Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Thursday, October 6, 2011
9:00 a.m. Session


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.

09:00:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Good morning.

09:08:42 The regular meeting of Tampa City Council is called to

09:08:44 order.

09:08:46 October 6, 2011.

09:08:50 I'd like to introduce Cindy Davis to give our invocation

09:09:04 today.

09:09:05 Cindy is the director of the Trinity Cafe which serves lunch

09:09:17 Monday through Friday to the hungry.

09:09:21 Thank you, Cindy.

09:09:22 Please stand for the invocation and pledge of allegiance.

09:09:25 >> Please join me in a moment of reflection.

09:09:29 It is not necessary to bow your heads or close your eyes.

09:09:33 Instead, look ahead to what you can accomplish by working

09:09:37 together.

09:09:38 Keep your eyes open to the issues we face as a community.

09:09:43 We are grateful for your talent, your reason, and your

09:09:47 insight that can help lead this community to a better

09:09:50 future.

09:09:52 We ask that decisions are made with compassion and mercy,

09:09:57 being mindful of the needs of all of our citizens, those

09:10:00 with homes, jobs, and businesses, and those without.

09:10:05 I pray for the health, happiness and well-being of each of

09:10:09 you especially Councilman Miranda as he recovers from

09:10:12 surgery.

09:10:18 We are grateful for your desire to be fair, to keep an open

09:10:21 mind, to be honest and to serve others.

09:10:23 Let us all be thankful for this day, these opportunities,

09:10:28 these challenges, and especially its blessings.

09:10:32 Amen.

09:10:38 (Pledge of Allegiance)

09:10:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Roll call, please.

09:10:56 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

09:10:59 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Present.

09:10:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

09:11:03 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

09:11:03 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Here.

09:11:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

09:11:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a memo, except I can't find it, but

09:11:22 after roll call, I wanted to read.

09:11:25 We have a memo from Councilman Miranda.

09:11:31 Do you have a copy of the memo from Councilman Miranda that

09:11:33 we all received?

09:11:42 Each of us on council received this memo from Councilman

09:11:45 Miranda after our last meeting, so today is the first time

09:11:51 that we have the opportunity under the Sunshine Law to

09:11:55 respond to the memo.

09:11:56 I'm submitting it here to be entered into the record, and we

09:12:03 can take this question up under agenda approval.

09:12:05 The memo is from September 23rd, 2011, from Charlie

09:12:12 Miranda, City Council chairman, to City Council regarding

09:12:18 telephone participation at City Council, October 6, 2011.

09:12:25 I will be participating by telephone at the October 6, 2011

09:12:30 City Council meeting so that I may vote on the three

09:12:33 solicitation ordinances and the water meter reading services

09:12:37 contract.

09:12:39 Please make arrangements to have the proper equipment

09:12:41 available for my participation at 10:00 a.m.

09:12:46 Thank you.

09:12:50 Now we will move to -- I need a motion for adoption of the

09:12:57 minutes.

09:12:57 >> So moved.

09:12:58 >> Second.

09:12:58 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

09:13:00 Anyone opposed?

09:13:04 And now we will move to a very long addendum to the meeting.

09:13:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt, but ceremony items

09:13:17 usually come first before the approval of the agenda.

09:13:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Ceremonial items?

09:13:22 Okay.

09:13:25 Sorry.

09:13:27 So we will move to item 1, presentation of firefighter of

09:13:33 the quarter from our public safety chair Frank Reddick.

09:13:37 Councilman Reddick.

09:13:38 >>FRANK REDDICK: Good morning, Madam Chair and member of

09:13:45 the council.

09:13:46 It's my pleasure for us to present this morning the fireman

09:13:52 of the quarter, captain Don Bennett.

09:14:03 >> Good morning, council.

09:14:08 It gives us great pleasure this morning, Tom Forward, fire

09:14:17 rescue, will be acknowledging our firefighter of the

09:14:19 quarter.

09:14:20 This individual that I will be presenting to council is a

09:14:22 member that has over 28 years with Tampa Fire Rescue, a

09:14:26 seasoned veteran firefighter, seasoned veteran officer, who

09:14:29 has served this community with absolute utmost

09:14:34 professionalism and has discharged his duty in such an

09:14:37 admiral posture.

09:14:38 Captain Bennett is also assigned to fire station number 17

09:14:45 on Davis Island and one of the major, major contributors

09:14:49 with our $3 million fire boat, so much so that he was also

09:14:54 on the front end of helping to design that 69-foot vessel

09:14:58 and identifying all of the intricacies that it would need to

09:15:02 be able to provide adequate protection to the City of Tampa

09:15:06 and to the entire port of Tampa area.

09:15:09 Along with his duties as a captain with Tampa fire, he is

09:15:14 also a tactical medical response technician assigned to law

09:15:19 enforcement, to TPD when they go out on tactical responses.

09:15:23 He's also a hazardous materials technician.

09:15:26 As now the City of Tampa and port of Tampa brings in over

09:15:29 44% of all the hazardous materials and petroleum product in

09:15:33 the community, and captain Bennett oversees those areas from

09:15:36 the fire boat perch.

09:15:40 He's also a member of Florida task force 3 which is our

09:15:44 search and rescue corps in the event of a man made or

09:15:50 natural disaster as well.

09:15:52 Captain Bennett has deployed on numerous events with respect

09:15:57 to hurricane ravaged issues and again man made and disaster

09:16:03 type of processes.

09:16:04 He's also an instructor with Hillsborough community college,

09:16:07 an instructor with Murray technical center and has been

09:16:13 involved with instructing as the state's firefighters in

09:16:16 Ocala as well.

09:16:17 So he has given and devoted the entire core of his

09:16:21 profession not only providing a service response to this

09:16:24 community but training and developing our team and our corps

09:16:28 that allows us to be that functional component of Tampa Fire

09:16:31 Rescue from the special OP.

09:16:36 He is also a certified paramedic and has been assigned to a

09:16:41 rescue unit as well.

09:16:42 Donny has been in, his 28 years, assigned to the busiest

09:16:46 stations and the heaviest rescue operations in this

09:16:50 community, in our department, and these are just some of the

09:16:53 achievements and some of the accomplishments that allow us

09:16:55 to recommend him and to recognize him as Tampa Fire Rescue

09:17:00 firefighter of the quarter.

09:17:01 Captain Don Bennett.

09:17:03 [ Applause ]

09:17:05 He's accompanied by his wife Kimmie, son Logan, and

09:17:19 son-in-law David McConnie.

09:17:23 >> Captain Bennett, on behalf of the Tampa City Council, we

09:17:26 would like to present you this commendation, recognizing you

09:17:30 as the firefighter of the quarter for the period ending

09:17:36 October 2011. Congratulations.

09:17:39 [ Applause ]

09:17:40 >> Do you want me to speak?

09:17:47 >> Well, you can do that after.

09:17:49 >> Steve Stickley representing Stepps towing service, on

09:17:54 behalf of Jim, Judy, Todd Stepp, we would like to present

09:17:58 this plaque, token of our appreciation for a job well done,

09:18:01 and also a gift card to Lee Roy Selmon's.

09:18:06 Thank you very much.

09:18:06 >> I'm Frank DeSoto with Bill Currie Ford Lincoln.

09:18:16 It's our pleasure on behavior of the curry family and all

09:18:19 the employees of Bill Currie Ford to congratulate you on a

09:18:23 job well done.

09:18:23 >> I'm with Straz center for the performing arts.

09:18:30 We have two tickets for the Celtic performance.

09:18:39 >> The roses but they are not for you, they are for your

09:18:48 missus.

09:18:49 >> Thank you very much.

09:18:50 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I have a couple questions.

09:19:04 What do you do in your free time?

09:19:06 >> Nothing much.

09:19:07 >> I have a charity.

09:19:11 >> It depends on what you ask me to do.

09:19:13 >> I don't have a charity.

09:19:14 On behalf of Bern's, we would like to present you with a

09:19:18 $100 gift certificate and enjoy dinner and hopefully the

09:19:22 roses will still be fresh.

09:19:23 And also Bryn Allen studios, we are going to provide with

09:19:26 you a photographic package for you and your family, go and

09:19:29 have your portraits done.

09:19:30 I have a quick story for you, though. A few years ago, a

09:19:34 visiting dignitary wanted to visit the port and wanted to go

09:19:37 on the fire boat to see all the different aspects of the

09:19:39 port. Do you remember this story?

09:19:41 >> I do.

09:19:43 [ Laughter ]

09:19:44 >>STEVE MICHELINI: And he wasn't quite used to be out on

09:19:47 the water on a really, really hot day.

09:19:50 And it was a little, well, diesel fumes were coming up.

09:19:56 >> They were.

09:19:57 >> So I won't go any further but it wasn't as pleasant

09:20:01 experience as he hoped but it wasn't your fault.

09:20:02 >> This is true.

09:20:04 [ Laughter ]

09:20:06 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We still congratulate you for what you

09:20:09 do and it was an effort that goes way beyond normal for the

09:20:12 fire rescue people, and we always appreciate what you do.

09:20:16 But it was funny because the gentleman was dressed in a very

09:20:21 tight suit and he didn't enjoy himself.

09:20:23 But we always enjoy fire rescue and the fire boats, and they

09:20:26 do protect us, and we appreciate that.

09:20:28 >> Thank you. I appreciate it.

09:20:33 [ Applause ]

09:20:36 I appreciate the acknowledgment, but, now, we are the ones

09:20:38 that serve the public.

09:20:39 We are the ones that are seen.

09:20:41 But if it weren't for the folks that support us, we wouldn't

09:20:43 be here, and that's the people in communications that do a

09:20:46 great job, supply, they are always there with us, and the

09:20:49 maintenance division.

09:20:51 I want to say a shout-out to them because they are always

09:20:54 there, EMS, and they put up with us.

09:20:58 If it wasn't for them we wouldn't be here.

09:21:00 And I appreciate this award.

09:21:03 Thank you very much.

09:21:05 [ Applause ]

09:21:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

09:21:27 Now we will move to the approval of the agenda.

09:21:34 Madam clerk.

09:21:34 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Shirley Foxx-Knowles, city clerk.

09:21:39 Just to briefly review the addendum to the agenda for

09:21:42 October 6, 2011, we have a substitution of agenda items

09:21:48 under substitution of agenda items.

09:21:51 Item 17, we have a memorandum from Robert A.rose, director

09:21:57 of the Tampa Convention Center requesting that the agreement

09:22:01 attached to said resolution be substituted.

09:22:06 This is for resolution approval and agreement between the

09:22:10 Board of County Commissioners of Hillsborough County and the

09:22:14 City of Tampa for the allocation of tourist development tax

09:22:18 funds from Hillsborough County to the City of Tampa.

09:22:24 Item 59, we have a memorandum from the legal department

09:22:28 requesting a continuance to October 20th, 2011.

09:22:33 This pertains to changes to chapter 5 of the City of Tampa

09:22:39 code.

09:22:41 Under item 62, we have a memorandum from the legal

09:22:45 department transmitting substitute resolution that pertains

09:22:51 to a water easement located at 9891 delaney creek Boulevard.

09:22:59 Under removal of items from the agenda, item number 2, we

09:23:04 have a verbal request of chair pro tem to remove the said

09:23:09 item from the agenda.

09:23:14 Under special notes to the agenda as noted by the chair pro

09:23:19 tem, we have a memorandum from chair Miranda indicating that

09:23:26 he will be participating by telephone regarding items 57 and

09:23:33 58. Also, item 38. 57 and 58.

09:23:50 Items being removed from the agenda, we have a request for

09:23:58 items 34 through 37 to be pulled for discussion.

09:24:04 This is via e-mail from council member Montelione.

09:24:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, madam clerk.

09:24:16 I wanted to ask Councilwoman Montelione, did you want those

09:24:20 to be under staff reports or did you want to address them

09:24:23 under your committee report?

09:24:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Staff report is fine so that we can move

09:24:28 things forward.

09:24:29 >>MARY MULHERN: So we'll add that to the addendum.

09:24:33 And then I would like to move -- to not make a motion but to

09:24:39 move the special notes for the meeting, item 57 and 58, I

09:24:44 would like to take that up separately after we approve the

09:24:49 rest of the agenda.

09:24:51 So if there's a motion to approve the agenda except for the

09:24:56 special note to the meeting agenda, and then we can take

09:24:58 that up after --

09:25:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So moved.

09:25:02 >> Second.

09:25:04 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

09:25:05 Anyone opposed?

09:25:13 Items 57 and 58 were the requests by Councilman Miranda to

09:25:22 be able to vote electronically on three items that are on

09:25:27 our agenda today.

09:25:28 And as I said earlier at roll call, this council meeting is

09:25:33 the first opportunity that council has had to respond to

09:25:38 that memo, and I believe that this is the appropriate time

09:25:43 to do that because this is our approval of the agenda.

09:25:46 So we need to deal with this at the beginning of the meeting

09:25:50 as a council.

09:25:58 Since receiving Mr. Miranda's memo, I have reviewed our

09:26:03 governing documents, which are the city charter, the

09:26:08 council's rules of procedure, and Robert's Rules of Order.

09:26:14 Until yesterday, to my knowledge, all of those documents

09:26:17 were silent on the question.

09:26:20 So as far as I know, at least in my memory -- memory and

09:26:27 definitely since I have been on council, this council never

09:26:29 had anyone vote electronically because they were unable to

09:26:32 attend the meeting.

09:26:39 We do have a discussion on the agenda for November 3rd.

09:26:42 So we were anticipating that plan to discuss it.

09:26:46 But yesterday -- and this is our City Council meeting, this

09:26:52 is our official public business right now, so whatever you

09:26:55 read in the paper today, this is going to be different,

09:26:58 because this is us attending to our business, because

09:27:03 yesterday, after I had spoken with a reporter, I went to a

09:27:10 local book store, Ingrid books, and I bought the new copy,

09:27:18 the revised 2011 edition of Robert's Rules of Order, which I

09:27:25 had in my mind that was coming out, and it turns out it just

09:27:31 came out like a week or two ago.

09:27:33 So I have had this for -- I have been reading a lot, and I

09:27:40 had it for a little bit.

09:27:41 So this changes our approach to this decision about whether

09:27:50 to have an electronic vote today or not

09:27:58 On page 97 in here -- and I believe Mr. Shelby was able to

09:28:03 get a copy of this last night, too, is that correct?

09:28:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I learned last night that Robert's Rules

09:28:11 of Order, I had been informed that it was going to be

09:28:14 released mid October.

09:28:17 I did not know until last night that it had been released

09:28:21 and I was able to make it to the book store last night

09:28:24 before it closed to purchase a copy.

09:28:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

09:28:27 On page 97, I'm going to read a couple things.

09:28:31 But what has happened is they have added -- well, I said

09:28:37 this earlier -- this book was silent on electronic meetings.

09:28:42 There was no direction in there, even though every

09:28:46 legislative body in the country, probably in most of the

09:28:50 world, uses this as their parliamentary rules.

09:28:53 It didn't say anything about electronic meetings, even

09:28:56 though public boards have been using them in different ways

09:29:00 for 20 or 30 years.

09:29:02 So they now have a new section called electronic meetings,

09:29:07 and I'm going to read you just the first paragraph.

09:29:12 It says: Extension of parliamentary law to electronic

09:29:16 meetings.

09:29:20 Except as authorized in the bylaws, the business of an

09:29:24 organization or board can be validly transacted only at a

09:29:30 regular or properly-called meeting that is as defined on

09:29:37 pages 81 and 82, a single official gathering in one room or

09:29:43 area of the assembly of its members at which a quorum is

09:29:49 present.

09:29:52 There's a lot more here, but what it boils down to is they

09:29:55 decided that it's permissible to have electronic meeting and

09:30:03 participation by telephone or by Internet participation.

09:30:05 However, you can only do that if you have rules for the

09:30:10 conduct of that meeting in your bylaws.

09:30:16 So that's where we are as far as our rules of order here.

09:30:25 Council rules, that's in our rules of procedure, says that

09:30:31 Robert's Rules of Order newly revised shall govern the

09:30:36 proceedings of the City Council in all cases, not provided

09:30:40 for in these rules of procedure.

09:30:44 So we have a complete loop here where between Robert's Rules

09:30:49 of Order and our -- adopted by the council rules of

09:30:55 procedure, they both say, these become the rules of

09:31:00 procedure if it's not addressed in our rules of procedure,

09:31:05 which it's not, and this also says that -- so this

09:31:11 basically, this is what determines what our rules are.

09:31:21 Okay, I'm sorry, I have read all -- okay, I have read all of

09:31:26 the Florida attorneys general opinions that were provided to

09:31:30 me by our City Council attorney, Mr. Shelby, and I also read

09:31:36 a law review article that summarized them, and the summary

09:31:40 was that they all said different things, and none of them

09:31:43 really got to the crux of it.

09:31:46 That law review article was written in 2010.

09:31:49 Now we have rules in Robert's Rules of Order.

09:31:53 So it may be that that was part of the problem.

09:32:01 While some of the opinions do advise that Florida boards and

09:32:03 committees advise Florida boards and committees when and how

09:32:08 electronic voting may be permissible, the fact that the

09:32:12 opinions were requested in every case was because the bodies

09:32:17 had no rules of procedure for electronic voting, and there

09:32:21 is no state statute governing electronic meetings for local

09:32:25 boards.

09:32:26 There is a statute for state-appointed boards, but for

09:32:29 local, municipal, and city, the state doesn't say anything.

09:32:32 So when these other agencies, the asked the attorney general

09:32:42 over the years for an opinion, it was because there were no

09:32:45 rules on the books, and they needed that opinion.

09:32:48 So had we not gotten this revised rules of order just

09:32:52 yesterday, that would have been the logical step for us to

09:32:57 do today, would be to request an attorney general opinion,

09:33:00 because we didn't have any rules to go by.

09:33:02 But today we have rules.

09:33:05 So I don't, you know, personally don't think that's

09:33:08 necessary, but if council wanted to do it, we could talk

09:33:11 about that.

09:33:12 So while our city attorney may advise us that these opinions

09:33:16 support allowing electronic vote today, we now have rules of

09:33:19 procedure -- I just said that, and I am reading it over --

09:33:23 that state we cannot allow it unless it is delineated in our

09:33:27 bylaws.

09:33:29 The government has sought the AG opinions were very likely

09:33:33 doing so because there were no parliamentary rules in place

09:33:36 to guide them.

09:33:38 So this council has no reason to consult those opinions as

09:33:44 the question has been settled by the parliamentary rules of

09:33:50 Robert's Rules of Order, which we have adopted.

09:33:54 So we do not have a procedure -- we do not have a process to

09:34:03 allow voting electronically.

09:34:05 Our adopted bylaws in Robert's Rules of Order state that

09:34:08 electronic voting must be prescribed in the bylaws in order

09:34:12 to be allowed.

09:34:14 Roberts rules also advises that if electronic voting is

09:34:22 allowed by the bylaws, additional rules of conduct should be

09:34:24 submitted and they have suggested language in the book.

09:34:27 So when we do have our meeting to discuss whether to adopt

09:34:33 new bylaws on this, we have guidelines in here about at

09:34:37 least some of the things that we should consider.

09:34:40 We have a scheduled discussion on November 3rd at which

09:34:43 time council as a body can arrive at a vote on the rules and

09:34:48 procedures should we wish to change them, and these new

09:34:55 rules could throw into question the legality of a vote by

09:35:00 telephone today should council vote to allow it.

09:35:04 Because we now have these new rules.

09:35:10 I'm almost done.

09:35:11 I know I'm taking a long time.

09:35:14 But not only procedurally and legally -- I got that you want

09:35:20 to speak -- but for substantive reasons, I feel a vote by

09:35:24 telephone today is not just problematic but an abdication of

09:35:30 our responsibility as a body to create, adopt and follow our

09:35:33 rules in our public meeting.

09:35:37 We are the legislative body of this city government, the

09:35:41 law-making branch.

09:35:45 These regularly scheduled meetings are public assembles, the

09:35:49 place where we hear from those that elected us and where

09:35:53 they hear from us.

09:35:56 If today we were to ignore our own adopted rules of

09:36:00 procedure without council's deliberation at this public

09:36:05 meeting, we abdicate our authority and responsibility as a

09:36:11 legislative board.

09:36:12 To allow the ad hoc vote at the direction, that this memo is

09:36:20 not a request from Councilman Miranda but a direction of our

09:36:25 absent chairman to concede our individual elected duty to

09:36:31 our constituents.

09:36:34 He wanted to direct this council to allow something that --

09:36:41 and I don't -- I don't begrudge Mr. Miranda.

09:36:45 I wish he was here today.

09:36:47 I was hoping that I would come in and he would have been

09:36:49 come to the meeting and we wouldn't have had to have all

09:36:51 this discussion.

09:36:54 This is nothing personal.

09:36:56 I miss him, I have utmost respect for him, I'm praying for

09:36:59 him, I think we all miss him.

09:37:03 But this is about the fact that if one person on council

09:37:06 dictates what we can do, then we are not acting as the board

09:37:11 that we are.

09:37:20 So takes chair, I want to read the definition of chair.

09:37:25 I have it in here somewhere.

09:37:26 As the chair -- and I refer you again to Robert's Rules of

09:37:29 Order for the definition of chair -- the term "the chair"

09:37:36 refers to the person in a meeting who is actually presiding

09:37:40 at the time.

09:37:41 Whether that person is the regular presiding officer or not.

09:37:51 Per our rules of procedure, the chair decides the question

09:37:54 of rules of procedure, and I as chair, sitting as chair,

09:38:01 have decided against allowing a vote by telephone today by

09:38:04 Chairman Miranda.

09:38:07 Or Councilman Miranda.

09:38:17 You have one more question, and then I am done, for our

09:38:21 attorney.

09:38:21 Our rules also state that the chair's decision shall stand

09:38:26 unless reversed by a majority vote of council of the

09:38:31 So what I'm saying to you is, you need to decide.

09:38:39 I, as chair, have made my decision, but council as a body

09:38:44 has the right to -- is it overrule the decision?

09:38:53 To reverse the decision by a majority.

09:38:55 And I have one question.

09:39:02 Mr. Shelby, I will ask you this question later.

09:39:04 Councilwoman Capin and then Councilman Suarez.

09:39:10 >>YVONNE CAPIN: What I would like to hear is from our City

09:39:14 Council attorney on the very issue, lack of bylaws reference

09:39:27 to electronic voting, and the Robert's Rules of Order.

09:39:33 From what I understood Councilwoman Mulhern speak is that

09:39:40 that is in our bylaws, that Robert's Rules of Order --

09:39:49 please explain it for us.

09:39:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: As best as I can answer your question,

09:39:57 council member Capin, the chair did state the rules, and

09:40:03 specifically I believe she was referring to the

09:40:09 parliamentary -- policy under rule 4.

09:40:14 She referred to rule L, which I believe is the subject of

09:40:17 what you said, that is rule 4-L, Robert's Rules of Order

09:40:21 newly revised shall govern the proceedings of the City

09:40:24 Council, in all cases not provided for in these rules of

09:40:27 procedure, and she also did reference rule K that says the

09:40:32 chair shall decide all questions of procedure and that

09:40:36 decision shall stand unless reversed by majority vote of

09:40:38 council.

09:40:38 Those are what the rules state.

09:40:40 And that was what was stated by Ms. Mulhern.

09:40:44 I don't know whether that answers your question.

09:40:48 Are you asking for anything more than that?

09:40:51 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Well, I was just wondering, in absence of

09:40:53 this being in our bylaws, which we are taking up in

09:40:56 November, if an ordinance that is passed today could be

09:41:01 challenged simply because though rules were not followed

09:41:05 that we have in our very own bylaws?

09:41:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You are asking a question of law that is a

09:41:12 relevant question.

09:41:13 What I respectfully ask City Council, based on this

09:41:17 information that has just been provided to you and to me and

09:41:21 Mr. Shimberg, that council will grant us the opportunity for

09:41:25 a ten-minute recess so that I may confer with the city

09:41:28 attorney on this.

09:41:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Can't we have our -- what's your pleasure?

09:41:48 Why don't we hear from counsel.

09:41:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Again, the question is, I'm concerned that

09:41:58 the -- again, I think that was clear, your response was,

09:42:05 that lacking the direction or the rules in our bylaws, that

09:42:11 should we take this up, this vote, any vote, any ordinance,

09:42:17 passed, could be challenged.

09:42:20 That's my concern.

09:42:32 I'll wait.

09:42:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I am going to go along the same lines as

09:42:37 what council member Capin is saying.

09:42:40 Here is the question I have.

09:42:41 Obviously, we did not know there was going to be a revised

09:42:46 edition just before we are going to vote on this.

09:42:50 I'm sure you didn't either.

09:42:52 But there may be other rules inside Robert's Rules of Order

09:42:55 that are conflicting with what our own rules may even be.

09:43:00 The question I have -- and this goes back to what she

09:43:03 said -- which is, do courts look at Robert's Rules of Order

09:43:10 as a legitimate basis for taking a case against a city?

09:43:15 Secondly, we still have -- we still have the wherewithal to

09:43:21 make our own rules regardless of what it says in terms of

09:43:24 Robert's Rules of Order do. We have to change that saying

09:43:26 that in absence of a rule it always goes to Robert's Rules

09:43:29 of Order?

09:43:30 Because there are lots of different circumstances that are

09:43:32 not going to be Robert's Rules of Order.

09:43:34 So my question is -- and I know Robert's Rules of Order

09:43:38 universally is looked at as a way to kind of run meetings.

09:43:41 They run meetings from, you know, as small as somebody's

09:43:45 nonprofit all the way up to larger governments.

09:43:49 So my question is, there may be a lot of things in Robert's

09:43:53 Rules of Order revised edition that may in conflict to what

09:43:57 our own rules are.

09:43:59 I mean in, my mind, state law, county ordinance, city

09:44:05 ordinances control this board, and we make our own rules.

09:44:07 So can we continue to make our own rules and vote to allow

09:44:12 that without fear of reprisal by the courts?

09:44:16 And that I think you are going to have to ask with your

09:44:19 questions between yourself and Mr. Shimberg.

09:44:22 But I'm along the same lines.

09:44:25 Think we can make our own rules.

09:44:27 I don't think we are going to have a problem with.

09:44:29 That I don't think we are going to get sued if we decide to

09:44:31 vote in order to allow Mr. Miranda to vote today.

09:44:35 Now, we are in the 21st century.

09:44:37 I don't see any reason why we can't have some kind of rule,

09:44:40 and that's something we are going to discuss in November.

09:44:42 And because of the circumstances, and getting back to chair

09:44:46 pro tem's statement about what the meaning of "chair" is,

09:44:51 "chair" in my mind -- and it's defined in lots of different

09:44:56 ways -- he's still the chair, even with his absence.

09:44:59 Chair pro tem is obviously a position that we need in order

09:45:02 to run the meeting if he is absent for any reason.

09:45:05 But it doesn't mean that he's no longer the chair.

09:45:08 Because there is no rule, it's my understanding, based on

09:45:11 conversations with Mr. Shimberg and Mr. Shelby, he still has

09:45:14 the right to say that he can do that, just as you have the

09:45:18 right now to say you can't do that.

09:45:21 So and that was one of the main questions I had with the

09:45:25 legal folks, which is how does this work, now?

09:45:29 Because you have someone who is present, who is by

09:45:31 definition chairing the meeting, and by definition someone

09:45:34 who is already a chairman who can say, I would like to do

09:45:37 something.

09:45:38 So I think we are going to have to sort this out with the

09:45:40 legal eagles over here and see what else we can come up

09:45:43 with.

09:45:51 >>HARRY COHEN: Just along the lines with Mr. Suarez's

09:45:55 comment, the city attorney, the conference you are going to

09:45:59 have during the ten-minute recess.

09:46:02 Would it not be possible for the council simply to adopt the

09:46:08 tenth edition of Robert's Rules of Order as our rules as

09:46:11 opposed to the eleventh?

09:46:12 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would like to discuss that.

09:46:18 >>HARRY COHEN: You can answer that after the thing.

09:46:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would like to be able to do that.

09:46:23 >>HARRY COHEN: That might be an option.

09:46:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Shelby, I would like you to read from

09:46:28 the Robert's Rules of Order.

09:46:31 >>HARRY COHEN: Well, they can bring us back the answer

09:46:35 after the --

09:46:38 >> Should we hear the rest of council?

09:46:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Don't anyone forget their questions.

09:46:42 Councilman Reddick.

09:46:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Madam Chair.

09:46:48 To our attorney, isn't it true that if we make our own rules

09:46:54 as a council, we can also wave our rules as a council?

09:47:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The answer to the question simply is yes,

09:47:03 and you have done so.

09:47:04 >>FRANK REDDICK: So if we wanted to allow Chairman Miranda

09:47:10 to vote today, we can waive the rules and move forward?

09:47:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's council's pleasure, pursuant to

09:47:18 council's rules, and I will read that to you.

09:47:20 And that's rule 9, amendment B.

09:47:25 Any of the foregoing rules may be temporarily suspended for

09:47:28 the meeting then in session by a super majority vote of five

09:47:32 or more members of council, unless such waiver is in

09:47:36 conflict with the city charter or state or local law.

09:47:40 >>FRANK REDDICK: So instead of taking ten minutes of

09:47:46 council time as attorneys to discuss these questions, isn't

09:47:52 it the simple solution to this to waive the rule of council

09:47:57 and move forward?

09:48:00 It seems to me we don't need attorneys to go meet when we

09:48:04 can simply just waive the rules and move forward.

09:48:07 If we grant him the opportunity, or we say not grant him the

09:48:13 opportunity, but I don't see the need to have the city

09:48:17 attorney and council attorney to go take ten minutes of our

09:48:23 time which is not going to be ten, it's going to last 15,

09:48:26 and it's going to be more than ten -- it always happens

09:48:29 that way -- and then if you give us ten minutes, give them

09:48:32 ten minutes, we are not coming back in ten minutes, and we

09:48:35 are going to drag back in later than ten so, it seems to me

09:48:40 there's a simple solution to this problem.

09:48:42 All we have to do is waive the rules, move forward, either

09:48:46 grant him his opportunity or say no, because I read in the

09:48:54 paper, also talked to reporters, but read this morning, Mr.

09:48:57 Miranda stated if he doesn't have opportunity to vote today,

09:49:00 when he comes back later this month, he's going to bring the

09:49:02 issue back up anyway.

09:49:04 So we are going to be back in here again.

09:49:07 So we either do this, or Mr. Miranda, if you are watching,

09:49:10 call in now and tell us you withdraw your request, we wait

09:49:14 till you come back and we move on.

09:49:16 One or two.

09:49:17 But I don't think -- we can waive the rules and move

09:49:22 forward.

09:49:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione.

09:49:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Madam Chair.

09:49:29 Contemplating a vote by electronic means came up back in

09:49:33 July when my fiancée's mother passed away and I had to

09:49:37 suddenly travel to Pittsburgh, and at that time, I had

09:49:41 requested our city attorney, Mr. Shimberg, Mr. Shelby, our

09:49:47 council attorney, and other attorneys staff, Julie Cole, and

09:49:55 they researched, and at that time the answer was that it was

09:49:58 permissible, it would require a waiver of the rules as

09:50:06 Councilman Reddick pointed out, and I had wanted to have the

09:50:11 discussion about amending our rules at that time when I came

09:50:18 back and it was suggested that we wait until Councilman

09:50:26 Miranda returned as chair, in deference to the chair, before

09:50:30 we have a discussion to change our rules.

09:50:32 In retrospect, I wish that I had not agreed to wait until

09:50:37 chair Miranda returned, because we would have discussed this

09:50:40 issue, we would have all voiced our opinions on whether or

09:50:44 not to allow members in extenuating circumstances emergency

09:50:51 reasons, not because you decide to attend your child's

09:50:57 baseball game or attend a conference out of town, but for

09:51:02 emergency situations that you had no control over but yet

09:51:07 wanted to weigh in on an important subject coming before

09:51:11 this board.

09:51:13 So saying that, hindsight is 20-20, but the question that I

09:51:20 had about the new release of Robert's Rules of Order is that

09:51:25 the request of chair Miranda to vote came before -- I don't

09:51:33 know if it came before the publish date of the book or

09:51:38 before any of us in the city or any parliamentarians who are

09:51:42 professionals in the area had obtained a copy of the book,

09:51:47 and so my question to -- thank you for returning to the

09:51:55 room -- my question to our legal staff, our council attorney

09:52:02 and our city attorney, would be a question of timing.

09:52:05 Since this agenda item was scheduled prior to anyone knowing

09:52:10 that the new edition, the eleventh edition of Robert's Rules

09:52:13 of Order would be published, it was scheduled before we knew

09:52:20 that it would be released since everyone was under the

09:52:23 impression it would be mid October.

09:52:25 So at chair Miranda's memo that he would be voting by

09:52:33 electronic means or telephonically was received prior to

09:52:36 this edition perhaps even being published is one question I

09:52:40 have.

09:52:41 And speaking to the challenges, possible to the ordinance,

09:52:47 as Councilwoman Capin pointed out, we were all concerned

09:52:51 about that.

09:52:52 And from what I understand, or at least from what I

09:52:55 concluded in my own research and my own conclusions, is that

09:53:00 some of the parts of the ordinances that we may or may not

09:53:04 pass are open to challenge anyway.

09:53:06 So there are many reasons why these ordinances may be

09:53:10 challenged, this being one of them.

09:53:13 So does this one have any more weight than the other

09:53:16 challenges that we might face in court if we pass the

09:53:19 ordinances as they are presented to us?

09:53:21 I don't know.

09:53:22 It's anybody's guess.

09:53:25 So that's my piece, and --

09:53:30 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm going to recognize you in a minute, but

09:53:32 I want to read --

09:53:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE: To conclude, I see Councilman's

09:53:37 Reddick's point because I am not one for dragging things on

09:53:40 either.

09:53:40 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to answer her question, because this

09:53:46 is part of my argument, and it answers her questions.

09:53:50 This eleventh edition supersedes all previous editions and

09:53:55 is intended automatically to become the parliamentary

09:54:00 authority in organizations whose bylaws prescribe Robert's

09:54:05 Rules of Order.

09:54:07 That's what our bylaws do, we prescribe this as our rules.

09:54:12 Robert's Rules of Order newly revised, or the current

09:54:16 edition of, any of these titles or the like without

09:54:20 specifying a particular edition.

09:54:23 The bylaws specifically identify one of the ten previous

09:54:26 editions of the work as parliamentary authority, the bylaws

09:54:30 should be amended to prescribe the current edition of

09:54:34 Robert's Rules of Order newly revised.

09:54:37 I believe our bylaws state Robert's Rules of Order currently

09:54:42 revised.

09:54:43 Council, do we want to vote before we hear from our attorney

09:54:49 on whether you want their opinion now, or you want them to

09:54:51 have ten minutes?

09:54:56 >>JIM SHIMBERG: If I could speak for ten seconds.

09:54:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Is that okay?

09:55:02 >>JIM SHIMBERG: Jim Shimberg, city attorney.

09:55:03 I just received word that Mr. Miranda is on his way in.

09:55:06 So you may want to delay this till he gets here or not.

09:55:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, if Mr. Miranda is on his way in, we

09:55:13 can suspend this discussion because we are going to have it

09:55:17 in November, and when he gets here, he chairs the meeting.

09:55:20 >> Perfect.

09:55:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

09:55:46 We have 30 minutes for public comment.

09:55:48 And each speaker is limited to three minutes.

09:55:51 So please do come forward.

09:55:55 We are having a long meeting already.

09:55:57 So let's come forward.

09:56:00 And please speak on items on the agenda first.

09:56:03 So if you are speaking on something that's not on the

09:56:07 agenda, please be toward the back of the line.

09:56:11 Thank you.

09:56:11 >> I'm Ed Tillou.

09:56:17 I come to speak about a lot of things, but I'll postpone

09:56:21 four of them to a future meeting whenever that will be.

09:56:24 I'll address agenda items.

09:56:26 First is item 55 about curbs and sidewalks.

09:56:32 Some sidewalk construction is being done now, reconstruction

09:56:37 is being done in sulfur spring on Nebraska Avenue.

09:56:40 That's wasted money.

09:56:42 Because it's being done in the way things have always been

09:56:45 done and is being done wrongly.

09:56:47 I don't really care if a sidewalk is eight or nine feet

09:56:51 wide.

09:56:52 I would be glad to have a sidewalk five feet wide if it

09:56:56 wasn't with bicycles coming at you.

09:56:59 Very few people use the sidewalks.

09:57:01 And the thing is, you are actually jeopardized to a certain

09:57:06 extent by the bicycles that do not have a bicycle lane.

09:57:10 And the bicycle lanes could be created out of the sidewalks

09:57:14 by making them narrower.

09:57:16 And this is where there's need for a continuous review of

09:57:21 this work that's probably been in the shelves for years and

09:57:24 years.

09:57:29 One of the ultimate traffic devices is not speed tables,

09:57:31 which are horrible, but narrower lanes.

09:57:36 The thing is Nebraska Avenue already has narrow lanes.

09:57:39 They are only about eight and a half feet wide.

09:57:41 I thought they were nine feet wide.

09:57:43 So could you take a half a foot on each lane and slow the

09:57:46 traffic down a little bit, but you might not want to do that

09:57:49 on Nebraska Avenue.

09:57:53 But in any case, item 55.

09:57:57 With respect to the mayor going to the city of New York

09:57:59 trying to get improved rapport and things, New York -- I'm

09:58:04 originally from New York.

09:58:06 Haven't been there in 30 years.

09:58:07 I went back to visit once or twice.

09:58:09 And the thing is a friend of mine that went up there told

09:58:12 me, as a result of 9-11 is no longer very liberal, it's

09:58:18 extremely very conservative, and that might have been

09:58:21 changed a little bit by the economic collapse, because a lot

09:58:24 of people used to work for the stockbrokers and laymen and

09:58:29 things like that.

09:58:30 They are now possibly beggars themselves on sidewalks.

09:58:33 And it doesn't take a great leap of intelligence to realize

09:58:37 that panhandling in other places has to be done from the

09:58:40 streets.

09:58:41 So that also bears on cushioned sidewalk.

09:58:45 Item 26 about stormwater management, it's about water

09:58:51 management but we'll say stormwater management, there's

09:58:54 always too much focus on the pipes.

09:58:56 When I worked with the Maryland Department of Health and

09:59:03 hygiene I found the inlets are often not large enough, and

09:59:06 in the case of Nebraska and Linebaugh, you have a pond that

09:59:10 is not percolating.

09:59:12 So a total focus on pipes isn't enough.

09:59:17 (Bell sounds)

09:59:18 I do get another 30 seconds?

09:59:21 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

09:59:22 Sorry.

09:59:22 >> I was here two weeks ago on the 22nd talking about the

09:59:37 same issue.

09:59:38 I'm here to speak about the solicitation ban.

09:59:41 Just on the 2nd, just Sunday, there were eight members

09:59:46 from the post office collecting money for muscular

09:59:50 dystrophy.

09:59:51 God bless 'em.

09:59:52 There were four paper guys and four panhandlers all at one

09:59:57 intersection.

09:59:59 This is not going to get nothing but worse on Sunday.

10:00:01 When you take away six days, everybody is going to be out

10:00:04 there.

10:00:05 There is going to be 20 or more people at every

10:00:09 intersection, not to mention if you say just the panhandlers

10:00:13 have to go, now you are violating Constitutional laws.

10:00:16 I work out there to keep my family together.

10:00:20 This pays my rent, buys my food, keeps our clothes clean.

10:00:28 Nobody is offering us jobs.

10:00:30 There is no work out here.

10:00:36 I'm trying to stay calm.

10:00:41 It's going to be chaos if we are not able to do this.

10:00:45 A lot of people pay for the shelters and everything.

10:00:50 Their motel rooms.

10:00:51 Everybody lives off the money that they get all week long.

10:00:54 If you think the streets have a lot of people sleeping in

10:00:56 them now, when you take this away, there's going to be a lot

10:01:00 more.

10:01:01 A lot more.

10:01:02 If you have ever been by the Salvation Army downtown at

10:01:07 night, there's 30 people sleeping on the sidewalk.

10:01:10 There's going to be 90.

10:01:15 They are already trying to limit how many times a church can

10:01:22 feed in parks.

10:01:23 I don't receive food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare or

10:01:27 Hillsborough County insurance.

10:01:28 I support everything by what I do out here.

10:01:31 My customers -- I'm not out here just begging.

10:01:36 I sell products.

10:01:38 I sell refreshments.

10:01:39 Mostly to the military.

10:01:41 Also to executives.

10:01:43 I mean, I sell to everyone.

10:01:47 I have upped the sales percentage at the store across from

10:01:52 me, 900 percent on their refreshments through one week.

10:01:55 And I do this day in, every day.

10:02:00 My costs are high, but I have to make profits.

10:02:05 If you all stop this, we're homeless.

10:02:09 And I'm talking about within a day.

10:02:12 Please think about this.

10:02:14 I understand that you all said it's a safety issue.

10:02:18 Like I said before, it's as simple as setting some

10:02:21 guidelines.

10:02:22 Don't allow people out there doing green lights.

10:02:25 I'm not out there doing green lights.

10:02:26 When it red, I go through.

10:02:29 Before it green, I am off.

10:02:31 There is no safety issue.

10:02:33 There's no cars moving when I'm out there.

10:02:35 (Bell sounds)

10:02:37 I sell and I'm gone.

10:02:39 Please.

10:02:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:02:44 Next.

10:02:44 >> Good morning members of council.

10:02:49 My name is Bill Hauf, owner and president of Island Travel

10:02:53 and Tours, one of the three companies that will be flying to

10:02:56 Cuba from Tampa International Airport.

10:03:00 We are unique because we will be starting on Sunday

10:03:02 departures on November 6th.

10:03:04 The reason I'm here is because there has been a lot of

10:03:07 discussions about the history behind the airport being

10:03:09 approved.

10:03:10 And I want to read a letter which I will ask to be read into

10:03:13 the record later.

10:03:14 But let me read from it because of the limited time.

10:03:17 Dear mayor and members of the City Council: On September

10:03:20 22nd, 2011 the City Council of Tampa Bay held a meeting at

10:03:23 which one topic of discussion centered on the person or

10:03:26 entity that originated the initial request and was most

10:03:29 responsible for getting Tampa International Airport added to

10:03:32 the list of approved airports authorized by the U.S.

10:03:35 government to conduct direct air charter flights to Cuba.

10:03:38 I ask that this letter and the enclosed documentation and

10:03:40 support of this letter be read into the official record of

10:03:43 the next City Council meeting which documents my efforts and

10:03:46 that of my company traveling tours began July 18th, 2008

10:03:51 and the efforts of many other individuals and organizations

10:03:53 in Tampa that supported this request and diligently worked

10:03:57 for over two years to obtain TIA approval for these direct

10:04:00 flights from both Cuba and the United States.

10:04:03 On July 18, 2008, over three years ago prior to President

10:04:07 Obama's election I met with the vice-president of Havana

10:04:10 tour in Cuba, Antonio Diaz, and request if our company was

10:04:14 able to assemble the support necessary to convince the U.S.

10:04:17 government to add TIA to the list of approved airports that

10:04:20 our company Armand traveling and tours be granted landing

10:04:24 rights at both airports.

10:04:25 In December 2008 I contacted the following people and

10:04:28 entities and presented our request.

10:04:29 Executive director of TIA, representative Cathy Castor, you

10:04:33 visited her office in Washington, D.C., and in Havana met

10:04:36 with incoming chief of the Cuban intersection Jorge

10:04:39 Bilagnos, and with copies of the current at the time head of

10:04:47 the intersection in Washington for Cuba, Fernando Ramirez

10:04:52 and a copy to Mr. Bilagnos.

10:04:55 On December 23rd, 2008 I sent the first letter to the

10:04:57 U.S. customs and border protection requesting this.

10:05:00 In January 2009 the Executive Director of the airport said

10:05:02 that the airport supported this and we both agreed to ask

10:05:06 Kathy Castor to support it which she enthusiastically did.

10:05:09 This is followed by a March 8th letter from

10:05:13 representative Kathy Castor, many letters from the Chamber

10:05:16 of Commerce, additional letters on May 8th from

10:05:18 Executive Director of TIA to the president of Havana tour,

10:05:21 which I personally delivered stating has been working with

10:05:25 the Aviation Authority since December 2008.

10:05:27 Among the strongest advocates for this has been the world

10:05:29 trade center who has had -- continual conversations about

10:05:34 the advocacy of this.

10:05:35 I have taken the support letters and resolutions and

10:05:37 assembled them in this bound book which I am going present

10:05:40 to you.

10:05:42 After the tireless efforts of the former head of the airport

10:05:45 authority, Louis Miller, Kathy Castor and many of the groups

10:05:49 in Tampa who supported these flights President Obama

10:05:51 announced in January that the new airport had been approved.

10:05:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:05:55 >> We also sent a letter to indicate that the airport needed

10:05:59 a letter from the service provider.

10:06:02 What I am saying to you is we need to give credit to all

10:06:05 those organizations and not just one.

10:06:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Hoff, thank you.

10:06:10 Did you give us your address?

10:06:12 >> I did.

10:06:12 2942 west Columbus, and also --

10:06:19 >> In Tampa?

10:06:20 >> I have a letter-

10:06:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Sir, your time is.

10:06:22 >> I understand but this is a letter I sent on November 11,

10:06:25 2009 with the same book.

10:06:27 You are aware of this as well.

10:06:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm happy to meet with you and talk to you.

10:06:31 Time is up.

10:06:31 Thank you.

10:06:32 And I need to tell the other people, if you are speaking on

10:06:34 a nonagenda item, go to the back of the line, because we are

10:06:38 speaking on the items on the agenda first.

10:06:41 Thank you, Mr. Hoff.

10:06:42 >> Good morning.

10:06:49 I'm Martha Stevens, Amalgamated Transit Union, local 1464,

10:06:55 1912 North Himes. I represent the bargaining unit of the

10:06:59 City of Tampa.

10:07:00 And I'm here to speak on item 57 where we are contracting

10:07:05 out the job of meter readers with the water department.

10:07:09 And anytime that conversation is contracted out, labor has a

10:07:13 concern.

10:07:15 And contracting these positive positions is going to

10:07:20 eliminate our bargaining units and not create jobs.

10:07:24 The city has budgeted ten positions for meter readers at a

10:07:27 cost of $357,000 and this contract is for $360,000, so the

10:07:34 budgeted amount, a position of ten positions right now, the

10:07:38 meter readers are operating, I understand, with eight

10:07:41 positions.

10:07:42 Our request is that you do not rubber stamp this, give this

10:07:46 the same consideration as you have given other items,

10:07:48 because we feel this is an attempt to contract out our meter

10:07:53 readers and replace our employees, and of course labor

10:07:57 objects to that.

10:07:58 Again, we appreciate all you do in reserving and taking into

10:08:02 consideration other items, and we appreciate your endurance

10:08:07 in this.

10:08:08 Thank you.

10:08:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:08:09 Next.

10:08:09 >> My name is Chris caston, a shareholder of bush Rosh and

10:08:18 property owner on Franklin Street about two blocks up

10:08:22 speaking on agenda item number 58.

10:08:24 I previously spoke to the council asking for some help in

10:08:26 trying to get some rules and procedures put in place to help

10:08:29 deal with some of these problems, and I'm pleased that

10:08:33 agenda item 58 has been put on, and I certainly support that

10:08:35 and would urge that that particular item be passed.

10:08:39 But that's only a piece of the problem of what we have down

10:08:42 here.

10:08:42 We have a good portion of what goes on down there has got

10:08:44 nothing to do with solicitation.

10:08:46 It has to do with people who are living on the street, that

10:08:49 are homeless, that are doing the kind of things that human

10:08:51 beings do to live that they have to do, and they are doing

10:08:55 them right there on the street corner.

10:08:57 Since the last City Council meeting, at 7:00 at night, a

10:09:01 woman right outside the CVS pharmacy just hiked up her dress

10:09:06 and sat down and did the business.

10:09:08 I apologize for the graphic nature much that comment but

10:09:11 that's right across from your police department.

10:09:13 We have other people since your last meeting where they go

10:09:15 up to a restaurant that has a smoked window and decide they

10:09:19 really need to relieve themselves and I guess they figure

10:09:21 because it's smoked and he can't see in that the people

10:09:24 inside can't see out.

10:09:25 Doesn't stop him.

10:09:26 He takes care of his business.

10:09:27 This is what's going on in what Mayor Buckhorn has said is

10:09:30 the front door of Tampa.

10:09:32 This is why those comments were made during those folks that

10:09:37 are interested in coming down here for the G.O.P.

10:09:39 convention, where they see certain areas of Tampa are seedy.

10:09:43 We need to have some type of rules put in place or some help

10:09:46 to get this type of conduct sorted out other than simply

10:09:50 solicitation.

10:09:51 When these incidents happen, the owners -- the businesses,

10:09:55 they call the police.

10:09:56 The police are very responsive.

10:09:58 They come out there.

10:09:59 If they don't see the act in pro, their comment to the

10:10:01 people is, I'm very sorry, I don't have the tools to help

10:10:04 you here.

10:10:04 I cannot stop this from going on, I cannot take that person

10:10:08 into custody, or do something to get them off the front door

10:10:11 of Tampa's downtown area.

10:10:13 I would like to see the City Council figure a way out to

10:10:16 give the police some rules or some procedures, that they can

10:10:20 follow to take this problem from going on right down, and

10:10:23 this is going on daily, not just every now and then, daily.

10:10:27 The owners down there, they are threatened by some of these

10:10:30 people.

10:10:31 And they'll see what's going on.

10:10:33 A couple of weeks ago two homeless guys fight in the street.

10:10:36 They call the police.

10:10:37 They come out.

10:10:37 The police come out.

10:10:39 The homeless guys see them make that call.

10:10:41 They say, we saw you do it and they whip out a switchblade

10:10:45 and threaten the particular -- the owner.

10:10:47 This is what happening in the area that we want to have

10:10:49 commercial development in, in downtown Tampa, to make this

10:10:52 city blossom.

10:10:53 And it's not working.

10:10:55 These people have invested a huge amount of money in these

10:11:00 down here that they'll drop from 150,000 to 300,000 to get

10:11:03 their business up and running and they want to be able to

10:11:06 serve the public at night.

10:11:07 As I mentioned, the last time I was here, the hotels won't

10:11:10 each let their people walk over there.

10:11:12 They'll take them in a bus, but they won't let them walk

10:11:15 over here.

10:11:15 When they go in to have something to eat and they exit, the

10:11:18 homeless people are there to give them all kinds of threats,

10:11:21 verbal and otherwise.

10:11:22 We need some help from the council to do something, to put

10:11:26 something in place that will help to help get this problem

10:11:30 sorted out.

10:11:31 And I am compassionate for the homeless problem, but we

10:11:34 don't want them living on the downtown street down here and

10:11:37 doing what human beings have to do to live.

10:11:40 Please do something about this.

10:11:42 This is why you good folks were hired to make the big

10:11:45 decisions.

10:11:46 Let's make some efforts on this part.

10:11:48 Thank you very much.

10:11:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:11:51 Next.

10:11:51 >> Tom Atchison, 6011 East Bougainvillea Avenue, pastor of

10:11:59 New Life Church and founder of New Beginnings of Tampa.

10:12:03 First of all, I would like to say, I have dedicated my life

10:12:07 to helping homeless.

10:12:08 However, I do not believe in enabling homeless.

10:12:13 There's a few people that have come up to speak that have

10:12:16 talked about the hardships that will happen if we pass this

10:12:20 panhandling ordinance.

10:12:22 Well, most of them are operating illegal businesses, selling

10:12:25 products that they are not claiming taxes on.

10:12:28 It's an illegal thing they are doing anyway.

10:12:31 And the majority -- there's a few exceptions, but the

10:12:35 majority of the ones on the street that are panhandling,

10:12:40 that are there, are there for a specific reason.

10:12:43 It either drugs, alcohol, or medical conditions.

10:12:50 The ones that really want help, I know we say there's a

10:12:53 shortage of beds, and there is, but the ones who really want

10:12:56 help get help.

10:13:00 There are several agencies in Tampa, including ours, that

10:13:03 will help those that want help.

10:13:05 But what they want to do is they want to panhandle, get

10:13:09 their money for drugs and alcohol, and when we tell them,

10:13:11 look, you're a veteran, we can pull you off the street, we

10:13:15 have a grant that can pay your housing and food and

10:13:17 everything for two months, let us help you get a job, and

10:13:21 when we tell them they have to quit drinking and drugging,

10:13:24 they say no.

10:13:26 So there's no excuse other than just a very few exceptions.

10:13:31 The ones that are on the street, the majority of them are

10:13:35 there because they choose to want to drink and drug, or they

10:13:39 have mental issues that we definitely should address.

10:13:43 And I feel like we should pass this panhandling ordinance,

10:13:46 we should quit enabling these people to continue on with

10:13:49 their addictions, as long as we enable them to continue on

10:13:53 in their addictions, they are going to continue being out

10:13:56 there doing what they do.

10:13:58 We need to be able to force them, if that's the proper word,

10:14:02 we need to force them to get the help that they really need.

10:14:06 Thank you.

10:14:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:14:09 Next.

10:14:09 >> Susan Long, 920 east broad.

10:14:16 I want to read a letter given to me and I was asked to read

10:14:18 it into the record.

10:14:19 Dear City Council members, we are writing this letter to beg

10:14:22 City Council to pass a panhandling ban.

10:14:25 As neighborhood associations we find this important to the

10:14:27 safety of the citizens and visitors to Tampa.

10:14:31 City Council has been struggling with the panhandling issue

10:14:34 for over a year.

10:14:35 In that time, no decision other than to make them wear

10:14:37 reflective vests has been reached.

10:14:40 Our people need a way to make some money, the economy is so

10:14:44 bad these panhandlers will become homeless, then we'll

10:14:47 really have a problem, and we don't want to penalize the

10:14:49 newspaper sales people, et cetera.

10:14:51 First, according to the homeless coalition, only -- this is

10:14:58 not a homeless issue.

10:14:59 Homelessness is a separate issue that we need to resolve.

10:15:03 According to the police on the street, the vast majority of

10:15:07 panhandlers are criminals.

10:15:09 This is not good for Tampa.

10:15:10 However, this is not the issue either.

10:15:12 The actual issue is that panhandling in the streets is

10:15:14 unsafe.

10:15:16 Assistant Chief Bennett talked to City Council more than

10:15:20 once. In each case he states it is not safe to have

10:15:22 panhandlers wandering in the road and standing and sitting

10:15:26 in the medium.

10:15:27 As the assistant chief of police he should know.

10:15:29 Either we believe our police or we don't.

10:15:32 We do.

10:15:33 According to the city's transportation department, allowing

10:15:36 panhandling on city streets and med useless is not safe.

10:15:39 The department states that the roads were not designed to

10:15:41 commingle pedestrians, vendors and cars.

10:15:43 The roads were designed only to move traffic with the

10:15:46 objective of separating pedestrians and vendors from the

10:15:48 vehicle.

10:15:49 Allow panhandlers and vendors to wander between the cars

10:15:53 violates every objective the transportation department

10:15:55 strives to meet.

10:15:56 According to the police, they get an average of three calls

10:15:58 a day regarding problems with the panhandlers, turf wars,

10:16:02 threatening drivers, et cetera.

10:16:03 Prior to the large influx, the police responded to less than

10:16:07 one call every two days for pedestrian-related issues.

10:16:10 This is a waste of our police resources.

10:16:13 As a result the police are responding to pedestrian related

10:16:15 issues instead of patrolling our neighborhoods and ensuring

10:16:17 that we are safe.

10:16:18 We have been lucky no one to our knowledge has died due to

10:16:21 the panhandlers.

10:16:22 However, in the case of "St. Pete Times" versus city of

10:16:25 St. Petersburg, Judge Richard LAZAR stated "common sense

10:16:31 tells you people out in the roadway in situations like this

10:16:33 put themselves at risk as well as other people at risk."

10:16:38 Do we have to wait until have empirical evidence that

10:16:41 someone has been seriously injured or killed?

10:16:44 So not only the Tampa Police Department, Department of

10:16:49 Transportation, most residents of Tampa feel this is unsafe

10:16:52 but the courts do, too.

10:16:54 It is our strong desire to have you pass the panhandling ban

10:16:57 medley to protect the panhandlers, citizens and visitors to

10:17:00 the City of Tampa and that this ban be implemented as part

10:17:03 of an overall policy, planning and developed to provide

10:17:07 actual solutions, rehabilitation for the homeless and

10:17:11 panhandling citizens.

10:17:11 This letter is signed by Gary Elsworth, president of south

10:17:15 Seminole Heights, Hampton terrace neighborhoods association,

10:17:18 Sherri --

10:17:20 (Bell sounds).

10:17:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:17:21 >> And president of --

10:17:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:17:28 Next.

10:17:28 >> Pete Johnson, 6113 Margo drive, Tampa, Florida.

10:17:34 As far as panhandling, yes, it is a safety hazard because I

10:17:37 hit somebody.

10:17:38 It scared the, pardon the language, but the hell out of me.

10:17:41 It didn't hurt the man.

10:17:42 Goat up, grabbed his paper and kept on going.

10:17:45 But it scared the hell out of me.

10:17:46 So there is a safety hazard.

10:17:50 Second thing, you all know that I'm a very strong

10:17:52 neighborhood advocate, and I fight for different

10:17:56 neighborhoods throughout the city.

10:17:58 We have a particular problem that I can't seem to get TPD to

10:18:01 take action on.

10:18:03 It has to do with a motel called the Jawhawk motel at 3415

10:18:11 Nebraska Avenue.

10:18:15 This is a list of the police activity and all of the

10:18:19 prostitution that is active at this location.

10:18:24 The police do use this location for reverse extinction.

10:18:29 The section here where it says S.A. is the only known

10:18:36 recorded dates of a reverse sting authorized by TPD.

10:18:40 Every other case there is the property owner allowing

10:18:45 prostitution on his property.

10:18:47 I cannot seem to get TPD to forward this information on to

10:18:52 legal to see if it qualifies, by legal, for public nuisance

10:18:58 abatement.

10:18:59 That is one.

10:19:02 This second sheet.

10:19:08 Under Florida State statutes, just last year, this property

10:19:16 qualified for public nuisance abatement.

10:19:20 But still I cannot get anyone to refer this on to legal so

10:19:23 that they can make a determination, not TPD.

10:19:28 It is legal's responsibility to make the determination.

10:19:32 I sent you e-mails on this.

10:19:36 As a matter of fact, Hillsborough County is trying to come

10:19:38 up with stronger rules to enforce prostitution laws.

10:19:46 Prostitution has gotten outrageous.

10:19:49 This happens to be in the Ybor neighborhood.

10:19:53 I am not affiliated with that neighborhood or the

10:19:54 association in any way.

10:19:57 However, this particular area on Nebraska Avenue has been

10:20:02 overlooked for years.

10:20:05 TPD using the Jawhawk motel is enabling drugs and

10:20:12 prostitution in the neighborhood.

10:20:17 I request that you ask TPD to meet with me and explain to me

10:20:22 why they have not corrected this problem or taken it to the

10:20:26 next step of legal, then to Nuisance Abatement Board.

10:20:31 Thank you.

10:20:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:20:36 Please, next.

10:20:38 Please come up, state your name, and please tell us what

10:20:41 agenda item you are speaking to, and if you are not speaking

10:20:45 on an agenda item, let someone else go first.

10:20:48 >> My name is Chuck Lee, and I'm a life-long resident of

10:20:52 Tampa.

10:20:54 My parents were born hear, so we have been here a long time.

10:20:57 I'm here talking about the items concerning panhandling.

10:21:04 I'm a Bishop of the Apostolic Catholic church and president

10:21:08 of the Florida council of churches, and I'm a senior board

10:21:11 member and head of communion at the national council of

10:21:14 churches.

10:21:16 Looking at this agenda item, I'm really kind of ashamed.

10:21:21 I would tell you very clearly that panhandling, begging, is

10:21:26 a right of human beings expressed both in scripture and in

10:21:31 the tradition of the early church.

10:21:34 From my point of view -- and I think from the point of view

10:21:37 of the people that I lead -- this is an immoral action.

10:21:46 Having it even in front of council, I think the whole

10:21:52 question of the integrity of the council is in question.

10:21:57 It's an immoral act to vote for it, for the police, it's an

10:22:05 immoral act to enforce it, and I think for the rest of us,

10:22:10 it's an immoral act to let it happen.

10:22:13 And I do promise you -- I promise you that if it passes,

10:22:17 it's the job of the Christian church to stand with those who

10:22:19 are being persecuted of the and it clearly is a

10:22:23 criminalization of poverty.

10:22:27 If you pass it, I will be begging on the streets, and I will

10:22:32 urge the people that follow me to do the same.

10:22:35 Because we have got to stand with people that are being

10:22:39 really persecuted like this.

10:22:41 This act has nothing to do with safety.

10:22:45 I mean, that's just something you throw out there because

10:22:51 you could do things to make it safe.

10:22:53 It has to do with how the corporate and political interests

10:22:56 view your control of the city.

10:22:59 And the real question is, we elected to help the people or

10:23:07 to help the corporations?

10:23:12 There's nothing more I can say than clearly it is an immoral

10:23:17 act.

10:23:17 I want to be clear on that.

10:23:19 I want you to understand that at least a good number of the

10:23:21 Christians in this city believe that.

10:23:24 And we will not in any way cooperate with this law if do you

10:23:30 pass it.

10:23:32 Thank you for your time and attention.

10:23:48 Where.

10:23:49 >> My name is John dinger, 908 East Avenue.

10:23:54 I want to say I am also a Christian, a follower of Jesus.

10:23:57 And at that address, we have a washing machine and a shower,

10:24:01 and a lot of things people have at their houses so if anyone

10:24:06 is watching, come to 908 east Lake Avenue, just come over.

10:24:09 I want to share what I have.

10:24:11 And I want to say that --

10:24:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you speaking on an agenda item?

10:24:19 >> I am on the panhandling issue.

10:24:20 I'm sorry.

10:24:21 I want the opportunity to share, to know the needs in the

10:24:23 community.

10:24:24 I want the people to come over and share what I have.

10:24:28 And if I have a meal, and I have extra, or I leftover, I

10:24:33 want to be able to share and I can with you or a friend.

10:24:36 But in this city, I can't do that if someone happens to be

10:24:40 homeless or poor or outside.

10:24:42 We try to do that, and the police tell us we are breaking

10:24:45 some ordinance that they can't seem to tell us what it is,

10:24:48 but we are not allowed to share food with poor people.

10:24:51 Poor people are not allowed to ask for help or be out on the

10:24:54 streets.

10:24:54 Meanwhile, we are discussing this ordinance which like I

10:24:58 said is immoral, as I said a few weeks ago, we are on murky

10:25:02 Constitutional waters or whatever.

10:25:04 It is.

10:25:04 But it's very clear in morals and ethics, this is an

10:25:08 immoral -- and I notice a ton of pressure from the city.

10:25:12 I do not envy your seats at all to have to be under the kind

10:25:15 of pressure that you are.

10:25:16 But after a year of discussion, you know that you just

10:25:19 cannot -- we cannot allow this to pass.

10:25:22 And it's a cumulative effect of no jobs, the policing of

10:25:29 sharing, and then to ban -- the criminalization of poverty.

10:25:35 And the effect of all of this together is an act of violence

10:25:38 on poor people.

10:25:39 And we as a city, we cannot pass this.

10:25:44 And I agree, as a Christian, we cannot submit to it either.

10:25:48 We cannot -- it's not okay.

10:25:50 We are taught to feed the hungry and clothe the naked and

10:25:56 heal people.

10:25:56 I want to urge you, do not criminalize poverty or

10:26:00 Christianity, being a Christian and sharing.

10:26:03 >> I am going to ask council if they want to give a 15

10:26:16 minute extension, and anyone that's in line now will speak

10:26:19 within those 15 minutes.

10:26:20 >> I of no we extend to the 15 minutes.

10:26:22 >> Motion by Mr. Suarez, second by Mrs. Montelione on a

10:26:27 close vote with Mr. Reddick.

10:26:28 All in favor of the motion indicate by Aye.

10:26:31 Nay?

10:26:32 The Ayes have it unanimously.

10:26:33 >> My name is Marvin Atkins and I'm a freelance grower.

10:26:39 I sell flowers on the side of the road.

10:26:50 I came out of the unification church, got me started working

10:26:53 selling flowers, have been doing it, and don't use no drugs.

10:26:59 Going to the Catholic church now.

10:27:00 But I pay taxes.

10:27:03 I have a peddler's license.

10:27:05 I pay sales taxes and I pay federal income tax.

10:27:09 And I read a book by Dale Carnegie.

10:27:14 People have been selling flowers on the road and newspapers

10:27:17 on the side of the road for hundreds of years.

10:27:19 And if they put this panhandling, six days, I have to pay

10:27:24 rent, I have to pay taxes, I got $307 fine I have to pay now

10:27:30 because they stopped me, picked me up and throw me in jail

10:27:35 for selling flowers.

10:27:35 I pay my rent.

10:27:37 If they pass this thing I'm homeless and unemployed.

10:27:40 And that's the only thing.

10:27:42 I am down here begging that they don't pass this ban so I

10:27:44 don't lose my job and end up homeless and unemployed.

10:27:51 That's the only thing.

10:27:52 I go to church holy redeemer, you know. I am not doing no

10:27:57 drugs or nothing like that, now.

10:27:59 No alcohol or anything, now.

10:28:03 >> Thank you very much.

10:28:04 Next, please.

10:28:04 >> My name is Donna Cryer, 4929 East 7th Avenue, Tampa.

10:28:16 I'm homeless.

10:28:18 Here is the safety issue.

10:28:21 Students killed on walk to school.

10:28:24 Was that student panhandling?

10:28:26 No. Anyway, when the power of the holy people are shattered

10:28:32 all things will be finished. Daniel 12:7.

10:28:37 I am here to speak about the issue mistakenly misnamed

10:28:40 panhandling.

10:28:42 I'm a flyer.

10:28:45 I don't panhandle unless I have to.

10:28:49 Flying is protected under my right.

10:28:52 Do you need a demonstration of the difference?

10:28:55 People are going to continue to panhandle no matter what you

10:28:58 do here today.

10:29:01 1 John 3:17 says, whoever seeks his brother is in need and

10:29:06 shuts off his heart from him, how does the love of God abide

10:29:10 in him?

10:29:11 How many of you here on the council are Christian?

10:29:14 How many are here because the media put you in that seat?

10:29:19 How many did you buy your way in?

10:29:22 1 John 3:20, if you say you love God and you hate your

10:29:25 brother, you're a liar.

10:29:26 As of today the corruption in your hearts will sign for the

10:29:30 world to see.

10:29:31 So be it, amen.

10:29:32 And if by your actions here today at City Council make me

10:29:36 have to commit my first dire act as a criminal just to

10:29:40 survive, breaking the state's laws and the divine laws that

10:29:47 I try to live by, by banning flying, I ask to bring hail

10:29:52 fire and brimstone down on St. Pete and Tampa and the bay

10:29:54 area for being the cause of me breaking his commandments.

10:29:57 Are you as strong in your faith to stand tall and survive

10:30:01 God's wrath as I am?

10:30:06 Read Hebrews 15:1.

10:30:12 James 1:8, a two face person is unstable. One face saying

10:30:17 that you're a Christian.

10:30:20 The second face taking away the charity of others so a

10:30:23 person can survive.

10:30:24 James 2:15.

10:30:25 If the brother and sister be naked and destitute and in need

10:30:30 of daily food -- daily food, and you say get away, go in

10:30:38 peace, be filled and clothed, not give those things which

10:30:41 are needful of peace of mind and body, what does that

10:30:45 profit?

10:30:46 Oh, woe to you greedy hearts.

10:30:48 Jesus was homeless and look what they did to him.

10:30:51 And if you are continuing to sacrifice him still today, by

10:30:55 the way, the greedy people are trying to do the homeless.

10:30:58 Maybe I'm homeless for a reason.

10:31:01 And 17,000 other reasons.

10:31:03 One issue: Greed.

10:31:05 And 17,000 ways to steal.

10:31:09 And then there's you from whom they steal.

10:31:13 Praise Jesus.

10:31:14 Amen.

10:31:15 1 Corinthians 4:21.

10:31:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:31:25 >> It's time for Christians to stand up.

10:31:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Your time is up.

10:31:28 Thank you very much.

10:31:30 Next, please.

10:31:31 >> Jim Lake, 4218 West San Pedro street, and here this

10:31:39 morning on behalf of the Tampa Tribune, just briefly about

10:31:42 item 58.

10:31:44 Good morning, Chairman Miranda.

10:31:46 Welcome back.

10:31:48 We continue to believe that if council is going to legislate

10:31:50 in this area, and change its current ordinances, that

10:31:56 council has been referring to, I think the hybrid approach,

10:31:58 based on Jacksonville and Pasco ordinances, strikes a

10:32:02 reasonable compromise.

10:32:03 That is combining a Sunday exception with a newspaper

10:32:07 exception addresses the safety concerns without unduly

10:32:12 burdening activity that hasn't been shown to create a real

10:32:14 safety problem.

10:32:15 Also, I just wanted to share with council the fact that the

10:32:18 Tribune has reached out to the Sentinel Bulletin regarding

10:32:21 this matter.

10:32:22 We are interested in working with that newspaper to make

10:32:24 sure that the Sentinel Bulletin is not adversely affected by

10:32:28 any legislation addressing panhandling.

10:32:32 The Tribune, of course, is distributed seven days a week and

10:32:35 is sold by street vendors on Sunday, and would be pleased to

10:32:39 include the Sentinel Bulletin and the Tribune distribution

10:32:42 system, if there's some way to make that work, and to

10:32:45 encourage the Tribune's vendors to look to the sentinel

10:32:51 bulletins folks.

10:32:53 But, of course, none of that is necessary if the proposals

10:32:56 that are before you today are enacted as written.

10:32:58 And the experiences of Jacksonville and Pasco County, I

10:33:01 think, show us that that hybrid approach that you have

10:33:04 discussed has worked in other communities and can work here.

10:33:09 So if any changes are to be made today, we support the

10:33:12 enactment of the current proposals with, I should mention

10:33:18 association changes between first and second reading.

10:33:20 The safety rules, I mentioned those in a letter to council

10:33:23 at the last meeting.

10:33:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:33:26 Next, please.

10:33:27 >> Gary steel, single copy manager for "The Tampa Tribune.

10:33:32 I'm here to address the panhandling issue.

10:33:34 "The Tampa Tribune," can support the two ordinance, the

10:33:38 six-day ban coupled with the newspaper exemption.

10:33:42 This will allow our hawk towers hawk papers on Sunday as

10:33:44 they have for several years, allow them to make some money

10:33:47 to stay hopefully off the streets, and not have to do

10:33:51 panhandling the way others are having to dot.

10:33:53 But I do want to the be known that when were looking at the

10:33:57 six-day ban it was very important for us to include the

10:33:59 Sentinel Bulletin who also disabilities on Tuesdays and

10:34:02 Fridays, so we are in support of the overall newspaper

10:34:05 exemption which would allow us all to be able to continue to

10:34:08 do business as we have in the past and provide a valuable

10:34:11 service to the 20, 30,000 people that buy the Sunday paper

10:34:15 or the daily papers through the Sentinel Bulletin.

10:34:18 Thank you.

10:34:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:34:21 Next, please.

10:34:21 >> Cheney with the "St. Pete Times," 1000 Ashley drive,

10:34:35 Tampa.

10:34:35 I want to thank everybody for their efforts in addressing

10:34:38 the issues on panhandling and roadside solicitation.

10:34:41 I'm speaking to item number 58 on the agenda, and I would

10:34:44 also like to thank Charley for making no less than a

10:34:48 Herculean effort to be here in person to help guide us

10:34:51 through these very difficult times.

10:34:55 The six-day ban is unfair for everybody.

10:34:59 It allows everybody to get out there and try to do what they

10:35:03 need to do in their personal lives as well as business tows

10:35:06 serve the community, and the people with viable news, and

10:35:14 information on Sundays selling newspapers.

10:35:19 I just wanted to thank you for your efforts, and also that

10:35:25 since October of 2010, we have also tried to reach out to

10:35:29 the Florida Sentinel Bulletin to try to show a united front

10:35:34 on this effort, but our attempts have gone unanswered, but

10:35:41 we do support what you all are trying to do.

10:35:43 Thank you.

10:35:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

10:35:44 Next.

10:35:49 >> I'm Diana McLean with muscular dystrophy association, 502

10:35:55 south Fremont, here to speak about panhandling, too.

10:35:57 I will be quick.

10:35:58 I just wanted to thank everyone on council for their time

10:36:00 and consideration on this matter and I know it hasn't been

10:36:04 easy.

10:36:05 You have heard everyone's arguments and positions, a six-day

10:36:08 ban, I think, would be fair to everyone, and still allow MDA

10:36:14 to raise funds and provide services that we need to provide

10:36:16 to our local community.

10:36:19 We thank you for your time and wish you good luck.

10:36:25 Thanks.

10:36:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: All right.

10:36:27 This concludes this portion of the public section.

10:36:30 Mr. Reddick?

10:36:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: Mr. Chairman, I am going to request from

10:36:41 the council that we have unanimous consent to address item

10:36:44 57, 58 at this time.

10:36:48 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Reddick, second by

10:36:50 Mr. Cohen.

10:36:51 All in favor indicate by saying Aye.

10:36:53 Nay?

10:36:53 The Ayes have it unanimously.

10:36:56 Mr. Cohen, and then Ms. Capin.

10:36:59 Okay, Ms. Capin.

10:37:04 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I would like to make a statement.

10:37:05 And Councilman Miranda, I agree, this is Herculean, and we

10:37:10 all appreciate, and we all on council are sitting here, we

10:37:15 have been tried and tested to be sitting in these seats, and

10:37:22 you beyond call.

10:37:23 I would like to also state that what we have here today is,

10:37:31 in my mind, a manufactured or contrived crisis.

10:37:35 There is no crisis here.

10:37:37 What we have is a azzos con mango.

10:37:44 It's rice and mango.

10:37:47 That is what I heard my uncle speak about when I was a

10:37:51 child.

10:37:51 It is -- it doesn't taste good and it doesn't look good.

10:37:57 But this was not cooked up on this side of the dais.

10:38:02 I'm going to go back a little bit on the first part of this

10:38:06 year, and what is lost here is in the first since I have

10:38:11 been on council proposed compromises from the very

10:38:15 beginning.

10:38:18 The first part of the year, I brought for the a compromise

10:38:21 of a five-day two-day which would be the weekend.

10:38:24 The staff came forth and said it could not or should not be

10:38:28 done, and the transportation manager explained that on

10:38:33 Sundays, because cars move, because there is less traffic,

10:38:37 therefore cars move faster.

10:38:40 I countered and said, I didn't think that was correct, where

10:38:44 did we get the phrase "Sunday driver"? We fast forward to

10:38:49 September, and I brought forth a second compromise.

10:38:55 It's on page 106 of the transcript on September the 8th

10:39:03 meeting.

10:39:04 And it was a combination of the Jacksonville newspaper and

10:39:07 Sunday-only solicitation, a hybrid, which has been referred

10:39:11 to here.

10:39:12 Only this time, there were no objections from the staff on

10:39:16 the Sunday drivers.

10:39:18 What we have and what I feel is that we have conflicting

10:39:24 information.

10:39:27 And the compromise that was offered was not acceptable

10:39:30 earlier, but seven months later it is allowed, or can be

10:39:37 defended.

10:39:39 And the public wonders why we have been grappling with this

10:39:42 issue of solicitation.

10:39:47 On September the 8th, we on council voted to have a

10:39:50 combination ordinance, a hybrid, drafted and for legal to

10:39:55 have a dialogue with City Council.

10:39:57 And for the ordinance to come back on September 22nd.

10:40:03 Directives were not followed, leading to the arroz con mango

10:40:04 that we find ourselves in now. That's the rice and mango

10:40:14 combination.

10:40:14 We could have resolved this a long time ago with negotiation

10:40:23 and council's independence not being undermined.

10:40:29 The point has been made, be and as a result we have the

10:40:35 arroz con mango.

10:40:40 I spoke with the newspaper and they bring forth a reasonable

10:40:43 and generous offer.

10:40:45 And really, as a matter of principle, I could vote against

10:40:48 this ordinance, but my main concern, and always has been,

10:40:53 the newspaper and, more importantly, jobs be protected.

10:40:58 Two weeks have passed, and now I tell you, I did have a

10:41:03 conversation with the attorney from "The Tampa Tribune," and

10:41:06 the distribution manager.

10:41:09 Should the newspaper solicitation portion of the ordinance

10:41:13 be struck down in the courts, they have reached out to the

10:41:16 smaller community newspaper offering to help with

10:41:19 distribution and even the hawkers, the sales people of the

10:41:24 newspapers.

10:41:25 E-mails from the publisher to publisher were exchanged.

10:41:32 This has been one of my primary concerns, that jobs be

10:41:35 protected, and because I have reached a certain comfort

10:41:38 level, that the disadvantage of the small newspaper, that

10:41:43 the small newspaper faces, has and will be addressed in the

10:41:47 future fountain becomes necessary.

10:41:50 It is time to move on.

10:41:53 I will be supporting the reading of the first ordinance of

10:41:58 the combination ordinance.

10:42:00 But let me make this perfectly clear.

10:42:03 This vote does not lessen my commitment to this institution

10:42:11 City Council, as an independent body, and we owe it to the

10:42:14 citizens no less.

10:42:15 Mr. Shimberg, you have inherited a fine and very dedicated

10:42:18 staff of attorneys.

10:42:21 Use them wisely.

10:42:23 I will be supporting this ordinance.

10:42:27 Thank you.

10:42:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern.

10:42:31 Anyone else after Ms. Mulhern?

10:42:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

10:42:36 Thank you, Mr. Miranda, for coming down here.

10:42:38 Since we can't talk to each other on council, Mr. Miranda

10:42:43 felt that he needed to be here to vote on this important

10:42:46 thing that he has been working on, and I have been working

10:42:51 on, and Councilman Capin has been working on for a year at

10:42:55 least, and which our other colleagues have been working on

10:42:59 since they have been here, and every single person on this

10:43:03 council has taken this so seriously and has shown our

10:43:09 compassion and has tried to find a solution that would

10:43:15 protect those newspaper jobs, that would protect rights to

10:43:19 free speech, or the unions, that would in some way not put

10:43:26 all of the people who are on those busy streets asking for

10:43:32 money, those T growing number of unemployed, underemployed

10:43:37 people in poverty.

10:43:39 And this council has also worked very hard, and are

10:43:46 continuing to do so, and everyone in the audience who has

10:43:49 come with proposed solutions for where these people are

10:43:54 going to go, because that is the underlying question, I

10:44:00 think, for all of us, before the people arrived at being

10:44:03 able to vote for some kind of solicitation ban was this is

10:44:07 going to solve nothing, because these people who are on the

10:44:11 streets have nowhere to go, so we can ban it, we can make it

10:44:16 illegal, our police force will pick them up, and where are

10:44:20 they going to go?

10:44:21 So we have worked and worked, and everyone had to arrive at

10:44:25 their own decision about it.

10:44:27 And you want to point out that -- and Councilman Miranda was

10:44:34 probably -- when this item first came up, it was probably

10:44:37 more than a year, probably two years ago, Councilman Miranda

10:44:42 was the most compassionate person, and he has been pushed to

10:44:47 this point where he felt he had to come in here today to

10:44:51 vote on this, and that was not because of his colleagues on

10:44:56 council, that was because this administration refused to

10:45:02 work with council, and even refused to, as Councilwoman

10:45:08 Capin said, refused to follow a motion, not only didn't do

10:45:13 what this council passed as a motion in writing these

10:45:16 resolutions, but didn't even contact the maker of the motion

10:45:20 to work something out.

10:45:25 I have not heard over this period where Mr. Miranda was

10:45:28 contemplating voting by phone, I didn't get one phone call,

10:45:33 not one phone call from the city attorney to discuss how

10:45:37 this council was going to proceed.

10:45:39 So I just want you to know that that discussion we had

10:45:42 earlier, that may have caused Mr. Miranda to feel that toad

10:45:49 come in here, was not because of this council, and as you

10:45:53 are going to see, this ordinance is probably going to go

10:45:58 forward and would do so without Mr. Miranda being here.

10:46:02 So I'm just very sorry that he felt he had to come in.

10:46:07 I just want -- I want to say one other thing.

10:46:10 And this is in answer to some of the things I heard from the

10:46:12 public today.

10:46:17 The man that wants them all to go away, where are they going

10:46:21 to go?

10:46:23 If you don't want to see poor people on the streets, you

10:46:26 help us find a solution.

10:46:28 And there's a task force working on it with council.

10:46:31 Contact my office and I'll get you involved in how there's

10:46:35 so many, so many churches, not-for-profits, homeless

10:46:39 coalitions, so many people working on this, but we don't

10:46:41 have places for these people to go, and we need to work on

10:46:44 it.

10:46:48 And a couple iterations of this ordinance ago, I talked to

10:46:52 the mayor the day before we were going to vote, and he

10:46:57 agreed to work on finding a place, and work on an arrest

10:47:05 diversion program with the county with, the sheriff, with

10:47:09 the community, the homeless advocates, to make sure that we

10:47:13 do have somewhere for them to go.

10:47:15 So you have that commitment from the mayor and from this

10:47:18 council that we are going to work on this, and this council

10:47:20 will continue to do so.

10:47:25 And the other thing I have to say is, that was my moral

10:47:32 dilemma at that point.

10:47:33 I thought I was going to be able to vote for a compromise

10:47:36 when I talked to the mayor a couple of weeks ago or whenever

10:47:39 that was.

10:47:40 But when I came in here, and I thought about it, and what I

10:47:46 have gone through over all these years, for me, it's a

10:47:49 personal decision, and it's because of the cooperation of my

10:47:55 colleagues who are willing to pass a compromise, I am able

10:48:01 to vote symbolically against this, because I do believe -- I

10:48:08 believe it was the priest said -- we cannot criminalize

10:48:12 poverty.

10:48:13 And this is a first step in doing that.

10:48:17 And in the bad TENOR we have right now, the way people are

10:48:26 treating the least among us, I cannot support it.

10:48:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

10:48:29 Mr. Cohen and then Mr. Reddick.

10:48:30 >>HARRY COHEN: First of all, I want to welcome back our

10:48:34 chair and tell him how glad that we are to see him.

10:48:40 This has been an agonizing debate and there's not a person

10:48:45 that sits on this dais, a sure you, that hasn't lost sleep

10:48:49 over trying to reconcile the different sides of this issue.

10:48:54 We all respect, any in some ways, agree or disagree with one

10:48:58 another, but we are going to, it appears to me, move forward

10:49:01 today on a compromise position, and we are going to, as

10:49:05 Councilwoman Montelione pointed out last week, give the

10:49:10 public some of the answers that they have been seeking from

10:49:12 us.

10:49:13 And the public has not been shy about coming up to all of us

10:49:16 in restaurants and grocery stores, and when we are getting

10:49:19 into our cars and walking down the street, to tell us their

10:49:22 opinions on this matter.

10:49:25 But I just want to say that once this vote is over, the

10:49:29 issue does not go away.

10:49:30 The issue is still with us.

10:49:32 And Councilwoman Mulhern is right, it is up to every single

10:49:35 one of us to turn our attention away from this to the larger

10:49:40 issues of homelessness and poverty in our community,

10:49:44 problems that are getting worse, problems that have been

10:49:47 exacerbated by the economy, and by the actions of other

10:49:52 municipalities have taken to basically compile these

10:49:55 communities into Tampa.

10:49:57 And I hope and pray that when this vote is completed that we

10:50:05 will move on and really start to comprehensively do what we

10:50:10 can do to help those less fortunate.

10:50:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Reddick.

10:50:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:50:17 Welcome back.

10:50:17 I tried to save that trip by getting the rules waived but

10:50:21 they told me you railroad already in the car.

10:50:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I saw that.

10:50:24 >>FRANK REDDICK: Welcome back.

10:50:27 I hope we can get you out of here.

10:50:29 When we first started this discussion about this panhandling

10:50:32 issue, I strongly rejected anything that will have denied

10:50:40 the only African-American newspaper in this city, not to

10:50:42 allow them to sell their newspaper.

10:50:45 I could not accept those young men and women and some of the

10:50:50 senior citizens that are supplementing their income, not to

10:50:53 be automobile to sell those papers on Tuesday and Friday.

10:50:55 And I strongly rejected any ban that did not support it and

10:50:59 did not support it in the past.

10:51:01 But I had a chance to speak with the publisher of the

10:51:05 Florida Sentinel Bulletin, Kay Andrews, and we discussed

10:51:10 this at length.

10:51:12 And with the current proposal, she informed me that she was

10:51:18 comfortable with the current proposals that we have before

10:51:22 us today, and when she stated that to me, I can be

10:51:30 comfortable with the proposal as well.

10:51:34 My only usual you was making sure that that paper was

10:51:40 preserved, and since the publisher is comfortable with it,

10:51:43 I'm comfortable with their decision, I'm comfortable today,

10:51:46 and I will be changing my vote to support the current

10:51:51 ordinance we have on the books.

10:51:53 I just want to state that for the record.

10:51:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, after I hear all these honorable

10:51:59 council people speak, what am I doing here?

10:52:04 [ Laughter ]

10:52:07 Ms. Montelione?

10:52:08 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I am just going to keep this short.

10:52:12 I along with everyone else am really glad that you are back

10:52:15 here, and thanks for coming down here.

10:52:18 And I don't say what I feel sometimes as eloquently as

10:52:24 Councilman Cohen does.

10:52:25 I think once again I am really happy I'm sitting next to

10:52:28 him.

10:52:30 But I said this last time.

10:52:33 Everyone who wants this ban put in place, this is the time

10:52:38 to put your money where your mouth is.

10:52:40 I expect to see contributions to the many charities who work

10:52:46 in the field of feeding the homeless, who are putting roofs

10:52:50 over their heads, to feed them and clothe them and care for

10:52:55 them and get them the services they need.

10:52:57 I really expect to see those contributions go up.

10:53:00 And I am going to be checking to see if those charities have

10:53:04 experienced increased contributions, and those of you that

10:53:08 follow me on council know that I follow up with what I say,

10:53:11 and I will be checking in with them.

10:53:12 So please, I implore you, to help us find the solutions that

10:53:18 we need, because -- just because everyone knows, you make

10:53:23 something illegal does not make the problem go away.

10:53:26 So this is your chance.

10:53:30 I'm voting for my constituents who overwhelmingly want a

10:53:33 seven-day ban, but I will compromise, and I will put

10:53:36 something in place that brings a partial solution.

10:53:40 The other part is left up to the public and left up to us as

10:53:44 public officials to use our position to try and find

10:53:46 solutions for the greater issues that face our community.

10:53:53 And, again, street solicitation is not equal to

10:53:57 homelessness.

10:53:58 Not everyone who is out there soliciting for money or goods

10:54:03 or donations is homeless, and not everyone who is homeless

10:54:06 is out there on the streets participating in street

10:54:11 solicitation.

10:54:12 That's all I am going to say.

10:54:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

10:54:15 Mr. Sanchez.

10:54:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: In a, Suarez.

10:54:20 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I wanted to see if you knew who you were.

10:54:22 I woke you up.

10:54:23 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You did.

10:54:25 I want to welcome you back, chair.

10:54:26 I wasn't sure if I was going to call you Lazarus.

10:54:30 The only thing I know that you love more than City Council

10:54:34 is baseball and horse racing.

10:54:35 I have to say you are more like curl chilling.

10:54:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Why don't you take tell the public the

10:54:41 nickname that I gave you?

10:54:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I am not going to.

10:54:44 [ Laughter ]

10:54:44 Anyway, we really appreciate you being here, and we know

10:54:47 it's a struggle for you being here on most days but

10:54:51 especially today.

10:54:52 I want to just point out that the kind of compromise that we

10:54:54 have been able to work on and work through with Councilman

10:55:00 Cohen's leadership and help is something that bodes well for

10:55:04 this City Council, and I want the people of the City of

10:55:07 Tampa to know that this is not an easy issue for any of us,

10:55:10 as said by all of my colleagues, but it is something that we

10:55:13 needed to work on and we needed to work through.

10:55:16 Without doing this, the City of Tampa, the citizens that

10:55:20 live here, have lost confidence in our ability to get

10:55:24 questions answered and issues resolved.

10:55:26 And I want to thank my colleague Councilman Cohen for

10:55:29 working so hard on this.

10:55:31 I want to thank my other colleagues who have looked at this

10:55:35 from all angles and trade to figure out what is going to be

10:55:37 the best compromise.

10:55:39 It may not please everyone at first, but I think that this

10:55:42 is an example of representative democracy at work and I will

10:55:48 be voting on these ordinances after it's brought up.

10:55:51 Thank you.

10:55:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Ms. Mulhern.

10:55:53 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Mr. Miranda, for letting me have

10:55:56 a second chance to speak.

10:55:57 All I wanted to do, I have an e-mail from Beverly Moreau

10:56:02 that I would like the clerk to enter.

10:56:05 She wanted to us read it but it's very long.

10:56:07 But it's excellent suggestions for solutions and ideas to

10:56:14 deal with panhandling, and homelessness and all kinds of

10:56:19 these issues.

10:56:20 So out great, and I will follow up with her.

10:56:22 And I'm entering it into the record right now.

10:56:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Cohen?

10:56:28 >>HARRY COHEN: Mr. Chair, I would like to go ahead and move

10:56:30 the ordinances.

10:56:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say this before we start.

10:56:34 This is item number 58.

10:56:35 And Mr. Cohen will read the title of these ordinances for

10:56:38 first reading.

10:56:39 >>HARRY COHEN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

10:56:43 I move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending

10:56:47 City of Tampa code of ordinances chapter 25, transportation,

10:56:51 repealing section 25-173, safety requirements for soliciting

10:56:57 business or contributions from within streets right-of-way,

10:57:00 repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict

10:57:03 therewith, providing for severability, providing an

10:57:05 effective date.

10:57:05 >> Correct.

10:57:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Cohen, a second by

10:57:10 Mrs. Capin on a very close vote with Ms. Montelione.

10:57:14 Thank God I got two ears.

10:57:18 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying Aye.

10:57:21 Opposed, nay.

10:57:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Nay.

10:57:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion passes 6-1.

10:57:27 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no.

10:57:30 And second reading and adoption will be on October 20th,

10:57:35 2011 at 9:30 a.m.

10:57:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The second reading will be October

10:57:39 20th at 10 a.m.

10:57:42 9:30 in the morning.

10:57:43 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance of the city of Tampa,

10:57:50 Florida amending chapter 25 code of ordinances

10:57:54 transportation, creating section 25-173, solicitation and

10:57:58 distribution on public roads, repealing all ordinances or

10:58:01 parts of ordinances in conflict therewith, providing for

10:58:04 severability, providing an effective date.

10:58:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Cohen.

10:58:08 This is 58, part B.

10:58:10 Sounds like an insurance company.

10:58:18 Motion made by Mr. Coen second by Mr. Suarez.

10:58:21 We are going to take the vote.

10:58:22 All in favor of the motion please indicate by saying Aye.

10:58:25 Opposed, nay.

10:58:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Nay.

10:58:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Motion passes 6-1.

10:58:30 The motion carries.

10:58:31 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no.

10:58:34 Second reading and adoption will be on October 20, 2011,

10:58:42 9:30 a.m.

10:58:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: October 20, 9:30 a.m. right here in these

10:58:46 chambers.

10:58:47 Part C.

10:58:49 There is where you go to the hospital if they don't pay you.

10:58:54 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance of the city of Tampa,

10:58:56 Florida amending City of Tampa code of ordinances chapter 6,

10:58:58 business regulation, creating division 12 of article 3,

10:59:02 newspaper sales allowed, repealing all ordinances or parts

10:59:05 of ordinances in conflict therewith, providing for

10:59:08 severability, providing an effective date.

10:59:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion by Mr. Cohen, second by

10:59:13 Mrs. Montelione, originally said on that date where the

10:59:17 motion was trying to pass.

10:59:18 All in favor of the motion, please indicate by saying Aye.

10:59:21 Opposed, nay.

10:59:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Nay.

10:59:25 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting.

10:59:28 No second reading and adoption will be on October 20, 2011

10:59:31 at 9:30 a.m.

10:59:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. Chair, I want to point out in, light

10:59:37 of the votes that are cast, this may not be an issue but I

10:59:41 will not be present at the October 20th meeting, and I

10:59:43 just wanted to state for the record they'll be out of town.

10:59:46 So I won't be here to cast that vote on the 20th.

10:59:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I hope I get relief.

10:59:55 Okay.

10:59:55 These three items on 58 are now completed.

10:59:59 We go now to item 57.

11:00:02 We jumped one there because that was the main discussion

11:00:05 when I came in.

11:00:14 A bid of AMS, the water department, $367,015.92.

11:00:23 >>BRAD BAIRD: Brad Baird, water department.

11:00:25 This is to approve the bid of AMSUTIL serve to read 50% of

11:00:33 Tampa's water meters, and to transition to monthly meter

11:00:36 reading as recommended by the water task force report, and

11:00:41 the internal audit report that was recently issued.

11:00:47 Two weeks ago I provided a presentation on this item.

11:00:55 And you respond with you would like to have a time to review

11:00:58 the internal audit report.

11:01:01 So I'm here at this point to answer questions on this item.

11:01:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you.

11:01:08 Ms. Mulhern.

11:01:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, Chairman Miranda.

11:01:14 I pulled this off the consent agenda last week.

11:01:19 I haven't finished reading the audit because I got so busy

11:01:24 with other unnecessary legal research I was doing, but this

11:01:35 has been going on for a year or more.

11:01:39 And I actually took home a book this thick of all the

11:01:45 discussion we had at meetings over these water meter

11:01:50 readers.

11:01:51 I was satisfied with finally when we finally got the task

11:01:56 force report from you.

11:02:04 Unfortunately at this point I think we are in a situation

11:02:06 where you are asking us to hire an outside contractor to do

11:02:14 meter reading when I think what I know that I had asked for

11:02:21 from the beginning was that your department figure out what

11:02:26 the problem was and fix it.

11:02:28 And now we are finding out what the problems were, and

11:02:32 instead of fixing the mechanism and what going on in your

11:02:37 own department, you want to farm it out to a company that is

11:02:42 from out of town, because they do it better and cheaper.

11:02:47 And I think that the cheaper part we may never be able to

11:02:52 get around, but the better part, we should be able to do it

11:02:56 better because we have the experienced people as opposed to

11:03:02 hiring untrained people through a company that's not even

11:03:06 based in Tampa, will come here and hire people who are not

11:03:11 trained, don't have any experience in this.

11:03:15 And I think in your audit and in your task force report,

11:03:19 there are a lot of reasons, which, by the way, was an

11:03:23 internal audit.

11:03:24 And back when these questions really came to a head, last

11:03:38 winter, the department was asking for an internal audit and

11:03:42 we gave the water department the time and the energy to

11:03:55 figure out what the problems were, and I pulled this last

11:03:58 week and let her know, and then the long-time water

11:04:00 department vice-president of the union had just died, so he

11:04:10 wasn't here.

11:04:10 I mean -- not great timing, but for this resolution to come

11:04:18 to us.

11:04:18 And so I can't support it.

11:04:21 I can't support.

11:04:25 And I said this so many times, and because I get so busy, I

11:04:28 haven't followed up on my request.

11:04:30 But we have been asked to privatize things and told we are

11:04:38 going to save money.

11:04:39 There's never any accounting in the end about whether after

11:04:42 mid-term period of maybe two, three, four, five-year period,

11:04:46 we actually are saving money.

11:04:48 And there's never any accounting about how well the job is

11:04:54 getting done, and you, by hiring outside people to do it,

11:04:58 you completely lose your accountability of the so I can't

11:05:00 support it for that reason.

11:05:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: How are you doing?

11:05:09 The last time we discussed this, the internal auditor had

11:05:15 promised that he was going to provide us a copy of the

11:05:18 audit.

11:05:20 To this day, I haven't received my copy.

11:05:27 So I wonder what happened to it, first.

11:05:31 That's number one.

11:05:31 The privatization posed some concerns to me because I just

11:05:38 read where the administration just pulled a private contract

11:05:45 from waste management and decided to let the employees of

11:05:48 solid waste handle the waste facility because they found

11:05:51 that it was cheaper, instead of the private company doing it

11:05:55 because they found it would be more expensive.

11:05:58 Then my concern now, if administration decided to pull the

11:06:03 contract from waste management and let solid waste, the city

11:06:09 employees provide the services over there to the waste

11:06:11 facility, why is it necessary for the water department to

11:06:17 privatize, and seemed like administration is setting two

11:06:23 different examples.

11:06:24 On one side they are saying it's cheaper to do it

11:06:27 internally, instead of having a private company do it, and

11:06:33 another section of the city saying, let go privatize.

11:06:37 So there's a conflict saying it not only to the council but

11:06:45 to the public, if it's cheaper to do the sewage, why is it

11:06:48 not cheaper to have internal you employees doing the meter

11:06:53 reading?

11:06:53 And isn't it true that we are already utilizing contractors

11:06:58 from the Hillsborough County government for the county to do

11:07:03 some of the meter reading to try to catch up from previous,

11:07:06 what was right behind before?

11:07:08 And is that true?

11:07:09 Let me ask you that question first.

11:07:10 >>> In an interim basis we retained SWI, which was our meter

11:07:17 reading contractor, to read three cycles as a pilot program,

11:07:22 if you will, to transition to monthly meter reading.

11:07:27 And as part of that we did, and that was also a

11:07:32 recommendation as part of the task force report.

11:07:34 >> Okay.

11:07:38 I just have some reservation about bringing an outside

11:07:42 private company, especially after I read the article about

11:07:46 what the city is doing in terms of eliminating that contract

11:07:50 with waste management, in order to allow solid waste

11:07:53 department employees to do the work, and at a cheaper cost.

11:07:57 And, therefore, I just think personally that if you can do

11:08:05 that with solid waste, then we should not privatize the

11:08:12 water department if we can utilize our own employees

11:08:14 internally to do the work.

11:08:17 It seems to me that instead of hiring a private contractor

11:08:21 that you go out and hire additional people to do this.

11:08:26 And I'm pretty sure there are deserving citizens in this

11:08:31 community and deserving people in the water department that

11:08:33 can do this job instead of going out and getting a contract

11:08:38 from somewhere else to probably come in and do the service.

11:08:41 So internally, I think we are setting a bad example and

11:08:46 sending mixed messages to the public at one end when it's

11:08:50 cheaper to do it internally for solid waste and then is

11:08:56 advantageous on a contract for the water department, and I

11:08:59 just don't feel comfortable with that, and I have some

11:09:02 reservations.

11:09:04 And I agree with some of the comments I heard from the union

11:09:09 representative, and that is, is it true -- my last comment,

11:09:16 Mr. Chairman is this -- is it true that there's a budget for

11:09:23 ten positions, in the city budget?

11:09:26 And there's only currently eight individuals working?

11:09:32 >>BRAD BAIRD: No.

11:09:32 The meter reading group is budgeted for 13 positions.

11:09:38 We have -- and I want to correct way said last time because

11:09:41 I just learned some new information -- we have four

11:09:44 vacancies out of those 13 positions, which leaves nine

11:09:52 filled but two of those vacancies were due to recent, very

11:09:56 recent promotions of two meter readers into on the parts of

11:09:59 the water department, and we are in the process of

11:10:03 advertising to fill those two vacancies.

11:10:06 >>FRANK REDDICK: How many physicians would a private

11:10:12 contractor -- are you going to hire additional employees

11:10:14 with that private contractor, or are they going to come in

11:10:18 and manage and monitor those current employees you have?

11:10:20 >> They will hire additional employees, and will look for

11:10:27 employs experienced in meter reading.

11:10:29 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay, so in that case, it would make more

11:10:32 sense from a physical standpoint to utilize the current

11:10:39 employees you have and hire additional employees and let it

11:10:42 be managed by the current staff that you have, so you are

11:10:48 promoting within, versus a contract outside agency doing it.

11:10:53 From a logical standpoint, is it more simple just to hire

11:10:57 people from within and promote from within instead of

11:11:01 bringing an outside contractor?

11:11:03 >>BRAD BAIRD: Well, first with the existing meter readers,

11:11:11 we are staffed to match 50% of the meter reading.

11:11:15 Our thought were that in retaining a contractor to read the

11:11:20 other 50%, we could meet the objectives of the water task

11:11:26 force report and implement this over the next year and it

11:11:40 would be a year's transition to get to full meter reading

11:11:43 and go from there.

11:11:44 It does main tain some flexibility that we are able to --

11:11:48 that the city needs to cover for the contractor or vice

11:11:50 versa because of sickness and vacation and those kinds of

11:11:54 things, he gives us an, arrangement that provides for the

11:11:57 most flexibility.

11:11:58 And I would like to point out that other area municipalities

11:12:03 are using that same model.

11:12:05 Pasco County and Hillsborough County.

11:12:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Mr. Baird and I met before this item

11:12:18 first came up and reviewed the terms of the contract, and

11:12:23 from what I understand -- and unless things have changed,

11:12:26 which I doubt they have, we will be reading 50% of our

11:12:30 meters, and this outside company will be reading the other

11:12:33 50% of the meters.

11:12:36 >>BRAD BAIRD: Correct.

11:12:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: My position on why I supported this item

11:12:49 and I voiced the last time, and I will add another

11:12:53 commentary, it's been no secret that our water department,

11:12:55 our water meter readers, everybody challenged, so to speak.

11:13:00 It's been causing a great deal of angst amongst our water

11:13:08 customers.

11:13:08 It's been publicized greatly in the newspaper and on TV.

11:13:12 And I feel that bringing in a company who will read not all

11:13:18 of our meters, just half of those meters, some relief to the

11:13:30 public that they know we are moving forward quickly to try

11:13:33 to bring the problem under control.

11:13:35 As I discussed with Mr. Baird, this is a one-year contract,

11:13:39 and I'm hoping -- I may be naive, but I'm hoping that after

11:13:42 this one year we will be able, as a water department, to get

11:13:48 our act together, that we will be able to learn from this

11:13:52 company who, if they can come in and they can do it faster

11:13:56 and cheaper, there have got to be lessons that we can learn

11:13:59 from what they are doing.

11:14:00 So in this one-year period, it will give us some breathing

11:14:06 room to make the improvements in our water department to

11:14:11 look at how the company who is quite successful at doing

11:14:17 this job does it, and we can learn lessons from that.

11:14:21 I don't see any problem with a one-year contract in order

11:14:25 for us to get our proverbial feet on the ground on this

11:14:30 usual you.

11:14:31 The other thing we spoke about at that meeting, and I talked

11:14:33 about it on council, is this company is going to be opening

11:14:36 up a local office here in Tampa, and they will be hiring

11:14:40 local people.

11:14:40 So it will Chip away just a little bit at the unemployment

11:14:44 that we have currently in the city, not by expanding the

11:14:49 number of employees of the City of Tampa, but they will be

11:14:53 coming here and nonetheless hiring our citizens.

11:15:03 I have requested that we talk to the company who is coming

11:15:05 here, and we also talked to some of the nonprofits and some

11:15:08 of the analysis who do workforce training, and that we

11:15:13 employ individuals who are part of the long-term unemployed

11:15:21 in disadvantaged communities or circumstances to put them to

11:15:27 work: I participated in training programs before with this

11:15:31 method of training people for a specific task to be hired by

11:15:36 a specific company, worked beautifully.

11:15:40 And I would just request that again that we talk about that.

11:15:46 And again, that audit report was available from the first

11:15:50 time doc agenda was posted before this item came um before I

11:15:56 was able to read it, my aide was able to print it out, and

11:16:01 from what I understand, Councilman Cohen kept his promise to

11:16:04 me and did he read the audit report as well.

11:16:07 So I appreciate that.

11:16:10 And I would like to move this item forward.

11:16:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have a motion.

11:16:16 Did anyone else want to speak before I get a second?

11:16:19 Mr. Suarez.

11:16:20 And I will hold your motion for a second.

11:16:21 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Thank you, Mr. Baird, for coming out here.

11:16:25 I know the audit that was done, we wanted to read more

11:16:29 meters because of the perfect storm that we had last year

11:16:34 with the change, you know, everything that happened.

11:16:40 Now, what has been the performance of the contractor in

11:16:43 comparison to our current employees?

11:16:49 How good have they done it so far?

11:16:51 >> They have done very well.

11:16:53 The numbers are essentially the same, within a percentage

11:16:57 point, I will say.

11:16:59 When you compare the number of meters located and read, and

11:17:05 also when you compare the meter reading accuracy, City of

11:17:09 Tampa versus SWI, for those meters that were read, it was

11:17:15 within .3 of one percent so 99.8% accuracy versus 99.5

11:17:24 accuracy for the contractor.

11:17:27 So essentially the same level of service.

11:17:31 >>MIKE SUAREZ: In terms of the number of people you are

11:17:34 looking at hiring or the contractor is looking at hiring,

11:17:36 with this particular contractor, do you know that number?

11:17:40 Or is that their own leeway in terms of how many they hire?

11:17:44 >> I don't know that number.

11:17:45 We will find out that number when we meet with them.

11:17:48 >> Okay.

11:17:48 In terms of the total costs that we are looking at, $367,000

11:17:52 and change, if we were to hire -- how many people could we

11:17:57 hire with that $367,000 in-house?


11:18:07 >> Based on an entry level meter reader.

11:18:10 I know there's additional costs for pensions, health

11:18:12 benefits and so on.

11:18:13 >> In F my quick math in my head is correct, that would be

11:18:17 seven to eight meter readers, I believe, according benefits.

11:18:22 >> Needless to say, it sounds like with this particular

11:18:25 contract we are going to essentially double the number of

11:18:27 meter readers that we currently have, or about, to do the

11:18:30 exact same job.

11:18:34 I don't have any problem with hiring outside contractors.

11:18:38 I don't have a problem necessarily with this particular

11:18:40 thing because we really need to solve the problem of meter

11:18:43 reading.

11:18:44 We really fell behind before, and it really caused a lot of

11:18:48 heartburn and a lot of problems with those people that are

11:18:51 out there.

11:18:52 The issue that is always going to come up is, why can't we

11:18:55 do it internally?

11:18:56 I think Mr. Reddick said it eloquently, that why not hire

11:19:02 internally?

11:19:02 And that's a question that you are going to have to answer

11:19:04 in terms of why this contract is important.

11:19:07 So what is the nexus tore reason why we would go outside and

11:19:14 hire when we can probably hire seven or eight people

11:19:17 internally?

11:19:22 >>BRAD BAIRD: I think I am going defer to my boss, Steve

11:19:25 Daignault.

11:19:25 >> It's always good to punt to the boss.

11:19:28 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator for public works and

11:19:30 utility services.

11:19:31 And that's a very good question.

11:19:33 Brad mentioned earlier the flexibility.

11:19:35 We have been in cases in various part of the city before

11:19:40 where if we had had a contractor, we could have substituted

11:19:43 some contractor people for city people when we had either

11:19:47 vacancies or injuries or workman's comp cases and we need

11:19:51 add little help and vice versa. So this is a great way to

11:19:54 have some flexibility.

11:19:56 But even more important than that, it's our customers'

11:20:00 costs.

11:20:00 We are trying to keep costs down.

11:20:01 And through this whole process.

11:20:03 And this does go back to the February, January time frame

11:20:07 when we were discussing this with the council at that time,

11:20:10 and with the press, and the administration.

11:20:13 We want to keep costs down.

11:20:15 So this is a significant cost savings versus hiring city

11:20:22 employees long-term and bringing them into this picture.

11:20:24 >> And I just want to point out one last thing.

11:20:26 I'm sorry, chair.

11:20:27 This is just a replacement contract for one we already have

11:20:31 in place, correct?

11:20:33 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Not exactly.

11:20:35 We have always read meters every other month.

11:20:38 So we had two-month meter reads.

11:20:42 As a result of what's happened, we have decided to go to

11:20:44 monthly meter reads.

11:20:46 So, if you will, that has doubled the number ever reads we

11:20:49 need to do each month.

11:20:51 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So is that --

11:20:55 >> Than the amount of reads we used to do in the past.

11:20:58 >> So SWI is still in the picture?

11:21:00 >> SWI is doing three of the cycles, three of the routes we

11:21:03 have are being read on a monthly basis, as Brad said, kind

11:21:07 of a forebearer to see how it's going.

11:21:11 But we intend to read all of the meters monthly.

11:21:14 So that's why we are bringing in, that's why we went out for

11:21:17 competitive bids, that's why we are bringing in someone to

11:21:21 basically read the other half of the reads that we require

11:21:25 when we go to monthly reading.

11:21:26 >> Okay.

11:21:27 Because I was under the impression that SWI was no longer

11:21:30 going to be the contractor, but --

11:21:34 >> SWI will go away when the new contractor comes in.

11:21:37 >> That was my question.

11:21:38 So if this is approved, we are only going to have one

11:21:41 contractor in terms of meter reads?

11:21:43 >> That's correct.

11:21:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Any other council member who has not

11:21:47 spoke?

11:21:52 Ms. Montelione had made a motion to move this resolution.

11:21:55 Do I hear a second?

11:21:58 Second by Mr. Suarez.

11:22:00 All in favor of the resolution, please indicate by saying

11:22:02 Aye.

11:22:04 Opposed?

11:22:06 Motion passes, if I heard it right, 5 to 2.

11:22:10 >>THE CLERK: With Reddick and Mulhern voting.

11:22:12 No.

11:22:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.

11:22:25 Okay, I can't stay much longer.

11:22:27 And I want to thank all of you for all the cards and the

11:22:31 prayers that I have gotten.

11:22:34 Some are than others, because they sent me hundred dollar

11:22:39 bills.

11:22:40 [ Laughter ]

11:22:40 But then I really didn't get any so, I'm just joke with you.

11:22:45 So seven weeks is a long time.

11:22:52 Those are the cards that I was dealt.

11:22:58 I had too many surgeries.

11:22:59 That's why I asked to vote by phone.

11:23:04 One was abdominal.

11:23:05 And the other was lung.


11:23:09 My left side still has a tube in it.

11:23:16 If anybody wants to see it, I can shot to you so you can

11:23:19 tell I'm not lying.

11:23:20 I have always tried to be straightforward.

11:23:22 The reason I came down today is very clear.

11:23:27 I heard more about Charlie Miranda, Charlie Miranda this and

11:23:30 that, and it's really not about me.

11:23:32 Bits the city.

11:23:34 And what the city should move forward and look forward to

11:23:37 what they want to do.

11:23:40 So when you have a 3-3 vote, somebody has got to break that

11:23:44 vote.

11:23:46 If I had known it was going to be 6 to 1, I would have

11:23:49 stayed at home.

11:23:53 But I just thank the council members.

11:23:56 I never questioned anyone's vote in the past and never will

11:23:58 in the future.

11:23:59 They have the same right I have.

11:24:01 You got elected just like I did.

11:24:03 And they are entitled to express their opinion.

11:24:06 And, therefore, it's a pleasure to have served you, and I

11:24:12 will continue serve you -- serving you hopefully for the

11:24:16 remainder of the term.

11:24:17 Please don't come dressed in white.

11:24:20 I will think you are a Dr.

11:24:23 And they are great people, but I get a little nervous now.

11:24:30 I think it's now called the CM scan.

11:24:33 I have seen so many of them.

11:24:34 In fact, I had one yesterday.

11:24:37 So I want to thank you.

11:24:38 I am not going to stay for any other discussion because some

11:24:44 of them where you have to know much more about the

11:24:48 background of that suggests not only with that item but the

11:24:50 surrounding neighborhoods, and you have heard none of that.

11:24:53 So it's imperative that I say thank you all.

11:24:59 I have a doctor's appointment, one on Monday, one on

11:25:01 Wednesday, and let's see what happens and what they are

11:25:04 telling me, and hopefully I will be back here in the next

11:25:06 two or three weeks, no longer than that.

11:25:08 Okay, thank you all very much.

11:25:10 I appreciate it.

11:25:12 [ Applause ]

11:25:58 >>MARY MULHERN: We will go back to our regularly scheduled

11:26:00 agenda.

11:26:00 We have ordinances presented for first reading

11:26:04 consideration.

11:26:08 Item number 3.

11:26:09 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:26:14 I want to state for the purposes of the record that this is

11:26:16 an old vacation ordinance that when they were going through

11:26:20 the process of selling the property or doing some work,

11:26:22 title work on the property, it came to everybody's attention

11:26:25 that the legal description that was attached to the previous

11:26:27 ordinance wasn't exactly clear as it related to the exact

11:26:32 portions of the road that have been vacated, even though I

11:26:35 went back and checked and everything was properly given to

11:26:37 council at that time.

11:26:37 So I'm recommending that we do a scrivener's error ordinance

11:26:42 so that title can be clear for this property owner.

11:26:45 Thank you.

11:26:52 Thank you. My questions?

11:26:56 Councilman Montelione, could you read that?

11:26:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: An ordinance presented for first reading

11:27:02 consideration.

11:27:02 An ordinance amending ordinance number 97-226 passed and

11:27:06 ordained by the City Council of the City of Tampa on October

11:27:09 9, 1997 correcting a scrivener's error by substituting a new

11:27:13 legal description for the old legal description that was

11:27:15 attached to the ordinance which supplied in error, providing

11:27:19 for severability, providing an effective date.

11:27:20 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Second.

11:27:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion by councilwoman Montelione, second

11:27:29 bid Councilman Suarez.

11:27:30 All in favor?

11:27:31 Anyone opposed?

11:27:32 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

11:27:37 Second reading and adoption will be on October 20, 2011, at

11:27:41 9:30 a.m.

11:27:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 46789 does anyone wish to speak

11:27:56 on this from staff?

11:28:02 Councilman Cohen.

11:28:04 >>HARRY COHEN: I move an ordinance being presented for

11:28:06 first reading consideration, an ordinance of the city of

11:28:10 Tampa, Florida creating code section 14-33 to make it

11:28:14 unlawful for any person engaging in a transaction with a

11:28:18 pawn broker, secondhand dealer, secondary metals recylcler

11:28:23 or mail-in secondhand precious metals dealer to provide any

11:28:27 false or inaccurate information in connection with the

11:28:30 transaction, providing for a penalty for violations thereof,

11:28:33 providing an effective date.

11:28:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

11:28:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Cohen, seconded

11:28:39 by Councilman Reddick.

11:28:41 All in favor?

11:28:42 Anyone opposed?

11:28:43 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

11:28:47 Second reading and adoption will be on October 20th,

11:28:50 2011 at 9:30 a.m.

11:28:52 >>MARY MULHERN: We will move to our committee reports.

11:28:56 Public Safety Committee, Councilman Reddick.

11:28:58 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move items 5 through 15, Madam Chair.

11:29:03 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

11:29:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Coked Cohen.

11:29:07 All in favor?

11:29:08 Anyone opposed?

11:29:22 That was through 16?

11:29:24 Okay, thank you.

11:29:26 Parks, Recreation and Culture Committee.

11:29:29 Councilwoman Montelione, if could you read that, and taking

11:29:35 note that number 17 is a substitute ordinance.

11:29:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I hate to do this to you, Madam Chair,

11:29:44 but if I may defer to Councilman Reddick, and also ask to

11:29:48 take a separate vote on item 18 because I need to recuse

11:29:51 myself from the vote on item number 18.

11:29:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you can state the reason for that,

11:30:00 please.

11:30:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Item 18 is approving a change order to a

11:30:06 contract under which the company that I participate in as a

11:30:11 non-paid employee is benefiting.

11:30:15 We have a subcontract with the contractor that is named in

11:30:17 the item.

11:30:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And you believe that that may be perceived

11:30:21 to be a conflict of interest?

11:30:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you, Mr. Shelby.

11:30:26 Yes, I see that may be construed as a conflict.

11:30:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And I will prepare the form for you to

11:30:31 file.

11:30:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you so much.

11:30:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione, could you move

11:30:37 everything but that item then?

11:30:39 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Certainly.

11:30:41 I move items number 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21, with a notation

11:30:53 that item number 17 has a substitute resolution attached.

11:30:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

11:31:01 Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione, second by Councilman

11:31:05 Suarez.

11:31:05 All in favor?

11:31:11 Councilman Reddick, could you move item 18?

11:31:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move item 18.

11:31:16 >> Second.

11:31:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Cohen.

11:31:20 All in favor?

11:31:21 Anyone opposed?

11:31:22 >>THE CLERK: On number 18, motion carried with Miranda

11:31:25 being absent and Montelione abstaining.

11:31:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Public Works Committee.

11:31:34 Public works chair, Councilman Suarez.

11:31:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move items 22 through 30.

11:31:41 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

11:31:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Cohen.

11:31:47 All in favor?

11:31:48 Anyone opposed?

11:32:07 Finance Committee.

11:32:07 Councilman Cohen.

11:32:09 >>HARRY COHEN: I move items 31, 32 and 33.

11:32:13 >> Second.

11:32:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Suarez.

11:32:20 All in favor?

11:32:22 Anyone opposed?

11:32:26 Building, Zoning and Preservation Committee, Councilwoman

11:32:30 Montelione.

11:32:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move items 38 through 46 with a

11:32:36 notation that items 34 through 37 I have pulled for

11:32:39 discussion during staff reports.

11:32:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,

11:32:46 second by Councilman Suarez.

11:32:48 All in favor?

11:32:49 Anyone opposed?

11:32:54 Transportation committee, Councilwoman Capin.

11:33:00 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I move items 47 through 53.

11:33:03 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

11:33:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion by Councilwoman Capin, second by

11:33:08 Councilman Cohen.

11:33:09 All in favor?

11:33:10 Anyone opposed?

11:33:16 We will move to our public hearings, second readings on

11:33:25 proposed ordinances.

11:33:37 Item 54.

11:33:38 >>THE CLERK: Madam Chair, would you like to open the public

11:33:41 hearings?

11:33:44 >> Move to open the public hearings.

11:33:46 >> Second.

11:33:46 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the record, that's 54, 55 and 56, is

11:33:52 that correct?

11:33:53 >> Yes.

11:33:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 54.

11:33:58 Is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak on item

11:34:01 number 54?

11:34:14 Councilman Reddick?

11:34:16 >>THE CLERK: Madam Chair, you need to close.

11:34:19 >> Motion to close.

11:34:21 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

11:34:22 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

11:34:24 Councilman Reddick, could you read item 54?

11:34:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move an item presented for second reading

11:34:29 and adoption, an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida

11:34:33 amending Tampa code section 3-40, 3-41 and 16-46 to provide

11:34:40 for a specified civil infraction, penalty in lieu of the

11:34:44 general penalty provision of Tampa code section 1-16 for

11:34:49 certain offenses relating to possession or consumption of

11:34:53 alcoholic beverage on public property, amending Tampa code

11:34:56 section 23-5-5 to include code section 3-40, 3-41 and 16-46

11:35:05 among the existing code sections the violation of which

11:35:08 shall be class 1 civil infraction, authorizing community

11:35:13 service hours as an alternative penalty for class 1 civil

11:35:15 infraction, and providing an effective date.

11:35:17 >> Second.

11:35:19 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Reddick, seconded

11:35:22 by Councilman Suarez.

11:35:24 All in favor.

11:35:27 We are going to need to do voice roll call on second

11:35:30 reading.

11:35:30 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Aye.

11:35:36 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Aye.

11:35:37 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.

11:35:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

11:35:39 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.

11:35:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

11:35:43 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

11:35:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 54.

11:35:51 >> 55.

11:35:53 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry.

11:35:54 Item number 55.

11:35:55 Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak on item

11:35:58 55?

11:36:00 Seeing no one, Councilwoman Capin, could you read that?

11:36:04 >> Move to close the public hearing.

11:36:06 >> Second.

11:36:06 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor of closing?

11:36:09 Councilwoman Capin.

11:36:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

11:36:12 All right.

11:36:15 Thank you, Madam Chair.

11:36:18 I volunteered to read 56, also.

11:36:22 An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida making revisions

11:36:25 to the City of Tampa code of ordinances, chapter 22, streets

11:36:28 and sidewalks, amending section 22-235, installation and

11:36:34 dimension requirements, repealing all ordinances or parts of

11:36:37 ordinances in conflict therewith, providing for

11:36:40 severability, providing an effective date.

11:36:42 >> Second.

11:36:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Capin, second

11:36:47 by Councilman Suarez.

11:36:48 All in favor -- voice roll call, please.

11:36:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.

11:36:54 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

11:36:55 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.

11:36:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

11:37:01 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.

11:37:02 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

11:37:03 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

11:37:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 56 we have a generous offer

11:37:08 from Councilwoman Capin.

11:37:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

11:37:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone from the public who wishes

11:37:16 to speak on item number 56?

11:37:18 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to close.

11:37:22 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

11:37:23 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

11:37:24 Councilwoman Capin?

11:37:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Madam Chair.

11:37:28 It is my pleasure to read an ordinance being presented for

11:37:30 second reading and adoption, an ordinance in the city of

11:37:33 Tampa, Florida making revisions to the City of Tampa code of

11:37:35 ordinances chapter 3, alcoholic beverage, creating section

11:37:39 3-22 dealing with posting of conditions for the sale of

11:37:43 alcoholic beverages, and chapter 27, zoning, amend willing

11:37:50 section 27-267, classes of special use permits, agent or

11:37:53 body responsible for each general procedure, providing for

11:37:57 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing for

11:37:59 severability, providing an effective date.

11:38:01 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Capin, seconded

11:38:07 by Councilman Cohen.

11:38:09 Voice roll call, please.

11:38:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.

11:38:13 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

11:38:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.

11:38:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

11:38:17 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.

11:38:18 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

11:38:18 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

11:38:21 >>MARY MULHERN: We move on to our staff reports.

11:38:37 Item number 59, there was a request to continue this.

11:38:44 I'm not sure if we passed the continuance.

11:38:47 >>THE CLERK: That was done under approval of the minutes.

11:38:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

11:38:50 Councilman Montelione.

11:38:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, when we were moving that item

11:38:54 for continuance to the 20th, again, I am not going to be

11:38:57 here the 20th, and that is something that I would like

11:38:59 to be present for discussion.

11:39:02 Is there a possibility we can delay that to the next meeting

11:39:07 which would be November 3rd?

11:39:12 >> Motion to move to the November 3rd meeting, item

11:39:14 number 59.

11:39:15 >> Second.

11:39:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion by Councilman Cohen, second by

11:39:23 Councilman Montelione to continue the meeting to November

11:39:27 3rd at 9:30?

11:39:33 >>THE CLERK: Under staff reports.

11:39:34 >>MARY MULHERN: 10 a.m.

11:39:36 All in favor?

11:39:38 Anyone opposed?

11:39:41 Item number 60, Mr. Shelby.

11:39:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 60 and 61 are motions put in writing

11:39:51 for council's action appointing these citizens to their

11:39:54 respective boards, so the appropriate motion would be just

11:39:56 to move the resolutions 60 and 61.

11:39:59 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move resolutions 60 and 61.

11:40:01 >> Second.

11:40:03 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

11:40:05 Anyone opposed?

11:40:11 Item number 62.

11:40:13 I believe -- did we already move that with the substitute

11:40:16 resolution?

11:40:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe it's been substituted.

11:40:19 I believe that was Ms. Cole's request, and item 62, you have

11:40:24 received a substitute resolution, and it would just be

11:40:26 appropriate for council to move that resolution.

11:40:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

11:40:31 I could get a motion to do that?

11:40:33 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So moved.

11:40:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

11:40:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Moved by Councilman Suarez, seconded by

11:40:39 Councilman Reddick.

11:40:40 All in favor?

11:40:41 Anyone opposed?

11:40:50 Item number 636789 that is Councilwoman Capin's item.

11:40:54 Let's move to item number 64.

11:41:04 These were, I believe, Councilwoman Montelione, this is part

11:41:18 of our rule that anything over a million dollars needs to be

11:41:23 under staff reports.

11:41:24 So this is 64.

11:41:38 Item 64 is the Williams oil company fuel and diesel of the.

11:41:44 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator for public works, utility

11:41:46 services.

11:41:47 Again, this is an additional amount of fuel that is required

11:41:52 again for the city, city-wide use of fuel.

11:41:57 It is a large number dollar amount but again we buy a lot of

11:42:00 fuel for all of our vehicles.

11:42:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And that's part of the reason why I

11:42:05 always highlight this item.

11:42:06 This is the second time in six months that we are increasing

11:42:09 the dollar amount budget for the expenditure of fuel costs.

11:42:19 And I am always going to highlight when it comes to items

11:42:21 that pertain to us moving in a more sustainable alternative

11:42:26 energy in a responsible fashion.

11:42:32 This is also why I bring up the issues of when we purchase

11:42:34 vehicles that I always pull those purchase of vehicles items

11:42:38 from the consent agenda, because if we don't start

11:42:40 recognizing that we need to be as efficient as possible --

11:42:46 it doesn't just mean buying cars that are efficient, or

11:42:49 trucks or vans that are fuel efficient, but looking at other

11:42:53 ways to make our trips efficient.

11:42:56 I'm not sure we are utilizing GPS in an efficient way in

11:43:03 calculating our trips for a variety of departments, whether

11:43:06 it be water meter reading that we just talked about, or

11:43:10 whether it be code enforcement, all of the folks who drive

11:43:14 around all day long.

11:43:16 Are they going about their routes in efficient manner, not

11:43:20 driving especially my district.

11:43:22 I think folks who work district 7, or drive the most miles

11:43:28 of anyone.

11:43:29 So fuel costs are going to continue to escalate if we don't

11:43:35 start getting smart as a city.

11:43:36 Mr. Daignault, you see a lot of departments that fall into

11:43:39 that category.

11:43:40 So I am begging you to start really taking notice of what

11:43:43 our fuel costs are.

11:43:44 We are looking at just with this 1.5 million dollars ever

11:43:52 increased fuel costs, which is over and above our estimated

11:43:57 $4 million cost, we are now up to 5.5 million.

11:44:02 That's a huge number of gallons of gasoline that we are

11:44:07 buying, whether it be diesel, but these are items that are

11:44:13 going to continue to call attention to.

11:44:16 With that, I move item number 64.

11:44:18 >> Second.

11:44:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,

11:44:22 seconded by Councilman Suarez.

11:44:24 All in favor?

11:44:26 Anyone opposed?

11:44:31 Councilwoman Capin, do you wish to take up item number 63?

11:44:36 Or should we continue with these other?

11:44:42 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes, take that up, if we can.

11:44:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 63.

11:44:47 Mr. Shelby.

11:44:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Consistent with council's motion, I have

11:44:53 drafted a resolution for council's consideration.

11:44:58 And for that presentation, I would prefer to defer to

11:45:01 council member Capin.

11:45:07 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you, Mr. Shelby.

11:45:09 Madam Chair.

11:45:10 We have a resolution that we voted on 9 ---I'm sorry,

11:45:20 September 8, resolution creating a City Council advisory

11:45:25 committee on the economic impact of cultural assets

11:45:29 prescribing its purpose and appointment, its term and

11:45:33 membership, providing an effective date.

11:45:35 This memo came -- this draft came to all council members, I

11:45:41 believe, on Monday.

11:45:42 So if there's any discussion on it, Madam Chair, I think

11:45:54 that it does pertain to the -- to the membership and how

11:46:06 those appointments will be brought forth.

11:46:13 >> I haven't had a chance to read through it, but could you

11:46:21 tell us what are our responsibilities as far as other

11:46:26 council members if we are making appointments?

11:46:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Hereby creates a citizens advisory committee

11:46:32 on the economic impact of cultural impacts, the committee

11:46:35 shall consist of eleven members, a member of the Tampa City

11:46:38 Council shall be appointed by City Council to serve as a

11:46:40 representative.

11:46:41 Each member of the City Council shall submit the name of her

11:46:44 or his appointee, three at-large members shall be appointed

11:46:49 by the council member represented on the committee with the

11:46:51 approval of City Council.

11:46:53 Each member shall serve a term of two years, committee

11:46:57 members need not reside in the City of Tampa.

11:47:00 The committee members shall serve without compensation and

11:47:03 no funds shall be appropriated for the use thereof.

11:47:07 Such clerical, secretarial and other services as shall be

11:47:12 needed by the committee shall be rendered through the City

11:47:14 Council staff.

11:47:16 All meetings and deliberations of the committee shall be

11:47:18 conducted in and open to the public.

11:47:20 All members shall be subject to State of Florida public

11:47:23 records sunshine disclosure laws and the code of ethics of

11:47:28 the City of Tampa.

11:47:29 I want to make sure that this is clear.

11:47:31 The three at-large members that shall be appointed by the

11:47:34 council member represented on the committee with the

11:47:37 approval of City Council, that is intended for City Council

11:47:40 to approve the three members.

11:47:42 I wanted to make that clear.

11:47:49 That would be at-large.

11:47:52 And then the members of the committee shall serve, again, it

11:47:56 says for two years commencing September 30th to October

11:47:59 1, of 2013 -- right, September 30, 2013.

11:48:12 For the purpose and function, the committee shall be to

11:48:14 review studies and make recommendations to City Council to

11:48:17 assist the City Council's determination of municipal needs

11:48:22 and planning with respect to how it may facilitate and

11:48:26 support our unique cultural assets that attract and provide

11:48:29 the environment conducive to economic growth, thereby

11:48:33 enhancing economic growth in the community.

11:48:37 And this is important.

11:48:38 In addition the committee may form a fact-finding task force

11:48:41 as needed to research information.

11:48:45 The findings of fact may be brought forth to the committee

11:48:49 for review and study to assist the committee in its

11:48:52 formation and deliberation of recommendations.

11:48:57 That pretty much is the crux of the organization, or of the

11:49:01 committee.

11:49:01 >>MARY MULHERN: I had one concern, and I am wondering if

11:49:12 you would be willing to work with it, and it what you

11:49:15 brought up about the three at-large members of the

11:49:22 I just haven't seen an appointed board like this before

11:49:25 where one council person appoints and then the others would

11:49:29 have to approve it.

11:49:31 Maybe what we could have is have the full council just vote

11:49:36 on those three appointees like we do for the boards, the

11:49:41 people that apply as opposed to having the council person,

11:49:47 sewage that's going to be you, appoint people, and then we

11:49:51 approve your appointment.

11:49:54 Mr. Shelby, you could give us direction on that.

11:49:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, there's another concern that I

11:50:02 think we need to address prior to that, and that is in

11:50:05 consultation with the legal department, the very fact that

11:50:07 there is a council member who is a member of the committee

11:50:11 creates additional Sunshine Law concerns such that it may

11:50:15 actually require the clerk to cover these meetings, and that

11:50:19 adds a level of complication to that, and that is something

11:50:25 that I feel that I need to bring to council's attention.

11:50:29 With regard to what you have before you, this was drafted

11:50:32 with the intent as expressed by council member Capin.

11:50:37 It is certainly council's discretion in the deliberation how

11:50:44 it wishes to proceed with the composition of this board.

11:50:46 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, Mr. Shelby, if you have questions

11:50:59 about this, I think that you need to work on a resolution

11:51:02 that you don't have questions about with Councilwoman Capin

11:51:08 and come back with that.

11:51:10 I can't make a motion, but that's my feeling.

11:51:13 If you think there's some sunshine, let's get this ironed

11:51:17 out.

11:51:17 >> I'm not saying it's illegal.

11:51:21 I'm not saying it's improper.

11:51:22 I'm saying it may impose additional restrictions upon the

11:51:25 board.

11:51:25 And, frankly, I haven't completed my research on the

11:51:28 subject.

11:51:29 I have been fortunate --

11:51:31 >>MARY MULHERN: You also haven't answered my question.

11:51:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Which is?

11:51:34 >>MARY MULHERN: The sunshine law.

11:51:35 >> And the question again if could you repeat that, please.

11:51:37 >>MARY MULHERN: The question was about the appointment by

11:51:42 the council member for the full council to approve, and if

11:51:48 this council has done that with a board or committee before.

11:51:57 And Councilwoman Capin, we haven't created a lot of

11:52:00 committees, so I give you a lost credit for doing this.

11:52:04 It's not like we are doing it all the time.

11:52:06 But we did create the citizens budget advisory committee,

11:52:09 and that was just each council member, and I understand you

11:52:12 want to have a bigger board, and I have no problem with

11:52:15 that.

11:52:15 But I just think as a council, I would be more comfortable.

11:52:21 >>HARRY COHEN: First of all, I totally support this

11:52:27 concept, absolutely one vote to make it happen.

11:52:31 If there are issues, though, that need to be worked out,

11:52:34 maybe they could be ironed out over the next week and we can

11:52:38 bring this back on the 20th.

11:52:40 We are meeting again next week, and we could finalize it

11:52:44 then.

11:52:47 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

11:52:47 That would be absolutely -- again, this is where we get to

11:52:52 talk about what we are doing.

11:52:55 It's brought forth, and the reason that the city council

11:53:01 person is because -- remember that was one of the

11:53:06 suggestions.

11:53:06 But it doesn't have to be.

11:53:08 We can work this out, I'm sure.

11:53:10 So I'm willing to come back next week, and we will bring it

11:53:16 forth, hopefully.

11:53:17 But if you have suggestions, we really need to talk about it

11:53:21 now.

11:53:22 So if you think that a council member shouldn't be on

11:53:25 there --

11:53:26 >> No.

11:53:28 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Or if you think maybe we need ten or nine,

11:53:31 whatever, let us know.

11:53:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez.

11:53:36 >>MIKE SUAREZ: The only thing I was going to say is by

11:53:39 adding -- I don't think there's as much of a problem with

11:53:42 adding a City Council person on there, on the committee

11:53:44 itself, because you have already said in there that this is

11:53:47 going to be in the sunshine anyway.

11:53:49 I don't think there's going to be problems with reporting or

11:53:51 any other issues.

11:53:52 I think having additional three at-large people, the only

11:53:56 problem I would have with it is may be making it too

11:54:01 ungangly.

11:54:03 You may not get a lot done, how many people might be able to

11:54:06 make it.

11:54:07 I think the citizens committee on the budget was a good

11:54:09 example, and they even had a lot of people missing.

11:54:12 You may be trying to do it to make sure we have enough

11:54:14 people.

11:54:15 I don't know. But that's the only issue that I would have.

11:54:17 But having a council member in and of itself, I think, is a

11:54:24 good idea, and I would support it.

11:54:29 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I have gotten that feedback, and we will

11:54:32 certainly work on that, and come back next week.

11:54:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if I can, if that's the desire of

11:54:38 council, I can do additional research and have the answer to

11:54:44 the question what additional burdens there would be, if

11:54:47 council wants to know that in advance of voting.

11:54:49 Otherwise, if council wishes to move it today and put in the

11:54:51 place, then we'll have to just address whatever those would

11:54:54 be.

11:54:54 And if there's a problem we could always come back to

11:54:56 council and share that.

11:54:58 I should share with you next week, by the way, council, is a

11:55:01 CRA meeting, and -- it's a night meeting.

11:55:06 If you want to put it on the night meeting you certainly

11:55:08 could.

11:55:10 >>YVONNE CAPIN: What's the pleasure of council?

11:55:11 I'm really open to whatever.

11:55:15 >>HARRY COHEN: I would like to make a motion we take it up

11:55:19 at the beginning of our night meeting on Thursday and we'll

11:55:21 move it right through.

11:55:22 >> Second.

11:55:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Cohen, seconded

11:55:26 by Councilman Montelione.

11:55:28 Council, it is by this clock -- or we didn't--sorry.

11:55:35 I'm very sorry.

11:55:37 All in favor.

11:55:42 Anyone opposed?

11:55:44 Sorry about that.

11:55:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Reading your mind, I would like to make a

11:55:49 motion that we continue the hearing past 12:00, if we could

11:55:55 do a time certain.

11:55:59 Is that what you were going to say?

11:56:02 >>MARY MULHERN: No, that's not way was going to say.

11:56:04 I was going to say, because I understand from staff and

11:56:06 legal, that the public hearing coming up is very -- going to

11:56:10 be very long, that we should break at noon for lunch.

11:56:16 It's up to council.

11:56:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I understand the same thing, chair

11:56:23 Mulhern.

11:56:24 There's not one but three that are going to be very lengthy.

11:56:27 And it's five minutes till 12.

11:56:34 I would say I suggest we break for lunch ath and come back

11:56:37 at 1:30 and hear all the public hearings at one time.

11:56:43 I would make that motion to break for lunch, come back at

11:56:46 1:30.

11:56:46 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

11:56:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to break at noon and come back at --

11:56:58 oh, there was a suggestion that perhaps we make it a

11:57:01 one-hour lunch, if council would like to do that, to

11:57:05 accommodate these people who came.

11:57:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: 1:00 then.

11:57:08 >>MARY MULHERN: And seconded by Councilwoman Montelione,

11:57:13 seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

11:57:15 All in favor?

11:57:17 Anyone opposed?

11:57:22 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No.

11:57:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm really sorry that these meetings take

11:57:29 so long and you don't know when you are going to be heard

11:57:31 and you have to sit through this.

11:57:32 I'm sorry it happened.

11:57:33 We had a lot going on this morning.

11:57:34 But I do want to tell you that if we are fed, we will give

11:57:38 you a much better hearing.

11:57:41 If we get a little bit of a break, we are going to be

11:57:44 fresher and do a better job for you.

11:57:49 We have a few more.

11:57:52 Councilwoman Montelione, are there any of these items that

11:57:56 you are satisfied with that you might be able to move?

11:57:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'll move item 66 for approval.

11:58:03 >> Second.

11:58:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Suarez to move item

11:58:09 number 6 of 6.

11:58:11 All in favor?

11:58:16 Anyone opposed?

11:58:17 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I will also move item number 65 for

11:58:20 approval.

11:58:20 >> Second.

11:58:22 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,

11:58:24 seconded by Councilman Cohen: All in favor?

11:58:27 Anyone opposed?

11:58:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Item numbers 67 and 68, I did have some

11:58:39 questions on.

11:58:39 So we can Mayk maybe come back.

11:58:42 Oh, we have staff present?

11:58:43 Excellent.

11:58:44 Thank you.

11:58:44 >>MARY MULHERN: We are going to break at noon, though.

11:58:48 So if you need more time than that.

11:58:50 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That should be fine.

11:58:51 >> Kasper, wastewater department positive.

11:59:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: There are a couple of questions, and

11:59:02 forgive me because maybe I am not as familiar with, but why

11:59:05 are items 67 and 68 seemingly identical?

11:59:09 >> One to S to realign funding to pay for the contract,

11:59:13 which the other item is to award the contract.

11:59:15 >> So item number 67 is simply to align the funding to move

11:59:20 the funds?

11:59:22 >> It's actually opposite order.

11:59:25 Item number 67 is to award the construction contract.

11:59:28 Item number 68 is to move the funding into the proper --

11:59:32 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Then that's even more confusing, I

11:59:36 believe, to me.

11:59:37 Oh, wait, no, I'm sorry.

11:59:39 I guess I'm having difficulties with how the background and

11:59:43 the descriptions of these cover sheets are written, and I

11:59:46 suspect at almost every single council meeting.

11:59:51 And I don't know how many times I have to say it on the

11:59:54 record, these descriptions that a company these agenda items

12:00:00 need to be more specific, because I am going to question

12:00:04 every single contract if I don't have the information up

12:00:07 front.

12:00:09 And often especially with the agenda items we have this

12:00:11 week, to come and go through every single one and meet with

12:00:15 every single staff member for questions, is really taxing on

12:00:19 time.

12:00:21 And hoping that I am going to give this up and, you know,

12:00:23 because it's a heavy agenda and not question this, is the

12:00:26 wrong assumption to make.

12:00:27 So if I don't hear from staff prior to the meeting when

12:00:32 these items come up, you are going to be here listening to

12:00:35 me with the diatribe on council during the meeting.

12:00:40 So I noticed that we have only point 2 SLBE in the contract

12:00:49 in Ybor City which we have a tremendous amount of

12:00:52 underemployed and unemployed individuals, a lot of small

12:00:57 companies, we have people from Palm Harbor, from Sarasota,

12:00:59 and Riverview here coming to do the work, aerial innovators,

12:01:05 didn't put a location of that you are business but they will

12:01:06 be flying around.

12:01:08 I don't know.

12:01:09 So that's an issue that I have.

12:01:14 Although SLBE is indicated on here, thank you very much, it

12:01:18 is showing up.

12:01:19 I think we could do better than .2% of almost a $5 million

12:01:25 contract.

12:01:26 >> Well, the bulk of this contract is actually for

12:01:29 procurement of equipment which is the major line item, and

12:01:34 another major line item is bypass pumping services required

12:01:38 to be able to do the work.

12:01:39 So it is a big contract number, but most of that money is

12:01:43 not going to actual labor but more to procurement of parts,

12:01:50 pumps, mechanical.

12:01:51 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And were there no painters available in

12:01:56 Tampa to do the work for us to paint this facility once it's

12:02:02 constructed and installed?

12:02:04 >> I don't know who was solicited by the low bidder, RTD.

12:02:12 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's a conversation we are going to

12:02:13 have when minority business comes forward, because I'm

12:02:16 intimately familiar with how the goals are set, and then

12:02:22 maybe met, maybe not, but the idea that wave to bring a

12:02:27 painter from Palm Harbor and an electrician from Sarasota to

12:02:31 do work in Ybor City is kind of interesting to me.

12:02:34 So that's all I have to say about those two items.

12:02:39 And it's 12:00 so I will move 67 and 68 if there's no

12:02:44 further discussion.

12:02:44 >> Second.

12:02:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,

12:02:49 second by Councilman Reddick.

12:02:50 All those in favor?

12:02:52 Anyone opposed?

12:02:56 Thank you.

12:02:58 Council will break until 1:00 p.m.

12:03:04 We will have item number our public hearings, items 69, 70,

12:03:19 and 71 and 72.

12:03:25 Councilwoman Montelione, I have lost track.

12:03:31 Did we address the items you removed?

12:03:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If we are coming back, I would like to

12:03:44 ask that those come back at the end of our public hearings.

12:03:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That would be my intention.

12:03:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Probably around three.

12:03:58 Stay tuned.

12:03:59 Thank you.

12:04:05 (City Council in recess)

12:04:08 >>

01:07:42 >>MARY MULHERN: City Council is called to order.

01:07:48 We will continue with our agenda after we have roll call,

01:07:53 please.

01:07:53 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Here.

01:07:57 >>FRANK REDDICK: Here.

01:07:59 >>HARRY COHEN: Here.

01:08:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.

01:08:10 We are going to move to our public hearings.

01:08:13 If there is anyone here who wishes to speak on any of our

01:08:19 public hearings, please stand and be sworn in.

01:08:23 >>THE CLERK: Do you swear or affirm to tell the truth, the

01:08:29 whole truth and nothing but the truth?

01:08:31 >> Move to open the public hearing.

01:08:41 >> Second.

01:08:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we do that -- do we have to do those

01:08:45 individually?

01:08:51 Okay, so to open number 69, 71 --

01:08:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For the purposes of the record, can we

01:09:00 just take 69 individually?

01:09:04 69 individually.

01:09:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to open number 69 moved by

01:09:09 Councilman Reddick, seconded by councilman Suarez of the all

01:09:13 in favor?

01:09:15 Anyone opposed?

01:09:18 Item number 69, file Z-09-21.

01:09:24 Ms. Cole?

01:09:25 >>JULIA COLE: City of Tampa legal department.

01:09:27 Item number 69, rezoning ordinance being presented to you by

01:09:31 the legal department as a result afternoon order that was

01:09:35 issued granting a petition for writ of certiorari,

01:09:39 overturning the decision of City Council in a previous

01:09:42 hearing on this matter, and remanding the case back to City

01:09:46 Council.

01:09:49 I would be happy to give you some background if you wish,

01:09:51 but I would like to tell you where we are procedurally at

01:09:54 this point.

01:09:55 This is a rezoning application which was denied by City

01:09:58 Council.

01:09:59 There was a mediated mediator review of this case pursuant

01:10:04 to Florida statutes, and proposed settlement which comes to

01:10:08 City Council on this matter which was also denied by City

01:10:10 Council.

01:10:11 As a result, petitioner did file an action in circuit court.

01:10:15 The petition for writ of certiorari that I am speaking about

01:10:18 in that case.

01:10:19 The court after hearing argument from both the petitioner

01:10:24 from the city has responded and also several of the

01:10:29 adjoining property owners who did join in as intervenors in

01:10:32 the matter.

01:10:33 The circuit court determined that City Council did not, did

01:10:36 not have competent substantial evidence to support its

01:10:39 denial of this rezoning application.

01:10:41 It did describe in great detail the evidence that was heard

01:10:43 by City Council at that time, and remanded the case back to

01:10:47 City Council to take action on the rezoning ordinance

01:10:54 consistent with the court's order.

01:10:55 So where you are procedurally is the case sits in front of

01:10:59 you with a closed record, with a court order, that you are

01:11:04 to be reacting to, and for you to take action consistent

01:11:08 with that court's order and taking a vote on the rezoning

01:11:13 ordinance in front of you.

01:11:15 You are -- it is in front of you as a first reading zoning

01:11:18 ordinance.

01:11:18 This is a public hearing but your public hearing is limited.

01:11:22 It's limited only to discussion and argument relating to the

01:11:26 court's order, because as I said, the record is closed at

01:11:30 this point in time.

01:11:33 You can provide any additional information, or answer any

01:11:36 questions.

01:11:36 But at this point, way would recommend is you go ahead and

01:11:39 open the public hearing, which you have already done, and

01:11:42 allow any party who would like to speak to the court's order

01:11:45 to present you with any comments.

01:11:47 Thank you.

01:11:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Anyone from the public who wishes to speak

01:11:55 on this, this is the opportunity.

01:11:57 Mr. Shelby?

01:12:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, Madam Chair.

01:12:03 For the purposes of the, I have provided every council

01:12:06 member with Ms. Cole's memo to you, attached to which is a

01:12:12 copy of the order that has been provided to the clerk as

01:12:15 part of the record.

01:12:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Grandoff, as petitioner, is that how I

01:12:32 should recognize you?

01:12:33 You are the petitioner, so we will hear from you.

01:12:38 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Suite 3700 Bank of America Plaza on behalf

01:12:42 of petitioner, Blanchard.

01:12:47 I agree wholeheartedly with Ms. Cole's and Mr. Shelby's

01:12:52 opinion to you this afternoon, and I will reserve any of my

01:12:55 time for rebuttal, if necessary.

01:12:57 Thank you.

01:12:57 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there anyone who wishes to speak?

01:13:03 Please come to the microphone.

01:13:04 >> My name is Ethel Hammer.

01:13:12 I do have a presentation that I prepared.

01:13:14 I am here this afternoon representing a group of ten of the

01:13:22 families that live in this neighborhood, and I guess my

01:13:26 question is, is it appropriate for me to proceed with my

01:13:28 presentation?

01:13:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May I ask?

01:13:32 >> And I do have a form with extra minutes.

01:13:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me ask a question to clarify.

01:13:40 And Mr. Shelby, you can answer this.

01:13:45 When the City Council is limited to discussion, that's what

01:13:50 you told us, right, Ms. Cole?

01:13:52 Maybe you need to answer this.

01:13:53 And then Mr. Shelby, we can hear from you.

01:13:57 But if City Council's discussion is limited to the subject

01:14:04 of the order?

01:14:07 >>JULIA COLE: You are taking action on the court's order.

01:14:11 You are acting with --

01:14:13 >>MARY MULHERN: I understand what we are doing.

01:14:14 But when you said that, you said City Council.

01:14:17 Is that correct?

01:14:18 >>JULIA COLE: Let me clarify.

01:14:19 The proceedings are limit at this point to no new evidence

01:14:23 coming into the record.

01:14:24 The record is closed and we are simply taking action in a

01:14:28 manner consistent with the court's order, meaning anybody

01:14:30 who wants to speak.

01:14:31 As I said, we need to be speaking to the court's order, and

01:14:36 that would be part of your deliberation for taking action

01:14:39 as -- taking action consistent with the court's order, but

01:14:43 no new evidence can be allowed into this record.

01:14:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

01:14:48 Ms. Hammer, it sounds to me -- we will hear from Mr. Shelby.

01:14:54 If you are speaking to the subject of the court order, you

01:14:58 can speak, you just can't introduce any new evidence.

01:15:02 Mr. Shelby?

01:15:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I just wish to state that I

01:15:07 concur fully with assistant city attorney Julia Cole.

01:15:12 This is not an evidentiary hearing.

01:15:15 This is an order for City Council, pursuant to your rules,

01:15:20 to conduct the process of Florida statutes requires for the

01:15:24 court's order to be implemented, and you are to act

01:15:27 consistent with the court's order.

01:15:31 That's the opportunity for this process to take place.

01:15:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Cohen.

01:15:41 >>HARRY COHEN: Can I ask a question?

01:15:43 Maybe this is best directed to Ms. Cole.

01:15:45 When you say act consistent with the court's order, it

01:15:51 sounds to me like we don't have discretion in this matter.

01:15:57 >>JULIA COLE: You have a court order that has come back to

01:16:01 you, to take action on that says that the evidence that was

01:16:04 in the record, when this was originally acted on, was not

01:16:07 competent, substantial evidence to support a denial.

01:16:11 You have to take action consistent with that court's order,

01:16:17 and no new evidence can come into this record at this point

01:16:20 in time.

01:16:21 Let me also say that the way we are advising you on this

01:16:23 writ of certiorari coming back to City Council is consistent

01:16:27 with the way the legal department had advised City Council

01:16:30 when other writs of certiorari had overturned a decision of

01:16:35 City Council, and City Council was faced with taking action

01:16:39 consistent with the court order overturning its decision.

01:16:41 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm sorry.

01:16:47 Has everyone on this council had this court order -- have we

01:16:53 all had it?

01:16:55 This isn't the first time people have seen it, is it?

01:16:58 I just wanted to make sure.

01:17:00 >> Well, my role here today was going to be to augment the

01:17:07 record with the apparently lack of competent substantial

01:17:11 evidence that was entered into the record originally, which

01:17:15 would have supported City Council's decision at the prior

01:17:20 public hearing.

01:17:20 So, in fact, the majority of my presentation were things

01:17:27 that would have been new to the record.

01:17:29 I know my clients are going to be extremely disappointed

01:17:32 because we all thought that we could provide the evidence

01:17:36 that was needed to substantiate council's prior decision.

01:17:44 So I don't know how to proceed at this point.

01:17:51 I think it might be up to council.

01:17:52 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm speaking because I was here for all of

01:18:00 the decisions on this.

01:18:01 Go ahead, Julia.

01:18:03 >>JULIA COLE: Without advising Ms. Hammer how she can

01:18:07 proceed, because she has clients and an attorney that can

01:18:11 deal with it.

01:18:12 Anybody who wants to get up and speak and discuss the

01:18:14 court's order and argue from the court's order absolutely

01:18:18 has the right to make those comments, statements, agree,

01:18:22 disagree, argue why the court's order is wrong, whatever it

01:18:25 is they want to do that is completely within the realm of

01:18:28 the type of information that City Council can take at this

01:18:33 point in time.

01:18:34 But we cannot have any additional evidence placed into this

01:18:38 record at this time.

01:18:39 So Ms. Hammer or anybody else would have the right to speak

01:18:42 to the court's order and argue from the court's order.

01:18:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez.

01:18:49 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Ms. Cole, I just want to be sure about

01:18:54 specifically what our role is here.

01:18:57 As you have said to us both in terms of the memo and

01:19:01 privately, the City Council can be held in contempt for not

01:19:06 agreeing to this particular order at this time, because it

01:19:08 is from a court that has already looked at the evidence of

01:19:14 the case.

01:19:16 Now, that means that we can be held as a council and

01:19:20 individually.

01:19:21 Is that correct or am I wrong?

01:19:22 >> If you act in a manner inconsistent with the court's

01:19:25 order and the court deems you to have acted inconsistent

01:19:28 with the court's order, the petitioner's remedies would

01:19:30 include requesting contempt of court and requesting damages

01:19:38 against City Council members, potentially even personal

01:19:42 liability, individual standpoint.

01:19:44 This is a very serious matter.

01:19:46 You have a court order which has stated that there is no

01:19:50 competent substantial evidence in this record to allow --

01:19:56 for you to deny it.

01:19:57 And that is where this case stands at this moment.

01:20:08 >>MARY MULHERN: It's your judgment based on her advice

01:20:11 about how we can base our decision, but certainly if any of

01:20:17 your arguments relate to the court's order and were

01:20:23 presented before, it sounds like you can present them again.

01:20:29 The question is whether council -- it's not really a

01:20:32 question, I don't think.

01:20:34 Council doesn't have much room to do anything here.

01:20:41 But you, the public, certainly have the right to speak.

01:20:45 >> Ethel Hammer: Thank you very much.

01:20:48 With your indulgence, perhaps I will limit my presentation

01:20:51 to try to talk about issues that are already in the record,

01:20:56 and I wanted -- no, he's shaking his head.

01:21:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for the record, this is Martin

01:21:05 Shelby, and Ms. Hammer looked as if she was about to offer

01:21:09 some bound material to council that she wished them to

01:21:11 review and have placed in the record, and, council, it would

01:21:15 be my position that that clearly would be inappropriate

01:21:19 under these circumstances.

01:21:20 >> All right.

01:21:25 Well, I'll mention my name and address for the record. It's

01:21:26 Ethel Hammer, 4343 Anchor Plaza Parkway, Suite 220, Tampa

01:21:32 33634.

01:21:34 I'm obviously here today in opposition to the court's order

01:21:39 and in support of the council's previous decision on this

01:21:42 matter.

01:21:47 There are factual errors that were part of the record in the

01:21:54 previous hearing that went forward.

01:21:58 Some of the data that was the basis for the denial of the

01:22:03 application was incorrect, which makes it actually more in

01:22:07 favor of the neighborhood.

01:22:14 Okay.

01:22:16 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Can't go there.

01:22:17 John Grandoff on Pa behalf of the petitioner.

01:22:19 This is rearguing the evidence.

01:22:21 The discussion is limited to the court order under penalty

01:22:25 of contempt.

01:22:27 Thank you.

01:22:27 >> So then I am kind of have my hands tied.

01:22:36 I don't really -- all the evidence that I had was going to

01:22:40 be new evidence, as I said, in support of your prior

01:22:43 decision.

01:22:44 So I don't know.

01:22:49 Maybe some of the neighbors can talk about things that they

01:22:52 said at the prior hearings.

01:22:54 My testimony would have been on there.

01:22:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez.

01:22:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Ms. Hammer, we are both in the same

01:23:02 situation.

01:23:02 Now, we are limited to what we can and cannot say,

01:23:04 obviously.

01:23:06 I'm not sure that -- it's a unique situation because I don't

01:23:12 know that there's anything that the public can offer that

01:23:15 hasn't already been decided as part of the legal case.

01:23:19 Once we decide to go forward and agree with the court order,

01:23:26 in that way, then I believe that there -- maybe I am wrong

01:23:30 about B this -- there may be some remedy at law four, and I

01:23:34 defer to Ms. Cole as to what the next steps are.

01:23:37 If there is no other remedy, it doesn't really come back to

01:23:40 us.

01:23:41 I think part of the problem is that now, since it is in the

01:23:44 courts, we have our hands tied based on what the courts can

01:23:48 do, and as you know, it would be not only foolhardy but

01:23:57 against what we should be doing to defy court order so we

01:24:01 are hemmed in ourselves.

01:24:03 >> Understood.

01:24:05 I do have one question.

01:24:06 Is there any implication legally about the fact that four of

01:24:09 you were not part of the original decision?

01:24:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, that would be inappropriate for

01:24:17 us to discuss.

01:24:18 That we are obviously not legal counsel for anybody other

01:24:21 than City Council.

01:24:21 >> All right, thank you.

01:24:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Hammer, is there an attorney with you?

01:24:31 Can I ask that -- have you spoken with Mr. Grandoff about

01:24:39 this?

01:24:41 >> No, ma'am, I have not.

01:24:43 Not personally.

01:24:44 No.

01:24:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Grandoff, would you be willing --

01:24:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, I don't believe -- let me see

01:24:53 if I can put this to you in a different context.

01:24:56 The context is very simple.

01:24:58 Due process has been afforded by sitting council.

01:25:02 Legal remedies have been effectuated.

01:25:06 You have an order from a court of competent jurisdiction,

01:25:11 and what you have is you have a court that does not have

01:25:13 jurisdiction to implement what is directed to be done.

01:25:19 That jurisdiction lies within the power of this board.

01:25:22 So Florida statutes indicates that a process must be in

01:25:26 place in order for this to be legally implemented.

01:25:29 That is your role.

01:25:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Reddick.

01:25:33 >>FRANK REDDICK: I'm glad you expressed that because that

01:25:37 is the point I was saying.

01:25:39 Ms. Cole, can I ask you a direct question?

01:25:41 We are bound by this court order?

01:25:43 >>JULIA COLE: It's a court order upon City Council, on the

01:25:46 city, not withstanding who is actually sitting in those

01:25:50 chairs.

01:25:50 >>FRANK REDDICK: So, in essence, we need to -- the motion

01:25:55 to abide by this court order and move forecasted correct?

01:25:58 >> You need to take action consistent with that court order.

01:26:01 >>FRANK REDDICK: I understand, because they can make

01:26:06 comments, but basically there's nothing we can do outside of

01:26:13 comment, and inconsistent, we are still bound by this court

01:26:16 order.

01:26:17 >>JULIA COLE: That's right, you are.

01:26:19 >>FRANK REDDICK: And adopt this and move forward.

01:26:21 >>JULIA COLE: Yes, sir, you are.

01:26:22 I also want to make another statement for the record.

01:26:25 And I do apologize if there was any confusion, but I

01:26:28 actually did try to make an effort to make clear in the

01:26:30 notice, because the legal department actually sent the

01:26:32 notice out for this proceeding, what the subject matter was,

01:26:36 and what we said in the notice that City Council will

01:26:40 consider the order during this hearing, and I actually gave

01:26:44 what the court's order was, I included the resolution, and

01:26:48 if anybody had any questions, I said please call me.

01:26:52 It was clear, at least in what I was attempting to

01:26:56 accomplish -- and I'm sorry if people got confused -- but

01:26:59 the only thing City Council was doing was considering the

01:27:02 court's order.

01:27:03 And just so I can also make it clear, you have a court

01:27:07 order, but there is no authority for a judge to say the

01:27:12 property is rezoned.

01:27:14 You still have to go through this process.

01:27:16 And as I said, ask in a manner consistent with the court's

01:27:20 order.

01:27:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Cole?

01:27:31 We haven't heard -- we don't know if we have heard from the

01:27:34 public yet.

01:27:37 You should wait for your rebuttal, I think.

01:27:40 I think you have made it abundantly clear to all of us, and

01:27:46 this judgment, this order, is very clear.

01:27:51 There isn't a question -- or maybe there is, but I doubt

01:27:55 there are any more questions, unless anyone has them, about

01:27:59 what council needs.

01:28:04 I think you made it clear, also, what can be discussed by

01:28:12 the public, that they had the right to speak.

01:28:17 This is a public hearing.

01:28:18 >>JULIA COLE: Correct.

01:28:23 >> Rebecca Johns, Fowler Ferguson here on behalf of Jim and

01:28:28 Natalie Goodwin.

01:28:30 They would just like to request, if you would grant, a

01:28:32 two-week continuance just so they can get their hands around

01:28:35 what's actually going on, and what, if anything, they can

01:28:39 do.

01:28:45 >>MARY MULHERN: I guess we can ask petitioner.

01:28:48 We'll wait till your rebuttal.

01:28:51 Or do you want to hear now?

01:28:53 Do we want to hear?

01:28:55 Let's hear from the rest of the public before.

01:29:02 >> My name is Colleen Brandon, 3309 west Lykes Avenue.

01:29:11 I can speak to a couple things that are in the record, one

01:29:15 of which I repeated in all my appearances here, which this

01:29:19 is about the sixth one, that there is no PD in the

01:29:23 eight-block area surrounding this neighborhood.

01:29:25 That was stated over and over again.

01:29:28 Unfortunately, staff has failed us and this council by

01:29:32 saying the reason there's not a PD is a PD is reserved for

01:29:39 mixed use commercial, not residential.

01:29:42 Your own code states this.

01:29:44 Okay?

01:29:45 Now, that's new evidence, but I think maybe we should look

01:29:49 at our code.

01:29:51 That is my one thing that is substantial, competent

01:29:55 evidence, although I would like to speak to the special

01:29:58 magistrate where inaccuracies abound in the record, and I

01:30:04 could go over those one by one by one where he states 60% of

01:30:10 the homes are lots less than --

01:30:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.

01:30:14 I'm sorry.

01:30:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, that's not -- that's not --

01:30:18 >> This is what the judge decided on.

01:30:24 You say that the court's decision was due to all these

01:30:27 hearings, all the evidence, and the special magistrate.

01:30:30 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt.

01:30:33 And I will address my answer to City Council.

01:30:36 Council, the remedy in this case is not for this board.

01:30:40 The remedy in this case is before courts of competent

01:30:45 jurisdiction that would challenge the judge's decision.

01:30:49 My understanding -- and Ms. Cole can state this -- is that

01:30:53 that was an option.

01:30:55 That order could have been appealed, and an appeal was not

01:31:00 taken.

01:31:00 So, therefore, I would argue with you that to discuss that

01:31:07 would be -- for this body to second guess findings of fact

01:31:13 and review by the court would be unappropriate.

01:31:15 >> But I can discuss it, right, in my three minutes?

01:31:22 In the special magistrate, and additionally, there is no

01:31:25 record of that, which we have requested the transcript

01:31:29 several times.

01:31:31 No record.

01:31:34 So I don't know, but it really burns you as a homeowner and

01:31:39 a taxpayer to be penalized for not being an attorney.

01:31:43 Thank you.

01:31:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Next.

01:31:49 Could people, if you are able to, just stand if you are

01:31:52 planning to speak so we know who is going to speak.

01:31:54 Anyone else wish to speak?

01:31:56 >> Becky Roundhorse, 3305 Mullen Avenue, directly behind a

01:32:06 portion of the property in question.

01:32:08 I have spoken before this body numerous times.

01:32:11 The only problem in this situation now is that Ms. Mulhern

01:32:15 is the only member of City Council that has ever heard any

01:32:18 of the evidence in this case.

01:32:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Capin.

01:32:27 >>YVONNE CAPIN: That isn't correct.

01:32:28 I heard it.

01:32:29 >> Maybe you heard it once.

01:32:32 But we have been here more than that, believe me.

01:32:37 All right.

01:32:37 And then my other question is, who decides now what is the

01:32:44 process for deciding whether this -- whether this property,

01:32:48 which has been zoned RS 100 for 24 years, who is going to

01:32:55 decide whether it get rezoned as a PD?

01:32:57 What's the process for that?

01:32:59 >>MARY MULHERN: The judge.

01:33:08 (audio lost).

01:34:35 >> And it's about the motion to rezone from RS 100 to a PD.

01:34:41 That's what it says on the plaque sitting on that lot right

01:34:46 behind my house.

01:34:47 And it's been up there for, what, a month, suction weeks?

01:34:51 It's really unfair.

01:34:52 And I think the threat of lawsuit to those of you who sit on

01:34:57 council is a bomb dabble.

01:35:00 Who is to say we neighbors couldn't sue all of you, you

01:35:03 know, or sue the city?

01:35:05 We could do the same thing.

01:35:07 But we are nice people.

01:35:11 We are not willing to do that.

01:35:15 It's very unfair.

01:35:16 >>MIKE SUAREZ: A question.

01:35:20 As I understand it -- and I want to make sure I get right,

01:35:23 Ms. Cole -- it says in here that several of the residents

01:35:27 became parties to the suit, were they not granted status at

01:35:35 some point?

01:35:38 >> We were allowed to attend the hearing but we were not

01:35:41 allowed to speak.

01:35:41 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I want to ask the lawyer and ask what she

01:35:46 has to tell us about it because my understanding is that

01:35:48 several of the residents had become parties to the suit

01:35:51 themselves.

01:35:52 Would they have not known about the court order then because

01:35:55 of the being parties to the suit?

01:35:57 Or am I incorrect with B that?

01:35:59 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

01:36:00 There was a motion to request leave to intervene with

01:36:06 full-party status, which motion was granted and within the

01:36:10 body of the court's order that you have in front of you, it

01:36:13 was clear that the request for intervention was granted.

01:36:17 I understand that those parties are represented by an

01:36:20 attorney.

01:36:21 They did attend the hearing, and argue along with the city

01:36:24 attorney's office as respondents to this matter.

01:36:29 So at this point procedurally that's where we are.

01:36:32 >> Do you know what group of residents -- were you not part

01:36:34 of that group?

01:36:36 I guess my question to you is --

01:36:39 >> Several of us were there --

01:36:42 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Suarez let me ask first.

01:36:44 If you intervened as party to this suit, are you saying did

01:36:50 you not know that this court order came down after the fact?

01:36:54 We are stuck in a situation where we have a court order, and

01:36:57 if you were part of the suit, and you had gotten standing as

01:37:00 part of the suit, my understanding of court -- I'm not a

01:37:03 lawyer so I can't say --

01:37:04 >> I'm not either.

01:37:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Typically don't they tell you that what has

01:37:09 happened in the court case, were you represented by council

01:37:12 at the court case and not know --

01:37:16 >> There was an attorney who spoke on our behalf -- no in,

01:37:27 there was an attorney that spoke, but we as a neighborhood

01:37:32 residents were not allowed to speak.

01:37:35 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I understand that.

01:37:36 That's not the proper process.

01:37:37 >> I don't know the legalese thing.

01:37:40 >>MIKE SUAREZ: We are just trying to straighten it all out.

01:37:43 I mean, we are stuck.

01:37:44 >> You are stuck.

01:37:44 And guess what, we are stuck.

01:37:46 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I understand that.

01:37:47 >> We have been working on this for over two years and it's

01:37:50 really an unfair situation.

01:37:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Capin.

01:37:59 Did you have a question for her?

01:38:02 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Basically, yes, or for Ms. Cole.

01:38:06 The neighbors that were part of the court case had legal

01:38:14 representation.

01:38:17 >>JULIA COLE: When they filed motion for leave to

01:38:21 intervene, it was filed by attorneys, and I understand --

01:38:26 because I was not at the court proceedings -- that the

01:38:29 attorneys represented their interests and their argument at

01:38:31 that proceeding.

01:38:32 >> Repeat that?

01:38:34 >>JULIA COLE: That the attorney who represented the -- the

01:38:38 neighbors in the motion for leave to intervene as a

01:38:42 respondent, meaning they wanted to be a party in the case,

01:38:45 that the attorney that filed the motion attended the hearing

01:38:49 was allowed to speak, did speak on their behalf, and then

01:38:53 the court's order, the court indicated as part of its order

01:38:57 that the neighbors were granted party status.

01:39:01 So as far as I know, they were given all opportunity to

01:39:05 participate in this case fully as intervenors given

01:39:10 full-party status.

01:39:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

01:39:12 That clarifies.

01:39:15 >>JIM SHIMBERG: I also want to mention that our office

01:39:17 participated in the court case as well, in support of the

01:39:19 council's decision.

01:39:21 So we did argue the decision that council had made in front

01:39:25 of the judge, and we lost.

01:39:28 That's the way it is.

01:39:30 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

01:39:31 That is also very clarifying.

01:39:34 Is there anyone else from the public who wishes to speak?

01:39:39 >> My name is Angela Rodriguez.

01:39:44 I reside with my husband at 3305 west Lykes, directly across

01:39:47 the street from the lot in question.

01:39:51 And I would first like to say, I think all of us back there

01:39:54 are completely aghast at what's going on.

01:39:59 We had no clue.

01:40:01 Basically Watt sounds like is the attorney is saying we are

01:40:08 taxpayers and we pear pay our taxes, they are basically

01:40:12 saying, you have got to side with what the judge said and

01:40:15 against the homeowners.

01:40:16 And basically that's what we feel like.

01:40:19 And when this started, City Council unanimously denied her

01:40:25 request unanimously.

01:40:27 Petitioner took it to a mediator.

01:40:32 The mediator came back and sent it to City Council, and Ms.

01:40:36 Mulhern, I remember her saying, why are we discussing this?

01:40:40 City Council unanimously denied this.

01:40:43 And it was denied again.

01:40:45 And then it goes to court, and now it's basically back

01:40:48 saying, sorry, guys, sounds to me like you are going to have

01:40:53 to go ahead and in order to, you know, stay out of the legal

01:40:57 work, then you just need to go ahead and give her what she

01:40:59 wants.

01:41:00 And as homeowners who live here, and lived here a long time,

01:41:06 our neighborhood is a very distinct neighborhood, it's known

01:41:10 for the qualities it has.

01:41:12 It would be like going to the people on Bayshore and saying,

01:41:14 oh, you know, you bought for the water view.

01:41:17 Guess what, we are putting up big walls now, and you are not

01:41:20 going to have that water view anymore.

01:41:22 You know, it's not fair.

01:41:25 And I will say we are all extremely shocked at the way this

01:41:30 is turning today, and how things are proceeding.

01:41:34 So thank you for your time.

01:41:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Next.

01:41:37 >> Good afternoon.

01:41:41 I'm Melissa Steadman, 3401 Mullen Avenue, Tampa, Florida.

01:41:46 I'm board adviser with the Gulf view civic association.

01:41:49 I'm not going to add much more.

01:41:51 We are absolutely shocked, dismayed, and I don't know how

01:41:54 four people who haven't really heard all of the background

01:41:58 on this can go along with it, but I guess it's court

01:42:04 ordered.

01:42:06 Thank you.

01:42:07 Very disappointing.

01:42:08 >> I'm Dominique mellow, 3700 west Lykes, a block from where

01:42:15 this property is located.

01:42:16 When I moved into the neighborhood 15 years ago there was

01:42:18 one home on this lot.

01:42:19 The owner's house was demolished.

01:42:25 I just moved back to the neighborhood and saw the post,

01:42:28 that's right now on the property that mentions that the

01:42:30 hearing today was to rezone the property.

01:42:33 From RS 100 to PD zonings, which is not consistent with the

01:42:38 neighborhood so I am very surprised about how this is

01:42:40 happening.

01:42:40 I was not part of any lawsuit, and I would say there's a lot

01:42:44 of misinformation that's been passed around the

01:42:47 neighborhood.

01:42:47 Thank you.

01:42:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, next.

01:42:49 >> I'm Joan Williams.

01:42:58 I live at 3316 west Lykes Avenue.

01:43:02 And I have been at all these proceedings.

01:43:07 Just my comments.

01:43:08 You all had a code, 100.

01:43:11 You have a legal staff who, in my opinion, needs to be

01:43:20 supporting the codes that you all unanimously agreed that

01:43:25 that code should stay that.

01:43:30 This whole process has been very interesting to me and very

01:43:33 eye opening.

01:43:38 And I just can't call Julia all the time and say I think

01:43:49 this is how it should be presented.

01:43:50 We were counting on her, you know, to really go to bat on

01:43:54 this thing.

01:43:55 Well, she wasn't even a lawyer there.

01:43:58 But we all live in this community, and I'm sure this is

01:44:06 going to be the beginning, and I feel sorry for you all

01:44:10 because it tells me that you have these codes but they mean

01:44:12 nothing.

01:44:13 Get a lawyer, and county be changed.

01:44:17 So good luck in you all's jobs.

01:44:22 [ Applause ]

01:44:23 >>MARY MULHERN: No, please, no, no applause, please.

01:44:27 Is there anyone else who wishes to speak?

01:44:39 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to close the public hearing.

01:44:42 Oh, that's right.

01:44:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Grandoff, your rebuttal.

01:44:52 And Mrs. Roundhorse, if you want to ask him about whether

01:44:59 they would be willing to have a continuance.

01:45:01 You might want to do that.

01:45:03 Can she come and talk to but it?

01:45:07 Do you want to just answer that?

01:45:11 >> I can just answer.

01:45:12 No.

01:45:13 >>MARY MULHERN: Sorry.

01:45:14 I shouldn't have made you get up.

01:45:17 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: I also -- John Grandoff on rebuttal.

01:45:20 I also want to make you aware of a few items in the record.

01:45:26 Under the lawsuit, there was a motion for leave to intervene

01:45:30 as respondents.

01:45:31 The following people I am going name that are named as

01:45:34 intervenors on this motion are in this building, in this

01:45:37 room right now.

01:45:38 James Goodwin, Joan Williams, Kalyn Brandthowy, Marion

01:45:41 Hamlin, Rebecca Roundhorse, Missy Steadman, Angela

01:45:46 Rodriguez.

01:45:47 They were granted party status and they were represented by

01:45:53 Johns sitting right there.

01:45:54 The court order was issued by judge Arnold in very direct

01:45:57 terms and he provided a copy of this court order to the

01:46:02 Johns as attorney for the intervenors and also to Mr.

01:46:05 Jeffrey Gibson who argued the appeal before judge Arnold.

01:46:10 Many of the folks I just named are also present at that

01:46:13 hearing.

01:46:16 There is nothing further to say.

01:46:20 The court has spoken.

01:46:23 We are a nation of laws.

01:46:24 We abide by our law.

01:46:28 It is the foundation of our republic.

01:46:31 I respectfully request that you move and adopt an ordinance

01:46:35 approving Blanchard's property under the PD zoning district

01:46:40 as filed over two years ago.

01:46:42 Thank you for your time.

01:46:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Grandoff.

01:46:46 Councilwoman Capin, did you have a question?

01:46:48 >> No there, was just an outbursts.

01:46:50 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm trying to keep under control.

01:46:52 Thank you.

01:47:00 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Thank you.

01:47:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: Move to close the public hearing.

01:47:06 >> Second.

01:47:07 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

01:47:10 Aye.

01:47:12 What's the pleasure of council?

01:47:14 >>FRANK REDDICK: Madam Chair, if I word this right.

01:47:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, may I make a recommendation?

01:47:32 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.

01:47:32 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, Mr. Shelby.

01:47:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The purpose of this hearing is to follow

01:47:39 the process required by your code and Florida statutes to

01:47:42 implement the zoning change.

01:47:44 So, council, on your agenda, under item 69 is the title of

01:47:51 the ordinance for first reading consideration, and if you

01:47:54 wish to read that ordinance, you can present it for first

01:47:57 reading consideration, and if it's your pleasure, you can

01:47:59 add that it's pursuant to the court's order.

01:48:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Okay.

01:48:03 Madam Chair, I want to move an ordinance for first reading

01:48:07 consideration, an ordinance rezoning property in the general

01:48:10 vicinity of 3310 west Lykes Avenue in the city of Tampa,

01:48:13 Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from

01:48:17 zoning district classifications RS-100 residential single

01:48:22 family to PD, planned development, residential single-family

01:48:28 detached, providing an effective date as described in the

01:48:29 court order from judge -- whatever his name -- Arnold.

01:48:36 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there a second?

01:48:43 I have a question for Mr. Shelby.

01:48:46 Or Ms. Cole before we vote.

01:48:50 Is there a second?

01:48:52 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'll second.

01:48:56 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a motion and second.

01:48:57 Is there a question?

01:49:02 I don't know who said this, but someone said it.

01:49:08 I think someone asked.

01:49:09 Maybe it was Councilman Suarez, whether if council did not

01:49:16 vote to approve this petition, we could be held in contempt

01:49:31 of court.

01:49:32 Did I hear that?

01:49:34 Did one of you --

01:49:36 >>JULIA COLE: Again, I would be happy to make that

01:49:39 statement again for the record.

01:49:40 >>MARY MULHERN: If you could make that statement and

01:49:44 clarify if you are saying if this council -- if this council

01:49:52 votes -- if the council as a whole voted, or if an

01:50:01 individual vote, you could be held in contempt?

01:50:06 >>JULIA COLE: Let me say it this wait a minute you will

01:50:08 have to take action.

01:50:09 A vote on the rezoning ordinance.

01:50:10 If you take action to deny this rezoning ordinance at this

01:50:14 point in time, and City Council as a body dense the rezoning

01:50:18 ordinance, that could very well be deemed -- likely be

01:50:24 deemed as being an action inconsistent with the court's

01:50:27 order for remedies being contempt, potential liability, and

01:50:34 individual liability.

01:50:35 If individual members vote a certain way but ultimately this

01:50:39 is approved, I feel comfortable that an individual member

01:50:47 voting in denial wouldn't have individual liability so long

01:50:51 as the action is to approve the rezoning.

01:50:55 >>MARY MULHERN: That clarifies it for me.

01:50:59 >>JULIA COLE: I don't have a case you can throw at you

01:51:03 right now on that issue but I think I would be comfortable

01:51:05 that you would have a limited amount of liability.

01:51:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

01:51:09 We have a motion made by Councilman Reddick, seconded by

01:51:14 Councilwoman Montelione.

01:51:17 Do we need voice roll call?

01:51:20 All in favor opposed?

01:51:26 Nay.

01:51:26 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mulhern voting no and

01:51:30 Miranda being absent.

01:51:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 70.

01:51:44 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: Thank you for your time this afternoon,

01:51:45 council.

01:51:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Second reading?

01:51:49 >>THE CLERK: Second reading of the ordinance will be on

01:51:52 October 20th, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.

01:51:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 70, continued public hearing.

01:52:05 Is the petitioner here?

01:52:10 If anyone is here who has not been sworn in and wishes to

01:52:20 speak at any of the public hearings this afternoon, please

01:52:24 stand and be sworn.

01:52:25 If there's anyone who hasn't already been sworn in and will

01:52:28 speak.

01:52:37 Jamie Nieves.

01:52:44 >> This is a continued public hearing.

01:52:56 If I can refresh council's memory, this hearing is pursuant

01:53:00 to council's rules because of the fact that the motion in

01:53:05 this quasi-judicial matter failed to receive at least four

01:53:08 votes.

01:53:09 The motion, therefore that was on the floor, which you see

01:53:12 on your agenda in blew failed.

01:53:17 Another motion -- blue failed.

01:53:19 Another motion was not made and therefore the public hearing

01:53:21 was automatically reopened and continued to this date and

01:53:25 time certain.

01:53:29 So, council, what you then have buff is you have a continued

01:53:34 public hearing, which means of all the evidence that you

01:53:38 heard, up until this point, is in the record, and for your

01:53:43 consideration in your determination.

01:53:46 What the appropriate thing to do would be to either, if

01:53:50 council feels the need for it, to take additional testimony.

01:53:54 And when I say that, I remind council that council has

01:53:57 traditionally had a custom that those people who have spoken

01:54:01 previously at the first public hearing do not get another

01:54:04 opportunity.

01:54:06 Obviously if it does move forward, they have the opportunity

01:54:08 to come back and present evidence at the second public

01:54:11 hearing.

01:54:11 That has been council's practice in the past.

01:54:14 So, therefore, normally the only time people have an

01:54:18 opportunity to speak a second time is to address the reasons

01:54:23 for the continuance.

01:54:24 The reasons for the continuance, obviously, is the failure

01:54:27 of council to take action under the charter as required by

01:54:31 getting four votes.

01:54:36 There is no motion on the floor at this time.

01:54:37 It would be my recommendation for council to proceed with

01:54:39 this hearing.

01:54:41 Then ultimately to close the public hearing, have the

01:54:46 ordinance read again or not, depending on what the motion

01:54:49 is, and take action on that motion.

01:54:51 The other option is for council to discuss how it wishes to

01:54:54 proceed beforehand.

01:54:55 The 3-3 vote being the same members that are present,

01:54:59 Councilman Miranda is absent, obviously, affects the outcome

01:55:04 here, assuming the vote does not change.

01:55:06 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I don't believe -- and maybe we can ask this

01:55:15 question if we are going to have any new or substantial

01:55:17 evidence of the folks that have been in opposition to this

01:55:21 particular petitioner are here.

01:55:23 They are not going to be able to speak, obviously, based on

01:55:26 what Mr. Shelby said.

01:55:27 I don't know if there's going to be any additional evidence

01:55:30 by petitioner to come forward.

01:55:32 I would guess that if petitioner came forward with different

01:55:36 information, then the members of the public that had spoken

01:55:39 against it before will have another chance to speak based on

01:55:42 that new evidence.

01:55:43 Correct?

01:55:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That would be appropriate if that's the

01:55:50 case.

01:55:50 This is a continued public hearing.

01:55:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would suggest we ask petitioner if there's

01:55:54 any additional information that petitioner has to provide to

01:55:56 us, and, if not, that we would continue this until another

01:56:00 time, because if we are tied at 3-3 now, I don't know of

01:56:04 anyone that's going to change their vote per se, I don't see

01:56:07 the reason to continue.

01:56:08 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Capin.

01:56:17 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I'm ready to vote.

01:56:18 >>MARY MULHERN: We have not heard from the public.

01:56:29 And I don't know, are we going to hear from the petitioner?

01:56:34 Or is that our decision?

01:56:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If that's council's decision to do so.

01:56:42 It is a continue public hearing.

01:56:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I don't remember at what point we continued

01:56:46 it.

01:56:47 Do you remember?

01:56:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: What Mr. Shelby was saying since it is 3-3,

01:57:01 unless there is any more evidence that petitioner has, the

01:57:03 public will not be able to speak who has already spoken on

01:57:07 it.

01:57:07 That's why I was saying --

01:57:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, let me say this.

01:57:12 I think if the petitioner wishes to speak, the petitioner

01:57:16 can speak.

01:57:17 Is that correct, Mr. Shelby?

01:57:19 We should give the petitioner an opportunity to speak.

01:57:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.

01:57:26 >>MARY MULHERN: And what you talked about was the custom

01:57:28 was that the same people wouldn't speak if they had already

01:57:33 spoken at the hearing.

01:57:34 If they had the same thing to say.

01:57:35 So if there's anybody new, we need to find that out and hear

01:57:39 from them.

01:57:40 And I am also wondering, Mr. Shelby, there are people who

01:57:45 spoke before, but if they have new -- anything new -- I'm

01:57:51 sorry, I kind of faded out when you were giving --

01:57:54 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, council.

01:57:56 >>MARY MULHERN: Canst they speak again or wait until

01:57:59 the second meeting?

01:58:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I may read from rule 6 under

01:58:06 quasi-judicial hearings, it says in part that if a

01:58:09 quasi-public hearing is continued, speakers at the continued

01:58:14 public hearing are limited to the issue that is the subject

01:58:18 of the continuance with the petitioner also allotted five

01:58:22 minutes for rebuttal.

01:58:23 So then I guess the clarification then, if there are people

01:58:28 who have previously spoken, or if there are people who are

01:58:30 here today just to speak and have not spoken before, they do

01:58:34 have the opportunity, but they have to speak to the subject,

01:58:37 the continuance, which is in fact a tie vote, which is

01:58:41 rather broad.

01:58:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, is there anyone from the public who

01:58:45 wishes to speak on this who has not already spoken at the

01:58:49 previous hearing?

01:58:53 Party, do you wish to speak?

01:59:00 You have the opportunity if you want to.

01:59:03 You must come up here and say "yes" or "no," at least.

01:59:06 >>> Jimmie NIEVES, I have been sworn.

01:59:16 Thank you again for reviewing this.

01:59:18 I was in contact with Mr. Miranda's office and that's why I

01:59:26 am here.

01:59:26 I think all the matters were well expressed, and the mayor's

01:59:34 initiative to seek small business, to push small business as

01:59:41 myself who would hire people, and all of that has been

01:59:44 considered.

01:59:48 Everything has already been considered so I would say that I

01:59:50 need not add anything to the record.

01:59:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

01:59:56 Councilman Suarez.

01:59:57 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I move that we continue the hearing till our

02:00:03 first November regular meeting on November 3rd at 10:30

02:00:10 a.m.

02:00:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, Councilman, but doesn't the petitioner

02:00:20 have to agree to it or ask for it?

02:00:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I was going to ask -- petitioner, if you

02:00:26 can come up, please, if I may make inquiry.

02:00:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Cohen.

02:00:31 >>HARRY COHEN: Doesn't it just get pushed off to the next

02:00:36 meeting again?

02:00:37 So really if we vote and there's a continuance.

02:00:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Except for one issue that I would like to

02:00:46 make clear for the petitioner.

02:00:47 Sir, you had indicated that it was your desire or your

02:00:51 intent to wish to have Chairman Miranda here today?

02:00:57 >> Obviously, I wanted the tie breaker, I wanted peace of

02:01:00 mind to know it was voted properly and denied.

02:01:03 Obviously the this can go on infinite um.

02:01:07 >> Let me ask you this then.

02:01:08 Having heard -- there was no second to the motion actually,

02:01:11 was there?

02:01:12 >>MARY MULHERN: There was no second, and I would like to

02:01:15 point out to council that there will be -- Councilman Cohen,

02:01:21 there will be a difference.

02:01:22 If this is continued, this will be the third first hearing

02:01:27 on this.

02:01:30 So what is the pleasure of council?

02:01:33 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move to approve the application.

02:01:38 >> We already had the motion.

02:01:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Of what the motion was last time.

02:01:44 You didn't get a second.

02:01:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I know that but that's because it was an

02:01:49 interruption in terms of discussion, not for the other

02:01:51 reason, because Mr. Cohen brought up the point that it's

02:01:53 automatically continued if it tied 3-36789 so I think we

02:01:56 should take up my motion prior to asking Ms. Montelione for

02:01:59 her motion.

02:02:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there a second on Councilman Suarez's

02:02:03 motion?

02:02:04 Seeing -- motion made by Councilman Suarez, seconded by

02:02:12 Councilman Reddick.

02:02:14 All in favor?

02:02:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry to interrupt.

02:02:17 That being the case, that being the motion on the floor --

02:02:23 I'm asking the petitioner. You heard what the motion to

02:02:26 continue again is to November 3rd at 10:30 a.m.

02:02:34 And do you have any objection, or do you agree to that

02:02:37 continuance, or do you wish to have a vote taken today?

02:02:45 >> Well, I might as well wish to have a vote taken today.

02:02:53 I don't see how continuing -- everyone has the information.

02:02:58 The record is closed.

02:03:01 Nothing can be presented to change the mind from here to

02:03:03 there.

02:03:04 It would have the same effect be if it to be even again.

02:03:08 So I would ask for a vote.

02:03:11 That way I may proceed with other means if I need to at that

02:03:14 point and not lose another month.

02:03:16 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez?

02:03:20 Are you willing to withdraw your motion since the petitioner

02:03:22 is not agreeing or requesting it?

02:03:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I withdraw that motion.

02:03:29 I will move to deny the petition as stated at last meeting.

02:03:34 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we have to take this up, because --

02:03:41 is that right?

02:03:44 Councilwoman Montelione was making a motion to approve it so

02:03:50 I just want to make sure.

02:03:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I think it doesn't really matter because

02:03:55 either way --

02:03:56 >>MARY MULHERN: It doesn't matter.

02:03:58 I want to do this procedurally right.

02:03:59 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Sure.

02:04:01 I wasn't sure if I still had the floor.

02:04:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The determination is the chair's

02:04:06 determination who have had the floor.

02:04:08 Obviously, and without -- parliamentary procedure per se, it

02:04:13 appeared that what council member Suarez did was to raise a

02:04:17 point of order saying that council member Montelione's

02:04:20 motion was out of order at that time because his motion --

02:04:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay so --

02:04:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Without a ruling from the chair as to

02:04:28 whether there was a second.

02:04:29 That being said it was taken up by the chair to allow

02:04:35 council member Suarez to complete and deal with his motion.

02:04:37 >>MARY MULHERN: It's up to the chair.

02:04:42 Councilwoman Montelione.

02:04:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes, ma'am?

02:04:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Would you like to make your motion?

02:04:48 Or are you fine with Mr. Suarez making the motion?

02:04:53 Do you have a motion?

02:04:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move to vote on this item.

02:04:58 I move to approve the item, and let go ahead and vote on it.

02:05:05 And see how it pans out.

02:05:07 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm giving her that because I had

02:05:11 originally given her the floor, whether it was mistaken or

02:05:14 not.

02:05:14 If there's a second on this motion.

02:05:17 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

02:05:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,

02:05:22 seconded bid Councilman Reddick, to approve the petition.

02:05:27 >>THE CLERK: Madam Chair, she will need to read the

02:05:30 ordinance for first reading.

02:05:31 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm looking for the page.

02:05:37 Thank you very much, council mane Cohen.

02:05:39 I move an ordinance being presented for first reading

02:05:43 consideration, an ordinance approving special use permit S-2

02:05:46 approving a daycare in an RS-50 residential single family

02:05:51 zoning district in the general advice unto of 2315 Woodlawn

02:05:54 Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida and as more

02:05:56 particularly described in section 1 hereof providing an

02:05:58 effective date.

02:05:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilwoman Montelione,

02:06:03 seconded by Councilman Reddick.

02:06:06 All in favor?

02:06:15 Who seconded it?

02:06:21 Red ready I was sending for her to vote.

02:06:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, you were seconding for her to vote.

02:06:28 Who seconded it?

02:06:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The second under Robert's Rules of Order

02:06:31 is not required to support in support of the main motion

02:06:33 that's on the floor.

02:06:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Just to have the vote.

02:06:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, back to reading that book again.

02:06:41 [ Laughter ]

02:06:45 Clerk, okay, anyone opposed?

02:06:50 >>MIKE SUAREZ: There was only one aye.

02:06:57 >>MARY MULHERN: There was one.

02:06:59 There was one yes.

02:07:00 Anyone opposed?

02:07:07 If you vote no, that you are supposed, then you voted yes.

02:07:15 Wait.

02:07:15 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Her motion was to approve the petition.

02:07:22 Obviously it was reverse of what the original petition was,

02:07:25 which was for denial.

02:07:26 So her motion to go forward is consistent with what her vote

02:07:29 was previously.

02:07:31 Mine was also as was yours and Mr. Cohen's, and the only

02:07:34 two, I think maybe -- no confusion.

02:07:39 So that motion died.

02:07:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I think we need to do a revote.

02:07:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Roll call.

02:07:52 Councilwoman Montelione.

02:07:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You don't have to read it again.

02:07:55 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I move to approve.

02:07:57 >>THE CLERK: She has a second from Mr. Reddick.

02:08:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Seconded by Councilman Reddick.

02:08:07 Voice roll call, please.

02:08:08 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No.

02:08:12 >>YVONNE CAPIN: No.

02:08:13 >>FRANK REDDICK: Yes.

02:08:19 >>MARY MULHERN: No.

02:08:20 >>HARRY COHEN: No.

02:08:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

02:08:24 >>THE CLERK: According to my vote the motion to approve

02:08:35 failed with Suarez, Capin, Mulhern, Cohen voting no, red

02:08:42 duck and Montelione voting yes, and Miranda being absent.

02:08:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Suarez?

02:08:52 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would like to make a motion for denial due

02:08:54 to the fact 2002 be -- it would substantially unit fear with

02:08:58 or injury the rights of others whose properties are

02:09:00 affected, further that it would injury the public health,

02:09:02 safety and general welfare of the subject neighborhood, and

02:09:05 further that it is incompatible -- with Tampa code of

02:09:10 orphans section 27-324 and section 27-269.

02:09:14 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

02:09:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion to -- yes, Mr. Shelby?

02:09:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May I make inquiry of the maker of the

02:09:25 motion?

02:09:26 And by your motion, which is the same motion that you had

02:09:30 made at the previous date of this public hearing, do you

02:09:34 wish to have as incorporated as part of this motion the

02:09:37 arguments that were made in support when you previously made

02:09:42 that motion?

02:09:44 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes, I do.

02:09:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Suarez, seconded

02:09:48 by Councilman Cohen.

02:09:53 Voice roll call, please.

02:09:54 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Yes.

02:09:59 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Yes.

02:10:00 >>FRANK REDDICK: No.

02:10:02 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes.

02:10:04 >>HARRY COHEN: Yes.

02:10:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No.

02:10:10 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Suarez, Capin, Mulhern and

02:10:17 Cohen voting yes.

02:10:18 And Reddick and Montelione voting no with Miranda being

02:10:22 absent.

02:10:22 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, just as a caution to remind you

02:10:29 that obviously this doesn't necessarily close the issue.

02:10:34 There is also an additional window that I advise you against

02:10:39 any ex parte communications on this subject as I have in the

02:10:42 past until the time closes for an appeal.

02:10:48 >>MARY MULHERN: Your petition was denied, sir.

02:11:02 We are moving on to the next -- to our 10:30 public

02:11:07 hearings.

02:11:07 Item number 71.

02:11:09 >>THE CLERK: You will need to open the public hearing.

02:11:14 >> Motion to open the public hearing.

02:11:17 >> Second.

02:11:18 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

02:11:19 Lunch lynch land coordination.

02:11:22 C 11-13 is a request by LLC to vacate a portion of full ton

02:11:28 street in the Gandy Westshore area, and I have a map for the

02:11:30 overhead.

02:11:35 The petitioner's property is in red, and the portion of the

02:11:38 street to be vacated in yellow.

02:11:41 This street lies south of price Avenue, and lies between

02:11:45 bridge street and Westshore Boulevard.

02:11:47 Full ton is a dead-end street and it's unimproved, and I

02:11:51 have some photos.

02:11:52 The first photo is full ton street looking south from price

02:11:55 Avenue.

02:11:59 The next street is a shot at the petitioner's property

02:12:03 looking west on the intersection of full ton and price

02:12:05 street.

02:12:08 And the last photo is abutting staff has no objection to

02:12:20 this request.

02:12:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

02:12:32 Petitioner?

02:12:32 >> Rob wiles, North Florida Avenue.

02:12:38 I have been sworn in.

02:12:39 On behalf of petitioner.

02:12:40 We just would ask that the council approve the petition, a

02:12:47 piece of property, the city is not maintaining its

02:12:50 rights-of-way has no use, and I was contacted by Alan

02:12:55 Steenson of the Gandy civic association and they have no

02:12:58 objection.

02:12:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

02:13:03 Does anyone from the public wish to speak on this?

02:13:09 If we can have a motion to close.

02:13:11 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Motion to close.

02:13:12 >> Second.

02:13:13 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

02:13:15 Item number.

02:13:26 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Move an ordinance on first reading vacating

02:13:28 closing discontinuing abandoning a certain right-of-way all

02:13:30 that portion of Fulton Street lying south of Price Avenue,

02:13:33 north of Ballast Point Avenue, east of Bridge Street, and

02:13:36 west of Westshore Boulevard, in Bay bridge, subject to

02:13:47 certain covenants, conditions and restrictions as more

02:13:50 particularly described herein providing an effective date.

02:13:51 >>HARRY COHEN: Second.

02:13:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Motion made by Councilman Suarez, seconded

02:13:57 by Councilman Cohen.

02:14:03 All in favor?

02:14:06 Anyone opposed?

02:14:06 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miranda being absent.

02:14:11 Second reading and adoption will be on October 20, 2011 at

02:14:15 9:30 a.m.

02:14:15 >>MARY MULHERN: Item number 72 is a continued public

02:14:22 hearing.

02:14:25 >>BARBARA LYNCH: Land Development Coordination.

02:14:32 I don't believe this was ever presented.

02:14:35 It was continued the first time and the second time again --

02:14:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Lynch, could you talk a little closer?

02:14:43 >>BARBARA LYNCH: Sure.

02:14:44 This is a request by the greater Mount Carmel AME church to

02:14:48 vacate a portion of -- well, the entire portion of a

02:14:53 dead-end alley.

02:14:56 This is in the City of Tampa and I have a map for the

02:14:59 overhead.

02:15:01 The petitioner's property is in red, and the alley is in

02:15:07 yellow.

02:15:08 I have some photos.

02:15:09 This alley lies east of 34th, and between general easy

02:15:17 and 38th Avenue.

02:15:18 The first fought -- Genesee, the first shot is east of

02:15:24 34th street toward the dead-end.

02:15:28 The alley is unimproved.

02:15:29 There is a tree in it.

02:15:31 The next shot is the alley looking west from the dead-end

02:15:34 towards 34th street.

02:15:40 We have a shot of the petitioner's property.

02:15:42 This is the church.

02:15:47 And then just a shot of the parking locality which is also

02:15:50 on 34th street.

02:15:57 At the time, we didn't realize that there was any activity

02:16:00 in the alley, or that there were abutting owners that were

02:16:04 affected by this.

02:16:05 They did show up at the public hearing last time at the

02:16:07 church, and the owners were going to try to work out an

02:16:10 agreement for access, but to our understanding, we met with

02:16:14 petitioner on Tuesday, and they had not come to consensus on

02:16:17 that.

02:16:17 And I just had made a mark-up of just how the alley affect

02:16:22 the abutting owners.

02:16:28 The church owns the property abutting the alley down here.

02:16:35 Here.

02:16:36 Here.

02:16:37 And this block right here.

02:16:40 The two owners that are affected by the closure would be

02:16:46 3403, which abuts this alley, and then the last is 3405

02:16:53 Genesee, and only by a portion. 6.84 feet.

02:17:02 Due to the dead-end that did not go through it.

02:17:06 I know the petitioner has some pictures he would like to

02:17:06 show you. I will let him speak, and then if you have

02:17:06 questions for me, I will be happy to answer them.

02:17:14 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) that little piece, the

02:17:30 6.84 --

02:17:34 >> Is Baker.

02:17:38 Right above the alley there.

02:17:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Petitioner?

02:17:54 My name is Wade, pro tem of the greater Mount Carmel AME

02:17:59 church.

02:17:59 The church wishes to install an elevator at the portion of

02:18:04 the alleyway because of many of our people are seniors, and

02:18:13 super seniors.

02:18:15 You are going up the steps in front of church.

02:18:17 There are three levels of steps.

02:18:20 I would like to show you the front of the church so you can

02:18:22 see.

02:18:25 This is something that we really need.

02:18:26 And we are willing to work with the two people whose

02:18:30 properties adjoins the alleyway.

02:18:34 I don't know how this works.

02:18:36 Just set it down?

02:18:39 You see those steps?

02:18:47 That's for people that want to lose weight.

02:18:50 [ Laughter ]

02:18:54 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I better start attending your church,

02:18:57 sir.

02:18:59 [ Laughter ]

02:19:00 >> We have decided that the architect who engineered the

02:19:06 site said the only way we can put the elevator in is a spot

02:19:10 that is part of the alleyway near the front of the church.

02:19:15 And when you were showing the picture where our property

02:19:19 abuts the alleyway, we need about six foot of that which

02:19:23 leaves about four foot of alleyway that would be

02:19:27 unencumbered.

02:19:29 The people that live in the back that utilize the church

02:19:33 property to drive over, we have never had a problem with

02:19:36 them.

02:19:37 We have never told them that they couldn't drive over it.

02:19:39 As a matter of fact, the last time we were here, we sent

02:19:42 them a letter, our attorney sent them a letter stating that

02:19:46 we will allow them to continue to drive over that property

02:19:50 so long as they were the owner.

02:19:53 Once they were not the owners, then the letter would not be

02:20:00 in effect.

02:20:02 My understanding is they disagreed with that, and they

02:20:07 wished to continue to have access over our property, which

02:20:11 is a church, and on the alleyway.

02:20:15 Now, we don't have a problem with them utilizing the

02:20:18 alleyway.

02:20:20 We have eye soon up there now where construction is doing

02:20:26 minor repairing of the church.

02:20:28 They are the ones that are going to install the elevator.

02:20:30 I don't have a site plan to show you where the elevator is

02:20:36 going to go.

02:20:37 But when you look at the picture, it's going right over on

02:20:40 this side, going up to the second floor here.

02:20:46 Now, we try to be good neighbors to everybody.

02:20:50 We do a lot in the community, for the community.

02:20:57 We have just had some outside people to come in, they give

02:21:02 us a hand to raise funds.

02:21:05 On the 24th of September, you know, I am not fluent in

02:21:14 Spanish or attempt to, but it's Centro Asturiano building.

02:21:21 We had a fair there that was part of the Jewish community

02:21:30 came in to give us a hand, William holden presented a good

02:21:40 background of what happened during the holly cost, and --

02:21:45 the Holocaust, and this was to aid us in the fundraising.

02:21:53 His group and several others will be back to help us just to

02:21:55 raise money to acquire an elevator.

02:22:01 Now, as I stated before, many of our seniors are unable to

02:22:06 come to church, and now that we are in this bad economy, any

02:22:14 excuse is enough to use not to come to church, we are

02:22:16 finding that our level of giving has started to decrease,

02:22:19 and the reason that most of them are saying that is because

02:22:23 they can't climb these steps.

02:22:25 So I have listened to all that has gone on this morning, and

02:22:30 I don't envy none of you all's jobs.

02:22:33 But in this case, I would ask you to allow us a small

02:22:39 portion of land so that we can install an elevator.

02:22:45 Any questions?

02:22:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Any questions from council?

02:22:51 Is there anyone from the public who wishes to speak?

02:22:54 If you wish to speak, now is the time.

02:22:56 Please come up.

02:22:57 >> My name is Lilly Anderson, Tampa, Florida.

02:23:26 I am one of the owners of the adjacent property.

02:23:30 I know how old this map is that they are showing.

02:23:33 >>MARY MULHERN: Closer to the microphone.

02:23:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we ask to turn up the volume on the

02:23:40 microphone?

02:23:40 That might be helpful.

02:23:41 >> I can talk a little louder, too.

02:23:45 I moved in in '56, and within a few feet of plot later on,

02:23:51 and as of now, the alley is going to be divided, used,

02:23:58 whatever, and as a resident adjacent to the alley, so it

02:24:06 will be allocated to the residents, and the church, they

02:24:10 only need three feet.

02:24:13 The alley, they are allocated five feet and the other will

02:24:20 go to the residents.

02:24:21 I would like City Council to just allocate the alley and

02:24:23 give each resident, now, whatever the city allotted to them.

02:24:28 And that way the property lines will be even, and as far as

02:24:34 using the church's property, and no one else, once they move

02:24:39 or will sell or whatever, that would be in my opinion unfair

02:24:44 to other people because they would have the same problem.

02:24:48 So I would ask you allocate the alley as you all usually do,

02:24:53 and do something with unused alleys, and normally allocated

02:24:59 and divided between the residents.

02:25:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, ma'am.

02:25:03 Can you wait for just a second?

02:25:04 I want to ask Ms. Lynch to put that map up, because it's not

02:25:11 clear to us where the elevator is going, and, ma'am, who

02:25:21 just spoke, I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name.

02:25:24 >> (off microphone).

02:25:49 >> Only asking for 122 fate.

02:25:51 There's in a alley -- her property is here.

02:25:59 >>MARY MULHERN: And there's no alley there?

02:26:02 >> No.

02:26:09 It's not platted.

02:26:10 And in this case, if you were going over this, you are

02:26:17 basically trespassing.

02:26:20 >> My property is here.

02:26:24 >> This is a private alley.

02:26:33 >> (off microphone)

02:26:43 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you, thank you.

02:26:46 Next.

02:26:47 Councilwoman Capin.

02:26:49 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Would you leave that on the overhead?

02:26:51 Thank you.

02:26:51 >> And the church, I believe, tends to put the elevator

02:26:57 towards the front.

02:26:58 >> I think next to the steps.

02:27:05 Is the elevator going to be in what is now the alley?

02:27:10 Lynch lunch I think they want to use part of it.

02:27:12 They own the property to the north.

02:27:14 Mr. Day would be better to answer that question.

02:27:17 We trade to get a site plan but it was not available.

02:27:20 They don't have it yet.

02:27:21 >>MARY MULHERN: We will hear from the public and then --

02:27:24 let hear from anyone else who wishes to speak.

02:27:30 Is there anyone else who has not been sworn who wishes to

02:27:33 speak?

02:27:39 (Oath administered by Clerk)

02:27:40 >> Hi.

02:27:47 I'm Katrina hatchet Glen, 3403 east GENESSEE street.

02:27:59 This is my property here.

02:28:04 What I had suggested to Mr. Day is that we split the

02:28:08 alleyway with the five feet, the church getting their five

02:28:13 feet property and I am also getting my five feet of

02:28:16 property.

02:28:17 If we couldn't come to a decision as far as the easement,

02:28:24 from my understanding, they are sending a letter that they

02:28:27 would give us that right, but it also states further on in

02:28:32 the letter that they could also give us a 30-day notice that

02:28:35 they are going to block it off.

02:28:37 So, you know, he says they are not going to put anything up

02:28:40 there, but that's just word of mouth.

02:28:42 It's no good to me.

02:28:46 And we are going to leave it open permanently, or give us

02:28:51 the easement, not something in writing that says in 30 -- I

02:28:56 can give you a 30-day notice and close it off.

02:29:00 But they did give us where we could cut across their

02:29:03 property.

02:29:04 I have no problem with that.

02:29:06 But they can still give us a 30-day notice that they are

02:29:09 going to block it off.

02:29:10 >>MIKE SUAREZ: Ma'am, the way that this proceeding goes is

02:29:19 what's before us is just for us to vacate that.

02:29:23 Any individual contractual obligations that he may do with

02:29:26 you is his business in terms of that.

02:29:30 If you are saying that you do not want to us vacate it

02:29:32 because of it, you know, we don't have any -- you don't have

02:29:36 any standing right now to ask for a part of the vacated

02:29:41 alley.

02:29:42 So what we typically like to do in these hearings is that

02:29:45 neighbors find a way to go forward, but right now in terms

02:29:51 of what we are asked to do, we either will agree to allow

02:29:54 the vacating of that particular alley or not.

02:29:58 And it's not going to include your right to go through that

02:30:02 alley currently.

02:30:03 Because right now it is a public alley.

02:30:05 So you already have that right.

02:30:09 So the only thing I can suggest -- and we have done this

02:30:11 before in the past -- is if -- and it sound like you have

02:30:15 already been in discussion with the members of the church,

02:30:18 Mr. Day, in finding accommodation.

02:30:21 Obviously, the legal wording that he's going to use is going

02:30:25 to, because he will then be the owner of that particular

02:30:28 land, is going to have some rights for himself.

02:30:32 So I just want to make sure I explained that to you so that

02:30:34 you didn't realize, we can't split up right now in terms of

02:30:38 the alley because the way the petition is brought to us

02:30:41 right at this moment.

02:30:42 >> Right.

02:30:43 And I understand that.

02:30:44 That's just a term that I use because I don't know how this

02:30:46 meeting is supposed to go.

02:30:48 So this is my first time doing this.

02:30:50 So I really, you know, don't know how --

02:30:53 >> I just wanted to make sure you were clear on that.

02:30:59 >>YVONNE CAPIN: I have a question.

02:31:01 The vacating of the alley, when I am looking at it, the

02:31:04 alley is not open.

02:31:05 It's open up to that point.

02:31:07 Otherwise, the rest of it is private property.

02:31:10 Correct?

02:31:11 Okay.

02:31:11 Now, here is my question.

02:31:14 Why, fits going to be vacated, why was not part of the alley

02:31:19 that abuts the hatcher property and the part of the alley

02:31:23 that abuts the baker property allocated to them, if the

02:31:30 church does not need the whole 122 feet?

02:31:33 >> Well, the property reverts by state statute, is my

02:31:38 understanding.

02:31:38 And this all came out of the same plat.

02:31:40 So what would happen in this case is the property revert to

02:31:44 the center line of the alley, and Ms. Hatchet would pick up

02:31:49 the suction feet abutting her property to the center line,

02:31:53 the church gets the six feet to the center line on the north

02:31:56 and on the south of the properties that abut, and then Mrs.

02:32:02 Baker would get the six feet, the remaining portion, which

02:32:06 is small, 6.84.

02:32:10 So everybody is going to get a piece depending on what you

02:32:14 own.

02:32:15 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Thank you.

02:32:16 I had that in the back but it didn't come forward.

02:32:18 So that is not the usual you here.

02:32:23 Okay.

02:32:23 Thank you.

02:32:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Petitioner, your rebuttal?

02:32:35 I would like to show you a picture of the young lady's

02:32:47 backyard, which shows the reason she really wants this alley

02:32:55 to be open.

02:32:57 The thing is, they want to be able to drive from the front

02:33:00 to the back, and they do that.

02:33:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Is that the alley, the grass that you were

02:33:08 just pointing out?

02:33:09 >> That's the alley right here.

02:33:10 This is the back of their house.

02:33:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Is that their property next to the tree?

02:33:17 >> That is their property.

02:33:18 This is our property on this side of the tree.

02:33:20 This is their property on this side.

02:33:26 There is another photo showing the backyard, and the two

02:33:31 vehicles in the back, the drives out of their back, this way

02:33:36 and the on the direction.

02:33:38 Either way, they are driving over church property.

02:33:45 So what I would like to end up saying, we want to be gad

02:33:50 neighbors, we want to work with them.

02:33:52 We have allowed 50 years since the church has been there to

02:33:55 drive over church property.

02:33:56 We never had a disagreement up until now, we want to put an

02:34:01 elevator in a small area, which will allow them right here.

02:34:09 If they come up this alley, we will allow them, this lady

02:34:13 right here, to drive over church property, right here, and

02:34:15 come on to her street, if they so desire.

02:34:21 That means they will have a right to come this way or go

02:34:25 this way.

02:34:28 We are not trying to cut off access to them either way.

02:34:32 But all we want is a small piece of property right in here.

02:34:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Does council have any questions for the

02:34:46 petitioner?

02:34:52 Thank you.

02:35:05 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I don't know if the other young lady there

02:35:07 would like to speak.

02:35:07 >>MARY MULHERN: I asked for public comment before he has

02:35:10 given his rebuttal.

02:35:12 So who wants to speak?

02:35:14 I don't want to prevent anyone from speaking.

02:35:24 I think if we allow -- you haven't spoken yet, correct?

02:35:29 Okay.

02:35:30 Petitioner, can we allow her to speak and then you will have

02:35:33 another opportunity for rebuttal?

02:35:35 Can we do that, Mr. Shelby?

02:35:37 Thank you.

02:35:38 Come on up.

02:35:38 >> My name is Sylvia Baker.

02:35:48 I live at 3405 east Genesee street.

02:35:55 I want to say with the opening of this alley, it's closed.

02:35:58 That's the reason I have a problem at the back of the church

02:36:03 now.

02:36:04 We used to use this alley until they put down sod.

02:36:12 I respected that for them being a church and started using

02:36:15 the back way.

02:36:18 There used to be a chain link fence through the side of the

02:36:21 alleyway.

02:36:23 Once they put the sod down, they put up a chain link across

02:36:26 the side, so I started using the back.

02:36:29 The alley was being used until they closed it off.

02:36:35 And then in the letter that they sent out, it says that we

02:36:38 do not want to create a permanent unrestricted easement, so

02:36:43 if there's not going to be a permanent agreement we can use,

02:36:46 then we still need the alley.

02:36:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Did you want to ask hear question?

02:37:02 >> Mrs. Barrack -- and I assume for the hatchet family -- do

02:37:05 you all not have access on GENESSEE or is it more just the

02:37:10 way this is how we have always gone through?

02:37:13 >> No.

02:37:15 We have multiple vehicles.

02:37:17 My house is made for a driveway for one vehicle.

02:37:20 And we have always used the back.

02:37:22 And he said we drive from the front to the back.

02:37:27 That is not true.

02:37:28 >> I was wondering, people are using the back way a lot.

02:37:33 >> We use the back a lot.

02:37:35 >> My property --

02:37:37 >>MIKE SUAREZ: You have to come up and speak.

02:37:39 Sorry.

02:37:39 >>MARY MULHERN: She's already spoken.

02:37:43 >>MIKE SUAREZ: No, that's okay, I think we have the answer.

02:37:46 That's way wanted to ask.

02:37:48 Thanks so much, Ms. Barrack.

02:37:49 I appreciate it.

02:37:50 >>MARY MULHERN: Thank you.

02:37:52 Mr. Day.

02:37:52 >> I want to correct something.

02:37:59 Something that she said.

02:38:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Start over because we can't hear you when

02:38:03 you are walking up.

02:38:04 >> Okay.

02:38:06 I said I wanted to correct something I said.

02:38:08 This young lady that just got up, she's correct in what she

02:38:14 said about driving through the alleyway at all previously.

02:38:16 I have been at the church five years.

02:38:18 I have never seen a chain link fence in that area.

02:38:21 I know there's a little rope fence there, but I have never

02:38:24 seen a chain link fence.

02:38:27 Also, I want to correct.

02:38:31 I said that they could drive from the front to the back.

02:38:34 She can't drive from the front to the back.

02:38:36 She's got some obstruction on the side that would have to be

02:38:40 removed.

02:38:40 But the other lady, they drive through with a boat.

02:38:45 And you can see the boat in the picture.

02:38:48 They have a boat on the side, they have a boat on the side,

02:38:52 two trucks in the rear, and one car in the front.

02:38:56 You can show you the picture.

02:39:03 There's you a boat sitting route there.

02:39:26 There's a boat sitting right there.

02:39:33 There.

02:39:34 Two trucks.

02:39:39 I didn't want to go through this.

02:39:46 There's the front where she has the car parked.

02:39:48 They drive straight through.

02:39:49 >>MARY MULHERN: Excuse me, you can't speak from the

02:39:55 audience.

02:39:57 Sorry.

02:39:57 >> Right here, there's no fence.

02:40:11 They can drive right straight around, straight through here

02:40:13 out to the back.

02:40:17 They can drive straight on through.

02:40:22 They came in from the front to the back.

02:40:24 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilman Reddick.

02:40:35 >>FRANK REDDICK: The homes adjacent to the rear --

02:40:44 >> On the rear of the church, I couldn't tell you.

02:40:46 Going down the street, there's several.

02:40:47 >>FRANK REDDICK: The reason I ask that question, the owners

02:40:54 of these homes, are they the only ones that are questioning

02:41:00 the church about the alleyway, and being able to drive

02:41:05 through there?

02:41:06 >> Yes, sir.

02:41:06 >> Are there other residents affected by this as well?

02:41:08 Are they using it?

02:41:09 >> Nobody else is using it.

02:41:11 >> Okay, thank you.

02:41:16 >> And wee we keep the alley clean.

02:41:20 We even cut the tree down in the alley because the tree is

02:41:23 dead.

02:41:23 >> Let me just ask you one other question.

02:41:25 What is the time line for this elevator?

02:41:28 What time line are you all working with?

02:41:30 >> Well, we are working with September of the coming year,

02:41:35 2012.

02:41:36 >> 2012?

02:41:38 >> Yes, sir.

02:41:38 >> Okay.

02:41:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Mr. Day, I have a few questions.

02:41:47 >> Yes, ma'am.

02:41:48 >>MARY MULHERN: That's still up there.

02:42:00 The church has been there --

02:42:03 >> The church was across the street, built in 1883.

02:42:08 The church burned down, and they built a new church across

02:42:10 the street, before they built the new church the city came

02:42:15 in and took part of the land under eminent domain, so when

02:42:20 they built the new church they moved it back a little bit.

02:42:24 To where it is now.

02:42:24 And that was 1963.

02:42:26 >> Okay.

02:42:27 So what we are looking on your property, the alley portion

02:42:33 from 34th street over to the hatchet property line, is

02:42:42 that currently being used for access from 34th street?

02:42:50 >> Not by us.

02:42:50 >> Okay.

02:42:52 So now my question is for you, Ms. Lynch, but don't go away,

02:42:58 Mr. Day, because I might have another question.

02:43:00 As we look at where the neighbors were showing us, they

02:43:07 don't use the current alley, because they are actually using

02:43:13 the alley that's already been vacated?

02:43:16 Is that what I was hearing?

02:43:22 >> Well, I think when people are going out to the site, I

02:43:26 think what happens is this is the only piece of alley that

02:43:29 ever existed by plat.

02:43:32 And what I think is happening is baker is coming up here.

02:43:39 You can actually see tire tracks.

02:43:42 And I do have a picture.

02:43:43 Coming up from 38th and going into here.

02:43:46 Her opening is on this side.

02:43:51 She's crossing church property and coming in here.

02:43:53 >> Okay.

02:43:54 And that's the access you have been allowing them.

02:43:57 Is that what you are saying, Mr. Day?

02:44:00 So it's from 39th street up to their property.

02:44:03 And that was never platted out?

02:44:08 >>BARBARA LYNCH: No.

02:44:09 And then way think is happening, there's a tree here.

02:44:16 When we first went out there, there were no tire tracks,

02:44:25 construction blocking and a tree.

02:44:27 So no one is coming in from this side.

02:44:29 But I think where it's being used from hatchet, she's coming

02:44:32 up this side of the church property and come in, I believe,

02:44:35 here.

02:44:35 I think she's coming up following the same route as baker,

02:44:39 correct?

02:44:39 And coming down the alley at this point and then accessing

02:44:42 her yard.

02:44:43 >> So the tree is what's obstructing her from using the

02:44:50 existing alley currently?

02:44:52 I would say yes.

02:44:53 >> And Mr. Day, you showed us that's where your elevator is

02:45:02 going to go on that corner, right?

02:45:04 >> Yes.

02:45:04 >> So does the tree have to come down?

02:45:07 Is the elevator going to be encroaching into --

02:45:09 >> No.

02:45:10 The elevator is not going to be encroaching but the tree is

02:45:13 dead and needs to come down.

02:45:20 Lynch lunch my understanding is where they want to put the

02:45:23 elevator is in part of the alley that would be vacated by

02:45:26 this action.

02:45:27 I'm not sure how much of the elevator.

02:45:30 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

02:45:31 I would like to -- I don't have any more questions.

02:45:36 Does anyone else have any questions for Mr. Day?

02:45:38 Okay.

02:45:38 I have some questions for staff.

02:45:42 Four, Mrs. Lynch.

02:45:51 I'm just reading the guidelines for us as far as vacating.

02:45:57 And I don't understand why in this process, where they

02:46:05 petitioned, that you didn't -- it sounds like you understood

02:46:08 what all these problems were.

02:46:11 So did anyone explore, since they could probably -- if they

02:46:20 didn't vacate that alley, they could probably be using it

02:46:24 instead of having to use the church's property.

02:46:26 So it could be used for the use that it's there for, by the

02:46:33 residents, if you took the tree down.

02:46:37 >> Well, at the time that this was filed we did not know

02:46:40 there was any access by anybody.

02:46:43 We were under the impression that this alley was not in use,

02:46:46 and then when we went out and looked --

02:46:48 >> right, but by the time it gets to us to mach this

02:46:51 decision that we are asked to make, we have to tease all

02:46:57 this out, when apparently -- how did you find out, because

02:47:01 of the continuance and then talking?

02:47:02 >> Because they showed up at the public hearing last time,

02:47:05 and --

02:47:06 >> That's when we found out about the tree?

02:47:08 >> No, that's when we found --

02:47:10 >>MARY MULHERN: So we didn't know anything about this until

02:47:11 today?

02:47:12 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

02:47:14 What happened was, as it was about to go forward at your

02:47:17 last hearing we identified there were some folks who may

02:47:20 have some issues, that they were in the process of working

02:47:24 out with the church, and they asked for the opportunity to

02:47:26 work those issues out, and that's how we got here.

02:47:31 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.

02:47:32 I don't understand why you can't help these people reach

02:47:36 these kinds of solutions before it comes to us.

02:47:40 I don't understand it.

02:47:43 I do not understand it.

02:47:49 Thank you.

02:47:56 Does council have any more questions?

02:47:58 Do we have a motion to close the public hearing?

02:48:00 >>MIKE SUAREZ: So moved.

02:48:02 >>FRANK REDDICK: Second.

02:48:03 >>MARY MULHERN: All in favor?

02:48:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, just for the record you made

02:48:12 reference to the standards.

02:48:13 And just for the record, that is the memo that you had

02:48:20 received, April 4th, 2011, by senior assistant city

02:48:26 attorney Julia Cole, vacating petitions, and as you see on

02:48:30 the second page, the bottom of the page, are your criteria

02:48:33 that City Council uses for their determination.

02:48:37 Now I am going to give a copy of the memo to the clerk for

02:48:40 the file.

02:49:43 >>MARY MULHERN: What's the pleasure of council?

02:49:45 >>MIKE SUAREZ: I would like to move an ordinance for first

02:49:48 reading consideration, an ordinance vacating, closing,

02:49:50 discontinuing, abandoning a certain right-of-way all that

02:49:54 alley lying south of GENESSEE street north of 38th

02:49:58 Avenue east of 34th street and west 38th street, in

02:50:02 map of Montana subdivision, a subdivision of the City of

02:50:04 Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida, the same being more

02:50:07 fully described in section 2 hereof, subject to the

02:50:09 reservation of certain permanent easements as set forth

02:50:13 herein subject to certain covenants, conditions, or

02:50:15 restrictions as more particularly described herein,

02:50:18 providing an effective date.

02:50:18 >> Second.

02:50:26 >>MARY MULHERN: We have a motion to approve by Councilman

02:50:30 Suarez, seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

02:50:34 >>FRANK REDDICK: Question.

02:50:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Question by Councilman Reddick.

02:50:41 >>FRANK REDDICK: Is it possible we can put something, a

02:50:47 provision in here that the church and the residents continue

02:50:51 to try to work out their differences prior to the second

02:50:55 reading?

02:50:59 >>> Maybe our attorney can answer this but I think that is

02:51:03 something we cannot specifically do, because if the action

02:51:05 is just to vacate to allow them to own that peace of

02:51:08 property -- or the church, I should say.

02:51:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And Ms. Cole, I think we are both in

02:51:21 agreement on this.

02:51:22 >>JULIA COLE: Yes.

02:51:23 >> I have been hanging around lawyers too long.

02:51:25 >>JULIA COLE: If you want me to say anything more.

02:51:28 That would a private discussion between two private property

02:51:30 owners and you really shouldn't be tying this vacation

02:51:32 ordinance to that private discussion.

02:51:34 >>MARY MULHERN: I can't support this, because I'm reading

02:51:51 this criteria here.

02:51:56 And under vacation of right-of-way -- well, understood the

02:51:59 public rights-of-way generally, dedicated public

02:52:02 rights-of-way are considered to be an easement interest held

02:52:06 by the governmental entity.

02:52:09 This easement is like a super easement which can be used for

02:52:12 a variety of public uses such as utility, on and on.

02:52:17 Then under vacation of right-of-way -- and this for me gets

02:52:20 to the crux of it.

02:52:21 The government has the power to abandon or vacate its

02:52:27 easement interests in the public right-of-way.

02:52:29 If such vacation is in the public interest.

02:52:37 I can't say that the plans for the church are in the public

02:52:43 interest, but I also can't say that they are in the

02:52:49 public -- or the public interest, and the interests of the

02:52:54 people who live adjacent to it.

02:52:57 It goes on to talk about what we can be sued over.

02:53:07 And I don't think that that is enough of a basis to

02:53:10 determine, because we figure who is more likely to sue us,

02:53:15 and because from what I heard from everyone here today,

02:53:19 including our staff, they could have reached an agreement on

02:53:28 this.

02:53:28 And that's why we continue this.

02:53:30 And you didn't reach an agreement.

02:53:34 And the fact is that those people are adjacent to an alley

02:53:38 that is public.

02:53:40 And so I can't support it for those reasons.

02:53:46 We have a motion to approve by Councilman Suarez, right?

02:53:52 Seconded by Councilwoman Capin.

02:53:56 Thank you.

02:53:56 All in favor?

02:53:58 Anyone opposed?

02:54:00 Nay.

02:54:00 >>THE CLERK: Mulhern voting, no Miranda being absent.

02:54:05 Second reading and adoption will be held October 20, 2011 at

02:54:09 9:30 a.m.

02:54:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we are going now back to the item

02:54:22 number 34 through 37, which were removed from the consent

02:54:27 agenda today.

02:54:39 Let me hear from staff.

02:54:45 Item number 34.

02:54:49 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management development services.

02:54:50 I'm here just holding the fort till Irv gets in here talking

02:54:57 about how we arrived at why we need to have these parcels,

02:55:01 and then any other questions about the assessments and

02:55:03 things like that.

02:55:05 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione, you asked to have

02:55:09 this removed, is that correct?

02:55:11 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Yes.

02:55:12 >>MARY MULHERN: You present your questions.

02:55:16 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, on 34, the questions will apply to

02:55:22 all of the items.

02:55:25 There's very little difference between items 34 through 38,

02:55:29 except for the last, 38, which is owned by a separate entity

02:55:38 from the first four.

02:55:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Are these adjacent properties?

02:55:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Seven of them are adjacent and the one

02:56:01 owned by a separate entity is a S across the street.

02:56:04 >>MARY MULHERN: Items 38?

02:56:08 You removed 38, too?

02:56:09 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I'm sorry, 37.

02:56:14 >>MARY MULHERN: So all of the properties in that, in all

02:56:18 four of those resolutions, are adjacent to each other?

02:56:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Um, yes.

02:56:24 And it's -- I'm afraid to walk out here for fare of falling

02:56:33 over.

02:56:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Maybe someone can come and get that.

02:56:38 Mr. Snelling, could you help us out here?

02:56:41 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Can you put these on the overhead,

02:56:43 please?

02:56:53 He's got them, thank you.

02:56:56 It's the properties with the asterisks that are the subject

02:57:01 of the agenda items.

02:57:09 Actually, there's a total of eight properties that we would

02:57:18 be approving the purchase of.

02:57:22 All along -- on the north side of Frierson it's the entire

02:57:29 black and on the south side of Frierson it's -- well, it's

02:57:33 nearly the entirely block on the north side.

02:57:36 There's one parcel on the corner that is not being

02:57:38 considered.

02:57:38 That's the vacant one all the way to the west.

02:57:42 Thank you very much.

02:57:45 And, again, nearly the whole block on the other side.

02:57:48 We already own the parcel to the east, on the corner, the

02:57:53 southeast corner.

02:57:54 We already own all those properties with the red dots.

02:57:56 >>MARY MULHERN: What are your questions?

02:58:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And I have to beg, before I get started,

02:58:08 this is not an exciting or particularly sexy topic, and I

02:58:12 have got quite a bit to review.

02:58:15 So bear with me.

02:58:18 The reason I objected, I will just say from the very

02:58:21 beginning, to the consent agenda of the purchase of these

02:58:25 property is because I felt that the dollar amount that we

02:58:29 are paying for these properties is way above what we should

02:58:32 be paying in a buyer's market.

02:58:34 The sales price on each of the contracts, seven of the

02:58:38 contracts out of eight is $71,000.

02:58:44 Plus additional moneys, $1200, I believe it is, a piece for

02:58:48 the closing costs.

02:58:51 The last property we are paying $80,000 plus additional

02:58:56 money in closing costs, again slightly higher than the 12.

02:59:06 The appraised properties on these properties through an

02:59:08 appraisal that our staff requested and engaged the appraiser

02:59:14 for is 66,500.

02:59:18 So we are paying above market, above appraisal, for each of

02:59:24 these properties.

02:59:26 We are paying for the total of eight properties nearly

02:59:30 $800,000, comes to $577,000 for these properties.

02:59:36 The appraised value, 66,500, which I still believe is high,

02:59:41 is at 532,000.

02:59:43 So we are paying $45,000 above the appraised value for the

02:59:49 collective group of eight properties.

02:59:53 That bothers me, especially in a buyer's market and

02:59:56 especially in areas of town where there are lots of

02:59:59 properties that are foreclosed on.

03:00:01 So if I may get started, actually, Mr. Lee, I think my

03:00:07 questions for you will come at the end of this.

03:00:11 Is the reason we are buying these properties is because

03:00:13 there's been flooding experienced in the street adjacent to

03:00:19 our stormwater pond?

03:00:20 What I have been told and waive seen for myself is that the

03:00:22 stormwater pond is not adequate to address the sudden

03:00:27 rainstorms that we have been having.

03:00:29 Three there's been quite a bit of flooding.

03:00:31 And as far as I understand it, I haven't been told that this

03:00:34 flooding is systemic throughout the area.

03:00:39 It is just really basically right in front of the property

03:00:45 that you see the asterisks on and across from our stormwater

03:00:51 pond so across the street from there.

03:00:52 >>FRANK REDDICK: Let me -- you brought up stormwater.

03:01:00 The drainage problem in that area, okay.

03:01:02 I live within walking distance be, okay?

03:01:07 I pass through that every day.

03:01:10 And let me explain

03:01:17 Most of you probably don't know this.

03:01:25 One of the most beautiful schools in that community.

03:01:28 And the water from the school overflowed into Williams park,

03:01:33 the same park that we were discussing about the pool, okay?

03:01:37 People cannot use the park --

03:01:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I appreciate that.

03:01:44 >>FRANK REDDICK: There's a trail out there.

03:01:46 Senior citizens, myself, kids, a whole bunch of us, we used

03:01:49 to walk that trail.

03:01:52 We can't do that no more when it rains, because it's

03:01:55 drained, and so much water overflows from Williams magnet

03:01:59 school next to this retention pond, and it takes five, six,

03:02:11 seven days for the water.

03:02:13 Now, you go to Frierson and 47th, you look at those

03:02:18 dilapidated structures there, not searching any purpose at

03:02:24 all, okay?

03:02:26 Now, if you ask anybody in that community -- and that

03:02:31 surrounding community -- we are hungry for that drainage

03:02:36 problem to be resolved.

03:02:37 And if the city can assist and utilize the retention pond

03:02:44 and expand it in order to let some of that water from

03:02:46 Williams magnet school overflow into that retention pond,

03:02:51 that runs into that park, where nobody can use it, and it's

03:02:55 a city park, and the kids can't even play out there, because

03:02:58 of so much water, and then we have mosquito problem out

03:03:04 there, because all that water just compacts in that area.

03:03:10 And I don't know, you know, I didn't want to get into it,

03:03:17 but --

03:03:19 >>LISA MONTELIONE, no I understand.

03:03:21 And what I am trying to do is address the larger problem

03:03:26 than what's going to be addressed here.

03:03:27 >>FRANK REDDICK: And I see appraised at 71,000, a $5,000

03:03:37 difference.

03:03:38 Now, now, that might seem excessive to some, but to those

03:03:42 though live in that community, $5,000, and we have been --

03:03:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: If I may just explain why, it may be

03:03:54 $5,000 over the appraised value, but this appraisal has

03:03:57 serious issues with it.

03:03:58 And 66,500 is way above what I believe, and others that I

03:04:05 have consulted with, and researched and analysis shows

03:04:11 that's way above market price as well.

03:04:14 >>MARY MULHERN: Allow Councilman Reddick to finish while he

03:04:17 has the floor.

03:04:18 We went over to him.

03:04:20 We'll come back to you because I know you have a lot of

03:04:22 questions.

03:04:22 >>FRANK REDDICK: I just wanted to lay that foundation by

03:04:25 the drainage problem, and that what the people are going

03:04:31 through in that community when they drive through those

03:04:33 areas, the floods, when they cannot utilize the park because

03:04:39 of the contract the city has with the school district, with

03:04:42 all that water flow right into that park, and, you know, I

03:04:47 was excited when I heard about that you are looking at -- we

03:04:52 have been watching the development of the retention pond out

03:04:55 there.

03:04:55 Just put the fence and everything up around it.

03:04:57 And we are looking at, this is an excellent opportunity to

03:05:01 take some of that overflow water from Williams magnet school

03:05:04 and put in that park and he they can fix that pool out

03:05:12 there, but if the people are going drown trying to get

03:05:16 there, it's not going to do you any use.

03:05:18 And until they can deal with that drainage problem, for the

03:05:21 magnet school, drainage problem at the pool, we just have a

03:05:26 beautiful facility out there that we cannot utilize, and,

03:05:30 therefore, no more are you seeing senior citizens.

03:05:37 I can't walk out there no more.

03:05:41 You don't have it where you can walk in that park on a rainy

03:05:44 day.

03:05:45 And we have been getting a lot of rain lately.

03:05:47 I just want to say that foundation about the drainage

03:05:50 problem.

03:05:50 That's a major issue in that area.

03:05:52 Thank you.

03:05:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Capin.

03:05:57 >>YVONNE CAPIN: These properties were appraised by who?

03:06:01 The appraisal is what?

03:06:02 Is this from the tax rolls or private appraisal company?

03:06:09 >>THOM SNELLING: We used the appraisers of Lee Pallardy who

03:06:13 has a reputation as one of the most conservative appraisers

03:06:16 around so we didn't feel he overinflated the prices, he's a

03:06:20 relatively conservative appraiser, and that's one of the

03:06:23 reasons we use him.

03:06:24 We try to help control our costs, and that was the appraisal

03:06:29 we felt was a fair appraisal.

03:06:31 And just to answer real quick, I'm just saying, they

03:06:38 identified the need for the drainage.

03:06:42 The flooding Councilman Reddick talked about, the need for

03:06:46 the drainage.

03:06:50 We purchase property, we go through condemnation or through

03:06:55 eminent domain.

03:06:56 Even if you go through condemnation and eminent domain, you

03:06:59 still give the property owner cash for his property.

03:07:01 And on top of that you are appraisal for appraisals on both

03:07:06 sides, because then they fight about it, and you are paying

03:07:08 for additional attorneys fees and everything else.

03:07:10 We felt this was the most efficient use and expenditure of

03:07:13 money than having to go through any of those on the two

03:07:15 processes.

03:07:17 They just cost way more money and take years.

03:07:20 And if it's already been all this time it's been out there

03:07:23 flooding, we felt we wanted to take care of it a little more

03:07:26 in an expeditious fashion and we don't feel at all that our

03:07:29 appraisals are out of line.

03:07:34 >>YVONNE CAPIN: And thank you for answering all of us.

03:07:41 This appraisal company has been used by the city before?

03:07:45 >>THOM SNELLING: Yes.

03:07:46 Meantimes.

03:07:46 >> For generations?

03:07:52 >>THOM SNELLING: Three generations.

03:07:53 >>YVONNE CAPIN: Three generations.

03:07:54 That alone will attest to their knowledge of this.

03:08:01 I appreciate that.

03:08:02 I just was curious as to who and how that appraisal came

03:08:06 about.

03:08:10 I'll listen to more questions.

03:08:11 Thank you.

03:08:11 >>MARY MULHERN: Councilwoman Montelione.

03:08:16 Back to you.

03:08:18 I'm just trying to break it up a little so you don't have to

03:08:20 ask all your questions.

03:08:21 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Oh, no, I am going ask all my questions.

03:08:24 >>MARY MULHERN: No, I know.

03:08:26 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Because --

03:08:27 >>MARY MULHERN: No, I'm apologize.

03:08:29 Thank you.

03:08:32 I recognized someone else.

03:08:34 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Thank you.

03:08:36 I am not doubting that there's a drainage issue here.

03:08:39 And I'm looking to address the larger problem, because it is

03:08:46 a problem with Williams park.

03:08:47 It is a problem with the school.

03:08:49 It is a problem for the neighborhood.

03:08:50 And digging a bigger hole in the ground and putting a

03:08:55 retention pond in this area, the size of what we are looking

03:09:00 at, that's not a retention pond anymore, that's a lake.

03:09:04 This is a very large purchase of property to try and

03:09:10 alleviate a tremendous flooding problem that -- I'm no

03:09:17 stormwater engineer but I have worked in the industry for a

03:09:19 while, and I have consulted with folks in stormwater for

03:09:22 quite a number of years, and I'm not sure that this is going

03:09:25 to be the only solution, and before I get there, you will

03:09:30 have your chance to speak, we can address things.

03:09:33 But I'm not sure that building a lake in this neighborhood

03:09:36 is going to really address once and for all all of the

03:09:40 drainage issues that the neighborhood has.

03:09:42 It's abandoned.

03:09:43 And I don't know that spending all this money on a Band-Aid

03:09:46 is really what we need to be doing.

03:09:49 Okay.

03:09:49 So let me go through the appraisal.

03:09:51 Yes, I dealt with appraisals from Mr. Pallardy before with

03:09:58 his firm, long standing, very respected, but appraisal is an

03:10:02 art and a science.

03:10:04 Every case is different, and you really have to address each

03:10:07 one on its own merits, not on the body of he's always done

03:10:12 great work for us before.

03:10:13 So let me go through the questions that I have.

03:10:17 Now, I understand, a couple of questions have already been

03:10:22 addressed.

03:10:23 When we receive an appraisal that we have requested, do we

03:10:27 check these appraisals and have one person, one staff person

03:10:33 review the appraisals?

03:10:34 Or are they multiple staff members do the appraisals?

03:10:39 >>THOM SNELLING: Several.

03:10:40 >>LISA MONTELIONE: All right.

03:10:45 Then let me address some of the issues that I found with

03:10:47 this appraisal, and, like I said, I have been doing this a

03:10:52 little while, so have we considered that this plot may have

03:11:02 been the subject of the city's research and receipt of

03:11:07 appraisals before?

03:11:08 Did anyone check to see if we have already got appraisals on

03:11:11 file for these properties?

03:11:14 >>THOM SNELLING: For these specific properties?

03:11:16 I don't know.

03:11:17 I don't know if we have actually gone back and checked to

03:11:20 see if we had previous appraisals on them, no.

03:11:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, the appraisals that I am referring

03:11:25 to are part -- because these properties are part of NSP-2,

03:11:29 they were looked at for purchase by some of the nonprofits

03:11:34 that were considering applications, or had put in

03:11:36 applications, so there are other appraisals out there on

03:11:40 these properties?

03:11:42 That was part of the NSP-2 applications, I believe it was

03:11:47 Capitaris.

03:11:50 It might have been another one.

03:11:51 And I understand from some of the research that I have done

03:11:54 that -- I don't know if we had problems with the appraisals

03:11:57 that came back on the banks, financing, problems with the

03:12:03 appraisals.

03:12:04 And my point is that this area is very difficult to

03:12:08 appraise.

03:12:09 So, you know, having the one appraisal from Mr. Pallardy, it

03:12:14 hard to rely on this one appraisal as being the be all and

03:12:18 end all of what this property is worth.

03:12:20 So back to the appraisal.

03:12:26 If we are reading these, and more than one staff member is

03:12:30 reading these, I want to direct you to the neighborhood

03:12:32 comment section of this appraisal under the market

03:12:34 conditions.

03:12:36 Which states, it is currently a buyer's market due to the

03:12:41 high number of residential parks which has caused a

03:12:43 significant increase in the number of properties being

03:12:46 available for sale and for rent, many of which are owned by

03:12:50 banks or distressed investors.

03:12:56 This appraiser stating that this property is in a

03:13:00 neighborhood where it's a buyer's market.

03:13:03 So we are paying $50,000 more collectively for these

03:13:07 properties than the appraised value, and the apprasier is

03:13:12 saying collectively $45,000 more.

03:13:16 >>THOM SNELLING: But we don't purchase -- I mean, there's a

03:13:19 couple of different owners here.

03:13:21 It's not everybody gets together and you spread it out over

03:13:23 the number of properties.

03:13:24 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Seven of the properties are owned by two

03:13:28 individuals who happen to be partners in business together.

03:13:31 And because they are owned, they are titled individually, it

03:13:34 doesn't change the idea that this is a unit for a business.

03:13:41 >>MARY MULHERN: Mrs. Montelione, can I help you in your

03:13:44 question?

03:13:45 Would you mind?

03:13:49 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, not --

03:13:52 >>MARY MULHERN: Just this one, because I will forget.

03:13:54 I think if would you ask on -- they are asking us to approve

03:13:58 each one of these individual appraisals.

03:14:01 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Based on -- we did not get a separate

03:14:05 appraisal on each property.

03:14:06 There's only one appraisal.

03:14:08 >>MARY MULHERN: There's one appraisal for all these

03:14:10 properties, yet the appropriations are broken up into four

03:14:16 different resolutions? Is that correct?

03:14:19 >>THOM SNELLING: No, there's three separate appraisals.

03:14:21 There's not a single appraisal for all.

03:14:22 >>LISA MONTELIONE: No, no, no.

03:14:25 Not --

03:14:31 >> Why don't they explain to us by resolution if they

03:14:39 haven't given to you that already?

03:14:42 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I asked for the appraisals on this

03:14:44 property. I met a couple of days ago and asked for the

03:14:48 appraisals on the property.

03:14:49 I was given one appraisal for 4514 east Frierson and was

03:14:54 told that the evaluation and our sales and contract

03:14:56 negotiations were based on this appraisal for all the

03:14:59 property.

03:14:59 >>MARY MULHERN: So each of the eight properties, that's

03:15:03 what each of them --

03:15:05 >>LISA MONTELIONE: That's way was told.

03:15:07 I was told our negotiation were based on this one appraisal

03:15:11 for all the properties.

03:15:13 >>THOM SNELLING: I am going let Irv address that.

03:15:17 >> I'm Irv Fecter, manager of real estate division there.

03:15:24 Were, in fact, Mrs. Montelione, three appraisals.

03:15:26 The conclusions were all the same.

03:15:28 >>LISA MONTELIONE: I asked for the appraisals on the

03:15:30 property.

03:15:30 >> They were all the same conclusion.

03:15:32 I sent you one electronically with the comment that we based

03:15:37 our conclusions on the three being all the same.

03:15:39 >> So each appraisal is identical?

03:15:42 >> Each appraisal's conclusion is identical.

03:15:46 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Were all the comparables for rent and

03:15:48 all the rent comparables all exactly the same?

03:15:52 >> Yes, they were.

03:15:53 >> So in essence we have three copies of the same appraisal

03:15:55 with --

03:15:56 >> In effect do you.

03:15:57 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Okay, thank you.

03:15:58 >> Yes.

03:15:59 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So that was my first concern.

03:16:07 That this is a buyer's market.

03:16:10 So now, looking at the comparables, in this appraisal -- and

03:16:16 I'm told now that all three are exactly the same.

03:16:20 The property that we are buying, the subject property

03:16:23 identified as being on septic, the comparable rental one is

03:16:27 on septic, but the others on water and sewer, so there is a

03:16:31 difference.

03:16:32 That is one difference between those.

03:16:33 And I don't see within the appraisal any adjustment that the

03:16:37 prayer made for a substandard septic system rather than the

03:16:44 water and sewer system, which is a difference that generally

03:16:48 is not acceptable in this neighborhood because it is in the

03:16:50 urban service area and should be on water and sewer.

03:16:53 The other is that the sales comparables, this is how many

03:16:58 units that we are purchasing?

03:17:00 >> Eight.

03:17:00 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Eight.

03:17:02 >> And they are all duplexes.

03:17:06 >>LISA MONTELIONE: So the sales comparable on sale number 3

03:17:08 is on how many units?

03:17:11 >> I don't know the number of this one.

03:17:14 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Well, the total number of rooms in this

03:17:19 sales comparable is 608.

03:17:22 I don't think that that's a comparable sale.

03:17:26 So that's another major problem with this appraisal.

03:17:34 The on the problem I have with the appraisal, as if that's

03:17:40 not enough, is we have a situation where it says in the

03:17:50 appraisal that it is -- the 13 duplexes, even thousand

03:17:56 pointed out that they are separate people and whatever, but

03:17:59 I am trying to show this is really one multi-familiar family

03:18:04 apartment unit business structure, it says on the first page

03:18:06 of the cover letter is part of a larger duplex development

03:18:11 consisting of a total of 13 buildings, 26 rental units, 13

03:18:14 are managed, leased as a single property, and in my

03:18:18 opinion -- this is the appraisal -- in my opinion, the

03:18:23 method of evaluation is subject -- to appraise these as part

03:18:26 of a larger development at the request of the client.

03:18:30 So we are directing the appraiser how to appraise these

03:18:34 properties.

03:18:34 It says at the request of the client.

03:18:36 Okay.

03:18:40 So it's a little bit offputting to me that although we

03:18:44 appraise them as part of the multifamily larger development,

03:18:47 each of the comparisons except for the one are individual

03:18:51 duplexes.

03:18:52 So is -- there is a contradiction in terms there.

03:18:56 Going on to another part of the appraisal, under definition

03:18:59 of market value, it says that the most -- the property

03:19:07 should bring open market under all requisite to a fair

03:19:10 sales, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and

03:19:13 knowledgeably and assume the price is not affected by undue

03:19:17 stimulus.

03:19:17 The unused stimulus in this case is that we want to build a

03:19:21 retention pond.

03:19:22 And they know that we want to build a retention pond, and we

03:19:24 want to buy this property because we have flooding in the

03:19:27 area.

03:19:28 That to me is a stimulus.

03:19:30 It's not accounted for in this appraisal.

03:19:35 The third item under that same paragraph is that a

03:19:38 reasonable time is allowed for exposure to the open market.

03:19:42 Now, although this property may not be on the market now, I

03:19:48 didn't see it on Lukenet which is customarily used in the

03:19:57 land purchase or sales for commercial properties where you

03:19:59 find multifamily apartment complexes.

03:20:04 I didn't have the access to MLS but I don't believe it's

03:20:08 listed on MLS either, so I don't understand that these are

03:20:11 currently being offered for sale.

03:20:12 But since I had the knowledge that they were being

03:20:15 considered under NSP-2 by one of the nonprofits it had been

03:20:19 up for sale in the past.

03:20:21 And I don't see that that prior sales comparison or any of

03:20:25 the information was included in that comparison appraisal

03:20:29 either.

03:20:30 The page also from the appraisal, five basic steps in this

03:20:34 analysis are listed below.

03:20:36 Step one is to research the market to obtain information on

03:20:39 sales transactions listing that purchase or sale properties

03:20:44 that are similar.

03:20:46 We already talked about how most of the comparables that we

03:20:50 used were not similar.

03:20:52 Select relevant units of comparison.

03:20:55 One is five mails away, in a neighborhood in an area where

03:20:58 there are lots of properties that are foreclosed, vacant, up

03:21:01 for sale, and what have you.

03:21:04 And that they are -- the sales are adjusted, or the market,

03:21:10 the comparables are adjusted, based on element of

03:21:13 comparison.

03:21:15 They are on septic.

03:21:16 Others are on water and sewer.

03:21:18 These are 13 units.

03:21:19 We are looking at 200 unit apartment complexes.

03:21:23 So there are basic problems that I think are very clear in

03:21:27 this particular appraisal.

03:21:33 As a matter of policy, when we go out and we buy property,

03:21:37 it's in a secret to the market that we are out looking for

03:21:40 property.

03:21:43 In the private sector, when you are out looking for

03:21:46 property, usually for a reason, and this is where Mr. Lee

03:21:49 comes in with the stormwater, you look at all of your

03:21:52 alternatives, and you have plan A, plan B and plan C, so if

03:21:57 the property that you want to buy is dependent upon your

03:22:00 purchase of adjacent properties, and what we call land a

03:22:03 assemblages, you look at what the total value is, and then

03:22:07 look at your alternative plans.

03:22:11 I'm contending that we only looked at these properties

03:22:14 because they are across the street from the stormwater pond

03:22:17 that we already own, that we want to buy this because we can

03:22:21 dig a great big hole in the ground and tell the community

03:22:24 that we have addressed this stormwater problem, and without

03:22:29 looking at a better way of addressing the stormwater

03:22:32 problem, which is this is a one block from Hillsborough

03:22:36 Avenue do. We have stormwater drains that run along

03:22:39 Hillsborough Avenue?

03:22:40 We do.

03:22:41 Mr. Lee?

03:22:42 You have to come to the --

03:22:45 >> Lee, director of public works.

03:22:48 The D.O.T. operates and maintains the storm drainage system.

03:22:52 >> Have we reached out to D.O.T. for us connecting to

03:22:55 Hillsborough Avenue?

03:22:57 >> I don't have an area map here, but this area forms a

03:23:02 natural roll so the situation, this is not just a normal

03:23:06 drainage usual you.

03:23:08 We have structural flooding in the area, and this is a

03:23:12 basin.

03:23:12 This is the low point in this area.

03:23:15 So to get the water up to this system, and the reason that

03:23:22 the situation in Williams is such a challenge for us is

03:23:27 because gravity is taking that water down towards this area.

03:23:30 So you have Hillsborough up on this end, Williams back up

03:23:33 here, this is -- we would have to mechanically move that

03:23:37 water to get to that system.

03:23:41 And the cost of that --

03:23:43 >>LISA MONTELIONE: And do we have drainage problems in

03:23:46 other areas of town?

03:23:47 >> Yes.

03:23:48 I am going to the Bayshore Beautiful neighborhood this

03:23:50 evening.

03:23:50 We recently broke ground on a $35 million purpose station

03:23:56 project --

03:23:58 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Bayshore Beautiful is getting a pump

03:24:00 station and this neighborhood is getting a big hole in the

03:24:03 ground?

03:24:04 >> That is the most economical assessment of the different

03:24:09 solutions that are available to resolve the issue, that we

03:24:13 believe it is much more cost effective here to do that in

03:24:16 this case.

03:24:17 >> Let's go back to the appraisal.

03:24:19 So if we don't have any other alternative but to put a big

03:24:24 hole in the ground here, and buy these properties --

03:24:26 >> In perspective that is the most cost effective way to

03:24:29 address, to mitigate the issue at this particular location.

03:24:33 We evaluate our challenges on a site --

03:24:36 >>LISA MONTELIONE: Understood.

03:24:37 Okay.

03:24:39 After what we are paying for these properties.

03:24:41 So if we know -- it's common knowledge that we have to buy

03:24:47 these properties, and this owner can, say I don't care what

03:24:51 the appraisal, is I want $100,000 for these properties.

03:24:55 Are we going to pay it?

03:24:57 >> If somebody would come back with something that was

03:24:59 clearly a certain percentage, I don't not exactly what that

03:25:02 line in the sand would be, Councilwoman, but, no if somebody

03:25:05 can came back and said I want 100 that you or 200,000 or I

03:25:10 want some, in real estate opinion where it was over the line

03:25:15 and they were trying to gouge us, then that may make the

03:25:17 option of eminent domain, or condemnation more feasible,

03:25:21 because if they are going to all dig in and do that, then

03:25:24 that's a possibility.

03:25:26 It's more expensive.

03:25:27 >> Now the property owners of these properties except for

03:25:29 two have not paid property taxes on these properties in two

03:25:33 years?

03:25:33 >> I am not sure how that goes into the calculation, though.

03:25:40 >> Well, it's not considered as a distressed property, and

03:25:43 in the appraisal that gave us 66,500 as the evaluation.

03:25:47 I mean, I would assume that that would be another item that

03:25:51 the appraiser would have taken into consideration, that this

03:25:54 is a distressed sale and a dilapidated --

03:26:00 >>THOM SNELLING: I don't know what the appraiser who did

03:26:01 this property would assume or not assume about how he

03:26:04 evaluates, somebody being behind in their taxes.

03:26:08 It's not uncommon virtually around the entire population of

03:26:11 the city that many people are behind in their taxes at this

03:26:13 point.

03:26:14 And maybe that is also considered in his appraisal that this

03:26:18 is not an than common thing because so many people are in

03:26:21 the exact same boat.

03:26:23 >>LISA MONTELIONE: What I see is this is a problem in the

03:26:28 city. What I see is we are purchasing properties, with

03:26:30 taxpayer money, whether it be for the best cause or reason

03:26:35 in the world, if we were purchasing these properties for a

03:26:40 homeless shelter, I would still question what we are paying

03:26:43 for the land, because the more money we save, the more

03:26:46 stormwater projects we can do.

03:26:49 The more jobs that we can --

03:26:51 >> And we think we