Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tuesday, June 22, 2010

10:00 a.m. session - Budget Discussion


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.

>>THOMAS SCOTT: Tampa City Council will now come to


10:03:17 We'll stand for our invocation.

10:03:20 Remain standing for the pledge of allegiance.

10:03:26 We are always grateful and privileged to come into your

10:03:30 presence and say thank you.

10:03:31 Thank you for the blessings of this day.

10:03:32 We pray now for our nation, for our country.

10:03:35 We pray for those who lead us in Washington.

10:03:39 We pray for our president and the decisions that he

10:03:41 must make and decide us -- guide us in this war and the

10:03:45 Gulf catastrophe.

10:03:46 We pray now that you might protect our men and women

10:03:50 who are fighting for democracy and freedom around the

10:03:53 world.

10:03:53 We pray for our City Council today as we review the

10:03:56 budget together and share with the different

10:03:58 departments.

10:03:59 Give us wisdom, knowledge and insight.

10:04:01 Thank you for your blessings.

10:04:02 In your name we pray.

10:04:03 Amen.

10:04:04 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]

10:04:06 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll have roll call.

10:04:24 Clerk

10:04:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.

10:04:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

10:04:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.

10:04:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

10:04:33 Okay.

10:04:33 This is -- I am going to turn it over to Councilwoman

10:04:41 Mary Mulhern, chairman of our budget Finance Committee.

10:04:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:04:47 I just got my agenda.

10:04:48 And my book.

10:04:49 So I'm going to turn it over to Bonnie Wise to

10:04:54 introduce who we are going to hear from today.

10:04:56 We are going to discuss the budget with budget

10:04:59 representatives.

10:05:01 Bonnie is going to fill us in.

10:05:02 >>BONNIE WISE: Director of revenue and finance.

10:05:07 You have a few documents.

10:05:10 Before you, you have a City Council budget workshop

10:05:13 book.

10:05:14 The presentation that we are going to go through today

10:05:16 is behind the first tab that says workshop

10:05:21 presentation.

10:05:22 And then there are various other items in this book.

10:05:24 There's a report on governments by mood Y, and not for

10:05:31 us to go through today but for you to go through at a

10:05:33 later time is information regarding the budget that we

10:05:36 have provided to the budget -- to the various

10:05:38 departments to begin their budget process.

10:05:41 And similar to what you as council members, as the

10:05:44 council received, this is their beginning starting

10:05:47 point.

10:05:48 And so I know that you did just get this, and this will

10:05:53 give you an opportunity before our next budget work for

10:05:56 you to go through this and answer any questions.

10:05:58 Today we are going to -- I am going to provide an

10:06:00 overview for you.

10:06:01 A follow-up from our six-month update that we had about

10:06:04 a month ago.

10:06:05 We are going to go extensively to parking.

10:06:07 I did touch on parking in the six-month update, but

10:06:11 parking is really going to impact the general fund

10:06:13 considerably.

10:06:14 This coming year.

10:06:17 We knew this was coming and wanted to go through the

10:06:22 intricacies of the parking department so those folks

10:06:24 are here.

10:06:25 And we are going to touch on solid waste as well.

10:06:29 But really just touch on it because I know that Tonja

10:06:32 is going to be before you at City Council on Thursday.

10:06:36 So just wanted to give you a little preview.

10:06:40 If you could pull out your budget workshop item.

10:06:47 That would be good.

10:06:50 This is a follow-up, as I said, to our six-month

10:06:53 update.

10:06:54 As you know, our department revenue and finance is one

10:06:57 of the developments that has gone through a

10:06:59 consolidation effort.

10:07:00 And I am going to talk some more about the

10:07:02 consolidation as we go forward.

10:07:03 So my new staff, my consolidated staff worked on this,

10:07:08 and this has worked out very well, because these are

10:07:11 folks who some of them came from the outside but some

10:07:14 of them came from the various departments.

10:07:16 And so that was part of working together with our

10:07:19 departments to ensure greater information flow, and

10:07:23 that is really becoming -- we are seeing some benefits

10:07:26 of it as we are going through this budget process.

10:07:30 But as we talk about the budget as we have today, I

10:07:33 want to use the word "preliminary" a lot, because we

10:07:36 are now just developing the budget.

10:07:39 So these numbers that I am giving you today are

10:07:42 preliminary regarding that.

10:07:45 We are also -- I wanted to update you about several

10:07:50 bond issues and talk about solid waste later.

10:07:53 I have spoken to a few of you before about this.

10:07:55 The solid waste is for some savings.

10:07:58 I am going to mention that later.

10:07:59 We are looking at refunding the 2001 CIT bond because

10:08:04 interest rates are lower and potential savings.

10:08:08 So these are things that we do on an ongoing basis to

10:08:11 see if we can save some money.

10:08:13 We Powerball may take out the stormwater commercial

10:08:16 paper and the water commercial paper, because interest

10:08:19 rates are relatively low, and you have probably all

10:08:21 heard a little bit about the America bond program from

10:08:26 the federal government that may help us reduce interest

10:08:29 rates too. So just want you to know that that's going

10:08:32 on as we come before you with bond issues.

10:08:34 And finally, the information that we are using here for

10:08:39 property values is what we have received most recently

10:08:43 from the property appraiser's office.

10:08:46 However, within the next week, we will be receiving

10:08:50 final certified values.

10:08:51 So we do expect it to change a little bit every year.

10:08:55 It does tend to change slightly from the estimate that

10:08:57 they provide to us, but the information that you have

10:09:01 here before you is the most recent information that we

10:09:03 have.

10:09:05 Just as a quick reminder, July 22nd, you all have

10:09:08 scheduled your next budget workshop.

10:09:10 So as you go through this, and as you go through your

10:09:13 book, if you can think about what departments you would

10:09:16 like to have at your July 22nd update, I think that

10:09:22 would be helpful and let me know later.

10:09:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonnie, I have a question just looking

10:09:27 at that first page with the general fund utility tax

10:09:30 fund, and what you just said about the property taxes.

10:09:35 So last year we budgeted our budget projection for that

10:09:38 was $137 million, and then you got projected 2010 up to

10:09:47 139.

10:09:47 So is that 139 based on the current property

10:09:52 appraiser's record?

10:09:55 >> The 139 is what we would have collected for this

10:09:57 fiscal year that we are in, fiscal year '10, so a

10:10:01 little higher than what we budgeted which was a

10:10:03 positive thing that occurred --

10:10:06 >>MARY MULHERN: But based on the actual --

10:10:08 >>> The fiscal year '11 is what I was referring to, 123

10:10:13 million.

10:10:13 And I am going to go through each of those.

10:10:15 >> You are going to explain to us why that went down.

10:10:19 That projection is so low based on the fact that it

10:10:23 actually -- there was more than -- the actual revenue

10:10:29 was higher than what we projected last year.

10:10:31 So --

10:10:33 >> Right.

10:10:35 Property values.

10:10:35 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.

10:10:39 >> Long introduction but wanted to let you know.

10:10:42 All righty.

10:10:43 So today as I mentioned, the overview we go through the

10:10:47 general fund and just a minute tax fund, parking fund

10:10:50 and update on solid waste.

10:10:52 Okay, back to the PowerPoint.

10:10:58 For fiscal year '11, we had the anticipate that

10:11:01 revenues will be less than fiscal year '10.

10:11:06 I am going to go through that.

10:11:09 From there taxable value will show you a graft of about

10:11:14 10.7%.

10:11:15 As I mentioned, we will have that exact number.

10:11:18 As you might recall, property values are based on

10:11:22 January 1 of the years that we are in.

10:11:24 So the information we will shall getting from the

10:11:26 property tax collector's -- appraiser's office are

10:11:30 values of January 1, 2010, which basically reflect

10:11:33 activity in '09.

10:11:35 So just kind of put in the perspective what happened in

10:11:37 the market since then.

10:11:42 And these are the revenues that Councilwoman Mulhern

10:11:45 was just referring to.

10:11:46 So we budgeted for fiscal year '10, $137 million, and

10:11:52 we anticipate that through fiscal year '10 we'll

10:11:56 actually collect about $139 million.

10:11:59 So a little bit better than budget.

10:12:01 Remember, we always budget less than 100 percent of

10:12:03 collection because we are required to.

10:12:07 And also because, as you know, when you pay real

10:12:09 property taxes, you try to take advantage of the

10:12:12 discount.

10:12:13 We had various other revenues that have been coming in,

10:12:16 some a little bit higher than budget in fiscal year 10

10:12:20 and some a little lower.

10:12:21 But if you look interestingly in total the budget book

10:12:25 from fiscal year 10 to where we are projecting is

10:12:28 almost exactly, which is frankly unusual.

10:12:35 Some up, some down.

10:12:36 But you can see there that some of the swings.

10:12:39 And then you can see our forecast.

10:12:40 I am going to go through these various items

10:12:45 individually as well.

10:12:45 But of course the material one being the property tax

10:12:48 value declining.

10:12:53 Our expenses, however, are anticipated to be about $13

10:12:57 million more than fiscal year 10, and mainly due to

10:13:02 these following items.

10:13:05 Pension.

10:13:05 You heard me talk about pension.

10:13:07 I am going to show you another graph on pension.

10:13:09 Pension is increasing substantially in fiscal year 11.

10:13:13 It increased in fiscal year 10, you may remember.

10:13:16 But in fiscal year 11 we are going to have a big

10:13:19 increase so we are having to incorporate that.

10:13:21 The parking deficit.

10:13:23 Fiscal year 11 so the general fund is going to have to

10:13:27 contribute to the parking fund.

10:13:28 And despite the departments as well as City Council

10:13:33 participating in this exercise of reducing your fiscal

10:13:36 year 10 budget and your fiscal year 11 proposed budget

10:13:39 certain areas of the operating expenses are increasing,

10:13:42 mainly fuel and electricity.

10:13:44 So we are doing whatever we can to reduce those costs,

10:13:48 but we are anticipating higher costs.

10:13:50 And then you heard me mention at the six-month update

10:13:54 about the downtown CRA.

10:13:55 The mayor is going to invite you, if she has not done

10:13:59 so already, to a separate meeting in her conference

10:14:02 room, really to discuss the CRAs.

10:14:05 I know the chairman and I have talked about it.

10:14:10 As much as the city property values are declining,

10:14:15 approximately 11%, the CRA values are increasing much

10:14:19 greater than that.

10:14:20 And that is going to -- declining, like 30% from 20%,

10:14:28 and that is going to have a material impact on the

10:14:30 CRAs, and that really is going to require, like I

10:14:35 said, the mayor is inviting you to this meeting, once

10:14:37 we have those final values.

10:14:39 So within the next few weeks.

10:14:41 Because it is really going to be a roll-up-the-sleeves

10:14:45 and see what's happening in each individual CRA, to the

10:14:48 point now where some of you who have been on council

10:14:50 for a while will remember that we are not able to cover

10:14:53 the convention center debt service anymore in the

10:14:55 downtown CRA.

10:14:57 And that was really how it was for the beginning of

10:15:00 time, until really just several years ago.

10:15:06 And so now we have a situation where the general fund

10:15:08 is going to have to help pay for certain expenses of

10:15:12 the downtown CRA.

10:15:13 So I wanted to let you know that that's coming.

10:15:15 And we have incorporated some of that in these numbers.

10:15:20 All righty.

10:15:21 So the next page shows our agenda fund expenditures.

10:15:25 You can see there in total that the budget book was

10:15:29 about $426 million in expenditures and we are really

10:15:32 only projected to spend about $407 million.

10:15:36 And that was really due to concentrated efforts I am

10:15:41 going to go through and really developing a savings

10:15:44 account per se this year.

10:15:47 It's almost like we passed the budget, and then

10:15:50 everybody started cutting their budgets and trying to

10:15:53 save money however they could.

10:15:54 As I mentioned, even council participated in that

10:15:57 exercise.

10:15:57 So we have really gotten to the point where we are we

10:16:03 anticipate spending about 407 million.

10:16:05 However, our forecast for '11 at this time

10:16:08 preliminarily shows about 419 million which is still

10:16:11 less than our fiscal year '10 budget because of the

10:16:15 exercise we did this year as well as asking the

10:16:18 departments to even roll back their budgets some more

10:16:21 for fiscal year '11.

10:16:23 But the personnel you can see increases substantially

10:16:27 due to the pension matter.

10:16:29 So let's go through it.

10:16:30 What does that mean in total?

10:16:32 Our total revenues, about 387 million, with our

10:16:36 expenditures about 419 million.

10:16:38 So about $33 million difference.

10:16:43 You remember the number from fiscal year '10 where we

10:16:46 were at $31 million difference and that was the amount

10:16:50 that we had the gap there last year.

10:16:54 I do want to note that we had various consolidation

10:16:57 efforts going on that resulted in net savings.

10:17:00 But what I did is I backed it out of both the revenue

10:17:04 side and the expenditure side to keep this clean apples

10:17:07 and apples for you.

10:17:09 So I just wanted to point that out.

10:17:10 Just an accounting matter that I wanted to bring to

10:17:10 your attention.

10:17:13 So various consolidations, you heard about them,

10:17:18 revenue and finance I mentioned.

10:17:20 You heard about it for human resources.

10:17:22 You heard it in technology and innovation.

10:17:24 Even contract admin.

10:17:26 So we want to make it really clear that those efforts

10:17:31 have in net resulted in savings and what we feel are

10:17:34 really better service to our departments, to our

10:17:36 customers.

10:17:38 What we have done over this past year is saved about

10:17:42 almost $20 million.

10:17:43 I mentioned this in our six-month update that we have

10:17:47 created this essential savings account of about $20

10:17:50 million because all the departments have participated.

10:17:52 So this is everything from the consolidation, it is --

10:18:00 it's layoff.

10:18:01 It's not having -- elimination of vacant positions,

10:18:07 various other savings, and over $7 million of

10:18:11 operational savings that have occurred this year, that

10:18:14 we will be able to use that $20 million to help fund

10:18:16 that '11 budget.

10:18:18 You heard me say this, too.

10:18:19 Every dollar we save this year helps us for next year

10:18:23 and this exactly shows how $20 million is helping us

10:18:27 save for next year.

10:18:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me ask you a question.

10:18:31 Are you going to go to a certain point to ask questions

10:18:33 or do you prefer us to ask questions as you go?

10:18:37 >>BONNIE WISE: Whatever your preference is.

10:18:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder wanted to raise

10:18:41 a question.

10:18:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, just as you go.

10:18:43 Otherwise I'll probably forget.

10:18:45 So when you talk about things like departmental

10:18:48 consolidation, some of us, as we have seen the memos,

10:18:54 some of those savings are concrete, salaries, eliminate

10:19:00 X number of positions and that sort of thing.

10:19:02 Some of them are a little --

10:19:05 >>BONNIE WISE: Intangible.

10:19:06 >> Intangible, projected, hopeful, that sort of thing.

10:19:09 The concrete ones, the tangible ones, fine.

10:19:12 But how do you deal with those that are a little more

10:19:15 speculative?

10:19:18 >>BONNIE WISE: It's a good question because I think

10:19:19 there are various advantages in the consolidation.

10:19:21 So a purely mathematical savings, you know, numbers of

10:19:25 people, those bodies, those positions, I'm able to

10:19:28 include it.

10:19:29 The things that are not so concrete and financial, I

10:19:33 haven't included.

10:19:34 But I'm seeing the benefits of that already.

10:19:36 Jim Corbin and I were just talking about it.

10:19:40 Mike Fitzgerald who used to work in public works is now

10:19:43 in my department.

10:19:44 And because of that we are having great dialogue, great

10:19:48 synergy in working with Jim and formulating his budget.

10:19:50 Hard to put a price on that.

10:19:52 But I think in the end, it really is going to be a

10:19:54 better process.

10:19:55 >> So you're taking a more conservative approach and

10:19:58 not including some of those speculative savings?

10:20:03 >>BONNIE WISE: Right.

10:20:03 For now.

10:20:04 Until they really come to fruition.

10:20:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:20:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman.

10:20:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonnie, when you have that savings of

10:20:14 19 million, is that before or after you figured out the

10:20:21 13 million shortfall in the general fund and utility

10:20:26 fund?

10:20:30 >>BONNIE WISE: That is -- I guess the point is that we

10:20:35 thought we were going to use $31 million of fund

10:20:38 balance in fiscal 10.

10:20:40 We are really only going to need 12, because of the

10:20:42 efforts we have taken, we have tangible savings of 19.5

10:20:46 million.

10:20:46 >> So you still are going to have that 13.

10:20:49 So what you are saying at this point is 13 million is

10:20:52 the shortfall?

10:20:56 >>> 13 million for '11, yes.

10:20:58 Thank you.

10:20:59 >>MARY MULHERN: And here is my other question.

10:21:01 And I know that -- I want to give credit to our budget

10:21:05 advisory committee working with you, and I know that

10:21:12 they had a lot of questions about the fund balance both

10:21:19 encumbered and unencumbered, and I would like to know

10:21:23 if some of that 19 million that you found was part of

10:21:25 that effort to find money that we had purchase orders

10:21:31 on from other years, that was already in the fund

10:21:34 balance.

10:21:35 Is that part of what is in there?

10:21:38 >>BONNIE WISE: No, not really.

10:21:39 >>MARY MULHERN: That's based on the actual actions

10:21:45 taken with the reduction of personnel costs?

10:21:50 >> It is personnel but it's operating as well.

10:21:53 But the part that's the advisory committee is talking

10:21:57 about is outstanding purchase orders and that kind of

10:22:00 thing, and that has been an ongoing effort, and it is a

10:22:04 way, clearly, to find moneys that are not being used

10:22:08 that perhaps for projects, or activities that we

10:22:11 thought were going to be done, and now aren't done.

10:22:15 So it does give the opportunity for the department to

10:22:17 really evaluate their own budgets.

10:22:21 >> I can ask you about that later.

10:22:24 One other question that goes back to the basic

10:22:27 expenses.

10:22:30 Our biggest expense always is general fund expense.

10:22:36 And so you got personnel.

10:22:39 What I'm curious about is when you total up our

10:22:42 personnel costs, does that include all the private

10:22:48 contracts, the privatization that we put into place as

10:22:53 a result of eliminating staff?

10:22:57 >>> No.

10:22:58 >> Is that somewhere in here?

10:23:00 >>> Yes, it in the operating expenses.

10:23:02 >>MARY MULHERN: So all those contracts for actual

10:23:05 labor are in the operating expenses?

10:23:08 >>> It's all included in the budget, yes, but not on

10:23:10 the personnel side.

10:23:11 For the personnel side, our government and any

10:23:16 government, frankly, the biggest expenditure are

10:23:18 people.

10:23:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, so I am going to ask right now,

10:23:22 and I'll ask it again at the end, for our next meeting,

10:23:26 if we can see how much we are spending on those

10:23:29 contracts.

10:23:31 So it's probably going to -- I'm sure you are going to

10:23:34 have to do that by department, have them tell you how

10:23:36 much we are spending on the parks, security, I don't

10:23:41 know, what other departments have been privatized,

10:23:45 solid waste, so we can see a total of what we are

10:23:49 spending on contracts for employment, basically,

10:23:57 privatize.

10:23:57 >> We'll see what we can do.

10:23:59 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.

10:24:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:24:05 I believe that we should expand on that to be fair with

10:24:08 both sides.

10:24:10 If you are going to ask a question, then those

10:24:13 contracts that are let out to private individuals,

10:24:16 whether it's repair or sewer line, so forth and so on,

10:24:21 to have just the cost, and then if we would have done

10:24:24 it, what would that cost be in addition to the other

10:24:27 items that we would have had to pay, which is about a

10:24:30 30% cost increase.

10:24:32 So in order to be fair with the numbers, I think that

10:24:37 you ought to have a configuration of this is what we

10:24:41 paid and this is what it would have cost if we would

10:24:43 have done it.

10:24:44 >> This year when we see a skyrocket in the pension

10:24:49 cost, for example.

10:24:50 >>MARY MULHERN: That would be great if you want to do

10:24:52 that.

10:24:53 My interest is just seeing a total number, which I

10:24:56 thought would be easy to do.

10:24:57 So, yeah, that would be great if you can break it down

10:25:00 for us, too.

10:25:02 But I would rather not hold my breath for that and just

10:25:04 get -- it doesn't seem like it would be that difficult

10:25:07 to give us some total figures on the cost of the

10:25:11 privatized contracts.

10:25:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Discussing the pension costs today?

10:25:18 >>> There is going to be a chart on pension so maybe

10:25:21 you can ask me then.

10:25:24 It's such a large component.

10:25:29 So these are some of the actions that we took this year

10:25:32 and next year to help us get to this budget, the

10:25:37 consolidations, the operating expense reductions.

10:25:40 We are still working with the departments to continue

10:25:42 to reduce their operating expenditures.

10:25:44 So like I said, the books that you have has the budget

10:25:50 office first sent to the department and we are still

10:25:51 working with them on creating their budgets for fiscal

10:25:54 year '11.

10:25:56 And as you know, the deletion of vacant and noncritical

10:25:59 positions, because personnel is such a huge factor.

10:26:05 So as I mentioned, in fiscal year '10, we were able to

10:26:11 create that savings account of about $20 million.

10:26:16 And this is really where it came from, in those various

10:26:19 areas.

10:26:20 Compensation and benefits.

10:26:22 Operating expenditures and capital expenses.

10:26:27 To narrow it down and summarize it for you.

10:26:30 So really kudos to all the departments for working with

10:26:33 us in order to ultimately help us balance the '11

10:26:39 budget to do this.

10:26:40 Here I am going to talk about some of the major revenue

10:26:43 trends.

10:26:44 These are property taxes, and there is later a property

10:26:47 value on discussion.

10:26:48 So here is our property taxes.

10:26:51 Interestingly, we are back to fiscal year '05 numbers

10:26:55 in property taxes.

10:26:57 You can see thereby, '06, 07, we had that huge

10:27:01 increase.

10:27:02 Then with the legislative changes, and then of course

10:27:04 the red for fiscal year 10 and 11, that's been the

10:27:09 economy.

10:27:09 And so this shows values as of January 1, and as soon

10:27:13 as we get this updated, we'll let you know.

10:27:16 But we anticipate about that $123.7 million that fund

10:27:22 the current millage rate.

10:27:24 So you can see where we are there.

10:27:26 The exercise that we did internally was drafting

10:27:30 departments to go back to their '09 expenses.

10:27:33 But you can see that we are really on the property tax

10:27:37 side anyway closer to '05 in revenue.

10:27:41 TECO franchise fee came up in '05 to '06, and up a

10:27:46 little bit, and we are seeing the projected for fiscal

10:27:50 year '10 really to be flat from 'on the and '11

10:27:56 anticipating it to be flat as well.

10:27:59 This is one of these troublesome graphs, for lack of a

10:28:05 better adjective here.

10:28:08 You can see since '06 has been steadily declining, and

10:28:14 we are anticipating based on information we are getting

10:28:17 from the state a further decline.

10:28:19 So that's one area.

10:28:21 And then we are not really talking about C.I.T. at this

10:28:24 time, but of course when there's general sales tax

10:28:27 decline, our C.I.T. revenues decline as well.

10:28:31 Which is why partly why we are looking at refunding

10:28:35 those bonds if we can get some debt service savings,

10:28:39 free up some funds there.

10:28:42 The same kind of trend there that we are seeing.

10:28:45 Convention center.

10:28:50 Santiago assures me he is going to pull it out in the

10:28:53 end in '10 and they are really doing whatever they can

10:28:56 to do that.

10:28:57 Just the overall economy, the overall trend for

10:29:00 convention centers.

10:29:01 And ours is frankly faring well better than many others

10:29:05 in the state and in the nation.

10:29:06 But we are anticipating a further decline in the

10:29:09 convention center revenues.

10:29:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The big convention changes forecast

10:29:20 and bump --

10:29:22 >>BONNIE WISE: In 2012?

10:29:23 That's the item.

10:29:24 2012.

10:29:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So we wouldn't see that on here.

10:29:28 >>> Right.

10:29:29 Next fiscal year, right.

10:29:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Maybe you can get the deposits.

10:29:32 >>> I know they are really working through the

10:29:34 agreements, and that the fee is going to pay for all

10:29:39 their services.

10:29:41 So a good thing.

10:29:42 Building permit fees.

10:29:45 It's kind of jagged.

10:29:46 We did have a change in January of 2010.

10:29:51 But you know that the volume is just down considerably.

10:29:55 So we are not really seeing an improvement there.

10:30:00 Here is the pension.

10:30:02 This is city-wide pension, police and fire is only in

10:30:05 the general fund.

10:30:06 But I thought it was interesting to go back to '06 and

10:30:10 you can see in '06 we were at a pretty high

10:30:13 contribution as well.

10:30:14 But not as high as what we are seeing in fiscal year

10:30:20 '11.

10:30:20 This is really reflective of calendar year '08 decline

10:30:24 from the market.

10:30:25 And so, yes, in calendar '09 there was an increase.

10:30:30 But the returns were both in GE and in S&P down so much

10:30:35 in calendar year '08 that we are seeing this huge

10:30:39 increase.

10:30:39 This is not only going to affect the city, the police

10:30:42 and fire contribute to their pension plan, so they too

10:30:45 are going to see a significant increase in their

10:30:47 payments.

10:30:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Because the pension fund is such a

10:30:53 very large sum, is there anyway we can mitigate, you

10:31:00 know, the scale of the basic investment with what both

10:31:03 the individual firefighters and police put in and what

10:31:06 we put in?

10:31:08 I mean, you know how obviously over time it ebbs and

10:31:12 flows.

10:31:13 This is obviously a very tough time, because I assume

10:31:18 there's a $2 billion fund at this point?

10:31:21 >> I think S&P is less than that.

10:31:23 I don't -- for some reason, it's a little over a

10:31:26 billion, I believe.

10:31:28 But I'm not positive.

10:31:29 But it is a large fund.

10:31:31 One thing that they do, they do try to actuarial smooth

10:31:36 the contribution.

10:31:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

10:31:38 That's the term I was looking for.

10:31:40 >>> Yes, which they are doing.

10:31:42 I believe that's over a five-year period.

10:31:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's what I thought.

10:31:46 So it's less arduous.

10:31:48 >>BONNIE WISE: If they were not actuarial smoothing it,

10:31:51 the contribution frankly would even be greater.

10:31:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So this reflects that?

10:31:59 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes, right.

10:32:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Goodness.

10:32:02 Okay.

10:32:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Chairman?

10:32:07 In regard to that, going back to this earlier spike,

10:32:11 the '05 spike, thirteen eight, before that you had 9/11

10:32:21 and the economy dropping, and I guess the dot com

10:32:29 stuff, was that around this time?

10:32:31 >>> Dot com, right.

10:32:32 >> But then look at that $12 million drop, can we

10:32:38 optimistically anticipate that even though it's nine

10:32:43 teen five and eleven, in 12 and 13 that will drop back

10:32:47 down radically?

10:32:49 >> No.

10:32:49 The short answer is no.

10:32:50 But your observation is accurate.

10:32:52 Your observation is accurate because the year 2000 was

10:32:57 a terrible year in the market.

10:32:59 And 2000 was bad and 2001 was bad even before 9/11

10:33:04 occurred and it did get even worse.

10:33:06 So you're right that the 13.8 is a result of that very

10:33:09 poor market that you were referring to.

10:33:10 >> With the three or four year lag?

10:33:13 >> Right.

10:33:14 But '05, and we don't have it here, but believing that

10:33:20 '05 was high, too, and '04 was high as well.

10:33:24 So what happened, in that five-year period is when they

10:33:27 had high contributions to cover that decline that

10:33:30 occurred in 2000, 2001, and then we had several good

10:33:35 solid years in the stock market, which is why the

10:33:38 contributions were so low.

10:33:39 So if we were to have very positive returns in the next

10:33:43 few years, ultimately, yes, what you are describing

10:33:46 would ultimately happen, it just won't happen in '12

10:33:50 and -- calendar years 12 and $13 because we are still

10:33:54 making up for the 2008 decline.

10:33:58 So they do try to it off and smooth it out.

10:34:02 But, now, it just depends what happens in the market.

10:34:05 But we are still going to have in 2012 and 13 the

10:34:08 contributions where they will be still at that high

10:34:11 level.

10:34:11 They may not increase necessarily, but they will still

10:34:15 be at that high level, I'm anticipating.

10:34:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonnie, I have some questions on that,

10:34:22 too.

10:34:22 On the police and -- fire and police pension fund.

10:34:27 Did you say that that projection in these numbers on

10:34:30 the graph that we have are based on both the city's

10:34:34 contribution and the employee contribution?

10:34:40 >>BONNIE WISE: This is just ours.

10:34:41 But I wanted you to know --

10:34:44 >>MARY MULHERN: What the contribution has gone up to.

10:34:46 Okay.

10:34:46 Then my next question, I don't seem to see in here what

10:34:49 this total for what the city is spending on the general

10:34:56 employees pension, the union, and also the non-union

10:35:04 personnel.

10:35:05 >>> You know what?

10:35:07 I have a graph on general fund pension and it appears

10:35:12 to have disappeared.

10:35:21 Sorry.

10:35:23 I can put it on the Elmo from a previous version.

10:35:25 >>MARY MULHERN: That would be good.

10:35:27 >>BONNIE WISE: I'm so sorry about that.

10:35:35 This is before we switched to yellow.

10:35:39 So this is the draft.

10:35:46 Thank you.

10:35:46 Sorry.

10:35:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Looks about the same.

10:35:50 >> For general employees, they are on a different --

10:35:59 >> However, I believe you have it as part of the

10:36:03 six-month show on the tab inside the book.

10:36:08 We have also included the six-month.

10:36:12 >> What's the difference between the green and a blue

10:37:05 arrow?

10:37:06 >> What we anticipated it to be so we are going to have

10:37:09 a little bit of savings in fiscal year 10.

10:37:12 >>MARY MULHERN: So 20.5 is what was budgeted and the

10:37:15 reality --

10:37:16 >>> For fiscal year '11 it's going to be about 21.4

10:37:19 million as I recall.

10:37:20 So that one is going up a little bit.

10:37:22 We had the bigger hit on pension in this fiscal year as

10:37:27 you can see from 12.1 to 19 million.

10:37:29 >> And does that include all employees or just the

10:37:33 union employees?

10:37:34 >> All employees.

10:37:36 All non-sworn employees.

10:37:38 And that would include even people who work in police

10:37:40 and fire, who are nonsworn.

10:37:43 They are just general employees as well.

10:37:45 >> And make the same contribution, right?

10:37:48 >> For division B, we have the division A and division

10:37:52 B.

10:37:52 The division B, which is most of the employees,

10:37:54 division A may be less than 200 people still in it.

10:37:58 Division A people do contribute 7% of pay.

10:38:00 But there are very few in position A people still.

10:38:05 In our program.

10:38:10 And the reason is that they are on a different fiscal

10:38:13 year than S&P so that's why we took the bigger hit this

10:38:17 year with a little bit of increase in 11 but S&P is on

10:38:22 a calendar year basis.

10:38:49 You had asked about this a little bit ago to give you a

10:38:52 feel of what's been happening with the property values.

10:38:54 So we had big increases in the years '050 through '08.

10:39:02 As you can see the percentages, '07 being the largest

10:39:06 increase of 20% in property values.

10:39:08 And then the decline a little bit in '09.

10:39:11 And then '10, now, the budget year we are in.

10:39:16 And then another 11%.

10:39:17 And the other thing that we are really seeing change is

10:39:20 the new construction.

10:39:22 Historically, we have had large amounts of new

10:39:25 construction.

10:39:26 The highest was actually in '09 because that reflected

10:39:35 all the activity in of '06 and '07 of new construction,

10:39:39 then in fiscal year 11 about 1 -- we went from a

10:39:44 billion in '09 to 342 million in '11.

10:39:49 Once again those numbers will be finalized shortly.

10:39:53 So that's what we are facing.

10:39:54 Does that answer your question on values be? Okay.

10:39:59 And as you might recall, we don't have to go through

10:40:02 this whole legislative matter.

10:40:04 But in '07 when cities and counties were really

10:40:08 experiencing huge value increase, the legislature did

10:40:11 pass rules on how much of the increases governments

10:40:16 would be able to keep, and they established these

10:40:19 formulas that even when there are increases, you are

10:40:23 required to go back to the rollback rate, but you get

10:40:26 an adjustment for what's called the FPI, and it's

10:40:29 the -- Florida personal income, FPI.

10:40:35 And this is the first time that I'm aware of that the

10:40:37 FPI is actually a negative number.

10:40:40 So for 2009 the FPI was negative 1.89.

10:40:44 And the state shows statistics back to 1990, I believe.

10:40:49 The highest the FPI ever was in '05 at 6.87 so you can

10:40:56 see it's kind of a narrow band.

10:40:57 But if you were to change your millage based on their

10:41:00 new rules, actually, could you go to a rollback rate of

10:41:05 6.4 mills and that would get you basically the same

10:41:08 amount of refuse New Port Richey that we got the prior

10:41:10 year, and that's how the rollback works.

10:41:12 It's a little bit odd because a rollback to me

10:41:15 typically means you are rolling your millage rate back,

10:41:18 because values are normally increasing.

10:41:19 We are in a different situation by declining and

10:41:24 therefore to get the same property tax revenue, you

10:41:27 would actually have to significantly increase your

10:41:30 millage rate.

10:41:30 So I just wanted you to see how much more of a millage

10:41:33 rate you would have to get to get to that value because

10:41:36 of the huge decline.

10:41:38 But then the law says that you would have to actually

10:41:40 make an adjustment for the FPI which is a negative

10:41:43 number so you have to go down to the 6.29.

10:41:46 Then there's other rules on a super majority, and it's

10:41:51 under your discretion.

10:41:52 For purposes of this analysis, we didn't show the CRA

10:41:56 impact because it really does can you complicate the

10:41:58 formula, but trying to give you a feel for what that

10:42:01 means.

10:42:01 Then those are the rules that you have there.

10:42:04 So just as you recall, you have heard the mayor say

10:42:08 this a lot of times, let's say next year, not in fiscal

10:42:13 year 11 but fiscal year 12 the property values would go

10:42:17 up, which don't think will happen 20%, you know,

10:42:20 something crazy, this formula would say we could only

10:42:25 keep the property tax increase related to the FPI,

10:42:29 which would be a positive number.

10:42:35 So unless you circumvent it -- sorry, unless you have

10:42:38 an override of the process.

10:42:40 So that's just the limiting factors that the

10:42:43 legislature has imposed now on local government.

10:42:47 Anything else on the general fund before we go to

10:42:49 parking?

10:42:55 Jim is here and Steve Daignault is here with me to

10:42:58 answer any specific parking questions but I am going to

10:43:00 go through this presentation.

10:43:01 We are going to talk about the impact of the economy on

10:43:03 the parking system.

10:43:05 Some of the actions that the parking system has taken

10:43:09 to operate more efficiently, and from time to time you

10:43:13 hear about certain agreements that the parking system

10:43:16 has, that they confine their ability to raise revenue

10:43:21 or to operate as fluidly as they perhaps would like to.

10:43:25 And so I am going to go through that.

10:43:29 What's happening, of course, the downtown employment

10:43:32 space is declining so we have just less employees

10:43:35 parking, generally.

10:43:38 Fort Brooks, for example, was historically a garage

10:43:40 that has had a waiting list.

10:43:42 There is currently not a waiting list at Fort Brooke

10:43:45 anymore.

10:43:46 And the downtown building owners, because they are

10:43:49 having declining occupancy, are wanting to pay late or

10:43:53 not pay at all.

10:43:57 What has the parking system done?

10:43:59 Several things.

10:44:00 They are continuing their equipment automation.

10:44:03 This helps them to reduce staffing, and to help them

10:44:06 increase collections.

10:44:07 So that's one area.

10:44:10 They have reduced their STE's from 188 to 100.

10:44:15 This is a huge change that they have been doing.

10:44:18 And this allows them a little bit more flexibility on

10:44:21 scheduling their staff oh to adhere to events and

10:44:25 whatnot as opposed to having people waiting and being

10:44:28 on their full time.

10:44:30 And then we have received some stimulus money, and we

10:44:33 have made some garage and lighting improvements which

10:44:36 are great for safety as well as for efficiencies as

10:44:39 well.

10:44:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonnie, on that slide we have heard

10:44:49 and run into some problems with the automated parking

10:44:52 when -- for instance, if you have a garage, do you have

10:45:01 an employee in the garage in case the equipment

10:45:04 malfunctions, is that right?

10:45:06 >> In fact, I want Jim to come up and address that

10:45:10 specifically.

10:45:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Then I guess this would be a question

10:45:13 for you, too, Jim.

10:45:16 I would like to see some numbers on this.

10:45:22 So you are down 12 employees.

10:45:24 I would like to see the difference in costs.

10:45:28 What is the cost savings compared to the automation?

10:45:36 >> I don't have that info with me today, obviously.

10:45:39 Good morning.

10:45:40 Jim Corbett, parking division manager.

10:45:45 We do have a number of employees still in the garage

10:45:47 and operating or assisting with this equipment.

10:45:50 The automated equipment is certainly something that's

10:45:53 new to the bay area within the past couple of years.

10:45:56 We were fortunate enough that the Port Authority garage

10:45:59 had gone to automation at the same time we did to help

10:46:03 build that strength in numbers of just getting folks

10:46:08 familiar with this type of a revenue collection system.

10:46:10 You don't see it as much at the Tampa International

10:46:12 Airport, but of course they certainly do have automated

10:46:15 lanes, probably 50% of their lanes during peak times

10:46:19 are now paid through the automated cashierless system.

10:46:25 But you are always going to need a body present in the

10:46:28 event somebody doesn't understand, if it's their

10:46:30 first-time experience.

10:46:31 >> There is always somebody that can help you?

10:46:33 >> During peak times.

10:46:36 You will find, what we do is after, say, 10:00 at night

10:46:40 if there's nothing going on in that facility, you may

10:46:42 still have a handful of cars that are actually in the

10:46:45 facility.

10:46:46 But as you approach that exit lane or standing in front

10:46:48 of that automated machine there is a number that you

10:46:51 can call, and we can our mobile security guard respond

10:46:54 ton that type of situation and assist you with your

10:46:57 transaction.

10:46:57 >> Okay.

10:46:59 And what occurs to me -- and this is at least a year,

10:47:02 maybe two years ago, and I think this might be the Port

10:47:04 Authority garage, the garage that's right across from

10:47:09 the aquarium.

10:47:10 >> That's the port, correct.

10:47:11 >> That's the port's garage?

10:47:14 That machine had an attendant there for a really long

10:47:18 time.

10:47:18 Is that attendant still having to be there?

10:47:21 >>> I don't know if it's per se around the clock, but I

10:47:24 believe they have somebody -- what happens is it's not

10:47:27 per se an attendant becomes more of a custodial

10:47:30 ambassador position so that may be able to do some

10:47:35 light sweeping around that lobby area, some dusting,

10:47:38 some wiping down, so you get more of a multi-use.

10:47:42 >> But that's a Port Authority employee?

10:47:44 >> That's correct, yes.

10:47:45 >> Thank you.

10:47:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Jim, thanks.

10:47:53 You have done a great job four or five years.

10:47:57 How long has it been?

10:47:58 >> It was five in January.

10:48:00 Thank you.

10:48:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I appreciate all your hard work.

10:48:05 You and I traded e-mails sun pass at the TIA, long-term

10:48:11 garage.

10:48:12 Is that something we are still looking into?

10:48:14 >>> Absolutely.

10:48:14 With the demand in the sun pass and usage around the

10:48:18 bay area, it's certainly something that we can't

10:48:20 overlook.

10:48:21 The problem we are finding, just doing some initial

10:48:25 investigation, is of course the expressway authority

10:48:27 and the owners of that particular software package are

10:48:31 requesting a greater share in revenues.

10:48:33 So where it may be a convenience that we are able to

10:48:36 offer that type of service, it may take away from our

10:48:38 ability to capture 100 percent of the revenues.

10:48:43 We are still working to find -- to explore that

10:48:45 further.

10:48:46 >> So that's how they have treated the airport

10:48:50 authority?

10:48:51 >> Correct.

10:48:51 Correct.

10:48:52 I guess it's one of those soft costs you have to take

10:48:56 into play when you are talking about convenience.

10:48:58 You are going to have to give up something along those

10:49:00 lines.

10:49:00 >> The other question I have, I assume this is your

10:49:05 slide, downtown building owners expressing nonpayment

10:49:10 due to declining occupancy rates.

10:49:13 I guess we are always trying to be sympathetic to

10:49:17 people in these tough times.

10:49:18 But at the same time, what's our response?

10:49:22 Are we saying -- I mean, they are all just like

10:49:28 everybody else to the city.

10:49:29 What are we doing?

10:49:30 >> Essentially that's the line we are trying to hold at

10:49:32 this point in time.

10:49:33 We are the cheapest downtown compared to all of the

10:49:35 private asset office buildings in downtown.

10:49:38 So I don't know that you can get much less costly

10:49:42 compared to what we are providing.

10:49:44 But we are listening to what they are saying in trying

10:49:46 to understand what their financial hardships are, but

10:49:48 at the same time we have not made any decision to do

10:49:50 any reduction in rates or ask the administration or

10:49:55 council to reduce some of the rates.

10:49:57 >> So we are at the point of collections on some of

10:49:59 these?

10:50:00 Are there some large bills outstanding?

10:50:02 >> You know, without going into too much detail, I

10:50:04 wouldn't say there's large bills, but we do have a

10:50:07 couple of firms that do get behind from time to time on

10:50:09 their statements.

10:50:10 But, now, again it's just asking for more time to pay

10:50:13 that bill.

10:50:14 I don't think we have sent anybody to collections.

10:50:16 A lot of times, what we do experience, though, some of

10:50:19 the businesses are moving out of the downtown area, and

10:50:21 those are the ones that we are losing out on collecting

10:50:24 100 percent of the revenue.

10:50:25 >>MARY MULHERN: So are they still able to park there

10:50:29 if they are not paying --

10:50:31 >>> No.

10:50:32 We have that dialogue to learn what their hardship is,

10:50:35 and it may not be that we are collecting that exact

10:50:38 month we are supposed to be collecting but a month or

10:50:40 two down the road we get at that point.

10:50:43 Certainly we don't want to let that go any longer more

10:50:47 than a couple of months without having payment made.

10:50:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just see it as a slippery slope,

10:50:52 I guess.

10:50:54 Everybody is hurting.

10:50:57 So if one business decides not to pay, pretty soon

10:50:59 everybody finds out.

10:51:01 >>> Yes, I'm trying to retain every customer I have.

10:51:06 Certainly we need the revenue.

10:51:17 >>BONNIE WISE: I may talk a little bit about the

10:51:19 various agreements that we have, and Jim can certainly

10:51:21 answer any questions.

10:51:22 You have you have heard about the south regional

10:51:25 garage, the one we have the agreement with the

10:51:27 lightning.

10:51:28 And we have $750,000 a year that's guaranteed that goes

10:51:33 toward the debt service for that particular garage, and

10:51:36 that in addition, we guarantee any shortages.

10:51:39 There's a surcharge on -- a ticket surcharge H.and then

10:51:43 as well as the attendant -- attendance exceeds a

10:51:47 million we actually pay a dollar over a million, and if

10:51:53 it goes from a million up to two we actually pay the

10:51:56 lightning 50 cents.

10:51:58 It has not happened a lot of times but it's happened a

10:52:00 few times, with the idea that this was a garage that

10:52:03 provided great economic impact, because the lightning

10:52:06 were playing there, so therefore people are eating in

10:52:08 the restaurants, and all the other economic impacts of

10:52:12 bringing in the lightning.

10:52:13 But this was an agreement that's been in place for

10:52:15 quite some time.

10:52:16 But you can see there that it does cost the parking

10:52:20 system some money in order for them to have do that.

10:52:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask a quick question?

10:52:26 Thank you.

10:52:26 The orange cones, the massive numbers of orange cones

10:52:29 that are put out in anticipation of the games, and the

10:52:32 number of police who are deployed, are those costs

10:52:36 reflected here at all?

10:52:45 >>BONNIE WISE: In police, the police budget is

10:52:47 reflected.

10:52:48 And then I guess in public works, there will be some of

10:52:52 that as well, transportation.

10:52:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

10:52:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to follow up on that,

10:52:57 to share with you all that unfortunately, I was on

10:53:01 council when we adopted this.

10:53:02 It wags a very disadvantageous to the city deal, but we

10:53:07 accepted it because we were so eager to get the

10:53:11 St. Petersburg forum in our downtown, and the ongoing

10:53:14 personnel costs for that are huge.

10:53:18 And I know, as we move forward, and as -- and I love

10:53:23 the form, I love that it's active.

10:53:26 But as we move forward, I would like us to see if

10:53:29 perhaps we could use personnel that are less expensive

10:53:34 than police, if there's some kind of, you know,

10:53:37 transportation safety people who don't have all the

10:53:39 skills and training that our police have.

10:53:42 I think that this is an area where we possibly could

10:53:45 save a lot of money.

10:53:46 And I think it's something we really need to look at,

10:53:49 because it happens so frequently, and it's so personnel

10:53:52 intensive, that this is an area that, you know, might

10:53:55 be a smart way for us to save.

10:54:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonnie, I share your concern, Linda.

10:54:09 But as far as the parking fees, our parking fund, how

10:54:15 long is this contract for parking with the lightning?

10:54:19 >>> April 2025.

10:54:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That's right around the corner.

10:54:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Even the Rays are going to be --

10:54:42 theirs is 2017.

10:54:44 Has legal looked at that to see if there's any way we

10:54:47 can renegotiate their contract?

10:54:49 Because it's interesting.

10:54:51 Yeah, I know.

10:54:53 But when we made these kinds of decisions and these

10:54:56 kinds of contracts, I don't think we had the data that

10:54:59 is out there now.

10:55:01 There's like a shelf at the library about how

10:55:04 professional sports do not -- it's not that they don't

10:55:10 help economies, but that cities and municipalities are

10:55:16 giving it away to them.

10:55:18 So I just wonder.

10:55:21 >>BONNIE WISE: I will tell you we had a lot of

10:55:24 discussion about W the lightning over the years, not so

10:55:26 much recently westbound the new ownership, but this

10:55:29 agreement, they would say, is probably less favorable

10:55:31 than many in the norm in the economic arena.

10:55:36 They have said that in most places they get to keep all

10:55:39 the parking revenue.

10:55:41 We keep the initial parking revenue.

10:55:43 We cover our own expenses.

10:55:44 And then we pay them extra.

10:55:46 So I think --

10:55:48 >>MARY MULHERN: We have to pay them -- I guess that's

10:55:50 the other question.

10:55:51 What's the bottom line say for this year?

10:55:57 Are we making any money off of this?

10:56:00 >>> No, it really varies depending on how much volume

10:56:04 they have at the forum.

10:56:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Have we ever made any money?

10:56:09 >>> I think the Stanley Cup year.

10:56:10 >>MARY MULHERN: The Stanley Cup?

10:56:14 >>> The Stanley Cup year.

10:56:16 But, I mean, partly we pay an extra person $1 a person

10:56:20 when the attendance reaches over a million.

10:56:23 Because that is a good thing when the attendance in the

10:56:26 year reaches over a million, that we are all sharing in

10:56:28 that benefit.

10:56:29 It just hasn't happened much.

10:56:34 Anyway, they would argue that they have not as good a

10:56:38 deal. Anyway, we are moving on to the next.

10:56:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me ask one more question.

10:56:43 And this might be for Jim.

10:56:46 Have we ever raised the cost?

10:56:52 >>> The parking fee?

10:56:54 I think the last time we increased parking fees was in

10:56:57 2004, not just for the lightning, this is all of our

10:57:00 garages.

10:57:00 >> So this is treated just like our other garages that

10:57:03 are charging less than everybody else?

10:57:06 >>> Right.

10:57:06 And this garage is also used for other purposes.

10:57:09 And, for example, the Marriott that I am going to talk

10:57:11 about, it's the same garage.

10:57:16 He also has monthly parkers.

10:57:17 It's just certain aspects of the garage that need to be

10:57:20 retained for certain events.

10:57:21 >> Well, the event parking, that goes for other -- for

10:57:27 private parking, and any kind of parking, in a sports

10:57:32 arena.

10:57:33 It goes up every year.

10:57:37 And that's a captive audience.

10:57:39 You go over to the Rays game and you pay whatever you

10:57:41 have to pay to park, and the Bucs game.

10:57:44 So why are we raising the parking fees there?

10:57:47 >> That's certainly at council's discretion.

10:57:52 Maybe I can go over the whole financial picture and

10:57:54 then you can bring it up.

10:57:56 >> Here is what I'm thinking, yes, it's always bad to

10:58:00 raise fees but if you are talking about entertainment,

10:58:03 an entertainment facility, I don't want to put people

10:58:06 downtown who can't, you know, who can't afford to pay

10:58:10 more, and we want to keep downtown businesses downtown.

10:58:13 But you have got a sports arena and it's there, and

10:58:16 it's probably not going to go anywhere.

10:58:22 >>> I think our existing resolution has it capped at

10:58:25 $12 per event.

10:58:26 >> And is that what we are charging?

10:58:34 It's dependent on --

10:58:37 >>> Jim has shared in W me when you have the circus,

10:58:40 for example, they charge less and in family events they

10:58:42 charge less, a sold-out event they would go to a max of

10:58:46 12.

10:58:46 >> Did you say that the contract -- when was it first

10:58:48 signed?

10:58:49 >>> 1995.

10:58:51 >> '95.

10:58:53 So we haven't changed any of those terms.

10:58:55 Since then?

10:58:56 It's always been capped at 12?

10:59:00 >>BONNIE WISE: No, no, no.

10:59:01 The $12 relates to our entire parking rate resolution.

10:59:05 You all have adopted the last one in 2004 which is in

10:59:11 the various garages and capped, this event parking

10:59:14 amount.

10:59:17 That would need to come before you all --

10:59:21 >>MARY MULHERN: And does that go until 2025?

10:59:24 >>> No, you can go until -- sure.

10:59:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I know when I was on county commission,

10:59:33 there was quite a bit of money revenue, and I think the

10:59:43 owner then was out of Detroit, and losing millions of

10:59:48 dollars.

10:59:48 So I don't know what it is now, but that's only been a

10:59:54 few years ago.

10:59:55 >>> Right.

10:59:57 There's a new owner now and I'm sure we will have some

11:00:00 dialogue with them as they get into their operations.

11:00:04 All right.

11:00:04 Another agreement that we have is with the Marriott

11:00:06 waterside.

11:00:09 And that agreement was in 1997.

11:00:12 Of course, that is when they built the Marriott.

11:00:14 And they do use 385 spaces in that same garage.

11:00:20 As you might know it has a separate entrance over there

11:00:23 for the Marriott.

11:00:24 And so we can't use those during those arena events.

11:00:28 And that impacts to about 400,000.

11:00:30 So the economic development side of that would say

11:00:36 that's what brought the Marriott waterside here which

11:00:39 is a huge contributor to our downtown and the whole

11:00:41 economic activity in that area.

11:00:44 A much smaller impact is the YMCA, and after 5:00, the

11:00:50 patrons are allowed to park in that Fort Brooke garage

11:00:53 and that impacted about $23,000.

11:01:03 We have the Poe garage, with the Tampa Bay Performing

11:01:06 Arts Center.

11:01:07 And we take $2.50 of the parking fees there and put

11:01:12 that toward a capital improvement fund for improvements

11:01:16 to the Performing Arts Center.

11:01:18 And the thought process being there, that the patrons

11:01:22 for the Performing Arts Center is who is parking there

11:01:25 so they are helping to improve the Performing Arts

11:01:27 Center but that comes out of some of our revenue.

11:01:30 And then we have the Hillsborough County agreement for

11:01:33 the Twiggs Street garage where some of the spaces there

11:01:36 are reserved, and so that impacts about $86,000.

11:01:43 And then in Ybor, we have two garages.

11:01:47 And we have an agreement with the Centro Ybor folks

11:01:51 that we have a maximum rate in the Centro Ybor garage.

11:01:55 And so that impacts over 200,000.

11:01:58 And then in the Palm Avenue garage, Hillsborough

11:02:02 community college helped contribute property for that

11:02:04 particular garage.

11:02:05 And so the economic impact is about 400,000.

11:02:09 So we have over the years used the parking system to

11:02:13 help with economic development.

11:02:16 In fact it has occurred.

11:02:20 In Ybor City, we have a courtesy citation program.

11:02:25 I don't know if any of you had this happen to you.

11:02:27 But your first citation, if you had an expired meter,

11:02:31 you would not actually get a ticket.

11:02:33 Would you get a notice.

11:02:36 And your second time, then you get a citation.

11:02:39 But the first time you just get a notice.

11:02:41 And so that impacted about $200,000.

11:02:44 Then we did remove the parking meters on 7th Avenue

11:02:49 and that impacted about $300,000 for two hours of free

11:02:52 parking.

11:02:57 As a reminder, I am going to talk a little bit about

11:03:00 what we did to help with some of the debt service at

11:03:05 the parking system, the parking system had issued

11:03:07 various bond issues over the years, the most recent

11:03:10 ones for new money was for the Ybor garages.

11:03:15 But in 2005, I believe, we sold the Tampa general

11:03:21 garage.

11:03:22 The Tampa general garage used to be a city garage, and

11:03:25 we sold it for $29 million.

11:03:27 We used $23 million of it to pay off the bonds related,

11:03:33 the parking system, and put about $6 million in the

11:03:37 parking fund balance.

11:03:40 And so what we did is we reduced the debt service from

11:03:43 fiscal year '05 to $10 from about 6.5 million to 2.7

11:03:49 million and you can see that graph there that shows

11:03:51 that.

11:03:54 When we did this, what we were doing, when we increased

11:03:57 the parking rates in 2004, soon after I had arrived, we

11:04:03 had a lot of people here in council chambers when we

11:04:06 increase those rates.

11:04:07 And so we were really very sensitive to rate increases.

11:04:11 So we took the money from the Tampa general sale and

11:04:13 paid off the bonds, and if you look in the chart, in

11:04:16 the dark blue.

11:04:19 So the debt service in the parking system on an annual

11:04:22 basis was about almost $7 million.

11:04:25 And will be $7 million.

11:04:29 And so what we did is we -- in order not to have to

11:04:33 increase rates any further, as I recall in 2004, it has

11:04:36 been about seven years before that, before we had

11:04:40 increased rates.

11:04:41 It's very difficult when you increase rates every seven

11:04:44 years.

11:04:44 It's hard to catch up.

11:04:46 We had that situation occur in 2004.

11:04:49 And so what we did is that we paid off those bonds and

11:04:53 were able to, you know, stave off a rate increase for

11:04:57 quite some time.

11:04:58 But now we are faced with 2011 and you can see what's

11:05:01 going to happen with the debt service there in 2011.

11:05:03 And we are going to go back up to that almost $7

11:05:07 million number.

11:05:07 Now, if I can look at a good part of this, the good

11:05:11 part of this is that as we get to 2020, 2023, the

11:05:18 parking system doesn't have any more debt.

11:05:20 But we do have this ten-year period where we still have

11:05:25 this debt service before us.

11:05:27 So what's going to happen in fiscal year '11?

11:05:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam Chair?

11:05:38 I might have missed something.

11:05:39 What caused the balloon there to jump from the three to

11:05:43 the six?

11:05:44 >> Well, the debt service was always almost $7 million

11:05:47 in the parking system.

11:05:52 And it was after the Ybor garage, their debt was $7

11:05:55 million.

11:05:55 But what we did in 2005, we took the sale proceeds of

11:06:00 the Tampa general garage and paid off some of the debt,

11:06:04 and we paid off --

11:06:05 >> You front loaded?

11:06:07 >> The savings, right.

11:06:08 >> Okay.

11:06:09 So instead of just paying it off instead of having it

11:06:13 be level for something like that, then we just pushed

11:06:15 it toward the front end?

11:06:16 >> Right.

11:06:18 We paid off the bonds in the early years.

11:06:21 >> Jim, I take back my compliments.

11:06:23 This is a mess.

11:06:24 [ Laughter ]

11:06:25 No, I'm kidding.

11:06:32 >>> Frankly, this is the graph we had when we did this.

11:06:37 So this is not a surprise.

11:06:41 We don't like it but it's not a surprise.

11:06:43 We knew we were doing this at the time.

11:06:44 Yes, ma'am?

11:06:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So Tampa general at the time was

11:06:49 really passionate about buying that garage.

11:06:50 They felt it was, you know, served their mission,

11:06:53 et cetera.

11:06:56 Would some other entity like to purchase a garage that

11:06:58 would like to give us some breathing room for the next

11:07:01 ten years?

11:07:02 Have we discussed that seriously?

11:07:06 >>BONNIE WISE: I think internally we frankly tried to

11:07:08 bring -- do you sell a garage?

11:07:11 Do you sell a lot?

11:07:12 Do you sell the whole parking system, to take it to the

11:07:15 other extreme?

11:07:17 So like I say, internally, we tried to brainstorm

11:07:21 anything.

11:07:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: In other cities, for example,

11:07:24 Miami, they have a separate entity that runs all their

11:07:27 parking in a municipal parking system and it functions

11:07:32 separate from municipal government, and I think it

11:07:35 functions very well.

11:07:37 And I'm serious.

11:07:39 Have we explored that model at all?

11:07:40 >> I wouldn't say that we have seriously explored it.

11:07:47 We have discussed it.

11:07:48 Your right. It's the Miami off-street parking

11:07:50 authority. And Jim has similar examples to that as

11:07:52 well where you could just retain even the on-street or

11:07:56 retain the garages, a lot of flexibility.

11:08:01 But this is why this item does really need to be

11:08:05 discussed.

11:08:07 We are really at a critical point.

11:08:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

11:08:12 >>MARY MULHERN: I have been actually talking about

11:08:14 this since I started.

11:08:16 And the administration didn't show any interest.

11:08:20 So I worry that, you know, with just a few months left,

11:08:25 if you do start talking about privatizing the garages,

11:08:28 we need to be involved, council needs to know, because

11:08:33 as we are seeing especially in this parking arena, we

11:08:42 haven't been driving a very hard bargain, and I think

11:08:45 you guys inherited a lot of it.

11:08:47 The contracts are from before --

11:08:51 >>> Right.

11:08:52 >>MARY MULHERN: -- I think it's 2003.

11:08:56 So let us know if you are starting to talk about it.

11:08:57 >>> We are not talking about it.

11:09:01 And so I'm bringing this to your attention.

11:09:04 I think it really will be to consider this philosophy

11:09:10 of whether the city wants to be in the parking

11:09:12 business.

11:09:13 Your budget before you does not show a sale of any of

11:09:15 the garages or anything of that nature at this time,

11:09:17 because nothing like that is happening.

11:09:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What's the total debt?

11:09:24 I see what the debt service is.

11:09:26 What's the total debt?

11:09:28 >>> The principal?

11:09:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes, the payoff.

11:09:30 >>> I would have to --

11:09:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ballpark?

11:09:36 I mean, I guess while you are thinking about it, the

11:09:38 reason I'm asking is, it just seems like if you put

11:09:44 some type of RFP on the street to see if there's

11:09:49 interest in selling every garage, you know, across the

11:09:55 board to find out, okay, you know, pay off our debt

11:09:59 service, pay off our debt, our total debt, we walk away

11:10:04 from those garages.

11:10:08 If in fact you put that deal together it would show

11:10:11 that the private sector sees a value, you know, in

11:10:15 those garages, and maybe they in turn would parcel them

11:10:20 out in terms of, okay, we'll buy the whole thing and

11:10:24 then we'll sell this one to the lightning and this one

11:10:27 to this entity and this one to this other entity, and

11:10:30 then it's not our problem anymore.

11:10:31 And then we can go back to on-street parking.

11:10:35 >> I want to say two things.

11:10:37 One is that if we would sell a garage, of course the

11:10:40 agreements that are associated with the garage would

11:10:42 have to be --

11:10:44 >> Absolutely.

11:10:44 And they would know that in terms of --

11:10:46 >> Exactly.

11:10:47 And we would have that disclosure anyway because they

11:10:49 have to know what they are buying or what constraints

11:10:52 they are buying.

11:10:52 The other thing is that the city has really done its

11:10:55 best to try to keep rates low.

11:10:58 And really for our whole business community and anyone

11:11:02 who comes downtown in Ybor and whatnot.

11:11:04 So, surely, one would, of course, if they would buy

11:11:08 these garages, the first thing they would do frankly is

11:11:11 increase rates.

11:11:12 And, you know, the thing about what kind of impact that

11:11:18 has on --

11:11:20 >> But they are only going to raise rates to what the

11:11:22 market will bear.

11:11:23 I mean, that's just capitalism.

11:11:28 And so, yes, there would be a short-term thing, but at

11:11:33 the end of the day, looking at these numbers, guess

11:11:36 what.

11:11:36 The city is going to end up raising rates.

11:11:39 You know, just like we do with water and sewer and

11:11:42 everything else.

11:11:43 When you don't make ends meet, and you can't make your

11:11:46 bottom line, you have to raise the rate.

11:11:48 So I don't know if there's a whole lot of difference

11:11:50 between us raising it or the private sector raising.

11:11:53 I know that's a huge decision on the part of the mayor

11:11:58 to even consider something like this in your last year

11:12:01 of office.

11:12:02 I don't November that she would have that tendency, and

11:12:07 I understand that completely, from a political

11:12:09 perspective.

11:12:10 But I would probably encourage her to do that, but

11:12:14 definitely encourage staff and the next administration

11:12:17 to explore that as a very real option.

11:12:21 If you don't ask the question, you never know the

11:12:23 answer.

11:12:23 >>> And we do have operators from time to time asking.

11:12:28 The lightning actually wants to buy, you know, the own

11:12:32 old owners asked about the south regional garage.

11:12:34 That's natural kind of like the Tampa general.

11:12:36 That was a natural.

11:12:38 And then regarding economic impact.

11:12:40 I'm sorry, there's something that you said that I

11:12:43 really can't let go.

11:12:44 I think many would argue, and if Mark Huey was here,

11:12:47 the tremendous economic impact that the Marriott and

11:12:49 the lightning have had in our community, and it creates

11:12:53 restaurants and it creates, you know, with the

11:12:55 Marriott, there is convention center business, and so,

11:12:59 yes, the parking system itself is suffering because

11:13:02 they are the ones who are having to pay it.

11:13:04 But the city as a whole does have economic impact.

11:13:07 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't want to lose them, and I value

11:13:10 them, and it's not just economic.

11:13:12 I think the value of sports is more intangible, and

11:13:16 it's very important to our identity, and to our image.

11:13:20 And I'm not saying it doesn't have any economic impact.

11:13:24 I'm saying that what struck me about what you said is

11:13:28 all the restaurants, and, yeah, if you are staying at

11:13:31 the Marriott you are going to be going to restaurants.

11:13:33 But if you were driving into a sports arena -- I don't

11:13:38 know.

11:13:39 I guess that facility actually does, because they have

11:13:42 more events so if you have a hockey game, you have one

11:13:48 sports bar over there or two that are getting some

11:13:50 economic impact, maybe.

11:13:51 But mostly people are coming in, parking.

11:13:54 That's where the money is, in the parking.

11:13:56 And the concessions.

11:13:59 I think in general we exaggerate the spilloff from

11:14:05 sports into the neighborhoods.

11:14:09 I'm not saying I don't think it's worth it.

11:14:11 But I think the dollar amount is exaggerated.

11:14:22 >>BONNIE WISE: If we can go on.

11:14:23 I want to give you a little summary of the revenue and

11:14:26 expensewise for fiscal year '11 and '12 if we were to

11:14:30 continue along the path we are on.

11:14:32 So fiscal year '09, the revenues were about a million

11:14:38 and a half dollars less than the expenses.

11:14:39 And so the parking system used that million and a half

11:14:43 dollars from their fund balance.

11:14:44 And that's some of the Tampa general money.

11:14:47 And for fiscal year 10-P, the projection, their

11:14:52 revenues are going to be about $12 million less than

11:14:55 their expense.

11:14:55 And just like to look at that debt service line right

11:14:58 there.

11:14:58 That's about $2.7 million in debt service.

11:15:02 Kudos to Jim, because when we did the budget originally

11:15:05 we thought they were going to use about 2.7 million of

11:15:10 fund balance but they ended up a little better.

11:15:13 As we look to '11 we see where the revenues are, and we

11:15:17 see where the expenditures are, but that big line

11:15:20 difference are the -- is the debt service.

11:15:23 And so in that case, we are going to have about a $7.2

11:15:27 million difference of the revenues and the

11:15:30 expenditures.

11:15:32 And so they do have about $5.5 million still left in

11:15:36 their fund balance.

11:15:37 That's where some of that money will come from.

11:15:39 But 1.6 million is going to have to come from the

11:15:41 general fund.

11:15:42 You know, given nothing else changes.

11:15:45 And so you can see there on the chart, the following

11:15:50 chart, we show that graphically.

11:15:52 And then just going to '12, just kind of pushing that

11:15:56 forward to 12, fiscal year '12, in fiscal year $12 they

11:16:02 no longer have the fund balance.

11:16:03 So any deficit would then have to come from the general

11:16:06 fund unless something was to be done --

11:16:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Bonnie, one question if you can go

11:16:11 back to the 5 -- whatever million that is fiscal year

11:16:16 '11.

11:16:17 That is specifically from the Tampa general sale?

11:16:23 >>BONNIE WISE: It is.

11:16:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Bonnie, there was supposed to be a

11:16:32 reserve fund balance for a downtown project.

11:16:36 I remember it first came up when we were talking about

11:16:38 the federal courthouse, the art museum, et cetera,

11:16:41 et cetera.

11:16:42 Looking at these numbers, it looks like the

11:16:45 practicality of the situation is such that that notion

11:16:51 has sort of gone wayside?

11:16:53 >>> That's exactly right.

11:16:55 Your memory is good.

11:16:56 We set aside $5 million for the northern part of

11:17:01 downtown parking, and it was related to the courthouse,

11:17:04 or something that we thought may happen in the northern

11:17:05 part of downtown at the time.

11:17:10 Then a million was to do some improvements to the

11:17:12 parking symptom, which we have done some of those

11:17:15 improvements with other moneys.

11:17:17 So the fund balance is exactly $6 million that we

11:17:22 were --

11:17:25 >> I think it's a good thing we stuck it aside.

11:17:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

11:17:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Quick question.

11:17:32 Just as a way to examine other potential revenues

11:17:35 versus -- I would hope that we are looking at our

11:17:39 parking structures, air rights in terms of towers,

11:17:46 leasing them for something, potentially selling them.

11:17:48 I know we had to pay a fortune to CSX for the air

11:17:52 rights in the Poe over their tracks which I thought was

11:17:57 highway robbery.

11:17:58 But I wonder if we could make additional space

11:18:01 available.

11:18:02 And as we look at the CAMLS project to the south of our

11:18:07 garage, perhaps we will be making -- making more

11:18:13 revenue from the CAMLS project parking needs.

11:18:18 >>> Thank you for mentioning the CAMLS project because

11:18:21 they are going to purchase that Hart lot.

11:18:23 And let's call it 3 million, 3.5 million, somewhere in

11:18:26 that nature, 3.5 million is what I recall the

11:18:30 resolution.

11:18:31 And what we'll do at that point is take those moneys

11:18:34 and pay off the debt associated with the Hart lot

11:18:37 because there is debt associated with the Hart lot.

11:18:41 So the debt service will decline a little bit.

11:18:43 But it's such an immaterial number compared to the

11:18:47 total.

11:18:47 I know the whole discussion of air rights is something

11:18:49 that Mark Huey has been talking about a lot.

11:18:54 What exactly the value of the air rights -- I'm

11:18:56 probably not the best person to say but I know it's

11:18:59 definitely ...

11:19:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

11:19:05 >>> So that's where we are in the parking system.

11:19:14 The fund balance situation that we are going to be

11:19:17 faced with.

11:19:23 Anything else on parking?

11:19:26 All right.

11:19:28 I'm going to talk very briefly about solid waste.

11:19:31 And this is going to be briefly because I know that

11:19:33 Tonja Brickhouse is coming to your meeting tomorrow to

11:19:36 talk about a few service matters.

11:19:38 But I wanted to let you know that a bond refunding

11:19:42 update.

11:19:43 The solid waste system has some bonds outstanding.

11:19:47 One of the bond issues is a 1999-C issue.

11:19:51 And there's an opportunity to refund it for savings

11:19:54 based on interest rates, and the opportunities to call

11:19:59 the bond 10-1 of 2010.

11:20:03 If we are able to do this refunding, they would save

11:20:05 about $300,000 a year in debt service through 2016,

11:20:10 just for a window.

11:20:11 But they could save the money.

11:20:14 With the next present value savings of just over $2

11:20:17 million.

11:20:18 We are pursuing that refunding, and so we will

11:20:22 hopefully have bond documents before you, probably in

11:20:27 one of your July meetings.

11:20:28 We may have to come to a CRA meeting or CRA council

11:20:31 meeting, ask you to do that for us just because of the

11:20:33 timing.

11:20:34 However, we are beginning the rating agency process

11:20:37 right now, and we are going to present the materials to

11:20:42 the rating agency.

11:20:44 Normally going through the rating agency process is a

11:20:46 very, you know, positive but thorough process.

11:20:49 The rating agencies have over the years gotten very,

11:20:52 very diligent, which is a good thing.

11:20:55 And we know that our debt service coverage in the solid

11:20:57 waste system has been declining over the last few

11:21:00 years.

11:21:00 We know that because attendance is down, number of

11:21:04 customers are down.

11:21:05 This is something that other governments are facing as

11:21:07 well.

11:21:09 So it is part of the story.

11:21:11 We are going to have to share with the rating agencies

11:21:13 as we go through this.

11:21:15 Fitch did review the solid waste system earlier this

11:21:17 year and they did give us an "A" rating, and if we are

11:21:21 able to maintain that "A" rating we will be able to

11:21:23 move forward with a refunding.

11:21:25 But having said that, we are going to have to really

11:21:29 discuss the various changes, and Tonja is going to

11:21:33 speak to some of those that we have made in the solid

11:21:35 waste system where they have saved money, taken steps

11:21:37 to save money, and the various other programs that they

11:21:41 are implementing in the future.

11:21:43 To really talk about our entire creditworthiness with

11:21:46 the solid waste system.

11:21:48 So like I said, debt service coverage really has

11:21:51 declined over the past few years.

11:21:54 It's something that they are seeing in various other

11:21:56 jurisdictions too, and we are hoping that we'll see

11:21:58 some improvement going forward.

11:21:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Mulhern.

11:22:03 >>MARY MULHERN: You kind of whipped by this and I

11:22:06 didn't quite catch it.

11:22:07 If you do this refunding, did you say $3 million a

11:22:10 year?

11:22:11 >>> No, 300,000.

11:22:13 >>MARY MULHERN: A total of 2 million through --

11:22:16 >>> Present value of 10-1-16.

11:22:21 >>MARY MULHERN: 2-point 1 through 2016.

11:22:29 >> Present value.

11:22:31 When I say net, because I want to make sure I

11:22:33 incorporate any cost associated with the refunding.

11:22:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

11:22:39 >>BONNIE WISE: It's a little bit unusual transaction.

11:22:43 I know that, Mr. Chairman, you have been involved in a

11:22:45 lot of bond issues.

11:22:45 This one is a little different than the solid waste

11:22:49 system and can only be called on certain payment

11:22:52 interest days so we don't have as much flexibility as

11:22:54 we normally do on refunding and that's why we have to

11:22:58 have you have a special meeting.

11:23:00 So I am going to ask Tonja to talk about some of the

11:23:03 things we are going to be sharing with our rating

11:23:05 agencies.

11:23:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question before we move

11:23:08 on, on the money side.

11:23:09 Excuse me, tan yeah. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

11:23:11 The refunding, when you start the bond you start

11:23:15 speaking a different language and you have to slow down

11:23:18 for some of us.

11:23:19 Refunding sounds to be me like sort of a refinancing?

11:23:25 >>BONNIE WISE: Sorry.

11:23:25 I come from the bond world.

11:23:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's like being Mork from Ork.

11:23:39 >> And we have super bonds and all kinds of stuff.

11:23:42 But, yes, it is like refinancing.

11:23:44 Every refinancing on your home.

11:23:46 But it's only a portion of the bond frankly that we

11:23:49 could call for savings.

11:23:50 And so it's really the bounds that have a higher

11:23:53 interest rate coupon.

11:23:54 Some of the bonds that interestingly have lower rates

11:23:56 than we can currently get in the market.

11:23:58 So obviously we can't refinance those.

11:24:00 But we'll be refinancing the ones with the higher --

11:24:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I remember having this discussion

11:24:06 with my good friend Mr. Metcalf in wastewater, and then

11:24:11 we were being closely reviewed by your friends in the

11:24:15 bonding agency and resulted in a rate hike with

11:24:21 wastewater.

11:24:25 And so I'm wondering when is the last time you had a

11:24:27 rate hike with solid waste?

11:24:30 And is that something that you anticipated having to

11:24:33 revisit with the Fitch folks looking over our

11:24:38 shoulders?

11:24:40 >>BONNIE WISE: We have we haven't built into a rate

11:24:42 increase at this time because the folks at solid waste

11:24:44 are trying to minimize any rate increase.

11:24:48 So we are not anticipating one at this minute.

11:24:53 But we are going to see what our rating agency friends

11:24:55 have to say.

11:24:56 >> And when is the last hike that we had for solid

11:24:58 waste?

11:24:59 >>> 2006.

11:25:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.

11:25:04 >>> I know it was just the one year at the time as well

11:25:07 unlike the water and wastewater that were multi-year

11:25:11 plans.

11:25:11 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm bringing this up just for us to

11:25:14 discuss.

11:25:14 We do have need to reserve time for public comment.

11:25:20 And it's specified on here that we should take public

11:25:22 comment after end of each workshop so I guess we'll

11:25:30 just do it at the end but I want to make sure we get

11:25:32 through staff presentation so we have time for

11:25:34 public --

11:25:35 >>> Tonja is going to be coming before you on Thursday

11:25:37 anyway, but maybe she could just follow up on the bond

11:25:40 side.

11:25:40 >>TANYA BRICKHOUSE: Department of solid waste.

11:25:48 Briefly I want to go over some things that we have been

11:25:50 doing in the department to reduce expenditures and also

11:25:54 look at the areas where we can increase revenues and

11:25:59 recover revenues.

11:26:00 Just for historical purposes, though, the city has

11:26:05 embarked on -- I want to say back in 2003, the city

11:26:09 embarked upon going through automated service.

11:26:12 The city approaches the first semi automated trucks and

11:26:16 also introduced carts back in 2003.

11:26:19 So we have been on the journey to going to one driver,

11:26:21 one truck, and cart for a number of years now, seven

11:26:25 years now.

11:26:26 And so with that effort, what we find is we have got to

11:26:30 take some action.

11:26:33 We had to take some action because a lot of the issues,

11:26:37 and Bonnie said, relates to solid waste as relates to

11:26:40 revenues, and the tonnage issue.

11:26:43 We have seen a huge reduction in tonnage.

11:26:45 So some of the things that we have done to reduce

11:26:48 expenses have been CGS initiative.

11:26:53 You heard about equating to about $500,000.

11:27:00 In addition to that, reduced contracts, because of the

11:27:03 reduction in times in correlating to that, cut some

11:27:08 places there.

11:27:10 In addition to that, what I want to emphasize also is

11:27:13 that for FY 11 the service change that we just kicked

11:27:18 off a few weeks ago, we will see close to a million

11:27:21 dollars in savings, 900,000 just in terms.

11:27:26 Effort in reduction in equipment and fuel expenses and

11:27:29 personnel costs associated with that.

11:27:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That was what you reported to us at

11:27:35 our last meeting.

11:27:36 >>> That's correct.

11:27:37 In addition to that, we are also looking at different

11:27:40 ways to manage a transfer station, and our preliminary

11:27:43 research has indicated that we can save about 600,000

11:27:48 just in changing the way that we manage the transfer

11:27:50 station at MacKay Bay so there's some realization

11:27:56 there.

11:27:56 Also, you all approved several months ago commercial --

11:28:03 that is looking at accounts when I mention recovery and

11:28:08 revenue, there are some accounts that are out there

11:28:11 getting service that aren't paying.

11:28:13 So we are auditing all of those accounts.

11:28:15 We believe that will generate in recovery revenues

11:28:19 about a million dollars.

11:28:21 So when you look at some of the things that we are

11:28:25 pulling back in, there's a lot we are doing that

11:28:27 relates to trying to reduce expenses but also recover

11:28:30 revenues.

11:28:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you going to present us with some

11:28:35 different writing at our meeting on Thursday?

11:28:39 >> My focus Thursday was going to be on alley service

11:28:42 because that's what the agenda item is.

11:28:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, that's what we are talking about?

11:28:47 Okay.

11:28:47 >>> The presentation, maybe send a report to council.

11:28:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, we don't have any backup here

11:28:56 from the budget department on that.

11:28:58 I'm just saying, we have got all of these numbers for

11:29:02 the other departments.

11:29:03 So if this is the official solid waste report, we don't

11:29:07 have, you know --

11:29:10 >> I'll work with Bonnie to make sure we get the

11:29:13 right --

11:29:13 >> And I think we could just get that at our July 22nd?

11:29:17 Is that when it is?

11:29:23 >>BONNIE WISE: This is not intended to be the

11:29:24 thorough -- the parking is going to be the time and we

11:29:27 were going to have time for Tonja to do a solid waste

11:29:30 so if you want to do that July 22nd.

11:29:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, what I really want is the paper,

11:29:35 and then maybe you can just give a really brief

11:29:37 presentation, us what because I don't feel like you

11:29:40 need to be do it twice.

11:29:42 But Bonnie, tell me, what else are we getting today?

11:29:46 >>> This is it for today.

11:29:47 >>MARY MULHERN: This is it.

11:29:49 Okay.

11:29:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Dingfelder.

11:29:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

11:29:55 Two questions, Bonnie.

11:30:01 I've noticed in my household that our tonnage in the

11:30:05 form of our kitchen, garbage, trash, is reducing

11:30:11 because we are recycling more.

11:30:13 You know, we now can recycle all sorts of things that

11:30:17 you couldn't used to recycle.

11:30:22 That my wife and I are filling up three of the blue

11:30:24 bins and putting out a lot less traditional trash.

11:30:29 And I'm just wondering, is the reduction in tonnage

11:30:32 that you are seeing, is there a corresponding

11:30:35 increasing and recycling like it is at my house?

11:30:41 >>> Tonja Brickhouse: It really is related to not the

11:30:45 recycling tonnage but related to the reduction in

11:30:48 residential accounts and commercial accounts.

11:30:50 And so the tonnage issue is related to economy issues

11:30:55 as we deal with foreclosures and as we see businesses

11:30:59 go down.

11:30:59 So that's where the tonnage correlation --

11:31:02 >> So you are not seeing an increase in recycling

11:31:06 corresponding to any decrease?

11:31:08 >> We are seeing it increasing but not to the levels we

11:31:12 are seeing with the tonnage.

11:31:14 We believe that it's directly related to the number of

11:31:16 residential, commercial accounts.

11:31:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the only other question/comment

11:31:22 that I have is I think the automated thing is great, I

11:31:28 think it's faster, clearly more efficient.

11:31:30 I know some folks have trouble with the bigger cans and

11:31:34 where to put them and I get calls about that.

11:31:36 I hope we can get that resolved.

11:31:41 But one thing I noticed that I just thought was weird

11:31:43 is that we have purchased one-sided arms that reach

11:31:49 out, you know, to pick up the blue bins, and I think I

11:31:56 inquired about this, and I think I was told, yes, you

11:31:59 can have two-sided trucks, they just cost more.

11:32:04 But it seems to me, because what I watch on my street

11:32:07 is the guy or woman drives up the street, picks it up

11:32:11 on the one side, has to spin around and come back down

11:32:14 by my same street again and pick up the other side, you

11:32:18 know, because that's the way it works.

11:32:21 It just seems to me in the future, if we had two-sided

11:32:25 pickup, that way you are only going to make the a trip

11:32:28 down that street one time.

11:32:29 >>> Brickhouse: Let me just clarify.

11:32:34 The arm and the one-sided pickup is related to your

11:32:38 routing.

11:32:39 And so it's a technique that we use in the solid waste

11:32:42 industry to cut down.

11:32:43 We found that if you do everything right side figure 8,

11:32:48 it cuts down on safety incidents, cuts down on the

11:32:51 number of things.

11:32:51 I don't want to take up any more time.

11:32:53 But they are routing issues, not necessarily

11:32:56 capability.

11:32:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: All I know on my neighborhood the

11:33:00 streets are narrow, the truck is blocking the street no

11:33:03 matter what, so it's not like it's going down the Main

11:33:05 Street where you can't go all the way across.

11:33:07 And be if they were just going down the middle of the

11:33:10 street doing right, left, right, left, I can't imagine

11:33:13 that you can do it faster, you know, coming back and

11:33:16 circle back.

11:33:17 So I guess my comment is perhaps constrained to your

11:33:21 smaller streets, you know, and those type of areas

11:33:24 where you have the narrow streets anyway.

11:33:27 But I guess we can talk about it one on one.

11:33:31 >>> Okay.

11:33:32 >>MARY MULHERN: I know you inherited the new garbage

11:33:37 cans.

11:33:38 You weren't here when we ordered them.

11:33:40 What I want to understand is where we are.

11:33:42 I remember Mr. Daignault telling us.

11:33:48 We are going to replace everything, right?

11:33:51 All of our -- where are we with that?

11:33:56 >>> I would say we are pretty much about 90%.

11:33:59 We have some areas with the last cart distribution,

11:34:02 there's some areas that we are identifying now, pockets

11:34:05 that we didn't deliver carts to.

11:34:07 And then as you will hear on Thursday, we have got

11:34:10 other things that relates to alley service that we

11:34:13 still have some issues to resolve, so that we can get

11:34:17 that carted properly as well.

11:34:18 So there's more to follow.

11:34:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess we'll talk about the alleys on

11:34:22 Thursday.

11:34:23 But my comment is -- I just want to say this, because

11:34:30 those garbage cans are humongous and heavy.

11:34:33 And my family of four has never -- we could go two

11:34:38 weeks for pickups and still not fill one of those.

11:34:43 So I know -- I'm glad to hear that we are saving money

11:34:47 on the auto migraines, and it does seem efficient, but

11:34:52 not only are they unwieldy but it's overkill.

11:34:55 But at this point, I guess if we are 90% done, we are

11:34:59 stuck with them.

11:35:00 >> We have multiple sizes.

11:35:03 So if there's a requirement to get a smaller cart, it

11:35:06 doesn't take away -- so we have 35-gallon, 60-gallon

11:35:12 and 95-gallon.

11:35:13 >> Okay, we must have 95 because we can't get it out.

11:35:16 >> I'll take that as a request and put it in the

11:35:19 system.

11:35:20 [ Laughter ]

11:35:20 But 95 is the standard because what we found is most

11:35:23 households need that requirement.

11:35:26 But we do have the other option.

11:35:27 >> 95 gallons?

11:35:29 Really?

11:35:30 You probably don't have recycling.

11:35:32 Is it because you don't have recycling?

11:35:36 I don't know.

11:35:37 I'll follow up.

11:35:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Question.

11:35:40 With all of this going on, has there been any

11:35:43 consideration to once a week pickup?

11:35:47 The reason I raise that is, I was out of town last

11:35:50 week, in fact in Atlanta, and was talking about our

11:35:56 pickup, and they said, you have it twice a week?

11:36:01 So we only get once a week here in Atlanta, you know.

11:36:04 So I was wondering, has there been any dialogue by us

11:36:12 relative -- what would be the cost savings should that

11:36:14 be implemented?

11:36:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I brought that up, I think right as

11:36:20 you guys were coming on board.

11:36:22 And it didn't seem to fly for whatever reason in the

11:36:28 administration.

11:36:30 So it definitely seems like a cost savings.

11:36:33 Like a no brainer if it's a cost savings.

11:36:36 But I think it's just an issue of community acceptance.

11:36:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I raise it only as an issue that

11:36:41 we are looking at now the bond rate, and, now, the

11:36:44 tonnage and all that, what will be the cost savings to

11:36:47 the city, given whereby we are financially.

11:36:52 >>> Brickhouse: There are some steps that we are

11:36:58 exploring in terms of research.

11:36:59 The first step of in this process is getting everybody

11:37:02 fully auto mated.

11:37:03 And then we are exploring some other things, pay as you

11:37:07 go.

11:37:07 The same stuff that you see in other municipalities.

11:37:10 I'm looking at to see how other municipalities are

11:37:13 doing that.

11:37:14 But right now, we are getting this automated process,

11:37:17 and then we'll see Watts what's around the corner.

11:37:20 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to second that.

11:37:22 Because we did bring that up and discuss it.

11:37:24 And I think John brought it up, and I took it on and

11:37:27 was questioning.

11:37:28 And I was told -- and so I think this is before you

11:37:32 started, so this is a great opportunity for you to look

11:37:34 into it, because it didn't make any sense what I was

11:37:37 told was picking up twice a week, or going to

11:37:44 once-a-week pickup wouldn't save us any money.

11:37:49 Once a week.

11:37:50 It made no sense to me.

11:37:51 But it had to do with how we had our routes set up and

11:37:54 all of this.

11:37:55 But it kind of defies logic that had you wouldn't save

11:37:58 on gas and all that.

11:37:59 But that's what I was told, and we wouldn't save any

11:38:01 money on gas or reduce our carbon output.

11:38:04 >> Thank you all.

11:38:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Mrs. Wise, anything else?

11:38:14 >>BONNIE WISE: No, sir.

11:38:14 Before we leave if you could give me some direction on

11:38:16 your interest for the July 22nd, or even follow up

11:38:19 afterwards.

11:38:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I believe we are going to hear from

11:38:22 Mr. Briggs and an issue and the issue he will bring up

11:38:29 to discuss our next round.

11:38:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: To tell what we have coming before us.

11:38:36 >>MARY MULHERN: I am going to get back to you about

11:38:40 specific departmental things.

11:38:42 But some things that came up today that I really would

11:38:45 like to see is for you to address.

11:38:53 I know that the general employees, the ACU is willing

11:39:03 to look across the board at wage reductions and a lot

11:39:05 of people have said rather than reviewing any layoffs,

11:39:09 they would be willing, especially the unions,

11:39:11 especially that union.

11:39:13 I don't know about police and fire.

11:39:15 But they would be willing to look at -- probably you

11:39:19 should just look at the general employees, giving given

11:39:21 the reaction I am getting over here.

11:39:24 To address that.

11:39:25 Because I know the mayor has said, you know, she's

11:39:27 always said she's against that.

11:39:29 But when we have people, such high unemployment, and

11:39:34 there is no employment possibilities, really, in the

11:39:36 private sector once people get laid off if we could

11:39:43 have look at that.

11:39:44 I would also like to see the -- I know that from our

11:39:48 budget committee that they had asked you to look at the

11:39:52 fund balance and the purchase orders outstanding and

11:39:58 how much money is actually in that fund balance that is

11:40:01 not encumbered, I guess is what it is.

11:40:04 So that's what I would like to see.

11:40:06 As much as you can tell us about how much money in the

11:40:09 fund balance is unallocated at this point.

11:40:14 And probably by department.

11:40:20 And then I am going to reiterate what I asked for

11:40:22 earlier is the break down of how much we're spending on

11:40:26 private employment contracts -- privatization.

11:40:32 And Mr. Miranda wanted all the breakdown of, I think,

11:40:35 what they were spending on operations or something.

11:40:37 I don't really care about all of that.

11:40:39 I just would like to see the more detailed you can be

11:40:43 is great but I just want to see how much we are

11:40:45 spending on employment that's not part of our personnel

11:40:47 costs.

11:40:49 You gave us the pension.

11:40:56 Maybe if you could give us a breakdown -- and this is

11:41:01 probably already in here, but if it's not, our costs,

11:41:06 personnel costs, besides the pension costs, but the

11:41:11 personnel costs split between police, fire, union,

11:41:17 general employees union, and non-union.

11:41:22 >>> The benefits, you mean?

11:41:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Not the benefits.

11:41:26 Just the whole --

11:41:29 >>> Breakdown?

11:41:31 >>MARY MULHERN: You could include the benefits, too,

11:41:33 in the salary part but I want to see the salaries, how

11:41:36 it's broken down, where the bulk of all that money that

11:41:38 we spend on employees is going.

11:41:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Bonnie, going back to your initial

11:41:46 presentation, $31 million, that sort of thing, I

11:41:56 thought the message that you were sending is that we

11:42:03 will have a balanced budget based upon the savings that

11:42:08 we made coming out of last year, which was 19.5 million

11:42:14 plus dipping into our fund balance to the tune of $13

11:42:18 million.

11:42:20 Totaling approximately $32 million which is the

11:42:22 projected deficit.

11:42:25 So we once again have a balanced budget of not a

11:42:31 thrilling or exciting way to make budget, but one that

11:42:35 works.

11:42:35 >>> Actually, you said it better than I did.

11:42:40 Yes.

11:42:41 We will have a balanced budget.

11:42:42 It will be based on a combination of money that we

11:42:46 saved in fiscal year '10 and reductions in the budgets

11:42:50 that all the departments are making for fiscal year '11

11:42:53 that allow us to reduce expenditures, and that together

11:42:56 with taking some moneys from our previous years' fund

11:42:59 balance and savings is how we will represent present to

11:43:02 you a balanced budget.

11:43:03 Once again this is preliminary, and the budget is not

11:43:08 complete, but we are working on it.

11:43:10 But these are the best numbers at this time.

11:43:12 Yes, sir.

11:43:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me ask a question, Ms. Wise.

11:43:18 Given all of the savings and so forth, is there

11:43:25 anticipation of any more layoffs in the 2011 budget

11:43:29 cycle?

11:43:30 >>BONNIE WISE: I think we are still working through

11:43:32 that.

11:43:32 There are still departmental consolidations that are

11:43:34 occurring.

11:43:35 So those are still ongoing.

11:43:37 But I think the main consolidations have occurred.

11:43:39 I think all the departments are always looking at ways

11:43:42 to improve.

11:43:46 I don't want to say that there is none, because there's

11:43:48 probably others out there.

11:43:50 But the main consolidation, I believe, have occurred.

11:43:54 Maybe parks and rec is still outstanding, but --

11:44:03 >> In the budget hearings for the workshop at the

11:44:06 county was we always had all the department directors

11:44:09 that appear before us.

11:44:15 That's had you been my experience having different

11:44:17 department directors reviewing the with council, all

11:44:20 the commissioners.

11:44:21 I don't know if that's something you may want to

11:44:22 consider in the future.

11:44:23 >> Well, I think you have a few opportunities.

11:44:26 You only scheduled two budget workshops.

11:44:28 So we have to, I think, therefore kind of narrow in on

11:44:32 one department director.

11:44:33 I know that your advisory committee has had several

11:44:35 directors.

11:44:36 For example, they have a meeting today and I know

11:44:38 police is coming to their meeting today.

11:44:40 So you can tell me how you warrants to handle that.

11:44:44 But in two meetings I frankly GTE can't get the whole

11:44:47 staff here.

11:44:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's kind of late, I guess.

11:44:53 Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

11:44:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that normally,

11:44:59 traditionally, I guess, in other years since I have

11:45:02 been here, it was the department heads doing the

11:45:04 presentation, and just today you adopt opted to present

11:45:08 kind of instead.

11:45:09 >>BONNIE WISE: Well, I think I wanted to really dig

11:45:12 into the parking, and I'm really the best person to

11:45:16 talk to you generally about the overview on the general

11:45:19 fund.

11:45:19 So I think I can delegate that.

11:45:21 >> I agree with Chairman Scott because in other years

11:45:26 we have had each department.

11:45:27 So if you would give input what you want to hear at the

11:45:35 next workshop we can hear from department heads.

11:45:37 I am going to follow up on John's question because

11:45:40 that's what I was trying to ask you at the very

11:45:42 beginning was the difference of the savings between $19

11:45:45 million.

11:45:47 The general fund.

11:45:51 So how much -- the amount that you are using to balance

11:45:56 the budget, how much under budget were we?

11:46:01 And where is it coming from?

11:46:03 Is it $19 million from what you are saying you are

11:46:06 finding in individual department savings?

11:46:09 And then 13 million from the fund balance?

11:46:12 Is that correct?

11:46:14 >>> Right.

11:46:15 19, 20 million.

11:46:18 Rounding.

11:46:18 But from the savings that we have done --

11:46:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Just so we are clear, the 13 million

11:46:23 that we are talking about right in here under general

11:46:27 fund expenses, that is coming from fund balance.

11:46:31 And I want to give credit to our budget advisory

11:46:34 committee who discover this and found that there is all

11:46:41 this money that is not encumbered, you know, for

11:46:46 costing us no money for three years.

11:46:49 We have had some of these people appointed for three

11:46:51 years as volunteers who have been digging into the

11:46:54 budget at an incredible amount of time and expertise

11:47:00 going into that and they are doing that for us as a

11:47:03 service.

11:47:03 And I think that I want to thank Bonnie and Dennis,

11:47:07 too, because they have been really, really helpful and

11:47:10 really working in concert with this group this year,

11:47:15 and it's been better every year.

11:47:17 So I just wanted to bring some kudos.

11:47:19 >>> We have worked with them but I'm sorry, frankly

11:47:22 this is money that your department directors found, and

11:47:25 your staff has found, and they have provided very good

11:47:28 input and assistance.

11:47:29 But, I mean, this is really every department rolling up

11:47:33 their sleeves and looking at every way that they can

11:47:36 save money and eliminate every non-essential position.

11:47:39 So everybody participated in that.

11:47:43 >> I'm just talking about the fund balance.

11:47:45 I know that they have had to do that, and that's really

11:47:47 hard for them to do.

11:47:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

11:47:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.

11:47:50 The two specific dents that I would like to hear from

11:47:53 at our next one are parks and recreation, because I

11:47:59 feel that we are constantly expanding their

11:48:00 responsibilities and shrinking their resources.

11:48:03 And I know it's been extremely tough for them.

11:48:05 I would like to hear how they are adjusting to this

11:48:09 challenge.

11:48:09 And, also, from public works.

11:48:13 Mr. Daignault, the other day, somebody said that there

11:48:17 was a project in their area and we weren't doing it and

11:48:21 we cut back on some of our major initiatives, because

11:48:25 it took human resources to do this, but I would like a

11:48:28 general overview in next year's budget.

11:48:32 Are we finishing up this year?

11:48:34 Sort of an overview of how we are doing in the world of

11:48:39 public works, and what our issues are next year and how

11:48:43 we are doing with personnel and how much in-house.

11:48:45 I have to say, I don't envy your job.

11:48:51 And this time it is so very painful and difficult to

11:48:54 make these choices.

11:48:56 And I really appreciate the work of your staff, which

11:48:59 is even more limited than it was last year.

11:49:02 And all the other departments are more limited and the

11:49:06 costs for things like pensions, there's just no glory

11:49:09 in that, and trying to come up with the money to

11:49:12 compensate for real life services that we perform for

11:49:15 the public, very, very challenging.

11:49:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's hear from the public.

11:49:21 We only have ten minutes.

11:49:23 All right?

11:49:24 Let's hear from the public at this time.

11:49:27 State your name and address.

11:49:28 >>> Good morning.

11:49:31 My name is Fred Hearns, 18017 bella creek drive in

11:49:37 Tampa, 33647.

11:49:38 And thank you for giving me an opportunity to address

11:49:41 you this morning.

11:49:42 I did get a chance ton get some written communication

11:49:45 to all of you.

11:49:46 I spoke with each of you individually, including, well,

11:49:49 Mr. Miranda is the only one.

11:49:51 But he had a chance to talk to you.

11:49:53 But my concern is to save one position in next year's

11:49:58 budget.

11:49:58 And I understand all of these restraints that you are

11:50:01 under and I understand the shrinking property values

11:50:03 and everything else that we are dealing with, and I'm

11:50:07 talking about the community affairs division.

11:50:10 I retired from the city three years ago.

11:50:12 At that time it was a department.

11:50:14 Community affairs department.

11:50:15 At that time we had 22 employees.

11:50:18 I think they are down now to about 10.

11:50:20 And with three proposed cuts that will be in effect

11:50:23 this Friday, I believe, June 25th, one of those

11:50:27 positions, I think, is going beyond a bare bones

11:50:32 budget.

11:50:32 I think it's cutting through the bone.

11:50:34 This is the person who supervises the EEOC contract for

11:50:38 the City of Tampa.

11:50:42 Tampa has had a contract with the federal government to

11:50:44 investigate discrimination complaints for about 20

11:50:47 years.

11:50:48 This person who has 20 years experience -- and this

11:50:51 position I'm talking about, I really like for to us

11:50:53 keep this person in place, but their future is up in

11:50:57 the air.

11:50:58 I'm not sure they are going to be available.

11:51:00 But saving the position is really my concern.

11:51:03 The department has two divisions.

11:51:06 We have a federal -- the City of Tampa has a federal

11:51:09 contract with HUD.

11:51:11 We are investigating fair housing complaints.

11:51:13 There are about four people in that section.

11:51:16 And the city also has a federal contract with EEOC to

11:51:20 investigate employment complaints.

11:51:22 And there are about four or five people in that

11:51:24 division.

11:51:25 I think the key position of the person who is the

11:51:30 direct contact with EEOC, who is listed as a

11:51:33 supervisor -- and I think maybe that's why this was

11:51:35 considered by the city, a not critical position.

11:51:39 We are cutting supervisors.

11:51:40 But this person probably investigates half the

11:51:42 complaints that come through the division.

11:51:44 Last year, the city closed 120 employment

11:51:48 discrimination complaints filed in that office.

11:51:52 120.

11:51:53 So discrimination is still alive in our community.

11:51:57 Now, this department generates about 100 to $125,000

11:52:02 each year.

11:52:03 It goes into the general fund.

11:52:05 That money is paid by HUD to the City of Tampa and by

11:52:09 EEOC to the City of Tampa for closing those complaints.

11:52:12 HUD has a backlog, as you can imagine.

11:52:14 People losing their jobs all over the country.

11:52:17 And so if they don't have enough investigators they

11:52:21 contract with the City of Tampa and other cities and

11:52:24 counties and states throughout the country to share

11:52:26 their work.

11:52:26 The city gets paid per case that it closes.

11:52:30 The other thing that this department has done, or this

11:52:33 division has done, just in the past three years, they

11:52:36 recovered close to half a million dollars for victims

11:52:39 of discrimination, people who work within the city

11:52:41 limits of Tampa.

11:52:43 That's where they go.

11:52:44 They go to this office.

11:52:46 102 East 7th Avenue in the free library building.

11:52:49 People who don't have money for attorneys.

11:52:51 This service is free to them.

11:52:53 If they would go directly to EEOC which is probably

11:52:55 going to happen, if we lose this position, I believe in

11:53:00 another year or two, if they go directly to EEOC they

11:53:03 can be waiting one year, two years, who knows?

11:53:05 Because of the great backlog that EEOC has.

11:53:08 The fair housing division, supervisor, cannot do two

11:53:13 full-time jobs.

11:53:14 It is impossible.

11:53:15 She's already overworked.

11:53:17 There is no way she can add supervising and division

11:53:21 responsibilities to what she's already doing.

11:53:24 The City of Tampa has won national awards for

11:53:27 efficiency in the area of maintaining these contracts

11:53:30 and serving the community.

11:53:33 I predict in a couple of years, if we lose that

11:53:36 supervisor position, not only are we going to put that

11:53:39 contract in jeopardy, but the fair housing contract is

11:53:43 going to suffer, also, again because you cannot get

11:53:48 blood out of a turnip.

11:53:49 And with these reductions that are going on, I don't

11:53:51 see this as a noncritical.

11:53:53 This is a very critical position.

11:53:55 So my recommendation is that we have at least eight

11:53:59 employees in that department, four housing in HUD, four

11:54:04 EEOC.

11:54:05 The EEOC supervisor also is responsible for the city's

11:54:08 human rights ordinance.

11:54:09 That's a law.

11:54:10 That's chapter 12 under the ordinance.

11:54:12 So it protects city employees as well as people from

11:54:16 the general public.

11:54:18 So that's my request.

11:54:19 Itch given you given you some things in writing to look

11:54:22 at.

11:54:23 This position generates money for the city.

11:54:26 It generates money for victims of discrimination.

11:54:29 It's very critical.

11:54:30 And I don't think it's feasible to ask the fair housing

11:54:33 supervisor, who is also overworked, to do another

11:54:36 full-time job.

11:54:37 It just won't work that way.

11:54:41 Thank you.

11:54:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. Hearns.

11:54:46 Councilman?

11:54:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask you a question?

11:54:51 We definitely appreciate your input after so many years

11:54:56 being with the city and involved with these programs.

11:54:58 I'm sure that nobody knows them better than you.

11:55:02 My question is as to do with caseload.

11:55:05 I would think that with all these different

11:55:08 municipalities and agencies doing this, there must be

11:55:10 some kind of national standards in terms of how many --

11:55:16 what a reasonable caseload is, you know, for the

11:55:20 caseworkers, for the supervisors, and that sort of

11:55:23 thing, and I have no idea, now, to this question, but

11:55:27 how we would match up to the national standards.

11:55:31 Do you have any sense about it, historically, or

11:55:34 currently?

11:55:36 >> We are probably on an average with most

11:55:39 investigative agencies of the same size as the City of

11:55:40 Tampa.

11:55:42 An investigator can do maybe 40 cases, 35 to 40 cases a

11:55:46 year.

11:55:46 Some of those are mediated so they don't have to go a

11:55:50 full investigation.

11:55:50 Once you get around 50 or more, you know, the quality

11:55:53 of investigations are going to suffer.

11:55:56 People are not going to get the kind of full service

11:55:58 that they require.

11:56:00 Also, because the city is substantially equivalent,

11:56:04 when people come to the City of Tampa to file a

11:56:05 discrimination complaint, that's just like going to

11:56:08 EEOC, or it's just like going to HUD.

11:56:11 And they are very demanding.

11:56:13 They require training.

11:56:14 There is a mandatory training that the investigators

11:56:17 have to attend, supervisors have to be go to.

11:56:21 So it's like they have two masters.

11:56:24 They have EEOC they have to respond to as well as the

11:56:27 city.

11:56:27 And our staffers.

11:56:30 I think we are pretty much at the national average.

11:56:32 If we have two investigators and a supervisor who is

11:56:35 also an investigator, and just looking at this year's

11:56:39 numbers, 120 cases, that's 40 cases apiece.

11:56:42 That's about the average.

11:56:43 Once you get beyond that, quality is going to suffer.

11:56:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When you were with us, I seem to

11:56:49 recall full community relations department and division

11:56:54 with 20 or 30 folks, and that's now sort of been

11:57:00 splintered up and diminished to this 8 you are talking

11:57:04 about?

11:57:04 >> Correct.

11:57:05 We had a community services division, and you all know

11:57:07 because you attended some of these events.

11:57:09 Police, community relations workshops, we had all kinds

11:57:12 of programs we did.

11:57:13 All those programs left.

11:57:15 When I retired, one of the last things I had to do was

11:57:18 lay off half my staff.

11:57:19 So all those people went away in 2007.

11:57:21 Now we have investigators and two clerical people, and

11:57:26 the human rights -- pardon me, disability rights

11:57:30 coordinator who serves persons with disabilities, and

11:57:34 that community.

11:57:34 So all we have now on the investigative staff and

11:57:37 clerical and we are about to lose the key investigator

11:57:40 and the key person with EEOC if the proposed city

11:57:43 budget is approved.

11:57:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Hearn, for presenting

11:57:54 all this information to us and make it so clear.

11:57:57 One suggestion.

11:57:58 You can maybe let me know if you think this is a

11:58:00 possibility.

11:58:00 But this is really a suggestion for our administration

11:58:03 to look into whether there is more federal funding

11:58:08 available in the way of grants, stimulus money,

11:58:12 whatever department that might be able to contribute

11:58:15 before we have to cut that position specifically.

11:58:27 This some something we need to look into.

11:58:28 I don't know if you are aware of any possible sources

11:58:30 of funding that we can get at the federal level, that

11:58:34 would be interesting or helpful.

11:58:37 Then the other question I have -- and this is my

11:58:39 concern about being, you know, as you said, we have

11:58:43 already cut down to the bone.

11:58:46 You went from 22 to 8 or 10 employees.

11:58:50 Now if we are talking about eliminating any more

11:58:52 positions, and especially if we are talking about no

11:58:56 longer performing that function that we have been doing

11:58:58 for HUD and for the EEOC, we have a legal obligation

11:59:05 through our human rights ordinance.

11:59:07 Are we going to end up having to pay, instead paying

11:59:10 expenses out side legal counsel specializing in

11:59:15 employment?

11:59:16 So we could have some very experienced mediator who has

11:59:20 been doing this for years and getting -- maybe it's not

11:59:25 paying the whole salary but it's paying close to what

11:59:28 that salary would be.

11:59:29 We are getting that from HUD and from the EEOC.

11:59:32 Are we going to end up being liable for more legal

11:59:34 costs?

11:59:35 So you could give me your opinion on that if you think

11:59:40 that might happen.

11:59:41 >> Fred Hearn: Well, I think what might happen with

11:59:44 city employees a because this is an office they go to

11:59:48 file complaints, if they feel like they have been

11:59:50 discriminated against as a city employee by their

11:59:53 department head or whoever.

11:59:56 What happens now is they go to that department and a

11:59:57 lot of those cases are mediated which means they are

12:00:00 resolved in about a month or so.

12:00:01 They just go away.

12:00:03 But if that function is not there, that person -- if it

12:00:07 was me, I would get an attorney.

12:00:09 That's the first thing I would do.

12:00:10 Now there's no need for an attorney because we have a

12:00:13 mediation program.

12:00:15 Even if remediation doesn't resolve it that case will

12:00:19 be investigated.

12:00:20 And there's a deliberate firewall between community

12:00:22 affairs and be the city attorney.

12:00:24 So there's no appearance of a conflict of interest.

12:00:27 So I don't know what might happen if that department is

12:00:30 not there, and if I am a city employee, I'm probably

12:00:33 going to call EEOC.

12:00:36 If I really think I have a good case, I am probably

12:00:38 going to get an attorney.

12:00:39 Now the city legal department is going to have to

12:00:41 respond as opposed to community service -- community

12:00:45 affairs and an investigator in that office.

12:00:49 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to follow up from your

12:00:52 answer.

12:00:53 But from probably the legal department, and from maybe

12:00:57 human resources, I would like to see if they are

12:01:01 probably cutting this position.

12:01:02 It sounds like they already are.

12:01:05 I would like a report on what the savings are going to

12:01:09 be, how much money we are going to lose, and how much

12:01:13 we can anticipate having to spend in our own staff,

12:01:17 legal time, and/or hiring outside counsel.

12:01:23 Thank you.

12:01:23 >>GWEN MILLER: My question is for you, Ms. Wise.

12:01:27 Is it in the budget to eliminate that position Mr.

12:01:29 Hearn just talked about it?

12:01:31 Is it already placed in the budget?

12:01:34 Wise ways I don't really know, but if I can say

12:01:36 something about the budget because I tried to say it

12:01:38 several times.

12:01:39 These are preliminary numbers.

12:01:40 But in the earned, we will present to you a balanced

12:01:43 budget.

12:01:43 So I'm sorry to go back through all of that, the

12:01:47 combination of fund balance and our savings, whether or

12:01:50 not in the growth management, this is the growth

12:01:52 management department, whether that particular position

12:01:55 is in or not, you really don't know, and I'm --

12:02:00 >> Is there anything that we can do to make sure that

12:02:03 it's put back in the budget?

12:02:08 >> Can we put it back in there?

12:02:12 >> Once it becomes council's budget, council can budget

12:02:16 for that position.

12:02:17 The mayor may choose not to.

12:02:21 But council can put it in the budget.

12:02:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The other issue, Mr. Chairman, if I

12:02:26 can follow up, is the mayor, the chief executive of the

12:02:29 city, is implementing the budget.

12:02:31 What she can do, her department can create vacancies

12:02:36 within the budget so that when you are presented with

12:02:39 the budget, you are informed that these are now vacant

12:02:42 positions.

12:02:42 But it's through the administration that the vacancies

12:02:46 are created and do exist.

12:02:49 Do you follow what I'm saying?

12:02:52 >>GWEN MILLER: I follow what you are saying.

12:02:54 So I there's nothing we can do about it?

12:02:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, my suggestion is if this is a

12:02:59 concern, it would be appropriate to talk to the chief

12:03:01 administrator of the city.

12:03:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, what I will suggest --

12:03:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Which is the mayor.

12:03:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I would suggest is that we have

12:03:07 whoever the department director to be put on the agenda

12:03:13 July 22nd and make a report to us, and I will tell you,

12:03:16 Mr. Hearns and I talked, and I talked to Cindy Miller

12:03:22 over the department.

12:03:23 Her explanation is, one is, I think it has more to be

12:03:27 do with the person versus the position as I was told,

12:03:29 that pretty much the position is still there, and all

12:03:31 these things will continue, what she told me now.

12:03:34 Whether it's going to be -- I don't know if that will

12:03:36 come before us and tell us that.

12:03:38 The second thing I was told was that there are no --

12:03:44 that employees of the city cannot go to EEOC because

12:03:49 the city would be investigating itself.

12:03:51 That serves as an HR function.

12:03:54 So all those issues need to be clear, because that's

12:03:57 what I was told.

12:03:58 And we heard about 30 minutes on this issue.

12:04:02 So we need to have her come before council at our July

12:04:06 22nd meeting and let's talk about this issue.

12:04:08 Has it been cut?

12:04:10 Has it not been cut?

12:04:11 Because she said to me when I raised the question, you

12:04:13 know, is EEOC going to suffer?

12:04:17 She said no. There are still persons there.

12:04:19 Pretty much said that that person that person's name, I

12:04:23 won't call it on the television, said it's an issue of

12:04:26 whether another person can do that function versus that

12:04:28 person who is the supervisor.

12:04:30 That was how she presented to me.

12:04:33 Watt sounded to me was can another person do this

12:04:36 versus a person who has seniority?

12:04:38 That's how he equate it.

12:04:39 But let's bring her before us at our next meeting on

12:04:42 the 22nd.

12:04:45 Then we can air all that out.

12:04:46 I think councilman Dingfelder.

12:04:49 Then it's 12:00.

12:04:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: My only concern is the timing,

12:04:53 Mr. Chairman.

12:04:57 Gwen, don't leave me.

12:04:58 One second because you want to hear me.

12:05:01 It's the timing of this.

12:05:02 And what I would like to see council do today is vote

12:05:08 for the chairman to send a letter on behalf of council

12:05:11 saying as follows: Dear Madam Mayor, we would

12:05:15 encourage the administration to revisit the issue

12:05:18 raised by Fred Hearns at today's meeting.

12:05:20 Sincerely, chairman Tom Scott.

12:05:22 From all of us.

12:05:24 However we want to word it.

12:05:25 Marty can help.

12:05:29 I think it's just a casual thing, now, but it's just

12:05:32 like we are concerned.

12:05:34 We would like you to revisit.

12:05:35 And then we can continue to have this dialogue at

12:05:38 whatever future time.

12:05:40 That would be my motion.

12:05:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And a second.

12:05:43 Can we include then that they appear, I guess

12:05:45 administration appear before council as well on the

12:05:48 22nd so we can get a full --

12:05:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll add that as a friendly

12:05:53 amendment.

12:05:53 >>MARY MULHERN: And the cost associated?

12:06:00 As you said, what she's planning to do, and also if we

12:06:04 do eliminate these functions, what the ramifications --

12:06:12 >> That will be part of the report when she comes on

12:06:14 the 22nd.

12:06:15 Okay.

12:06:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, if I can, thank you,

12:06:20 Mr. Dingfelder.

12:06:21 That was the point I was trying to Mike as chief

12:06:23 executive.

12:06:23 Things can happen within the departments between the

12:06:27 opportunity for council to get the budget or whatever.

12:06:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

12:06:31 Mr. Hearns, you want to ask a question?

12:06:34 >> Just very briefly.

12:06:35 This position is scheduled to be terminated in three

12:06:37 days.

12:06:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's why we are doing this now.

12:06:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else from the public?

12:06:44 Before we do that, we have to hear from the public

12:06:47 before we do any voting.

12:06:48 So anyone else from the public?

12:06:49 Seeing none, there's a motion on the floor been moved

12:06:52 and seconded by Councilwoman Saul-Sena.

12:06:53 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

12:06:56 Opposes?

12:06:58 Okay.

12:06:58 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent

12:07:05 at vote.

12:07:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

12:07:07 Anything else to come before us? If not --

12:07:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to receive and file.

12:07:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Second.

12:07:14 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

12:07:15 Opposes?

12:07:16 We stand adjourned.

12:07:16 Thank you.

12:07:17 (Meeting adjourned)



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