Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Thursday, August 5, 2010

9:00 a.m. Session


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

09:03:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Our guest to do the invocation is Mr.

09:04:02 Jim Crews who has been married for 21 years to his

09:04:08 lovely wife and is a member of the U.S. Air Force

09:04:14 retired reserve, having served 23 years military for

09:04:19 our nation.

09:04:20 He is a graduate, most recently graduated from River

09:04:28 Bible Institute, extending his studies in biblical

09:04:30 education.

09:04:32 Jim is a member of the River of Tampa Bay church and

09:04:36 his aspiration is to return to the military service as

09:04:39 a chaplain.

09:04:40 Please stand and remain standing for the invocation and

09:04:46 the pledge of allegiance.

09:04:47 >>> (Microphone off) Thank you for the opportunity for

09:04:52 the invocation.

09:04:53 Let us pray together.

09:04:54 Father, we thank you for this beautiful day you have

09:04:56 given us.

09:04:57 We thank you for your mercies every morning.

09:04:59 (Microphone off)

09:05:19 We thank you for your great love this morning.

09:05:37 We offer ourselves a living sacrifice in service not

09:05:48 only in our lives but in our world.

09:05:50 We pray, Dear Lord, for those in authority over us, we

09:05:55 pray for our president and all in authority in Congress

09:05:57 and our state government and our local government.

09:05:59 We pray for the mayor and this body of lawmakers here,

09:06:02 our council.

09:06:04 We pray your blessing upon them, we pray your wisdom as

09:06:07 for them as they conduct the business of this city, and

09:06:09 we thank you that you give it because you hear our

09:06:11 prayer, and you are as close as the mention of your

09:06:14 name.

09:06:14 These things we pray and give you all the glory. In

09:06:17 Jesus name, whom I call Lord.

09:06:19 Amen.

09:06:20 (Pledge of Allegiance)

09:06:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We will have roll call at this time.

09:06:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.

09:06:44 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Here.

09:06:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.

09:06:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.

09:06:49 >>CURTIS STOKES: Here.

09:06:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.

09:06:51 For the record, we have a memorandum from Councilwoman

09:06:53 Mulhern.

09:06:54 "I'm currently out of town and regret I will not be in

09:06:57 attendance at this week's council meeting."

09:07:00 Okay.

09:07:01 I think it also refers to the evening meeting as well.

09:07:05 Then also a memorandum from councilman Stokes who has

09:07:09 to leave at 10 a.m. due to a previous scheduled

09:07:12 engagement.

09:07:13 We give that to the clerk for the record.

09:07:19 I'm going to have reverse our ceremony this morning.

09:07:21 The chief has to leave to catch a flight so we

09:07:24 certainly thank the chief and those that are here to

09:07:26 recognize the three women who assisted the officers

09:07:33 that were killed a few weeks ago, Officer Curtis and

09:07:41 Officer Kocab.

09:07:44 At this time we would like to make that presentation.

09:07:47 I am going to ask the chief to have join me along with

09:08:07 Mrs. Wislande Louis-Paul Dodson and Renee Roundtree and

09:08:16 Dolores Keene.

09:08:17 Are they here?

09:08:18 Not here?

09:08:19 Okay, I was told they were here.

09:08:28 All right, then, I was told they were here.

09:08:35 Councilman Caetano, do you want to come and make the

09:08:38 other presentation to clear channel?

09:08:57 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: It gives me a great pleasure to

09:09:00 make a presentation to Clear Channel, Mr. Ryan Frazier,

09:09:03 Beth hang, and Mr. Tom O'Neal.

09:09:11 I will read recognition of Clear Channel outdoor Tampa

09:09:15 division for its public service to the Tampa Bay area

09:09:18 for providing advertising space on its digital

09:09:21 billboards that assisted in locating the suspect who

09:09:25 recently shot and killed two dedicated Tampa police

09:09:28 officers.

09:09:29 David Curtis and Jeffrey Kocab.

09:09:32 Tampa City Council would like to take this opportunity

09:09:34 to applaud and congratulate Clear Channel for their

09:09:38 service and for its willingness to go above and beyond

09:09:42 the call in providing key information to the public

09:09:45 that led to the apprehension of the suspect.

09:09:49 And for donating space to promote the memorial funds

09:09:52 for our officers and families.

09:09:59 Thank you, sir.

09:10:00 We really appreciate it.

09:10:04 Thank you very much.

09:10:06 Would you like to say something?

09:10:13 >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman Scott and council, new

09:10:17 members as well.

09:10:18 Just very briefly, at Clear Channel outdoor we take the

09:10:21 responsibility and privilege of being able to operate

09:10:24 these digital signs in this community with as much

09:10:29 responsibility as we can, and the unfortunate situation

09:10:32 that occurred a couple weeks back, called into action a

09:10:38 plan to utilize digital billboards to put a message out

09:10:42 to the community as quickly as possible.

09:10:45 Our partners CBS outdoor were also participating in

09:10:50 this.

09:10:50 And we a sure you we are here to help this community.

09:10:54 And thank you so much for the recent vote to allow this

09:10:57 to happen in the City of Tampa.

09:10:58 Again, we accept the responsibility and the privilege

09:11:02 to participate to help the community in this

09:11:05 information.

09:11:05 So thank you so much.

09:11:08 [ Applause ]

09:11:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

09:11:14 I have been informed that they are trying to find a

09:11:16 parking space.

09:11:20 So, chief, it's going to be awhile.

09:11:22 Chief, I understand you do have to leave shortly.

09:11:25 But as soon as they arrive we'll come back and try to

09:11:27 recognize them.

09:11:28 Okay.

09:11:29 But chief, before you leave, thank you.

09:11:36 We can review the agenda now.

09:11:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Good morning.

09:11:55 Before you, you have the addendum to today's agenda.

09:11:59 You have an item of new business, a request to add a

09:12:03 resolution accepting temporary construction easements

09:12:06 donated by the property owners in conjunction with item

09:12:09 19.

09:12:10 So we would ask that this item be placed on the agenda

09:12:14 to be moved in conjunction with item 19.

09:12:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved, Mr. Chairman.

09:12:20 That's an item where they are going to give us the

09:12:22 right to use the right-of-way for the construction.

09:12:25 >> Second.

09:12:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:12:32 (Motion carried).

09:12:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 14 is a request that that item

09:12:35 be removed from the agenda.

09:12:37 And that request is from the director of contract

09:12:39 administration.

09:12:41 Item 52 is a request from the director of growth

09:12:44 management service requesting that this matter be

09:12:47 postponed and continued to the workshop to coincide

09:12:49 with the workshop that's scheduled on September

09:12:52 30th of 2010 at 9 a.m. pertaining to surface and

09:12:57 interim parking lots.

09:12:59 Item number 56 -- and this is an afternoon item,

09:13:05 council -- the afternoon item, item 56, is a request

09:13:09 for a continuance, and the request will be to have it

09:13:14 continued to September 2nd, 2010.

09:13:16 Unfortunately, council, because this is a noticed

09:13:18 public hearing, this matter cannot be taken up till

09:13:21 1:30 in the afternoon.

09:13:24 Item 57 is also scheduled for the afternoon, and that's

09:13:28 an appeal hearing, but that cannot be heard because the

09:13:30 affidavit in the and the record was not filed so but

09:13:38 council doesn't have to wait till 1:30 because that's

09:13:40 not properly renoticed.

09:13:41 That can be done today by council's approval of the

09:13:44 agenda to September 23rd, 2010 at 1:30 in the

09:13:47 afternoon.

09:13:48 And that motion again will remove that item number 57

09:13:50 from this afternoon's agenda.

09:13:53 So, in effect, this afternoon really what you have only

09:13:55 is one request for a continuance.

09:13:57 Item 58 was added on late to the agenda.

09:14:03 Because of the process it was placed at the end of the

09:14:05 agenda.

09:14:06 However, it is an ordinance related to the establishing

09:14:09 of the Encore community development district.

09:14:12 That is to be considered for first reading, council, it

09:14:16 is appropriate then to add that to the agenda rather

09:14:18 than leave it to the very end, to take it up after

09:14:21 items 3, 4 and 5 when you do take up ordinances to be

09:14:24 considered for the first reading.

09:14:26 Also, council, with regard to that, there's a request

09:14:28 by Rebecca Kert to incorporate an exhibit A that has

09:14:31 been provided to the clerk that is to be made part of

09:14:34 the ordinance.

09:14:36 Other than that, council, I am not aware of any

09:14:38 additions or deletions to today's agenda and I present

09:14:40 to the you for your approval.

09:14:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Move approval.

09:14:45 >> Second.

09:14:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:14:47 All in favor?

09:14:49 Opposes?

09:14:50 Okay.

09:14:51 Thank you very much.

09:15:01 I am going to ask the chief to come and any staff that

09:15:11 wants to come.

09:15:12 Ms. Roundtree is here, so we want to recognize Renee

09:15:16 Roundtree who is going to be accepting these

09:15:20 commendations for all three of them.

09:15:22 And, again, these three women assisted the two officers

09:15:28 that were down at the time and stayed there until help

09:15:33 did arrive.

09:15:34 We are certainly grateful for their act of good citizen

09:15:39 and heroism and being there to assist.

09:15:43 It was a very devastating time for the entire

09:15:47 community.

09:15:48 It's always good to have people like this, good

09:15:50 citizens, who are willing to go beyond what is expected

09:15:56 and be involved and stay there to assist in whatever

09:16:00 way they could, and make the 911 call.

09:16:04 So this city and this community is grateful and

09:16:08 indebted for their assistance and their help during

09:16:11 this time for our police department, during the tragic

09:16:16 time for our community, for our city.

09:16:18 And so let me also really take the opportunity to thank

09:16:22 the entire police department and the chief for

09:16:25 leadership and for also assisting these women as well,

09:16:32 providing for them on numerous -- a number of things

09:16:35 that are needed for the children, for them, and so we

09:16:38 are really grateful for you, chief, for your staff, for

09:16:41 what you have done.

09:16:42 I think many times we always hear the negative side but

09:16:45 we never want to highlight the positive of the day.

09:16:48 I just want to take the opportunity on behalf of City

09:16:50 Council to thank the entire department and thank these

09:16:53 women who acted bravely to help out where they were

09:17:00 needed.

09:17:00 On behalf of this City Council, let me just present

09:17:04 these accommodations.

09:17:06 It has all three ladies names.

09:17:10 Whereas Renee Roundtree, City Council recognize it is

09:17:15 heroic efforts of Ms. Roundtree and all the ladies

09:17:19 mentioned, and response in assisting David Curtis and

09:17:25 Jeffrey Kocab until arrival of paramedics, until Mrs.

09:17:29 Roundtree in her thoughtfulness aided these officers

09:17:35 all in the face of eminent danger to herself, now

09:17:38 therefore be it proclaimed that the Tampa City Council

09:17:40 does recognize the courage of Mrs. Roundtree and all

09:17:44 the ladies mentioned in each of these commendations,

09:17:47 and is forever grateful for her compassion and display

09:17:50 of bravery, signed by all seven members of Tampa City

09:17:53 Council.

09:17:53 So I am going to present this to her.

09:17:58 And I think she deserves a round of applause.

09:18:02 [ Applause ]

09:18:10 >> The only thing I would like to say is thank everyone

09:18:13 for acknowledging us with this.

09:18:13 It's a hard struggle we're going through, but we

09:18:19 Just leave it in God's hands.

09:18:20 Thank you.

09:18:23 [ Applause ]

09:18:28 >> Chief Jane Castor: I would like to say thank you as

09:18:30 well on behalf of the men and women of the Tampa Police

09:18:33 Department and of the entire community.

09:18:34 I think everyone has been traumatized by these events.

09:18:38 But obviously those who showed up, walked upon this

09:18:43 horrific scene, is just unimaginable, and for them to

09:18:48 stay not knowing where the shooter was at, to day

09:18:51 there, to call 911 and to render aid until we were able

09:18:54 to arrive on the scene, as councilman said, it's very

09:18:58 heroic.

09:18:59 And we applaud their efforts.

09:19:02 And again they exemplify what's great about this

09:19:05 community, and we can't thank them enough.

09:19:08 Thank you, council.

09:19:26 >> We have set aside 30 minute for public comments.

09:19:52 First for items on the agenda first.

09:19:56 If you would like to speak, please come forward, state

09:19:59 your name and address.

09:20:00 You have three minutes today.

09:20:04 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherill here representing

09:20:08 Tampa homeowners, particularly the zoning committee.

09:20:11 First of all, we, T.H.A.N. works like to acknowledge

09:20:16 those who were just recognized, because Clear Channel

09:20:19 is the one we worked with over a year getting billboard

09:20:23 industry together, and we really appreciated what they

09:20:26 did to help.

09:20:28 Of course, the three women were very heroic.

09:20:32 I'm here to speak on number 4 which has to do with the

09:20:37 sign ordinance now.

09:20:39 And Tampa homeowners has not met since last week when

09:20:46 this was presented for first reading today, and we, as

09:20:51 we said, we worked on the sign ordinance two years

09:20:54 before it was passed several years ago when Rose

09:20:58 Ferlita was still on this council, and then worked last

09:21:01 year for over a year with the billboard industry,

09:21:04 because signs have become so important to

09:21:07 neighborhoods, and the way the City of Tampa looks.

09:21:09 The reason that those were put into place was for the

09:21:13 aesthetics of the city.

09:21:14 So we felt, the zoning committee got together, we

09:21:18 haven't been able to bring it before our full

09:21:20 membership, but we felt that we would ask you now to

09:21:23 postpone this, at least do first reading when you are

09:21:28 proposing to do second reading, around that day, so it

09:21:32 wouldn't prolong it as long as the billboards did, but

09:21:37 we could at least bring it to the membership so that we

09:21:40 would have input to you on the issue, because we only

09:21:43 got it this week.

09:21:44 So we had no way of bringing it totally before.

09:21:49 So item 4 we would ask you that you not do first

09:21:52 reading today, but put it off so that T.H.A.N. could

09:21:56 review it.

09:21:58 The second item has to do with the proposed ten-minute

09:22:04 speaker time for neighborhoods.

09:22:06 We understand any other organized group during public

09:22:13 hearings, particularly zonings, so that the presenter

09:22:19 from a neighborhood could give all of the information

09:22:22 that the neighborhood would like to present, or

09:22:24 whatever group it is.

09:22:26 And that's item number 54.

09:22:30 We were hoping that there would be a workshop so that

09:22:34 we could give you more information, because right now I

09:22:36 can't possibly give you everything we would like to

09:22:38 say, because we did have some ultimate ideas if the ten

09:22:45 minutes isn't okay, that maybe the speakers would be

09:22:50 able to give three minutes, and that way the speaker

09:22:54 would have nine minutes, and then others could still

09:22:58 present.

09:22:59 So on item 54, T.H.A.N., before you do anything with it

09:23:04 works really like more input to you.

09:23:08 So I'm here today for Tampa homeowners.

09:23:12 Oh, also, I'm sorry, there's so many things.

09:23:15 Welcome to the new council members.

09:23:18 Thank you for giving your time to serve for us.

09:23:21 With everything else this morning I almost forgot the

09:23:23 welcome.

09:23:24 Thank you.

09:23:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What about the old ones?

09:23:31 >>MARGARET VIZZI: Oh, always.

09:23:33 [ Laughter ]

09:23:33 >>> My name is Edward Collins.

09:23:44 Way said about the old council member, a friend of mine

09:23:46 said, he's on the City Council.

09:23:47 I mentioned Charlie Miranda.

09:23:49 He said good, you're in good shape.

09:23:51 You have been around for a while.

09:23:53 But my name is Edward Collins, the son of LeRoy

09:23:56 Collins, Jr., the gentleman who was struck and killed

09:23:59 last week crossing a crosswalk here in the City of

09:24:02 Tampa.

09:24:03 He was crossing Brorein street when he was hit by an

09:24:08 SUV driving, I believe turning off of Platt Street

09:24:11 there.

09:24:12 His neck was broken and he died at the scene.

09:24:15 My father was a devoted admiral to his country where he

09:24:19 served in the U.S. Navy over 30 years, a devoted

09:24:22 business leader here in the Tampa community, started

09:24:24 numerous companies, starting numerous jobs for this

09:24:26 community.

09:24:28 He was a devoted husband to my mother for over 50

09:24:31 years, devoted father to his four children, his eight

09:24:34 grandchildren, which he was an excellent grandfather.

09:24:37 He also served the last four years for governor Charlie

09:24:40 Crist, director for Veterans Affairs for the State of

09:24:42 Florida.

09:24:43 He became involved leading the charge as veterans were

09:24:47 returning from Iraq and Afghanistan with numerous

09:24:49 injuries relating to Veterans Administration, did not

09:24:52 necessarily address their needs specifically.

09:24:57 He was a man of action.

09:24:59 He did not believe in sending memos.

09:25:01 He believed in sending himself personally to address

09:25:03 issues.

09:25:04 He did not just write e-mails.

09:25:06 He followed up with personal visits to make sure the

09:25:08 job was getting done.

09:25:09 He didn't just talk about an action.

09:25:11 He believed he should be judged by your action, not

09:25:14 your intentions.

09:25:16 His last act was to become another traffic statistic in

09:25:23 the City of Tampa.

09:25:24 As you know the city leads the nation or at least in

09:25:27 the top five of every list of pedestrian fatalities and

09:25:30 cyclist fatalities in the nation.

09:25:34 He was struck in the same stretch of road where a

09:25:36 couple of months ago a young cheerleader struck and

09:25:40 killed a homeless woman.

09:25:41 Their deaths have one thing in common.

09:25:43 In both instances, neither driver was issued a citation

09:25:47 by Tampa Police Department.

09:25:48 And I don't mean to take away from what just occurred

09:25:51 here, but I think it's important fact to point out.

09:25:56 On the last eight years under the current mayor's

09:25:59 administration where pedestrians ands cyclists have

09:26:04 been struck by vehicles.

09:26:05 I'm a cyclist myself.

09:26:07 And the City Council has repeatedly talked about

09:26:10 spending money on studies to determine what to do.

09:26:12 You have an agenda item today, number 53, which is just

09:26:15 such a study.

09:26:20 I ask the City Council instead of spending money on yet

09:26:23 another study to determine what to do, please engage

09:26:25 the local resources you have.

09:26:28 Cycling clubs, southwest Florida bicycle dealers

09:26:31 association.

09:26:33 I believe Alan has addressed the council several times.

09:26:37 These have lots of information they would be happy to

09:26:40 provide the city free of charge without having to spend

09:26:43 money on yet another study.

09:26:45 I want to finish by saying, like my father I am a man

09:26:48 of action.

09:26:49 A lot of people come up here and just unload on City

09:26:51 Council.

09:26:51 I want you to know that I am leaving behind my contact

09:26:55 information. If there's anyway I can assist the City

09:26:57 Council in moving forward with that agenda item, my

09:27:00 number is here.

09:27:01 Please call me.

09:27:02 Thank you.

09:27:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

09:27:08 >> Christie Hess, 1011 Broad Street.

09:27:13 I'm here to talk about item number 4.

09:27:15 And basically to reiterate everything that marring

09:27:18 relate advise I has already informed you of.

09:27:22 As a resident in the City of Tampa.

09:27:25 I would hate to see a rash implementation of a sign

09:27:28 ordinance that's going to adversely affect our

09:27:31 neighborhoods and potentially put small business owners

09:27:35 up against each other because of the way that the

09:27:39 ordinance has been written.

09:27:40 So I would echo her sentiments and request that you

09:27:43 continue this, give everyone a chance to look at it,

09:27:49 and agree that this is the best way to go instead of

09:27:52 rushing something through that is going to have a

09:27:54 negative impact instead of the positive impact that you

09:27:58 want.

09:27:58 Thank you.

09:28:05 >> Susan long, 921 east broad street.

09:28:09 I'm here to talk about item number 4, sign ordinance.

09:28:11 I found out about this last night.

09:28:13 I'm usually pretty well in tune with what's going on.

09:28:17 If I found out about it last night there are numerous

09:28:20 people who know nothing about this.

09:28:21 I'm very concerned that this came and is this far along

09:28:24 with no public input, to our knowledge, no real

09:28:31 listening to the issue what's going on.

09:28:33 I would like this to be continued so we can look at it

09:28:36 more carefully, provide some input, maybe have a

09:28:38 workshop for those of us who live near commercial

09:28:40 corridors could have some input to this ordinance.

09:28:43 Thank you.

09:28:43 >> Rebecca Johns, McFarland Ferguson, 201 North

09:28:54 Franklin Street, on behalf of Jim and Natalie Goodwin

09:28:58 regarding agenda 55, 09-21 rezoning which we are very

09:29:03 familiar with.

09:29:04 I just want to reiterate that the Goodwins object to

09:29:07 the rezoning and they ask today that you reject the

09:29:10 special magistrate's recommendation to either

09:29:14 reconsider your decision, because your decision was an

09:29:18 unreasonable burden on the property, or consider a

09:29:20 modified site plan.

09:29:23 City Council went through an exacting analysis of the

09:29:27 PD requirements at the zoning hearing, and we feel that

09:29:30 your decision was based on competent, substantial

09:29:33 evidence, and we ask you to reject the recommendation.

09:29:36 Thank you.

09:29:44 >> Pastor Frank Williams, paradise Baptist church.

09:29:51 I brought my book here so I could do some reading but I

09:29:54 know you aren't going to give me enough time to do any

09:29:57 reading.

09:29:57 Can you all extend my time?

09:30:06 You have to understand, the young lady, what the police

09:30:15 force is doing for them, but you have to understand,

09:30:20 that plaque don't pay no bills.

09:30:22 You all reward her for $100,000.

09:30:25 Why don't you give each of the women $10,000 apiece to

09:30:29 show how much you appreciate them for trying to save

09:30:31 those policemen's lives?

09:30:33 You won't do that, will you?

09:30:36 But I'm here basically to talk about our brothers and

09:30:41 sisters who are Mexican.

09:30:45 And the reason I want to talk about -- I'm not going to

09:30:48 talk about myself today.

09:30:49 I'm going to talk about the Mexicans, because they are

09:30:53 passing all kinds of laws calling the Mexicans illegal

09:30:57 immigrants.

09:30:58 If you look at Arizona, California, Texas, Nevada, all

09:31:06 that was owned by the Mexicans.

09:31:08 Did you all know that?

09:31:09 Yeah, that was owned by the Mexicans.

09:31:11 And the Mexicans, they had a war in 1846, had a war

09:31:21 against the Mexicans, and ran them out of their land.

09:31:25 Now that they want to come back home, you all don't

09:31:28 want them to come back home, talk about illegal

09:31:34 immigrants.

09:31:34 Now who is illegal immigrants?

09:31:37 We are.

09:31:39 Came over and made slaves out of us.

09:31:41 Jesus Christ, what's wrong with us people today?

09:31:47 You all want nothing to do with it.

09:31:49 Jesus Christ.

09:31:50 I believe in Jesus Christ.

09:31:52 We are here today because of Jesus Christ.

09:32:00 Why allow to you put shackles on my mind?

09:32:03 No, I am not going to let you do that.

09:32:05 I have a lot I want to read, but you all aren't going

09:32:08 to give me the time.

09:32:09 And Gwen Miller, where were you when that white girl

09:32:16 ran over the poor innocent little black kid?

09:32:19 And then she was acquitted.

09:32:20 I went down on the scene.

09:32:25 Blood all down the street.

09:32:26 And you know what?

09:32:32 That's ridiculous.

09:32:33 I'm sick of it.

09:32:47 >>> Good morning.

09:32:49 Connie Burton, 5771-40th Street, here on item 44.

09:32:57 Last week, the mayor spoke very passionately in my

09:33:03 opinion regarding --

09:33:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, I'm sorry to interrupt.

09:33:08 Mr. Chairman, that is set for a public hearing.

09:33:11 That is an item that's going to be heard this morning

09:33:13 sometime after 9:30.

09:33:17 And if it's germane to that discussion, the comments

09:33:21 should be held for that time.

09:33:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's a public hearing.

09:33:27 That's what it is.

09:33:27 >> Oh, wait until that item and then we can come back

09:33:30 up?

09:33:31 >> Yes.

09:33:32 Thank you.

09:33:38 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I would like to speak on item

09:33:39 number 4.

09:33:40 The issue before you is to repair an injustice which

09:33:44 has been placed upon all of the small businesses within

09:33:47 the City of Tampa.

09:33:49 That particular code as it's currently written makes

09:33:53 90% of the signs for small businesses illegal.

09:33:57 It doesn't allow them to switch out their sign phase

09:33:59 for digital signs.

09:34:00 It doesn't allow them to upgrade their signs.

09:34:03 It doesn't allow them to have repair the signs beyond

09:34:06 general cosmetic repairs.

09:34:08 And so in working with the various folks, and

09:34:11 including -- this is not the first time that I asked

09:34:14 this from City Council.

09:34:15 It been going on for months.

09:34:17 And the draft that you have before you simply allows

09:34:20 the existing legal nonconforming signs to be repaired

09:34:24 and to exchange the sign faces for digital signs.

09:34:29 It doesn't put a burden on the neighborhood.

09:34:31 These are commercial districts for small businesses.

09:34:34 And that's what it repairs.

09:34:36 And any provision in the code that renders 90% of the

09:34:41 signs illegal is wrong.

09:34:44 And you ask me where I got that number from.

09:34:46 I got that number from the construction services

09:34:48 center.

09:34:49 So the alternative is to make every small business that

09:34:51 wants to upgrade their sign go and seek a variance,

09:34:55 which is expensive and time consuming.

09:34:58 Plus the expense if they can't locate the sign exactly

09:35:00 where it is, where it was previously approved, then

09:35:04 they have to move it.

09:35:05 And that's 100,000, 55, 60,000 to do that.

09:35:11 So it's an extreme measure and is not just a benign

09:35:14 issue.

09:35:16 It causes all kinds of problems.

09:35:18 The solution is a very simple one.

09:35:21 It allows the small business to comply with the sign

09:35:24 code, and it allows them to leave the existing sign

09:35:26 where it is and comply with the sign code.

09:35:29 That's what it does.

09:35:31 It's not an encroachment on the neighborhood and it

09:35:34 doesn't burden anyone else.

09:35:35 It relieves a burden that was unjustly placed on small

09:35:38 businesses.

09:35:40 I respectfully request that you consider that

09:35:43 favorably.

09:35:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone else?

09:35:48 Okay, thank you very much.

09:35:50 Is there anyone who wishes to request for

09:35:53 reconsideration of a legislative matter?

09:35:57 If not then we'll move to ordinance being presented for

09:36:00 first reading consideration.

09:36:06 Item 3 is the ordinance being read.

09:36:10 Councilman Stokes, do you want to read item 3?

09:36:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just the title, madam clerk, on the

09:36:18 copy as it is?

09:36:19 >>

09:36:22 >>CURTIS STOKES: An ordinance for first reading

09:36:24 consideration.

09:36:24 An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending

09:36:26 ordinance 2010-53 by correcting a scrivener's error in

09:36:30 section 27-2, consistency matrix, providing for repeal

09:36:34 of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

09:36:36 severability, providing an effective date.

09:36:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

09:36:40 >> Second.

09:36:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.

09:36:43 Opposes?

09:36:44 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.

09:36:47 Second reading and adoption will be held on August 26,

09:36:50 2010 at 9:30 a.m.

09:36:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item number 4.

09:36:53 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

09:36:57 This item was placed on the agenda by motion of City

09:37:00 Council.

09:37:00 I had sent a memo previously to you explaining the

09:37:03 changes that I had made.

09:37:04 I'm available for any questions.

09:37:05 Thank you.

09:37:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?

09:37:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say this.

09:37:14 There seems to be some debate on whether this was

09:37:22 accepted or not accepted, rejected, not rejected,

09:37:26 presented, not rejected, understood, misunderstood.

09:37:31 I don't want anyone to leave here with the idea that

09:37:34 someone, even though there was none of that going on,

09:37:38 that did anything to enhance the passing of something

09:37:41 without debate.

09:37:42 So I don't mind putting it to a further dated.

09:37:47 I would like to have both sides debate in any issue

09:37:49 that comes here.

09:37:50 In fact, later on today, I'm bringing another change

09:37:56 that may or may not be in favor of.

09:37:59 And I want that to be put on an agenda for a further

09:38:03 date for first reading two or three weeks from now,

09:38:06 when I bring that one up.

09:38:07 So I'm always -- like all of us, very clear minded,

09:38:13 civic minded, and understand that I want full debate on

09:38:17 the issue.

09:38:18 I may not agree.

09:38:19 You may not agree.

09:38:20 But at least we can have debate.

09:38:22 And that's what it's about.

09:38:23 So I don't mind postponing this to a further date.

09:38:26 And that's up to the remainder of the council.

09:38:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Chairman, this has been going

09:38:34 on before I got onto this council.

09:38:37 I talked to Mr. Bob Smith, who was on the review

09:38:40 committee on the sign ordinance, and some of these

09:38:50 small businesses are hurting.

09:38:53 As Mr. Michelini said 90% of the signs are not in

09:38:56 conformance.

09:38:57 We need to go on and make some changes to this sign

09:39:00 ordinance.

09:39:02 These people are hurting.

09:39:03 They cannot modify their signs.

09:39:06 I know Hillsborough County, that's one on Fletcher

09:39:09 Avenue where a guy has a small digital billboard.

09:39:13 It's not large.

09:39:14 He just took his existing sign and remodeled it.

09:39:17 Anybody could see it.

09:39:18 It right by 275.

09:39:21 And I called him up and he says it has helped his

09:39:25 business.

09:39:25 It has helped immensely.

09:39:28 Because the sign that was there was not conforming.

09:39:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, I agree with councilman Miranda

09:39:35 that we ought to continue the item.

09:39:38 I heard a number of public speakers this morning.

09:39:40 The question that we at least continue so they have

09:39:42 opportunity to raise any questions or concerns.

09:39:44 We do not want to have any unintended consequences as a

09:39:49 result of this particular ordinance.

09:39:52 And since I have been on council, it's always been

09:39:56 council's purview to at least allow the public to speak

09:40:01 on these kinds of issues.

09:40:03 So I'm supporting the continuance, at least give the

09:40:08 public an opportunity to express any concerns they have

09:40:11 or raise any questions they may have.

09:40:13 It may be answered.

09:40:14 It may not be answered.

09:40:17 I don't want to move forward until we have that public

09:40:19 debate.

09:40:20 Okay?

09:40:20 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a question, Ms. Cole.

09:40:26 The small businesses, will they be encroaching into a

09:40:29 neighborhood?

09:40:30 Most of them are not in the neighborhood, are they?

09:40:32 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

09:40:33 I can't answer that question directly, but I can tell

09:40:36 you is that the signs that would have the benefits of

09:40:39 changing out to electronic, whether through variance or

09:40:43 through a code change, are typically on commercially

09:40:48 zoned properties.

09:40:49 So whether or not that would be considered encroachment

09:40:51 in the neighborhood or not, I couldn't answer that

09:40:54 question.

09:40:54 But it's on commercial or office zoning,

09:41:05 >>CURTIS STOKES: Mr. Chairman, I am in agreement with

09:41:07 both my colleagues here to my right.

09:41:10 We do need public debate on the issue.

09:41:14 I agree with Mr. Caetano that small businesses are

09:41:17 hurting.

09:41:18 Butch we do need healthy public debate on this issue as

09:41:20 well so I am inclined to agree with my colleagues to

09:41:23 the right.

09:41:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And, Mr. Chairman, if I may have my

09:41:29 second bite of the apple.

09:41:30 I don't want this to be a year from now.

09:41:32 The closest time that we can.

09:41:34 And I think the 26th of August is so filled up.

09:41:41 So I'm looking at the first week of September,

09:41:43 something like that, where we can have clarity on this

09:41:45 issue.

09:41:46 >>THE CLERK: Currently for September 2nd you have

09:41:50 a public hearing at 10:00 on the Encore community

09:41:54 development district.

09:41:55 You have three unfinished business staff reports and

09:41:58 one closure public hearing at 10:00.

09:42:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think that would be a better date

09:42:07 than the one in August.

09:42:08 The one in August may seem like a two-year term but

09:42:15 that's what my recommendation is, and we'll get it off

09:42:17 the table one way or the other then.

09:42:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I agree also with my colleagues, that

09:42:27 more input should be, both from neighborhood residents

09:42:31 and the small businesses, and September 2nd.

09:42:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a motion to that effect?

09:42:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

09:42:38 >> Second.

09:42:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Motion and second to continue to

09:42:41 September 2nd.

09:42:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: At what time?

09:42:46 >>THE CLERK: At the end of staff reports.

09:42:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if I can.

09:42:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, the question becomes how do we

09:42:50 hear from the public if it's under staff report,

09:42:54 because we don't allow public to speak under staff

09:42:56 report.

09:42:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Normally in the case such as today

09:43:00 where it's an ordinance that's legislative as nature

09:43:02 and being considered for first reading it's not set for

09:43:04 public hearing.

09:43:05 Council can choose to set this for a public hearing,

09:43:08 although your code does not require that.

09:43:11 Normally what you would do, autumn though it's later on

09:43:14 in the month, is set it for workshop.

09:43:15 But if you want to move it on September 2nd,

09:43:18 council can always waive its rules, allow for public

09:43:21 comment at any particular time.

09:43:23 If you want to set it for a specific time you have

09:43:26 closure hearing that afternoon.

09:43:28 If you want to set it for the afternoon and allow for

09:43:30 the public to speak, or set it for the morning.

09:43:32 It's council's pleasure.

09:43:35 But normally as it stands now, to be placed under staff

09:43:38 reports would not allow to accept public comment in the

09:43:43 morning.

09:43:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, if it was set as

09:43:48 today, the public can speak on it even though it's

09:43:51 first reading because they usually speak on the

09:43:54 ordinance for second reading at that time.

09:43:56 That doesn't mean that from time to time we can't let

09:43:58 them speak on first hearing.

09:44:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's council's pleasure.

09:44:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm just bringing it up for

09:44:05 suggestion.

09:44:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So we can speak it as it is now, and

09:44:08 they can speak during that time?

09:44:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My recommendation would be to place

09:44:11 it at a time certain, council, either in the afternoon

09:44:14 or if you wish to place it on -- it should not remain

09:44:19 where it is on the agenda, because right now it appears

09:44:22 on the consent docket.

09:44:25 If council wishes to set it for a morning meeting,

09:44:28 let's say at 10 a.m. or after the Encore oh or at 1:30

09:44:33 after the closure of public hearing.

09:44:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In the morning at 10:00?

09:44:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 10:00 in the morning.

09:44:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

09:44:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Amend to the 10:00 in the morning

09:44:45 on that date of September 2nd, 2010.

09:44:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And to place it as a public hearing?

09:44:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Right.

09:44:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:44:54 All in favor?

09:44:55 Opposes?

09:44:56 Okay.

09:44:57 Thank you.

09:44:59 Item 5.

09:45:03 Councilman Miranda?

09:45:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance for first reading

09:45:07 consideration, an ordinance approving a special use S-1

09:45:09 on appeal from a decision of the zoning administrator

09:45:12 approving a congregate living facility 6 to 8 beds in

09:45:16 an RS-50 single-family dwelling district in the city of

09:45:20 Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in

09:45:23 section 1 hereof approving waivers as set forth herein,

09:45:27 providing an effective date.

09:45:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

09:45:30 >> Second.

09:45:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Caetano.

09:45:33 All in favor?

09:45:34 Opposes?

09:45:34 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.

09:45:38 Second reading and adoption will be held August

09:45:40 26th, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.

09:45:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 58.

09:45:44 >>GWEN MILLER: An ordinance of the city of Tampa,

09:45:55 Florida establishing the Encore community development

09:45:59 district generally located south of Kay and Scott

09:46:01 streets, west of Nebraska Avenue, north of Cass Street,

09:46:04 and east of Perry Harvey Sr. park comprising of 28.9

09:46:09 acres of land more or less for the purpose of managing

09:46:12 and delivering basic community infrastructure

09:46:14 improvements, said district to be located entirely

09:46:17 within the boundaries of the City of Tampa, the same

09:46:20 being more particularly described in section 2 hereof,

09:46:23 pursuant to chapter 190, Florida statutes, naming the

09:46:27 district, providing for severability, providing an

09:46:30 effective date.

09:46:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Under the circumstances moved and

09:46:32 seconded by councilman Caetano.

09:46:34 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

09:46:37 Opposes?

09:46:38 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.

09:46:40 Second reading and adoption of this ordinance will be

09:46:42 held on September 2nd at 10 a.m. in conjunction

09:46:47 with the public hearing.

09:46:47 >> Public Safety Committee Miller.

09:46:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Move 6 through 12.

09:46:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Caetano.

09:47:00 Miranda, I'm sorry.

09:47:01 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

09:47:11 Opposes?

09:47:14 Okay.

09:47:15 Parks and recreation, chairperson councilman Stokes.

09:47:19 >>CURTIS STOKES: Motion to move items 13 through 17

09:47:21 with the exception of item 14 which was removed.

09:47:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded again by councilman Miranda.

09:47:29 All in favor?

09:47:30 Opposes?

09:47:33 Public works, councilman Miranda.

09:47:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move items 18 through 27.

09:47:37 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.

09:47:42 All in favor?

09:47:44 Opposes?

09:47:44 >>THE CLERK: Including the item that was to be in

09:47:48 conjunction with item --

09:47:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, that's correct for that

09:47:54 correction.

09:47:54 Finance Committee.

09:47:57 Councilman Caetano, co-chair vice chair of that.

09:48:02 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move 28 through 30.

09:48:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.

09:48:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:48:11 Building and zoning.

09:48:12 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to move items 31 to

09:48:15 37.

09:48:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.

09:48:21 All in favor?

09:48:22 Opposes?

09:48:24 Transportation committee, Councilwoman Capin.

09:48:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move items 38 through 39.

09:48:30 >> Seconded by councilman Miranda.

09:48:35 All in favor?

09:48:36 Opposes?

09:48:38 Okay.

09:48:40 We are now to our 9:30 public hearings.

09:48:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to open 40 through 46.

09:48:51 >> Second.

09:48:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:48:54 Opposes?

09:48:54 Okay.

09:49:02 If you are going to be speaking, please stand and be

09:49:04 sworn at this time.

09:49:05 (Oath administered by Clerk).

09:49:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My understanding from the clerk is

09:49:20 there's nothing to be received and filed on these

09:49:22 hearings.

09:49:23 If there's any ex parte communications please disclose

09:49:25 that prior to your vote.

09:49:27 Thank you very much.

09:49:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

09:49:28 >> Towanda Anthony, land development.

09:49:37 Items 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45 and 46 all require

09:49:42 certified site plans.

09:49:43 Plans have been certified by the zoning administrator

09:49:45 with the exception of item 41 and 43.

09:49:51 Plans have been provided to the city clerk.

09:49:53 Copies are available for count.

09:49:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 40.

09:49:56 Anyone to speak on item 40?

09:49:58 >> move to close.

09:50:00 >> Is there a second?

09:50:03 >> Second.

09:50:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:50:05 All in favor?

09:50:06 Opposes?

09:50:07 Councilman Stokes, do you want to read item 40?

09:50:11 >>CURTIS STOKES: Ordinance for second reading and

09:50:13 adoption.

09:50:14 An ordinance approving a special use permit S-2

09:50:17 approving a drive-in window in a CG commercial general

09:50:20 zoning district in the general vicinity of 2102 east

09:50:23 Fowler Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida and as more

09:50:26 particularly described in section 1 hereof providing an

09:50:28 effective date.

09:50:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Second.

09:50:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Miller.

09:50:35 Record your vote, please.

09:50:47 >>THE CLERK: It's not coming up on my screen but I'm

09:50:49 showing it moved with four votes yes, and with Miranda,

09:50:52 Mulhern and Caetano being absent.

09:50:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 41.

09:50:57 Anyone wishing to address council on item 41?

09:51:00 >> Towanda Anthony, land development.

09:51:03 Council, we are asking that item 41 be moved to August

09:51:07 26th.

09:51:08 It cannot be heard today.

09:51:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to accept that, continued to

09:51:18 August 26.

09:51:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can it be taken that date?

09:51:25 Okay, sorry, Mr. Chairman.

09:51:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:51:30 Councilman Stokes.

09:51:38 >>CURTIS STOKES: Second.

09:51:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:51:40 Opposes?

09:51:41 Item 42.

09:51:47 I'm sorry.

09:51:48 >>THE CLERK: The second reading on item 41 has been

09:51:51 continued to August 26th, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.

09:51:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 42.

09:51:57 Anyone want to speak on item 42?

09:51:59 >> Move to close.

09:52:01 >> Second.

09:52:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

09:52:03 Opposes?

09:52:04 Item 42, councilman Miranda.

09:52:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance presented for

09:52:08 second reading and adoption, an ordinance approving a

09:52:11 special use permit S-2 approving a daycare in an RM-16

09:52:15 residential multifamily zoning district in the general

09:52:18 vicinity of 2909 west Azeele street in the city of

09:52:21 Tampa, Florida and as more particularly described in

09:52:23 section 1 hereof providing an effective date.

09:52:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.

09:52:28 Record your vote.

09:52:37 >> Motion carried with Caetano and Mulhern being

09:52:41 absent.

09:52:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 43.

09:52:43 Anyone wishing to address council on item 43?

09:52:46 >> Towanda Anthony, land development.

09:52:52 Council, we ask that item 43 be moved to August

09:52:55 26th.

09:52:56 It cannot be heard today.

09:52:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to have 43 continued to August

09:53:01 26th.

09:53:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded, the item being

09:53:07 continued to August 26th at 9:30.

09:53:09 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

09:53:11 Opposes?

09:53:18 Item 44.

09:53:20 Anyone from the public wish to address?

09:53:22 >> Connie Burton.

09:53:33 The reason, as I said before, the mayor made what I

09:53:39 thought to be very calming comments regarding the 500

09:53:46 people that was going to potentially be laid off with

09:53:49 the Pricewaterhouse, and even though I wasn't directly

09:53:53 affected, it was calming to me to know that the

09:53:56 political leadership was really concerned not just

09:53:58 about the economy, but the people that would be

09:54:01 adversely affected.

09:54:02 And the reason why I wanted to come today is because of

09:54:06 the issues of jobs on Kenneth court.

09:54:12 The community welcomes the redevelopment and the

09:54:14 transformation that the developers have laid out in

09:54:17 terms of addressing the ongoing history of that, that

09:54:26 have in my opinion led to people having a sense of

09:54:33 despair.

09:54:35 We see it very positive with the new management team

09:54:38 out there, the willingness to listen to the community,

09:54:41 that when we hear renovation, redevelopment, it don't

09:54:46 strike a fear that when you go out, you know, making

09:54:50 the transformation to the community, that the people

09:54:53 that once lived when it was so, so bad, will be given

09:54:56 the opportunity to live when the community and the

09:55:00 property reaches full potential.

09:55:02 And we are very satisfied at this point with the

09:55:05 management and the board and we come in support of the

09:55:12 direction in which the owner is taking the property.

09:55:15 And I want to thank councilman Stokes for receiving the

09:55:18 call, because there was a real serious panic on the

09:55:21 community in that we was going to receive the backlash

09:55:26 based on all the negatives going on in Kenneth court.

09:55:30 So that's why we are here.

09:55:32 Thank you very much.

09:55:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My office received a number of calls

09:55:37 and we got the city attorney involved.

09:55:39 Where is Mr. Fletcher?

09:55:41 We talked about that.

09:55:43 Because this was concern by many residents in terms the

09:55:47 of, I guess, eviction.

09:55:50 So I spoke with Mr. Fletcher regarding this, and I

09:55:53 think that it was limited in terms of what we could do.

09:55:59 You may want to speak on the record.

09:56:01 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.

09:56:04 We did look into what kind of relationships we may have

09:56:07 on a contractual basis or otherwise would play into

09:56:11 that issue.

09:56:12 But we have not determined any authority the city has

09:56:14 over that process.

09:56:16 It's a private transaction between the landlord and

09:56:19 tenant.

09:56:19 Nor would it be appropriate based on what I know at

09:56:22 this point to consider that as part of the rezoning

09:56:24 application.

09:56:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, thank you.

09:56:28 I just want to you know we did follow up with our

09:56:30 staff, the city attorney, to try to address any

09:56:33 concerns or issues that may be there.

09:56:36 Next speaker.

09:56:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for purposes of clarification of

09:56:38 the record, Mrs. Burton did make reference to council

09:56:42 member Stokes.

09:56:42 And my understanding, Mr. Stokes, is that did you have

09:56:45 a conversation but did not involve a specific rezoning?

09:56:49 >>CURTIS STOKES: Yes.

09:56:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay, thank you.

09:56:50 >>> 4205 Kenneth H health court, apartment 308.

09:56:59 I'm here to show support for my community which is

09:57:03 Kenneth court and also the new development they are

09:57:06 doing around there and also our new manager.

09:57:09 I'm just here to show support.

09:57:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

09:57:13 Next speaker.

09:57:13 >> Irea Montgomery. I reside at 4205 Kenneth Court,

09:57:21 and I'm here for the same thing as well.

09:57:24 I just would like to say I love our community and I

09:57:27 love what they are about to do, and anything that's

09:57:35 going on with our property.

09:57:36 >> Hi. My name is Erlisha Oaks. I reside at 10829 --

09:57:41 Riverview, Florida, but I am an upcomer from --

09:57:46 She's been over there for 25 years.

09:57:50 And with everything -- well, she's been with the bad,

09:57:56 the good and everything else, and I wanted to let

09:57:58 everyone know that I support what's going on with the

09:58:01 community, because I have a disabled son, and he's over

09:58:08 there all the time.

09:58:09 And with everything that's going on, I feel safe to let

09:58:12 him go there and be able to play in the community where

09:58:14 I was raised and where I came from.

09:58:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank all of you for coming down and

09:58:19 speaking to this issue.

09:58:20 Thank you very much.

09:58:20 >> I'm Robert Williams.

09:58:25 I represent the developer.

09:58:27 And I want to thank you for coming and showing your

09:58:29 support.

09:58:30 And hopefully this will be very good for the community.

09:58:33 If there are any questions or anything about a ditch or

09:58:37 those types of things, please feel free to contact me.

09:58:41 I can say on the record publicly that the intent is not

09:58:47 to evict everyone by any stretch of the imagination.

09:58:51 We have a very good plan, solid plan to keep the

09:58:52 residents that deserve good housing to live there,

09:58:56 residents to keep them there while this is going on.

09:58:58 So if there are any questions, I'm glad to help.

09:59:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you very much.

09:59:05 The redevelopment plan, it's a very good one for

09:59:07 Kenneth court.

09:59:10 Anyone else?

09:59:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion to close.

09:59:14 >> Second.

09:59:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

09:59:17 Councilwoman Miller.

09:59:18 >> I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second

09:59:20 reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

09:59:23 vicinity of 5711 Troy court and 4203 Kenneth court in

09:59:28 the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly

09:59:29 described in section 1 from zoning district

09:59:31 classifications RM-24 residential multifamily to PD

09:59:35 planned development, residential multifamily, providing

09:59:38 an effective date.

09:59:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Stokes.

09:59:43 Record your vote, please.

09:59:45 Item 44.

09:59:46 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.

09:59:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 45.

09:59:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

10:00:00 >> Second.

10:00:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

10:00:03 Opposes?

10:00:04 Item 45.

10:00:05 Councilwoman Capin.

10:00:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, chairman.

10:00:09 Ordinance being presented -- oh, I'm sorry.

10:00:14 Notify adopt the following ordinance upon second

10:00:16 reading.

10:00:17 Ordinance being presented for second reading and

10:00:20 adoption.

10:00:20 An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity

10:00:23 of 3715 West Swann Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida

10:00:27 and more particularly described in section 1 from

10:00:29 zoning district classifications RS-60 residential

10:00:34 single-family to CN commercial neighborhood, retail,

10:00:37 office, personal services, hair salon, providing an

10:00:40 effective date.

10:00:41 >> Second.

10:00:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by councilman Miranda.

10:00:47 Record your vote, please.

10:00:50 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.

10:00:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Item 46.

10:00:59 Anyone to address council on item 46?

10:01:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

10:01:07 >>CURTIS STOKES: Second.

10:01:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

10:01:09 Opposes?

10:01:09 Okay.

10:01:10 Item 46.

10:01:11 Councilman Caetano.

10:01:12 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: An ordinance being presented for

10:01:15 second reading and adoption.

10:01:16 An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity

10:01:19 of 2101 west Hillsborough Avenue and 5410 north Albany

10:01:24 street in the city of Tampa, Florida and more

10:01:26 particularly described in section 1 from zoning

10:01:29 district classifications CG commercial general to PD

10:01:33 planned development, retail, commercial, providing an

10:01:36 effective date.

10:01:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

10:01:41 All in favor record your vote, please.

10:01:43 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern being absent.

10:01:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We need to open item 47.

10:01:53 >>THE CLERK: 47 is continued.

10:01:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

10:01:59 Item 47.

10:02:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, I believe that's

10:02:01 quasi-judicial.

10:02:02 The witnesses will have to be sworn.

10:02:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone here who hasn't been sworn?

10:02:06 (Oath administered by Clerk).

10:02:19 >>JAMES COOK: Land Development Coordination.

10:02:22 This is a petition to vacate lying west of Causeway

10:02:28 Boulevard.

10:02:31 It on the Elmo.

10:02:35 This is an old right-of-way called causeway crescent.

10:02:40 For a point of reference, this is the parcel.

10:02:43 This is MacKay Bay.

10:02:45 The old Seabreeze Restaurant.

10:02:47 Tampa Port Authority property.

10:02:50 For old-timers, this is the 22nd causeway drive-in

10:02:54 theater.

10:02:57 Here is a picture of the right-of-way.

10:02:58 Looking south from 22nd street.

10:03:07 This is Port Authority.

10:03:14 Looking west at 22nd street.

10:03:18 Just a couple more pictures.

10:03:23 The fence I am stalled for security purposes by the

10:03:26 Port Authority.

10:03:26 This is looking east towards 22nd street causeway.

10:03:30 Staff has no objections to this vacating request.

10:03:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Petitioner?

10:03:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were you sworn in?

10:03:51 I'm sorry.

10:03:52 >> No, I'm not.

10:04:00 (Oath administered by Clerk)

10:04:04 Deputy port director, Tampa Port Authority.

10:04:07 And we have objection to the vacation from TECO, and

10:04:12 that's been removed.

10:04:13 We received all objections are resolved.

10:04:21 The purpose of the vacation of the property, we had all

10:04:30 the properties surrounding the roadway.

10:04:34 None of the property owners have any interest in the

10:04:36 property.

10:04:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?

10:04:43 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

10:04:49 The legal department is aware that the Port Authority

10:04:51 was working to resolve the TECO easement issue.

10:04:54 But until just now we weren't aware that it was

10:04:57 completely resolved.

10:04:58 So the ordinance that you have in front of you does not

10:05:02 contain the TECO easement.

10:05:04 However, just in case, we have available an ordinance

10:05:06 which has removed the TECO easements, and given the

10:05:09 representations on the record today I will hand this

10:05:11 ordinance to the clerk so that you can read the

10:05:13 ordinance that does not include the TECO easement.

10:05:15 Thank you.

10:05:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Anyone from the public wish to address

10:05:18 council?

10:05:19 Anyone from the public wish to address council on this

10:05:21 issue?

10:05:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Move to close.

10:05:25 >> Second.

10:05:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

10:05:27 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

10:05:36 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance substituted, an

10:05:39 ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing, and

10:05:41 abandoning a certain right-of-way lying north and east

10:05:44 of Hillsborough bay and south of west Causeway

10:05:46 Boulevard in causeway sites units number 2 and in

10:05:49 resubdivision of lot 11, causeway sites, subdivisions

10:05:53 in the city of Tampa, Florida, Hillsborough County,

10:05:54 Florida, the same being more fully described in section

10:05:57 2 hereof subject to certain covenants, conditions and

10:06:00 restrictions as more particularly described herein

10:06:03 providing an effective date.

10:06:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second?

10:06:06 Is there a second?

10:06:10 Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

10:06:12 All in favor?

10:06:13 Opposes?

10:06:13 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern and Stokes

10:06:17 being absent.

10:06:18 Second reading and adoption will be held August

10:06:20 26th, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.

10:06:23 >> we are ahead of schedule, council.

10:06:27 We are now at 10:30 staff reports.

10:06:30 We can move to those.

10:06:34 I see Mr. Corrada here for item 48, I assume.

10:06:38 Do you want to come forward?

10:06:40 If the rest of the staff is watching, they certainly

10:06:42 can move forward.

10:06:43 So we can continue to move the agenda.

10:06:45 Thank you.

10:06:45 >> Santiago Corrada, administrator.

10:06:50 Item 48 represents revisions to the user fee schedule

10:06:53 for parks and recreation, resetting a number of fees

10:06:57 that we discussed at prior council meetings, just as a

10:07:00 reminder, it would reset our after-school program fees

10:07:04 to zero per session.

10:07:06 It would reset next year's summer traditional camp fees

10:07:10 to $70 for an entire session and would also include

10:07:17 swim for individuals having a parks and rec card for

10:07:21 next summer, so we ask for your support so that we can

10:07:24 immediately implement these new fees with the upcoming

10:07:26 after-school program.

10:07:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions?

10:07:33 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Corrada, excuse me, I didn't

10:07:35 know you still had that job.

10:07:37 How about the seniors who don't live in the district?

10:07:47 >> What we are doing for seniors that live in the

10:07:48 district with the current fee schedule we have the

10:07:50 parameters to go ahead and reverse those to 2009

10:07:53 levels.

10:07:53 For those seniors that live out of the city, we have

10:07:57 not reversed those fees.

10:08:00 Those fees are still in effect with the rec card.

10:08:03 If you are purchasing a rec card you are still paying

10:08:05 somewhat more for that rec card.

10:08:07 But then when you come to the center you are paying the

10:08:09 same fees as everyone else within the city so we have

10:08:13 not reset the rec card fee for out-of-city residents.

10:08:16 >> How much is a rec card fee?

10:08:19 >> For the entire year $115 but that's broken down

10:08:22 seasonally, so if they plan on using one of our centers

10:08:25 during the summer they can purchase a rec card for just

10:08:28 that part of the year, the fall, the spring.

10:08:30 >> How many seniors are utilizing that point?

10:08:35 >> What we did was we did analysis of the seniors that

10:08:39 were participating at Barksdale center, and in 2008,

10:08:45 just to give you an example, we went back that far,

10:08:48 these are numbers provided by the parks and rec

10:08:50 department.

10:08:50 In 2008 at Barksdale we had 478 city residents.

10:08:55 We had 106 non-city residents for a total combined

10:08:59 number of 578.

10:09:01 In 2009, prior to the adjustment of the fees and the

10:09:08 raising of the rec card which was then at that time

10:09:10 called an activity fee, we had 448 city residents at

10:09:14 Barksdale, 61 non-city residents, for a total of 509

10:09:19 participants.

10:09:19 We had actually seen a decline in both city and

10:09:22 non-city residents using Barksdale.

10:09:26 When we instituted the red card fee the number of city

10:09:32 residents went down to 438 and for non-city residents

10:09:35 went from 61 to 49.

10:09:37 So we dropped 12 for a total combined number this past

10:09:41 year of 487.

10:09:45 Now the numbers at Barksdale are somewhat skewed

10:09:48 sometimes because we have had different clubs that were

10:09:51 using the center, and those clubs included individuals

10:09:54 from Manatee, Bradenton, Polk, Pasco, Pinellas and

10:09:59 unincorporated parts of Pasco County so sometimes those

10:10:03 were inflated by those clubs that were not really

10:10:06 purchasing those rec cards.

10:10:07 But some of that membership has dropped off because

10:10:10 some of those individuals that were coming from those

10:10:12 counties are now having to pay the $115 rec card fee to

10:10:16 use the center.

10:10:17 >> So are they coming back?

10:10:21 >> Wave some coming back, especially those within the

10:10:24 city.

10:10:25 Some of those individuals coming from out of the city

10:10:27 because it was such a great bargain, rather come from

10:10:30 Pasco, Pinellas, autumn those other counties to use our

10:10:33 centers because in their own homes they were having to

10:10:35 pay some higher fees.

10:10:37 >> Because I know I received a number of calls about

10:10:42 this.

10:10:43 I guess it was about 60 seniors from out of town who

10:10:47 were utilizing that.

10:10:49 >>> That's correct.

10:10:50 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: And considering some of the

10:10:52 salaries that we pay and recreation, I can't see why

10:10:55 the city can't forgo that and keep the rates as they

10:10:58 were before.

10:11:01 Some of these people just want to come there, sit

10:11:03 there, just to be there, and not really participate,

10:11:06 but they are there.

10:11:08 And I can't agree with that.

10:11:11 That's my opinion.

10:11:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, anyone else?

10:11:17 Any other questions?

10:11:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can only speak to what my office

10:11:24 has received.

10:11:26 Some have come back.

10:11:28 Most of them have not.

10:11:29 There's some, from what I gather from the phone

10:11:32 conversation that the office had, some of the county's

10:11:36 rec centers on Hillsborough area and Hanley, through

10:11:40 that neighborhood.

10:11:40 I can tell you the names but I'm not.

10:11:43 And what it's done is that it's not about, in my

10:11:47 opinion, it's about camaraderie, people that felt

10:11:54 pleasant being where they were at, and they are all

10:11:57 elderly.

10:11:59 They went to some rec center not because it was in the

10:12:02 city or in the county but because they went to a rec

10:12:05 center where they felt compelled to be around their

10:12:07 friends.

10:12:08 They might have been friends from childhood and somehow

10:12:10 through life you scatter around the area but you are

10:12:13 still part of the neighborhood in one form or another.

10:12:16 And that's the disheartening part, through this

10:12:21 process, some feel that the city has divided them and

10:12:24 their friendship now is extended to different centers,

10:12:28 and they are no longer together.

10:12:29 And I think that means more, I think, than paying the

10:12:33 fee.

10:12:34 Yes, they left because of the fee, and where they are

10:12:38 at now.

10:12:39 Whether it's higher or not, I don't know.

10:12:41 I would imagine if it's higher, they would be back with

10:12:44 the city, to be honest with you.

10:12:46 But the camaraderie and the feeling that they belong in

10:12:48 that neighborhood when they were kids, and now they

10:12:51 live just outside the city limit, and that's where it's

10:12:54 at.

10:12:54 I mean, I am not trying to expound on this anymore but

10:12:59 we charge extra for people?

10:13:02 Of course not.

10:13:02 It's a gathering place.

10:13:04 And that's how it is.

10:13:05 But I understand the administration's position, and

10:13:12 it's a very difficult one.

10:13:15 You lose, and you lose.

10:13:17 I wish I could say you win and you win, but it's not a

10:13:19 win-win.

10:13:21 That's it.

10:13:24 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, chairman.

10:13:26 Mr. Chairman Corrada, I spoke with Congressman Kathy

10:13:30 Castor on Monday, and she has meetings with seniors I

10:13:40 think monthly or quarterly, and the feedback was they

10:13:44 are concerned.

10:13:44 Could you explain to me what the senior fees are again,

10:13:48 just tell me?

10:13:52 I'm reading it.

10:13:53 >>> And it isn't in this amended fee schedule because

10:13:58 within our existing and active fee schedule we have the

10:14:01 range to be able to revert our fees for in-city

10:14:04 residents to what they were in 2009.

10:14:06 So rate now minimally, for staff-led programs, for

10:14:11 session is seniors paying $1.50.

10:14:14 The issue has come about where we had out-of-city

10:14:16 residents and they are paying upfront with the rec card

10:14:19 to be able to come in and pay the same low fees for any

10:14:22 program that they deserve to participate in any center

10:14:25 within the city.

10:14:26 And that was enacted when we enact not only for seniors

10:14:30 but was across the board.

10:14:31 Out-of-city resident, rec card fees and in-city rec

10:14:35 card fees.

10:14:36 And the issue is, unlike the Gasparilla, you know, our

10:14:39 taxpayers support the operations of the centers.

10:14:42 And if you don't live in the city and you don't pay

10:14:45 city taxes, then you are not contributing to the

10:14:47 operation, maintenance of these facilities.

10:14:49 And that was the genesis of the decision to charge a

10:14:53 bit more for the rec card for out-of-city residents,

10:14:56 not just related to seniors but to anyone.

10:14:58 >> Okay.

10:15:00 That being said, there are seniors and residents that

10:15:04 live in the city and paid city taxes for many, many

10:15:07 years, and now incorporated, part it of the county

10:15:15 or -- so thank you.

10:15:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions on this item?

10:15:21 Thank you, sir.

10:15:25 Item 49.

10:15:26 >>THE CLERK: Item 48, there's a resolution to be

10:15:34 adopted.

10:15:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

10:15:36 Is there a motion?

10:15:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again, council, this being a

10:15:38 resolution, does not require a second reading at a

10:15:44 public hearing.

10:15:46 One vote.

10:15:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a motion?

10:15:57 This resolution addressed the rollback fees?

10:16:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the after-school program and --

10:16:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You have to understand this does not

10:16:07 include the senior fees, right?

10:16:09 This is including the summer program, after-school

10:16:13 program, which you are rolling the fees back, so that,

10:16:17 you know --

10:16:20 >> Corrada.

10:16:21 Yes, sir.

10:16:22 It rolled back to zero, the summer program $70, open

10:16:27 swim to free.

10:16:28 The reason seniors aren't reflected is we can already

10:16:32 drop back and charge the least amount which we are

10:16:34 going to already do for in-city residents.

10:16:37 The only still outstanding issue that we grapple with

10:16:40 is the out-of-city rec card fee.

10:16:43 This does not deal with --

10:16:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.

10:16:46 That's why I am making a clarification, okay.

10:16:49 Is there a second?

10:16:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move that item, so these kids get

10:16:56 the same benefit that they had before, although it's

10:16:58 not 100% lake it was, it's 99.9%, and that's the best I

10:17:03 can do with what I have to work with.

10:17:08 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I second.

10:17:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: That doesn't include the senior rec

10:17:11 card?

10:17:13 >> That's not part of the resolution.

10:17:14 >> So that can come up at another time?

10:17:16 >> Yes.

10:17:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

10:17:19 All in favor?

10:17:20 Opposes?

10:17:20 Okay.

10:17:22 Thank you, sir.

10:17:25 Item 49.

10:17:30 >>JEAN DORZBACK: Transportation manager.

10:17:31 This is a memo that was submitted to provide some

10:17:35 clarification regarding chapter 22.

10:17:37 We had made some code changes in order to get some

10:17:42 clarity and provide a process for homeowners that had a

10:17:45 desire to have other materials in the driveways,

10:17:51 concrete.

10:17:51 This memo is clarifying that process that now exists as

10:17:55 an option to those homeowners.

10:17:57 I'm here to answer any questions you may have about

10:17:59 that.

10:18:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:18:04 At the conclusion of this meeting, I'm prepared to

10:18:07 bring an ordinance regarding sidewalks that you may or

10:18:12 may not agree with, a process that we can give and take

10:18:17 and I'll bring that up, has a couple of changes in it.

10:18:20 And I would like to give you that opportunity to review

10:18:23 it.

10:18:23 I'm not asking for first reading today.

10:18:25 I'm sending it to the legal department.

10:18:26 And it was not drafted by the legal department.

10:18:28 It was drafted by my office.

10:18:30 So I want you to understand that for a long time, the

10:18:40 word silent in the ordinance means the department could

10:18:43 do how they chose.

10:18:45 In this ordinance the word silent is no longer silent.

10:18:49 I wanted you all to have that to digest, and whatever

10:18:54 date this council chooses to come back, that's when its

10:18:57 going to come back.

10:18:58 I want you to be aware of it and to have the knowledge

10:19:01 of it.

10:19:02 That's all.

10:19:03 Thank you very much.

10:19:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any questions on item 49?

10:19:09 Motion to receive and file?

10:19:11 >> So moved.

10:19:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

10:19:15 All in favor?

10:19:16 Opposes?

10:19:17 Item 50.

10:19:18 >> Irvin Lee, public works director.

10:19:29 I'm here to answer any questions you might have on the

10:19:32 report that was provided regarding the prioritization

10:19:35 of the sidewalk request.

10:19:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Mr. Lee.

10:19:40 I appreciate it very much and commend you for bringing

10:19:41 the report and reading the report, although you have

10:19:45 points 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, the one we are discussing right

10:19:49 now.

10:19:52 In life that's perfect.

10:19:53 Buff in reality and practicality, some areas that you

10:19:57 give a 5 to can't be seeing the 5 because there's

10:20:01 ditches.

10:20:01 And you can't get to the playgrounds from.A to point B.

10:20:08 I know Ms. Vizzi is here.

10:20:10 And we have had various meetings.

10:20:12 I'm not bringing her name up for any reason other than

10:20:14 she's had the same conversation I had with the same

10:20:18 people in certain neighborhoods.

10:20:19 So even though that works on paper, when you apply to

10:20:21 the reality, it doesn't fit the mold, because they

10:20:27 can't build a sidewalk.

10:20:28 That's what this is all about and this is what I'm

10:20:30 addressing in the knew addition to the ordinance, if it

10:20:32 passes sometime back.

10:20:34 All I can do as a legislature is make presentations.

10:20:37 It's up to the rest of the world to see whether we are

10:20:39 right or wrong.

10:20:40 But thank you very much.

10:20:41 I appreciate it.

10:20:42 And I again with the rankings.

10:20:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Any other questions?

10:20:47 Motion to receive and file?

10:20:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

10:20:50 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Second.

10:20:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.

10:20:53 Opposes?

10:20:55 Okay.

10:20:55 Item 51.

10:20:57 Item 51 is an item that I initiated and Ms. Dorzback

10:21:11 came and reported about a month ago relative to the

10:21:15 traffic and the accident happening down on MacDill

10:21:20 and in that area.

10:21:24 At that time you gave us a report that there was four

10:21:26 crashes only that had been reported.

10:21:28 Subsequent to that, council, I handed out a report that

10:21:32 was sent to Mr. Steven Diaco that highlights 34

10:21:36 crashes.

10:21:37 So that's a big difference from 4 to 34.

10:21:41 So you may want to speak to that.

10:21:43 And, again, what is being done to address the backup on

10:21:48 those issues that happen there?

10:21:51 >>JEAN DORZBACK: Transportation manager.

10:21:53 The memo that was provided addresses several different

10:21:57 areas that we are looking at to address this situation.

10:22:03 It's an ongoing situation because of the fact it's got

10:22:08 entrance points to the base, has a certain number of

10:22:12 folks entering the base every morning so it's not

10:22:15 something that has a quick fix that's available.

10:22:17 But the memo outlines different areas that we are

10:22:19 looking at to try to minimize the problem and come up

10:22:22 with plans for future projects to minimize even

10:22:26 further.

10:22:26 The first thing we are doing and we continue to do is

10:22:29 communicate with MacDill Air Force Base.

10:22:31 They are conducting a traffic study, been going on for

10:22:35 a few months, and will sure that information with us in

10:22:38 the very near future, and so we feel that we have a

10:22:41 good communication with them.

10:22:43 We are actually working with them, and submitted two

10:22:49 grants that will make improvements at two of the

10:22:51 different gates, the tanker way gait and MacDill

10:22:57 gate, and we feel those improvements will have a

10:22:59 benefit to the Bayshore gate as traffic equalizes and

10:23:02 starts to use some of those other gates more than they

10:23:05 are currently.

10:23:06 We also are supporting the efforts of the Tampa

10:23:11 Hillsborough expressway authority with the sun pass

10:23:18 program that they have to use the expressway an not get

10:23:21 off downtown and take the Bayshore gate into the base.

10:23:25 We have also had conversations with Hart.

10:23:27 They do have plans in their transportation improvement

10:23:30 plan to add more service to the base.

10:23:37 Their plans are dependent on funding and looking at

10:23:39 when the funding opportunity comes along to implement

10:23:42 those improvements and additional service to the base.

10:23:47 Another benefit to the vehicle backups that we are

10:23:49 seeing on Bayshore with maybe more opportunity for

10:23:52 commuters to take the bus instead of drive their

10:23:56 personal vehicles.

10:23:57 And we do continue to monitor and do traffic studies to

10:24:02 look at accidents that occur, what the cause of it is,

10:24:06 if there's changes on the city side of the base, that

10:24:11 we could make in terms of modified signage or signal

10:24:16 timing, continually doing those things to make sure

10:24:18 that we are trying to minimize accidents as they are

10:24:22 occurring.

10:24:22 So that's a summary of what's going on currently.

10:24:26 These activities will continue to be ongoing as we work

10:24:28 through the short term and the long-term solutions to

10:24:31 the problem.

10:24:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess my question, though, is -- and

10:24:35 I hear about the studies being done, and you mentioned

10:24:38 something about the two gates on MacDill.

10:24:43 I guess my question is, when will that take place to

10:24:45 help this traffic down MacDill?

10:24:50 >>JEAN DORZBACK: I have the grants.

10:24:52 Actually look at the time frame for the fund to be

10:24:56 awarded this program.

10:24:57 I can get back with that information, if you don't

10:24:59 mind.

10:24:59 But we are looking to receive funding to make those

10:25:04 improvements, and we are hopeful we will get funding

10:25:06 for at least one of the grants if not both of them.

10:25:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

10:25:11 And that you are doing ongoing improvements based on

10:25:14 the studies, you said?

10:25:17 >> As we are monitoring the traffic situation out

10:25:21 there, depending on whether it's a timing issue or

10:25:25 accident issue, or ongoing, looking at different

10:25:30 situations that are coming up to try to continually

10:25:34 tweak the system and make improvements within our

10:25:38 resources that we have, that there are some

10:25:41 improvements that I think are outside our resources,

10:25:45 that those things we can do presently, we are

10:25:47 continuing to do that.

10:25:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: When you look at the report, and the

10:25:56 report that was provided on July 15th, that Mr.

10:25:59 Diaco highlights 34 crashes or accident along

10:26:05 MacDill, actually it's Bayshore Boulevard between

10:26:10 Gandy and MacDill.

10:26:11 And so that's 34.

10:26:13 I guess the question I have is, what has been done to

10:26:17 address those, so you now know is 34 crashes, 34

10:26:22 accidents.

10:26:23 Has there been any improvement to address those

10:26:25 accidents?

10:26:26 >> I can tell you, I have not seen that report.

10:26:31 I would be very interested in looking to see what I can

10:26:35 respond to, let me take a look at it.

10:26:38 In some cases, the accidents are -- there are physical

10:26:45 changes in the roadway to minimize those accidents.

10:26:49 In some case depending on the accident type, the

10:26:52 general behavior.

10:26:53 There's not anything that we can do --

10:26:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: But we got 34 crashes.

10:26:57 That's a lot of crashes along MacDill there.

10:26:59 Council, what I would like to do is request that we

10:27:01 continue this item, come back to us in 30 days, and

10:27:05 that staff bring back to us a list of remedies, of

10:27:09 solutions that they have allotted or that they are

10:27:11 working on to address the issue.

10:27:13 I mean, 34 crashes along MacDill, that's a lot.

10:27:23 It's actually Bayshore, backing up on Bayshore, right?

10:27:27 Near MacDill Air Force Base to Interbay.

10:27:34 Bayshore.

10:27:34 So what I will do is move that we continue -- well

10:27:37 with, to come back in 30 days, and address the issue of

10:27:41 this many crashes.

10:27:42 What solution, what remedies, are they putting in

10:27:51 place?

10:27:53 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I would like to find out more about the

10:27:54 sun pass on that report.

10:27:59 I understand -- I was in San Diego recently, and the

10:28:05 naval Air Force Base does help out with their employees

10:28:11 coming in so they are not in the neighborhood streets.

10:28:18 So I was wondering if that's something that we are

10:28:20 looking into with MacDill Air Force Base and the

10:28:24 sun pass so that the employees, which is somewhere

10:28:27 around 9,000 coming in, is that right? Or 4,000?

10:28:37 If could you add that to the report if you know now.

10:28:39 >> I can tell you the Tampa Hillsborough authority is

10:28:45 providing sun passes through some different

10:28:48 opportunities at the base to encourage folks to use

10:28:50 those passes to, like I said, take it further down and

10:28:55 not get off on Bayshore Boulevard.

10:28:57 So providing the pass itself, but they are not

10:29:01 subsidizing the trips.

10:29:03 They are paying for the trips being used.

10:29:07 It's providing the pass itself.

10:29:08 And there's been a number of conversations about the

10:29:12 limitation that the base has to subsidize, with the

10:29:15 limitation that the expressway authority has to

10:29:18 subsidize those.

10:29:20 But providing the pass itself is seeing some additional

10:29:26 use by employees at the base and they are continue

10:29:30 owing to do that.

10:29:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second to Mr. Scott's

10:29:36 motion?

10:29:36 >> Second.

10:29:37 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?

10:29:39 Opposed?

10:29:40 >> okay, thank you.

10:29:50 Item 52 has been continued.

10:29:52 Is that right?

10:29:53 Item 53.

10:30:01 >>JEAN DORZBACK: Transportation manager.

10:30:03 This particular item is a status of the bicycle and

10:30:11 sidewalk master plan that we had in the works for some

10:30:14 months with the MPO.

10:30:16 The MPO has generously offered to pay for this study,

10:30:21 and we have had a number of meetings to work out the

10:30:27 scope of services, they also will be doing a mobility

10:30:30 study for the City of Tampa, and we have worked to make

10:30:34 sure these are in sync with each other, sharing

10:30:38 information.

10:30:39 This came out of the comprehensive plan update that

10:30:42 weighed last year, and so we are following through on

10:30:45 the policies of that comprehensive plan to do this

10:30:50 master planning to make sure that the limited resources

10:30:53 that we do have are going to be prioritized and placed

10:30:57 for projects that have the most need and provide the

10:31:01 most benefit to our citizens.

10:31:02 So we will be glad to come back and give a further

10:31:05 update as we get underway with this study.

10:31:08 We will have public outreach as part of this study and

10:31:11 are very interested in getting feedback and input from

10:31:14 the bicycle and sidewalk community as we develop the

10:31:17 master plan.

10:31:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you want to come back in 30 days?

10:31:23 Or longer?

10:31:25 >>JEAN DORZBACK: Probably a little longer.

10:31:26 It going to be a six-month study.

10:31:28 So there's a lot of data collection and input that we

10:31:31 would be putting together in the beginning.

10:31:34 Probably more like two or three months and be able to

10:31:37 give you a little more substance at that time.

10:31:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

10:31:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Is November time enough?

10:31:49 >>JEAN DORZBACK: Yes, that's fine.

10:31:50 We can give you a status and let you know where we are

10:31:52 at at that point in time.

10:31:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Our first meeting in November?

10:32:01 >>THE CLERK: Our first meeting at this time there are

10:32:02 no staff reports or unfinished business scheduled and

10:32:06 no alcoholic beverage.

10:32:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Perfect.

10:32:09 >>THE CLERK: That would be November 4th.

10:32:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: First meeting in November.

10:32:15 Okay.

10:32:18 There's a motion.

10:32:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

10:32:22 >> Second.

10:32:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

10:32:25 All in favor?

10:32:26 Opposes?

10:32:27 Okay.

10:32:29 Thank you.

10:32:32 Item 55.

10:32:37 Item 55.

10:32:43 Ms. Cole?

10:32:46 Item 55, Ms. Cole.

10:32:49 >>JULIA COLE: Julia Cole, legal department.

10:33:00 You have before you a recommendation of the special

10:33:06 magistrate which was filed in the Vance Blanchard

10:33:14 versus City of Tampa case.

10:33:15 I have submitted a memorandum that outlines the process

10:33:17 of we are and what we are doing but I will briefly go

10:33:21 through that.

10:33:21 City Council did deny a rezoning on this matter, which

10:33:25 would have allowed the development of two lots, for two

10:33:29 lots which would be substandard to the zoning

10:33:34 classification of RS 100.

10:33:36 As a result of that denial, the property owner filed a

10:33:41 Florida statute 7051 request for relief which is a

10:33:45 request for a special magistrate, mediation in the

10:33:49 matter, in essence a prelitigation type of process.

10:33:54 As a result, a special magistrate is similar to a

10:33:58 mediator, and we held not a public hearing, but it has

10:34:03 the effect of a public meeting where the mediator

10:34:06 actually has members of the public as well as the

10:34:08 property owner, the city presents the item for a

10:34:13 determination on the part of the magistrate as to

10:34:16 whether or not the denial of the rezoning unreasonably

10:34:19 or unfairly burdens the real property.

10:34:22 In addition, the special magistrate has the opportunity

10:34:24 to hear as to whether or not there's a way to

10:34:27 facilitate resolution of the matter through a mediation

10:34:30 process.

10:34:32 We did hold a hearing in City Council chambers, or a

10:34:36 meeting in City Council chambers.

10:34:37 There was an opportunity for members of the public for

10:34:42 the homeowners to speak about proceeding.

10:34:44 As a result, the special magistrate did issue a

10:34:47 recommendation which I have given to members of City

10:34:49 Council in which a determination was made -- a

10:34:54 recommendation was made, I might say, from the special

10:34:57 magistrate that the action of denial did unfairly or

10:35:00 unreasonably burden the real property and the special

10:35:03 magistrate did recommend facilitating the resolution by

10:35:08 allowing City Council the opportunity to hear an

10:35:10 alternative planned development, rezoning plan in that

10:35:14 matter, which would limit the size of the houses on the

10:35:17 two lots which would be split as well as look at

10:35:21 additional side yard setback.

10:35:25 As I stated this is a Florida statutory proceeding.

10:35:27 Once it comes to City Council you have three options.

10:35:30 You can accept the recommendation of the special

10:35:33 magistrate.

10:35:35 If City Council does accept that recommendation, I just

10:35:37 want it clear for the record what that would simply

10:35:39 mean is you would have to set a public hearing for the

10:35:44 reconsideration of the rezoning in light of the special

10:35:47 magistrate's recommendation.

10:35:49 You have the opportunity to modify or City Council

10:35:52 could take action to reject the special magistrate's

10:35:55 recommendation upon rejection on the parties, and the

10:36:01 property owner would sit as they did prior to the

10:36:04 filing of the 70-51 proceeding and they could proceed

10:36:10 forward in any manner they chose at that time.

10:36:13 So what the legal department is requesting City Council

10:36:15 to do is simply take action on the special magistrate

10:36:20 recommendation, so it would require a motion to either

10:36:23 accept for the purposes of setting a public hearing,

10:36:27 modify or reject.

10:36:29 Thank you.

10:36:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Council?

10:36:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Cole, of the three that you gave

10:36:44 us, this special magistrate is not the decision maker

10:36:56 because county go on to the courts?

10:36:59 >>JULIA COLE: That is correct.

10:37:02 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So I am trying to be very cautious

10:37:03 to have a reduction of moneys there.

10:37:08 My charge to the city, if we do something here that the

10:37:13 courts later find is inconsistent with the law.

10:37:16 So which of the three would be the least in your

10:37:21 opinion?

10:37:22 And I'm not trying to put you in the spot.

10:37:24 I'm just trying to save some legal fees down the road.

10:37:29 Which avenue do you think is the best for the city?

10:37:32 Not necessarily for this council, but for all the

10:37:34 taxpayers for action from this council?

10:37:44 Again, that's the only way I can put it.

10:37:46 I don't know what else.

10:37:47 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: City attorney.

10:37:52 Just for purposes of preface, we don't have an

10:37:56 opportunity for a closed session on this type of

10:37:58 matter.

10:38:00 Because there is not actual litigation at this point.

10:38:02 So we have not had the opportunity, or had the

10:38:06 opportunity to discuss this in a closed attorney-client

10:38:09 session.

10:38:09 So to address this issue, the conservative orderly

10:38:22 approach to this would be to seek an accommodation that

10:38:29 satisfies both sides.

10:38:30 That's what the nature of this process that we just

10:38:33 went through was, was a mediation.

10:38:40 I believe that council has full legal authority to

10:38:41 reject the report if council deems that's appropriate.

10:38:44 The initial action by council, we believe, to reject

10:38:47 the petition and enforce the standard for the existing

10:38:52 zoning is legally defensible.

10:38:58 If council chose to, it could seek to accept the report

10:39:02 and adopt something with the mediated type of

10:39:05 conditions that are in there.

10:39:07 Certainly, that would be more conservative and would

10:39:10 eliminate the opportunity for the property owner to

10:39:13 seek judicial relief.

10:39:16 I will say, though, that in my opinion, if council did

10:39:24 choose to reject the report and the property own der

10:39:27 seek judicial review, the appropriate remedy would be

10:39:33 to grant a writ of certiorari which would simply

10:39:36 approve the PD.

10:39:37 It would not result in damages assessed against the

10:39:41 city.

10:39:43 Can I promise council that through some creative cause

10:39:46 of action the property owner couldn't seek damages?

10:39:48 I can't make that promise for.

10:39:52 We are actually defending one right now.

10:39:53 But certainly I do not believe that this creates

10:39:57 exposure for the city if in fact the council were to

10:40:01 choose to reject the report.

10:40:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may, Mr. Chairman, continue.

10:40:08 If my mind serves me correct, parties of those

10:40:10 interested parties within this case here.

10:40:15 So then I guess -- I'm assuming that the best remedy to

10:40:19 this situation today is to reject the magistrate's

10:40:28 finding of fact and let the courts decide so that one

10:40:32 way or another, this is settled by the court, and the

10:40:35 city is not held liable for additional costs.

10:40:38 Am I correct?

10:40:44 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: That is certainly within council's

10:40:46 prerogative and that is a course that council could

10:40:48 choose to take and I believe your statement is

10:40:50 accurate.

10:40:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, just thinking on the

10:40:53 record and thinking of what can and likely will happen,

10:41:00 that's the only remedy I see at this point, although

10:41:02 the other two certainly have other remedies, and

10:41:06 satisfactions.

10:41:08 I'm just thinking of avoiding additional legal expense

10:41:14 whereby we get sued for X amount of dollars for X, Y

10:41:18 and Z, which includes use of the property, attorney

10:41:20 fees and so forth and so on.

10:41:22 I assume of that to be a fact.

10:41:24 I'm not -- my opinion is to reject the magistrate's

10:41:31 finding of fact and let whoever, I guess the courts,

10:41:39 decide the remedy in this case.

10:41:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

10:41:45 There's in a second to that motion.

10:41:46 >> I second it.

10:41:52 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay, Mr. Grandoff, do you want to

10:41:53 speak to council?

10:41:55 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Just briefly.

10:41:56 >> Mr. Fletcher, do you have any concern about that?

10:42:00 Because at this point in time, there was another

10:42:04 attorney who was representing -- I guess somebody was

10:42:07 appointed.

10:42:07 I just want to be clear this is an appropriate thing to

10:42:11 do at this point.

10:42:11 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: It's not a public hearing

10:42:14 F.council would like Mr. Grandoff to be heard, I don't

10:42:17 have an objection.

10:42:18 If there is another counsel for another noticed party

10:42:21 that would also like to be heard, I think that would be

10:42:23 appropriate.

10:42:23 But we haven't received that request at this time.

10:42:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there another council person that

10:42:34 wanted to be heard?

10:42:37 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America plaza. I

10:42:39 represent Vance Blanchard, the petitioner in this case.

10:42:43 I would have spoke earlier this morning but I us what

10:42:45 at another appointment.

10:42:47 I just want to briefly mention that Mr. Thom's report

10:42:53 is supported by the department and Planning Commission.

10:42:56 Within the report you will notice there is a compromise

10:42:58 that was put on the table by Ms. Blanchard, significant

10:43:02 compromise, which compromised some of her property

10:43:05 rights, which obviously could all be redeemed in a

10:43:09 court of law.

10:43:10 We would prefer not to have any further dispute with

10:43:13 the city, and vis-a-vis damages and attorneys fees,

10:43:19 et cetera, et cetera.

10:43:20 I think the public would be better served and the

10:43:23 public work would be better done by approving this --

10:43:27 by setting the suggested compromise for hearing.

10:43:29 We are just asking to set it for hearing in front of

10:43:32 you for a further date so I can explain it to you.

10:43:35 I think the public purpose would be better served by

10:43:38 doing that, because the ultimate result would be these

10:43:41 homes would be built creating jobs and contributing to

10:43:50 the neighborhood.

10:43:51 We don't want to be in court.

10:43:52 Chip doesn't want to be in court spending fees, on and

10:43:56 on and on.

10:43:56 I think in my experience this is a defensible position.

10:44:01 He's the preeminent zoning attorney in the city.

10:44:03 This is about one foot.

10:44:08 That's all it's about.

10:44:11 And I think it begs the question in these times, and I

10:44:16 think our time is better spent in progress rather than

10:44:20 litigation.

10:44:21 I sincerely believe that.

10:44:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So I understand, you support the

10:44:28 magistrate's opinion or ruling?

10:44:31 >>> Yes, which includes a compromise.

10:44:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay: And then I think the lady who

10:44:36 spoke this morning also supports, is that right?

10:44:39 Ma'am, ma'am, you have to come up.

10:44:43 >> Rebecca Johns on behalf of Jim and Natalie Goodwin

10:44:48 are the -- who are the next door neighbors, and they

10:44:50 object to the modified site plan for the same reasons

10:44:53 that the original site plan was objected to.

10:44:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you.

10:44:59 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me clarify my statement.

10:45:01 If I had an agreement between this attorney and this

10:45:03 attorney, two outstanding individuals, two outstanding

10:45:07 attorneys, I wouldn't have said what I said.

10:45:10 But I don't have agreement between the two attorneys

10:45:14 and the two parties.

10:45:15 So, therefore, I feel compelled that the president of

10:45:20 the evidence presented leads me to believe that the

10:45:24 only way that the taxpayers in total, not I, not you,

10:45:28 not us, but all of us, can be best served is if this

10:45:34 was continued on the course of remedies through the

10:45:38 court, because we come back, we get back here, and I

10:45:42 have seen this time and time again, guess what happens.

10:45:45 It starts back where it started again.

10:45:47 And it goes back to the magistrate's hearing, and it

10:45:50 keeps going around and around and around.

10:45:54 And I would love to tell you, Mr. Grandoff, you're

10:46:04 right.

10:46:04 And I'm not saying you're wrong.

10:46:06 I'm just saying how do I solve this problem that just

10:46:09 keeps on going?

10:46:10 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: That's a good question.

10:46:11 One thing I need to clarify, Mr. Miranda, Ms. Johns was

10:46:16 not a party to the mediation that we had.

10:46:18 The party to the mediation was Ms. Blanchard and the

10:46:21 city represented by Ms. Cole.

10:46:23 And we proposed a compromise that is defensible and

10:46:27 that was supported by Ms. Feeley and by the Planning

10:46:31 Commission.

10:46:31 So we are there as far as the parties that are

10:46:35 involved.

10:46:36 They will never compromise.

10:46:38 I have to be blunt about it.

10:46:41 We are in sync with the city officials and the zoning

10:46:43 department and the Planning Commission under the law.

10:46:46 We merely need to under the statute have to have a

10:46:50 hearing before you to have this approvable.

10:46:57 I would have ask if the city would grant us the

10:46:59 courtesy of awaiting till this afternoon when Mr.

10:47:02 Stokes arrives.

10:47:03 I think it is that important to us to have Mr. Stokes

10:47:06 involved.

10:47:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We only have five -- Mr. Stokes will

10:47:10 only be back this evening, as I understand.

10:47:13 We only have one item to be continued at 1:30 so we

10:47:17 will be here less than two minutes.

10:47:23 Chip if I may, just to clarify the process.

10:47:32 There is not a decision that council would make today

10:47:35 that would result in this going back to the magistrate,

10:47:37 just so we are clear.

10:47:38 The three options are to reject the report, which I

10:47:42 believe is the motion that's before council at the

10:47:45 moment, to essentially accept the report and the

10:47:53 compromise that was discussed therein, which is

10:47:59 contained in the report, and then that would be set for

10:48:02 a public hearing which would be through a normal land

10:48:04 use public hearing process with two hearings, just as

10:48:08 you normally would do any rezoning.

10:48:10 So you had a little bit of confusion as to what those

10:48:16 options were.

10:48:19 And while in the spirit of mediation, which is the

10:48:22 nature of what was before the special magistrate, the

10:48:29 city staff did consult on some of those issues.

10:48:31 I think it's overstating to say the city staff had

10:48:35 advocated for this compromise.

10:48:36 I think it was in the spirit of mediation in which

10:48:39 those items were discussed as potential resolution.

10:48:44 I don't believe there were statements by the city staff

10:48:47 advocating for that position.

10:48:49 Just for clarification.

10:48:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could just ask Mr. Fletcher if

10:48:55 co-clarify another point, and that is that a decision

10:48:59 to set this for a public hearing to address the issue,

10:49:04 the magistrate's recommendation and mediated settlement

10:49:13 council action today does not bind the council to any

10:49:16 particular action at the public hearing, when it hears

10:49:18 all the evidence, that's presented to it.

10:49:20 Is that correct?

10:49:22 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: That's absolutely correct.

10:49:23 There would in essence need to be a planned development

10:49:28 application with those conditions in it for council to

10:49:30 consider and weigh the evidence at that time, through

10:49:34 that process as you normally do on any other planned

10:49:37 development, and the evidence that's before council at

10:49:39 that point in time.

10:49:40 So that would be the process if you were to move

10:49:44 forward in accepting the -- move forward with accepting

10:49:47 the recommendation.

10:49:53 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Point of clarification.

10:49:54 Would it be appropriate to have move to accept now?

10:50:02 >> The motion on the floor is to reject it.

10:50:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Off motion on the floor and a second.

10:50:22 Madam clerk, the motion on the floor now --

10:50:25 >>THE CLERK: Motion on the floor at this time is to

10:50:27 reject the magistrate's recommendation.

10:50:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Based on the information we have

10:50:32 received from the legal department.

10:50:36 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I could mention one other thing, Mr.

10:50:38 Scott?

10:50:38 All I want you to do is set a hearing.

10:50:40 There will be a noticed public hearing.

10:50:41 I will provide notice to the surrounding owners like

10:50:45 rezoning the property and I get to tell but the

10:50:48 compromise that Mr. --

10:50:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Legal explained already that the day

10:50:56 to set would be to set a public hearing.

10:50:58 That's what this is about.

10:51:00 If we accept the magistrate's recommendation, set a

10:51:05 public hearing, all right, and then have a whole

10:51:08 hearing on those.

10:51:14 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I think it behooves this council -- as

10:51:17 a matter of representative government, it behooves this

10:51:20 council when you have two sitting new City Council

10:51:22 members, it behooves this council to set this matter

10:51:25 for hearing and gives them the opportunity to hear what

10:51:28 there is.

10:51:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, I am not debating Mr.

10:51:33 Grandoff.

10:51:33 I think he makes very valid points.

10:51:35 But when you just base it on the fact that two new

10:51:38 council members that represents 29.24% of the voting

10:51:41 members of the council, 14 and 14 times -- 114 times 7

10:51:49 is 98 so that's somewhere around 29% rounded off.

10:51:52 If I remember the vote, it was unanimous.

10:51:56 So that leaves you with 71% of the council's vote that

10:52:01 you still have to contend with.

10:52:02 So what I'm trying to do is get to the core of the

10:52:06 apple and not bite around the outside to say, okay,

10:52:09 let's leave the outside intact, let's take the core out

10:52:13 and only discuss that in the legal proceedings of this

10:52:15 council.

10:52:17 Is the vote going to change?

10:52:18 I really don't know.

10:52:20 Are minds going to be changed?

10:52:22 I really don't know.

10:52:24 But not knowing these things, because now we are saying

10:52:28 that two council members may vote differently, but they

10:52:32 also may vote the same.

10:52:34 So what I'm saying is how in the world we here are

10:52:38 going to be generally explaining this to the public

10:52:41 about the cost of these things.

10:52:43 So I'm not disputing your case.

10:52:45 I think you have made an excellent presentation, very

10:52:48 well versed like you always are, very to the point.

10:52:51 But the risk and factor lies with us.

10:52:56 And we have to assume that risk.

10:52:58 And that risk continues.

10:53:00 Our legal department has got to continue to go on in

10:53:03 this case and cost the taxpayers money.

10:53:06 And that's what I'm saying.

10:53:08 I'm not saying against or for.

10:53:09 I'm saying we have got a report, the finest and easiest

10:53:13 and quickest way to go through all the notice, two

10:53:17 hearings, have debate for hours -- and I'm not afraid

10:53:20 to be here for hours -- is to have the court decide and

10:53:23 say the council was right or the council was wrong.

10:53:27 And that's happened before.

10:53:28 I can name you two or three cases right off the top of

10:53:31 my head right now but I won't because it would help

10:53:33 your case.

10:53:35 I will be very sincere with you.

10:53:40 I could tell you another.

10:53:41 So I'm saying that's my opinion.

10:53:44 The council doesn't have to agree with me.

10:53:46 But I think the legal department stated that that was

10:53:49 the avenue that we should take without them saying we

10:53:52 should take that avenue.

10:54:02 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I just want to say that my reason for

10:54:13 not agreeing to this motion would be that when the

10:54:15 council voted unanimous, they did not have the special

10:54:18 magistrate's recommendation under consideration.

10:54:22 This would give us the opportunity to hear this, and

10:54:29 the public hearing.

10:54:30 So that would be my reason for not agreeing with this

10:54:41 motion.

10:54:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

10:54:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Fletcher, did you want to raise

10:54:47 that issue with the council, that needs to be

10:54:49 clarified?

10:54:53 >>CHARLES FLETCHER: What Mr. Shelby pointed out was if

10:54:56 as described this matter were to go directly from here

10:54:59 to circuit court and a writ of cert were granted

10:55:03 resulting in a decision by the court that the PD should

10:55:06 be approved, what would be approved would be the

10:55:10 original application that was in without any of the

10:55:13 compromise provisions that Councilwoman Capin had

10:55:18 referenced.

10:55:19 So just so everybody is clear on what the results of

10:55:21 the various options that councilman Miranda described,

10:55:25 that would be the result if it were to go to court and

10:55:29 lose.

10:55:30 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So going to court it would be without

10:55:31 the special magistrate recommendation?

10:55:33 >> The special magistrate recommendation would be part

10:55:36 of that record in that proceeding.

10:55:37 But what would be at issue would be the denial of

10:55:40 council's -- council's denial of the original

10:55:44 application.

10:55:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.

10:55:53 What's the pleasure of council?

10:55:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion on the floor.

10:55:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: There's a motion.

10:55:59 It's been moved and seconded.

10:56:01 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

10:56:03 Opposes?

10:56:04 >>THE CLERK: Motion was not adopted with Caetano and

10:56:09 Capin voting no.

10:56:11 Mulhern and Stokes being absent.

10:56:13 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You don't have the votes anyway because

10:56:15 only three.

10:56:16 It has to have four votes?

10:56:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So the motion dice.

10:56:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move the public hearing on this

10:56:29 for PD.

10:56:34 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: How are you going to get four votes?

10:56:37 >>GWEN MILLER:s it has to carry over till we have a

10:56:40 full board.

10:56:41 >> Just trying to help you out.

10:56:46 >> He's going to bring the same ruler in.

10:56:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We will have to continue to the oh

10:56:53 next time we have a full board.

10:56:55 >> Till somebody else comes back.

10:56:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Chairman, my recommendation would

10:57:05 be -- I am going to refer to the present rule C which

10:57:11 we will discuss later.

10:57:12 But rule C says if a motion to approve denial

10:57:16 continuance of a motion -- to approve denial or

10:57:19 continue an ordinance or a resolution fails to receive

10:57:22 at least four votes either in support or opposition it

10:57:24 shall automatically be brought back before the council

10:57:27 at the next regular council meeting as unfinished

10:57:29 business.

10:57:31 Therefore, this motion did fail, but it would be

10:57:35 appropriate then to still continue this item before a

10:57:37 full council but would not be just an up or down vote

10:57:41 based on reviewing the record.

10:57:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right. Which is the 26th, which

10:57:47 is what I said earlier.

10:57:49 Okay.

10:57:51 So we need a motion.

10:57:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So move to continue till the

10:57:56 26th on that short day.

10:57:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would it appear under staff reports

10:58:02 or at a set time?

10:58:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's a set time to me.

10:58:07 I don't think this is staff report.

10:58:10 I don't know.

10:58:13 It came today at a certain time.

10:58:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Time certain.

10:58:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you want to set it then for --

10:58:23 >>GWEN MILLER: 10:00.

10:58:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Before the staff reports?

10:58:29 >>GWEN MILLER: That's at 10:30 so do it at 10:00.

10:58:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm trying to think with all the

10:58:35 second readings, Mr. Chairman, we may not get done with

10:58:37 second readings before 10:30 and normally what council

10:58:41 does stop for staff reports.

10:58:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are going to just take a vote

10:58:46 whether to reject.

10:58:48 I understand what you said earlier.

10:58:53 We don't have to have a discussion from the public on

10:58:57 the issues.

10:58:59 It a matter of council deciding what they want to have

10:59:02 do.

10:59:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to set it after staff

10:59:06 report, or 9:30 or 10:00?

10:59:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's put it as the first item under

10:59:13 staff reports.

10:59:21 >> I made the motion. Is there a second?

10:59:24 >> I second.

10:59:25 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

10:59:26 Opposes?

10:59:29 All right.

10:59:31 That took more than the whole morning.

10:59:35 The last item, Mr. Shelby.

10:59:39 54.

10:59:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Martin Shelby, City Council attorney,

11:00:09 here on item 54.

11:00:11 And the first of the items was to discuss -- to develop

11:00:17 a rule regarding neighborhood organizations to make a

11:00:19 request of ten minutes for a block of time to present

11:00:22 their organized opposition.

11:00:25 Council, I took this motion as an opportunity for City

11:00:30 Council to review its entire rules of procedure.

11:00:34 And the reason I do this specifically is there have

11:00:38 been in the past several weeks and months some items

11:00:41 that have required revision, and most importantly is

11:00:46 the concept of how council will be addressing its

11:00:48 appeals that will be heard.

11:00:51 You will have appeals from the various boards being

11:00:54 heard at de novo hearings, and you will also have now

11:00:59 your consideration of recommended orders from hearing

11:01:01 officers.

11:01:03 So these changes would then address that, and that's

11:01:07 why I am asking council to take the opportunity to look

11:01:10 at their rules of procedure, and I would like to just

11:01:12 very briefly go over some of the changes, and then to

11:01:15 get direction from council.

11:01:18 Council, if you have -- is there anybody who needs a

11:01:21 copy of the rules of procedure, a marked-up version?

11:01:23 Okay.

11:01:24 Very quickly, council, on page 2, there are two items

11:01:33 that I neglected to put in there but need to be made.

11:01:35 One of them is recall 1-B-1.

11:01:39 And what that says is, that came up this year.

11:01:41 It's to add the words "on or after April 1st of

11:01:46 each year."

11:01:47 This year it came up after April 1st, but the

11:01:52 organizational meeting shall be at the first meeting

11:01:54 regular meeting on or after April 1st.

11:01:56 I would like to make that change.

11:01:58 The other change is to rule 2 which is your committee

11:02:02 departments that are your assigned committees have been

11:02:06 reorganized by the administration.

11:02:08 So I have been working with Ms. Marshall and with

11:02:12 Darrell Smith, the chief of staff, to get the proper

11:02:15 titles for these committees.

11:02:18 Council, the other issue is on page 4.

11:02:22 Staff reports and unfinished business presently set for

11:02:25 10:30 but a.m. but council experienced these last

11:02:29 several meetings have been to start those before 10:30

11:02:32 a.m.

11:02:34 Next meeting on the 26th is going to be an

11:02:38 aberration with all the second readings you have, but

11:02:41 you might want to consider moving your staff reports up

11:02:43 to perhaps 10:00 a.m. and move the legislative matters

11:02:47 to 9:45 to be able to start those sooner.

11:02:51 Council, on the bottom of page 4, rule 2-C, I changed

11:02:59 the time to 5:00, and there's some question as to why I

11:03:04 did that, and maybe it's best to go back to 6:00.

11:03:08 But a lot of these changes were made to reflect the

11:03:10 present practice of the council.

11:03:12 The rules should reflect what the City Council wants,

11:03:15 and how the City Council operates.

11:03:18 At the outset, let me just say -- and I said this

11:03:21 before -- these are your rules.

11:03:27 This is the way City Council chooses to operate

11:03:32 meetings.

11:03:33 They are for your use, and it's your agenda, it's your

11:03:37 rules, and whatever changes council wishes to make to

11:03:39 the rules would be appropriate.

11:03:40 So certainly I don't claim ownership of these rules.

11:03:43 I am not wedded to them.

11:03:45 A lot of these rules existed before I got here.

11:03:48 A lost these rules were added as council changed the

11:03:50 ways it wanted to do business.

11:03:52 But, again, everything in the rules of procedure are on

11:03:57 the table for discussion.

11:03:59 With regard to setting the public hearings for land use

11:04:03 petitions and ware moving away from the concept of

11:04:07 zoning and referring to land use, is because a lot of

11:04:10 times your plan amendments are set for 5:00 and that's

11:04:15 just been by practice.

11:04:16 So as a general rule your land use meetings do

11:04:18 sometimes start at 5:00.

11:04:20 But if they are PDs, rezonings and the like, those

11:04:25 take place after 6:00.

11:04:27 So however you want to do it.

11:04:28 You can actually start setting your plan amendments for

11:04:31 6:00 if you choose to do it.

11:04:33 There's no reason in the world why you need to do it at

11:04:36 5:00.

11:04:36 If you choose to do it at 6:00, then when you set those

11:04:39 hearings they can take place at 6:00.

11:04:42 The other issue, council, that I would like to bring to

11:04:44 your attention is page 5.

11:04:47 There's been some talk about the concept of special

11:04:49 discussion meetings.

11:04:51 And as you know, council has evolved the concept of

11:04:55 special discussion meetings over time.

11:04:57 They originally began in the Mascotte room, very

11:05:01 informally, and as you know now they are scheduled on

11:05:03 Thursdays, they are scheduled in these chambers, they

11:05:06 are televised, and they become a much more formal

11:05:08 process.

11:05:09 So if there's any direction on council, with council on

11:05:12 special discussion meetings, we can change that to

11:05:15 reflect what council's pleasure is.

11:05:17 There is nothing in here, council, on special called

11:05:20 meetings.

11:05:21 And now lately you have been setting special called

11:05:23 meetings on one subject to take up one particular

11:05:29 serious, important advice, some special action.

11:05:32 So if would you like, council, way would like to do --

11:05:35 I'll be very quick --

11:05:39 (Bell sounds)

11:05:39 Put a special called meeting in here.

11:05:41 Council, I presented for you changes, and one of the

11:05:47 changes that I did address was in here that what about

11:05:53 the group or organizations having ten minutes?

11:05:56 And I have had the opportunity subsequent to

11:06:00 distributing this to talk to Mr. Fletcher, and to talk

11:06:04 to Ms. Cole, and, council, my rationale in doing it

11:06:09 this way was because it was very clear up front who was

11:06:14 able to get notice, and who was able to get up to ten

11:06:18 minutes, and therefore no advance approval was

11:06:21 required.

11:06:22 There was no machinations.

11:06:24 Logistics of finding out who they contact, whether they

11:06:27 contact, does the petitioner know?

11:06:29 And in all these quasi-judicial matters, council, my

11:06:33 main concern is to protect everybody's due process

11:06:35 rights, particularly that of petitioner who the courts

11:06:41 have hired, or greater burden obviously be because it

11:06:48 you is their private property rights as opposed to the

11:06:51 general public, and even one appellate district said

11:06:54 even greater than perhaps some adjoining property

11:06:56 owners.

11:06:56 That's a very recent days.

11:06:58 But -- case.

11:07:00 But everything I looked to do, council, when I sit

11:07:02 there, is to see how, whatever decision is made by this

11:07:08 council, would be supported if it were challenged in

11:07:11 court.

11:07:12 And I also look from a process standpoint to not burden

11:07:15 this council with a lot of extra things that it has to

11:07:20 deal with.

11:07:21 So I'm very curious.

11:07:22 I heard Ms. Vizzi's comments this morning.

11:07:25 I'm very happy to continue to work with them, T.H.A.N.,

11:07:28 and the community, Mr. Fletcher, Ms. Cole, on making a

11:07:32 better process, because, council, quite frankly, I'm

11:07:35 concerned about how would you implement this from a

11:07:39 practical matter, because if you want to, conceivably

11:07:44 we would have to start every meeting with saying who

11:07:46 here wants to speak for more than three minutes?

11:07:48 And if there are with there were several organizations

11:07:50 then the question would be, do you divide up that time

11:07:53 between -- do you give them each ten minutes?

11:07:57 And what's the process impact on the petitioner?

11:07:59 Then do you have to give them more time for rebuttal?

11:08:03 Or do you give them more time for presentation perhaps?

11:08:06 And those are the kinds of things that we wrestled with

11:08:09 in trying to create fairness which is the ultimate goal

11:08:11 in any one of these hearings.

11:08:13 So that being said, you have these changes before you.

11:08:16 I certainly would like to be able to bring back at a

11:08:19 future council meeting, the sooner the better with

11:08:23 regard to the appeal process, because we are going to

11:08:27 be having hearings coming before you now that will take

11:08:29 place under the new code.

11:08:32 So the sooner we change our rules with regard to that,

11:08:35 the better off we'll be prepared when we move forward.

11:08:37 I'm sorry to take up so much time, but again, your

11:08:40 rules govern your meetings, and they are important to

11:08:44 the way you do business.

11:08:45 So I appreciate you taking the time, and I look forward

11:08:48 to any input and any direction you give me.

11:08:50 Thank you.

11:08:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, based on the

11:08:54 information we received, I understand that work has

11:08:57 been done between all the organizations, T.H.A.N., the

11:09:00 neighborhoods, our own City Council attorney, our own

11:09:04 city attorney, and the staff.

11:09:07 And although I did read this last night, in my rush to

11:09:11 get here early this morning, I left it at the house.

11:09:14 And I conferred with our own City Council attorney that

11:09:19 this morning, he was kind enough to give me another

11:09:22 full packet of it.

11:09:23 But during the workload this morning I haven't been

11:09:27 able to find the notes that I mentally put on the other

11:09:30 sheet, and I would like to ask for an extension so that

11:09:33 all these things might be resolved before they come up.

11:09:36 Certainly, the part about due process, the times and so

11:09:40 forth and so on.

11:09:41 Then my question becomes to myself, where have we gone

11:09:45 wrong?

11:09:47 In other words, has there been anything that has been

11:09:49 so out of line for so many years that -- not that I say

11:09:54 I'm not open to change, but to say that everyone has

11:10:00 had the process.

11:10:01 If someone, some committee or some organization gets

11:10:04 ten minutes, anyone, not one specifically, that doesn't

11:10:08 allow -- that doesn't disallow a group or groups or

11:10:13 individuals within that organization to say that I also

11:10:17 want to make a point.

11:10:19 And I'm not against that.

11:10:20 But sometimes we have 30 on this side and 40 on the

11:10:24 other side, and we listen to both sides.

11:10:29 So if someone takes that ten minutes from any

11:10:32 organization, does that mean that that's it, ten

11:10:37 minutes?

11:10:39 What about the other people that haven't been heard?

11:10:41 Those are the things that I'm muscling in my own mind.

11:10:46 >> And Mr. Fletcher did that address those in his

11:10:49 comments to me and drafting some language that council

11:10:52 may want to consider, that if somebody does get up here

11:10:54 and speak on behalf of the organization officially,

11:10:57 then no one else can speak on behalf of that

11:11:00 organization.

11:11:00 They have to speak individually.

11:11:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I heard many times I may be a member

11:11:17 of T.H.A.N. but I am speaking on behalf of myself

11:11:19 today.

11:11:20 Personally, I think you are going to open a whole can

11:11:22 of worms, personally.

11:11:24 Again I want everybody to be heard.

11:11:26 But under the law, you have to make sure there's due

11:11:29 process that is given to the petitioner, is that right?

11:11:37 And make sure -- they have the burden of proof as

11:11:39 stated earlier.

11:11:40 Under the process we have now, seems to be a good

11:11:46 process because it allows for anybody to get three, up

11:11:50 to five, seven, ten minutes, if they get a speaker

11:11:53 waiver form.

11:11:54 That is a fair process, in my opinion, already, that if

11:11:58 T.H.A.N. or anyone comes in, okay, they say, okay, what

11:12:06 I want all members to sign off on the waiver form and

11:12:08 they still get ten minutes.

11:12:10 It limits them.

11:12:13 The problem comes if you give every group ten minute

11:12:15 and then members in that group decide they want to

11:12:18 talk, then you are going to have issues.

11:12:21 So we will be here --

11:12:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mrs. Vizzi posed an interesting

11:12:29 option this morning, which is a speaker waiver form,

11:12:32 you give up three minutes to give the speaker who wants

11:12:35 to speak one minute, and that's how you get seven

11:12:38 speakers, give you seven minutes, plus your three gets

11:12:41 to ten.

11:12:43 Council can keep that.

11:12:44 Council can amend that.

11:12:46 But that has existed for I don't know how long, but

11:12:50 long before I got here.

11:12:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby, I think the process that we

11:12:57 have been using, we haven't had any problems with it

11:12:59 and I don't see no need to make changes.

11:13:02 If you make changes, go back to the same process.

11:13:06 I say leave it like it is and continue to work on that

11:13:09 same process that we have.

11:13:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's the pleasure of council.

11:13:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Again, I think they are given their

11:13:20 ten minutes now by the statement you just made.

11:13:22 If any organization wants to have ten minutes, all they

11:13:24 need is one speaker who is allowed three minutes and

11:13:28 seven signees who is allowed seven minutes which equals

11:13:32 ten minutes.

11:13:33 And that individual gets that.

11:13:37 Now whether they have the seven individuals here or not

11:13:40 is the question that they have to determine.

11:13:41 >>GWEN MILLER: That's the same process we have now.

11:13:46 So it's the same process we have been using.

11:13:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's true.

11:13:51 And I don't disagree with that.

11:13:52 The argument that I heard against that is when you have

11:13:54 a continued public hearing it's difficult to get seven

11:13:57 people to come back.

11:13:58 Or I have also heard that if it's a neighborhood

11:14:01 organization, and one person has been charged with

11:14:05 coming to council to represent the organization's

11:14:07 views, it sometimes difficult to get seven members of

11:14:10 that organization here at the same time.

11:14:13 And it was represented to council as being burdensome

11:14:16 which is why council asked to be considered.

11:14:20 But that being the case, you have been able to weigh

11:14:22 the decision, and Mr. Miranda, you said you wanted

11:14:25 additional time to act on it.

11:14:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I would like to have, yes.

11:14:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby, you said in a continued

11:14:32 public hearing, sometimes you spoke the first time, you

11:14:34 cannot speak the second time.

11:14:36 So why would you need the second?

11:14:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Well, sometimes what happens, when a

11:14:41 public hearing takes place, and a petitioner gets up

11:14:44 there, before the public hearing even begins and says I

11:14:47 would like the opportunity to continue to work with the

11:14:50 neighborhood, may I continue?

11:14:51 And you have perhaps a room full of people who showed

11:14:54 up for that purpose, normally, council does grant that

11:14:58 continuance to be able to resolve the issues with the

11:15:00 neighborhood, and that sometimes requires the

11:15:02 neighborhood to have to come back the second time.

11:15:04 >>GWEN MILLER: And we just continue, at that first

11:15:10 hearing they cannot speak.

11:15:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Unless we change the rule to and I

11:15:18 clarified that on page 8.

11:15:19 If a quasi-judicial hearing is continued, speakers of a

11:15:23 continued public hearing are limited to the issue that

11:15:25 is the subject of the continuance.

11:15:26 So that they can't come back and make a whole new

11:15:29 presentation.

11:15:30 Speaking about why you are continued.

11:15:34 Anyway, I appreciate council's input and direction.

11:15:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think you wanted to say something.

11:15:47 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.

11:15:50 The issues that I brought up this morning and why to

11:15:54 give three people three minutes to the speaker is

11:15:57 because many times an organization, whatever

11:16:02 organization, has better speakers, and so if that

11:16:08 person can bring out all of the issues, at least the

11:16:11 three people -- this first person has nine minutes now,

11:16:15 you don't have people coming up and repeating the same

11:16:17 thing that maybe you have a continuous -- you have seen

11:16:21 it where they put the presentation up here and

11:16:24 different people come up and read it.

11:16:26 And that's the only thing is that the one person then

11:16:30 would be able to make the whole presentation if you

11:16:36 give the entire three minutes of those other three

11:16:40 people, that person, and those three then couldn't

11:16:42 speak.

11:16:44 We understand that part of it altogether.

11:16:49 That was the reason it was proposed, because we have

11:16:53 had some major issues come up for neighborhoods

11:16:55 recently, and I know other organizations as well.

11:16:59 So that's why we have it.

11:17:04 The other thing that was brought up, and I would like a

11:17:06 little clarification.

11:17:07 When with he spoke about the 5:00, was that for

11:17:13 hearings?

11:17:13 Because that's a big problem to people in neighborhoods

11:17:16 for people who work and that's why it's also difficult

11:17:18 to get people back for the second readings when there

11:17:23 are concerns.

11:17:24 So these are all the things that we have in mind when

11:17:29 we brought it to you.

11:17:31 But as usual, whatever council's decision is, we'll

11:17:35 live with it.

11:17:35 Thank you.

11:17:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thanks very much.

11:17:38 Anything else?

11:17:41 So we are going to bring this back in 30 days, you

11:17:44 said?

11:17:50 November 26th?

11:17:51 >>THE CLERK: That would be the first meeting in

11:17:57 September which is the 2nd.

11:17:58 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:18:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you wish to speak he with me

11:18:04 individually about how to improve your rules of

11:18:06 procedure I am certainly willing.

11:18:15 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor?

11:18:17 Opposes?

11:18:17 New business?

11:18:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Chairman, for some time, most

11:18:22 council members have heard me speak about things that I

11:18:26 feel are in balance, not right, and put a burden on a

11:18:33 lot of individuals that we should not burden.

11:18:39 The section 22-103 speaks about sidewalks, and in lieu

11:18:43 of sidewalks, fees.

11:18:47 I'm offering some changes to that sidewalk ordinance,

11:18:50 and I'll pass them out and let the council members

11:18:54 here -- I'm not doing it for any vote for today.

11:18:57 I just want to bring it up to the colleagues here and

11:19:00 let the chips fall where they may.

11:19:03 But I think time and time again, since May of 15th

11:19:08 of 2009, a young he named Elizabeth park we are the

11:19:13 "St. Pete Times" tack time out to look and see and

11:19:19 understand what we were talking about then, about

11:19:21 different things that changed, and the sidewalk

11:19:25 ordinance.

11:19:26 There is only really only two changes that I would like

11:19:28 to make.

11:19:29 One of them has an A and B part.

11:19:31 And let me read to you what it is.

11:19:36 The amendment change brings two things.

11:19:39 It provides an exception for payment into the sidewalk

11:19:43 trust fund -- and these are all important in my

11:19:47 minds -- no connectivity within three blocks of a

11:19:51 single-family residential building, and no plan to fund

11:19:56 or construct sidewalks in the city capital improvement

11:20:00 plan.

11:20:01 What does that mean?

11:20:03 That means that a lot of parts of this city have

11:20:07 connectivity and sidewalks.

11:20:11 A lot do not.

11:20:12 Most do not.

11:20:13 So that means that you have one lot, a standard 50, 60,

11:20:19 70-foot, 100-foot lots, and that individual is forced

11:20:24 to build a sidewalk.

11:20:30 Now when is that going to be completed?

11:20:32 You mean to tell me we are going to walk a whole block

11:20:37 and we see a 50-foot sidewalk and we are going to jump

11:20:39 to the sidewalk, to walk 50 feet on that sidewalk and

11:20:44 jump back out to the street?

11:20:46 I don't think so.

11:20:47 So what I'm saying is if we, the city, doesn't have a

11:20:51 plan, doesn't have any funding mechanism, doesn't

11:20:55 foresee anything being built there, why are we making

11:20:59 that individual spend $43 a linear foot to pay if he or

11:21:07 she chooses not to?

11:21:09 If 1905 the fee was $19.

11:21:11 It changed to 43 in 2006.

11:21:14 That's quite a jump.

11:21:18 That's A part.

11:21:19 The B part is this.

11:21:21 And you have to realize that all the city is the same

11:21:26 but most of it is different.

11:21:29 If it's determined by the transportation manager, not

11:21:31 I, not us, not we, by his or her designee that a

11:21:38 sidewalk is not practical for reasons like a grand tree

11:21:41 or a protected tree or stormwater ditch or fire hydrant

11:21:45 or any similar utilities, that prohibits that

11:21:49 individual of putting a sidewalk in his or her front

11:21:54 lawn, then you will not have to pay into the sidewalk

11:21:58 trust fund.

11:21:58 Why do I say that?

11:22:02 There are many individuals who have paid into the

11:22:04 sidewalk trust fund simply because in front of their

11:22:09 homes they had a ditch on the city right-of-way.

11:22:15 And talking about a city right-of-way, the law

11:22:18 specifically states -- and I can ask the legal

11:22:20 department to correct me anytime that I say something

11:22:23 out of line -- that all sidewalks must be built on city

11:22:26 rights-of-way.

11:22:28 So what do we do?

11:22:29 We tell the individual, we are sorry that you can't

11:22:33 build a sidewalk because you have an impediment, a

11:22:36 ditch.

11:22:37 Or you have a grand oak in the middle of the

11:22:39 right-of-way.

11:22:41 So for being so helpful, and maintaining the ditch and

11:22:45 maintaining the tree, now you have to pay $43 a linear

11:22:50 foot into the trust fund.

11:22:54 Is that fair?

11:23:00 Think of you being the person that has to pay into this

11:23:02 trust fund and you have no sidewalk and that you are

11:23:05 paying for a sidewalk for somebody else.

11:23:07 Well, that's like raising somebody else's children.

11:23:13 That's how I look at that.

11:23:15 Let me talk about the second exception.

11:23:18 The second exception to payment of sidewalk trust fund

11:23:22 is that the width of the pavement or driveway or

11:23:25 driveways, apron, shall be subtracted when calculating

11:23:30 said contributions.

11:23:31 Let me say why I said that.

11:23:34 The transportation manual says that you should have --

11:23:39 and the good folks in the applications when you are

11:23:43 applying for permitting, you have must have an

11:23:48 entrance, ingress and egress into your home, so that

11:23:52 your automobile can go wherever it's going into the

11:23:54 driveway or to a garage or whatever.

11:23:57 However, if you have an impediment, or you have a

11:24:01 ditch, guess what happens to you.

11:24:05 When they measure your property, let's say for you have

11:24:11 a 100-foot lot, and let's just say that you have a

11:24:14 20-foot apron going in.

11:24:17 Well, they charge you 100-foot because the code is

11:24:24 silent.

11:24:27 I hope it's silent no more.

11:24:29 That 20-foot of what you have already paid for to have

11:24:33 the rate to park your vehicle in your drive or your

11:24:36 garage or whatever, is then measured again from lane to

11:24:41 line as 100 feet without the correction of the 20-foot

11:24:46 you have already paid for.

11:24:48 So now you are paying for it twice.

11:24:56 Just because the code is silence, common sense has not

11:24:59 been used.

11:25:00 This is nothing new.

11:25:02 I have debated.

11:25:03 I have debated.

11:25:04 I have asked those in power -- and not the mayor --

11:25:07 those in power to change that and to change that the

11:25:11 20-foot has already been concrete, built to standards,

11:25:16 approved by all permitting processes, and then it's

11:25:21 done.

11:25:23 But yet you get charged again.

11:25:25 And you have to pay $43 a linear foot into the sidewalk

11:25:29 trust fund.

11:25:31 Those are basically the two items that we are bringing

11:25:36 up for possible change.

11:25:40 I'm not bringing it up today.

11:25:42 I'm bringing it up so that the legal department can

11:25:44 review this.

11:25:52 I don't want to put anything in August because of the

11:25:54 tightness of the agenda but I want my colleagues to

11:25:56 have this way in advance, the neighborhoods to have it,

11:26:01 there will be give and take, there will be someone to

11:26:03 say that's wrong, then let that someone come answer my

11:26:13 phones, let someone come to the one who has paid in the

11:26:16 funds, let that someone one who says I have expanded my

11:26:21 home by 50% and no one told me that's what they say,

11:26:24 and now I have to put a sidewalk not only in front of

11:26:27 my house but the length of my house but also on a ditch

11:26:31 because I have a corner lot and I have to pay $9,000

11:26:33 into the sidewalk trust fund.

11:26:35 I believe that's unfair.

11:26:37 When you talk about taxes or representation -- this is

11:26:41 not a tax.

11:26:49 You showed me a difference between a tax and somebody

11:26:52 built at somebody's property and you get none of yours

11:26:55 and yet you pay for it.

11:26:56 So I think this is a compelling issue for us to review.

11:27:00 And at any time that anybody wants some of these names,

11:27:10 I think the office of Mary Bryant is one that did an

11:27:15 exception job on it and give you the information to

11:27:17 review.

11:27:19 I can tell that you Mr. Parker wrote and saw exactly

11:27:21 what I was talking about.

11:27:23 Sidewalks that go through the center of a block then

11:27:34 the sidewalk is only going gad for half a block because

11:27:36 the on the half doesn't have one.

11:27:38 There's a tree in the middle.

11:27:39 So there's a lot of things, there's even sidewalks that

11:27:41 are built that run into a complete wall.

11:27:47 War they going to do, jump the wall?

11:27:55 I remember one zoning hearing a couple years ago next

11:27:58 to the airport that boarded wetlands, and this council

11:28:02 told that petitioner in so many words, put it in your

11:28:05 property or you don't get the zoning.

11:28:08 They didn't use that word, but that was a reference

11:28:10 that was given.

11:28:11 And I said to them, if I was you, I would build a

11:28:14 sidewalk on my property, put a fence around it.

11:28:23 Because it's your property.

11:28:24 I wasn't trying to be smart.

11:28:25 I wasn't trying to be unreasonable.

11:28:27 I was trying to bring up the fact you can't take

11:28:29 somebody else's property without paying for it.

11:28:31 And these are the things that I have seen for years

11:28:33 here.

11:28:34 And I just want with to you digest this, change this,

11:28:36 speak about it, think about it with the legal

11:28:41 department, but whatever you do, don't speak to me.

11:28:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: For legal to bring it back --

11:28:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The first week in September.

11:28:50 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is there a second?

11:29:01 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

11:29:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:29:02 All in favor?

11:29:03 Opposes?

11:29:04 Okay.

11:29:08 Councilwoman Capin?

11:29:11 Councilman Caetano?

11:29:14 Okay.

11:29:14 I have one memo here.

11:29:15 We have an evening meeting on the 12th of August.

11:29:17 Okay.

11:29:18 I have a memo from Cindy Miller, requesting that we add

11:29:24 the Tampa crosswalk MSP amendment 1 to the agenda at

11:29:30 5:01 p.m.

11:29:31 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.

11:29:32 >> Neighborhood stabilization program, need an item

11:29:41 approved before the deadline.

11:29:42 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Second.

11:29:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All in favor signify by saying Aye.

11:29:47 Opposes?

11:29:50 Give this to the clerk.

11:29:53 The other item, I would just say I want to thank

11:29:56 council for the letter that we sent over to the county

11:30:00 commission yesterday at 2:15, 2:30.

11:30:04 They did approve the renaming of the College Hill

11:30:07 library, a unanimous vote, and also looking at

11:30:16 allocating some funds to help renovate or expand the

11:30:19 library as well.

11:30:20 So it want to thank council again for your support on

11:30:23 that issue.

11:30:23 Okay.

11:30:25 Anything else?

11:30:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to receive and file all the

11:30:30 documents that were submit dad.

11:30:32 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:30:33 All in favor?

11:30:35 >>THE CLERK: I do have one other item.

11:30:37 We received a call from David singer, who is the

11:30:42 campaign head for moving Hillsborough forward.

11:30:45 He would like to be scheduled on September 23rd at

11:30:48 approximately -- for about ten minutes to make a

11:30:50 presentation regarding the campaign, the transit

11:30:56 referendum for Hillsborough County including

11:30:59 PowerPoint.

11:31:00 >> So moved.

11:31:02 >> Second.

11:31:02 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:31:04 The 23rd.

11:31:05 That's a regular meeting?

11:31:06 At what time?

11:31:08 THE CLERK: He didn't specify a time.

11:31:09 He just said September 23rd for ten minutes.

11:31:11 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:31:13 All in favor?

11:31:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What time is that?

11:31:16 I'm sorry.

11:31:18 Under staff reports or under ceremonial?

11:31:21 Do you want it 10:30, first item at 10:positive

11:31:26 30th?

11:31:27 >> Put it under staff report at 10:30, first item.

11:31:29 >>THE CLERK: First item?

11:31:31 Then the only other item I have is to receive and file

11:31:33 the voting conflict form from council member Caetano

11:31:38 regarding the petition 185 was heard last week.

11:31:41 >> So moved to receive and file.

11:31:44 >>

11:31:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Moved and seconded.

11:31:48 All in favor signify by saying Aye.

11:31:50 Opposes?

11:31:52 Okay.

11:31:52 At 1:30.

11:31:53 We have to be back at 1:30.

11:31:55 We shouldn't be any more than about two minutes to

11:31:57 continue one item.

11:31:58 We stand in recess till 1:30 then.

11:32:01 (meeting recessed at 11:32)



This file 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.