TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, May 20, 2010
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon
for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
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.
09:05:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to
09:05:20 The chair will yield to the honorable Charlie Miranda.
09:05:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's my pleasure to introduce an
09:05:25 individual who is an outstanding citizen of this
09:05:29 wonderful community, and he's been kind enough to come
09:05:32 various times to do the morning prayer, Mr. Steve
09:05:36 Please rise and remain standing for the pledge of
09:05:39 allegiance after the chair.
09:05:41 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Good morning, council.
09:05:43 Dear Lord, we are thankful for the many gifts that you
09:05:45 bestowed upon us.
09:05:47 We are grateful for the day that you made, for the
09:05:48 elements that you have given us to care for, for the
09:05:51 humans and all of the natural elements and for the
09:05:53 animals of all kind that reside on the earth and the
09:05:56 sky and under the sea.
09:05:59 They are companions in our life's journey and we ask
09:06:02 that you care and watch over them and all of them that
09:06:06 are unable to care for themselves.
09:06:08 Do not fear the challenges before you.
09:06:11 Seek out the truth for the truth is the Lord's voice
09:06:14 and consider the greatness contained therein.
09:06:16 Beware of those who seek to twist it for they are
09:06:19 speaking against your truth and the faith.
09:06:23 Turn from them that cannot stand the light nor the
09:06:27 power of the glory of God.
09:06:28 We ask your Holy Spirit be called upon and gathered and
09:06:32 bestowed upon all those gathered here, and lighten the
09:06:35 seas of adversity, wisdom to decide wisely, justice to
09:06:39 be treated fairly, truth to be honorably delivered.
09:06:42 We ask that you bless all those gathered here, provide
09:06:45 us with the protection from the oil disaster and all
09:06:47 those who rely upon the sea for their livelihood.
09:06:51 God bless Florida.
09:06:52 Protect all its people, the City of Tampa, it's elected
09:06:56 official and employees.
09:06:57 We ask this in your name.
09:06:59 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:07:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Michelini, for your
09:07:22 We have roll call.
09:07:23 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:07:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:07:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:07:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:07:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:07:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
09:07:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:07:33 We have two that need to be adopted.
09:07:38 >> Move the minutes.
09:07:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:07:48 All in favor?
09:07:52 We have to review our agenda.
09:07:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: In front of you, you have the
09:07:57 addendum of today's agenda.
09:07:59 It's quite lengthy.
09:08:00 We do have some items of new business.
09:08:03 Three of the items there are to be scheduled for items
09:08:08 at future meetings, but there are two requests for
09:08:11 add-ons, that those be added to today's agenda.
09:08:14 The first being an emergency ordinance to provide for
09:08:19 regulation of pain management clinics.
09:08:22 Ms. Cole is providing the final copy of that to the
09:08:26 And I suspect, Ms. Cole, do you know whether Mr.
09:08:33 Fletcher wishes to have that taken up early on, or
09:08:36 under staff reports at 10:30?
09:08:38 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
09:08:39 After 10:30 would be appropriate as I have members of
09:08:43 the police coming over to give testimony with regards
09:08:47 to this ordinance.
09:08:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
09:08:48 So that is being added for after 10:30.
09:08:51 The other item is a resolution that pertains to item 57
09:08:55 relating to the electronic signs, and that is a
09:09:01 resolution per the direction of council so that would
09:09:05 be requested to be added on to be considered at the
09:09:08 time that item 57 is considered.
09:09:13 Substitutions of items, with regard to item 57, you
09:09:16 have an ordinance being substituted in order to clarify
09:09:19 section 6 relating to the lighting of traffic shelters.
09:09:24 Item 58, you have a substitution that changes the
09:09:27 effective date to read June 24th, 2010.
09:09:34 Continuing to the next page, item 36 is a request from
09:09:39 the administration that that item be removed from the
09:09:43 agenda, and that is relating to the QTI resolution.
09:09:51 Item 47 is a request that this item relating to the
09:09:58 single-bid technology be pulled for council discussion,
09:10:04 and that would be, I suspect, under staff reports at
09:10:10 Item 64 and item 66 are requests by Karen Palus to
09:10:18 request two-week continuances for both of them, one
09:10:22 being a report regarding a park being named, the second
09:10:27 being a discussion of the possibility of Seminole
09:10:28 Heights community gardens being relocated to 22nd
09:10:33 street park.
09:10:34 Item 67 relates to the request for USF banners on
09:10:39 Fletcher and Fowler Avenue.
09:10:40 That is a request to have that continued to June
09:10:44 3rd, 2010, to allow for further coordination with
09:10:48 the University of South Florida.
09:10:52 Item 76, which I believe is scheduled for this
09:10:55 afternoon and cannot be handled before then, but it
09:11:07 will be a request to continue, a 30-day continuance for
09:11:12 a vacation of a right-of-way on an alley east of
09:11:18 Florida Avenue, west of Marion street.
09:11:21 Item 77 sentence a request by the petitioner that that
09:11:25 item be withdrawn, so that will not be heard this
09:11:28 afternoon, but it will be taken up at that time
09:11:30 regarding the petition of Walgreen's at 3518 Henderson
09:11:37 Item 79 is an SU-2 at 4650 West Kennedy Boulevard.
09:11:43 That is not perfected.
09:11:44 That item will not be heard this afternoon.
09:11:49 Item 75 is an item we can take up this morning.
09:11:52 I believe the discussion was a vote that was originally
09:12:01 taken on May 6th.
09:12:04 And Mr. Caetano, that was your request.
09:12:08 Last time you made a motion to reconsider your vote.
09:12:11 Under the assumption that that did not accurately
09:12:14 reflect your sentiment.
09:12:16 In fact it was a scrivener's error.
09:12:18 It has been recorded correctly.
09:12:20 You did vote as you had intended.
09:12:23 And therefore you were not on the prevailing side, and
09:12:26 therefore the motion to reconsider is not on the agenda
09:12:29 because it was out of order.
09:12:30 So that matter, unless anybody else wishes to take it
09:12:33 up that matter is resolved.
09:12:40 Council, I believe the other items that appear here are
09:12:48 for reports that you have received.
09:12:52 I am not aware of any other changes to the agenda, and
09:12:56 I present it for your approval as amended.
09:12:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: On item 63 and 68, the specific
09:13:07 request from council was to appear and provide a
09:13:10 report, and in both cases they have asked to provide a
09:13:14 written report.
09:13:16 And not to be nitpicky but I really want them to
09:13:21 So I would like them to appear as requested by Tampa
09:13:24 City Council.
09:13:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And that is today.
09:13:28 So it's on the agenda and you are making the request
09:13:30 that the administration hearing this at this time
09:13:33 appears under staff reports at 10:30.
09:13:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Correct.
09:13:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can just clarify, Mr. Chairman,
09:13:39 having taken up item 75, # there's any further
09:13:42 discussion, it would be my recommendation to remove it
09:13:44 from the agenda.
09:13:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
09:13:46 Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:13:49 >>MARY MULHERN: With regards to that, we received an
09:13:54 executive order from the mayor late yesterday regarding
09:13:57 the park fee.
09:13:59 So I think maybe we could bring that up briefly at that
09:14:03 point, on the agenda, and that relates to that.
09:14:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That item then will remain on the
09:14:11 agenda, Mr. Chairman.
09:14:12 Thank you.
09:14:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On item 47, that's in my committee
09:14:21 on transportation.
09:14:28 I have some questions for staff and haven't had a
09:14:31 chance to talk to them, so rather than taking council's
09:14:34 time, later, this is just a regular renewal of an
09:14:37 existing bid.
09:14:39 But I am going to ask for just a two-week continuance.
09:14:42 I'll make that motion, plug that motion into our
09:14:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you want to do that now?
09:14:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
09:14:53 If there's no objection.
09:14:55 It will take up less time if I get my answers and come
09:14:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you get that number?
09:15:01 We are going to include this into the motion for
09:15:03 changes to agenda for a two-week continuance.
09:15:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Exactly.
09:15:09 I need a date.
09:15:10 >>THE CLERK: The date would be June 3rd.
09:15:13 Regular meeting.
09:15:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So that item will not be heard on
09:15:17 today's agenda under staff reports which is what was on
09:15:20 the addendum.
09:15:21 A two-week continuance request.
09:15:24 >> Correct. A motion for changes?
09:15:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Motion to change.
09:15:31 >> Moved and seconded.
09:15:32 All in favor?
09:15:34 So moved.
09:15:36 Council set aside time to take public comment.
09:15:41 At this time come forward, line up, and state your name
09:15:43 and address for the record.
09:15:44 You have three minutes.
09:15:48 Preference given first to items on the agenda.
09:15:51 Preference given first to items on the agenda.
09:15:55 Then whatever time remains you can speak to any other
09:15:58 item after that.
09:15:59 You may come forward.
09:16:01 State your name for the record.
09:16:19 >> Good morning.
09:16:20 I'm an owner at the towers of channelside, reside on
09:16:26 the 19th floor there.
09:16:28 I purchased my unit in August of 2007, and 55 other
09:16:34 owners purchased in 2007.
09:16:39 13 additional owners purchased in 2008.
09:16:43 Altogether there are 68 owners who did not receive a
09:16:48 required notice.
09:16:51 For comparison purposes, we bring to City Council's
09:16:55 attention another petition presented in 2008.
09:16:58 One year prior for the sale of alcoholic beverages.
09:17:03 WZ 08-116 was filed on July 31st, 2008, and the
09:17:10 second hearing on September 18, 2008.
09:17:12 This petition was for a site on south 11th street
09:17:16 directly across from our towers.
09:17:18 Support for City Council to recognize tower 2 was
09:17:21 actually the very first tower to be occupied, and is
09:17:27 directly across the street from 223 south 12th Street.
09:17:33 And the prayer's office does update records daily but
09:17:37 not later than one week.
09:17:38 Today representing myself as one of the 76 owners of
09:17:41 the 150 who did not receive notification, we ask
09:17:46 Chairman Scott and members of the City Council to
09:17:48 inquire, investigate the following issues.
09:17:51 Number one.
09:17:52 How did it occur that the latest ad valorem tax records
09:17:55 in 2009 did not include four owners in tower one, one
09:18:00 of whose owners is the vice-president of our board, and
09:18:05 also did not include 68 purchased units in tower two,
09:18:10 all sold by the end of 2008.
09:18:13 Item two.
09:18:14 How did it occur in 2008, a year prior, another agent
09:18:17 for WZ 08-116, petition for the sale of alcoholic
09:18:22 beverages, did obtain the latest ad valorem tax records
09:18:27 for 33 members of tower one and 53 members of tower two
09:18:35 and effectively complied with the notification
09:18:38 Item three.
09:18:39 The certificate of mailing submitted with 09-360
09:18:46 packages, not the official property appraiser's list as
09:18:51 provided by Tatum.
09:18:52 Why did the agent place the packet in the tight labeled
09:18:56 mailing list of less than one half of the owners within
09:18:58 the 250 feet radius from the site?
09:19:02 The agent Mark Bentley making conflict of interest as
09:19:05 an owner in tower one.
09:19:07 He certainly knew about the rest of us in tower two in
09:19:13 the presentation.
09:19:14 The photo of the site that he submitted very curiously
09:19:17 did not show either of these two humongous towers well
09:19:22 within the 250 feet of the site that they are talking
09:19:32 I respectfully submit the information there and request
09:19:38 the City Council to look into this matter.
09:19:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you put your name on the record?
09:19:44 >> Paul Thomas Addock.
09:19:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:19:49 Mr. Dingfelder.
09:19:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Where are we with this procedure?
09:19:53 I know we have heard this rumbling before.
09:19:58 I don't want to step on toes legally.
09:20:01 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Our office did a memo, Rebecca
09:20:05 Kert wrote it.
09:20:06 I believe it should be in your package for discussion
09:20:08 today during staff reports.
09:20:09 >> Is there an agenda item?
09:20:14 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: 74, I believe, is the item.
09:20:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Short of looking at that right this
09:20:19 second, tell me where we are procedurally or legally.
09:20:22 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Legally, essentially what we
09:20:25 believe we are constrained to advise you all is council
09:20:30 acted in a manner that believe it or not is consistent
09:20:33 with what is written in our code right now.
09:20:35 So jurisdiction has passed on this, absent a revocation
09:20:40 action really out side of council and city jurisdiction
09:20:46 in terms of the initial approval at this point.
09:20:49 And at the appropriate time we can go through --
09:20:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Why don't we take the item up when we
09:20:54 come to have that so we don't disrupt the flow of
09:20:57 public comments at this time.
09:20:58 Councilman Dingfelder, we can take that up as I said
09:21:01 before, and then that gives a little more time for
09:21:04 discussion versus holding the public up.
09:21:08 Thank you.
09:21:09 >>> My name is Sam fell on behalf of myself and my wife
09:21:16 Betty Castor, two of the more angry residents of tower
09:21:20 two, and this holdup of petition of all the people of
09:21:23 tower two did not get notice.
09:21:25 And I can tell you, not withstanding what your attorney
09:21:27 has said, is that it is very clear that the law was not
09:21:30 followed, and the notice was not given to us about this
09:21:35 We are being killed by all of these places that are
09:21:38 around us, the blasting from the movie theater at 3:00
09:21:42 in the morning, the fiasco that's really a disgrace,
09:21:48 and now you have got another application here, and you
09:21:51 are giving all kind of variances.
09:21:53 If we had had a chance to come to the hearing and
09:21:56 present some testimony, we might have been able to do
09:21:59 something to prevent what's happening to us.
09:22:01 But we are very upset, and we very much disagree with
09:22:06 your attorney.
09:22:06 You have got the authority to take another look at
09:22:10 this, because they did not give us notice.
09:22:13 And here is the signed petition of the people in tower
09:22:16 two who did not get notice.
09:22:17 And I tell you, this is a travesty.
09:22:20 If you can sit there knowing that we were not given
09:22:24 notice and not doing anything about it, then that is
09:22:27 really a mistake.
09:22:28 And so I encourage you to stand up and do what you are
09:22:31 elected to do, and help us as citizens do something
09:22:35 about this situation.
09:22:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:22:42 >>> YATES: I'm a resident of tower one.
09:22:46 I did receive the notice, but my purpose of being here,
09:22:50 because everybody in tower one didn't get the notice,
09:22:52 and those in tower one represent one third of those
09:22:56 between tower one and tower two.
09:22:58 So two-thirds did not receive the notice.
09:23:01 I do want to ask those, many of our people are so
09:23:04 concerned, have jobs and could not be here this
09:23:07 So those of us who are here I would like them to stand
09:23:11 up, please.
09:23:12 And let you know that we care.
09:23:15 And we want you to do whatever you can in your power to
09:23:18 help us out.
09:23:19 Thank you.
09:23:20 And one of the things that would be helpful, you know,
09:23:23 we are not against businesses.
09:23:25 We want to be involved with them.
09:23:28 We don't want outside speakers.
09:23:31 We don't want loud music blasting our windows at three
09:23:34 in the morning.
09:23:34 And we don't want them to park, because it's in the
09:23:38 variances, and in the variance we only need two or
09:23:42 three parking spaces.
09:23:43 We don't want them to park on our grass at the towers.
09:23:46 We don't want them to block our entrances at Cumberland
09:23:49 So again we have a lot of issues.
09:23:51 We need your help with.
09:23:52 Thank you.
09:23:52 >> Pete Johnson.
09:24:02 I've got three or four items I want to go over quickly.
09:24:06 Number 72 on the agenda, animal control.
09:24:09 I sent you all an e-mail as I did to all the county
09:24:13 commissioners stating that animal control has been
09:24:16 extremely proactive every time I personally have had to
09:24:20 call them, or that I have called the code enforcement
09:24:23 department and I'm very proud that the customer service
09:24:27 in code enforcement takes it upon themselves to go
09:24:30 beyond their call of duty and make calls when I can't.
09:24:34 All I have to do is call them.
09:24:36 Second thing I want to talk about is, finally, after
09:24:40 two years of battling, Nuisance Abatement Board, I have
09:24:44 a meeting with the assistant chief John Bennett and the
09:24:48 legal staff regarding nuisance abatement.
09:24:52 We have seen it work already.
09:24:53 We have seen an extremely positive reaction from the
09:24:57 property owner that runs a drug and prostitution house.
09:25:01 So it does work.
09:25:03 So I'm very proud that finally we are getting to use
09:25:07 this state law.
09:25:08 Number three, the people in Ybor City, 3 $3:00 .3
09:25:16 million six years ago to rehab.
09:25:18 3.3 million.
09:25:20 Now it leaks like a sieve.
09:25:25 There is a portion of the contract that was removed
09:25:26 from the contract stating waterproofing.
09:25:30 Now who in their right mind would pull waterproofing
09:25:33 from a contract or by the advice of someone on a pool
09:25:38 that had classrooms underneath it?
09:25:41 Now the money is going to have to come out of CIP funds
09:25:43 to fix it, and they have no idea how much it's going to
09:25:46 But I'll tell you one thing, it's going to cost more
09:25:48 than $3.3 million.
09:25:50 Besides, this was federal money that was not used in
09:25:53 the best interest of the public.
09:25:57 And I'm scared to death, just like with Steve
09:26:00 LaBrake, we are going to end up paying this back.
09:26:04 The oversight is just not acceptable.
09:26:10 This is an e-mail I sent you out.
09:26:13 If legal can't go back against an illegal decision by a
09:26:18 Code Enforcement Board that is stated in the state
09:26:21 statute, then because of the length of time that has
09:26:28 gone by and they can't reverse that decision, then
09:26:31 legal needs to use the entire state statute, not just
09:26:35 portions of it, and require that every single
09:26:39 violation, whether it's a conviction or not for code,
09:26:42 be presented to the hearing master or to the Code
09:26:45 Enforcement Board as required by the state law to make
09:26:49 a true decision on what kind of a fine or penalty the
09:26:54 owner should get.
09:26:56 So either use the entire state law.
09:26:59 Don't just break it up and use what's convenient.
09:27:01 And Chip and I are still discussing this.
09:27:06 Sorry, two other things.
09:27:08 Snipe signs.
09:27:09 If you look out the window, right across the street on
09:27:12 Franklin Street, there are three snipe signs that I
09:27:16 called in this morning about 8:00.
09:27:18 I'm waiting to see how long it takes to get those snipe
09:27:21 signs removed.
09:27:22 Legal tells me that they can issue citations for this.
09:27:30 It's not happening.
09:27:32 The last thing is -- and I will talk to Kimberly Crum
09:27:37 about this, I just don't understand why the employees
09:27:40 in that building get free coffee but the employees in
09:27:43 this building have to pay for their own coffee.
09:27:47 Or walk across this parkway.
09:27:49 I mean, that doesn't make sense.
09:27:51 Thank you.
09:27:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
09:27:54 Next speaker.
09:27:55 >> I pay two bucks to the vendor down here.
09:28:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Next speaker.
09:28:04 >> Good morning.
09:28:06 My name is Carol Dunn.
09:28:07 And I'm here to address agenda item number 65, fire and
09:28:12 protection fees.
09:28:14 I first of all want to thank the City Council for
09:28:16 allowing fire marshals to meet with the Westshore
09:28:21 alliance last week.
09:28:22 We had what we felt was a very good and productive
09:28:28 My organization, building managers and owners
09:28:34 represents most of the owners and managers of most of
09:28:36 the major office buildings in Tampa and we met fire
09:28:39 marshals on May 11th and expressed our concerns
09:28:41 with the recently adopted fees and inspection process.
09:28:46 The inspection fees are based on the square footage of
09:28:50 tenant space, and there are just a couple of items that
09:28:53 we have asked to be reconsidered with regard to those
09:28:55 fees, and some of the processes that I would just like
09:28:58 to highlight some at this point.
09:29:01 We had asked the fire marshal to adopt the following
09:29:03 policies, which we think will facilitate the inspection
09:29:07 process and enable the building owners and managers to
09:29:10 deal more effectively to oversee our office properties.
09:29:14 We would like to see included in the established
09:29:18 inspection schedule and the city's fee resolution so
09:29:21 that the building manager or owner can plan on the
09:29:25 scheduling plan for it.
09:29:26 Routine fire inspections should be conducted every five
09:29:29 years in tenant spaces and every two years for building
09:29:32 cores and common areas.
09:29:35 We also requested the fire marshal's office notify our
09:29:39 building management company or owner of a scheduled
09:29:41 tenant space inspection.
09:29:43 We would also request that when scheduling an
09:29:45 inspection, the fire inspector inform the tenant that
09:29:48 there is a fee associated with the inspection.
09:29:52 We would also request that the fire marshal's office
09:29:55 provide building management company, the building
09:29:57 management company or owner with a copy of each
09:30:00 tenant's inspection report within seven days of the
09:30:04 We feel that this would allow us to effectively work
09:30:07 with our tenants to keep our solid relationships and
09:30:09 helping them deal with any discrepancies that they may
09:30:14 Professional office building managers and owners are
09:30:17 concerned with the safety of our tenants and the
09:30:19 maintenance of the property as is the City of Tampa,
09:30:21 and we look forward to strengthening our relationship
09:30:25 and open communication with city officials.
09:30:28 We also submitted a letter outlining all of these
09:30:31 things on May 18th.
09:30:32 And I do have extra copies if anyone needs them.
09:30:36 Thank you.
09:30:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:30:40 Next speaker.
09:30:41 >> My name is Moses Knott, Jr.
09:30:51 I reside at 2902 East Ellicott street three nights a
09:30:55 And then I just thank God for his grace and his mercy.
09:31:02 If it weren't for God's grace and mercy, I wouldn't be
09:31:05 standing here.
09:31:09 I want to talk about this park thing that's going on,
09:31:15 and article 10 this morning.
09:31:19 I see where you all spending all this money on a park
09:31:25 But if people, tourists come here and go down there and
09:31:28 sit down and enjoy the park and you all talk about this
09:31:34 and that, but, you know, but I been talking about this
09:31:41 You know, my heart went bad, and they put a machine and
09:31:46 I'm awful nervous.
09:31:47 But I been coming down here every year telling you all
09:31:49 about like in my neighborhood we got a park that takes
09:31:54 up one city block.
09:31:56 That's all it takes up.
09:31:57 And it used to be peoples go through there 8:00 at
09:32:02 night, the road be blocked.
09:32:07 But when I looked around, I'm sitting home, you know,
09:32:11 I watch you all every night.
09:32:13 Sit up all night watching you all and I know what's
09:32:15 been going on down here.
09:32:19 I know about it.
09:32:20 But when to let this park department go down there and
09:32:26 charge $25 a week for a poor child.
09:32:32 I mean, poor.
09:32:33 And downtown, right here, you have got 175,000 you
09:32:38 spent on a park downtown.
09:32:40 Now than is a shame before God.
09:32:42 You know, I know -- I been saying for years and years,
09:32:47 be on the human rights department, property rights,
09:32:51 Belmont Heights, I used to be on everything.
09:32:53 But I got out.
09:32:57 I didn't want to be involved in nothing.
09:33:00 You know, all through the Bible, God said you love me
09:33:06 and hate your neighbor.
09:33:07 Now, the he know what I talking about.
09:33:11 Now many people say, black people, we love God but
09:33:17 don't care nothing about the neighbors.
09:33:19 This neighbor hating thing is big in this town.
09:33:22 I'm going to switch.
09:33:27 I been watching you all the last two months.
09:33:31 I appreciate you sticking up for that park thing the
09:33:33 way you stick up.
09:33:34 You are the kind of lady that won't back down.
09:33:37 I like to hear you talk.
09:33:41 But you appreciate you saying that park come here, you
09:33:45 Now that should have never happened.
09:33:47 We got people that represent us over there.
09:33:49 That should never -- you don't represent us.
09:33:53 I mean you are city-wide, right?
09:33:55 But I appreciate you getting involved.
09:33:56 We never had nobody get involved over there like that.
09:33:59 But I want to say, Madam Chairman, that never should
09:34:05 have happened.
09:34:07 I appreciate you speaking up.
09:34:09 And let me tell you, you stand up, and one of these
09:34:11 days I am going to be mayor of this town.
09:34:15 But we won't don't have anybody representing us.
09:34:18 People in this town, we talk about when we get elected
09:34:21 we want to build new houses --
09:34:23 (Bell sounds).
09:34:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Knott.
09:34:32 Thank you very much.
09:34:35 Mr. Fletcher, on the item that the people are talking
09:34:41 about the tower two, I guess when we come to that --
09:34:47 and be prepared to address whatever options council may
09:34:52 >> Yes, we can address that at that time.
09:34:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Does anyone wish to request a
09:34:59 reconsideration on any legislative matter?
09:35:01 Anyone here wish to request an issue on a legislative
09:35:08 >>MARGARET VIZZI: I cleared this with Mr. Shelby as to
09:35:11 when I should speak.
09:35:14 The issue of, I guess, your workshop last week on the
09:35:21 Tampa homeowners were taking a position and asked me to
09:35:24 come whenever there was the workshop with you.
09:35:29 I called last week to see what time it was and I was
09:35:32 told it was going to be pulled so I did not come down.
09:35:35 The main issue that we had a concern with was -- and
09:35:39 when I listened, I was watching at home -- was that you
09:35:43 directed Julia Cole when it did come back from the
09:35:46 Planning Commission, which I don't think we have a
09:35:49 problem with that part, because that was set.
09:35:51 But the fact that she was only supposed to loon in
09:35:55 giving notice to the neighborhood, and to the immediate
09:35:59 neighbors, that T.H.A.N. has a problem with that,
09:36:01 because all that says is we just want you to know we
09:36:03 are putting a garden next door to your home.
09:36:06 So we would ask that you instead direct Julia Cole when
09:36:10 that comes back, and she prepares an ordinance, to
09:36:13 bring forth to you for passage regarding these gardens,
09:36:19 that it include public hearing.
09:36:22 There may be some neighborhoods that want it
09:36:25 automatically, but that's another issue.
09:36:30 The majority, all of the members of the T.H.A.N. who
09:36:33 were present at our meeting when we took a vote on it
09:36:36 wanted there to be a hearing so that you would have an
09:36:40 agreement with the neighborhood and the neighbors.
09:36:43 That's my request.
09:36:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say to that, that we
09:36:50 will be discussing all the options with Ms. Cole from
09:36:54 the legal standpoint, what we can do to afford public
09:36:59 hearing or public notice, and we have been talking
09:37:02 about it.
09:37:03 I think at this point it is early, and there were a
09:37:07 number of things that a number of different people
09:37:11 weren't satisfied with the specifics of the ordinance.
09:37:13 So when it comes back, we will address all those
09:37:17 And I think Ms. Cole knows.
09:37:21 >>MARGARET VIZZI: And you will have another workshop
09:37:22 before you do first reading?
09:37:24 >>MARY MULHERN: We can do that.
09:37:26 And I wanted to say one other things because it was off
09:37:29 the agenda for Mr. Johnson about the pool, at new
09:37:36 business I am going to ask for a report on that for our
09:37:38 next meeting.
09:37:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
09:37:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: As you know, Mr. Chairman, when
09:37:44 this item came up about gardens, I did everything but
09:37:47 vote against it.
09:37:48 I didn't vote against it because it was only four
09:37:50 members and I felt that if it should go through I
09:37:54 didn't want to stop something.
09:37:55 But I also said that I was not more than likely going
09:37:57 to vote for it when it came back, and I stated that
09:38:00 when talking about a 20-horsepower engine, that's what
09:38:04 I remember was said, and I said at various cycles that
09:38:08 had 8.5 horse power that makes a lot of noise, 12.5
09:38:12 makes more and 20 makes almost two and a half times
09:38:14 what an 8.5-horsepower engine makes.
09:38:18 I also said that I was curious why two acres was
09:38:23 debated, and that they were looking for more than two
09:38:28 acres, and we had to change to the two acres.
09:38:31 Then I did a little research.
09:38:33 And I tried to determine how many two-acre plots are in
09:38:36 the city.
09:38:38 Does anyone know?
09:38:39 I don't know if it's true or not.
09:38:41 But the number that was given to me, I have to assume
09:38:44 is factual.
09:38:45 There's over 700.
09:38:47 So what I'm saying is that I don't mind somebody doing
09:38:53 gardening in their backyard.
09:38:54 I applaud that.
09:38:55 I don't mind two neighbors getting together and saying
09:38:57 the backyard they can grow whatever they want to grow.
09:39:00 I applaud that.
09:39:00 It used to be that way, and I know people are getting
09:39:03 tired listening to that.
09:39:04 But I grew up in a different ERA.
09:39:07 That's how it was.
09:39:08 But I am not going to support someone coming in holding
09:39:12 functions to raise money selling the product.
09:39:17 That to me is a business and should fall under the same
09:39:20 auspices as any other business in the city.
09:39:26 That's all I have to say.
09:39:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Vizzi, you and I are on the same
09:39:30 page because I discussed that same reason.
09:39:32 I think it should be noticed.
09:39:33 The only reason I changed my vote, they promised me
09:39:37 that they are going to bring it back that you will be
09:39:42 And if they don't do that I won't be supporting it.
09:39:47 Let Ms. Vizzi come back.
09:39:49 You wanted to say something.
09:39:54 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 south Sherill.
09:39:56 I ask if notice meant that there would be a vote by
09:40:00 council so that the person next door in the
09:40:01 neighborhood could give input to it.
09:40:03 And I was told, no, because if the zoning
09:40:08 administrator, you give her the permission to do this,
09:40:12 the authority, then just giving notice does not give
09:40:16 the neighborhood or the immediate neighbor any rights
09:40:20 You would have to actually file an appeal of her
09:40:24 decision, which would put the onus of cost on the
09:40:28 person or the neighborhood, and that's the part that I
09:40:31 had a concern with when I found out it what giving
09:40:36 notice meant.
09:40:38 So it's got to be the other way.
09:40:40 >>GWEN MILLER: I will give Ms. Cole -- we are going to
09:40:48 get a clear understanding of what the public notice is
09:40:50 going to be because I cannot support fountain we don't
09:40:52 get that.
09:40:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: First of all, I think Ms. Cole is going
09:40:56 to bring back several options.
09:40:58 I raised the issue because I know in the county,
09:41:00 putting speed bumps in the community, there has to be,
09:41:04 I think, 51% of the community has to approve that for
09:41:07 to the happen.
09:41:07 So there would be several options that you have to look
09:41:10 at that will allow the community to have a voice.
09:41:13 As to a public hearing, I don't know what all that
09:41:16 means in terms of costs.
09:41:18 On these particular items.
09:41:21 It's going to come back.
09:41:22 It's coming back for council to discuss it.
09:41:25 And have input into the issue, and the community can
09:41:32 have input as I understand as well on this particular
09:41:37 issue so the opportunity for approximate public --
09:41:39 there will be several options.
09:41:42 Why don't we move to our first ordinance.
09:41:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Do I have the right to change my
09:41:48 vote now?
09:41:48 Because I am going vote against it when it comes back.
09:41:52 I voted on the prevailing side.
09:41:53 There was only four of us.
09:41:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You mean to transmit, do a motion?
09:41:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
09:42:00 I am going vote against it.
09:42:01 I already said that.
09:42:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: When it comes back -- by voting to
09:42:06 transmit you are not bound.
09:42:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.
09:42:09 Thank you very much.
09:42:09 That's all.
09:42:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You are not bound on any issue.
09:42:14 You can always change your vote.
09:42:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The question was whether he wanted
09:42:18 the motion -- --
09:42:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There's a full council now, and I
09:42:23 didn't want to be a pebble on a mountainside and say
09:42:26 that I held up something.
09:42:27 But now there's a full council.
09:42:29 So if I'm allowed to do that, I don't mind doing it.
09:42:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If your intention, sir, now is to
09:42:37 register your vote as your original intention was that
09:42:40 you had changed because you did not have a full
09:42:42 council, if you wish to have the vote accurately
09:42:44 recorded now that you have a full council, a motion to
09:42:47 reconsider would be in order.
09:42:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Before we do that, my point is the
09:42:51 issue is gone.
09:42:52 It's transmitted the next day, right?
09:42:55 >>MARY MULHERN: I believe we transmitted it.
09:42:58 I'm not positive but I think the Planning Commission
09:43:00 actually met and may have voted on it.
09:43:07 It would not make any difference.
09:43:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And that's my point.
09:43:09 The issue is they were going to transmit that day or
09:43:12 the next day.
09:43:13 So you can reconsider, but it becomes a moot issue at
09:43:17 this point.
09:43:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.
09:43:19 I see the mountain got taller.
09:43:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, council, I can verify this.
09:43:24 If it has not yet gone before the Planning Commission,
09:43:27 you have withdrawn things from the Planning Commission
09:43:29 before their consideration.
09:43:31 If that's council's intention.
09:43:32 I don't think council has lost jurisdiction.
09:43:35 I wouldn't want council to -- Mr. Miranda to lose that
09:43:38 If you wish me to verify and come back later, I can do
09:43:42 It's Mr. Miranda's choice.
09:43:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's not my choice.
09:43:45 If you can find out, fine.
09:43:46 If not, I am not going to debate the issue.
09:43:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Shelby, just for clarification,
09:43:54 I think there's a middle ground here when it comes
09:43:57 You know, I think that just because -- they look at the
09:44:01 big picture.
09:44:02 Do we want a gardening ordinance?
09:44:04 Do we want to include that in there?
09:44:06 In the big picture they'll probably come back and say
09:44:08 sure, fine, it's a great things.
09:44:10 I think we think it's generally a good thing.
09:44:13 I think we just need to work with T.H.A.N. and tweak it
09:44:18 out when it comes back.
09:44:19 So I think -- Mr. Miranda, I would urge to you let it
09:44:23 go, let it come back because we can all tweak it up and
09:44:26 if it's not tweaked to your satisfaction let's vote
09:44:28 against it when it comes back.
09:44:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, it's not to my satisfaction.
09:44:32 What's fact is fact.
09:44:33 I am not going to create a governmental entity that
09:44:36 other agencies are regulated and not this one.
09:44:40 When you start to sell something, then you fall under a
09:44:42 different category.
09:44:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Miranda, do you wish me to make
09:44:49 Miranda if you can, fine.
09:44:50 If not, it makes no difference to me.
09:44:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's move to the first ordinance
09:44:54 presented for first reading.
09:44:56 Councilman Dingfelder, do you want to read item number
09:45:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 1.
09:45:14 Reading a ordinance for first read being.
09:45:15 An ordinance amending ordinance 2010-4 passed and
09:45:19 ordained by the City Council of the City of Tampa on
09:45:23 January 7, 2010, correcting a scrivener's error by
09:45:26 substituting a corrected figure 2-6 and 2-7 for an
09:45:30 incorrect figure 2-6 and figure 2-7 that was supplied
09:45:33 in error for section 23-314 driveways, location, design
09:45:37 and construction standards providing for severability,
09:45:39 providing an effective date.
09:45:39 >> Second.
09:45:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
09:45:46 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:45:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a comment on an ordinance
09:45:51 not in front of us but I shared a letter with a former
09:45:55 engineer of the Davis Island civic association about
09:45:57 how we need to crisp up our language of sidewalks and
09:46:01 driveways and I'll be bringing that back under new
09:46:04 business to get a report back from staff on how we can
09:46:07 just improve our language so it's clear what the
09:46:10 expectations are.
09:46:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:46:12 Moved and seconded.
09:46:13 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
09:46:16 We move to our committee reports.
09:46:17 >>THE CLERK: Second reading and adoption will be held
09:46:21 on June 3rd at 9:30 a.m.
09:46:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
09:46:25 Public Safety Committee.
09:46:26 Councilwoman Miller.
09:46:27 >>GWEN MILLER: I move resolutions 2 through 7.
09:46:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
09:46:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The only thing, on number 4, if I
09:46:38 may ask this, memorandum between the Tampa Fire Rescue
09:46:42 partnership, among the City of Tampa and Tampa Bay
09:46:44 workforce alliance.
09:46:46 What is that all about?
09:46:47 And the school board.
09:46:48 >>GWEN MILLER: I would rather have staff explain more
09:46:59 to you.
09:46:59 They are going to be training firefighters.
09:47:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Who is going to be training
09:47:06 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: We can attempt to have somebody
09:47:07 here at the staff reports if you would like.
09:47:10 I can't speak to -- reviewed that document and it's
09:47:15 valid but I can't tell what you the purpose of having
09:47:17 that relationship is.
09:47:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would just like to have an answer
09:47:21 on that, because that's been in the news kind of
09:47:24 regularly here the past month.
09:47:27 If I can just hold that.
09:47:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We will hold number 4.
09:47:31 Move 2, 3, hold number 4, then 5, 6, 7.
09:47:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
09:47:37 All in favor?
09:47:39 Parks and recreation, Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:47:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to move resolutions 8,
09:47:45 9, 10 and 11.
09:47:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
09:47:50 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
09:47:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move 12 through 17.
09:47:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
09:47:59 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
09:48:01 Finance Committee, Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:48:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, brother chair.
09:48:12 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
09:48:14 I just have one question on 18 before I move all those
09:48:22 For legal, I need to know if the PBA ratified that
09:48:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
09:48:32 From what I was informed.
09:48:33 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items 18 through 24.
09:48:37 >> Second.
09:48:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
09:48:41 All in favor?
09:48:42 Building and zoning.
09:48:43 Councilman Caetano.
09:48:44 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to move 25 through
09:48:54 We removed 36.
09:48:55 So 25 to 41.
09:48:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
09:49:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
09:49:05 Councilman John Dingfelder.
09:49:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move items 42, 46, 48 to 51.
09:49:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
09:49:23 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
09:49:28 Set for public hearing.
09:49:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Set 52, 53, 54.
09:49:32 >> Second.
09:49:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
09:49:37 Now we move to our second reading of proposed
09:49:44 ordinances, please.
09:49:44 Do we swear the witnesses in here?
09:49:47 We just -- so we need to open the public hearings.
09:49:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved 55 through 58.
09:49:54 >> Second.
09:49:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor say Aye.
09:49:58 Anyone wish to address council on item 55?
09:50:00 Item 55?
09:50:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
09:50:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:50:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
09:50:06 Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:50:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You want to speak on 55?
09:50:13 >> You want to speak on 55, Mr. Knott?
09:50:19 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I want to speak on this 55 here.
09:50:25 Talking about the city towing of cars away, right?
09:50:30 >> No.
09:50:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This is about individuals who are
09:50:33 out of the norm, not the good guys who are in the
09:50:36 business, but those that ram rod through and they post
09:50:40 a sign and pull your car and instead of taking it to
09:50:44 their location they dump it in the neighborhood so they
09:50:46 can get another car within ten minutes.
09:50:48 And the neighborhood is not a parking lot for those
09:50:54 You have to take it to your lot and store it before you
09:50:56 can come back.
09:50:59 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I want to talk about the big
09:51:00 picture on this towing.
09:51:02 You know, in my part of the town, everybody wants to
09:51:06 make money, they come to the poor part of town to do
09:51:10 Even people in another country, they set up a business
09:51:13 in the poor part of town to sucker poor peoples.
09:51:16 But this towing thing here, you know what they are
09:51:19 doing over there?
09:51:20 Every Sunday morning, I want to tell you, on a Sunday
09:51:23 morning they got this flea market over there.
09:51:25 The flea market will be flooded out from people all
09:51:28 over the world come in there.
09:51:30 And they have nowhere to park.
09:51:31 Now over there, this park over there, they be closed on
09:51:40 Sunday morning, so most of the people, they can't get
09:51:42 in there, and this man own the flea market, he charge
09:51:46 But if he raise it to $4, and then all of these peoples
09:51:51 that park over there at night, on the other side of the
09:51:56 road, you don't see anybody over there.
09:51:58 So most of the people park over there, and they walk
09:52:01 four or five blocks.
09:52:03 But it's a big lot.
09:52:05 And what they do, they pay whoever wants something
09:52:10 done, I always say they got what they call black on
09:52:14 black crime.
09:52:15 A black man with a cell phone that walk all through the
09:52:18 lot, and before you can get out of your car they tow
09:52:23 your car away.
09:52:23 They towed my van one day.
09:52:25 I went to Popeye chicken there.
09:52:28 Popeye chicken, they own -- they got no sign there now.
09:52:34 They own the property on the west side.
09:52:37 And this mall on this side.
09:52:40 I park my van right there by that thing and they towed
09:52:44 my van away.
09:52:45 But I want to say it's a terrible thing going on over
09:52:47 And these are poor people now.
09:52:49 And you ain't going to come out under $200.
09:52:52 But it's a terrible thing.
09:52:53 And I'm glad you all are working on it but I wish you
09:52:56 would come over there on a Sunday morning and see
09:52:58 what's going on.
09:52:59 This flea market, on Sunday morning it be jammed over
09:53:02 there, and some people walk miles away just to get to
09:53:06 that thing.
09:53:06 But this whole thing been a racket to make money.
09:53:09 Like I said, you all charge $25 for a child to come to
09:53:13 the park.
09:53:13 You all are no better than these people's deals.
09:53:18 Thank you.
09:53:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:53:20 Motion to close.
09:53:20 >>STEVE MICHELINI: On item 55 I want to make sure the
09:53:26 council knows the Hillsborough County towing
09:53:29 association is a strong advocate of this change in
09:53:31 legislation to try to get some of what are called the
09:53:33 Wildcat towing companies under control.
09:53:36 And we have been advocating that at the public
09:53:38 transportation commission as well.
09:53:40 So we are encouraging you to pass this.
09:53:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
09:53:45 All in favor?
09:53:47 Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:53:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance being presented
09:53:51 for second reading and adoption, an ordinance of the
09:53:53 city of Tampa, Florida making comprehensive revisions
09:53:55 to the City of Tampa code of ordinances, chapter 14,
09:53:58 offenses, amending section 14-48 to clarify the
09:54:03 language of paragraph 14-48-D, to Mike it unlawful for
09:54:08 wrecker drivers to tow vehicles to a temporary site and
09:54:10 not tow the vehicle directly to the wrecker operator's
09:54:15 storage facility, providing for repeal of all
09:54:17 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
09:54:19 providing an effective date.
09:54:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
09:54:22 Record your vote, please.
09:54:23 >>THE CLERK: According tore my screen, motion carried
09:54:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 56.
09:54:48 Anyone wish to address council on item 56?
09:54:52 Anyone from the public wish to address council on item
09:54:56 >> Move to close.
09:54:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask one question?
09:55:00 Is there a staff person here?
09:55:02 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
09:55:04 I don't see one hear for this.
09:55:07 So City Council is aware, this is part of the July last
09:55:10 year that the round of changes you approved, moved to
09:55:15 second reading last time.
09:55:16 This particular ordinance just fell one meeting behind
09:55:20 But if there are specific questions on the ordinance I
09:55:22 would need to hold it for staff.
09:55:27 Or you can ask and I can try to help.
09:55:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can tell you it's the West Tampa
09:55:31 overlay and the signs can't be more than 25 feet, a
09:55:36 ten-feet separation, and another section, section
09:55:40 number 2 under 27-467.66 is the one that says, however,
09:55:46 no individual building sign shall exceed 25 feet, and
09:55:52 text shall not exceed 12 inches in height.
09:55:55 >>JULIA COLE: Yes.
09:55:58 That is what this is for.
09:56:00 It is to true this up with the other overlay district.
09:56:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Actually beings my question was
09:56:08 about protecting the historic fabric of West Tampa and
09:56:15 obviously this isn't the ordinance.
09:56:16 >>JULIA COLE: As it relates to signs.
09:56:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
09:56:21 Motion to close?
09:56:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
09:56:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:56:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
09:56:25 Councilman Miranda.
09:56:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move an ordinance for sed
09:56:31 certificated reading and adoption, an ordinance of the
09:56:33 city of Tampa, Florida making comprehensive revisions
09:56:35 to City of Tampa code of ordinances chapter 27 zonings
09:56:38 amending section 27-466 West Tampa overlay district,
09:56:42 development design standards, repealing all ordinances
09:56:45 or parts of ordinances in conflict therewith, providing
09:56:48 for severability, providing an effective date.
09:56:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.
09:56:52 Record your vote.
09:56:53 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
09:57:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here wish to address council on
09:57:06 item 57?
09:57:07 Item 57.
09:57:07 Anyone wish to address council here?
09:57:10 We have a substitute ordinance related to the transit
09:57:16 shelters that were added in reference to Hartline.
09:57:20 >>JULIA COLE: I just wanted to say if there are any
09:57:25 questions I'm available.
09:57:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:57:29 I understand that in the relationship of the build
09:57:32 boards that get removed in order for the electronic one
09:57:35 to be put up, there are four genuine visible billboards
09:57:41 that are removed.
09:57:42 The other six are just sort of virtual billboards that
09:57:45 they have in their inventory.
09:57:46 What city department is going to keep track of the
09:57:50 removal and make sure that that all happens properly?
09:57:54 >>JULIA COLE: It will be a joint effort between the
09:57:56 construction services department and the legal
09:57:58 And what I will do after all of this has passed and
09:58:03 assuming we do conclude all of the issues relating to
09:58:06 the billboard, I will be talking of standard operating
09:58:10 procedure and working with the construction services
09:58:12 staff and ensure that everything within both this
09:58:15 ordinance and with all of the agreements are followed,
09:58:18 so we will be working together to ensure that with the
09:58:22 legal department, making sure we have oversight of all
09:58:25 of these issues.
09:58:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Will the city have any input over
09:58:29 where the new billboards will be located and where the
09:58:31 old ones will be removed from?
09:58:35 You know, sort of priority corridors.
09:58:37 >>JULIA COLE: No.
09:58:40 Part of this is really a question of coming forward --
09:58:45 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Where the new billboards would go
09:58:48 are those described in your ordinance than is before
09:58:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: In terms of setbacks?
09:58:53 >> In terms of setbacks and specific locations.
09:58:56 Where they can go are relatively small areas in the
09:58:58 city in the ordinance.
09:58:59 Where they would come down from, we have no standards
09:59:01 regarding that in this ordinance.
09:59:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Other questions?
09:59:07 >> Wofford Johnson, 4625 Longfellow Avenue, president
09:59:18 of T.H.A.N.
09:59:19 I just wanted to express thanks to council for allowing
09:59:22 the additional time involving the billboards over the
09:59:26 past few months.
09:59:27 I think it worked to everybody's benefit.
09:59:32 While we really wish there were not any billboards, but
09:59:35 at the same time we know that's not going to happen, so
09:59:37 we do appreciate the time.
09:59:38 I think compromises have been worked out.
09:59:42 So we just want to thank you for that.
09:59:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
09:59:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Johnson, right before the meeting
09:59:55 there was some question about the exchange rate.
09:59:58 Were those questions answered just now?
10:00:01 >>> Yes.
10:00:02 I understand.
10:00:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the public?
10:00:06 Motion to close?
10:00:08 >> So moved.
10:00:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:00:09 (Motion carried).
10:00:12 >>GWEN MILLER: I move to adopt the following ordinance
10:00:13 upon second reading.
10:00:14 An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending
10:00:17 section 20.5-4, words defined, amending section 20.5-7,
10:00:23 allowable signs, permits, when required, amending
10:00:28 section 20.5-11, billboard signs, amending section
10:00:32 20.5-12, off-site signs, view corridors, amending
10:00:37 section 20.5-15, prohibited signs enumerated, amending
10:00:44 section 22-135, transit shelter advertising, repealing
10:00:48 all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
10:00:51 therewith, providing for severability, providing an
10:00:53 effective date.
10:00:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:01:00 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
10:01:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:01:02 I appreciate that the billboard companies through legal
10:01:06 has worked closely with the neighborhoods and I believe
10:01:08 than what is before us is where we began.
10:01:12 However, I think -- better than where we began.
10:01:14 I still think it's not a smart move for the City of
10:01:17 Tampa to allow these LED signs until the federal
10:01:20 government has come back to us with their findings on
10:01:23 the health and safety of these signs.
10:01:27 It's obvious to me that they are designed as
10:01:30 distractions, and I'm very concerned about the safety
10:01:37 as well as the aesthetic impact on our community.
10:01:39 And I feel it's slightly disingenuous to talk about ten
10:01:43 signs being removed when reality is there will be four
10:01:46 genuine billboards removed and the others are sort of
10:01:50 So it's not too late, council members, if a few of you
10:01:55 change your votes we can deny this at this moment and I
10:01:58 urge you to.
10:02:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
10:02:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Councilwoman Saul-Sena, for
10:02:05 pointing out that.
10:02:07 I just want to point out that we are making a big
10:02:12 policy decision here, allowing digital billboards in a
10:02:15 city where we don't have them and they are not allowed.
10:02:18 So while I do also commend legal and the neighborhood
10:02:26 association for doing a lot of work, a lot of research
10:02:29 and trying to protect neighborhoods, I think overall as
10:02:33 a city we are not looking at the big picture, that it's
10:02:37 the entire City of Tampa.
10:02:39 While we may have allayed some of the concerns of maybe
10:02:42 even most residential neighborhoods, we will still be
10:02:46 having these signs.
10:02:48 As Ms. Saul-Sena pointed out, there is this study
10:02:51 happening right now.
10:02:53 And interestingly, the city of Clearwater is looking at
10:02:57 this right now, really taking the approach, I think,
10:03:01 that I wish we could have taken, that this is a
10:03:04 decision about how we want our city to look, whether we
10:03:08 want to be a livable city, a beautiful city, and a safe
10:03:13 And they are waiting for the results, and they are
10:03:15 looking at it from that standpoint.
10:03:16 So I can't support this.
10:03:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, thank you.
10:03:25 I am going to support it because it's a step in the
10:03:27 direction that I think will lead to future councils
10:03:32 cleaning something up.
10:03:33 I agree with my new best friend Mr. Dingfelder that
10:03:36 these things are for the best.
10:03:40 Two years from now, if I remember Mr. Dingfelder's
10:03:42 comment on it, some future council will look at this
10:03:45 and redirect the actions of this great city.
10:03:51 It's a step in the right direction.
10:03:53 And there are certain things that were added to it and
10:03:56 that will make it much cleaner.
10:04:00 Yes, I remember there was 672 square feet, and one had
10:04:04 400 square feet and so forth and so on.
10:04:06 The ones that are being held.
10:04:09 And you're right, we have been in legal cost for many,
10:04:21 many years.
10:04:22 Does it mean you should vote only because of cost?
10:04:25 Absolutely not.
10:04:25 But I think we have somewhat of a consensus throughout
10:04:28 the basis of this community including those that
10:04:30 represent neighborhoods that they see the light that
10:04:34 possibly these things could be for the betterment of
10:04:36 the city, not for the detriment of the city as a whole.
10:04:41 The main one would be I-4 and 275, if I remember.
10:04:46 The corridors that are in the neighborhoods, if I
10:04:49 remember, will be much cleaner than they are today.
10:04:53 And that's why I'm supporting the issue, Mr. Chairman.
10:04:57 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I wasn't going to make a speech
10:05:02 but everybody is making speeches here.
10:05:04 If we are going to wait for Washington to come out with
10:05:07 this so-called study, just look at Washington, the
10:05:11 conditions that we have.
10:05:12 It's in such disarray.
10:05:14 Isn't that right, Mr. Miranda?
10:05:18 >> I'm going to go clean it. (Laughter)
10:05:18 >> We have people running this country who don't know
10:05:21 what they are doing.
10:05:24 Allegedly some of them are said they are communists.
10:05:32 Is this what we want our decisions to come out from?
10:05:34 Yes, if you watch the radio programs, Ms. Saul-Sena,
10:05:37 you will see it.
10:05:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I don't know about communists
10:05:43 and all that.
10:05:47 Let me just say -- let me just say to all of us,
10:05:52 whether we like it or not, this country has a
10:05:57 Constitution in place and it's governed by the people,
10:06:00 for the people, by the people, and we have heard from
10:06:02 the people on this issue.
10:06:04 We have heard from the neighborhoods.
10:06:05 We have heard from the community.
10:06:07 And council has moved forth and enacted an ordinance
10:06:12 that I think really protects the neighborhood.
10:06:14 Now, if we want to talk about what we would not want to
10:06:18 be in an ideal world.
10:06:20 We wouldn't want cell towers in neighborhoods.
10:06:22 We would not want these TECO high tower things in
10:06:27 We wouldn't want these bars and night clubs in
10:06:36 We can go on talking about what we wouldn't want in an
10:06:38 ideal world.
10:06:39 But also, at the same time, we have reached a
10:06:43 compromise that's saving taxpayers hundreds of
10:06:46 thousands of dollars and hoping for the future.
10:06:51 And also deserve integrity of the city and the
10:06:55 That's what this City Council has done.
10:06:59 We moved forward in good faith with good intentions,
10:07:03 moved forward to save taxpayer dollar, and to preserve
10:07:06 integrity of neighborhoods in this community.
10:07:08 So I think councilman Dingfelder deserves again a lot
10:07:13 of recognition and credit for crafting a good
10:07:15 compromise for us, and I am going to support it.
10:07:19 With that being said, record your vote.
10:07:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and Saul-Sena
10:07:31 voting no.
10:07:32 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
10:07:35 Per your City Council motion, a workshop, I have
10:07:41 provided you with a resolution describing City
10:07:43 Council's intent to reevaluate, possibly reevaluate
10:07:48 this through a workshop in two years.
10:07:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
10:07:53 Thank you.
10:07:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It requires a vote.
10:07:55 That was an add-on.
10:08:00 And that was previously provided to council.
10:08:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:08:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The three-year thing?
10:08:07 I think I read last night but it may be mistaken.
10:08:10 I read an hour and a half last night.
10:08:12 >>JULIA COLE: I provided City Council actually added
10:08:18 it to city agenda per the motion but because that was a
10:08:21 request of City Council I provided it to you.
10:08:22 If you are not comfortable taking action today --
10:08:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's moved and seconded.
10:08:27 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:08:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was the resolution provided by
10:08:34 Ms. Cole.
10:08:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There is a representative of the
10:08:39 Florida Department of Transportation who attended some
10:08:40 of our meetings who said that it was really important
10:08:43 for the city to talk to FDOT in terms of the locational
10:08:48 And I just want to make sure that our staff does that.
10:08:50 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: We did do that, a consultant of
10:08:56 FDOT at some point.
10:08:58 They have a separate permitting process.
10:08:59 And as I indicated last time, and they concur, any
10:09:05 purveyor of signs and sign operator would have to have
10:09:08 the local and state approval and have to meet the more
10:09:11 restrictive and conservative standards.
10:09:13 So that is how they would interact.
10:09:15 And I advised council that I would not recommend
10:09:17 getting into the state permitting process through our
10:09:20 ordinances and FDOT concur was that position.
10:09:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for communicating about
10:09:27 And I hope that the rules says if there's a tree within
10:09:31 500-foot of the billboard that the tree has to be
10:09:34 removed, I hope we won't lose trees in this process.
10:09:37 But that's something that is a staple -- a state law.
10:09:44 >> You wife to go to Tallahassee to get that state law
10:09:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Fletcher, coming back in two
10:09:50 years, we have just passed an ordinance that's giving
10:09:52 them the right to use digital billboards, right?
10:09:58 >> Correct.
10:09:59 >>MARY MULHERN: So we are giving that right.
10:10:01 What's the possibility that we could change our mind in
10:10:03 two years?
10:10:05 Is it possible we can take that right away that we are
10:10:08 giving them today?
10:10:13 >> That would be difficult to do, frankly.
10:10:15 In the event that the digital billboards went up and
10:10:19 there was reliance on that, then perhaps there would be
10:10:22 an alternative to do that.
10:10:24 Alternatively, if council wanted to expand the areas of
10:10:28 digital billboards within the city at that time, that
10:10:31 would be the option on the table I would think at that
10:10:35 >> So that option would probably not result in any kind
10:10:39 of reduction in signage.
10:10:43 An opportunity for more.
10:10:48 You can't reduce a property right that's already given,
10:10:51 >> If no digital billboard went up between now and the
10:10:59 date of this hearing then council would have the
10:11:00 authority to rescind or eliminate this ordinance. If
10:11:02 some billboards went up in the interim, council
10:11:05 probably could still eliminate or rescind or modify
10:11:09 this ordinance to eliminate those rights, but then they
10:11:12 would be an existing nonconforming use that would
10:11:15 >> Following up on that, if we do have good data
10:11:22 showing that these are dangerous, that they cause
10:11:29 public risk, is there any way we could change the law
10:11:32 based on new evidence?
10:11:35 >>> There's no areas that where that could come into
10:11:39 If a new federal standard were to come into place which
10:11:42 drove a state standard or if any state standard came
10:11:44 into place independent of the federal government, we
10:11:46 have a provision that ties our standard to a more
10:11:50 restrictive state standard.
10:11:52 So if any of that process happens, then we would follow
10:11:59 whatever that more restrict tiff state standard would
10:12:02 I think it would be an open issue that we would look at
10:12:05 it at the time based on the evidence whether or not the
10:12:07 police powers of the city you would have the authority
10:12:09 to have a different type standard based on that
10:12:14 convincing evidence that it was a safety hazard.
10:12:16 I think council would potentially have the authority to
10:12:18 do that with sufficient evidence.
10:12:20 >>MARY MULHERN: A different time standard as opposed
10:12:26 to no changeable digital billboards?
10:12:32 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I think we would have to address
10:12:35 it when the time came based on the evidence available.
10:12:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.
10:12:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Other questions by council?
10:12:41 We move to item 58.
10:12:43 Anyone from the public wish to address council on item
10:12:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we have all received
10:12:54 concerns, letters, from individual neighborhood
10:12:57 associations as well as T.H.A.N. on item 58 as related
10:13:01 to the news rack ordinance.
10:13:04 I'm torn on this because I think that we are
10:13:07 progressing in the right direction.
10:13:08 But, at the same time, I think the neighborhood
10:13:10 associations have brought up good issues about the lack
10:13:14 of locational criteria for news racks, et cetera.
10:13:19 I think the little individual news racks, the
10:13:22 stand-alone ones don't cause a big deal, but then
10:13:27 sometimes you get into these multiple modular, the
10:13:30 larger units, that if they are placed in the wrong
10:13:36 place they could create a problem.
10:13:41 I don't like to delay things.
10:13:42 But in this case, and with the risk of having Ms.
10:13:48 Kert's wrath, I am going to suggest and move that we
10:13:53 defer this for three months and put it on a workshop.
10:13:59 And during the interim I would urge that the private
10:14:04 folks who are proponents of this ordinance work with
10:14:07 T.H.A.N. and the neighborhood associations to see if
10:14:10 there's some compromise and middle ground, and also
10:14:15 work with our staff in doing that.
10:14:16 I don't think there's any urgency on doing this.
10:14:19 Apparently the existing ordinance is not great and does
10:14:23 not get enforced anyway.
10:14:26 So it's kind of moot.
10:14:32 You think we are just better off slowing down on this
10:14:35 and deferring it for about three months.
10:14:36 And that would be my motion.
10:14:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:14:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I was going to ask of legal if it's
10:14:44 possible, because it's my understanding that there's
10:14:46 really one minor change that if we could make it to the
10:14:49 ordinance that T.H.A.N. would be okay with.
10:14:53 I don't know if we can do this.
10:14:55 But as far as the locational criteria, if we could make
10:15:01 a minimum, that if they are going to be placed on
10:15:05 sidewalks, that it be a minimum of a five-foot
10:15:09 sidewalk, so it's not interfering with --
10:15:14 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
10:15:15 I'm not sure exactly what the one small change that
10:15:17 T.H.A.N. asked, but it was a rather lengthy list.
10:15:24 But as far as the placement on sidewalks, our
10:15:29 requirements have a minimum of five feet.
10:15:31 There is the requirement that, number one, the modular
10:15:35 news racks have to be on a concrete slab.
10:15:38 Number two that there has to be ADA clearance, which my
10:15:41 understanding is four feet.
10:15:42 So you are basically not going to have a situation
10:15:46 where you are placing a modular news rack on a sidewalk
10:15:49 that's less than five feet because you are going to
10:15:51 have to maintain that four-foot clearance.
10:15:54 >>MARY MULHERN: If we can hear from the neighborhoods,
10:15:57 and I don't think we need thee months, if we can agree
10:16:00 on just this one possible change.
10:16:03 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: If I may, Mr. Chairman that
10:16:07 change, that area of discussion we can address I think
10:16:11 in a fairly discrete period of time.
10:16:13 The issue of locational criteria in location to
10:16:16 neighborhoods is a much longer, broader evaluation that
10:16:19 will have to go through.
10:16:21 We would not be able to complete that in three months.
10:16:23 >>MARY MULHERN: But if it's just that one requirement,
10:16:26 we might be able to do that.
10:16:28 Could we do it today or do you need like another couple
10:16:30 of weeks?
10:16:31 >>REBECCA KERT: Of course we would want to be
10:16:36 accommodating, without having an opportunity to think
10:16:41 about it but perhaps we could make it --
10:16:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Two weeks?
10:16:46 >> Yes, two weeks.
10:16:47 >>MARY MULHERN: If that works.
10:16:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, that's not the motion.
10:16:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll withdraw my second.
10:16:54 >>GWEN MILLER: I'm agreeing to continue because I
10:17:00 received a letter from the East Tampa partnership, the
10:17:04 T.H.A.N., the president, and they had concerns tube
10:17:06 about the neighborhood putting them too close to the
10:17:12 And they need to discuss it discuss it with you.
10:17:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think you have folks that want to
10:17:18 come up.
10:17:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
10:17:20 Ms. Vizzi, Mr. Johnson, do you all want to speak on
10:17:23 this issue?
10:17:24 >> I'm Wofford Johnson, 465 Longfellow Avenue,
10:17:28 president of T.H.A.N.
10:17:29 I think a delay will be good.
10:17:34 There are considerable concerns, and the letter that we
10:17:38 sent to you, listing some 20-plus, I guess.
10:17:43 I think those were restrictions and requirements in
10:17:48 other cities.
10:17:50 We are not saying all those should be incorporated into
10:17:52 whatever ordinance we have here as Tampa.
10:17:55 But we strongly feel that provisions must be there to
10:18:00 keep boxes and racks out of neighborhoods and off
10:18:06 neighborhood streets, as well as in some of the
10:18:08 commercial, I guess, scenic corridors, because there's
10:18:14 no restrictions that would apply to those right now.
10:18:19 And I don't think, you know, a guy on TV who used to
10:18:24 say selling tires, he said, tires ain't pretty.
10:18:28 Well, news racks ain't pretty either, so we need to
10:18:31 have those in the proper locations, and we want to keep
10:18:34 them out of neighborhoods and off of our really our
10:18:38 nicer streets, et cetera.
10:18:39 Thank you.
10:18:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Johnson.
10:18:43 Ms. Vizzi?
10:18:47 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 south Sherill.
10:18:49 The issue of the five feet was that if you were
10:18:53 absolutely against prolonging this and putting it off
10:18:56 for a while to get discretion from all over -- and I
10:18:59 know East Tampa also has a concern, because we heard
10:19:03 from them as well.
10:19:05 So the 5-foot sidewalk was strictly sort of a
10:19:10 compromise, if you absolutely wanted to do it today,
10:19:14 but we really would like it to be put off to see if we
10:19:17 can't get stricter language in there in some way to
10:19:21 really protect neighborhoods, because if they don't put
10:19:25 a five-foot slab in front of your house, you would
10:19:28 still get these racks.
10:19:33 And that is just not acceptable.
10:19:36 Please consider just putting it off for a while.
10:19:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess my only concern is I guess my
10:19:43 only concern from legal was what we have now to
10:19:46 legal -- my concern for legal is and what I have been
10:19:52 told is what we have now is not enforceable.
10:19:55 And pretty much they can do whatever they want to do.
10:19:58 And so I thought it would be good we put something in
10:20:00 place, and at least have some kind of regulation that
10:20:03 would give the neighborhoods some protection and then
10:20:05 try to clean it up, moving forward, because right now,
10:20:09 you put it off three months, a year, whatever, you
10:20:13 don't have nothing legal that you can put in.
10:20:17 But that's the issue.
10:20:18 You are caught between a catch-22 pretty much almost.
10:20:22 Yes, sir.
10:20:22 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: That's exactly what I would
10:20:25 recommend, Mr. Chairman.
10:20:27 I don't have a problem with the concept of having some
10:20:30 locational requirements.
10:20:31 But we would have to go through and do a study to make
10:20:35 sure that the free speech obligations and rights of the
10:20:39 newspaper purveyors are not being abridged.
10:20:45 That's a very long process.
10:20:46 Right now we have a process on the books that simply
10:20:50 isn't enforced, and isn't enforceable.
10:20:53 So what we would recommend is a standard be put in
10:20:56 place that we have before you, and that we get that in
10:20:59 place, so we can get more off, we can start regulating
10:21:03 how they are made and what they look like, and then we
10:21:05 can start the process of where they can go in these
10:21:12 locational requirements.
10:21:14 We cannot just say they cannot go in residential
10:21:17 neighborhoods and scenic corridors, that that would not
10:21:19 be defensible and we would never be able to enforce the
10:21:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So that becomes a question for us,
10:21:25 council, at this point.
10:21:26 What do you do when your attorney is telling you what
10:21:30 you have now is not defensible?
10:21:33 All of us want to protect neighborhoods.
10:21:35 But based on what you have now, you can't do it.
10:21:41 You can't Don anything.
10:21:42 So do we leave it like it is now and not have anything?
10:21:45 Or do we at least try to work to get something and then
10:21:48 come back and try to work on improving it?
10:21:51 That's the question I raise for us to consider.
10:21:55 Mr. Dingfelder.
10:21:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think what you are saying makes
10:22:01 good sense, Mr. Chairman, combined with Mr. Fletcher's
10:22:03 I think the most important thing is that we give the
10:22:07 neighborhood associations our assurances that we won't
10:22:10 just pass it and drop it.
10:22:12 I think Mr. Johnson's letter as president of T.H.A.N.
10:22:18 dated May 17th included an addendum that has two
10:22:22 pages and probably 20-something suggestions of varying
10:22:29 languages from other jurisdictions, things that I'm
10:22:32 sure we could look at.
10:22:33 Chip, one question I have is, I know we can't say you
10:22:37 can't put these in residential neighborhoods, period.
10:22:39 But we had designations throughout the city of certain
10:22:42 types of streets and boulevards.
10:22:44 I can't remember what they are called, Linda.
10:22:48 The arterial, the major arterials, minor arterials and
10:22:52 that sort of thing.
10:22:53 And I think if we use both designations and map out
10:22:57 where those are, and we could see if you only allowed
10:22:59 them on major arterials and minor arterials but not on
10:23:03 residential streets or whatever, and we looked at that,
10:23:06 and maybe even got directions from some of our major
10:23:10 carriers, that they were in accord with that, then
10:23:13 maybe that's a compromise we could work out.
10:23:16 Mr. Chairman, I withdraw my motion.
10:23:18 I support passage of the ordinance today.
10:23:19 But my motion right after that is going to be that we
10:23:22 look at this over the next, you know, six months or so,
10:23:27 and see if we can tweak it up to address T.H.A.N.'s
10:23:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I think the issue raised by
10:23:33 Councilwoman Mulhern is a legitimate one that can be
10:23:36 looked at, as I understand, could be worked out, and we
10:23:40 can at least address that.
10:23:42 Let me just say to Mr. Johnson, Ms. Vizzi, I don't
10:23:47 think this council intends to just pass something so
10:23:50 there's no protection.
10:23:51 I think what we are concerned about is you don't have
10:23:53 any protection now.
10:23:54 I think that's the issue.
10:23:55 And we are trying to do what we can to make sure that
10:23:58 there is some protection out there, something that's
10:24:00 legally defensible, and then in the process of this
10:24:04 coming back and trying to re-sign it where it can meet
10:24:09 what you want and what the neighborhood wants.
10:24:11 And I don't think you want to have nothing out there
10:24:13 now that's not legally defensible.
10:24:15 At least I don't think so.
10:24:16 Councilwoman Mulhern.
10:24:17 >>MARY MULHERN: I think your point is well taken in
10:24:22 this, and why legal has taken this up and drafted this
10:24:26 new ordinance, but I think they are working not just
10:24:30 within putting regulations that are defensible, but
10:24:35 that aren't going to be challenged, and I know that Ms.
10:24:38 Kert has been looking at case law and looking at, you
10:24:41 know, the decisions.
10:24:43 And so we may have recommendations for what the
10:24:46 neighborhood wants, and we would love to accommodate
10:24:49 But I think our legal department has already determined
10:24:52 that those aren't going to be defensible.
10:24:57 Or may not be.
10:24:57 Then the other question is, the only way to defend some
10:25:03 of those things would be to do a study which not only
10:25:07 is going to take time, but which is going to be costly.
10:25:11 I just don't know that that is something that right now
10:25:13 we should be spending time on when it's the opinion of
10:25:18 our legal department that it may not hold water anyway.
10:25:23 So I would like to ask for a continuance for legal to
10:25:31 draft some language, putting a minimum width of five
10:25:36 feet if they can into the sidewalk distance where you
10:25:40 can place these racks.
10:25:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I think we have someone speak
10:25:49 from the public?
10:25:52 >> Jim Lake, 4218 W. Tampania, also a lawyer for the
10:25:58 "The Tampa Tribune."
10:26:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Paid to be here.
10:26:02 >> In a good month, yes, sir.
10:26:03 I did want to actually agree with you, Chairman Scott.
10:26:09 I do think that council makes a good point, though,
10:26:12 that until the city staff starts enforcing some sort of
10:26:16 news rack ordinance, you really don't know Wan you are
10:26:19 dealing with here.
10:26:20 If there's a real problem, it sounds like from
10:26:23 T.H.A.N.'s letter, from Mr. Johnson's comment, there's
10:26:26 a concern about modular news racks being in
10:26:29 If I remember right Ms. Kert mention add couple weeks
10:26:32 ago that this news rack ordinance hadn't been enforced
10:26:35 in 10 to 15 years.
10:26:37 We haven't seen any mod you -- modular news racks going
10:26:41 into any neighborhood.
10:26:42 There are areas in downtown Tampa in areas that were
10:26:46 selected I think during Mayor Greco's -- I think it
10:26:51 does make sense to go with what your staff proposed and
10:26:54 see if the problems -- if the problems materialize, see
10:26:57 if once warrior staff starts enforcing this ordinance
10:27:01 certainly from the newspaper's perspective isn't
10:27:04 perfect but it's something that I think your staff can
10:27:10 work with, see what the results are, see what happens.
10:27:12 Then if there is a need to revisit the issue, because
10:27:15 modular racks are put up in residential neighborhoods,
10:27:18 or there's a permit application for that, then you can
10:27:20 address it at that point.
10:27:22 But to start, just based on speculation, I think is
10:27:26 inviting a Constitutional challenge.
10:27:28 As Mrs. Kert told you, if you want to regulate in this
10:27:31 area, the courts have said we can only adopt,
10:27:35 municipalities can only adopt what's necessary to
10:27:37 achieve a compelling or substantial state interest.
10:27:40 And here, there's no way that a court would find that
10:27:43 if you just today, or in three months, were to go from
10:27:48 no regulation to extremely strict regulation.
10:27:51 Because your staff has already proposed a less
10:27:53 restrictive alternative that you haven't even tried.
10:27:56 So my suggestion would be to go with what your staff
10:27:58 has recommended, see what happens, see if contrary to
10:28:04 the last 15 years of experience modular racks do become
10:28:08 a problem and then deal with those.
10:28:10 Thank you.
10:28:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
10:28:11 Mr. Fletcher, I guess the question goes back --
10:28:16 >>MARY MULHERN: My motion was to have a continuance to
10:28:19 add language to the ordinance.
10:28:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: At the end of the day?
10:28:24 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
10:28:25 Two weeks.
10:28:25 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I think if the focus is on the
10:28:30 five-foot distance on the sidewalks, Rebecca has been
10:28:34 looking at that, we can do that today.
10:28:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, great.
10:28:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So bring it back at least by the end of
10:28:39 the day?
10:28:40 >> By the end of the day.
10:28:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And also I do support, though, wants
10:28:45 to come back and moving forward, but also coming back
10:28:47 and looking at those issues that have been raised by
10:28:50 T.H.A.N. and see -- it doesn't hurt to look at all the
10:28:56 issues and have a workshop.
10:28:58 I think those are legitimate issues.
10:29:01 There's a motion on the floor.
10:29:02 Let me get the motion, council or, if you don't mind.
10:29:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It was on the motion.
10:29:08 And, Chip, didn't you say at the beginning, after Ms.
10:29:15 Mulhern raised this issue, that we already include this
10:29:18 issue in the ADA.
10:29:21 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: That's why we are looking at it.
10:29:27 We think we can do it rather than just saying now that
10:29:30 it's ADA compliant, we can actually call cull out a
10:29:36 five-foot difference.
10:29:37 So it's not going to create any new issues.
10:29:39 >> So we will leave both in there.
10:29:43 We'll say ADA compliant and five feet?
10:29:46 >> Yes.
10:29:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Then I second the motion.
10:29:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need a motion just to bring this
10:29:54 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm amending my motion to bring this
10:29:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:29:58 All in favor say Aye.
10:30:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just so we are clear because it's a
10:30:04 motion to bring it back, but do you wish to have
10:30:06 additional testimony at this time or do you wish to
10:30:08 close the public hearing and just have it come back?
10:30:11 >> Let's just have it come back.
10:30:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Then a motion to close the public
10:30:15 hearing would be in order.
10:30:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
10:30:19 >> Second.
10:30:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
10:30:21 We have two 9:30 items.
10:30:23 We can take those up and then move to our staff
10:30:35 Those that are going to be addressing council need to
10:30:37 stand and be sworn at this time.
10:30:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: For items 59 and 60, Mr. Chairman?
10:30:42 >> 59 and 06.
10:30:44 If you are going to speak to council, please stand and
10:30:46 be sworn.
10:30:47 59 and 60.
10:30:48 (Oath administered by Clerk).
10:30:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Open the public hearing.
10:31:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved for items 59 and I believe
10:31:02 there's another one, 60.
10:31:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:31:06 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:31:08 Item 59.
10:31:09 Anyone here to address council on item 59?
10:31:13 Anyone here to address council on item 59?
10:31:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.
10:31:17 >> Second.
10:31:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
10:31:20 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
10:31:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Like to move an ordinance for
10:31:23 second reading and adoption, an ordinance vacating
10:31:24 closing discontinuing abandoning a certain right-of-way
10:31:27 a portion of Holmes street and 24th Avenue lying
10:31:30 south of 25th Avenue north of link street east of
10:31:33 22nd street and west of 24th street in AF Randall's
10:31:37 platinum 1 a subdivision of the City of Tampa,
10:31:42 Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully
10:31:42 described in section 2 hereof subject to certain
10:31:43 easements, covenants, conditions and restrictions as
10:31:46 more particularly described herein, providing an
10:31:48 effective date.
10:31:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's been moved and seconded.
10:31:51 Seconded by councilman Miranda.
10:31:53 All in favor record your vote.
10:32:01 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
10:32:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 60.
10:32:04 Anyone here wishing to address council on item 60?
10:32:06 >> Dennis Fernandez, historic preservation design
10:32:12 manager here for item number 60, which is a historic
10:32:15 property tax exemption for 715 south New Port Avenue
10:32:20 located in the Hyde Park historic district.
10:32:23 I had a couple of images to show you.
10:32:26 This is a photograph of the property prior to
10:32:30 There's a 1915 structure built in the style which
10:32:37 features shake shingle siding.
10:32:42 Part of the rehabilitation was to reopen the porch.
10:32:47 That's one of the features of this particular house.
10:32:49 It had been closed in at some point in the past and the
10:32:52 owners did rehabilitate that back to and open the
10:32:54 porch, so it does continue to wrap around.
10:32:58 To the exterior, inappropriate additions were removed,
10:33:04 an addition added on the rear.
10:33:06 You have a couple of exterior shots of the
10:33:08 rehabilitation for you.
10:33:14 And this application is consistent with Secretary of
10:33:15 Interior standards for rehabilitation in reviewing the
10:33:20 The criteria established by the department of state was
10:33:24 achieved and the Architectural Review Commission does
10:33:27 recommend approval of this application.
10:33:28 Thank you.
10:33:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
10:33:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?
10:33:36 >> Move to close.
10:33:37 >> Second.
10:33:39 (Motion carried).
10:33:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano.
10:33:43 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: An ordinance being presented for
10:33:45 first reading consideration.
10:33:47 An ordinance approving an historic preservation
10:33:49 property tax exemption application relative to
10:33:52 restoration, renovation, rehabilitation of certain
10:33:55 property owned by Michael P. and Jill Matthews located
10:33:59 at 715 south New Port Avenue, Tampa, Florida in the
10:34:02 Hyde Park historic district based upon certain
10:34:04 findings, providing for notice to the property
10:34:09 appraiser of Hillsborough Counties, providing for
10:34:11 severability, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
10:34:14 conflict, providing an effective date.
10:34:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded by councilman
10:34:20 Record your vote, please.
10:34:21 Oh, first reading.
10:34:23 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:34:26 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.
10:34:29 Second reading and adoption will be held on June
10:34:32 3rd, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
10:34:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll take up staff reports now.
10:34:37 Item 61.
10:34:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open 61 through 75.
10:34:41 >> You don't have to open them.
10:34:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's staff reports.
10:34:46 Item 61.
10:34:52 Is someone here on item 61?
10:34:55 This is legal department to appear.
10:34:57 Is the legal department here?
10:34:58 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: On item 61 regarding the
10:35:08 assessment methodologies, we have looked at the three
10:35:12 main special assessments that we have within the city.
10:35:15 One for the Westshore area, one for downtown, one for
10:35:17 the streetcar, and one for stormwater.
10:35:20 What we would recommend is to provide some cost savings
10:35:25 and reduction of staff time necessary to do these.
10:35:28 We can do the three regular special assessments for
10:35:33 Westshore, one for downtown, one for the streetcar, up
10:35:36 to five-year duration, the practice looking at the
10:35:40 jurisdictional of the state seems to be going with a
10:35:43 three-year duration.
10:35:45 The recommendation is it comes back to you all for
10:35:47 adoption the next time around that we provide those for
10:35:50 a three-year duration.
10:35:55 The stormwater, there's a separate statute on that, and
10:35:58 separate statutory methodology that's required.
10:36:01 The practice statewide seems to be to be go with every
10:36:04 two years.
10:36:06 And there will be a reduction in staff time and
10:36:08 reduction in consultant time to do some verifying of
10:36:16 the assessment rolls so there will be a cost savings
10:36:21 We recommend when the stormwater fee comes back to you
10:36:23 all that it would be adopted for a two-year period as
10:36:26 opposed to the one-year period that we typically do
10:36:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:36:37 I think a motion is probably in order to direct legal
10:36:40 and staff to amend those ordinances as they come back
10:36:44 to us as a cost savings approach.
10:36:51 And two years for the stormwater and three years for
10:36:54 the other ones.
10:36:57 That will be my motion.
10:36:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
10:37:01 >> Second.
10:37:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
10:37:03 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
10:37:08 We have an add-on, what is it, pain clinics?
10:37:14 We'll take that up now.
10:37:18 We will hear from legal and police department.
10:37:23 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
10:37:24 I am going present to the clerk and to City Council
10:37:27 some correspondence that I have received from Kenneth
10:37:30 Moreman, a lieutenant with the Tampa Police Department,
10:37:33 as part of the material that will be presented today.
10:37:53 In addition, I presented the clerk -- and I just want
10:37:55 to make sure that City Council has the emergency
10:37:57 ordinance that I am presenting today.
10:37:59 The ordinance that you received, I have added within
10:38:01 the titles that this is an emergency ordinance.
10:38:04 And this is the final ordinance.
10:38:06 Just as a brief overview, we are presenting today the
10:38:09 joint effort between the legal department and the Tampa
10:38:11 Police Department, an emergency ordinance relating to
10:38:15 the regulation of pain management clinics,.
10:38:22 What this would do is provide an obligation that pain
10:38:26 management clinics are currently and in the future
10:38:30 located within the City of Tampa to receive a business
10:38:33 operating permit that's in chapter 6 of the City of
10:38:36 Tampa's code.
10:38:37 It provides the requirements through those permits, and
10:38:42 also requires certain operating standards.
10:38:44 Prior to going through all the specifics in the
10:38:46 ordinance, I am going to ask the members of the Tampa
10:38:49 Police Department, I believe deputy chief Hamlin who
10:38:55 will give the presentation to go ahead and give us some
10:38:57 background information.
10:38:58 Thank you.
10:38:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You have the draft ordinance?
10:39:05 >> Yes.
10:39:05 >> Good morning, council.
10:39:08 On behalf of Chief Jane Castor and Tampa Police
10:39:08 Department, I'm assistant chief Marc Hamlin. With me
10:39:13 is lieutenant Ken Moreman, commander of our strategic
10:39:17 investigations bureau which handles narcotics
10:39:19 investigations, and he's department subject matter
10:39:23 I want to tell you why this ordinance is important to
10:39:26 We are seeing a chronic situation associated with pain
10:39:29 management clinics in Tampa.
10:39:31 The addiction rate found with Oxycontin and other
10:39:34 opiate derivative drugs is high.
10:39:38 238 deaths in Hillsborough County alone in 2009 were
10:39:40 associated with opiate derivative drugs.
10:39:44 We are also experiencing the same quality of life and
10:39:46 crime issues due to these pain management clinics in
10:39:50 Tampa that we saw with open air drug markets or dope
10:39:53 holes that were common with the use of and sale of
10:39:56 crack cocaine that became epidemic.
10:39:59 For example, we have burglaries, prostitution and
10:40:03 assaults, frequent pattern around these clinics just
10:40:07 like we saw with dope holes.
10:40:08 We are not asking for a moratorium on pain clinics
10:40:11 because there are patients in need of pain treatment
10:40:15 and Oxycontin was designed to offer safe and effective
10:40:19 pain treatment in chronic cases of pain.
10:40:21 We want to restrict clinics and their personnel that do
10:40:24 not properly diagnose patients, properly prescribe the
10:40:27 drugs and properly dispense the drugs.
10:40:30 Our goal is to prevent the abuse associated with opiate
10:40:33 derivatives, where they seek a high which is achieved
10:40:38 typically by crushing the pills and either snorting the
10:40:42 pills or injecting the drug which increase it is
10:40:44 toxicity and probability of a fatal overdose.
10:40:47 Tampa Police Department has initiated over 120 -- 128
10:40:51 cases involving illegal distribution of opiate
10:40:54 However, it is very time consuming and very difficult
10:40:56 to conduct these criminal investigations of these
10:41:00 This ordinance will enable the police to use our
10:41:02 resources more efficiently.
10:41:04 It will cause the associated burden of criminal
10:41:07 activity associated with these clinics to lessen, and
10:41:10 most importantly, it's going to save lives, and that's
10:41:13 what we are in the business of doing.
10:41:16 If you have any questions for me I will be glad to
10:41:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder, councilman
10:41:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, chief.
10:41:23 We appreciate that.
10:41:25 Obviously, TPD and legal is typically not coming to us
10:41:31 for emergency ordinances so clearly you feel that this
10:41:34 is an important issue.
10:41:36 Otherwise you wouldn't be here.
10:41:37 >>> Absolutely.
10:41:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: My question, and I'm pretty
10:41:42 comfortable with it.
10:41:43 I have looked at it earlier.
10:41:45 But my question is this.
10:41:47 Most of the time in law enforcement you all are relying
10:41:49 on state law, especially in these types of issues of
10:41:55 drugs and that sort of thing.
10:41:57 Sort of standardized across the state.
10:41:59 What's the problem here?
10:42:00 >>> We are in an epidemic.
10:42:02 We can't wait for the state law.
10:42:03 I know there's one passed that's going to take effect
10:42:05 in October but we can't wait, council.
10:42:09 People are dying every day.
10:42:10 I was at a meeting reference Gasparilla, and I met the
10:42:13 director of drug control for the State of Florida, and
10:42:15 at the University of Tampa, and he told me there's
10:42:18 about seven, eight deaths a day in the State of Florida
10:42:20 due to this.
10:42:21 We just can't wait.
10:42:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the state is just a little bit
10:42:27 >>> That's correct.
10:42:32 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: The state did pass a law during
10:42:34 this last session.
10:42:36 There are many elements of it related to these clinics.
10:42:39 One is new felony standards, but not go into effect
10:42:42 until October.
10:42:43 In addition to that, the licensure elements that are in
10:42:46 the state law do not provide the necessary local law
10:42:49 enforcement tools that we provide in this ordinance, so
10:42:52 in addition to there being a state statute, we still
10:42:56 believe that even if it was in effect today that we
10:42:59 would need the additional law enforcement tools that
10:43:01 are in this particular ordinance before you today.
10:43:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just want to say that I'm really
10:43:10 pleased that you all brought this to us.
10:43:13 I don't think many of us realize it's as big a problem
10:43:16 as you indicated that it is, but now that we are aware
10:43:18 of it I'm sure we'll be good with it.
10:43:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
10:43:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:43:26 Chief, I want to thank yourself, Chief Castor, all the
10:43:29 police officers, the undercover people who have worked
10:43:32 on this for a long time.
10:43:33 It hasn't been public to that extent.
10:43:35 But you have been working on it, I know.
10:43:41 I thank the mayor for being with you.
10:43:42 I think the neighborhoods who have suffered.
10:43:45 But when you look at this report, and you see that just
10:43:49 death by Oxycontin in the City of Tampa was 128, what
10:43:56 does that mean?
10:43:57 It doesn't mean that you lost 128 people.
10:44:02 It means the families of those people have suffered.
10:44:05 The children of those people have suffered.
10:44:09 Society has lost individuals that could have been
10:44:12 But for money some individuals will do anything.
10:44:19 And it's not one of these pain management areas that
10:44:24 you have.
10:44:25 I've seen signs in the office that I picked up myself.
10:44:29 One says $50 office visit, all over the city.
10:44:33 Another says 100.
10:44:35 So yesterday I went to the dentist to have a little
10:44:40 work done and as I'm leaving down I was driving down
10:44:45 Armenia and there was another pain clinic.
10:44:47 Whether that was legitimate or not I don't know as I
10:44:51 was heading back to City Hall.
10:44:52 But there are some that are legit and will adhere to
10:44:55 this new ordinance that we are about to pass.
10:45:00 But there's some that only for money are ruining the
10:45:10 core of what mothers and fathers are all about, that's
10:45:13 raising their children and not having to worry about
10:45:15 someone selling something.
10:45:18 Not only is this illegal, only taking cash, they go
10:45:22 around, skim around the law, they built fence as round
10:45:25 their buildings, they do a lot of things that you good
10:45:29 folks can't see, but they forgot you have helicopters,
10:45:34 If it takes a submarine we'll get one.
10:45:39 I'll get one from the Columbia drug dealers, fix it up
10:45:42 and put get to the you.
10:45:46 >> I'll put it in the budget.
10:45:48 [ Laughter ]
10:45:49 >> So what I'm saying is that it is a win-win for
10:45:56 society, not only for the City of Tampa.
10:45:59 When I look at this report, and you go to other drugs,
10:46:05 they don't do just one drug.
10:46:07 They get 250 cash the first time going in, they do
10:46:15 hundreds of patients a day, sometimes at 1:00, 2:00 in
10:46:18 the morning, there's still a line out side.
10:46:21 What is that doing to the individuals?
10:46:25 What the biggest tip-off was -- and I commend the news
10:46:30 I did do some work with channel 13 on this, but all the
10:46:33 medias are in it.
10:46:36 I can also tell you when you see licenses from
10:46:39 Michigan, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, North Carolina, to
10:46:46 come all the way here, not to bask in the sun, but to
10:46:51 bask in illegal drugs, tells us that there's something
10:46:54 really wrong.
10:46:57 When some states, I think there's about 38 states that
10:47:00 have this ordinance already, this law, and we will have
10:47:04 ours in October, and then it's up to us to enforce
10:47:06 those things, individuals like you on an everyday basis
10:47:10 doing the good job that you are doing.
10:47:12 It is incumbent upon us to unanimously pass this.
10:47:17 And this is not the end of these things.
10:47:19 This is only the beginning, because there's more police
10:47:23 work and some more, I would imagine, things that are
10:47:26 going to be done that will see your handcuffs in
10:47:31 This is nothing more than drug sales under the auspices
10:47:36 of pain management.
10:47:38 And America can't take that any longer.
10:47:41 And this is the world can't take that any longer.
10:47:44 We don't want to become another Mexico.
10:47:48 We don't want to become the city of Juarez where drug
10:47:54 car tells have taken over.
10:47:56 We have to draw that line and go no further.
10:47:58 And I just want to commend you again and your fine
10:48:00 staff and the chief and the mayor for working so
10:48:02 diligently and doing what you do best, and that's
10:48:06 keeping us safe.
10:48:07 Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
10:48:08 >>> Thank you for your support.
10:48:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.
10:48:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you very much for getting on
10:48:13 this so quickly.
10:48:14 It's become this national story and staid statewide
10:48:19 I have been hearing about it the last week.
10:48:21 And I know it's bad because I'm hearing from people in
10:48:25 legitimate medical community, nurses and doctors, who
10:48:28 are seeing patients coming in for care to a regular
10:48:35 clinic, finding out what's going on in these pain
10:48:41 So I support all of these efforts.
10:48:43 I also think it's interesting, if we can go further and
10:48:46 really -- probably have to happen on a state and
10:48:51 national level, but really, what is a pain clinic when
10:48:54 we have general practitioners, we have internists, we
10:48:57 have every specialty, we have dentists, orthodontists,
10:49:02 who are all charged and are treating people for
10:49:06 diseases and for pain, which is a symptom.
10:49:09 So I think anything we can do to shut these down is a
10:49:15 great thing.
10:49:16 And I did hear -- and I don't know if we are going to
10:49:20 hear from people today, but at the county commission
10:49:22 meeting yesterday, people were giving really heart
10:49:25 breaking testimony about their family and friends who
10:49:31 then become addicted through using these clinics.
10:49:35 So thank you so much for doing this.
10:49:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yesterday the county commission did
10:49:40 pass an ordinance as well on this particular issue.
10:49:44 And so thank you and administration very much for
10:49:47 bringing this forward.
10:49:48 There's a motion on the ordinance.
10:49:50 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
10:49:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we need to read the ordinance,
10:49:54 >>> You will read this ordinance once and move to
10:50:01 approve it upon that reading.
10:50:03 Thank you.
10:50:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the
10:50:06 reading of this ordinance.
10:50:07 Mr. Chairman, members of this council, members of the
10:50:09 public of the city, really the whole city council
10:50:12 reading this ordinance.
10:50:13 An emergency ordinance of the City of Tampa, Florida
10:50:17 making comprehensive revisions to the city of Tampa,
10:50:19 Florida code of ordinances chapter 6, business
10:50:22 regulation, creating division 2, pain management
10:50:25 clinics, section 6-255 through section 6-262, providing
10:50:31 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for
10:50:34 severability, providing for effective date.
10:50:38 I want to ensure, Julia, that that's what you need.
10:50:43 I don't want to bungle.
10:50:52 >>JULIA COLE: That's fine.
10:50:55 Emergency ordinance within this ordinance, to make this
10:50:59 an emergency ordinance by reading the ordinance and
10:51:03 moving to approve it.
10:51:04 >>> This ordinance is based on facts that we have with
10:51:10 the police department, the chief.
10:51:12 What we understand, there's a disease going on.
10:51:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's moved and seconded by councilman
10:51:17 >>THE CLERK: I need to do voice roll call.
10:51:22 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
10:51:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
10:51:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes.
10:51:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
10:51:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
10:51:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
10:51:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion was adopted with Ms. Miller being
10:51:35 absent at vote.
10:51:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.
10:51:40 Thank you again, chief.
10:51:50 Council, I am going to jump around a little bit.
10:51:53 Agenda 74 so I can get this The Towers of Channelside.
10:52:10 Mr. Fletcher, do you want to address that so that we
10:52:14 don't detain citizens from the towers?
10:52:20 Of Channelside?
10:52:23 Item 74.
10:52:23 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Thank you.
10:52:25 Item 74.
10:52:26 You have in your packet a memo from Rebecca Kert that
10:52:30 outlines the review that we did, the process.
10:52:35 The way our code is written, it directs the applicants
10:52:38 to attain from the tax assessor's office the most
10:52:46 recent ad valorem tax information.
10:52:49 And there's a process that they have in place where an
10:52:51 address is provided.
10:52:53 They provide a map with the showing the parcels within
10:53:00 the required distance, in this case 250 feet from the
10:53:03 boundaries of the subject property.
10:53:06 That information was obtained from the property
10:53:09 appraiser's office, but apparently included a number of
10:53:16 units within the parcel where the towers are located.
10:53:18 It did not include what we believe to have been all the
10:53:24 units within the two towers within that parcel.
10:53:27 Consequently, from our perspective, it appears that
10:53:32 they did follow the letter of our code in one regard,
10:53:37 in that they did obtain the information from the
10:53:39 property appraiser's office.
10:53:41 However, it also appears to be apparent that that
10:53:45 information, based on what we have here, did not fit
10:53:49 with what we believe to be the case of who was living
10:53:52 and who owned property within those buildings at that
10:53:55 particular point in time.
10:53:57 Procedurally, council has acted based on the
10:54:01 information provided and the affidavits provided which
10:54:03 on their face were correct.
10:54:07 And since council has acted here, essentially
10:54:11 jurisdiction has now passed.
10:54:21 We have looked at basis for revocation.
10:54:24 We have not reached that requirement.
10:54:25 While there could be an argument that the initial
10:54:28 action of council is void, my understanding is that
10:54:30 subsequent acts have happened in reliance on council's
10:54:33 action including -- we haven't verified this but
10:54:38 typically the state permit would have been issued by
10:54:40 this point based on certification from the city.
10:54:43 Considering all of those different actions, I don't
10:54:46 think additional action by council on this particular
10:54:49 permit is appropriate at this time.
10:54:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, councilman
10:54:56 Dingfelder, Councilwoman Mulhern.
10:55:01 Be? Mr. Fletcher, have you had an opportunity to see
10:55:04 the information submitted by the residents of
10:55:10 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: I believe it was in the materials
10:55:11 that we reviewed.
10:55:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: They showed us very clearly that
10:55:15 when grace language brought us something, everybody was
10:55:19 So we know that it's possible for the property
10:55:21 appraiser to get it right.
10:55:22 >> Yes.
10:55:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And based on the information that
10:55:27 that they submitted to us, this was not done properly,
10:55:31 and a mistake was made, and recognizing that, wouldn't
10:55:35 the option be available to us to go back, revoke it and
10:55:38 have a new hearing on this with everybody to be
10:55:41 properly notified?
10:55:45 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: If council's desire is to seek
10:55:47 some kind of redress or review of this, and because of
10:55:53 our recommendation, I guess the best way to put it, if
10:55:56 council wants to go in that direction, our
10:55:58 recommendation would be for the legal office to
10:56:00 evaluate and pursue a deck action or other type of
10:56:06 action in circuit court that's most likely the
10:56:08 appropriate jurisdiction at this point, and pursue an
10:56:12 action to seek a declaration that based on what you
10:56:16 have described that the permit is either void or
10:56:22 otherwise defective.
10:56:25 I am concerned about a variety of risks if the city
10:56:27 were to attempt to unilaterally pull back the permit.
10:56:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Saul-Sena, I think we are on the
10:56:37 same page.
10:56:37 It's just a function of the appropriate relief and the
10:56:43 relief that leaves the city with the least amount of
10:56:48 You think if we revoked it, Mr. Fletcher is indicating
10:56:54 they could file section 1983 action against us, and hit
10:56:57 us for several rights damages and fees and costs and
10:57:02 everything else, and I don't think that's a great
10:57:04 Avenue for the city to go down.
10:57:05 However, the alternative is declaratory judgment action
10:57:10 which I think we could go ahead and file with minimal
10:57:13 We do those internally, so we don't have to use outside
10:57:18 council, really doesn't from what I can see and Mr.
10:57:20 Fletcher can confirm, I don't think it involves a risk
10:57:23 of attorneys fees or civil rights violations, at this
10:57:29 Basically what you do is you go to the court, your
10:57:32 Honor, we have a controversy here, we need your help
10:57:34 resolving it, the court can look at all the facts, all
10:57:37 the details, and our ordinance, and hopefully the
10:57:41 neighbors will join us in that action, and meet with
10:57:44 the court to help us out.
10:57:46 We have got a problem.
10:57:47 I don't think we can resolve it simply like the
10:57:50 neighbors have asked us to, but I think we can join
10:57:52 with the neighbors and resolve it together, or at least
10:57:55 let the court help us resolve it together.
10:57:58 With that I move to direct legal staff to do whatever
10:58:02 it takes and research and hopefully file a declaratory
10:58:07 action, other appropriate action is necessary, and
10:58:10 maybe get back to us whenever appropriate with updates.
10:58:19 124 I'll second that if you add the word expeditiously
10:58:22 in it.
10:58:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have no doubt they will do that,
10:58:26 but I will include that.
10:58:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll support that motion, and that was
10:58:30 very helpful explaining this.
10:58:32 And I think we need to keep in mind that the neighbors
10:58:35 are coming to us with a complaint about not having due
10:58:40 So the idea that we would be at risk by examining that,
10:58:48 reexamining the process we went through doesn't really
10:58:51 make sense to me.
10:58:52 So why don't we do as Mr. Dingfelder suggested and ask
10:59:00 for a declaratory judgment.
10:59:01 That means we are saying to the court that the
10:59:06 procedure wasn't followed.
10:59:07 So it's basically what we are saying.
10:59:09 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Essentially what we are doing is
10:59:12 we are asking rather than unilaterally taking action
10:59:15 that could create some other obligations or
10:59:20 liabilities, we are asking a court to make that
10:59:22 decision in this instance, and a declaratory judgment
10:59:26 action is one of the ways of doing that.
10:59:28 >>MARY MULHERN: But the other option would be that you
10:59:36 are afraid of, the unilateral?
10:59:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It would be a revocation which is
10:59:42 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: And I don't know if any of these
10:59:46 are in place rate now.
10:59:47 If in fact we have provided information to the state
10:59:50 that has caused the state to issue a license for
10:59:54 operation of establishment, and then we were to then
10:59:57 call the state and say, no, you need to revoke that
11:00:00 permit, there could be ramifications for that action.
11:00:02 >>MARY MULHERN: What are the possibilities of
11:00:09 negotiating between the city and the -- the owner?
11:00:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask that we meet with council
11:00:23 members individually or have a closed session in
11:00:26 anticipation of legal action so we can discuss these
11:00:28 issues out side of the sunshine.
11:00:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:00:34 I don't know.
11:00:34 If we are going to do that, I don't know that we want
11:00:37 to -- I'm going to support -- I want to hear from the
11:00:40 neighbors about how they would like us to, council, to
11:00:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Ms. Saul-Sena asked a question, but
11:00:51 let me say as you come, we pay our legal staff to
11:00:55 protect the city government.
11:00:56 So if he's advising us this is the way we need to go,
11:01:01 we need to listen to that.
11:01:02 I'm for that.
11:01:03 If that's what he's advising us to do.
11:01:07 Because I just heard today about all the court costs.
11:01:10 So if this is going to get us where we need to go and
11:01:14 get it resolved, I think that's the way that we need to
11:01:17 hear what he's saying, okay?
11:01:20 >>MARY MULHERN: But I'm not clear, because -- are you
11:01:24 advocating that we do the declaratory judgment?
11:01:27 Ow advocating that we have a closed session to talk
11:01:30 about what to do?
11:01:33 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: If council's motion, which I
11:01:35 thought it was for our office to initiate a declaratory
11:01:38 action or some other action necessary to determine the
11:01:40 validity of the permit, then I am supportive of that,
11:01:43 and I think that's an appropriate course of action.
11:01:46 Getting into what happens if other types of things were
11:01:50 done on behalf of the city to rescind or revoke the
11:01:56 permit, that's not something that I'm real comfortable
11:01:58 talking about here today.
11:02:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
11:02:02 Then my question is maybe Mr. Bell can tell us if he's
11:02:06 comfortable with the declaratory action so we can make
11:02:08 the decision.
11:02:09 I can make the decision if I want to support that
11:02:11 >> Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, first of
11:02:13 all I'm here as a property owner, not as a lawyer, but
11:02:17 I thought it might help --
11:02:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: State your name.
11:02:20 >> Sam bell.
11:02:23 Your ordinance says that these procedures shall be
11:02:30 And one of those is that ab notice to the owners within
11:02:36 250 feet of whatever parcel.
11:02:40 That did not happen.
11:02:41 Evidence has been produced that that did not happen.
11:02:44 And, therefore, that is a jurisdictional issue.
11:02:47 You had no jurisdiction when you made the decision to
11:02:51 grant this application.
11:02:54 So it's like you had conversation earlier about
11:02:57 somebody else, nude jurisdiction.
11:03:01 If you add to that jurisdiction it's a nullity.
11:03:05 Now, what the attorney has said is that because you
11:03:09 acted, and people then have acted in reliance on your
11:03:12 action, there may be an estoppel issue.
11:03:15 And I understand that.
11:03:17 And you have got a good attorney, and I think he's
11:03:20 advising you of a prudent way to proceed.
11:03:25 We as owners would like to see the ordinance revoked
11:03:31 because did you not have the jurisdiction.
11:03:32 You have got to think in terms of liability for the
11:03:36 What we want, we are not necessarily opposed to a
11:03:41 facility being operated at this place.
11:03:43 But we have told you earlier, we are distressed by
11:03:47 what's happening around our neighborhood.
11:03:48 We want a chance to give input into this.
11:03:53 We don't want that ordinance granted and let those
11:03:56 people have an outdoor till 3:00 in the morning band
11:04:00 blaring in our faces.
11:04:01 So we want to be at the table, and we were not given
11:04:04 the opportunity to be at the table because we did not
11:04:06 get notice.
11:04:08 So my plea as a homeowner would be to revoke it.
11:04:16 You have got a good attorney, and he's given you an
11:04:18 alternative that might work.
11:04:20 And frankly, if these owners of the facility are people
11:04:26 of good will, they might want to revisit this.
11:04:30 But at least we want a place to go and have a hearing
11:04:35 where we can raise our concerns and objections, and
11:04:38 that's what we are really asking for.
11:04:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question.
11:04:46 Did the place that received this permit, are they open?
11:04:51 >> The building has been bull dosed.
11:04:53 It was the old star ship kind of a warehouse, and
11:04:59 Nothing there right now.
11:05:00 I presume -- I shouldn't make -- it's gone.
11:05:04 So there's nothing there now.
11:05:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So there's nothing there now.
11:05:08 So it's not like something what was built.
11:05:10 It seems like this is a very appropriate time to have a
11:05:13 conversation right now.
11:05:16 >> Yes.
11:05:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:05:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess this was a question for Mr.
11:05:27 Does the declaratory judgment give them an opportunity
11:05:29 to have a hearing to be heard?
11:05:31 >>> Well, what would happen, once that is filed -- and
11:05:37 I don't want to limit our options just to that but that
11:05:39 seems to be the most likely option.
11:05:41 Then through either a settlement or an order of the
11:05:43 court, it would come back to council, and council would
11:05:46 have jurisdiction returned to act in some form or
11:05:50 So that is how we get it back before City Council.
11:05:55 >>MARY MULHERN: The settlement would be between the
11:05:57 city and --
11:05:59 >> And the property owner.
11:06:00 >> And the property owner.
11:06:02 So if we settled they wouldn't necessarily get a
11:06:05 >> Well, I think our position would be that the
11:06:07 resolution of the issue would be to come back, for them
11:06:09 to submit to the jurisdiction of the council, and go
11:06:11 through the process again.
11:06:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think that you have given us a
11:06:16 remedy, or at least an option to look at, to get it
11:06:20 back before us.
11:06:20 And I'm amenable to moving forward within that action.
11:06:23 So what I would do, entertain a motion.
11:06:26 Southbound there a motion?
11:06:27 It's been moved and seconded that we will follow
11:06:29 legal's instruction. Mr. Grandoff?
11:06:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The only thing I was going to add
11:06:41 to my motion -- and who seconded it?
11:06:45 >> Me.
11:06:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It doesn't sound like a huge amount
11:06:47 of urgency but sometimes the way the courts are clogged
11:06:52 up these things take awhile.
11:06:53 So if the council feels it's appropriate to look at
11:06:58 injunctive relief as well as the declaratory action
11:07:04 that the court could put a hold on everything in terms
11:07:06 of construction, permitting, et cetera, et cetera,
11:07:08 until the court hags a chance to resolve the underlying
11:07:11 So I would add to my motion that the legal explore that
11:07:13 as well.
11:07:20 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: My address is suite 3700 Bank of
11:07:22 America plaza. I have absolutely no interest in this
11:07:25 I was back here listening.
11:07:27 I was involved in a matter in another jurisdiction
11:07:29 where I was defending a permit, a wet zoning that was
11:07:34 suspect as to a notice issue very similar.
11:07:37 Seems to me the city doesn't have any dog in this fight
11:07:41 right here.
11:07:41 But Mr. Bell and his neighbors are concerned about an
11:07:44 approval that's been granted, and the burden is upon
11:07:48 them to take that complaint to the court and ask the
11:07:52 court to review it.
11:07:54 This is not the city's problem.
11:07:56 Your duty is done.
11:07:57 The state has issued the license.
11:07:58 The permit is being valid.
11:08:01 If he has a notice question, and if he failed to get
11:08:03 notice, and he wants to have a proper hearing, then he
11:08:06 has to go to the court and ask the court to give him of
11:08:09 that relieve and the court will tell you to have a new
11:08:12 But this isn't your problem to go fix.
11:08:15 This is their problem.
11:08:17 And you shouldn't be wasting city funds, resources and
11:08:21 time on resolving an objection that they have about
11:08:25 They are alleging defective notice so let them go
11:08:28 search for the cure.
11:08:30 They can easily name the city as a nominal defendant in
11:08:33 a lawsuit, because the city issued the permit, and the
11:08:36 city attorneys will appear, and they will provide
11:08:38 evidence as to what's in the file, and a judge will
11:08:41 consider that.
11:08:41 But the city doesn't have a gripe in this matter.
11:08:44 They have the gripe.
11:08:45 They should go seek the cure.
11:08:49 Just a suggestion.
11:08:50 I have no issue in this at all.
11:08:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
11:08:54 There's a motion on the floor.
11:08:55 Moved and seconded.
11:08:56 All in favor of the motion signify by saying Aye.
11:09:00 Thank you.
11:09:02 Move to Armstrong, animal services here today?
11:09:11 Item 72.
11:09:12 >> Mr. Chairman, thank you.
11:09:16 Bill Armstrong, director of Hillsborough County animal
11:09:19 >> Sherry Silk, Executive Director of Humane Society of
11:09:22 Tampa Bay.
11:09:22 >> We have a presentation.
11:09:25 I don't know if it's coming on the computer or not.
11:09:27 There it is.
11:09:36 And the button to push.
11:09:39 Quickly go through this presentation to give you a feel
11:09:42 for the cooperative efforts that we have got between
11:09:45 the Humane Society of Tampa Bay and Hillsborough County
11:09:47 animal services as well as the City of Tampa.
11:09:51 When we look at animal services, some people don't
11:09:55 quite understand what we are about and what we do.
11:09:58 But I often refer to what we do as a combination of
11:10:02 something that would be an organization with the
11:10:05 sheriff's office, because we do enforce Florida State
11:10:08 statutes in the county ordinance, which is countywide,
11:10:13 and we also bring in homeless animals and try to find
11:10:16 them homes and get them back into loving homes, and we
11:10:20 also provide medical treatment for many of the animals
11:10:23 that come in who are stressed, so we are somewhat
11:10:26 similar to Tampa General Hospital in that way.
11:10:32 When we look at animal services, again I want to
11:10:35 emphasize we are countywide.
11:10:37 We provide animal services functions and assistance
11:10:40 throughout the county, and the City of Tampa, Plant
11:10:43 City, and Temple Terrace, and we of course got a
11:10:47 population of 1.2 million people, but we have nearly
11:10:50 600,000 known dogs and cats according to our estimates.
11:10:54 And the next number, which is a combination of the
11:10:56 number of animals that come into both Humane Society
11:10:59 and my facility is nearly 32,000 pets in the last
11:11:04 calendar year.
11:11:05 >> The Humane Society of Tampa Bay takes in just under
11:11:12 7,000 animals from the Tampa Bay residents, 5,206
11:11:18 adoptions, the most we have ever done, and the big
11:11:20 cooperation factor is that we twice a we can take
11:11:23 animals, at-risk animals from animal services because
11:11:26 they take so many more than we do.
11:11:27 So we go and take adoptable animals and put them in our
11:11:31 adoption program.
11:11:32 Something else we do for those of you that have seen
11:11:37 too many dogs and cats running loose in the City of
11:11:39 Tampa that we have low cost neuters in our clinics.
11:11:44 >> Part of the challenge that both Sherri and I have is
11:11:46 dealing with the number of animals coming into the
11:11:48 facility, nearly 32,000, and when we look at this
11:11:51 diagram, it shows how I see the flow.
11:11:55 Of course we have a lot of strays that are brought to
11:11:57 the shelter.
11:11:58 We have people surrendering their pets, and then we
11:12:01 have ways that those animals will leave animal
11:12:05 Unfortunately, the spigots that show three of the ways
11:12:09 on the right-hand side of the bucket, those can be
11:12:13 turned a little wider open to get more animals off, but
11:12:16 they are usually resource intensive both in people and
11:12:20 money, and you can't just open the spigot up and take
11:12:23 all loose animals that come into my facility and to
11:12:26 Sherri's and instantly provide homes for them.
11:12:30 Tragically the only spigot that I can control at will
11:12:32 is the one that's attached to euthanasia, and that's
11:12:35 the challenge we have, is we need to stop the number of
11:12:38 animals that are coming into both of our facilities.
11:12:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Go back.
11:12:45 The owner surrender issues have become a lot greater in
11:12:49 the last couple of years, correct?
11:12:51 Because of the economy?
11:12:52 >> Well, it has, councilman.
11:12:54 But we have been fortunate.
11:12:56 Through perhaps many years of good enforcement,
11:13:01 education in the spay neuter program.
11:13:04 We have seen a decrease in the number of owner
11:13:08 We have also begun to charge people who are
11:13:10 surrendering animals to try to recoup some of the cost
11:13:14 that the taxpayers in Hillsborough County are paying
11:13:15 for the services of trying to find these turned in or
11:13:19 surrendered animals home.
11:13:21 So we are kind of bucking the trend a little bit
11:13:23 compared to what we see going on in many other
11:13:25 communities in the state.
11:13:26 So we are fortunate.
11:13:32 >> Sherri: Bill Armstrong spoke to Tampa Police
11:13:35 Department and code enforcement go out to disadvantaged
11:13:37 neighborhoods and they have now asked the Humane
11:13:39 Society of Tampa Bay to come along.
11:13:42 I have been fortunate to go along with some of these
11:13:44 sweeps, and they are the enforcers but we are there to
11:13:46 help folks with vouchers if they need to have their
11:13:48 animals sterilized, give away free food, leashes, just
11:13:52 some basic education so folks can do a better job at
11:13:55 being really, really good pet owners.
11:13:59 We also have a low cost spay and neuter.
11:14:03 We opened a wellness facility on Armenia where the
11:14:07 citizens can come and get very affordable shots, heart
11:14:09 worm medications, flee treatments so that people again
11:14:12 can do a better job at keeping their pets and not have
11:14:14 to turn them in.
11:14:17 Bill alluded to his numbers are down.
11:14:20 Our numbers unfortunately are up a bit because people
11:14:21 are bringing to us because we are no kill shelter.
11:14:26 We took in more animals in 2009 than 2008 and people
11:14:32 cannot either afford to feed their pets or they lost
11:14:35 their homes and they had to turn their animals in.
11:14:37 >> The Humane Society is a great partner for us because
11:14:41 they take many animals that we have put up for
11:14:43 adoption, but they provide a great venue.
11:14:46 They have a great name recognition, and in the county,
11:14:49 and so they take animals from us weekly, place them in
11:14:52 their adoption program, and the number of animals that
11:14:55 we are saving.
11:14:56 We are also working jointly together in off-site
11:15:00 adoption events which has been a great boom to finding
11:15:02 more homes for these wonderful little critters.
11:15:04 And as Sherri mentioned, we are now working jointly
11:15:07 with Humane Society and Tampa Police Department in
11:15:11 these neighborhood sweeps where we go out into areas
11:15:14 where we know we have got a lot of animal issues, and
11:15:16 it's been just a very worthwhile effort, as we are
11:15:21 seeing fewer problems come out of those neighborhoods
11:15:23 once we have been through these areas, and we are
11:15:27 hoping as we do more and more of those that we will
11:15:29 further reduce the number of problems we have with
11:15:31 animals in our community.
11:15:34 The shot clinics that Sherri alluded to, we are able to
11:15:38 provide vaccinations that come through with donations
11:15:41 that Sherri is able to garner and we provide free tags
11:15:44 for those people that cannot afford to tag for the
11:15:46 first year so those animals become registered in
11:15:48 Hillsborough County.
11:15:49 And then we have worked together, Sherri and I, with
11:15:52 the ASPCA which has provided nearly 600,000 in our
11:15:56 community over the last three years.
11:15:58 It's been a great partnership.
11:16:01 One of the things than Sherri and I both have just
11:16:03 mentioned is the sweeps that we do together.
11:16:06 We recently had one, I believe it was March 24th,
11:16:10 and Sherri was providing good educational information
11:16:14 about spay and neuter.
11:16:16 We are working cooperatively, and we are arresting
11:16:19 people for animal cruelty.
11:16:21 In this particular case.
11:16:22 And it's more of an educational thing if and we have
11:16:25 gotten very good feedback from citizens in those
11:16:30 We have seen some dramatic decreases in the number of
11:16:32 animals coming into animal services over the past five
11:16:36 years, as you can see the number of dog and cat
11:16:39 impoundments down 30 and 28%, and very happy to report
11:16:44 that our euthanasia rate is down 42% in the last five
11:16:47 And we have seen over 100 percent increase in
11:16:51 An awful lot of that has to do with the cooperation
11:16:53 that we have got with Sherri and her staff, her
11:16:56 volunteers and our volunteers.
11:16:58 By the way, I'll just mention that in the last 12
11:17:00 months, we had volunteers that have donated 50,000
11:17:03 hours of their time in the last 12 months at animal
11:17:07 So I can't say enough about the wonderful people in our
11:17:10 community and this great city that are coming forward
11:17:13 to help the animals, which really need our assistance.
11:17:20 Sherri: This is my favorite graph.
11:17:21 If you look at the trends everything is going the right
11:17:25 Euthanasia is way down.
11:17:27 As you know, Hillsborough County used to be the highest
11:17:29 euthanasia county in the State of Florida, and those
11:17:33 numbers have greatly decreased.
11:17:35 We are doing more spay neuters.
11:17:37 Obviously adoption numbers are up.
11:17:38 We are on the radar of national organizations.
11:17:42 I have been asked as well as some bill's staff to speak
11:17:47 to conferences at animal services just recently, in
11:17:49 Texas, because of our cooperation, that's why we can
11:17:54 show you such a wonderful chart that euthanasia is
11:17:57 going down and adoptions going up and we have been
11:17:59 noticed that we are recognized in several national
11:18:02 publications because of the work that we do together.
11:18:04 >> Bill: And Sherri, I want to thank you for providing
11:18:09 assistance through your budget to the Humane Society of
11:18:13 Tampa Bay, because if her capability is diminished, I'm
11:18:16 going to end up with the problems that she's now able
11:18:19 to solve.
11:18:20 So it's been a wonderful public and not for profit
11:18:24 relationship we have had.
11:18:25 We are kind of joined at the hip.
11:18:27 And I just hope we can continue that, and would very
11:18:32 much appreciate it if you could support as much as you
11:18:34 can on these tight budget years, because Sherri and her
11:18:37 people are doing an absolutely great job.
11:18:39 And I'll end with saying that I believe that the
11:18:42 relationship we have with our two organizations is
11:18:45 unparalleled in any other community I'm aware of.
11:18:48 And I travel.
11:18:50 We are brother and sister.
11:18:52 We are joined at the hip.
11:18:53 And together we have been able to bring these numbers
11:18:56 down that truly are still way too high, but we are
11:19:00 getting there.
11:19:01 And I want to thank you for that.
11:19:02 >> Sherri: I didn't pay him to say that, had by the
11:19:07 Do we have any questions that we can answer for you
11:19:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:19:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm so thrilled you all were able
11:19:15 to come down.
11:19:16 I think public information is really, really critical.
11:19:20 I alluded to the economy before because the economy
11:19:22 affects these issues tremendously.
11:19:27 You all have been doing so much with such little
11:19:31 Hillsborough County animal services has been sort of
11:19:34 under the gun because of the county budget cuts, and I
11:19:38 commend the county commission.
11:19:40 Their cuts weren't as bad as they originally were
11:19:45 planned to be last year, but who knows what next year
11:19:48 is going to bring?
11:19:49 So we will all be working with you on that issue, and
11:19:52 the Humane Society of Tampa Bay is a not-for-profit.
11:19:55 So folks who are watching need to get in touch with
11:20:00 Sherri and Humane Society of Tampa Bay to contribute,
11:20:04 because we think we made progress.
11:20:06 We went from 35,000 euthanasias a couple years ago down
11:20:09 to 20,000 euthanasia, but is 20,000 too many?
11:20:13 And the only way we can do it is to continue working
11:20:17 The other issue that I was going to mention, Sherri,
11:20:20 tell us real quick about pet food.
11:20:23 I know we have been working on that, and I think it's a
11:20:25 wonderful project.
11:20:26 >> We have a pet food assistance program.
11:20:28 People were turning their pets in because they said
11:20:31 they couldn't afford to feed them so now anyone can
11:20:34 come in and get a free bag of dog food or pet food and
11:20:37 keep their pets.
11:20:39 And we take donations.
11:20:41 We have a lot of offices that do -- the Bucs recently
11:20:45 did a drive for us.
11:20:46 So any companies out there that are listening that
11:20:48 would like to contribute for that or do a food drive,
11:20:51 we give it right back to the community.
11:20:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Really, that's the best we can do,
11:20:56 is people love their animals, but if they can't afford
11:20:58 them we can help them afford them.
11:21:01 So thank you, Mr. Chairman.
11:21:03 >> Sherri: Thank you, everybody.
11:21:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 65.
11:21:13 Item 65?
11:21:23 >> Tom Forward, fire chief, Tampa Fire Rescue.
11:21:27 We are here to discuss issues of concerns as it relates
11:21:30 to fire safety and life safety code.
11:21:34 Inspections and reinspections of our office building.
11:21:39 With respect to and relation to the time element,
11:21:44 council has approved this ordinance in July of 2009 as
11:21:47 it relates to our fee increases.
11:21:52 We are not had any fee schedule increase for over a
11:21:56 With respect to the new fee schedule, we have had some
11:21:59 concerns as it relates to these inspections, and the
11:22:06 Overwhelmingly, we want to communicate the fact that
11:22:09 our initial inspection for those buildings that are
11:22:12 5,000 square feet and under come in at a new rate of
11:22:17 $75, and they incrementally change with 5,000 square
11:22:22 feet increments.
11:22:23 So the next building size will go from 5,000 to up to
11:22:27 10,000, and anything from 5001 to 10,000 feet would
11:22:31 have a different schedule.
11:22:33 Some of the concerns that we have realized are just up
11:22:38 to this point not had any issues, but that our
11:22:42 reinspection fee is quite substantial.
11:22:44 We want to clarify the point or the fact that
11:22:48 reinspection fee is actually a third inspection.
11:22:54 For the initial inspection of $75 for that initial
11:22:57 inspection, that's a one-time fee.
11:23:00 If the tenant or the building is in compliance, there
11:23:04 is no additional charge for the follow-up inspection.
11:23:09 If they are immediately in compliance, they get their
11:23:13 fire code compliance inspection certificate, and they
11:23:17 don't realize an inspection for the period of time
11:23:21 whether it's one year, two year, up to five years.
11:23:24 On that same note, if they have a compliance issue,
11:23:29 that compliance issue is recognized on the inspection
11:23:34 It's left with the tenant.
11:23:36 And the building owner with respect to what that issue
11:23:40 is, when we follow up, inspectors will come back and
11:23:45 reinspect that building.
11:23:46 And if they are in compliance, and they meet the code,
11:23:51 there is no fee for that.
11:23:54 If they fail to meet the standard, then there will be a
11:23:59 third inspection.
11:24:00 That third inspection is where we have the increase in
11:24:03 the fee schedule.
11:24:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, chief.
11:24:10 As you know, we discussed this the other day, and you
11:24:13 presented this information to me, I guess, to the other
11:24:16 council members.
11:24:17 What I'm looking at is two things.
11:24:23 A, normality.
11:24:25 None of us are normal.
11:24:27 I'm not talking about myself.
11:24:28 So if I made the mistake and I don't fix on the
11:24:31 30th day or whatever, first of all, do we send
11:24:34 notices that we are coming?
11:24:37 Or do we just show up?
11:24:38 >> You have someone here to answer technical but my
11:24:46 understanding is, yes, the tenant and building does get
11:24:49 a notice, Mr. Miranda, that the inspectors are coming
11:24:53 out to do the inspection.
11:24:54 >> The second thing is this.
11:24:56 The fee as you stated on page 3 is $75, up to 5,000
11:25:01 square foot.
11:25:01 And if we don't -- I'm not denying that -- and if the
11:25:05 reinspection is not done is 150.
11:25:13 That is after, say, 60 days or so.
11:25:17 That's a lot of money when something costs 75.
11:25:19 And then the next thing is, to me, more importantly, is
11:25:23 there is no department in the City of Tampa, not water,
11:25:27 which is a necessity every day, not sewer, not
11:25:31 ad valorem taxation, not wastewater, not the sanitation
11:25:37 department, none of those have a built-in 3% a year
11:25:44 And that one really is hard for me to swallow.
11:25:46 >> There are very few tenants or very few commercial
11:25:52 official buildings that don't comply upon that
11:25:56 More often than not, their issues are very menial.
11:26:01 They automatically comply.
11:26:03 But what we found to be factual is the ones that do not
11:26:09 comply and end up getting that higher end reinspection
11:26:11 which is a third inspection, which is we have to
11:26:13 reschedule another inspector to come back for that
11:26:15 building, which is time consuming, and along the fact
11:26:20 of the matter they have to forgo an inspection that
11:26:23 they already have set up to come back and reinspect
11:26:26 this facility, and that's a very small amount that
11:26:28 actually do that, that don't comply, and if there is
11:26:32 any concern with respect to them not being able to meet
11:26:34 the time line, the fire marshal's office has given
11:26:37 them, there's nothing wrong with them giving a call to
11:26:40 the fire marshal, asking for an increased time or
11:26:43 rescheduling that and the fire marshal's bureau will
11:26:47 comply to that.
11:26:48 >> That's what I wrote down.
11:26:50 How many of these do not fix prior to reinspection?
11:26:53 I don't know that answer.
11:26:54 I wrote it down here.
11:26:58 But my main concern is, what no other department has,
11:27:02 not even the city has, an ad valorem taxes, is a cost
11:27:09 of percent change of 3%, or the cost of CPI, whichever
11:27:14 is greater, not less, whichever is more.
11:27:17 And those are the things that I read than I voted
11:27:34 opening an the rest of us.
11:27:36 That's the only department in the city, and I know the
11:27:39 chief executive officer, finance regulations and
11:27:44 intelligence just spoke to you.
11:27:46 >> I understand that, councilman Miranda.
11:27:47 That 3% is an option of the fire chief based on the CPI
11:27:53 and based on conditions whether or not they want to
11:27:55 invoke that 3% increase, or invoke no increase at all.
11:28:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to see that part taken
11:28:03 out, because no other department has that.
11:28:07 That is we would have it across the board in every
11:28:09 department, that we would have individuals in the
11:28:15 community not directly with the fire department, but
11:28:18 directly with the city really suffering not only during
11:28:23 bad times but during good times, too.
11:28:26 During good times everybody is doing good.
11:28:29 And you and I know only a certain percent are doing
11:28:34 The majority is still struggling, no matter what times
11:28:37 you have, the percentage really doesn't change.
11:28:39 So that's the only troubling remark that I have on
11:28:43 section 4.
11:28:45 I don't know what this council is going to do, but I
11:28:48 will try something later on.
11:28:49 I'm not opposed to those that were done.
11:28:56 In fact it even goes back on resolution 654.
11:29:00 This was 653, if I recall.
11:29:02 654 has to do more with basic life support, advanced
11:29:07 life support, and those things are really covered by
11:29:09 the person's insurance or Medicare.
11:29:12 Am I correct?
11:29:15 >>> That's correct.
11:29:16 >> And we don't get a 3% increase in our Social
11:29:19 Security check.
11:29:20 I say we.
11:29:21 I would imagine some of us are getting that check.
11:29:33 Sometimes at my age I feel I shouldn't accept it but I
11:29:36 do because it comes by U.S. mail.
11:29:38 That's the only -- like that lady now at the taco bar,
11:29:44 that's the only beef I have with those sections 4.
11:29:47 On section 353 -- or 654, excuse me, and 653.
11:29:52 Section 2, instead of section 3 as it was in the prior
11:29:58 In other words, I don't like automatic things.
11:30:00 Even though I voted for it.
11:30:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you want to speak?
11:30:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can address Mr. Miranda's
11:30:08 Council, as you know, the discretion to set fees and
11:30:13 rates sits with this body, with the City Council.
11:30:17 Now, previously -- and this is one instance where you
11:30:21 in fact delegated that authority.
11:30:24 That's a policy decision.
11:30:27 To refresh your recollection, a similar policy decision
11:30:29 came up in a recreation ordinance setting that fee, and
11:30:32 council, I believe, removed that discretion because at
11:30:37 the time the council's policy was to keep that
11:30:42 discretion rather than delegate it.
11:30:45 So, Mr. Miranda, you're right, this is an anomaly, and
11:30:50 council historically has wished to retain the
11:30:54 discretion to set fees rather than delegating that to
11:30:58 the administration.
11:30:59 >> Well, Mr. Miranda and I are new best friend because
11:31:05 I agree with him completely on this.
11:31:06 I don't think we should -- I didn't notice it at the
11:31:12 time that we were delegating it, but I think we should
11:31:16 probably revisit that and I'll second your motion when
11:31:18 you do it.
11:31:22 New chief, congratulations.
11:31:23 And within a week, we got you here on the hot seat.
11:31:30 But you and I discussed this earlier in the week,
11:31:34 because I was curious, this has been in force since
11:31:37 last summer, what our experience has been in terms of,
11:31:40 you know, the folks who have been concerned about this
11:31:44 talk about a 300 percent increase and that sort of
11:31:47 What sort of increase in fees have you been recovering
11:31:51 since last summer as compared to prior years?
11:31:55 >>> Once council went ahead and approved the ordinance,
11:31:58 in July, we start implementing those, that fee schedule
11:32:02 in August, to March 31st of 2010 we have collected
11:32:08 $217,000, which was over 25% increase from what we had
11:32:13 collected in previous years, at previous periods.
11:32:17 And that's quite significant with regards to our fee
11:32:23 At the same time, we have not had a lot of pushback or
11:32:26 any anxious from any of our tenants with respect to
11:32:28 this fee schedule increase.
11:32:30 Some of them, because they had not realized any
11:32:32 inspections over a period of time, life safety is an
11:32:38 absolute paramount.
11:32:40 Inspectors felt very strongly that a lot of these
11:32:43 tenants, commercial buildings had not been received in
11:32:45 the proper inspections they needed in doing. They
11:32:48 stepped up and reorganized their department so they can
11:32:53 ensure we are doing those now.
11:32:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think this is perhaps an
11:32:58 important point.
11:32:58 As Mrs. Wise and the fire chief came to us because they
11:33:03 said, we have budget problems, we don't have enough
11:33:05 money to put our inspectors out on the streets and to
11:33:08 keep this program going, and it's one of the important
11:33:10 things they do other than fighting the actual fires and
11:33:13 saving the lives on the street.
11:33:15 So I recall Mrs. Wise saying we needed to do this to
11:33:21 help fund -- continue funding the program, and we
11:33:23 haven't done it since '98.
11:33:26 Is that correct, achiever?
11:33:27 >>> That's correct.
11:33:27 >> So we have gone eleven years without a fee increase.
11:33:31 >>> Right.
11:33:33 >> Some of the fees look like they are a lot on paper.
11:33:35 But in reality what we are seeing is it's only a 25%
11:33:39 increase, and that 25%, if you spread it over eleven
11:33:43 years, only amounts to two, two and a half percent that
11:33:47 Mr. Miranda was perhaps talking about earlier.
11:33:49 So I'm not completely alarmed about it.
11:33:51 The only thing is, Ms. Collier spent a lot of time
11:33:57 sitting with us this morning's and generated this
11:33:59 letter dated May 18th and I'm sure you got a copy
11:34:02 of it, and they addressed really not the money issues
11:34:05 but some procedural issues, one, two, three, four.
11:34:08 Have you had a chance to look at those?
11:34:10 And can you comply with those, or at least accommodate
11:34:13 some of those without us dealing with it in an
11:34:16 ordinance fashion?
11:34:17 >> I have had the opportunity to review this, along
11:34:19 with the fire marshal as well, and we are looking to
11:34:23 accommodate especially items 3 and 4 of that letter.
11:34:28 With respect to providing more clarity, our inspection
11:34:33 needs and notifying both the tenant and the commercial
11:34:36 office building, that they are going to be having an
11:34:39 inspection and inspection due.
11:34:43 Some of the concerns we had was that the tenant would
11:34:44 receive an inspection, but not knowing what to do with
11:34:47 the inspection, it would sit in their in basket, the
11:34:50 building owner who for all intents and purposes was
11:34:53 going to be responsible for the tenant inspection,
11:34:55 which is a good thing, but they wouldn't know that they
11:34:57 were -- that they had been inspected and would
11:35:01 subsequently end up incurring that third inspection
11:35:03 which would be that double.
11:35:05 We are going to ensure that not only when inspectors go
11:35:08 out, not only do the tenants know that they are going
11:35:10 to be doing the inspections but the building owner as
11:35:13 well, and once the inspection is done, the tenant would
11:35:17 receive a report of the inspection, and any
11:35:19 discrepancies therein, as well as the building owner as
11:35:22 So that should keep them well into that basic fee and
11:35:26 not have any concerns with respect to the penalty fee.
11:35:30 >> You think you can do that through your own process?
11:35:32 >> Absolutely, sir.
11:35:33 We are already doing some policy changes with
11:35:36 respect -- the fire marshal already put forth a letter
11:35:39 that we are reviewing that we feel certain, in fact
11:35:41 he's already pushing that out to the supervisor of
11:35:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Our time is getting away from us.
11:35:47 I think the only issue that is outstanding is what
11:35:51 councilman Miranda raised, that is a 3%.
11:35:54 I think we can address that so we can move to the next
11:35:56 item because it's going on 12:00.
11:35:57 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, in reading this
11:36:01 here --
11:36:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Caetano is referring to the
11:36:05 letter that you send out, talking about the
11:36:08 The letter you sent to the public.
11:36:10 That's in the backup material.
11:36:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: A fee will be billed to every
11:36:22 tenant for the initial inspection and a fee for any
11:36:23 second reinspection.
11:36:25 I understand there's in a fee for the second
11:36:29 But there is a fee.
11:36:31 It's for the third.
11:36:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They are going to tweak up that
11:36:37 >>> We are going to fix that.
11:36:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's why I say the only outstanding
11:36:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you for coming.
11:36:46 And also these fees are not generated every year in
11:36:48 every building.
11:36:49 Am I correct?
11:36:50 >> You are correct.
11:36:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: State on the record how the process
11:36:55 Just to get the record straight.
11:36:56 >> Just for technical clarity, I would like the fire
11:36:59 marshal to come and address that.
11:37:01 >> Russell Spicola, Fire Marshal. Could you repeat the
11:37:13 question again?
11:37:13 >> I don't know if I can.
11:37:14 I would say for the record that not every building sin
11:37:17 There's a criteria, one to three, one to five, one to
11:37:21 Just for the record for your own benefit I want to give
11:37:23 that you opportunity to put it on the record.
11:37:25 >>> That's correct.
11:37:25 Not every building or every business is inspected every
11:37:30 It depends on what the business is.
11:37:32 I'll give you an example.
11:37:34 Daycare center that has very high life safety issues
11:37:39 with regards to children and what have you, they are
11:37:42 inspected every year.
11:37:44 A bar, a restaurant, they are inspected every two
11:37:51 A high-rise building like the one downtown is
11:37:53 inspected, the core, every two years.
11:37:57 Each tenant in than building is inspected one time
11:38:01 every five years.
11:38:04 So it depends on what kind of business you have, which
11:38:07 would generate the inspection.
11:38:10 >> So I am assuming that when you say the core and the
11:38:13 tenants, that would apply to large shopping centers?
11:38:17 >> It could, yes.
11:38:18 >> The core is inspected every two years and the
11:38:22 individual shops every five years?
11:38:23 >>> It could, yes.
11:38:25 Depending on -- a mall is probably, I think, inspected
11:38:30 every two years.
11:38:31 Like International Plaza. Then each piece inside
11:38:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I don't know exactly
11:38:42 the process.
11:38:43 I guess I'll take a stab at it.
11:38:46 But on resolutions that were passed by this council in
11:38:50 2009, 653, and also in resolutions that were passed by
11:38:54 this council in 2001, resolution number 93, they both
11:39:00 include an automatic 3% increase.
11:39:04 And nothing against the great men and women of the fire
11:39:07 But that's the only where that I have seen this, unless
11:39:11 somebody can show me, it's not in water, not in sewer,
11:39:14 not in ad valorem tax, it's nowhere in the city that I
11:39:17 know of.
11:39:18 So what I'm saying is, this is an exception to the
11:39:21 general rule.
11:39:25 And I think that section 2 of the item passed in 2001,
11:39:29 resolution, that was an ordinance, by the way, not a
11:39:35 And I want to ask this council to remove that, because
11:39:39 no other place in history of this city do we have that.
11:39:44 And the other one is resolution number that was passed,
11:39:48 0115, and that's what I'm saying.
11:39:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
11:39:54 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a question first.
11:39:56 The 3%, is this every year, or when do you use the 3%?
11:40:00 >>BONNIE WISE: Director of revenue and finances.
11:40:01 I was one of the people who was associated when this
11:40:04 was created.
11:40:05 This is a new concept that we have built in.
11:40:07 As you know, you have complemented a 5-year water rate
11:40:11 increase plan as well as a 3-year wastewater rate
11:40:14 increase plan.
11:40:15 The reason that this was put in, and it's not a
11:40:19 mandatory increase, as you know, it is at the fire
11:40:23 chief's discretion, is because we did have a situation
11:40:26 here, for example, where we had not increased the fees
11:40:29 since 1998.
11:40:31 As you know, the costs of the fire department has
11:40:33 increased since 1998.
11:40:36 So it is very difficult to increase these so
11:40:42 So what we were trig really trying to do is limit the
11:40:44 amount of increase in any given year so that you don't
11:40:47 have a year where you have increased it so
11:40:50 So really trying to level it out.
11:40:53 Once again, you know, it is not an automatic increase,
11:40:57 and it really is partly to protect it from increase
11:41:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:41:04 That was my question.
11:41:05 Your input as our budget director.
11:41:08 I think that the way that you have explained it, it's
11:41:12 actually a protection of the public in terms of the
11:41:15 fees increasing.
11:41:15 So given that, I won't be supporting the motion.
11:41:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's fine.
11:41:20 Let me clarify the good works of Ms. Wise.
11:41:26 It could be, but it can be every year.
11:41:29 That's what this says.
11:41:31 Can't it?
11:41:33 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes, sir.
11:41:36 >> I should have been an attorney.
11:41:37 The second issue is when you mention water.
11:41:39 Water we did for only five years, not for an infinity
11:41:42 of time like this is written, and it was done with a
11:41:45 purpose, and that purpose was to accelerate the
11:41:49 replacement, not repairing of pipes that we were losing
11:41:52 16% of the water that was produced at the plants before
11:41:56 it got distributed to the citizens.
11:41:58 Am I correct?
11:42:00 >> Yes.
11:42:01 As I mentioned, water is for a limited time.
11:42:05 >> And the reason we did that, and we have lowered that
11:42:07 now, instead of doing 10 we were doing 40 and now we
11:42:12 lowered that 16 to 8, so the public has had a great
11:42:14 savings that we don't have to spend more money on
11:42:16 chemicals, on water that we were losing in
11:42:20 distribution, and they benefited from it.
11:42:23 In this case, I don't know what's going to happen in
11:42:26 future mayors and future councils, but this is not to
11:42:30 say that this is for three years, or five years.
11:42:33 This is forever.
11:42:34 Maybe Chief Forward will never increase this. But I
11:42:38 don't know what's going to happen tomorrow.
11:42:39 I don't know who is going to be mayor.
11:42:41 I don't know who is going to be chief.
11:42:43 I don't even nobody who is going to be sitting here.
11:42:46 I hope the public doesn't change.
11:42:48 But they are the only ones not changing.
11:42:50 We are going to have a change.
11:42:54 You know.
11:42:58 It's getting stronger.
11:43:06 A member of one.
11:43:07 So what I'm saying is that these things are written in
11:43:10 ordinance form, that no ordinance has.
11:43:13 And that's the only thing.
11:43:14 I have nothing against these fine gentlemen and men and
11:43:16 women of the department.
11:43:17 I just want clarity and fairness for all.
11:43:20 That's all.
11:43:21 But we do have a motion.
11:43:24 We have a second by my new best friend.
11:43:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So restate your motion, that we remove
11:43:29 that section.
11:43:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That section 4.
11:43:33 I mentioned the earlier times.
11:43:34 I'll mention one by ordinance, and the other one by
11:43:38 Resolution number 653 of '09 has in section 4, and in
11:43:43 the other one is an ordinance -- excuse me, resolution
11:43:47 number 654 that was passed in '09.
11:43:52 That was a resolution.
11:43:53 I want to make sure -- yes, both of them are
11:43:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Your motion would be for legal to
11:44:00 bring back a resolution?
11:44:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion.
11:44:04 You take that out, and then you need to have an
11:44:06 increase, how would you do the increase?
11:44:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The way council always retains its
11:44:12 What happens is anytime -- if the administration wishes
11:44:16 to ask council on a yearly basis to amend fees, it can.
11:44:20 If the administration wishes to waive a -- wait a long
11:44:25 period of time it can do so.
11:44:27 But -- here it would be inconsistent with what you have
11:44:33 done in the past, particularly what you did with the
11:44:35 recreation, because the discretion always --
11:44:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest a compromise, and put a
11:44:40 limit in there.
11:44:41 Maybe that might be better.
11:44:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, council has a right.
11:44:49 Whoever is here has the right to do that, to bring it
11:44:52 every year.
11:44:53 >>GWEN MILLER: By removing it can we put in the now,
11:44:56 for five years?
11:44:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here again, this is not -- we are
11:45:00 not building something with this money.
11:45:02 We are creating what we have at a higher rate.
11:45:05 And if you do that, then you are going to start asking
11:45:08 for more money for other departments because there's a
11:45:11 way to create revenue.
11:45:12 And I'm not saying that Chief Forward would do that.
11:45:15 I believe he won't do that.
11:45:16 But I don't know what's going to happen here.
11:45:21 >>BONNIE WISE: If I could say one thing, council
11:45:22 members, even if Chief Forward has this recommendation,
11:45:25 it would then of course be part of his budget, which
11:45:27 you, council members, ultimately approve.
11:45:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Except, council -- I don't wish to
11:45:36 get into an argument about it, but it's a major policy
11:45:39 Because once it's in the budget, your scrutiny as to
11:45:44 line by line with regard to fees would not appear.
11:45:46 It would ab cumulative account.
11:45:49 And I'm raising this as your City Council attorney.
11:45:53 Obviously, there are advantages to not wanting to have
11:45:55 to deal with fees, and to let it happen automatically.
11:45:58 But that is a significant policy decision, and if you
11:46:01 do set a precedent here you can expect to see that
11:46:03 happen in other resolutions and other ordinances.
11:46:06 If that is ultimately council's decision.
11:46:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, and that's why I have said, maybe
11:46:11 you ought to set a time limit on it if you want to do
11:46:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was thinking about another type
11:46:23 of compromise, which is right now, the way it's set up,
11:46:27 as we approved it and we delegated it, is they can just
11:46:30 do it and nobody really knows about it.
11:46:34 Or not.
11:46:34 But if they do do it, nobody really knows about it, and
11:46:38 that's my point.
11:46:39 I think that's a part of Mr. Miranda's point, is that
11:46:43 it's sort of in the dark.
11:46:45 And Bonnie, with all due respect, yes, it's part of the
11:46:49 budget, but the budget is this thick and, you know, I
11:46:51 don't not that that's really something that we would
11:46:55 jump hold of and say, aha, he did it or he didn't do
11:46:59 So what I would suggest is perhaps as a compromise,
11:47:01 Charlie, is especially in light of some dissension is
11:47:07 that maybe we include a requirement that if he enacts
11:47:11 that provision that he does so by putting it on the
11:47:14 agenda and notifying council in any particular year
11:47:19 that he did it.
11:47:21 And then that way, under the circumstances out in the
11:47:24 It's public.
11:47:26 If he does it year after year, some future council
11:47:29 says, you know what?
11:47:30 Maybe that's not such a great idea.
11:47:32 But at least it's part of the public discussion and
11:47:34 it's on the agenda.
11:47:37 That's just a suggestion.
11:47:38 We'll see what you think about it.
11:47:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Point Counterpoint, if I may.
11:47:44 And I understand what compromise.
11:47:46 I'm not against compromises.
11:47:47 But this tends to leave other departments to start the
11:47:51 same thing, and that's what I'm trying to avoid.
11:47:55 If we continue to leave this in, other departments will
11:47:58 go, look, you already did it.
11:48:01 You did to the fire department, fire marshal's
11:48:03 We want to do it.
11:48:04 And then you are going to be dealing westbound a lot
11:48:06 more paperwork, and a lot more things than we have now.
11:48:10 And that's what I'm trying to be avoid.
11:48:13 You know, it's just that simple to me.
11:48:19 I am not going to support anything other than removal.
11:48:23 And I'm not going to win.
11:48:24 But that's the way I am.
11:48:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I leave the motion standing and see
11:48:32 where it goes.
11:48:33 If it doesn't go then maybe there's a compromise.
11:48:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
11:48:37 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
11:48:40 >>THE CLERK: Saul-Sena and Miller voting no and
11:48:44 Mulhern being absent.
11:48:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I voted no.
11:48:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move the alternative that we
11:48:52 direct staff and legal to tweak that portion of the
11:48:55 ordinance of the resolution to require notice to
11:49:01 council, agendaed notice to council anytime.
11:49:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I still feel that there should be a
11:49:09 time limit with the notifications.
11:49:11 >> I make the motion with the five years.
11:49:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, I'm not clear.
11:49:20 Upon your expiration, provision for both resolutions?
11:49:23 Is that --
11:49:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Five year with notification to
11:49:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: An agendaed item each time it is
11:49:31 >>GWEN MILLER: To be brought to council.
11:49:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm not going to support the issue
11:49:35 because this is a precedent for other divisions within
11:49:39 the great City of Tampa to come after the same thing,
11:49:41 and it will really hamstring the population when you
11:49:46 have an automatic increase, and to have an automatic
11:49:50 decrease in salaries and unemployment is not 12 or 13,
11:49:53 in my estimate, it's 20.
11:49:56 5%, can't find a job, quit looking, and the other 5%
11:50:02 that have taken a job at 450, 50% less salary so it's
11:50:06 night 12, 14%, it's over 20.
11:50:08 Therefore I am not going to support that.
11:50:09 >> There's a motion by councilman Dingfelder, seconded
11:50:12 by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
11:50:14 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
11:50:16 >>THE CLERK: Caetano and Miranda voting no and Mulhern
11:50:21 being absent.
11:50:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's move to item 62.
11:50:28 >>> Just for point of clarity, we vote on a five year,
11:50:33 then it's a five year.
11:50:34 Is that five-year from the time the ordinance July last
11:50:42 Thank you.
11:50:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:50:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 62.
11:50:52 Item 62.
11:51:08 That's agreement between the City of Tampa and the
11:51:09 school board.
11:51:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe that council member Mulhern
11:51:15 asked that to be continued till today.
11:51:19 My understanding is that she had the opportunity to
11:51:20 meet with staff.
11:51:22 And I have received no direction from her as to whether
11:51:25 or not to hold it.
11:51:26 So I assume --
11:51:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I remember the reading,
11:51:32 Mr. Chairman, it's regarding the school property such
11:51:33 as Oak Park school, Tampa Bay Boulevard, two or three
11:51:37 other schools, for the event there's a natural disaster
11:51:41 for us to be able to move in and do the work that the
11:51:45 citizens expect us to do.
11:51:49 And I think the fee was something like $60,000.
11:51:52 I read it but I don't remember all the specifics.
11:51:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I thought it was the agreement that we
11:51:59 struck with the Hillsborough County school system and
11:52:03 us about using -- which they have been doing all along
11:52:09 Just need clarification.
11:52:10 >>> This is essentially the agreement as councilman
11:52:17 Miranda stated, we are going to use those facilities in
11:52:19 event of an emergency.
11:52:21 And a dollar amount was those funds are going to be
11:52:23 necessary to provide capabilities to those who don't
11:52:25 have backup power, things of that nature.
11:52:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So what do we want to do with this?
11:52:34 >> I was just informed by council member Mulhern's
11:52:37 objection that she has no objection to go forward.
11:52:39 >> Move the resolution.
11:52:41 >> Second.
11:52:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
11:52:44 Item 63.
11:52:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead, sir.
11:52:50 >> Again, here to --
11:52:53 >>GWEN MILLER: On the record.
11:52:58 Here to provide response to questions regarding the
11:53:04 damage and potential time line for repairs.
11:53:06 As I noted in correspondence to you, we do have an
11:53:10 unfunded project associated with that work.
11:53:13 There are a number of issues that not only would take
11:53:16 care of the roof but also the integrity of the facility
11:53:18 and the mechanical system to help deal with the water
11:53:22 intrusion that currently exists.
11:53:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, and I appreciate you
11:53:27 appearing because I wanted to ask you about this
11:53:30 We receive rent from Amtrak, don't we, for using this
11:53:36 >> That's not ours.
11:53:38 I'm not the expert on --
11:53:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe --
11:53:42 >>> But I believe we do.
11:53:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe that we do, also.
11:53:46 And this building, as you know, is a landmark building.
11:53:48 >>> Most certainly.
11:53:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And it's ours.
11:53:51 And we are the stewards of this building.
11:53:53 And we have 1.2 million of unmet needs.
11:53:56 I know that money is not hanging from trees.
11:53:58 The question is, have we gone after stimulus dollars to
11:54:02 perhaps make these repairs?
11:54:03 >>> Not as part of the most recent submission.
11:54:09 We have not pursued that.
11:54:10 >> I think that would be a great idea.
11:54:13 And in the interim, we need to do something to
11:54:15 stabilize this historic building that we have.
11:54:18 So do you think maybe in 60 days you could give us a
11:54:20 report back on either, "A," could we persist and, "B,"
11:54:27 can we at least do some interim provisions? Because if
11:54:31 you made the repairs, we do rent out the space and
11:54:35 generate those incomes.
11:54:36 >> The issue is, as I noted, we do repair the facility
11:54:40 on a regular basis.
11:54:44 We do have folks do those repairs.
11:54:47 The challenge is, we have some set some threshold
11:54:52 because we continue to throw good money after bad.
11:54:58 The issue that we are going to have until we seal the
11:55:02 building envelope and correct the issue of -- you know,
11:55:06 the window project that we had is to keep water from
11:55:12 intruding around the windows.
11:55:13 That's an issue.
11:55:14 We dealt with that.
11:55:15 But it needs a capital repair.
11:55:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It does.
11:55:18 I agree.
11:55:19 And so I know there's a very tight budget but are we
11:55:23 looking for resources to do this?
11:55:24 And that's why going after grant funding makes all the
11:55:27 sense in the world.
11:55:28 The other issue is that as in this building, old City
11:55:31 Hall, we are ending up doing something that's not
11:55:34 historically really correct, because we neglected
11:55:38 maintenance for so long on our windows, and that's what
11:55:42 happens if you don't have like a sinking fund,
11:55:45 particularly for historic buildings.
11:55:47 And it's something that I think we need to look at
11:55:50 coming up with an additional revenue source to maintain
11:55:55 the city's historic resources that we own and need to
11:55:59 So perhaps in 60 days you can come back with some ideas
11:56:04 on where we could identify resources to better maintain
11:56:09 the Union Station.
11:56:13 A motion we get a report back within 60 days on trying
11:56:16 to identify those resources.
11:56:17 >> Councilman Miranda.
11:56:19 >> Let me just say one thing.
11:56:21 Technology has come such a long way that the general
11:56:24 public and the city can no longer a Ford to have the
11:56:28 windows that we have.
11:56:29 You put them up five, six, seven, eight years down the
11:56:33 lane, no matter how you maintain them they rot because
11:56:36 it weather.
11:56:37 They are single-pane windows.
11:56:42 I'm cheap.
11:56:43 I don't like to spend money twice.
11:56:45 I admit it.
11:56:46 But I'm not going to go replace these windows every
11:56:49 seven, eight years, cost me 7, 8, $9,000 when I can do
11:56:53 it one time, have an insulated window and looks exactly
11:56:57 like way took out, because it's duplicated, in a
11:57:00 mannerism that you can't tell the difference unless you
11:57:02 go knock on it.
11:57:04 I can tell you that the Centro Espanol building had
11:57:07 those windows done.
11:57:08 I challenge anyone to go and put a pencil to the 2 by 6
11:57:13 in the bottom of the frame, your pencil goes right
11:57:16 through it.
11:57:17 I've done that.
11:57:18 So what I'm saying is, we talk about things.
11:57:21 We talk about saving money.
11:57:23 There's technology out there that does it exactly how
11:57:27 it was historically.
11:57:29 And that's all I'm saying.
11:57:32 We are at the point in life where America is always
11:57:37 talking about exercising, getting healthy and doing
11:57:40 this, and then you see the same person at a restaurant
11:57:43 going around 20 times around the block to get the
11:57:45 parking right next to the door.
11:57:47 I can't quite figure that out.
11:57:49 But that's how we are.
11:57:50 So I'm saying we are doing the best we can.
11:57:54 >> There's a motion.
11:57:56 What's the motion again?
11:57:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion is to get a report back
11:57:59 in 06 days on pursuing some resources to be able to
11:58:07 repair, to make the repairs we need to make at Tampa
11:58:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
11:58:21 Item 68.
11:58:23 No second.
11:58:25 Item 68.
11:58:27 >> Jean Dorsett, transportation manager.
11:58:32 This item is in regard to parking issues on New Port
11:58:37 and Delaware avenues.
11:58:39 We provided a report recently regarding our prior
11:58:43 assessment of the parking situation out there.
11:58:45 And explain that in more detail if you like, or just
11:58:50 take questions.
11:58:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do you have any questions,
11:58:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
11:58:56 This is the restriping on New Port.
11:59:00 Thank you for taking a look at it.
11:59:05 We had a request from the neighborhood to be see if we
11:59:07 could provide some additional parking.
11:59:09 I have a quick question.
11:59:10 Would we ever consider angled parking which would
11:59:13 allow -- just on one side of the street that would
11:59:16 allow both the fire vehicles to get by and would
11:59:19 accommodate more vehicles?
11:59:20 Is that something we would ever consider?
11:59:23 >>> Well, in this case it would not be physically
11:59:29 Delaware is 24 feet wide.
11:59:31 New Port is 26 feet wide.
11:59:34 If you think about the width of a vehicle, they are
11:59:38 two-way streets.
11:59:39 Angled parking would not be physically possible on
11:59:41 either one of those streets.
11:59:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for taking a look at it.
11:59:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 69.
11:59:51 We dealt with this.
11:59:52 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
11:59:54 I think this came up from some other issues.
11:59:57 But to save you some time, I do believe a -- there's
12:00:02 some issues with our notice provisions and there's
12:00:04 definitely tying them up.
12:00:07 I think specifically we were discussing earlier today
12:00:10 how we view the good neighbor notice and who that goes
12:00:13 to, and including a better registration process for
12:00:15 people who -- groups that would like to be noticed.
12:00:19 So instead of spending a lot of time on this, I think I
12:00:23 will go ahead and make the changes in line with some of
12:00:25 the issues that wave seen and bring those forward.
12:00:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I, Mr. Chairman?
12:00:32 >> You are going to bring that forward?
12:00:34 >>JULIA COLE: We'll just go ahead and process some
12:00:36 changes to discuss it and maybe bring that back on a
12:00:39 workshop agenda.
12:00:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: There are specific items on that
12:00:43 point and the people from Channelside towers.
12:00:45 >>JULIA COLE: We think there's some value in looking
12:00:50 at some of these issues, so why don't we go ahead and
12:00:53 plan to have this brought back on a workshop agenda, if
12:00:56 you would like that today, or go ahead and process that
12:01:00 and put it on a workshop agenda.
12:01:02 >> Please put it on a workshop agenda.
12:01:04 Do we need to make a motion to that effect?
12:01:07 On the workshop agenda?
12:01:08 Move to put it in the July workshop agenda.
12:01:20 Move to put this on the August workshop agenda.
12:01:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
12:01:25 Do we have a second?
12:01:27 Moved and seconded that we place this on the August
12:01:30 workshop agenda.
12:01:31 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
12:01:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's incumbent upon me to bring to
12:01:37 council's attention, the noon hour.
12:01:40 According to council's rules --
12:01:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You are doing your job.
12:01:43 I am trying to get the chief out of here while
12:01:45 councilman Miranda is still here.
12:01:48 Chief, do you want to come up?
12:01:49 Item number 4.
12:01:55 >> Tom Forward, fire chief Tampa.
12:01:58 To provide clarity on item 4 concerning the memorandum
12:02:01 of understanding for the Tampa Fire Rescue partnership
12:02:04 academy and the City of Tampa Tampa Bay workforce
12:02:06 alliance and the school board of Hillsborough County,
12:02:09 that has been a very good and beneficial collaborative
12:02:12 between the City of Tampa, Tampa Fire Rescue,
12:02:14 Hillsborough County schools, with the technical center
12:02:18 and the Tampa Bay workforce alliance.
12:02:20 We provide City of Tampa, Tampa fire provides the
12:02:23 resources, the equipment, and the facilities for this
12:02:28 collaborative to ensue, and it impacts those persons
12:02:31 within our community who are underserved or who
12:02:35 wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity to go to
12:02:37 school, identified as being possible candidates to be
12:02:41 fire rescue personnel.
12:02:44 Other than just the equipment, other than the
12:02:46 facilities, and other than some of the gear that we
12:02:50 provide these students really decreases their impact
12:02:53 out of their funds that they wouldn't otherwise have.
12:02:56 That's been a collaborative.
12:02:58 And we are looking at the resolution.
12:03:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The only reason I pulled this, I
12:03:04 understand we don't get the funds directly.
12:03:06 >> Not directly.
12:03:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So that means that no matter who,
12:03:10 what, when or where, we talk about saving money and
12:03:14 this, but now you have all these -- and I'm not talking
12:03:18 about these entities, I'm talking about, chief,
12:03:20 entities in general.
12:03:21 They get a chunk of something that they got.
12:03:25 And certainly I have heard individuals to get an
12:03:32 opportunity like where I come and possibly others.
12:03:34 So what I'm saying is, I don't quite understand why we
12:03:37 have to have a standard that we ourselves can't apply
12:03:41 for a grant and do the same thing without these
12:03:44 entities involved.
12:03:45 So I don't like, as I said earlier I was cheap.
12:03:52 I'm not cheap.
12:03:53 I'm frugal.
12:03:54 I don't like to spend my money and the taxpayers money
12:03:57 and somebody take a chunk of it to run an operation,
12:04:00 any operation, without that full money going to what
12:04:03 exactly you said, helping somebody up the ladder so
12:04:05 that they in turn can help someone else.
12:04:08 >>> If I can clarify, councilman Miranda, what happens
12:04:13 single-family the workforce alliance --
12:04:16 >> I'm not talking about them.
12:04:17 I know that's in the ordinance but I'm not talking
12:04:19 about them.
12:04:20 >>> Learey technical center.
12:04:21 Learey technical center does pay funds for the use of
12:04:26 our facilities, the use of our engines, the fire
12:04:30 engines, and so that money does come back and it comes
12:04:34 in and goes into the general fund, so they do pay for
12:04:44 using those facilities, and those things.
12:04:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Have somebody else move it.
12:04:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Move the resolution.
12:04:55 >> Second.
12:04:55 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda voting no and
12:05:00 Mulhern being absent.
12:05:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll take up 73.
12:05:03 Is there anyone from the Planning Commission?
12:05:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: She's been here.
12:05:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We'll take you up first thing at 1:30.
12:05:12 Legalities do 73.
12:05:20 Go ahead.
12:05:28 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
12:05:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you very much for your
12:05:35 Is the city transportation department going to look at
12:05:38 the creation of city-wide safe streets to ride
12:05:46 >> Yes.
12:05:47 We were here on a prior motion, and as we explained, we
12:05:49 are going to be taking a look at that through the
12:05:52 master plan we are working on, through that master plan
12:05:59 one of our tasks will be to take a look at that
12:06:02 commuting ask that you made previously.
12:06:03 >> Thank you.
12:06:04 In the last two years, the city of Miami went from
12:06:09 Tampa which is on the top ten dangerous cities to the
12:06:12 list of the top ten safe cities for bicycling.
12:06:15 So it's possible to be do this and lie forward to us
12:06:20 doing this.
12:06:21 Can you give us a sense of the time frame after we
12:06:23 applied to the MPO, when we get the money, when the
12:06:25 study is done?
12:06:27 Will this be a year and a half project?
12:06:28 >> We are going to come back in 120 days to give you a
12:06:32 status of where we are with that matching plan, and
12:06:35 through the master plan and through the new TCA
12:06:38 procedures that we are getting ready to adopt, it came
12:06:41 out of our comprehensive plan, we are looking to those
12:06:46 two sources either or development to give us
12:06:51 opportunities for provisions to become realities.
12:06:54 I don't have a set time line.
12:06:56 I can just say that between our TCA procedures and now
12:06:59 having a master plan for focusing our resources on
12:07:03 where we want those projects to occur, that we will
12:07:06 start seeing more improvements in terms of bicycle
12:07:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
12:07:13 That wasn't clear.
12:07:14 I really want something crystal.
12:07:16 We can talk more and maybe you will be able to give
12:07:18 that to me in a few months.
12:07:20 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We stand in recess till 1:30.
12:07:22 Thank you.
12:07:22 (The meeting recessed at 12:07 p.m.)
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon
for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
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.
TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
Thursday, May 20, 2010
1:30 p.m. session
The following represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon
for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
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.
[ Roll Call ]
13:32:52 >>CHAIRMAN SCOTT: We are going to take up where we
13:32:56 left off.
13:32:57 Councilman, I received a call from the mayor's office
13:33:01 from Mr. Smith.
13:33:02 Later on in the agenda the administration will come
13:33:04 over and brief us on action we can take relative to own
13:33:11 ovation of a historic building and will brief us for
13:33:15 about ten minutes.
13:33:16 I just wanted you to be aware of that.
13:33:20 I don't have all the specific details, okay?
13:33:24 Planning Commission.
13:33:24 >> Good afternoon.
13:33:31 I'm not sure how to work your PowerPoint.
13:33:35 If someone can turn that on.
13:33:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's on.
13:33:39 >> It's on?
13:33:43 And I apologize again.
13:33:48 My technical support didn't come with me this time.
13:33:54 Does anyone know how to advance?
13:33:56 Suzy Derringer, Planning Commission staff.
13:33:58 I'm here to tell you about the redistricting process
13:34:01 for the City Council.
13:34:01 It's done every four years.
13:34:03 Because population growth over time distorts the
13:34:07 single-member districts.
13:34:09 And our goal is to create districts that have as nearly
13:34:12 equal as possible population, without causing any
13:34:17 decrease in the minority population within a district.
13:34:26 From my perspective it's nearly a mathematical
13:34:29 exercise, for the staff to create alternatives by
13:34:31 moving entire precincts from one district to another to
13:34:34 try to balance out that population.
13:34:35 We want to make sure the districts remain contiguous
13:34:38 and compact, and we consciously make as minimum changes
13:34:42 as possible.
13:34:43 As a matter of fact, this time there were only five
13:34:46 precincts that we moved, and we would never move a
13:34:50 precinct that houses an incumbent so none of you would
13:34:53 ever be moved to another district.
13:34:58 We did a lot of public outreach.
13:35:00 We took five different alternatives to the public.
13:35:02 We went well above and beyond the required one public
13:35:05 We held five workshops throughout the city, one in each
13:35:09 We held a display in the downtown farmers market, and
13:35:12 then we had the public hearing on March 8th, which
13:35:15 was well in advance of the required April 1st
13:35:18 deadline, in case there were any changes that needed to
13:35:20 be made.
13:35:21 We still had plenty of time to make adjustments.
13:35:25 All the meetings were advertised in the "The Tampa
13:35:27 Tribune," La Gaceta and the Florida Sentinel Bulletin.
13:35:30 We sent letters to all the registered neighborhood
13:35:32 associations in the city.
13:35:34 I personally did a radio interview with WMNS and there
13:35:39 were three newspaper articles written about the
13:35:42 redistricting process, two in the Tribune and one in
13:35:44 the La Gaceta.
13:35:46 The role of the Planning Commission is to recommend and
13:35:50 approve a redistricting plan based on staff
13:35:54 recommendation, and public comment.
13:35:57 So they combined my mathematical exercise with public
13:36:00 comment, and they then choose which alternatives best
13:36:03 serves everyone.
13:36:06 Once that's completed, it is a supervisor of elections
13:36:08 that proclaims the district, and every redistricting
13:36:14 plan has to be recleared by the Department of Justice
13:36:17 as well.
13:36:20 In summary, this process eliminates any appearance of
13:36:23 political bias.
13:36:25 It frees City Council members from any accusation of
13:36:30 benefiting from these changes.
13:36:31 As a matter of fact, at our first public workshop, a
13:36:34 gentleman questioned me, a concern about Jerry
13:36:38 meandering, and I said this is being role model for
13:36:42 There can't be any jerrymandering, that the City
13:36:46 Council has no influence over how these alternatives
13:36:48 are developed.
13:36:53 And remember this is only point out, this affects one
13:36:56 It's done every four years.
13:36:58 Sewn so again we will be redistricting four years
13:37:01 before your next election.
13:37:02 There has never been an issue with the outcome in over
13:37:05 30 years.
13:37:05 I spoke to a supervisor of elections staff who has been
13:37:09 here over 30 years and he assured me there's never been
13:37:13 a problem with the outcome, always been precleared by
13:37:15 the Department of Justice, and everyone is very pleased
13:37:17 with the process.
13:37:19 So that's all I was here to tell but today.
13:37:21 If you have any questions about the process or the
13:37:23 outcome, I would be happy to answer them.
13:37:25 >> I know what the county commission, every ten years,.
13:37:35 >> I'll let your attorney answer why but it's based on
13:37:38 the law.
13:37:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: On law in the city ordinance or the
13:37:43 , special act?
13:37:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe it's a special act,
13:37:50 Mr. Chairman.
13:37:50 It appears to be a special act.
13:37:52 Section 8.3 of your related laws of the city charter
13:37:58 which were enacted by special act does says in the year
13:38:02 immediately preceding the year in which elections shall
13:38:04 be held for election to various offices to city
13:38:07 officials but no later than April 1st of the
13:38:10 preceding year and goes on to the Hillsborough County,
13:38:13 city-Planning Commission.
13:38:14 >> you said there were several meetings held.
13:38:25 Can you tell me what the attendance was like?
13:38:27 >> One meeting had one attendant.
13:38:29 Another had at least 30.
13:38:32 It did vary.
13:38:32 We held one meeting on a weekend.
13:38:34 All the rest were held in the evenings at regional
13:38:37 general libraries, Jan Platt, College Hills, wherever
13:38:42 we went when you showed up at the meetings.
13:38:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may, Mr. Chairman, the one was
13:38:53 at Barksdale senior center, and I think there were six
13:38:56 or seven participants.
13:38:58 The media was there.
13:38:59 And I think I gained a few people in the shift in the
13:39:05 population because other areas have grown more populace
13:39:08 than district six.
13:39:09 So district six had a pickup, too.
13:39:20 A precinct.
13:39:21 I think it was 243 if my memory serves me correct.
13:39:25 >> That's good, yes.
13:39:27 >> I'm great on numbers but not on names.
13:39:29 I remember that and I had no qualms with it.
13:39:31 It was advertised in the paper.
13:39:33 Just like we advertise things in the paper, and the
13:39:36 public either sees it or doesn't see it, but that's the
13:39:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Which of the different proposals
13:39:45 was the final one?
13:39:47 We got your materials.
13:39:48 >> There were five alternatives.
13:39:51 Alternative 3 was the staff recommendation, because of
13:39:53 the map.
13:39:55 It had a minimal change and it has the closest to legal
13:39:59 possible population in each district.
13:40:01 And that was the one the Planning Commission chose.
13:40:03 Thank you.
13:40:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can tell even tell you where 243
13:40:13 is at.
13:40:16 It was by Mr. Caetano, I believe, the one on Sligh, the
13:40:21 1912 sitting on the front porch there, where the Police
13:40:25 Benevolent Association meets, I think.
13:40:37 Every time I hit he hit a ball he would hit a home run
13:40:41 so I don't forget that area.
13:40:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?
13:41:06 Item 75 was sent back to council.
13:41:19 Item 75, after-school.
13:41:22 Item 75.
13:41:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That was the one we had discussed --
13:41:29 I'm sorry.
13:41:30 That is the one we discussed earlier this morning.
13:41:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We did that and asked to hold the item
13:41:39 to talk about it, I guess.
13:41:40 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't know that we were, you know,
13:41:43 councilman Caetano had asked for reconsideration, but
13:41:47 it turns out he had voted with the majority, so I just
13:41:52 wanted to say I don't know if anyone else was going to
13:41:56 bring it up to have a revote or not.
13:41:59 It doesn't seem like it.
13:42:01 So what I wanted to make council aware, but you have
13:42:07 probably all seen this, but we got last night an
13:42:10 executive order from the mayor stating that she was
13:42:15 authorizing funding for all children in after school
13:42:22 and several programs who needed assistance.
13:42:24 So I want to thank the mayor for doing that, but I
13:42:31 think really council should be thanked, because it
13:42:34 happened because we listened to our constituents, and
13:42:39 to the parents and the teachers and the police who said
13:42:43 that this was a problem and we needed to fix it.
13:42:46 And I also wanted to point out that while this is a
13:42:52 promise which I trust will happen, I have spoken with
13:42:59 Karen Palus, and she is going to provide us the data to
13:43:03 show that the people who were turned away are actually
13:43:10 So that's going to have to happen at the end of the
13:43:12 summer, for the summer programs, and probably in the
13:43:18 fall next year for the after-school programs.
13:43:21 But I just want to point out that by council taking
13:43:26 this up -- and I'm sorry, Mr. Miranda, I had to go
13:43:31 because I had a sick kid at home and I had to take my
13:43:34 turn with him but I was watching on TV and I would have
13:43:36 supported you on that council meeting to say when we
13:43:39 are going to raise fees.
13:43:41 And that's our job.
13:43:43 And I think, you know, we took it seriously, and the
13:43:47 threat that we were going to roll back those fees is
13:43:49 what caused the mayor to make this commitment.
13:43:52 And I know she has a great commitment to East Tampa,
13:43:55 and she always has.
13:43:57 I trust that this is going to be fixed, trust but
13:44:02 verify like Reagan and everybody likes to say, but
13:44:06 that's what we like to do is verify that it gets fixed.
13:44:09 It's troubling because some of the programs that were
13:44:13 cut, or that lost attendance, their centers are
13:44:20 probably going to be closed, so we need to watch and
13:44:22 see if that would be an appropriate step to take.
13:44:25 So I just want to point out that we are listening to
13:44:31 We are watching out for them.
13:44:32 And I think that this raising these fees was not a wise
13:44:40 decision, even from a purely financial standpoint,
13:44:44 because the burden, you know, leaving children nowhere
13:44:50 to go comes back to the costs that we have in crime and
13:44:54 other problems in the community.
13:44:55 So I think we need to really keep our eye on what's
13:44:58 happening with this, and I'm going to do that.
13:45:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would ask to come forward to speak
13:45:07 to the ordinance.
13:45:08 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.
13:45:10 The last regular City Council meeting, there was a
13:45:13 motion that our office draft an ordinance that would
13:45:18 authorize financial assistance program that had the
13:45:22 difference in what was in the resolution and have a
13:45:24 quarterly reporting period back to council on what is
13:45:32 implemented and the results and I have that prepared
13:45:34 and can distribute that to council for your
13:45:36 consideration as well.
13:45:38 That's consistent with what I believe the mayor did
13:45:40 through her executive order in this process we have
13:45:41 been going through to have a financial assistance
13:45:43 program for disadvantaged youth within the city.
13:45:47 What it does do is make sure that you all are updated
13:45:50 periodically as to how that is occurring, the
13:45:53 technology being used, any changes in that technology
13:45:56 that might occur in time to make sure that we are
13:45:59 including everyone that needs to be included.
13:46:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I think you can go ahead and
13:46:04 pass it out for council.
13:46:05 My only concern is we haven't had a chance to review it
13:46:08 to know details so I don't think we want to take any
13:46:11 action today but at least we can review it and agenda
13:46:14 it before we take action on it.
13:46:18 That would be my suggestion.
13:46:21 Thank you.
13:46:21 >>MARY MULHERN: I'll make that as a motion.
13:46:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
13:46:32 Mr. Chairman, you know, this is a lot more than about
13:46:35 It's about seniors.
13:46:36 It's about individuals who are solely on Social
13:46:40 It's about individuals who we all think getting a
13:46:46 Social Security check is over 2,000 or the basic limit.
13:46:49 But a lot of citizens don't get that.
13:46:50 They get under $1,000 a month the basic, the same needs
13:46:54 and necessities that you and I have.
13:46:56 And some of these programs are $15, and 250 session,
13:47:05 and somewhere else the same program in the city is
13:47:08 Well, you say that's a dollar, that doesn't mean much.
13:47:10 Well, it doesn't mean much maybe to you and I but it
13:47:14 means much to the individual who doesn't have it.
13:47:17 So I would like to see if we can get -- and I know they
13:47:20 said they will give us a report every 30 days -- on how
13:47:23 many of these were in classes prior to the change of
13:47:30 this ordinance.
13:47:31 They say that they are full in some capacities.
13:47:34 I believe that.
13:47:36 But I would like to see numbers, because I pass by some
13:47:41 these collections, and I don't recall the numbers that
13:47:44 they are telling me of great success being there.
13:47:49 And the seniors.
13:47:51 So what I'm saying is if we could get a report back on
13:48:00 why the fees are different between one center and
13:48:02 another center that does the same thing, whether it's
13:48:05 art or dancing or whatever the fee may be.
13:48:07 So I would like to propose a question for us to ask
13:48:10 them, so-so they can give us a report to see who are
13:48:14 the volunteers and what the different charges are for
13:48:16 the same program that they offer, and why does it
13:48:23 And how many they had before and how many they have
13:48:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You include in that the motion?
13:48:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, sir.
13:48:38 >>MARY MULHERN: That one motion.
13:48:39 So I wanted to say, council, Mr. Miranda, that it took
13:48:42 from -- I don't know when we started questioning
13:48:44 this -- January, and I still haven't gotten the numbers
13:48:48 I was asking for, for the school-age program.
13:48:52 So I think add your request to the motion, but I think
13:48:57 you are going to have to write it down and tell us
13:49:02 exactly what you want if you want to get any data back,
13:49:04 which is what I hope I finally accomplish with Ms.
13:49:08 Palus this week.
13:49:09 So tell her what you need and write it down.
13:49:13 >> I think I will do one better.
13:49:16 I will go to the center and ask the participants.
13:49:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Do your own research.
13:49:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to say in defense of
13:49:25 Karen Palus, she said from the get-go that nobody would
13:49:29 be turned away because they couldn't pay.
13:49:31 And the executive order memorializes that.
13:49:34 She told us that from the beginning.
13:49:36 I think that what we are doing today is useful.
13:49:39 But I also know that part of the drop in some of the
13:49:46 classes was people had been able to have their kids go
13:49:51 to the centers and participate, and now there's much
13:49:53 more formalized, computer-driven registration process,
13:49:57 and I think that was offsetting -- offputting to
13:50:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, thank you very much.
13:50:03 I met with Ms. Karen Palus, also, as well, this week,
13:50:09 and the numbers, I think you got the numbers as well on
13:50:14 how many are registered thus far, and also the issue
13:50:23 that child is registered and I think is going to
13:50:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't get the numbers, but I -- I
13:50:30 got some numbers from her, but the numbers that we need
13:50:33 to see that the attendance is back up is really the
13:50:36 only thing that's going to show us that there's enough
13:50:39 aid that people are able to get it.
13:50:41 So that's what I want to see.
13:50:43 We didn't get that for the after-school programs.
13:50:46 If they can show me that oar they are going to have to
13:50:51 show us that next year because she gave us the numbers.
13:50:53 We saw them a month ago.
13:50:55 They were really bad.
13:50:56 They were down like 60, 65%.
13:50:58 So all I'm saying is you can promise, and you can make
13:51:02 your best effort, but we have to see the results.
13:51:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion on the floor been
13:51:06 moved and seconded.
13:51:07 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
13:51:13 We will move -- we have one other item I think on our
13:51:16 morning, item 70.
13:51:19 Let's move to the afternoon agenda.
13:51:21 That completes most of our morning stuff except for
13:51:24 So move to our 1:30 item.
13:51:26 Item 76.
13:51:31 Let's go ahead and open the public hearings and swear
13:51:33 everybody in.
13:51:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved, 76 through 83.
13:51:37 >> Second.
13:51:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
13:51:40 If you are going to address council, please stand and
13:51:43 be sworn at this time.
13:51:44 (Oath administered by Clerk)
13:51:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, I ask that all written
13:51:53 communication written to today's hearings which have
13:51:55 been available for public inspection at City Council's
13:51:57 office be received and filed into the record at this
13:51:58 time by motion, please.
13:51:59 >> So moved.
13:52:02 >> Second.
13:52:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
13:52:04 All in favor?
13:52:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Secondly if you have had any ex parte
13:52:08 communication, with any petitioner or any member of the
13:52:10 public in connection with any of today's hearings,
13:52:12 please disclose that prior to taking action.
13:52:15 Finally, ladies and gentlemen, there is a sign-up sheet
13:52:18 out side.
13:52:18 Please do sign it to make sure that we can memorialize
13:52:21 the fact that we have your name when you do speak.
13:52:24 If you can, state your name.
13:52:26 We would appreciate that.
13:52:27 Thank you.
13:52:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 76.
13:52:29 Yes, sir.
13:52:29 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We respectfully are requesting a
13:52:32 continuance to June 24th at 10 a.m. for item
13:52:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Continuance.
13:52:44 Anyone here who wants to address council on the
13:52:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That headquarter said I move to
13:52:52 continue to June 24, 2:10 -- at 10 a.m.
13:52:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's your discretion.
13:53:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: There's no one here so maybe in the
13:53:06 morning we'll have better success.
13:53:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?
13:53:10 >> Second.
13:53:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
13:53:12 All in favor?
13:53:15 >>STEVE MICHELINI: Thank you very much, council.
13:53:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
13:53:17 Item 77, request to withdraw from the petition.
13:53:22 Item 77.
13:53:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: With no other action taken I move
13:53:29 to allow forthwith drawl of item number 77.
13:53:33 >> Second.
13:53:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
13:53:38 Item 78.
13:53:39 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
13:53:54 Item 78 on your agenda this afternoon is V-10-43
13:53:58 located at 200 east Madison.
13:54:01 It is a special use request for alcoholic beverage
13:54:03 sales of 4(COP-R).
13:54:07 There are three waivers associated with this request
13:54:09 this afternoon, one to reduce minimum separation from
13:54:14 other establishments selling alcohol from 1,000 feet to
13:54:17 21 feet.
13:54:19 The second is to reduce minimum distance separation
13:54:21 from is thousand feet to 548 feet for residential uses.
13:54:25 The last is to reduce the required minimum sis distance
13:54:28 separation from 1,000 feet to 115 feet for
13:54:31 institutional uses.
13:54:35 The applicant is requesting a 4(COP-R), which is beer,
13:54:39 wine and liquor for consumption on premises only, and
13:54:42 according to the application the existing restaurant
13:54:45 use on the site is a restaurant.
13:54:47 The site contains 5,722 feet, and the total area under
13:54:51 the request this afternoon is 2005 square feet.
13:54:56 The proposed special use will be contained within the
13:54:58 first floor of the structure and there is no outdoor
13:55:01 area proposed.
13:55:02 This is located within the central business district.
13:55:04 And I'll quickly show you where it is.
13:55:06 1,000-foot radius. Madison, Tampa Street, Franklin
13:55:29 The property is at the northeast corner of Madison and
13:55:36 Tampa Street.
13:55:44 A little closer, used to be the French restaurant, now
13:55:50 cantina, directly located next to Pita's cafe.
13:55:55 Gaslight park to the south.
13:56:00 And various other uses.
13:56:03 Around the property.
13:56:05 I think you are pretty familiar with where this area is
13:56:07 so I don't want to necessarily belabor the
13:56:12 Staff found the application consistent.
13:56:14 There are no modifications needed in between first and
13:56:17 second reading.
13:56:18 And we are available if you have any questions.
13:56:28 >> Officer Don mill we are City of Tampa police
13:56:31 City of Tampa police department has no objection to
13:56:32 this special use 2 petition.
13:56:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
13:56:38 >> We are just requesting the wet zoning.
13:56:45 Chris RIVAS.
13:56:49 People requested beer, alcohol, liquor.
13:56:52 A lot of people leave.
13:56:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here to speak on this petition?
13:56:57 Anyone in opposition to this petition?
13:56:59 >> Move to close.
13:57:02 >> Second.
13:57:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
13:57:07 Councilman Miranda.
13:57:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
13:57:12 Move an ordinance for first reading.
13:57:18 An ordinance adopting and approving a special use
13:57:20 permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales, small venue
13:57:24 making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol
13:57:26 regardless of alcohol content, beer, wine and liquor
13:57:29 4(COP-R) for consumption off premises only in
13:57:31 connection with a restaurant business establishment at
13:57:35 or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located
13:57:37 at 200 east Madison street, Tampa, Florida as more
13:57:40 particularly described in sections 2 therefore imposing
13:57:44 certain conditions based upon the location of the
13:57:45 property, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
13:57:49 conflict, providing for severability.
13:57:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion and second.
13:57:55 All in favor?
13:57:56 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena being
13:57:58 absent at vote.
13:57:59 Second reading and adoption will be on June 3rd,
13:58:02 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
13:58:04 >> June 3rd at 9:30.
13:58:08 Thank you very much.
13:58:09 Item 79 cannot be heard.
13:58:11 >> Remove it from the agenda, please.
13:58:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
13:58:16 >> Second.
13:58:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
13:58:18 Thank you.
13:58:19 Item 80.
13:58:50 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
13:58:52 Item 80 on your agenda this afternoon is V-10-182
13:58:56 located at 1327 East 7th Avenue.
13:59:00 This is the old furniture building for those of you who
13:59:05 are trying to position yourself on 7th Avenue.
13:59:07 The request before you this afternoon is for a 4(COP).
13:59:13 It's actually going to be for a 4(COP-X).
13:59:17 Staff received an e-mail yesterday afternoon from
13:59:19 Mr. Bentley, the agent for the petitioner, requesting
13:59:22 that this be placed back at the 4(COP-X) which is what
13:59:27 the application originally came in at.
13:59:30 Let me go ahead through my presentation and then I will
13:59:32 go back through the staff report to strike those items
13:59:34 that won no longer be related to this request.
13:59:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Remind us the difference of the X
13:59:41 and the no X, please.
13:59:43 >>> The X does not allow for package sales.
13:59:46 No X would allow for package sales on the property.
13:59:48 I believe it was the petitioner's intent to have a
13:59:51 portion of this site be allowed for package sales, but
13:59:54 as of yesterday afternoon that intent has changed and
13:59:58 there is no longer a cop 4 package sale associated with
14:00:03 this request.
14:00:04 There are waivers associated with the request.
14:00:08 All separation waivers, the first to reduce from 1,000
14:00:12 feet to 64 feet, for other establishments selling
14:00:14 alcoholic beverages.
14:00:16 The second to reduce from 1,000 feet to 835 feet for
14:00:19 residential uses.
14:00:21 And the last two, reduce the separation from 1,000 fate
14:00:26 to 630 feet for institutional uses.
14:00:39 Briefly I will show you the southwest corner of 7th
14:00:41 and 14th.
14:00:43 You know the Hart trolley barn is over to your west.
14:00:46 Hampton INN, and the old furniture building and we are
14:00:53 talking about the unit here.
14:00:54 It is a two-story request.
14:00:59 It would be for the first and second floors.
14:01:02 When we were out there, they were under renovation.
14:01:07 This is looking south on 14th.
14:01:09 And there is an alley behind the property.
14:01:17 According to the application, the proposed use is for
14:01:20 restaurant and retail sales.
14:01:22 The site contains 6,650 square feet.
14:01:25 The area under this request is 12,023 square feet.
14:01:29 As I mentioned two floors.
14:01:31 6,592 square feet on the first floor, and 5,431 square
14:01:36 feet on the second floor.
14:01:38 The site is located in YC-1 and parking is not
14:01:47 I did provide you with a revision sheet, and that
14:01:50 revision sheet should reflect the correspondence that
14:01:53 staff received in relation from the 4(COP) to the
14:01:58 Originally, we were asking for the site plan to be
14:02:02 modified to a 4(COP) that will no longer be necessary
14:02:06 as it's keeping the 4(COP-X).
14:02:08 We did ask them to remove note number 12 as it is
14:02:11 irrelevant, and we do want that to continue to be
14:02:16 New Hampshire prior e-mail received by staff on May
14:02:19 5th, there was a request for a self-imposed
14:02:22 condition that alcoholic sales on the premises would
14:02:25 not be in association with a bar or a lounge.
14:02:28 In response to that e-mail, staff is requesting that a
14:02:31 note be added to the site plan stating that alcoholic
14:02:33 beverage sales shall not be associated with a bar or
14:02:37 lounge on the premises.
14:02:41 On page 2 of your report, that fourth bullet talks
14:02:44 about in relation to the package sales, since there
14:02:47 will no longer be any package sales on the site, that's
14:02:50 no longer -- revision is no longer necessary.
14:02:53 The last thing is that the current site plan showed
14:02:56 occupancy on this property at less than 299.
14:03:01 Based on discussions with the fire marshal and given
14:03:04 the square footage of the request before you, we wanted
14:03:08 that changed because the occupancy will in fact exceed
14:03:14 We would like the site plan changed to show the
14:03:17 occupancy will be greater than 299.
14:03:21 Also as you may know for venues of that size if you do
14:03:24 not have a full kitchen there are other requirements
14:03:26 that are associated with that.
14:03:28 So we are asking that the note be added that this site
14:03:31 will in fact have a full kitchen in order to meet the
14:03:33 requirements of a large venue.
14:03:38 Staff is available for any questions.
14:03:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mr. Dingfelder, Councilwoman Mulhern.
14:03:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: On your site plan, I see less than
14:03:47 299 but you are saying perhaps more than 299.
14:03:50 >> Yes.
14:03:51 That is one of the revisions we are requesting be made
14:03:53 between first and second reading.
14:03:56 Staff discussed that with Mr. Bentley.
14:03:58 I believe that he acknowledges that.
14:04:00 >> It speaks to 125 seats.
14:04:02 So everybody else stands up and eats?
14:04:05 How does that work?
14:04:07 >>> Not exactly sure.
14:04:09 I did check the permit records for the property to see
14:04:11 if any permits were pulled for enter your so that I
14:04:14 could check these numbers.
14:04:15 I couldn't.
14:04:16 What my fear was, was that they would go in under the
14:04:21 299 as a small venue, and once they finished their
14:04:24 enter your work that it would exceed that.
14:04:26 So in order to take care of any discrepancies between
14:04:30 occupancy with their alcohol and their offices, issues
14:04:34 with the fire marshal, we acknowledged that should be
14:04:38 listed greater than 299.
14:04:39 >> So what's the point on the seat issue?
14:04:42 A parking issue?
14:04:43 >> No, because in the YC-1 there isn't any parking.
14:04:46 Seats isn't really necessary.
14:04:48 They could take that off the plan.
14:04:50 As long as the occupancy is showing as the greater than
14:04:52 the 299 we would be fine.
14:04:54 All that's going to need is to meet building code and
14:04:57 fire inspection.
14:04:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that answered my first
14:05:03 But it doesn't kind of make sense to me that you would
14:05:06 modify the site plan to show occupancy of more than
14:05:16 >> Life safety code, what they do is actually take the
14:05:19 floor plan of the building and break it down by
14:05:21 different square footages.
14:05:23 Kitchen area gets so many per square foot, storage area
14:05:27 so many persons per square foot, you come up with a
14:05:29 total occupancy for all square footage.
14:05:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Where is the --
14:05:35 >>> The life safety calculation?
14:05:38 That hasn't been required and we don't require that as
14:05:40 part of the special use.
14:05:41 >>MARY MULHERN: So the lower number was to make us
14:05:47 feel better, but now the higher number that isn't even
14:05:53 a maximum doesn't really mean anything.
14:05:55 I mean, I don't even know why you would put that in
14:05:58 >>> Alcoholic beverage is categorized as a small venue
14:06:02 or large venue, and the trigger is to occupancy, in our
14:06:05 >> So this is large venue and it has -- large venue has
14:06:10 different restrictions?
14:06:11 >> Yes.
14:06:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Does that mean there are limits?
14:06:16 Where are those occupancy limits?
14:06:17 >>> There are not occupancy limits.
14:06:20 How you are categorize goes based on your occupancy.
14:06:23 With 299 or less you are a small venue and your
14:06:27 criteria are different.
14:06:28 If you are greater than 300 your criteria are
14:06:30 different, especially --
14:06:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, so it's in our code, our fire
14:06:35 >>> It's in our zoning code, in chapter --
14:06:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Right, but I mean the protection of
14:06:40 not having too many people in any particular venue --
14:06:45 >>> Falls back to the fire.
14:06:47 >>MARY MULHERN: On the fire.
14:06:48 So it would be helpful to know what that is.
14:06:50 Then my other question is, this seems odd to me, too.
14:06:54 Alcoholic beverage has a note on the site plan,
14:06:58 alcoholic beverage sales shall not be associated with
14:07:00 the bar-lounge use on the premises.
14:07:03 We are not giving them -- well, this is a restaurant
14:07:09 special use permit, right?
14:07:11 >>> No.
14:07:12 This is not an R.
14:07:14 It's an X.
14:07:15 And that's why I think they are willing to impose that
14:07:18 condition on themselves that they will not be a bar.
14:07:20 >> How is that going to be enforced?
14:07:23 If we are giving them the zoning.
14:07:25 >>ABBYE FEELEY: And their current use on that property
14:07:29 is not a bar or lounge so they would have to go through
14:07:31 change of use, I believe, in order to legally establish
14:07:34 a bar or lounge on that property.
14:07:36 And at that time you would see in our system that the
14:07:39 alcohol-food cannot be associated to a bar-lounge.
14:07:47 >> Than seems backward to me. Why aren't they asking
14:07:49 for the zoning first?
14:07:50 They are asking us to give them the right to special
14:07:53 use permit to sell alcohol when they don't have this
14:07:57 zoning to do it.
14:07:59 I don't know.
14:08:00 I don't know what that -- putting that on the site
14:08:03 plan, how do you enforce that?
14:08:07 A note on the site plan.
14:08:08 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
14:08:15 I am going to try and help.
14:08:17 It's up to the applicant to explain why he chose this
14:08:21 But by allowing the 4(COP-X) as opposed to a 4(COP-R),
14:08:27 they are allowed alcohol sales with any underlying use
14:08:32 that's allowed under their zoning code.
14:08:34 It doesn't Virginia to be a restaurant.
14:08:35 It could be any number of allowable uses.
14:08:39 I believe because there may be some concerns that then
14:08:43 won turn into an allowable bar and lounge, where the
14:08:48 sale of alcohol is not incidental to anything, in fact
14:08:51 it's the primary use, they put that condition on there.
14:08:54 So they are allowed to be anything as long as the sell
14:08:59 of alcoholic beverages is incidental to the primary use
14:09:04 that's allowed under the zoning code.
14:09:07 Does that help?
14:09:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess we got to hear from the
14:09:13 Because if you are not a restaurant, you are not
14:09:14 selling package, you are selling drinks, you are a bar
14:09:20 or lounge.
14:09:21 I don't know how -- and then you write in there this
14:09:24 can't be a bar or lounge.
14:09:25 Doesn't make sense to me.
14:09:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm only taking the assumption that
14:09:33 they don't want to do the R because of the vicinity to
14:09:36 events on the street and historical things that happen
14:09:39 there during many holiday.
14:09:42 So I'm making another assumption that they feel that
14:09:45 some months they may not be able to meet the criteria
14:09:49 of the "R," so therefore they want the X's, so they
14:09:52 have extra protection so they don't violate the law.
14:09:57 That's what I'm thinking.
14:09:58 I don't know what petitioner is going to say but that's
14:10:00 the only thing I can think of.
14:10:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Officer Miller?
14:10:04 >> Tampa Police Department has no objections.
14:10:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
14:10:33 >> Bear with me a second.
14:10:35 Don't start the meter on that.
14:10:37 >> We charge.
14:10:39 We charge.
14:11:07 >>MARK BENTLEY: There's some menus.
14:11:08 >> Do you want these back afterwards?
14:11:13 My name is Mark Bentley, 201 North Franklin Street
14:11:33 representing applicant Ybor properties.
14:11:35 Just to address one of the issues right up front in
14:11:37 terms of capacity is the space is 6,000 square feet,
14:11:42 roughly the size of a 7-Eleven.
14:11:44 So I guess the fire department, they do these
14:11:47 calculations, potential capacity in terms of sprinkling
14:11:50 or whatever.
14:11:51 But that's not going to happen.
14:11:53 The intent here is max about 150 people.
14:11:57 We are also pursuing out side cafe and one on the
14:12:01 And I guess the significance, too, if you are a large
14:12:03 venue, then you are required to have a full kitchen,
14:12:07 which we have agreed to.
14:12:09 So from our perspective, it's not going to be 300.
14:12:13 We are going to have a full kitchen.
14:12:15 But that aside, this property is located on the
14:12:20 southwest corner of Republica de Cuba and 7th
14:12:24 Avenue. It was constructed in 1905, adjacent to the
14:12:27 Badcock building which is undergoing major renovation,
14:12:31 owned by Alan Kahana and Joe Capitano, and I'll talk
14:12:34 about that in a second.
14:12:35 Before I get started, Ybor properties, the principals
14:12:39 are Brian Schaefer and Ryan Clements.
14:12:42 And a lot of times in front of City Council you see
14:12:45 some speculators coming up here without any commitment,
14:12:47 they are just trying to establish a bar in Ybor City.
14:12:50 To the contrary, Brian and Ryan, they own the building,
14:12:53 and they are going to operate the business.
14:12:55 Also, they live in Ybor City with their families right
14:12:58 around the corner.
14:12:59 So not only do they have a vested interest in the
14:13:02 success of the business, likewise, the viability of
14:13:07 Ybor City.
14:13:07 These guys are very committed.
14:13:09 They have already restored the interior and exterior of
14:13:13 the building.
14:13:14 As I mentioned, the property is located directly to the
14:13:19 And I have given you a copy of, I think, a Tribune
14:13:22 article that relates to Mr. Capitano's property.
14:13:25 That has been deteriorating for who knows how long
14:13:28 because the western side of Ybor City west of 14th
14:13:31 is pretty much considered a stepchild that's been
14:13:34 ignored in terms of redevelopment.
14:13:35 Now you see Joe going in there, 22,000 square feet of
14:13:38 retail and office, and what Brian and Ryan are
14:13:41 attempting to do.
14:13:42 We believe this will be a catalyst to kind of open up
14:13:44 development opportunities on the west side of Ybor
14:13:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You mentioned 6,000 square feet.
14:13:53 Do you have --
14:13:56 >> Yes, John, that's correct.
14:13:58 So hopefully this will be a success and the opportunity
14:14:02 to expand in that space.
14:14:04 And quite honestly, this problem sees is very time
14:14:07 consuming and expensive.
14:14:10 And in anticipation of hopefully their success, we
14:14:13 wanted to cover that, John, so we are not back here in
14:14:16 a year spending five months and $20,000.
14:14:20 So if I could just show you a couple things here.
14:14:27 I guess this works.
14:14:28 This is the building before Brian and Ryan purchased it
14:14:33 here on the corner.
14:14:34 You can see it's in pretty poor condition.
14:14:36 To the left you can see Joe's building, 22,000 square
14:14:41 And here in isolation is Bryan's building.
14:14:46 And here is what Bryan has done so far which has been
14:14:48 approved by the Barrio Latino.
14:14:50 That's the exterior.
14:14:51 And Ryan.
14:14:57 Here is their property when they first bought it.
14:15:03 You can see all the graffiti and garbage, and it was
14:15:06 just really a mess.
14:15:07 And the building was in poor condition.
14:15:09 Here is after the renovation.
14:15:12 They cleaned the entire thing up, restored the brick,
14:15:14 sandblasted it.
14:15:18 There is an outside courtyard as part of the restaurant
14:15:20 cafe where you can consume alcohol.
14:15:22 Here is the interior when they first started working on
14:15:28 Mrs. Saul-Sena, I don't know if you can see that.
14:15:31 But here is the interior now.
14:15:35 I was out there for lunch today.
14:15:36 And if you are familiar with Manhattan, it's like the
14:15:40 upscale restaurant in SoHo.
14:15:44 I encourage you to go out there.
14:15:45 It's just amazing what these guys have done.
14:15:49 So what I have provided you are some draft menus for
14:16:02 the cafe restaurant.
14:16:05 And it's going to be a mixed use project.
14:16:08 The components right now are going to be office,
14:16:10 retail, actually an area to the west of the restaurant
14:16:15 right now, and then the restaurant cafe.
14:16:17 You can see on the menus they are going to serve
14:16:20 breakfast, lunch and dinner.
14:16:24 And when they floated this idea in the community, there
14:16:27 was some concern, obviously, because historically there
14:16:30 have been some problems with bars in Ybor City.
14:16:34 But actually to the contrary, some people were totally
14:16:36 indifferent and apathetic and they were just kind of
14:16:39 happy that something was going to go on in that
14:16:42 In any event, what my clients did is literally they
14:16:45 beat the pavement and knocked on doors, and solicited
14:16:50 feedback from the neighbors, and actually took them on
14:16:53 tours of the property and then they reached out to some
14:16:55 of the major stakeholders in Ybor City which as you
14:16:57 know with the historic civic association and YCDC, and
14:17:01 after some of the feedback they got, here again there
14:17:04 was this major concern that this property could
14:17:06 actually be converted into a bar, solely a bar.
14:17:11 So in working with Vince Pardo and the YCDC along with
14:17:15 input from city staff, we came up with this condition,
14:17:19 and it's pretty unique, from my understanding, and in
14:17:22 terms of an imposition of conditioning on the zoning,
14:17:25 and as Mary mentioned before, alcoholic beverage sales
14:17:30 shall not be associated with a bar, lounge use on the
14:17:35 So it could never be a bar.
14:17:39 Under your code that's as good as it gets.
14:17:42 Now, I want to talk a little more about support.
14:17:46 You have all seen a lot of wet zonings come up here and
14:17:50 get shot down and oftentimes YCDC is not in support.
14:17:55 This case is different.
14:17:57 Hopefully, got a letter of support from the chairman of
14:18:01 the YCDC.
14:18:04 So as a result of Bryan and Ryan's efforts they got
14:18:08 support from the civic association, YCDC, Joe Capitano,
14:18:12 obviously Joe's property next door which is going to be
14:18:14 retail and office.
14:18:15 If anybody is going to be adversely affected it would
14:18:18 be Joe.
14:18:18 And Joe is really encouraging that.
14:18:21 He's not here today unfortunately.
14:18:23 He's in support.
14:18:24 It's a great catalyst for employees to go next door and
14:18:27 have a meal or drink, et cetera.
14:18:35 Also, if you just indulge me one second, I think from
14:18:38 the community's perspective, this is one paragraph in
14:18:41 the YCDC letter sums it up.
14:18:44 Quote: The board is very impressed by the proposal of
14:18:48 both the business and property owners and believes this
14:18:50 project should be a catalyst for redevelopment on the
14:18:52 west side of Ybor City.
14:18:53 Furthermore, the property owner as a condition of
14:18:55 approval has committed to incorporating language on the
14:18:58 site plan which would prohibit the sale of alcohol at
14:19:01 the property in conjunction with a bar or lounge.
14:19:04 Accordingly, the board believes that this condition
14:19:06 provides the mechanism to ensure that the future land
14:19:09 use of the property will be harmonious with Ybor City.
14:19:14 So it's my understanding, council has never been
14:19:18 presented with this kind of condition since you
14:19:22 converted your wet zoning process from the zoning to
14:19:25 special use permit.
14:19:30 Also, in terms of support, you have heard Don Miller.
14:19:32 He did an investigation.
14:19:34 He had no problem.
14:19:35 Likewise, city staff, solid waste and transportation.
14:19:39 They don't have any problem.
14:19:41 And most of these people here are in support and also
14:19:46 stakeholders in Ybor City.
14:19:48 Some are employees who actually live in Ybor.
14:19:52 So this is what the city, one of their goals is to have
14:19:55 this mobility where actually people who are employed
14:19:58 can walk from work and back.
14:20:02 Also, Vince Pardo was here on behalf of the YCDC, and
14:20:06 to address this 51% issue, realistically in this
14:20:12 economy, think of the investment that these guys made.
14:20:14 They bought the property.
14:20:16 They are operating the business.
14:20:18 The license from the state costs about $80,000.
14:20:21 And this is a major risk that these people are taking.
14:20:27 And quite honestly, council, you are presented with an
14:20:29 issue oftentimes.
14:20:32 For example, you think that some of these restaurants
14:20:34 in Tampa did K live on the 51%.
14:20:36 I'll give you three examples.
14:20:41 Deli, South Tampa, 4(COP-X).
14:20:44 Bistro, 4(COP-X).
14:20:46 Wine exchange, 4(COP-X).
14:20:47 It's very difficult to meet the 51% and be hamstrung
14:20:52 with that.
14:20:52 I was looking at it.
14:20:53 You can sell ten bottles of wine, okay, and it will
14:20:56 take you 50 or 60 meals to balance that out.
14:20:59 So that's realistically the way of the world.
14:21:02 They have got a huge investment in this.
14:21:04 And they really can't meet the 51%.
14:21:06 Councilman Miranda, what you mentioned the activities
14:21:10 and knight parade, we didn't even think about that.
14:21:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's why I'm a council member.
14:21:18 [ Laughter ]
14:21:19 >>MARK BENTLEY: I guess when you have been around as
14:21:21 long as you, you think of it all.
14:21:23 But just a couple of other points.
14:21:25 And then I'll turn it over.
14:21:33 One other thing, too, here again in April 2008, you all
14:21:36 converted wet zoning to special use for two major
14:21:40 Number one, okay, to have the ability to impose
14:21:44 conditions that we are offering up today.
14:21:48 Number two, not a permit, it's not a zoning.
14:21:52 You can revoke a permit.
14:21:53 All right.
14:21:54 It's not any litigation where someone is going to come
14:21:58 in and challenge the zoning and take the zoning so it's
14:22:01 basically a permit.
14:22:02 So if there's any issue with respect to my client
14:22:06 and/or other wet zoning subsequent to April 2008, you
14:22:10 can revoke that.
14:22:12 So like I said, these guys have gone the extra mile.
14:22:15 They live there.
14:22:19 They have been successful businessmen in the City of
14:22:21 Tampa for 17 years.
14:22:22 Their families are there.
14:22:23 You are going to see and hear from a lot of their
14:22:26 employees who actually live in Ybor and are going to
14:22:28 work at this place.
14:22:30 There's been absolutely, from our per respect sieve --
14:22:33 perspective, no opposition.
14:22:35 Even the Chamber of Commerce, my understanding Mr.
14:22:37 Keating is here in support.
14:22:38 So you have to admire these guys for taking the risk
14:22:40 like Joe over here in this economy, and having that
14:22:43 kind of vision and faith in the future of Ybor City.
14:22:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me just see subpoena there anybody
14:22:49 here in opposition?
14:22:50 Anybody in opposition?
14:22:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I see no one, Mr. Chairman.
14:22:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All those in support want to stand?
14:23:03 Thank you.
14:23:04 You may be seated.
14:23:06 Thank you.
14:23:09 Mr. Bennett, if you don't mind, questions by council.
14:23:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
14:23:15 There's something really wrong with our process if we
14:23:20 have to call something that's not to -- it just doesn't
14:23:29 make sense to me.
14:23:30 So I guess my question to legal is what Mr. Bentley
14:23:35 just said about we can revoke the permit.
14:23:42 Really, my problem is that with any of this -- with any
14:23:48 of this particular establishment or what you want to
14:23:50 do, it's this precedent that we are giving zoning for
14:23:55 something or special use permit or something that it's
14:24:01 really not, but you all know it's not, but then we are
14:24:04 writing in that it is a restaurant, like it seems like
14:24:10 we are going to set a precedent so that every wet
14:24:14 zoning, every special use, alcohol special use that
14:24:18 comes in front of us gets to write their own zoning and
14:24:21 use code.
14:24:22 So tell me.
14:24:27 If this is going to be a protection writing something
14:24:30 on the site plan.
14:24:31 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
14:24:32 City Council, you do something similar to this on a
14:24:35 fairly regular basis.
14:24:36 You grant a 4(COP) or 4(COP-X) or whatever the category
14:24:43 Only as long as the sale of alcoholic beverages is
14:24:45 incidental to a certain use.
14:24:48 You have done an art gallery.
14:24:50 You have done a restaurant without requiring R
14:24:52 designation for sangrias, and not to give many of the
14:24:56 other -- the hotels.
14:24:59 You have done it on a very regular basis.
14:25:01 This is, although this is a negative, in effect it's
14:25:08 the same thing.
14:25:09 The city could find a violation, would have to be able
14:25:15 to prove up that the sale of alcohol was not
14:25:18 incidental, and instead of one particular use, it is to
14:25:23 any use that's allowable under the zoning code, Bub it
14:25:26 would be the same burden for the city, no greater or no
14:25:29 less than what you typically do.
14:25:30 >>MARY MULHERN: It doesn't make sense to me that you
14:25:36 would write a specific includes that's the opposite of
14:25:38 what the zoning they are asking for.
14:25:42 I'm not saying that I oppose this. It just doesn't
14:25:45 seem like this process that we are continuing to use,
14:25:49 because I don't think we have done it that often.
14:25:52 But I have been here three years.
14:25:56 So I am going to defer to my more experienced
14:26:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, then councilman
14:26:06 124 thank you.
14:26:07 I just wanted to make a comment.
14:26:10 The architectural transformation is dramatic.
14:26:12 The menu is mouth watering and I'm glad it came up
14:26:15 after lunch rather than before.
14:26:17 And the commitment made by the property owners to not
14:26:24 have this more than to a bar-lounge but to keep it as a
14:26:27 restaurant is really strong.
14:26:28 So I would be inclined to move the public hearing.
14:26:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.
14:26:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree with everything Ms.
14:26:38 Saul-Sena said as related to this particular project
14:26:40 but Ms. Mulhern brings up, I guess, a good point, sort
14:26:45 of theoretically.
14:26:47 And my question is specifically, what is the standard
14:26:54 that we would use, or you would use, or legal would
14:26:57 use, to evaluate when this use would be or not be
14:27:03 incidental to a restaurant?
14:27:10 Do you follow my question?
14:27:16 >> 51%?
14:27:18 I think some of the confusion there, if I may for a
14:27:20 moment, when you do an X, the X allows the sale of
14:27:23 alcohol, with any of the uses allowed in the underlying
14:27:30 In a YC-1 bar is an allowable use.
14:27:34 So in YC 1 you have bar and lounge, all these other
14:27:38 things. If they get the X that means they could sell
14:27:40 with any of those uses.
14:27:41 What they are trying to say to you is, we are never
14:27:44 going to be a bar-lounge.
14:27:45 We don't want to be a nightclub.
14:27:47 So instead of saying that the alcohol sales will only
14:27:50 be incidental to retail, they are reversing it and
14:27:55 saying it would K never be with a bar and lounges.
14:27:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So it's incidental to the
14:28:01 restaurant use, which is fine.
14:28:03 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Or retail.
14:28:04 They might have some square footage in there that, you
14:28:07 know, they might have a retail component, some of that
14:28:13 12,000 square feet, and now they have got this
14:28:18 They are going to have some mixed use going on there.
14:28:21 What I think they are trying, from my understanding of
14:28:24 this, to commit to you is, they are not going to be a
14:28:26 nightclub, they are not going to be a bar or lounge.
14:28:29 When you look back on a lot of old wet zonings in the
14:28:32 office there are conditions in the on the weird things.
14:28:35 You can't be 21, you have to be 21 to get in, so there
14:28:41 were conditions in historical times that these things
14:28:45 related back to.
14:28:45 I think that was their intent.
14:28:47 I'm not sure.
14:28:49 If you take that off are they asking for the same
14:28:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess my point, and maybe this
14:28:56 goes back to Mr. Miranda's question or comment, was if
14:29:01 you serve one meal a day -- I'm not talking about
14:29:06 Mr. Bentley's client at all.
14:29:08 I believe you when you tell me they are associated with
14:29:11 good people and made a big investment, that's great.
14:29:13 I'm always talking about what happens 30 years from
14:29:17 That's where I come from on this.
14:29:18 So my question is, if you serve one meal a day, okay,
14:29:22 and then the rest of the day is, you know, is liquor,
14:29:29 where is the standard?
14:29:32 If not 51%, is it 1%?
14:29:35 Is it something in between?
14:29:36 How can you possibly every enforce something be if
14:29:41 there is no standard?
14:29:43 >>REBECCA KERT: It's when alcohol sales become the
14:29:46 predominant use and it would be the city's
14:29:48 responsibility to build the case.
14:29:49 You were saying hours that they are operating is one or
14:29:52 the other, or the amount of sales of one or the other.
14:29:56 Those are things that we would use to build a case.
14:29:58 But that's what we have to do in any time of bringing a
14:30:03 code enforcement action.
14:30:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But you guys always insist that we
14:30:09 build it some standards into our code to help you be
14:30:11 able to enforce.
14:30:14 And here I don't know that we have a standard.
14:30:16 It's kind of like it walks like a duck, quack beings
14:30:21 like a duck.
14:30:21 >>REBECCA KERT: Councilman, I hear what you are saying
14:30:24 and I agree with what you are saying to a certain
14:30:28 There is not a black or white cut-off line.
14:30:30 But that is how most of the wet zonings in the history
14:30:33 of the city prior to us taking them to special uses,
14:30:36 all of them out side of Ybor City and some of the other
14:30:39 districts, it was always a requirement that it be
14:30:41 incidental to the primary use.
14:30:43 So for 40 or 50 years that was something that the
14:30:45 cities had to wrestle with in enforcing.
14:30:48 And it's something that we deal with.
14:30:49 It's something -- it seems like it's operating as a
14:30:53 bar, the city built the case, because probably 9 a 5%
14:30:57 of all of those two or three years ago were all
14:31:00 required to be incidental.
14:31:02 I hear what you are saying.
14:31:04 And it's City Council's decision if you don't feel
14:31:07 But it's not unusual what they are asking.
14:31:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The only other question I have --
14:31:13 and this gets back to Mr. Bentley -- the extra 6,000
14:31:17 feet above, I don't know if that concerns anybody,
14:31:24 saying that you might expand the restaurant to be
14:31:28 >>MARK BENTLEY: That's correct, John.
14:31:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That sounds like a massive
14:31:35 Are Ybor standards --
14:31:37 >>MARK BENTLEY: But here again, if it's never going to
14:31:40 be a bar -- and I know you have all these ambiguities.
14:31:44 We have done the best we can to ensure under your codes
14:31:47 in dealing with staff and YCD.
14:31:50 Your point is, is it interim use?
14:31:53 It's an office.
14:31:54 If this thing really takes off, this restaurant, he's
14:31:57 going to use upstairs, hopefully.
14:32:00 He might put more kitchen up there.
14:32:02 I don't know, in the retail component he might expand
14:32:05 over there.
14:32:06 John, the point is, if it can never be a bar, why
14:32:09 should we come back here in two years and say, hey,
14:32:12 this thing is really kicking butt, and unfortunately we
14:32:15 had to spend five months and all this money going
14:32:16 through the process.
14:32:17 So we thought we gave you all that protection
14:32:20 regardless of how big it is that -- do you see what I'm
14:32:24 saying, John?
14:32:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The alcohol area, we have had noise
14:32:30 issues in Ybor City.
14:32:31 I'm sure some of the places out here are concerned
14:32:34 about noise.
14:32:37 Has anybody spoken to music out side?
14:32:41 >>MARK BENTLEY: Here is the deal on that.
14:32:43 We can't even apply for what they call street permit.
14:32:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Talking about your court yard.
14:32:49 >>MARK BENTLEY: The court yard?
14:32:50 It's a little tiny thing back there but we'll stipulate
14:32:54 right now there won't be any music out side.
14:32:57 Are you all right with that?
14:33:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It would only go up, but who knows?
14:33:10 >> Okay.
14:33:10 Amplified music, if we put a note on the plan?
14:33:16 Brian, give your name and address.
14:33:18 >> Brian Schaefer, owner of Ybor City properties.
14:33:22 I live on 5th Avenue.
14:33:26 I want to use the property with the court yard to
14:33:28 address that question, it's almost a private courtyard
14:33:32 into an alley.
14:33:35 There will be minor music out there and a cafe, which
14:33:38 the ambience is essential to our business.
14:33:52 >> Here is the so-called courtyard.
14:33:56 There's the building.
14:33:56 Here is an alley.
14:33:57 The thing is going to be about 100 square feet, maybe
14:34:01 four or five tables.
14:34:03 So even if it was amplified, it can't be any concern.
14:34:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know who is back there,
14:34:11 which direction.
14:34:11 >> Brian, are you okay with non-amplified?
14:34:24 >> Just clarifying how loud?
14:34:25 Amplified music, if there's an acoustic guitar not
14:34:30 plugged in.
14:34:31 We'll comply with the city's noise standards.
14:34:33 How does that sound?
14:34:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think you need to do that anyway.
14:34:41 Listen, I don't live over there, and some of you all
14:34:43 And I'm sure that some of you have complained about
14:34:47 noise issues in Ybor.
14:34:49 If not I know your neighbors have because we get your
14:34:56 If it's not an issue in the community --
14:35:01 >> Vince is more familiar with the buildings.
14:35:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know where it goes to, the
14:35:08 alley, I mean noise generally stray straight up is
14:35:11 probably not a big issue.
14:35:13 But you deal with noise issues.
14:35:19 >>VINCE PARDO: Ybor Development Corporation.
14:35:20 This is a very small plan.
14:35:23 It is the only place in the building where actually
14:35:25 smoking a cigar and having a glass of wine would be
14:35:28 allowable within that open area unless they come in for
14:35:30 an outdoor cafe at a later point.
14:35:33 The area behind this building is office.
14:35:35 In fact, the alley is an L-shaped alley that ends up at
14:35:39 the Hampton IN so you have either an office use next
14:35:44 door, Joe Capitano's building, you have CC events,
14:35:48 immediately behind this.
14:35:49 So there is total building 100% down that particular
14:35:52 It's not one --
14:35:54 >> So now you have out-of-town people.
14:35:57 >> Yes, this is on 14th.
14:35:59 They are on 13th.
14:36:00 So it is on the other end of the block.
14:36:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know.
14:36:07 I would like to see some language between first and
14:36:09 second reading that it's acceptable.
14:36:11 >> Acoustic music shouldn't have any problem.
14:36:15 We have had than and never had any violations of those
14:36:18 at all.
14:36:23 The first rooftop, for example, venue, it's 360
14:36:29 We didn't see that.
14:36:29 I saw that as a great amenity to allow for cigar
14:36:33 smoking in the establishment which they would not be
14:36:35 able to do in the other parts
14:36:45 >>GWEN MILLER: I don't have a problem with the zoning.
14:36:47 Like Mr. Pardo say S saying, there's no residential
14:36:50 back there at all.
14:36:52 So I don't think sound is going to carry anyway.
14:36:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, here's what I think.
14:36:58 I have a problem with -- I've already said what I
14:37:03 It doesn't make sense to me to zone something, um,
14:37:07 which would allow use of the bar and lounge, and then
14:37:10 turn right in, scribble in there that you can't do
14:37:14 So I'm curious.
14:37:16 Is this -- was that for our benefit to convince us to
14:37:19 vote this way?
14:37:20 Or the people, the neighbors want us to write it in
14:37:24 I would actually like to hear from at least one
14:37:27 neighbor about this.
14:37:28 Because I would be more comfortable zoning this without
14:37:33 that clause in there, which I am not convinced, I
14:37:36 haven't heard anything showing me that we can enforce
14:37:39 So for us to tell you we are going to give the zoning
14:37:42 which would allow it to be a lounge, but we are going
14:37:44 to put this thing in there that that has no standard,
14:37:48 which was Mr. Dingfelder's question, which was never
14:37:51 The reason that we have that use being "R" and
14:37:57 requiring the 51% is so that we have some way to
14:38:00 And now in here there's nothing to measure.
14:38:04 So I'm not sure what would happen.
14:38:05 I'm not sure why the city would ever even enter into
14:38:10 trying to figure out if it's a bar or a lounge.
14:38:13 So are you a neighbor?
14:38:16 >>> I am.
14:38:17 >> I have no interest in then?
14:38:20 >>> No interest.
14:38:22 My name is Camille Renshaw. I live at 2001 East Second
14:38:26 Avenue, where a lot of the residential that you are
14:38:30 concerned about, on the other side.
14:38:33 It's mostly retail offices.
14:38:37 I'll tell you, I appreciate where you are going in
14:38:40 terms of, you know, when we have noise problems, and we
14:38:43 come here, and we need you guys to offer some legal
14:38:48 clarification, so we can run down the permits, we can
14:38:52 do different things.
14:38:53 I appreciate the issues that you are chasing, and we
14:38:55 need that help.
14:38:56 But on this particular issue, I need to try and get
14:38:59 your minds around the bigger good, because we are
14:39:03 begging, as residents and business owners, for just
14:39:06 this kind of establishment.
14:39:07 >>MARY MULHERN: What is that kind of establishment you
14:39:11 are begging for?
14:39:12 Does it have to be just a restaurant or do you mind if
14:39:14 it's, you know, a bar part of the time?
14:39:17 >>> I don't mind if it's a bar part of the time.
14:39:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, that's my point.
14:39:22 >>> I don't think it really will be.
14:39:24 Before I lived here, you lived in Brooklyn, and in an
14:39:28 up-and-coming neighborhood, Williamsburg, and I lived
14:39:31 in Orlando previously and Nashville.
14:39:33 Those are all up and coming areas that have avenues
14:39:37 like 7th that have retail, has residence, has art
14:39:43 galleries, we are all coming together, and we are
14:39:45 trying to do some vibrant, creative, not just on an
14:39:49 artistic level but on a professional level, and that is
14:39:52 what Brian is bringing to the neighborhood as a
14:39:56 long-time resident there.
14:40:00 I am a board member of the civic association.
14:40:04 I'm on several committees of the YCDC.
14:40:07 I know what most of the concerns are of the
14:40:12 This is exactly the kind of business that we as
14:40:15 professionals want to have in the neighborhood that we
14:40:18 can enjoy, we can have dinner at, we can drink at, we
14:40:21 can hear music if we want.
14:40:24 I'm not going to have a cigar out back but if you want
14:40:26 to have a cigar out back you can do that.
14:40:28 We are praying for more of these and less of the things
14:40:32 that we come in here normally fighting.
14:40:34 >>MARY MULHERN: I think that's great.
14:40:36 And I know all those neighborhoods.
14:40:37 And I spent my 20s and 30s in Chicago, so I know
14:40:42 what it's like to live where there's mixed use and it's
14:40:45 fun, and I have no problem with this project at all.
14:40:49 I have a problem with the kind of zoning and the kind
14:40:53 of restrictions we are putting on there, and I want
14:40:56 people to know that, to me it hasn't been clear that if
14:41:04 some future owner turns this into a nightclub, or a
14:41:07 bar, and the problems resulting from that, that you are
14:41:14 going to have a real legal basis to fight it.
14:41:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Miranda.
14:41:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
14:41:22 I am sitting here quietly listening and I don't know
14:41:25 how close Brookline is to Ybor City but I think it's
14:41:28 very close.
14:41:29 The thing that I saw, if this came in with a straight
14:41:34 4(COP), I don't think you would -- you would have left
14:41:38 It would have passed.
14:41:41 But it had the X.
14:41:42 And there's a lot of reasons to have an X to it.
14:41:48 And the X factor, I started looking at your menu.
14:41:52 (Bell sounds)
14:41:53 Thank you.
14:41:54 The menu breakfast menu is the only one I saw without
14:42:01 an "A."
14:42:01 Is that right?
14:42:02 >>> We'll address that, council.
14:42:04 >> I'm not in the chicken farming business.
14:42:08 On the entry menu which is to the left right of the
14:42:15 left page, two columns by four columns, I saw maybe
14:42:18 eight or nine items, ten items at most.
14:42:21 They were very inexpensive.
14:42:23 Am I correct?
14:42:24 >>> Correct.
14:42:25 >> So there is where your problem comes in with the
14:42:28 alcohol sales.
14:42:31 The alcohol sales, you can buy a bottle of wine, you
14:42:34 want to impress somebody in the mid 40s.
14:42:36 If you go with me it's $15.
14:42:38 I don't buy that kind of wine.
14:42:40 But what I am saying is, I understand what you are
14:42:42 trying to do and what you are trying to accomplish.
14:42:44 The problem is, and the word of putting it together is
14:42:49 how you do this, how you solve that, how you resolve
14:42:52 this, that and the other.
14:42:57 The investment here is great.
14:42:58 But there will be no investment unless you had the
14:43:01 If you don't believe me, ask the guy across the bay
14:43:03 that owns the baseball team.
14:43:05 So what I'm saying is, it's based on the fact -- and
14:43:11 tell me about the eggs.
14:43:18 >> There's an egg option.
14:43:20 This is very clogs to where we had as far as the price
14:43:23 you mentioned, a good range value in there to make it
14:43:30 accommodating for residents and everybody in Ybor City.
14:43:32 >> I saw a sandwich for ten bucks.
14:43:39 >> But they got the peanut butter bar.
14:43:41 >> The peanut butter is to make at Fordable for all
14:43:45 options we need on the menu.
14:43:46 We need to be very diverse for everybody's sake, from
14:43:50 mark's family and himself to my family and to the
14:43:53 younger 21-year-olds to, you know, my family.
14:43:57 >> If it will resolve it, the Miranda omelet --
14:44:07 >> Put anything with Miranda, they won't stay too long.
14:44:12 But I understand what you are trying to do.
14:44:13 >>GWEN MILLER: I move to close the public hearing.
14:44:15 >> Second.
14:44:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
14:44:19 >>THE CLERK: I do have an ordinance but it's a 4(COP).
14:44:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We got a new one.
14:44:27 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
14:44:34 >> We also want to make sure that you include the sheet
14:44:45 by the land development.
14:44:48 Thank you.
14:44:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Does and this includes the ordinance.
14:44:51 An ordinance approving a special use permit S oat 2 for
14:44:54 alcoholic beverages, large venue and making lawful the
14:44:57 sale of beverages regardless of alcoholic content,
14:44:59 beer, wine and liquor, 4(COP-X), for the consumption on
14:45:06 premises only from that certain lot plot or tract of
14:45:08 land located at 1327 East 7th Avenue, Tampa, Florida,
14:45:13 as more particularly described in section 2 hereof
14:45:16 imposing certain conditions based upon the location of
14:45:18 the property, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
14:45:22 conflict, providing an effective date.
14:45:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
14:45:27 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
14:45:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent
14:45:34 at vote.
14:45:35 Second reading and adoption will be on June 3rd,
14:45:37 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
14:45:40 >>MARK BENTLEY: Thank you very much for your time and
14:45:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 81.
14:45:45 Item 81.
14:46:10 >>ABBYE FEELEY: The next case is located at 1704 west
14:46:17 Hillsborough Avenue.
14:46:17 The applicant is Walgreen's.
14:46:20 The request before you is for a 2(APS) which is alcohol
14:46:25 beer and wine, package, for consumption off premises
14:46:39 This is at the southwest corner of Hillsborough and
14:46:41 Rome Avenue.
14:46:47 Looking west.
14:46:58 This is the western half of the drive-through.
14:47:03 This is behind the building, the dumpster enclosure.
14:47:06 There's a special 2 request for 2(APS) beer and wine
14:47:14 only for sale in package form for consumption off
14:47:19 According to the application submitted, the existing
14:47:22 use of the pictures I showed you of the Walgreen's, and
14:47:25 the site contains 2.503 acres.
14:47:27 The under this request is 14,412 square feet.
14:47:32 Total of 58 parking spaces are required and 78 are
14:47:34 being provided.
14:47:37 Staff did find this inconsistent.
14:47:40 There is just one issue on the site plan related to the
14:47:43 ADA parking space.
14:47:45 The striped aisle next to the space is showing it six
14:47:48 feet which is causing the parking space next to it to
14:47:50 be below standard.
14:47:53 So if that striped aisle were to be amended to be the
14:47:57 five feet as required, that would pick up the extra
14:47:59 foot for the space next to it and that would correct
14:48:02 If it's council's desire, if you could please make that
14:48:05 request part of your motion for the ADA space to be
14:48:09 And staff will find it consistent.
14:48:11 Thank you.
14:48:11 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I apologize for
14:48:17 stepping out but the chief of police had called, and
14:48:22 she gave some very good news.
14:48:23 The city shut down some pain management clinics
14:48:29 They have issued warrants.
14:48:31 In one clinic there was over 150 people.
14:48:34 And they have done a fantastic job in the pharmacy
14:48:38 area, and there's a doctor who they have been watching
14:48:43 for a while.
14:48:44 I am not going to mention his name because this is an
14:48:46 ongoing investigation.
14:48:47 They finally caught him coming out of the house with a
14:48:49 big bag, and there was a bunch of prescriptions, which
14:48:54 is illegal as far as it involves doctors and medicine
14:48:58 are concerned.
14:48:59 So they have been working on this and we owe a
14:49:02 gratitude of thank you for acting so professional and
14:49:05 so diligently in difficult times like this.
14:49:09 >> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:49:21 Tampa police has no objection to this special use
14:49:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
14:49:26 >> Grace Yang, 201 North Franklin Street, suite 200
14:49:31 Tampa 33602.
14:49:32 I have been sworn.
14:49:34 I'm here representing Walgreen's pharmacy.
14:49:36 This is an existing pharmacy.
14:49:39 And we are requesting a 2(APS) package beer and wine
14:49:43 Staff has pointed out the issue about the ADA parking
14:49:46 space and the striped lane.
14:49:50 Walgreen's will be correcting that and I will make that
14:49:52 change between first and second reading.
14:49:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.
14:49:55 Anyone here in opposition to this petition?
14:49:57 >> Move to close.
14:49:58 >> Second.
14:49:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:50:00 All in favor?
14:50:01 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.
14:50:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move an ordinance approving a
14:50:10 special using permit S-2 for alcoholic beverage sales,
14:50:13 small venue and making lawful the sale of alcoholic
14:50:15 beverages containing alcohol more than 1% by weight and
14:50:18 not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of
14:50:21 alcoholic content beer and wine 2(APS) in sealed
14:50:24 containers for consumption off premises only at or from
14:50:27 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 1704
14:50:31 west Hillsborough Avenue, Tampa, Florida, and more
14:50:35 particularly described in section 2 hereof providing
14:50:36 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
14:50:39 effective date.
14:50:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Included in that is the ADA striping
14:50:46 parking, so that's part of the motion.
14:50:48 Is there a second?
14:50:50 Is there a second?
14:50:51 >> Yes, second.
14:50:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:50:53 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
14:50:55 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried.
14:50:57 Second reading and adoption will be held on June
14:50:59 3rd, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
14:51:02 >> okay.
14:51:02 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
14:51:10 Council, the next item on your agenda this afternoon,
14:51:13 V-10-186 is located at 4141 Hillsborough Avenue.
14:51:25 Publix is next?
14:51:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, you can continue with that.
14:51:28 Just continue with that.
14:51:34 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Okay.
14:51:34 This is a Walgreen's located at 41741 Hillsborough
14:51:38 This is the northeast corner of Hillsborough and Lois.
14:51:44 It is also for a 2(APS).
14:51:46 There are three waivers.
14:51:47 The reduction, distance from other establishments
14:51:52 selling alcohol from 1,000 feet to 371, reduction of
14:51:56 distance separation from 1,000 feet to 208 for
14:51:59 residential uses, distance separation from 1,000 feet
14:52:02 to 232 feet for institutional uses,.
14:52:06 This store, the structure contains 150,000 square feet,
14:52:09 and that is the area being requested.
14:52:12 60 parking spaces are required and 67 spaces are being
14:52:17 Again this be is for a 2(APS), beer and wine only in
14:52:20 package sales.
14:52:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Officer Miller?
14:52:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner, you can go ahead.
14:52:34 >> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police.
14:52:43 I apologize, an important phone call.
14:52:45 Knife objection to this.
14:52:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Are you closing the pain clinics, too?
14:52:51 [ Laughter ]
14:52:54 >>> Grace Yang, suite 2200, 201 North Franklin Street.
14:53:00 I have been sworn. This if for an existing Walgreen's
14:53:03 pharmacy store.
14:53:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Does anyone here want to speak in
14:53:07 >> Move to close.
14:53:09 >> Second.
14:53:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
14:53:11 Councilman Caetano?
14:53:12 >> Making lawful the sale of beverages containing
14:53:26 alcohol of more than one percent by weight not more
14:53:29 than 14% by weight, wines regardless of alcoholic
14:53:33 content, beer and wine, 2(APS), in sealed containers
14:53:37 for consumption off premises only at or from that
14:53:40 certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 4141 west
14:53:45 Hillsborough Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more
14:53:48 particularly described in section 2 hereof providing
14:53:50 for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
14:53:53 effective date.
14:53:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
14:53:57 Yes, ma'am.
14:53:58 >> I forgot the modification on that one.
14:54:01 That was stop bars and stop signs as required by solid
14:54:05 They need to do that between first and second.
14:54:07 >> As amended.
14:54:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Add that to the motion.
14:54:12 >> Second.
14:54:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:54:15 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
14:54:17 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
14:54:21 Second reading and adoption will be on June 3rd,
14:54:23 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
14:54:25 >> item 82.
14:54:27 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, I am not going to
14:54:31 be voting in this.
14:54:32 I have litigation going on with the shopping center.
14:54:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You will file an appropriate form
14:54:41 with the city clerk at this time?
14:54:42 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Right.
14:54:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
14:54:46 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land Development Coordination.
14:54:48 The last alcohol case before you this afternoon is
14:54:50 V-10-185 located at 16041 Tampa Palms Boulevard west.
14:54:56 The applicant is Publix supermarkets.
14:54:59 The request before you this afternoon is for a 3 PS,
14:55:03 and I will go into a little bit about that.
14:55:07 There are three waivers.
14:55:08 The first is to reduce minimum distance separation from
14:55:11 100 feet to 203 for other establishments selling
14:55:14 The second from 1,000 feet to 30 feet for residential
14:55:18 And the last 1,000 feet to 575 feet for institutional
14:55:24 The special use will contain 56,420 square feet, and
14:55:29 the alcohol sales will be limited to sales equivalent
14:55:31 not to exceed the following classification.
14:55:34 54,817 square feet for a 2(APS).
14:55:39 That's your typical package within the grocery store,
14:55:42 beer and wine, that a Publix does.
14:55:43 This Publix is currently being remodeled.
14:55:47 Or reconstructed.
14:55:48 And they are going to have a small separate liquor
14:55:51 store out side, which I think you have seen a lot of
14:55:53 the Publixes that have been redone from Albertson's.
14:55:57 That 3 PS which would be only liquor would be 1603
14:56:03 square feet.
14:56:04 I want to show you real quickly.
14:56:06 This is the store here.
14:56:16 And that little red area is going to be the liquor, the
14:56:20 package with the liquor, the 2 would be everything
14:56:24 within the blue.
14:56:29 There were a couple of modifications needed to the site
14:56:35 I did provide you with a revision sheet.
14:56:38 One was to add all the distance waivers onto the site
14:56:41 The second one to add a signature block.
14:56:43 And the last one was to remove the landscape buffer.
14:56:49 Staff is available for any questions.
14:56:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Officer Miller?
14:56:57 >> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:56:59 City of Tampa has no objections.
14:57:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?
14:57:03 >> Grace Yang representing Publix supermarkets.
14:57:08 As Ms. Feeley explained, there used to be a Publix
14:57:11 supermarket here that had a 2(APS) but the new
14:57:15 supermarket that's going to be opening at the end of
14:57:17 the summer is a slightly bigger footprint so we have to
14:57:20 come back and try to get a different use approved for
14:57:24 In addition, they would like to develop a package
14:57:26 liquor store adjacent.
14:57:28 And those are the conditions on the plan.
14:57:31 With me is Jeff Platt who is the real estate manager
14:57:34 for Publix supermarkets, and we are both available for
14:57:37 any questions.
14:57:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public in opposition
14:57:39 on this petition?
14:57:40 Anyone from the public?
14:57:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
14:57:43 >> Second.
14:57:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
14:57:45 Councilman Dingfelder.
14:57:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have quite a few Publixes down
14:57:54 in South Tampa that already have both package stores
14:57:57 and don't seem to be a problem.
14:57:59 With that I'll move the following ordinance for first
14:58:01 reading, an ordinance repealing ordinance number 88-158
14:58:04 approving the special use permit S-2 for alcoholic
14:58:07 beverage sales large venue and making lawful the sale
14:58:10 of beverages regardless of alcoholic content beer wind
14:58:12 and liquor 3 PS in sealed containers for consumption
14:58:16 off premises only from that certain plot, plot or tract
14:58:19 of land located at 16041 Tampa Palms Boulevard west, in
14:58:24 section 3 hereof, providing for repeal of all
14:58:27 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
14:58:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
14:58:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: When do they close?
14:58:43 >> I assume they close at about 9:00.
14:58:46 >> I have a feeling the package store stays open
14:58:49 >> Motion carries.
14:58:51 Second reading and adoption will be on June 3rd,
14:58:54 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
14:58:55 >> The newspapers racks issues.
14:58:58 Then we'll hear from administration.
14:58:59 Then take up new business.
14:59:00 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
14:59:04 Pursuant to City Council direction I brought back a
14:59:06 change to your news rack res regulation based upon this
14:59:10 morning's discussion that there were five feet of
14:59:17 I took from the language that was regarding that issue.
14:59:21 And on page 10 at line 13, it says news racks will only
14:59:29 be installed on any sidewalk or pedestrian rack and not
14:59:35 less than 5 feet of sidewalk or unobstructed pedestrian
14:59:39 >> So moved.
14:59:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's moved.
14:59:42 Is there a second?
14:59:46 >> For second reading?
14:59:47 >> For second reading.
14:59:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Motion, moved for second reading
14:59:51 and adoption, an ordinance of the city of Tampa,
14:59:52 Florida amending City of Tampa code of ordinances
14:59:55 chapter 22, streets and sidewalk section 22-5,
14:59:59 definition section 22-57 regarding fees and division 3,
15:00:04 subdivision, 5, news racks, establishing criteria and
15:00:07 approval of application for modular news rack permit on
15:00:10 public rights-of-way and making general changes
15:00:13 regarding news racks, repealing all ordinances or parts
15:00:16 of ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
15:00:20 providing an effective date.
15:00:20 >> Second.
15:00:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:00:26 Record your vote, please.
15:00:27 This is second reading.
15:00:30 >>THE CLERK: I'm showing seven votes.
15:00:41 I haven't seen the display yet.
15:00:42 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: We only have seven members.
15:00:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There ought to be six.
15:00:49 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I abstained.
15:00:57 >> On the news racks.
15:01:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: 7-zero.
15:01:03 That's correct.
15:01:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As a follow-up, I would like to make
15:01:06 a motion for staff to revisit the issues that were
15:01:11 raised by T.H.A.N. and to meet with T.H.A.N. as well as
15:01:14 the newspaper industry, and many other affected parties
15:01:18 over the next six months and come back to council
15:01:20 during a workshop in six months.
15:01:29 I could say December, but I -- I'll say October.
15:01:34 Or so.
15:01:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Not many of us will be here.
15:01:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: October will be here.
15:01:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?
15:01:43 Thank you.
15:01:43 >>THE CLERK: At one time in October?
15:01:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The workshop.
15:01:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 9 a.m. would be the first item.
15:01:54 10 a.m.?
15:01:56 >> okay.
15:01:58 Item 70, Mr. Fletcher.
15:02:00 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
15:02:06 Chip Fletcher, city attorney.
15:02:08 As a follow-up on a discussion we had at the last
15:02:10 council meeting, I was asked to look at whether and how
15:02:14 council could go about placing further term limits on
15:02:18 council members.
15:02:22 As you know and we discussed in the charter, it
15:02:24 provides for eight years in a city-wide seat, eight
15:02:29 years in a district seat, an ability to go back and
15:02:34 It does not speak to any outside or upper limit on the
15:02:38 number of consecutive terms or years in office.
15:02:42 So long as there's not more than eight years in either
15:02:45 the district or the city-wide.
15:02:48 The basic rule is that council can enact additional
15:02:54 restrictions on election or reelection to office that
15:02:59 are not in conflict with the charter or special acts.
15:03:02 In this case it would be possible for council by
15:03:04 ordinance to establish an upper limit on the total
15:03:08 number of consecutive years a council member could hold
15:03:13 office by ordinance that would not be in conflict with
15:03:15 the charter or the special laws, so that would be an
15:03:22 Another option for council would be to place that in
15:03:23 the charter through a referendum, just as the existing
15:03:27 term limits were put in place.
15:03:29 So if council desired to place that kind of additional
15:03:33 restriction on yourselves, those would be your two
15:03:38 options to do that, and the way to do that would be to
15:03:40 set, in my view, a number of consecutive years or a
15:03:43 number of consecutive terms so you were not in conflict
15:03:46 about the existing charter provisions.
15:03:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
15:03:52 Thank you, Mr. Fletcher, for your report.
15:03:57 I can say this.
15:03:57 I know that Ms. Saul-Sena has never done anything else
15:04:01 but the same thing that I've done.
15:04:03 I have never served, served, searched.
15:04:05 We serve eight years, and then for whatever reason, my
15:04:12 memory is trying to calculate, if I have ever known a
15:04:16 council member who served eight years on a district,
15:04:18 eight years city-wide, and then came back to a
15:04:21 district, I don't believe that's ever happened.
15:04:23 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Not to my knowledge.
15:04:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Not to my knowledge either.
15:04:30 So I had to step out because I had to go different give
15:04:33 a speech, it was late in the afternoon in Drew Park and
15:04:36 I had to find out how many violations there were, and I
15:04:43 don't think there's an urgency to change what we have
15:04:48 because I don't think there's been one violation of the
15:04:50 intent, and that was the district and you can serve
15:05:00 I don't know of anyone who has ever violated that.
15:05:04 And last year, more than 16 years, didn't understand
15:05:12 what was going on, but anyone who serves here who has
15:05:16 served the public does it not for longevity but does it
15:05:22 for the right reasons.
15:05:23 I can also say this.
15:05:25 Term limits were being looked at one thing as being the
15:05:29 greatest new thing to come on earth.
15:05:31 But I think the public now is trying to understand and
15:05:35 to realize you know what?
15:05:37 They got the incumbency in their finger when they vote
15:05:37 yes or no for somebody else.
15:05:43 And even the legislature has talked about changing it
15:05:46 from eight years to 12 years.
15:05:50 I can understand all that.
15:05:51 And let's face it.
15:05:53 Let's be very sincere with all of us.
15:05:55 The only ones that run the government if you have
15:06:00 lesser term limits are the bureaucrats and the
15:06:04 And I don't think I would want to see that happen in
15:06:07 this chambers.
15:06:09 This chamber, as long as I have served, as long as Mr.
15:06:12 Dingfelder, Ms. Saul-Sena, Ms. Miller, have never had a
15:06:16 debate based on what party you belong to.
15:06:21 People ask me when I was running for office for this
15:06:24 seat, what party do you belong to?
15:06:26 I said I belong to the human race party, because there
15:06:28 is no party affiliation in this chambers.
15:06:31 And I feel very strongly about that.
15:06:34 And therefore I -- and I lose more often than not but
15:06:40 still try.
15:06:41 I like to see it remain the way it is, because there's
15:06:44 been no violation.
15:06:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
15:06:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I agree with everything you just
15:06:49 said, Mr. Miranda.
15:06:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
15:06:53 New best friends.
15:06:54 Thank you.
15:06:59 Let's hear from staff on the demolition.
15:07:03 Of historical buildings.
15:07:06 Then we'll take up new business and then we are out of
15:07:10 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Historic preservation design
15:07:13 Joining me today is Russell Spicola, the fire marshal,
15:07:17 Jake Slater, drawer of code enforcement, and Nick
15:07:20 D'Andrea of construction services division.
15:07:23 Unfortunately because of the nature of the situation,
15:07:27 we were unable to breathe you in advance.
15:07:29 However, we just recently found that threw a course of
15:07:35 our routine monitoring that we do on historic
15:07:38 properties in conjunction with code enforcement that
15:07:40 the union depot hotel, which is one of our locally
15:07:43 designated properties, had a catastrophic failure of
15:07:46 the roof and floor system.
15:07:49 This is a property that has had a long history of code
15:07:51 violations culminating with a hearing magistrate
15:07:57 hearing in August of 2009.
15:08:01 During that time, the hearing magistrate ordered that
15:08:04 the building be secured to vacant code, and the owner
15:08:12 was ordered to be fined $1,000 a day, and those fines
15:08:15 have been accruing on the property since that time,
15:08:19 they are currently over $350,000 in fines on this
15:08:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chairman.
15:08:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's let him finish.
15:08:29 >> The ownership situation is complicated by the fact
15:08:32 that there has been a notice to foreclosure placed on
15:08:34 the property.
15:08:35 The property was owned by a development company.
15:08:38 Currently there are in excess of $9 million in
15:08:42 mortgages applied to the property.
15:08:44 In addition to that, there are unpaid real estate taxes
15:08:48 dating back as well.
15:08:50 As I said, it has a long code enforcement history
15:08:53 dating back much before my time here into the 90s.
15:08:59 Most significantly, beginning in 2002 when there became
15:09:05 obvious structural concerns with the building.
15:09:09 The current condition that we find the building in,
15:09:12 with the photos that you are seeing, is that it has
15:09:15 experienced a catastrophic failure for the amount of
15:09:17 debris in the structure.
15:09:23 There's a great deal of potential that this buildings
15:09:26 is going to collapse.
15:09:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is the wall separating?
15:09:38 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: That's correct.
15:09:39 You can see the building is located immediately on the
15:09:41 corner of zero lot line of Zack Street and Nebraska
15:09:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Has the construction on Nebraska
15:09:55 contributed to this?
15:09:57 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: I'm unaware of that.
15:09:58 I think what contributed to it is the history of
15:10:01 neglect on the structure.
15:10:02 However, we did have an initial examination of the
15:10:06 property by two individuals who have experience in
15:10:11 historic rehabilitation and stabilization, Tom Hammer
15:10:15 with Rowe Architects and Jim Meltretter with Master
15:10:22 Consulting Engineers.
15:10:24 Their initial findings are obvious with the debris, you
15:10:26 can see that type of catastrophic damage.
15:10:29 In their opinion the building is not safe and is in
15:10:31 danger of collapse.
15:10:33 Due to the proximity of the building to the street,
15:10:35 they recommended that the sidewalk and one lane of Zack
15:10:38 be closed on Nebraska Avenue be closed.
15:10:40 We have done that since their recommendation.
15:10:43 Yesterday those streets are currently closed.
15:10:45 And the sidewalks are closed and marked to divert
15:10:50 They do recommend a stabilization technique that we
15:10:57 talk more about that today, this morning.
15:10:59 This has been a situation that's in motion for a few
15:11:06 Essentially we have come up, myself foremost, has come
15:11:09 up with four options that we can pursue at this time.
15:11:13 The administration has been weighing these options, and
15:11:16 we do very thoroughly investigate all of our options.
15:11:20 We feel the city may order the owner, Union Station
15:11:24 LLC, to stabilize the building in order to eliminate
15:11:26 the public safety.
15:11:28 The city may order the Union Station LL CRA to demolish
15:11:31 the building at its own expense to eliminate the public
15:11:34 safety hazard.
15:11:36 A third option that the city may stabilize the building
15:11:39 to eliminate the public safety hazard and lien the
15:11:43 property to attempt to recover its cost.
15:11:45 Current estimates, initial estimates, and they are
15:11:48 preliminary from the consultant, is that the
15:11:50 stabilization portion of this project would be
15:11:52 approximately $500,000, and that would not entail any
15:11:57 other rehabilitation necessary to bring it to a usable
15:12:01 The fourth option is the city may demolish the building
15:12:04 and eliminate the public safety hazard and attempt to
15:12:08 recover its costs from that demolition.
15:12:11 After much deliberation and consultation with my peers,
15:12:16 the staff recommendation forwarded to the mayor and the
15:12:19 recommendation that we are here to tell you about and
15:12:21 inform you of is fivefold, essentially that we maintain
15:12:25 the sidewalk and roadway barriers and restrict access
15:12:28 on the abutting streets in order to maintain the safety
15:12:30 of the pedestrians and travelers along the
15:12:34 thoroughfares, that we order the property owner
15:12:36 immediately, Union Station LLC, to remove the public
15:12:39 safety hazard immediately through stabilization and/or
15:12:44 demolition at its own expense, and that we commence
15:12:48 issuance of the order as soon as possible.
15:12:50 Those were options one and two combined into one
15:12:54 Concurrently, that we convene the city's condemnation
15:12:57 team which is composed of the individual before you
15:12:59 today and be given an assessment of the property based
15:13:02 on the available information.
15:13:04 And we do have a great deal of information in front of
15:13:06 us at this time.
15:13:07 In the event that Union Station LLC fails to act upon
15:13:10 the order, the city's condemnation team will order the
15:13:13 demolition of the building which will be carried out by
15:13:15 the city's contractor on Monday, May 24th, 2010, or
15:13:19 as clogs to that date as possible.
15:13:22 And the fifth recommendation is that we go through the
15:13:25 necessary archival steps, historic preservation staff
15:13:29 that's required when you do delete a historic property.
15:13:35 I have some backup information to leave with you.
15:13:38 And we are available to answer any questions you may
15:13:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena, councilman
15:13:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Fernandez.
15:13:49 When we lost most of the building across from the
15:13:55 Columbia, we changed our rules.
15:13:57 Instead of emphasizing demolition we emphasized
15:14:01 And I think you can see the shift that we are trying to
15:14:04 do that.
15:14:04 But based on the fact that the property owners have
15:14:07 left this building completely rot for over a decade,
15:14:10 why do we possibly think, particularly with $9 million
15:14:15 of fines and stuff, that they are going to be any more
15:14:17 responsible stewards of this property now than they
15:14:20 have been over the last decade, and they have let it
15:14:24 fall into complete disrepair?
15:14:25 And my question is really for legal.
15:14:27 Mr. Fletcher, how can we as a city bring additional
15:14:37 financial as well as legal pressure on property owners
15:14:41 that are such poor stewards of our resources?
15:14:45 This picture pains us all.
15:14:48 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: This is a situation where absent
15:14:54 another source of funding it's very difficult to force
15:14:57 property owner to take a different course of action.
15:15:01 They have got debt on the property.
15:15:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But to let it rot.
15:15:06 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: It's in foreclosure.
15:15:09 Absent some outside source of funding to come in and do
15:15:12 something with it, I'm at a loss to give you any other
15:15:18 options in that particular situation.
15:15:20 This is a worst case scenario from a regulatory
15:15:24 Because of the financial condition and the debt on the
15:15:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could the city, given the history
15:15:30 of this property, could the city have stepped in like,
15:15:33 just for sake of conversation, a year ago and said this
15:15:35 place is crumbling, we take it over and stabilize it
15:15:39 and put a lien on the property?
15:15:44 Looking at hindsight?
15:15:47 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: In theory, perhaps.
15:15:49 But our ultimate hammer is foreclosing on the liens and
15:15:52 taking over the property.
15:15:53 In any event that debt would have ahead of those --
15:15:56 what we were discussing.
15:15:59 And so we would still have the $9 million debt on the
15:16:02 property, once that mortgage is placed on the property
15:16:05 makes it very difficult to do a lot with that.
15:16:08 >> Can we like humiliate these owners for ruining a
15:16:13 perfectly good building?
15:16:17 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Yes.
15:16:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe you can share their names
15:16:20 with us and we can publicize it and put in the front of
15:16:22 this building and shame them into more responsible
15:16:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let us know when the flowing will
15:16:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can we save the brick?
15:16:35 That's a good question.
15:16:36 Can we save the bricks at least?
15:16:40 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Part of the recommendation you will
15:16:42 see, number five, is that we contract with a salvager
15:16:45 as part of the requirement.
15:16:47 So we will be dealing with the city's demolition
15:16:49 contract to see if it's possible to salvage as many of
15:16:54 the bricks as we are able to.
15:16:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: All right.
15:16:57 So, Chip, to indulge me, dust off my debtor creator
15:17:08 We have no priority whatsoever?
15:17:09 Let's say for argument sake the city's historic trust
15:17:14 fund spent the $500,000, we would have no priority?
15:17:18 We are behind $9 million of mortgages?
15:17:21 >> Well, there's a couple of different layers, and some
15:17:26 case law.
15:17:29 For the stabilization, we probably would be able to get
15:17:32 that paid as equivalent, as tax paid for foreclosed
15:17:41 Now, what we couldn't do is say, based on the code
15:17:44 enforcement lien, or that lien, then foreclosure on the
15:17:49 property, without satisfying the $9 million mortgage or
15:17:53 whatever we --
15:17:54 >> Just wait until somebody has an interest in it?
15:17:57 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: Exactly.
15:18:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Which leads to the next question,
15:18:04 How much money do we have in our historic preservation
15:18:06 trust fund or funds?
15:18:09 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: The historic preservation trust
15:18:10 fund that you see common loans come through is
15:18:14 restricted to the memorandum of agreement with the
15:18:15 Florida Department of Transportation to certain areas.
15:18:18 This is not one of the eligible areas.
15:18:21 Even if it were an ineligible area, we have exhausted
15:18:25 the fund.
15:18:26 We don't even have a remaining $500,000 in that fund.
15:18:33 We are at a very low level right now.
15:18:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have no other preservation
15:18:42 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: No.
15:18:43 No, sir.
15:18:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the limits are options.
15:18:46 I guess we have to go back to the flogging.
15:18:53 >> Then let's be proactive.
15:19:00 Is there anything building that's two years away, that
15:19:03 we need to focus on now so that we are not in this
15:19:06 painful situation two years hence?
15:19:09 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Code enforcement and historic
15:19:11 preservation work diligently to identify these
15:19:13 properties and put them through the code enforcement
15:19:16 process, and unfortunately you get the brunt of seeing
15:19:19 the ones that we are unsuccessful at.
15:19:22 There's other ones that we have dealt with, including
15:19:24 the Sicilian club which had a failure a couple years
15:19:28 ago which we were able to bring that up to current
15:19:31 code, and have been successful.
15:19:34 This particular one was the worst of all of the 53
15:19:38 landmarks that we had, and it has been for a long
15:19:40 period of time.
15:19:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Dennis, one more question.
15:19:45 It sounds like next Monday this building is done, and
15:19:49 right effectively for all intents and purposes.
15:19:52 So when we knock it down, why don't we just knock it
15:19:57 inward, put a fence around it, and let it be somebody
15:20:01 else's problem as opposed to doing a full demolition
15:20:04 with removal and everything else?
15:20:05 And how much, by the way, what is the estimate for
15:20:10 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: I have to let Jake Slater address
15:20:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And we aren't hiring the people who
15:20:16 owned the Gary school, are we?
15:20:18 >> Kept of code enforcement.
15:20:20 We don't have ab financial estimate as of now.
15:20:26 Probably in the morning we'll have an estimate.
15:20:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The cheapest way to knock it down
15:20:30 is knock it in, push it in, put a fence around it, walk
15:20:33 away from it and let it be somebody else's problem.
15:20:35 >> We don't have an estimate at this time.
15:20:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I understand about
15:20:42 the knock down and all of that but to drive by a
15:20:45 building and see rubble to me is distasteful.
15:20:49 I agree with what you are saying in theory but if you
15:20:51 put a fence around the existing building and let no one
15:20:55 near that I think you solve the problem without
15:20:56 knocking it down, unless you are telling me it's
15:20:59 going -- the walls are going to fall.
15:21:02 >> They are.
15:21:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Then let's knock it down.
15:21:06 We'll have a council meeting inside or it will go down
15:21:08 by itself.
15:21:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
15:21:13 Thank you.
15:21:15 Council, we have three other issues under new business.
15:21:21 One is a request from the mayor to appear August 12th
15:21:27 to present the budget.
15:21:31 Than generally is a CRA meeting but we will have a
15:21:33 special called meeting at 9:00.
15:21:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
15:21:37 >> Second.
15:21:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's my understanding that will go from
15:21:41 nine to ten and start the CRA at 10:00.
15:21:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Correct.
15:21:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:21:47 All in favor?
15:21:49 We also have Cindy Miller requesting a workshop on May
15:21:52 27th at 10 a.m. to present the transportation
15:21:57 concurrency regulations and procedures.
15:22:00 >>THE CLERK: A request with that --
15:22:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Oh, to June 17.
15:22:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
15:22:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You have items at 9:00, 10:and 10:30
15:22:16 on the 17th.
15:22:17 >> What kind of meeting is the 17th?
15:22:19 >> The 17th is a workshop.
15:22:21 At 9 a.m. you have a possibility of spending a number
15:22:25 of minutes that neighborhoods of record are given
15:22:29 during rezoning.
15:22:30 At 10:00 a workshop to discuss the mayor's citizen TECO
15:22:34 energy conservation task force.
15:22:35 At 10:30 you have discussion on LEED certification.
15:22:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sounds like 11.
15:22:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:22:44 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:22:48 Then we have a request to be appear to name the
15:22:55 recipient of the 2010 Hispanic scientist of the year
15:23:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
15:23:01 What day is that?
15:23:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: June 17th, 9 a.m.
15:23:06 >> moved and seconded.
15:23:08 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:23:11 And I have an item here.
15:23:15 Moved the commendation celebrating the class reunion.
15:23:23 This will not be considered at City Council.
15:23:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
15:23:30 All in favor?
15:23:32 >> All right.
15:23:32 Do you have any new business?
15:23:33 >>GWEN MILLER: No.
15:23:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, new business, as Mr.
15:23:37 Caetano had to leave, he had another meeting at 3:30,
15:23:40 asked me to bring this up in his behalf regarding
15:23:43 bicycle safety.
15:23:44 He bass advised that bicycle enthusiasts that do bike
15:23:49 ago round Davis Island are having problems that the
15:23:53 street sweeper hasn't been around on a regular basis,
15:23:57 and they would like to have the east and west Davis
15:23:59 Boulevard, the Channelside, and Severn Avenue, I
15:24:05 believe it is, swept once a week or as many times as
15:24:08 possible to keep it safety for those enthusiasts of
15:24:12 And I agree with that.
15:24:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:24:18 All in favor?
15:24:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One other.
15:24:21 I have been sitting still like most of us have here
15:24:24 just listening to news reports, and TV and media,
15:24:28 newspapers, all of them, talking about is the team
15:24:32 moving to Hillsborough County to Tampa.
15:24:35 I believe we ought to stay away from that.
15:24:37 They have a contract with another city called
15:24:39 St. Petersburg.
15:24:39 I don't like to be talking about things that we have no
15:24:43 control over.
15:24:44 They have a lease, just like a landlord has a lease
15:24:47 with a lessee, lessor, and I don't want to see this
15:24:55 city get involved even on the surface like other
15:24:59 governments are starting.
15:25:00 It would not be to our benefit to start this dialogue
15:25:02 because it's risky, and they have already said that
15:25:05 whoever gets involved before they solve their problems,
15:25:09 they are likely to have consequences of mucho deniro.
15:25:15 That means lots of money.
15:25:17 And I don't need a vote or anything.
15:25:19 I'm just speaking to myself here.
15:25:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
15:25:21 Councilwoman Mulhern.
15:25:22 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a number of items.
15:25:26 One, I guess when we called the -- scheduled the budget
15:25:30 workshop we didn't schedule the second one so I'm
15:25:32 asking that council schedule the second budget workshop
15:25:34 on Thursday, July 22nd at 10:00 a.m.
15:25:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
15:25:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:25:45 All in favor say Aye.
15:25:49 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to ask for a report from
15:25:52 contract administration on our next meeting, June
15:25:55 3rd, on the status of repairs and contracts for the
15:26:01 Cuscaden pool.
15:26:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Dingfelder.
15:26:07 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:26:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Then I would like to ask if maybe Mr.
15:26:15 Shelby could come back with a draft of a resolution.
15:26:23 We talked about this a little bit last week, but the
15:26:26 county commission, we can use this as a model, although
15:26:32 I wouldn't use the exact wording they use because it
15:26:35 was two weeks ago, but they passed a resolution
15:26:37 unanimously asking that -- so I would ask that City
15:26:45 Council oppose the approval of oil and gas drilling in
15:26:51 Florida waters, which I believe is going to be coming
15:26:53 up at a special session.
15:26:58 But I would also ask that we have a resolution to
15:27:05 address the national legislation on drilling in the
15:27:13 Gulf, and there is existing, the current legislation is
15:27:19 called the Gulf of Mexico energy act of 2006, before
15:27:26 the oil spill, the Obama Administration was talking
15:27:28 about allowing some drilling closer, but I would like
15:27:33 us to go on record as, I believe, senator Nelson has in
15:27:37 opposing even any new drilling or changes.
15:27:43 So what I was going to do is pass these out, because
15:27:46 the county's version is pretty close to what we can
15:27:50 pass at city.
15:27:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think Councilwoman Saul-Sena took
15:27:56 action early on.
15:27:58 She sent a letter to Tallahassee with our approval
15:28:01 opposing any drilling in the Gulf.
15:28:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We were leaders.
15:28:06 >>MARY MULHERN: This was last October that we did it.
15:28:09 And the language in that resolution is not as strong as
15:28:14 It's something like 100 miles.
15:28:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
15:28:17 Well, whatever.
15:28:17 >>MARY MULHERN: I looked it up.
15:28:21 Because I had to answer this at the Regional Planning
15:28:25 So this goes a little further.
15:28:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Delegate great.
15:28:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.
15:28:30 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:28:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Can I speak even though the motion
15:28:36 passed? We don't know that T consequence
15:28:39 environmentally but let me say if that disaster comes
15:28:42 this way, the desal plant has to be closed, I would
15:28:45 No one has thought of that.
15:28:47 TECO cooling apparatus, and those apparatuses in
15:28:54 Pinellas that use water to cool the turbines that
15:28:57 produce the energy more than likely -- I'm not trying
15:28:59 to scare anyone, but would have to be closed if there
15:29:01 is a catastrophe of any size.
15:29:04 But these are things that we have not anticipated, but
15:29:08 it's happening, and we all react when something like
15:29:12 this happens.
15:29:12 So I want to thank you for following through with that
15:29:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I am proud of us that we had wee did
15:29:21 this before we had a danger.
15:29:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for bringing this.
15:29:24 I want to share it with you all that I brought it to
15:29:26 the Tourist Development Council, this is before the
15:29:29 legislative session, and I couldn't get a second to the
15:29:32 This is a Tourist Development Council.
15:29:34 I'm sure if I were to bring it to the next meeting they
15:29:37 would think differently about it.
15:29:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Miranda, at the Regional Planning
15:29:41 Council we had experts from -- I'm not sure where they
15:29:45 were from, but to brief us, what we did on Monday, and
15:29:49 that's exactly what they said, is that it's something
15:29:52 we had to really be aware of, so the desal plant
15:29:58 Then I had one other thing that I wanted to put on the
15:30:00 agenda, if you all agree.
15:30:05 I don't know if we can fit it in, but it's really kind
15:30:07 of timely.
15:30:08 We need to talk about it now.
15:30:10 May 27th, that's next week, actually, Mr. Shelby,
15:30:13 can we put something on a workshop agenda?
15:30:17 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Sure.
15:30:17 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to speak about the high speed
15:30:23 rail and ask people to come and talk about it.
15:30:27 I'm not sure who may be.
15:30:30 Ed Turanchik and perhaps Bob Clifford, or someone to
15:30:34 talk about the fact that the high speed rail, which is
15:30:37 funded, we are going to get, and is supposed to have a
15:30:41 stop in Tampa, there's been a lot of discussion about
15:30:44 where it should be, and the city hasn't had any input
15:30:49 on it.
15:30:50 Really no one locally has had any input.
15:30:53 The county commission hasn't.
15:30:54 I think we need to at least have a discussion about it
15:30:58 besides, maybe somebody from the chamber to talk about
15:31:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Talk about it at our workshop May 27?
15:31:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You just removed an item that has
15:31:12 been rescheduled to June 17th.
15:31:14 That item on the transportation concurrency exception
15:31:17 You had two items scheduled for 9 a.m.
15:31:19 One was actually -- I stand corrected.
15:31:23 You had two commendations at 9 a.m.
15:31:25 You have nothing else presently scheduled.
15:31:27 Till 10 a.m. when you discuss the relationship with
15:31:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, good.
15:31:34 Do it at nine.
15:31:34 And I will invite some people.
15:31:37 Thank you.
15:31:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe that Mr. Clifford is the
15:31:40 staff person?
15:31:42 >>MARY MULHERN: He's the T-Barta person, but Ed
15:31:48 Turanchik is the public P.R. person.
15:31:51 I would rather have somebody who is more the technical
15:31:57 I don't know if Ed will be able to come.
15:31:59 I'm more interested in hearing from Tampa community as
15:32:02 opposed to the state, what they are planning to do.
15:32:05 Because we haven't been heard from.
15:32:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have been informed that as far as
15:32:10 the Florida Department of Transportation is the main
15:32:13 mover behind this.
15:32:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.
15:32:20 We can ask maybe somebody from that department, but
15:32:24 I'll get the best person I can.
15:32:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion, moved.
15:32:31 Who seconded?
15:32:31 Moved and seconded.
15:32:32 All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:32:35 Anything else?
15:32:36 Councilman Dingfelder.
15:32:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Some interesting discussions.
15:32:40 On the high speed rail station, I guess I heard from
15:32:47 Hart that clearly they have a station identified uptown
15:32:51 by the interstate, where the jail used to be, and
15:32:55 that's going to be a multimodal station that will
15:32:57 combine with the light rail station as well as be right
15:33:01 across the street from the existing bus station.
15:33:04 So that's the current plan.
15:33:05 But we'll hear more, and maybe there's other options.
15:33:11 But that's what they are talking about right now.
15:33:15 On the oil issue, I know we are all adjusted and
15:33:19 appalled by what's going on out in the Gulf and the
15:33:21 fact that it's possibly headed our way as well as the
15:33:25 rest of the state and who knows where, Cuba and the
15:33:29 keys and everything else.
15:33:32 And I had a thought.
15:33:36 What do we do to protect the bay?
15:33:38 To me it's kind of like the bay is like a glass of
15:33:42 water, and I don't know why we wouldn't put boons right
15:33:46 across at the Skyway to protect the entire bay.
15:33:49 And then we could let BP for somebody to open and close
15:33:54 it if ships need to go in and out.
15:33:56 I asked that question the other day, and somebody
15:33:58 referred me to some NOAA maps, and the NOAA maps don't
15:34:02 show booms like that.
15:34:04 There are some NOAA maps that show boons in the bay
15:34:07 protecting cockroach bay and protecting, you know, the
15:34:10 shoreline within the bay, but I don't know why you
15:34:12 wouldn't just protect the mouth of the bay because it's
15:34:15 only about ten miles across right there.
15:34:17 If you put boons up there it would seem to make a lot
15:34:19 of sense but I am going to try to get in touch with
15:34:22 NOAA and see what their plan is.
15:34:27 The only motion I have today, a couple weeks ago I
15:34:29 mentioned about safety concerns at the convention
15:34:32 center, and I was advised and I forgot to actually make
15:34:35 a motion.
15:34:36 So I am going to make a motion asking for
15:34:39 transportation staff to come back and give us a report
15:34:45 on the pedestrian safety issues about the convention
15:34:49 center between the convention center and the new hotel.
15:34:51 Even though we built the new ramp the walkway going
15:34:54 across, a lot of people don't use it and they are still
15:34:57 crossing at the street.
15:34:58 And I would like transportation staff to discuss this
15:35:01 issue, since Santiago Corrada is now running the
15:35:06 convention as well as the gentleman who worked out
15:35:08 there in the convention center parking area, because
15:35:11 they are the ones who told me that they watched these
15:35:13 pedestrian issues, and people almost getting killed on
15:35:17 a daily basis.
15:35:18 So I'll give them 60 days on that.
15:35:20 >> Second.
15:35:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:35:23 All in favor?
15:35:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the last thing, Rebecca and I
15:35:28 war talking about this a little earlier related to this
15:35:31 Ybor wet zoning that we just talked about, and she said
15:35:33 that she's in the process, she had a good meeting last
15:35:36 night, community meeting about wet zoning, and that
15:35:38 sort of thing.
15:35:39 And it dawned -- dawned on me that maybe what we need
15:35:43 to do as she's refining this ordinance is looking at
15:35:45 what I call a (COP-R) 25, R .25 category which would be
15:35:53 25% minimum food sales.
15:35:55 Because I think we come into this issue quite often,
15:35:59 and nobody can meet the 50%, so therefore we go to no
15:36:03 percent which is kind of silly.
15:36:05 So maybe what we need to do is explore an in between
15:36:09 I won't even do it as a motion but I'll just suggest it
15:36:12 to you, to legal counsel and Rebecca and the rest of
15:36:17 them when the issue comes back to us.
15:36:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, that's interesting.
15:36:22 I have been wondering what happened after our workshop
15:36:24 on alcohol.
15:36:25 I guess they are meeting and we are not invited.
15:36:28 It would be nice to know about those meetings.
15:36:30 >>> The schedule is about to come back to you all.
15:36:36 I thought we were working on a deadline in June to come
15:36:38 back with a recommendation.
15:36:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I think it would be nice if we were
15:36:42 noticed about that.
15:36:44 What staff is having meetings with the community.
15:36:47 And then I just wanted to say, John, because this came
15:36:50 up at the Regional Planning Council what you are saying
15:36:52 about the boom across the bay, because all the people
15:36:54 from Pinellas asked that question.
15:36:57 And here's war we were told.
15:36:58 You can't do it because it would cut off our pipeline.
15:37:06 It would interfere with the pipeline where we get our
15:37:10 fuel from that well.
15:37:11 >> But this from the top.
15:37:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I know.
15:37:17 That was their answer. What that mean, I don't know.
15:37:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That doesn't make sense.
15:37:21 >>MARY MULHERN: You can call Manny at the regional --
15:37:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, it was not working when it got
15:37:32 past the boons.
15:37:33 >> Is this like underwater or something?
15:37:33 >> I don't know but it got passed.
15:37:36 Now it's on the shorelines.
15:37:37 >>MARY MULHERN: The turbulence.
15:37:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Briefly, I want to share with you
15:37:43 all that having come back from vacation, which is
15:37:45 always inspiring, I asked the streetcar board to work
15:37:49 with the Hart board.
15:37:50 We are going to have a joint meeting to talk about
15:37:52 allowing people to do fares where you can transfer from
15:37:57 buses to street car and see if we can also work with
15:37:59 one Tampa Bay and company to throw in admissions to
15:38:07 museums and to other tourist attractions to try to make
15:38:12 this area more -- you buy a ticket and you can do a
15:38:16 variety of things, where other communities do.
15:38:21 No one has ever done it before.
15:38:24 And son how, that conversation never happened till now.
15:38:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: A motion to receive and file?
15:38:32 >> So moved.
15:38:32 >> Second.
15:38:34 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.
15:38:36 >>THE CLERK: Early this morning you scheduled a
15:38:39 workshop for August on item 69 on the agenda.
15:38:42 According to the calendar theres no workshop scheduled
15:38:44 for August.
15:38:46 Because of the Florida League of Cities.
15:38:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think we should query and see if
15:38:51 we really are going to go to that.
15:38:54 Do we have that conversation?
15:38:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This item again is the workshop on --
15:39:01 >>THE CLERK: Set for August on the public notice
15:39:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I brought that the that to the
15:39:09 attention of Julia Cole.
15:39:11 She said, council, if you set it for a meeting in -- I
15:39:15 believe she said June or July, either one, he oh-not a
15:39:24 She said this can be taken care we've staff report.
15:39:26 It's her opinion -- rather than wait.
15:39:29 Because the next workshop would be the end of
15:39:30 September, which is over four months away.
15:39:33 And I don't know whether council wishes to do that.
15:39:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What's the issue again?
15:39:40 >> It's About the public notice requirements with
15:39:42 variances on land zoning.
15:39:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could we do it the end of June?
15:39:47 >> July.
15:39:48 June is too -- it's your last meeting.
15:39:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The second meeting in July perhaps?
15:39:54 >>THE CLERK: The 29th.
15:39:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to set it on the 29th
15:39:57 under staff reports.
15:39:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.
15:40:00 (Motion carried)
15:40:02 Anyone from the public wish to address council?
15:40:05 Mr. Fletcher, you don't have anything?
15:40:08 We stand adjourned.
15:40:10 Thank you.
15:40:11 (Meeting adjourned)
The preceding represents an unedited version of
realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon
for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
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.