel District, and the other CRAs,
they kind of flatlined for the next five years, I
would say that's a realistic projection and what Mark

has done and his staff makes sense.
I would suggest what we need to do is challenge ours
us how to make that go up instead of flat line.
If you are not going to get any more money for the
next five years then let's be creative and figure out
how we can go do that.
Let me give you -- I'll give you three examples of
things in the Channel District and one example overall
of what could you do.
As some of you remember I came here 15 months ago and
gave a presentation about some things that the city
could do in the Channel District which I thought would
enhance the neighborhood, make more people want to
live there and enhance the revenue stream.
There were three things.
One was buy some land for parks.
I think we all acknowledge the real estate market was
down so now is the time to do that.
The second was fixing Kennedy Boulevard.
Right now it's a five-lane drag strip.
Do you have a lot of retail but it's not conducive to
pedestrian retail.

To work on that with FDOT to fix that problem to make
it more pedestrian friendly.
And the third thing was to come up with a program or
several programs to incentivize retail, and to speak
to Mr. Caetano and the supermarket, we have all three
big guys in the Channel District, they are all
interested to a certain extent.
We are at the tipping point.
It hasn't happened yet but we are at the tipping
point.
Let's assume that you assumed that you were going to
incentivize the supermarket and give them a half
million dollars a year.
That's a lot of money but if you did it year after
year and they had to be in business and perform first.
Let me give you another number.
The average payroll of a supermarket is $3 million a
year.
That's $3 million of jobs right hear.
So I would tell you this.
There are a number of other Florida cities that have
been pretty aggressive on incentivizing retail.

Orlando are is one that I know personally because I
worked there it worked.
Sometimes the businesses failed, yes.
But if you make commitment based on performance
chances are you won't lose.
If you do those three things, let's fix Kennedy, let's
buy some land for parks, and let's come up with a
program, I think could you be looking at a much higher
revenue stream.
For more projects, and this is the final thing, if you
share in what's created you will never lose.
We didn't do that yet.
And we should.
Because if we don't assume we are going to get
anything, you can either have all or nothing, or a
portion of something.
I would rather have the portion of something.
So if you incentivize people to do stuff, it may not
work for year two or three but it will start to work.
It will.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

>> Members of the board, greetings.
This is Al Davis.
And due to his sense of sight limitations let me ask
your indulgence so that he will not run over.
What is it, three minutes, Madam Chair?
>>GWEN MILLER: Three minutes.
>> We used to have four minutes.
>> We have never had four minutes.
>> We never had four minutes?
>>GWEN MILLER: No.
>> Madam Chairman, first of all there's two things I
wanted to know as part of my continuing education.
And then I do have some concern.
My continuing education observation is this.
What happens to the tax dollars, property tax dollars,
that is not above the baseline?
Who gets that and what do they do with it?
I understand the baseline.
And incidentally, very well educated what happened
above the baseline.
And I appreciate that.
But I can't find something that will help me

understand what happened, you know, below the
baseline.
But at the baseline.
>> I'll try to explain that when you finish talking.
>> Al Davis: The other thing, my concern has to do
with the East Tampa CRA.
As you know, East Tampa has a staff in addition to the
office person of three people that is, you know, kind
of economically redevelopment oriented.
But one is gone.
And you know, when one is missing the other two can't
do.
And so I'm hopeful they get that third person back in
East Tampa as soon as possible.
I'm pretty sure that East Tampa has made their
concerns known to the department.
And then I hear something about not having -- what is
it, a hiring freeze?
Anyway, having a hiring freeze so that might slow down
things.
But we need that person quickly.
The second concern I have, Madam Chairman, has to do

with the 13 members CAC.
I'm concerned about the competence, the efficiency,
and the timeliness of their performance.
And what I perceive to be a misguided assumption that
they have to perform double duty.
(Bell sounds)
I'm going to stop.
As the CAC and the other as the leadership of the East
Tampa revitalization partnership.
Right now, staff cannot get the kind of input from the
CAC necessary in a timely manner without having,
quote-unquote, special meetings.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Davis.
[10:24 a.m.]
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Madam Chair, let me see if I can help
with the baseline, and there was a slide, I think,
shown earlier on, in the PowerPoint presentation.
What happened is once you establish a CRA and TIF
area, what happens is everything stops at the tax
revenue at that level, will that continue to go to the
different municipalities.
Everything above that then goes into the CRA.

That's what it is.
Do you understand now?
When we created the CRA, let's say, for East Tampa,
whatever the tax base, or revenue was coming in,
stopped at that point, okay?
And the city, the county still get their share.
On that base.
Anything above that, that goes back into the CRA.
>> That's accurate.
Isn't that right?
>> Al Davis: Then why are we taking, if you will, the
TIF money to take care of infrastructure that the
municipal government ought to be providing in the
first place?
That's what I can't understand, you know, from the
perspective of without the TIF money there would be no
redevelopment S.that what you are saying?
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, the statute allows for
redevelopment.
That's the reason you have the Florida statute chapter
163, I believe it is, that those funds then become
available for redevelopment for stress or distressed

neighborhoods, or communities.
>>> But if I am understanding --
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Huey is going to explain it to you.
Come and explain.
Mr. Mark Huey will explain it to him.
>>MARK HUEY: I'm sorry, I apologize.
Just to clarify, Mr. Davis was really trying to make a
point that I didn't want to let sit there, and that is
that only TIF money is the only money being invested
in East Tampa.
That was sort of a concern.
And that is not the case, takes board is well aware.
For example, TPD 3 station which has had a huge impact
on the perception of crime in East Tampa was primarily
funded by non-TIF sources.
Sidewalks and road resurfacing has been funded from
other city departments, CDB programs, has benefited
East Tampa.
So there's been a variety of other funding sources
that council in its role in budgeting and the city
administration has brought to bear in East Tampa.
So that is the one item I wanted to clarify.

But your explanation was right on in terms of how the
base of the taxes coming out of East Tampa are
treated.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Would anyone else like to speak?
Okay.
We go to item number 6.
We need to approve the resolution.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: That was pulled, I guess, on request
by Mr. Johnson that the item be removed.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
We go to item number 7.
Mr. Huey.
>>MARK HUEY: This is presented to you as a program
earlier, last month, for your review.
A program we put together in partnership with the
housing department.
I don't know if you wanted me to respond to some of
the comments, a suggestion that Mr. KASS offered.
I was trying to write as quickly as I company.
But let me just offer a couple of observations.
Why would we invest in depreciating assets, this isn't

a program about making money.
We are not treating this as real estate investors.
We are concerned about how foreclosed properties might
create conditions of blight within neighborhoods.
And so we are trying to intervene in that process.
And our goal is not about whether we make money or do
not make money in the program.
Secondly, there was a concern that somehow our
engagement, our spending of $2 million might be such
that we would support the decrease of values.
A couple of things there.
First of all, we are buying at market value.
We are not trying to buy below market value.
So we are simply buying at existing -- we are not.
Secondly, the $2 million is substantial.
I don't want to minimize it in any way.
But it is not enough money.
We are going to probably deal with 30 or 40 properties
in an 8-square mile area.
So again we are not going to be moving the market
through to our investment.
There was a concern that this be 100 percent TIF

funded and that no city general funds be used.
I want to let you know that no general funds are being
used in this program.
The matching funds are coming from the housing home
and SHIP dollars, and we are very excited to leverage
those and not just have this be a $1 million program
but a $2 million program.
So again that's an important part of the project.
We will maintain our properties as we acquire them and
a sure that that's the case.
So again I could write down -- couldn't write down all
the documents comments but there were a few things I
want to share some observations on and again we
recommend it for your approval.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Move approval.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, I'm sort of confused
procedurally.
What is it that was pulled?
What item was pulled?
>>GWEN MILLER: Number 6 was pulled.
>>MARK HUEY: Somehow it got entered twice in the

agenda.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what I'm confused about.
>>MARK HUEY: That was an accident.
>>GWEN MILLER: So it wasn't really pulled.
It was just duplicated.
We struck number 6 but we are going to move forward on
number 7.
And number 7 includes the resolution, the draft
resolution.
>> It right.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me ask some questions then
about the draft resolution.
Was this presented to the CAC and did they vote for
it?
>>MARK HUEY: The CAC is supportive of the program.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: They had a formal vote on what we
are doing right now?
>>> Ed Johnson, CRA manager for East Tampa.
Yes, that's correct.
Mr. Dingfelder, the CAC committee was actually the
entity that created the idea and content around this
program.

The board met individually on several occasions with
Sharon West of housing and community development
department who we agreed to partner with as a result
of being able to create a foreclosure program.
This is quite similar to the city's overall NSP
program.
The funds were being targeted for Sulphur Springs and
West Tampa.
And we felt that because we have a large number of
foreclosed properties in East Tampa that we want to
create something quite similar.
So basically we have taken the concept and create in
East Tampa a process where we match -- that's one of
the things that the CAC committee was very adamant
about was being able to leverage our dollars, not just
having it just be a TIF funded program.
So the housing department was very cooperative about
being able to set aside half a million dollars from
their SHIP program and half million dollar from the
federal HOME program to match our TIF dollars, and by
doing that the YAC unanimously approved moving forward
with funding through this mechanism.

>> In the resolution you mentioned a $1.17 million
budget item that's I guess in the existing budget?
>>> Yes, that's correct.
That's where the mistake came originally.
It was felt that maybe we needed to create a new
separate line item, individual index code.
But the budget office has decided it would probably be
better just to go ahead and use the existing line item
being that it was already approved, already had the $1
million there, in our rehab program, so what we were
doing was reallocating that $1 million to the work
effort of the foreclosure rehabilitation program.
>> So downtown see this as a budget amendment then?
>> No.
Just an expansion of the currently existing program.
>> And then the last thing is, do you have a specific
goals in terms of the use of that $2 million number of
homes, or properties that we might be able to
acquire/rehab, and --
>>> I think mark was quite right on the point,
probably going to affect somewhere around 30
properties.

We believe the rehabilitation costs of putting a home
out of foreclosure back into the market and be able to
sell it at market rate is probably going to take an
investment somewhere in the neighborhood of $100,000
to dop that.
So between the acquisition and the rehabilitation and
the eventual sale through our existing nonprofits and
for-profit that is we have out there working in the
arena, we believe about 30 houses will be effected.
The other neat thing about this program that I think
goes counter to what Spencer Kass was alluding to
earlier is that none of these properties -- none of
these properties, once they are rehabbed, will sit for
very long.
One of the pieces we put into play here was that
within 90 to 120 days, the house isn't sold, we will
allow the entity to rent the property so you do not
end up having to populate -- the property dormant for
any long period of time.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Out of the $2 million, what
percentage is budgeted for administrative overhead
costs, either ours internally or externally with our

housing partners?
>>> As a matter of fact, the resources that the
housing department is already utilizing for the
management and conducting of our current rehab program
is in-house, so we are not expecting any additional
administrative overhead to be taken out of this
program.
It going to be 100 percent funding being utilized for
this process.
>> And external --
>>> External, obviously, our nonprofits that will be
taking the properties into their domain and then
rehabbing them.
Obviously there's going to be, you know, development
fee that they will be able to --
>> I'm just curious.
Ballpark, what is that budgeted for, percentagewise?
>> Probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 12 to
15%.
>> Thank you.
[10:36 a.m.]
>>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to thank you, Ed, for

explaining this, so that we knew what it was.
And I know that the East Tampa people were the driver
behind this, because they wanted -- they didn't want
all the money just to go to Sulphur Springs, and
thought that they had a need.
So I think that it's a good thing.
And it is supported by the community.
And I appreciate your explanation, because it is a
complicated thing that we did need the help on it.
So thanks a lot.
And I'll second your motion.
>> (off microphone).
>>SAL TERRITO: The resolution is pulled.
Right now you need a motion to approve -- the force
and effect of the resolution.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: So moved.
>>MARY MULHERN: Second.
(Motion carried).
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?
>>MARK HUEY: Two items very quickly.
One, I just wanted to thank Ken Stoltenberg again for
being here and all he's doing in the district.

And as he said, he came to you a few months ago and
gave us three priorities.
And we have listened, as he's well aware.
We are out looking to acquire park land in the
district.
We are very actively involved with FDOT on a plan to
reorient Kennedy Boulevard and the benefit of
pedestrians, and hopefully creating some additional
sidewalk.
We prepared a plan for FDOT.
They responded back with a plan.
And now responding back to.
That so we are very actively involved in that.
And we are also directly involved with grocers who are
considering coming into the district, and they are
very well aware of our eagerness to support them, and
the basis upon which we would.
So again I wanted to report that to you.
The last bit of good news, we were informed this week
that we were awarded a $400,000 brownfield grant that
will benefit Drew Park, East Tampa, Central Park, and
the Heights, as well as others possibly throughout the

city.
We have been using the brownfield grant very
effectively in East Tampa over the years, as you are
aware, and because of that success, we were again
awarded another grant, and this one, though, will
apply across some of the other redevelopment areas in
our city.
So I wanted to report that good news to you.
Again more resources, not just TIF resources that are
coming to benefit redevelopment in our city.
And that concludes my report.
Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything from council?
>> Move to receive and file.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: A motion to receive and file.
(Motion carried).
>>MARY MULHERN: I had a few items of new business
which Mark touched on quite a few of them.
I was going to bring up this great news and ask about
it.
So the $400,000 that we received from brownfield,

that's a brand new award?
So that's our third brownfield grant we have gotten?
Okay.
I would like to ask that at our next CRA meeting we
have a report of how the brownfield grants that we
have already received have been allocated and spent,
and what the balance is and what we are using it for.
And then add onto that what the plans are for the new
brownfield money.
And then the second thing I wanted to bring up was
just about Ken Stoltenberg's, actually all three of
his items that he asked about and that you just
brought up, Mark, I would like to have a report on
each of those at our next meeting.
Most importantly, Ken had some real specific proposals
for how he could incentivize retail there.
And I would like to see you work with him or whoever
is working on that, so that we actually have a
proposal for how we can do that, how we can actually
start to use the TIF money to incentivize retailing.
So I don't know, you know. He has a proposal.
Maybe you can look at it and talk to him and come up

with some specifics about how we can do that.
And I know that there are dollar amounts in there.
We would need to talk about that, too.
But I just want to feel like we are actually getting
somewhere with it.
And I think as Ken mentioned in his e-mail, we are not
just talking about a big grocery store, we are GTE
talking about getting some of those, you know, smaller
businesses in.
And I think that's going to happen.
That can happen a lot more quickly than getting
Sweetbay or any of these big stores that might come
in.
And also the idea, the Central Park idea that maybe
some of those displaced businesses might be interested
if they can get some incentives to relocate there.
And then basically, what areas we are looking at for
parks, and if we purchase them, and if not when we are
going to do that, what the plan is.
And then the FDOT, maybe could you report on where we
are with that, what we are asking for and where we are
in the discussion.

Do you want it to be one motion?
>> One motion.
>>MARY MULHERN: That's a motion.
>>MARK HUEY: If I can say something on the area
incentives.
I have made reports to you add nausea.
We have had many discussion busy incentives for
retail.
I think no less than four or five times.
I have met with Mr. Stoltenberg a great deal on the
matter.
What we have some fundamental differences blood
pressure how public moneys should be used to incent
private business.
At the end of the day, I hope our mutual goals are
going to get accomplished.
But I would hate for this motion to create some sense
that at some point I'm going to agree with exactly the
way Mr. Stoltenberg believes incentives should work,
because as he knows we have some fundamental
differences about the use of public funds.
>>MARY MULHERN: Okay, I understand that.

But we have been talking about this for years, and I
haven't seen any actual proposal or allocation of
funds, and I want to see that.
And if you are not planning to do that, then maybe
I'll come up with something and we can --
>>MARK HUEY: Yes.
Again, you have raised incentives on a number of
levels.
The one area that we are working on right now with a
grocer would involve an agreement between us and the
grocer that would come to you for approval and require
a financial commitment on the part of this board.
So the reason you haven't seen anything come to you
financially is because that grocer hasn't yet
committed.
>>MARY MULHERN: Okay, let's leave that out.
I don't even want to hear about the grocer. I want to
hear about getting some small businesses in there
which might actually be able to survive if they had
the help with the rent, the loan, the whole proposal
of paying it back, has it being performance based.
So these are smaller investments, and I think they are

investments that are much more likely to actually
work.
I cannot see the grocery store going in there.
I mean, not till we get those apartments and condos
filled up, and that's not going to happen if there's
nowhere for them to buy, you know.
Get the coffee, get their dry cleaning done and walk
their dog.
>>GWEN MILLER: Why don't you make these motions
separate?
Because as Mr. Huey just stated he has talked to Mr.
Stoltenberg that I doesn't need to bring back, and
make an agreement with them.
So why don't you pull out all those things and make a
separate motion for each one.
>>MARY MULHERN: For the incentives, maybe I should
just pull it and I'll come back with a plan.
I want the brown field report, the parks report and
the FDOT report.
>>GWEN MILLER: Have you made a report on that before?
>>MARK HUEY: No, and I would be glad, to give you a
little more information.

I will provide an update.
They are all very important initiatives.
We are working on them and we are glad to report to
you.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have three motions.
The brownfield, and what else?
You said brownfield.
>>MARY MULHERN: The brownfield, specifically how the
money has been used so far and how much money is left
from the two brown field grants that we already
received over the last four years.
Then what the plans are, if any, for the new $400,000
that we just received.
That's one motion.
>>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second on that?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of that motion say Aye.
Nay.
>>MARY MULHERN: Next I would like a report on which
properties are being looked at in Channelside for
purchase by the city to be used as parks, and where we
are as far as the purchase and negotiation for those,

and some dollar amounts.
And the third is to hear where the negotiations and
discussion are with FDOT on making Kennedy more
livable road in the Channel District area.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you believe Mr. Huey identifying
such property will raise the negotiation on that?
>>MARK HUEY: Well, in a sensitive way.
I hear your concern.
Believe me, when we do our presentation, I know we and
the entire board will be sensitive to the message that
we communicate.
>>MARY MULHERN: I would especially like to know, I
don't think there's any problem with you pointing out
a lot that you are looking at.
And I had heard that we did have some land that we
were going to purchase, or I thought has been done
already, but I knew at least one area.
So especially if we have made an offer, or if we have
already purchased something, I want to know about it.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, was that a motion?
Was that included in the other motion?
>>GWEN MILLER: That's a separate motion.

>>MARY MULHERN: I made the motion.
>>GWEN MILLER: We don't have a second.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>THE CLERK: There were two motions mentioned.
Are they both into one with that motion?
One was for the parks.
One was for FDOT.
>>GWEN MILLER: All those in together.
FDOT.
>>THE CLERK: The first motion was for the brownfield
report.
The second put together parks and FDOT.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess the question I have in terms
of incentivizing is how can does the QTI play into
that?
Because you do know --
>>MARK HUEY: That's a program that's available.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: That's a program that's available.
So you may want to look at that.

>>MARK HUEY: Right.
>>THOMAS SCOTT: Because you are talking state as well
as city funding.
So you may want to look at that and see how you can do
something similar if it's going to incentivize.
Follow what I'm saying?
>>MARK HUEY: Yes, I do.
Thank you.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just wanted to clarify something.
Based upon something you said that sort of struck me
as unusual, Mark.
You said that you have been in discussion was Ken
Stoltenberg and I think that's wonderful and you have
philosophical differences as related to this
incentives and how you might do it as compared to how
he might suggest you do it.
But as far as I know, those haven't necessarily been
aired specifically to us, you know, in the context, in
that exact context.
>>MARK HUEY: Okay.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because at the end of the day while
we are thrilled that you have a philosophy and he has

a philosophy, at the end of the day we should be
evaluating those and setting a policy, using the best
of both perhaps.
So I just wanted to -- I am not going to do that in
the form of a motion, but if and when we get back to
that discussion, which I think we should have one of
these days --
>>MARK HUEY: I again I would like to suggest at
previous workshops we talked about those things, but I
don't mind doing it again.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, I don't remember it in the
context of saying, I felt one way, Ken felt the other
way, and how do you feel, board?
I don't remember that.
>>> That I have not debated before you so that would
be accurate.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And not to create animosity.
We need to air these out and see where we come down on
it but at the end of the day that's what we are
elected for.
>>MARK HUEY: I would be glad to be part of that
request.

>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?
If not --
One thing.
I was going to say with the Channelside, we do have a
CAC.
And anything should come not just with Mr.
Stoltenberg, should come with the recommendation of
the CAC.
I just want to be clear.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Good point.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?
We stand adjourned until 6:00 p.m.
(The CRA meeting adjourned at 10:51 a.m.)



DISCLAIMER:
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied
upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
transcript.
The original of this file was produced in all capital
letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
third party edits and software compatibility issues.
Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.