Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, April 21, 2005
9:00 a.m. session

DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this transcript may have been 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.

[Sounding gavel]
>>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
The chair will yield to Mr. Shawn Harrison.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Madam Chair.
It's my pleasure this morning to introduce a fellow, elected official and colleague and friend of all of us up here, the reverend Thomas Scott, commissioner from East Tampa.
We all know Tom but let me say he's a native of Macon, Georgia, first elected to the Hillsborough commission in 1986, reelected in 2000 and 2004, assistant pastor of 34th street church of God and currently serving in that capacity.
He is on the metropolitan planning organization with me.
He is a good friend to the City of Tampa and all of us.
And this is the -- this week he happens to be celebrating the 25th anniversary of his pastoral commission at the 34th street church of God.
So reverend Scott, if you would come up and lead us in the prayer.
If we could all please stand for that and remain standing for the pledge.
>> Reverend Scott: Thank you, councilman Harrison and to the board.
It's a privilege to be here today. Thank you for the opportunity to come and God bless you on your time in session.
Shall we pray?
Father, we are reminded that we should always acknowledge you and that you will give direction to our path.
It is said that you watch all our steps so today we thank you for the privilege we have to come in your die vine presence.
You have been good to us.
You have caused us to rise to see the sun and you have given us the pleasure to walk in this beautiful day.
For that we say thank you.
Not only for this day but we thank you for this great nation of ours, a nation of opportunity, a nation of freedom, democracy, a nation that believes in equality for all of its citizens.
We thank you for America, for what she stands for, and we pray now for all of our leaders, elected leaders throughout this nation, meeting here locally, and lift up in this City Council today to deliberate on issues that are so important and relevant to our community.
Bless our chair to lead this governing body today.
Now we pray that you will just allow your grace, bless this entire session today, it is in your name that we pray.
Amen.
Madam Chair, thank you again.
I have to leave. The board of county commission is in session as well.
>> If you would like to stay with us -- (Laughter)
>> Thank you.
>> Roll call.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: (No response.)
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: At this time the chair yield to Ms. Rose Ferlita to do our officer of the month.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, good morning.
As in the past it is my pleasure to present the commendation to the officer of the month.
And as always it is my additional pleasure that the chief join me in applauding the services of his men and women.
Chief, if you will come forward and kind of give a description about why this officer was chosen, please.
>> My pleasure.
Your parents are here, too, aren't they?
Why don't you bring them up too?
We are very proud this month to name Officer Dale Frix as our officer of the month for April 2005.
I would like to read a little thing we have written up about his activities that was the reason for this honor.
In the short time that Officer Frix has been assigned as a patrol officer of district two he has been involved in multiple high profile incidences that resulted in the arrest of several very dangerous individuals.
On January 5th, 2005, Florida Highway Patrol trooper Brandon McElroy was shot during a traffic stop while trying to subdue a violent felony offender.
Officer Frix helped in apprehending this armed and dangerous individual.
Officer Frix and another officer were able to apprehend the citizen, thus preventing a potential hostage situation from developing.
On January 25th, 2005 Officer Frix and other officer were on patrol when they heard screams for help.
A naked woman was running toward them covered in her own blood.
A man was chasing her with a large butcher knife raised above his head.
Officer Frix broke off the attacker's crazy murderous pursuit and Officer Frix was able to arrest the suspect with a timely deployment of a nonlethal taser. The suspect in this attack had recently been released from prison for murder.
On March 19, 2005, Officer Frix observed a stolen vehicle parked in front of a local hotel.
Officer Frix confronted the suspect as they reentered the vehicle but they were able to avoid capture.
After a vehicle pursuit the suspects were captured in Sulphur Springs after intentionally ramming two vehicles and a dump truck.
Residential burglaries, grand theft auto and burglary.
These members were identified as a group that committed hundreds of offenses within Hillsborough County and City of Tampa.
Officer Frix is a shining example of the department's continuing dedication to improving the quality of life in the City of Tampa.
He is to be commended for his quit thinking, decisive action that resulted in the apprehension of a violent individual that shot a fellow police officer, a prior murderer who was intent on killing again, and a gang of thieves with no regard for producing, hard working individuals.
I would like to congratulate officer Dale Frix for his outstanding performance.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That first incident of leadership the chief referred to about Dale with the trooper being shot and apprehending the assailant, I happened to be there.
And impressive leadership that he showed, and the cooperation between different agencies and law enforcement, the stuff that goes on all the time, things we take for granted.
I was very impressed with the activity.
The chief has to go through a lot of determination about who the leader is for the month and he's just very blessed and we are very blessed that we have the chief leading some incredible individuals that represent us at TPD.
Today, Dale, you are the officer that we would like to say thank you to.
Some of our corporate members get to say thank you.
Perhaps you can introduce the background and the foundation that allow you to do what you do and give you the support that you need.
So if you will allow me to present this to you, I would be happy to read it.
Tampa City Council commendation presented to Officer Dale Frix in recognition of his outstanding service, Officer Dale Frix has been selected as Officer of the Month for April 2005.
Recent dangerous situations have presented opportunities for Dale Frix to shine among his peers.
The City Council and the City of Tampa commend you, and I particularly as public safety chair say thank you as many times as we can and appreciate what you do.
(Applause)
>>GWEN MILLER: Why don't you have our officer come to the podium.
We can't see him.
>> I'm from the Florida Aquarium.
Congratulations on this great award.
Awesome.
Thank you so much for protecting our community.
And we would like you and your family to come visit us at the aquarium.
Thank you.
Congratulations.
(Applause)
>> Danny Lewis representing Bill Currie Ford, 300 employees, very grateful families to for what you do for our community making it a nice, safe place to live.
A couple items for you.
Some tickets for Bill Currie night, Yankees.
Also a watch that's presented to the Officer of the Month.
Chief, give to the him.
>>CHIEF HOGUE: That's the way this works.
Congratulations.
(Laughter)
>> When the chief is Officer of the Month he'll get one.
>> Steve Stickley representing Stepp's towing service.
Officer Frix, on behalf of Stepp's towing service and staff we would like to present you with this statue for a job well done, taking care of the citizens and everybody in the Tampa Bay area here.
And we would also like to present you a gift certificate.
Thank you for everything you do.
(Applause)
>>STEVE MICHELINI: One day the officer is going to show up and the chief will be here and the officer won't be here and the watch is going to go away.
There will be two watches. Anyway, this is a small package but there's big things in this small package.
One is a gift certificate to Bryn Allen studios for you to have a photographic package done for you and your family however you wish to use that.
And a $50 gift certificate to Po Boy's.
$100 gift certificate to Signature Room Grille.
$100 gift certificate to Bern's.
$50 from the towing association to Carrabba's.
Congratulations.
(Applause)
>>ROSE FERLITA: The represent from Lowry Park Zoo was not able to come but they asked me to give to the you on behalf of your family.
Additionally, Danny Lewis from Bill Currie introduced me to a gentleman that's the communications leader, named Oniece Kalafe and asked that he be involved in the corporate thank-yous next time and he will be joining us.
Okay.
There's a little bit of an issue with that.
I didn't realize he wanted to present something and there were some things that we needed to talk about.
Go ahead and present it.
>>> On behalf of Intervision Opticals thank you for all the service.
This is our first time here and we will definitely be more than happy to offer you and your family free eye exam on us.
Thanks for all that you have done for us.
>>ROSE FERLITA: You get to keep the watch, not the chief.
You get to say a few words and introduce your family.
Congratulations.
>>> Thank you, City Council, chief, my sergeant back there.
It's been a pleasure the last four months working for him.
And I would just like to say thank you.
My mom and my stepfather, my girlfriend Jill.
Again, just thank all of you.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Our next agenda item is a commendation by Chairman Miller.
>>GWEN MILLER: Would the Bright House volunteers please come forward.
It always a pleasure to recognize a company that has so many volunteers and do so much not only for themselves but for the community.
And it's an honor for me to give them this commendation.
This is a commendation to BrightHouse Network in recognition of their 32nd annual national volunteer week and for the long-standing and beneficial relationship that exists between the City of Tampa and the BrightHouse Network, and for your dedication, hard work and support in improving the many residents and businesses within the City of Tampa.
The City Council also applauds you for implementing your new community service initiative program.
Therefore, Tampa City Council is honored to present this commendation to a valuable community organization and sincerely appreciates the way you inspire by example.
I'd like to say thank you again for all your hard work.
(Applause)
>> Thank you, councilman Miller.
I'm Dan Ballister, the vice-president of communications for Bright House networks Tampa office and I'm joined today by Hank Shera for Hillsborough, Brad McLaughlin, our new assistant general manager for Hillsborough, and Rhea white, who coordinates all of our volunteer activities, and Nancy carry, director of operations, and an entire group of BrightHouse Network volunteers that are also employees.
We are very excited to be here today.
Like the City of Tampa, we really encourage volunteerism in our community.
I know you have a great program that allows employees to take time off to mentor.
We have implemented our new community service day program just a few weeks ago.
And it's a great program because it's going to allow all 2500 employees that we have at Bright House networks Tampa Bay division to take one day off each year to volunteer in the community at a nonprofit organization of their choice.
So that's eight hours for each person, conceivably up to 20,000 hours of volunteer time.
And they can also, if they like, help two different groups.
They can take four hours for one group and four hours for another group.
So up to 5,000 organizations in our area can benefit from this new initiative from BrightHouse Network.
So I'm very excited about that.
And we really encourage other businesses to get actively involved in their communities.
And we'll issue a challenge, if you will.
We hope other companies in the Tampa Bay area follow our lead, encourage volunteerism and give back to their communities.
So thank you very much for this proclamation, commendation.
We appreciate being here.
And by the way, we feel a little funny not being up here before for the Officer of the Month.
So with the chief's permission and his approval, we'd like to offer the officer one year of free cable, if he's willing.
Thank you.
(Applause)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you very much for coming down.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: We will go ahead with department heads.
Cate O'Dowd is signed up for one minute.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can't talk for one minute.
Who are you fooling?
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Good morning, Madam Chair, members of council.
I am here on item 15 under unfinished business.
In response to council's request investigate the possibility of drafting an ordinance that will require wet zone establishments within city limits that want to hold teen dances, parties or gatherings to require the same security personnel at these events that those establishments are required to have on any other night.
That they are in business.
Section 3-29.1 of the code provides for the automatic imposition of certain environments including certain security under certain circumstances. This comes into play when the subject property is located within downtown Tampa, the Ybor City historic district, or the Channel District.
And the zoning classification request is for 1(COP), 2(COP), 4(COP), 1(COP-R), 4(COP-R), 1(COP-X), 4(COP-X).
The property is operated as a bar, club or lounge and wet zoning approved on or after March 15, 1995.
If these requirements are met and the occupancy exceeds 250 patrons, these establishments are already required to provide extra security in keeping with this section of the code.
And this would apply whether or not alcoholic beverages are being sold for consumption off premises.
So these have been for premises approved after March 15, 1995.
>>GWEN MILLER: Questions by council members?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Ms. O'Dowd, just for clarification, you're saying that these implementations are already in place.
So we don't have to move forward with the new ordinance, it's already in place, that if an establishment is wet zoned, they are required to provide the same security for dance or teen event that they would on any other regular night, they would be operating as a regularly wet zoned establishment?
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: If it's located within one of the three areas that I mentioned and it's being operated as a bar, lounge or club and approved on or after March 15th, this section of the code, that's the effective date of this section of the code and it was not to be applied retroactively so it doesn't effect wet zoned establishments that were approved prior to that date.
>>KEVIN WHITE: When we got word back, I guess, from the chief in his memo last week that we had no recourse in recouping the city's fees for the extra personnel, police personnel that were sent to Club Fuel a few weeks ago, was that based upon their wet zoning, was prior to the 1995 date?
It seems like if it was after that, it seems like we may have some firm legal footing to stand on here because it is within that Ybor historic district, or one of the districts.
If this is already on the books it seems like we would have some way to enforce this.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: I can't speak to the memorandum that Chief Hogue provided council with regard to recouping the costs.
I wasn't involved in that.
But I think there are two different issues.
One is the need to provide for extra duty security, which I believe is -- if you meet this requirement then the occupancy exceeds 250 patrons, I believe the minimum security is two exterior security officers, and perhaps one interior and the occupancy exceeds a certain amount.
The need for additional officers in Ybor City that evening I think is a separate issue and I'll have to defer to Chief Hogue on that matter.
>> I guess my main point is we know it's within the boundaries of one of the three designated areas.
It is a wet zoned establishment.
It requires police personnel, which there was none.
There was definitely more than 250.
Like I said, other than it being possibly grandfathered before that March 15th, '95.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Tampa Police Department.
Councilman White, it was approved prior to the date.
They are not required to hire.
However, Club Fuel routinely hires officers three nights a week to work Ybor.
But that night they did not have any.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Well, evidently then that's the basis of that particular loop hole, if you will.
So at least there is a requirement already in our code.
Just pay closer attention to that for the future.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Who are hair-
Jorge Martin, here to walk on a resolution authorizing to use the City of Tampa seal.
This was scheduled on your agenda for next week but events have gotten ahead of us, and I was asked by the administration to walk this on because we need to have the authorization earlier.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. David Smith.
>>DAVID SMITH: Good morning.
David Smith here to speak on item number 16 which I believe you requested that we consider extending the youth protection ordinance restrictions to Sundays.
And what we are doing is we are currently gathering the statistics that will or will not support the ability to extend the restriction to Sundays.
We are also looking at Sundays that are followed by Mondays which are holidays, which may be different than Sundays typically.
We will have that information we hope within the next week to ten days.
And if it supports the extension of the ordinance, we will then be here with the proposed extension of the ordinance.
I wanted to let now we are working on it.
Thank you very much.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Work real hard on it.
Mr. Steve Graham, is he here?
>> Steve Graham with parks and recreation department.
I'm here to answer any questions that you may have pertaining to the settlement agreement for trees removed by the Kimmins corporation.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
I had an opportunity to chat with Mr. Graham after the last meeting and I felt as our arborist that the flexibility for the determination to be made by the parks and recreation department about the species of the tree would be better.
So everybody agrees.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. PALUS.
>> Parks and recreation director here to speak to you this morning.
Previously on item number 22 for city marinas.
I want to quickly brief everybody on the update of the Marjorie Park yacht basin.
You all are familiar with B the new facility, about $5.1 million.
1.1 million of that was a grant from U.S. fish and mild life organizations that are pleased with that.
We ended up putting in 32 monthly slips and 22 transient slips which was a permit for the grants.
That's why we have so many transients at Marjorie Park.
A couple items regarding the renovations.
We were able to dredge the basin to increase the depth.
We installed all the concrete floating docks, repaired the sea wall, relocated and constructed a new fuel pump, a pump-out station which is centrally located.
We also refurbished the existing power building which has restrooms, shower facilities, stations and such as well as a ship store, which patrons have access to.
I wanted to show you these great pictures real quick.
Show you the before and after of at Marjorie.
It's quite a transformation.
We tried to take similar pictures so you can see how things have changed.
And also our power squadron building.
I just wanted to quickly thank all the individuals that were involved and share with you that our contractors, building maintenance, construction service administration, all the outstanding parks and recreation staff did a wonderful job transforming these facilities.
We are very thankful for that.
You will see some changes as well next time and I look forward to showing you some of the changes that we'll be addressing.
The item that's before you is the city yacht basin marina fees.
As you're aware the last time the fees were adjusted was 1989, about 16 years ago.
And these new fees are in-line with comparable facilities.
And the fees however are still below typical market out there, and the surveys that were done through the four counties.
And our new slip fees along with the fuel, service and amenities only cover those maintenance and operations.
It does not cover the debt service associated with Marjorie.
We did have a market comparison, just to make everyone familiar.
We had Hillsborough County and Imperial yacht basin which covers eight to ten dollars a month in Pinellas County.
City of St. Petersburg facility they have 610 slips which averages about 8 to $10 a month.
We also reviewed Manatee County which is the twin dolphins marina which is a monthly rate between 12 and $17 a month.
And the Sarasota County marina jack which averages 14.50 to $18 a month plus utilities.
Marjorie Park 32 monthly slips, 22 transient.
We have all the amenities and facilities there. Bayshore has 37 monthly slips.
Amenities are utilities, water and electric.
And the Tampa convention center has about 27 transient slips of which there's no amenities currently available at that site.
The proposed fee change starts with Marjorie Park yacht basin, is going to run about $10 a foot per slip length or length of vessel, whichever is greater, and that's for slips with water and dock boxes, which is a minimum of 40 foot at Marjorie.
We also have an 8.50, we are proposing a foot per slip length or length of vessel whichever is greater for slips without dock boxes and water minimum 30 foot on those slips.
There will be, if approved, a $1 per foot will be added to non-City of Tampa residents.
This is officially new for us.
So that's something to consider.
And we think that still has to apply with local, state and federal taxes are additional to those fees.
The fee change proposed for the Bayshore marina is half of that at Marjorie which is $5 a foot, per slip length or length of vessel, whichever is greater-a minimum of 30 foot on those slips.
Again the dollar is being proposed for non-City of Tampa residents.
And all the taxes will apply for Bayshore as well.
Proposed transient and special event rates increase is the transient goes to $2 a foot per slip length or length of vessel whichever is greater and the special events are being proposed at 4 foot per slip length or length of vessel whichever is greater.
There's also adding a $5 a day utility fee and a $25 non-refundable deposit.
Essentially that's for like Gasparilla and some of those designated events so we get people that are registered and wanting to participate in those activities.
Again taxes apply.
And the additional item is the proposed waiting list fee.
We currently have about $214 individuals on the waiting list, about 111 of those are individuals that are on both Bayshore and Marjorie.
So the maintenance of that you can imagine is quite lengthy.
What we'd like to do and we are proposing is $100 per list, waiting list fee.
It's a one-time fee, $25 of that would be nonrefundable.
$75 of it is refundable and would either be returned to the individual if they ask to be removed from the list or would be attributed to their first month slip rental.
And I wanted to show you protected revenue. If we leave the fees at the current 1989 rate, the potential of total revenue just for slip rentals, transients and special events we estimate about 64.5 thousand dollars.
The proposed fees which would -- again with the slip rentals, special events, would raise potentially about 261,000.
And that's assuming that we have 100% occupancy on our monthly slip rentals.
And that's to be determined, nonresident fee we are not sure what ha -- what that would raise based on the individuals that may apply or not apply as well as special events vary from year to year.
Essentially with the projected revenue, the 64,000, won't even cover one particular position within the marina group.
However, the 261 and goods and services would potentially cover operations and maintenance.
It still does not cover debt service.
And that's about it.
Those are the highlights on that.
Is there any questions?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to say that when you said refurbish existing power squadron building you did way more than refurbish it.
You transformed it.
I have never seen a more dramatic improvement in a city facility.
It's just great.
>> Our staff did a fantastic job.
>> You're really to be complimented.
Two questions briefly.
Do we have any plans right now to refurbish the Bayshore marina?
>> We are looking at some general maintenance things, the aesthetic things we can do, replacing fencing, replacing the bumpers that are there.
I have been out there as recently as yesterday with staff, to look at what we can and can't do.
There are some things structural that are sound but there's some things that we can't.
The fencing.
The gates you saw yesterday, those are things we as staff under maintenance, we'll be looking at that.
And hired an electrician to have that individual look at what we can do to maybe upgrade some of those electrical things.
We have to be careful because there are some things that we currently do not have the major capital dollars to invest in that facility at this time.
>> The other question is sort of a corollary to that.
Given the length of the waiting list, and the interest in creating more vitality in the urban core, and we all know marinas add vitality, is there any planning that's going on now to potentially in the future increase the number of slips in any other of our locations around that might be available?
Because there's obviously a market for it.
And I think the market will continue to grow.
>>> Yes, there are some opportunities that we are investigating and we'll be bringing forward to council in the future as far as how to maximize the facilities.
Potentially with the public-private type of partnership.
So we are looking into that.
We currently as I mentioned, don't have the capital dollars to infuse into overall renovation at Bayshore that we have done at Marjorie but we are looking at ways that we can improve those areas.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Ms. Palus.
It's good to see we are going to finally increase revenue especially with this area here.
My question is, what was the amount of the bond issue that went out for this?
>>> What was the amount of the bond issue that went out?
>> Was there a bond issue?
>>> I believe there was a $3.75 million bond that was on that piece, that portion of it was the bond.
>> What about the debt service on that?
>>> The debt service right now is running about $330,000 a year.
>> So this 261,000 proposed revenue is still not covering.
>>.
>>> Correct.
This will cover operation and maintenance at the existing facilities.
>> It's a shame because I thought maybe we could put some of this money into increasing the bond issue and getting some more slips.
Because when we first talked about this a number of years ago, I think we had a $5 million grant besides.
>>> 1.1 million grant.
>> But a total of $5 million that we had to spend as we were going to put in about 102 slips.
And as time went by, we were only able to not even half of the slips.
And there's a need for it in that area.
And it would be good if there would be some way that we could generate some more revenue, something that we could increase this bond issue, and continue to help out this area, especially the docks, not on Harbour Island ---yeah, Harbor Island, around that area there. So, anyway, I'm glad to see this.
And I think it's warranted.
And I will be happy to pass a resolution at the time that -- when it time.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Ms. Palus, what would we have to increase the slip rentals by in order to try to retire the debt service in a reasonable amount of time?
>>> I would need to go back and really calculate that.
We are dealing with the issue of there hasn't been a change in over 16 years.
So it is still major league for those that are currently in our system.
We were looking at a balance of $12 initially that was getting us a little bit closer.
Again, we had the allotted monthly slips with those revenues coming in. One of the things we are attempting to do is really trying to market those transient slips because that's where we can increase the revenues.
But 12, and maybe closer to 15 or more to really orchestrate that.
I would glad to go back, calculate and bring it back to you all.
>> I think that's where we should try to go with this. This is clearly a user fee.
There's a huge convenience factor to people that are taking advantage of this that I think we can get right up to market value and maybe even go a little bit beyond market value, because of the convenience factor.
It certainly seems like the folks that live outside of the area where you're going to own a boat, and be able to access that on the weekends, ought not to be subsidizing the debt service for a marina.
So to the extent that we can do that, and have it be equitable, I think that's where we should go with it.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple things.
When I looked at these numbers a couple years ago, and Karen, you probably know better than I do and perhaps you have a finance person here -- a lot of these improvements were not just to the slips.
I mean, a lot of the improvements were to the basin itself, to the sea wall, you know, obviously to the building, and we've seen what a great job that's been done.
So I'm a little hesitant to totally burden the boat renters with all of the improvements, because basically to a certain degree it's going to function as part of our city parks, you know.
It's going to be a nice place where you can go out and walk.
It's not going to be restricted to just the boaters to go out there and enjoy that pleasant view.
Is that correct?
>>> Yes.
>> And so I agree that we should keep up with the market and make sure that we are near the market but I don't want to go crazy on that one.
And then another thing.
Would you get back with us in about 60 days and let us know where you are on the Bayshore improvements?
I think we have all been sort of informed that there are some safety issues there and some security issues there that really do need addressing rapidly.
And obviously we don't have a lot of money to spend there.
But I think we should, especially since we are bumping up the rates a little bit, we should definitely address it.
And from a safety perspective we always have to address it.
>>> Yes.
Staff and I discussed and we need to make sure everything is safe and operational and we want to try to maximize dollars as much as possible within the facility.
>> Voluntarily get back in like 60 days?
>>> Absolutely.
>> Even if it's in the form of a memo, that's fine.
The last thing you listed on here and we never really discussed it much the convention center.
I think there's a great opportunity there at the convention center that's sort of lost right now, because -- and I talked to John Moors about this a little bit.
Because we have no electricity there, I think that's one of the reasons that it's not a popular place for transient use.
And I think that we need to take a real serious look at getting electricity there, so it will be a better destination for transient use.
And the other idea I was thinking about was -- and John and I talked about this -- also is if we had electricity there, perhaps like on a weekly basis we could let a commercial company come in and have their own little mini boat show just with their boats.
Like they could bring in 25 Yamaha, Boston Whalers or whatever, on a particular week, and who knows?
We might be able to make 5-z10 a week on something like that.
And as long as it's not intrusive to anything else that's going on.
Frankly from anesthetic perspective it might be very attractive when a boat show does come down and they park those nice boats out there, it's very attractive to the convention center and makes us look more like Ft. Lauderdale or something in terms of being a boating place.
>>> I would be happy to work with John Moors on that and talk with our staff.
And a lot of the transient slips is the marketing element and letting people know it's there, it's available, and we'll be working on that.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: A couple more questions.
When will the fees be?
>>> As we move our Marjorie Park individuals back into place, they will be enacted immediately once this moves forward.
However those on Bayshore that already paid up through their quarters, we wouldn't start that until July which is the next quarter.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: And why didn't you bump up the convention center fees?
>>> Why didn't we?
>> Yes.
>>> The they were bumped up just a few years back, 2003, and because there are no amenities currently there, that's kind of traditional transient amount.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Ms. Palus.
Mr. John Fernandez.
>>> John Fernandez, real estate division.
Here on item number 32.
We are bringing before you a contract for property in the APZ-1 zone.
We have members from MacDill Air Force Base that would like to speak on this as well.
If there are questions concerning this transaction, we would be happy to answer those.
>>GWEN MILLER: Any questions?
You can come up and speak now.
>>> Good morning, council members.
Tony Rodriguez, base community planner, MacDill Air Force Base.
The parcel we are talking about today is located on the extended center line of MacDill's run way 2-2 and it's approximately 3,000 feet off the end of the run way.
The parcel is located in accident potential zone 1 and is adjacent to clear zone, actually abutting right next to it.
The noise contour map indicates aircraft operation noise for this area to be at least 70 to 75 decibel range.
Our concern about this parcel is than through the comprehensive plan amendment process and rezoning process, the land has the potential to be developed to a residential land use with a density of up to 10 dwelling units per acre.
Once again, on run way center line, 3,000 feet off the end of the run way.
A little bit about the grant money.
The state grant money for part of this property was provided by the Florida defense alliance which is a unit of enterprise Florida, the state's primary economic development agency.
This grant program is Taylor made for situations like this.
Funding projects such as this benefit both the community as well as the military installation.
Annually MacDill coordinates with the city on what types of projects the city will apply for under this program.
And land acquisition for encroachment litigation has consistently been the top priority of the base for this program since encroachment is such a great threat to impacting our operation at MacDill.
And I would highly encourage you to approve this resolution.
I would also like to introduce lieutenant colonel John Prager, essentially our public works administrator at MacDill Air Force Base.
>>> Good morning, council.
First of all, I would like to thank you for your support, presented last week, and speaking on behalf of the MacDill team, we very much appreciate the support of that program.
As far as the implementation of the Florida defense alliance agreement, we look at it as having three basic benefits.
And obviously it benefits -- it limits encroachment, actually provides some easement access for the greenwood trail.
As I understand it.
And thirdly and most importantly, it actually enhances the safety of the South Tampa residents.
And again, thank you for your consideration of the grant implementation.
Thank you for your support of MacDill.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have two brief questions for the city.
The first question was, what is the size of the parcel?
And the second one is, they refer to the potential of increased rezoning.
What is the current zoning on this piece of property in land use?
>>> The land size is 2.75 acres.
Land use --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's light industrial, I believe.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So it doesn't have any residential zoning at this point?
>>> No, you would have to go through a rezoning.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that because this will be safer, because we got some federal money to make the purchase, and because it will be part of the green way trails I'm very supportive of this.
I'm very nervous about somebody using the argument about the potential for rezoning it to multifamily.
Because potentially anybody can request a multifamily rezoning for any parcel.
I mean, if they go through the process.
And I just don't want that to be a predicate for future requests.
Because we might not have money to buy up all of inner bay.
So I'm comfortable supporting this but I just don't want that thinking that something could potentially be rezoned multifamily that that's a reason for us to go out and buy the land.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Cathy Coyle.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ding are we done with that item?
I'm sorry.
I just want to say one thing.
I just wanted to thank MacDill for coming down and speaking to us and working with us on this important issue.
And everything we can do to make it a safer area, we're all for it.
Thank you very much.
>>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
Last Thursday night there was a case before you, Z 05-38 that was misnoticed.
We did receive a letter and the amendment fee payment from Mr. Scott steady, the agent to the petitioner.
And he is requesting as soon as possible date. The soonest date would be May 26th.
Do you have two open slots that night.
I think you have eleven cases.
So this would be your 12th.
If you are so willing to make that motion.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>> I believe Mr. Massey also has something on that.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: Legal department.
I'm here to address item number 17 on your agenda, which deals with balconies.
A couple things.
We researched how many balconies in the City of Tampa were actually wet zoned and there's only W one balcony we are aware of in the City of Tampa wet zoned to date.
Just so council is aware.
It doesn't mean that alcohol is not consumed on the balconies but only one has been wet zoned today.
We also talked to Chief Hogue's office and with Kirby Rainsberger.
He previously submitted a letter to council suggesting maybe additional security was a way to address some of the problems of containers on the balconies.
Chief Hogue wanted us to relate to you all he was speaking in terms of private security, not off-duty officers.
Off-duty officers are already stretched to the limit basically and they don't have the ability to provide more off-duty officers to address any issue.
If council wanted to, perhaps we could change in chapter 37 in the wet zoning ordinance saying if you have a wet zoned establishment that has a balcony, you have the private security stationed to prevent folks from taking glass containers out onto the balconies, the way they address this issue.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I really appreciate the research you have done.
I would like to go forward with this.
I understand Chief Hogue's concern about not using off-duty officers so we don't have to have that.
County just be the security with the -- that the people already have.
What I remember him saying is he didn't want people with glass containers at all.
If you're drinking on a balcony, wants it to be plastic for safety.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I just wanted to make sure council is aware a section of the city code prohibits glass on sidewalks.
They want to clarify anything thing council could clarify that section to ban glass containers on balconies.
I don't know if council wants to go to this length but we could also amend chapter 20 to prohibit wet zonings to occur on any balcony.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: First of all I think we have to distinguish between bar balconies and somebody having a condo on Bayshore and being able to drink a glass of wine in glass on the balcony.
But we are interested in wet zone establishments.
I just feel if there was security out on the balcony that people would behave better.
So that's the sort of aim.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Morris, you started off with the presentation by saying there's one wet zoned balcony in the whole city?
Is that what you said?
>>> That's correct.
Based on research.
>> I mean, we all observe on 7th Avenue that there's a lot of balconies, but obviously they are adjacent to apartments, to officers, to --
>>> night clubs.
>> To night clubs.
But they are not wet zoned?
>>> They are not wet zoned.
>> Oh, I see.
So, in other words, they are being abused and misused, and included in their wet zoning.
So how many of those are there?
>>> I don't know.
But we were able to research through our records, our permitting records, and they wet zoned the actual footprint of the building.
In some cases they may have wet zoned the sidewalk but they have not wet zoned the balcony except in one instance that we are aware of.
>> I do have a little bit of concern and want to express a little caution on this notion of glass and whether there should be glass or shouldn't be glass, because we are trying to encourage sidewalk cafes which often involve drinking an iced tea out of glasses in the afternoon.
So I think we want to be careful that we don't go too far.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Just further clarification, Mr. Massey.
Any of those properties in Ybor City particularly 7th Avenue, if the footprint of the property, not the footprint of the building, is wet zoned, then of course regardless of what has balconies or what doesn't, they are also wet zoned, are they not?
>>> Again, Ms. O'Dowd is probably better able to answer those questions but I understand in order to wet zone a property you have to submit a survey of what you're wet zoning to the City of Tampa.
And if the balcony is not included in that surveyed area from which you know this from, that area is not considered wet zoned.
>>ROSE FERLITA: And Ms. O'Dowd, maybe, if you would, again my question is the same.
If there is a parcel that has a building, and the wet zoning footprint that was petitioned for is the footprint of the property boundaries, then the entire building and balcony and everything else is wet zoned, is it not?
>>> If the balcony encroaches into the right-of-way that would not be included within the legal description of the property.
And that's what we discovered when Land Development Coordination went through the different wet zoning applications that have been approved for Ybor City.
Only one had inadvertently included the balcony.
>>ROSE FERLITA: As opposed to say a building that didn't have a balcony.
Just for conversational purposes.
However, they have got a little pathway in front.
But it doesn't encroach on the city right-of-way.
Then if the footprint of the property is wet zoned, they are okay to do that?
I'm crossing over to getting some clarification.
Then following up on Mr. Dingfelder's concern, where do we go then in the sense that we are trying to encourage the cafe type things?
Because those are encroachments?
So do they have to reapply?
>>> The cafes are -- sidewalk cafes are presented to council by separate petition.
They first have to get a sidewalk cafe permit from the city.
And once they receive that they can then apply for wet zoning.
And that's approved separately from the wet zoning for the building.
>> One last question.
Forgive me, Madam Chairman, for holding this up.
Any of those properties again on 7th, because I think that's what we are discussing, if you have a private residence there, does that still comply in terms of the resident going out on his or her balcony?
>>> Chapter 3 and 5 a applies to the sale.
It doesn't really regulate what private parties do.
>> So if it's not a retail establishment or bar-type environment then it's okay.
Thank you for the clarification.
I appreciate it.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Ms. O'Dowd, I guess the basic crux of this question is, in the bars in Ybor City that do have balconies, I think there's about five right offhand, I don't know which one is wet zoned, is my assumption correct that -- correct that saying they are operating illegally at this point in time, if they are allowing the patrons of their bar to be out on the balcony with alcohol at this time?
>>> That is a concern that we have.
Because the balconies were not included in the legal description of the wet zoning, then the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages on that balcony is not permissible.
We had that same issue with some of the restaurants that were wet zoned on Davis Islands where it was determined that alcoholic beverages would be consumed in the front sidewalk areas, and those had not been included in the description of the wet zoning.
So that is an issue.
>> Trouble is we just had a restaurant come down here I think two weeks ago to have their wet zone on the sidewalk cafe, because they couldn't -- we approved that.
But there are several balcony bars as well as restaurants where people come in and out frequently and drink on the balcony.
And if what you're saying, and my understanding of what you're saying is incorrect -- is correct, then we have a problem and we need to go back and correct that problem and notify these bar owners that they are not in compliance, and let them know what they need to do to come.
>> Into compliance, or we are going to start enforcing something, or is this just for informational purposes saying, guys, you're operating illegally but we are going to overlook it because we always have?
Or are we going to try to come out heavy-handedly and enforce anything?
Because obviously security and police are down there every weekend.
But what I'm saying, are we going to try to at least notify these individuals that they are operating in violation?
>>> With regard to enforcement I'll defer to TPD or Land Development Coordination on that issue.
>> Which one is wet zoned?
>>> Give me one moment.
>> And was it an Ybor City establishment?
>>> Yes.
It located at 1812 North 15th Street.
>> So that's not on 7th Avenue.
So every nightclub and liquor establishment in Ybor City on 7th Avenue that has a balcony is operating illegally if they allow patrons to come out on the balcony to consume alcohol.
>>> If the balcony is an encroachment to the right-of-way and it wasn't part of the legal description.
I'm assuming that everything on 7th Avenue, the buildings come right up to their property lines.
So for any balconies attached to those buildings that encroach into the right-of-way, I have not seen where we have permitted or approved it by wet zoning ordinance.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. O'Dowd, I have a question.
The private balconies, they use for like Gasparilla as, are they able to use liquor during that time?
Or do we have -- they should be under the same law as everybody else?
>>> By private balconies, what do you mean?
>> Residential.
Apartments.
>>> Chapter 3 --.
>> Unless we have a Gasparilla parade, some other parade, and they use them for that to have guests up there, they can drink wine or something else.
>>> Chapter 3 only applies when alcohol is going to be served and consumed on the premises.
So private residential area, private office areas, and it's a private party, chapter 3 does not come in to play.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I just have a concern that there's just no way to maintain this.
How do I want to say it?
We just don't have the personnel to go up there and check on each balcony if they are doing something illegally.
I'm concerned about that.
How do you do that?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have an idea about that.
I have been thinking about it.
In the same way that we require a certain number of security personnel, that's the same thing.
Right now, right now, there's no protection.
And according to legal, everything is operating without permission, too.
So that's a separate issue.
I think we need to address both issues.
But in terms of security, I think if we say to the bar owners -- currently bar owners who have liquor licenses have to provide security.
Isn't that the rule?
And if so many security people for so many patrons?
>>> That's what I was discussing earlier, is for wet zoned establishments that were approved on or after March 15th of 1995 they are operated as a bar and lounge or club and they have an occupancy exceeding 250 patrons.
They would then be required to have off-duty security.
And that is for those locations, the three locations downtown, Channel District and Ybor City historic district.
>> Don't we require them to also have some of their own security in addition to the off-duty police?
>>> I'll have to defer to TPD on that.
Scott?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: That's the part that upsets me a little bit.
We just can't enforce this ordinance.
I mean, these people are hiring their own security people.
If they were off-duty police officers, maybe.
But since they are going to be security people hired by them to go out there and sit on the balcony and make sure doesn't have a glass container or drinking on the balcony, it just ludicrous to me.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Tampa Police Department.
What you said is true.
Most every establishment that I'm aware of in Ybor has their own security.
I'm not aware however of any city ordinance nor state statute that requires them or forces them to hire these people.
I think most of them do as a matter of course, though.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I think the way that we could address this in terms of legislation is currently according to Ms. O'Dowd none of the balconies on seventh are legally having people drink out there because they are not wet zoned.
We could make as that glass containers aren't used on balcony and that they provide some security out there.
And I have some statistics from a neurosurgeon at Tampa General.
And basically every six months, somebody dies or has a very severe head injury from this.
And I think that in an effort to make our city safer, that we take some steps to make it safer.
And I think that our legal department who are very savvy could craft something linking the appropriate wet zoning of balconies to some kind of additional security for patrons of the wet zoned establishment to go out there.
I think there needs to be something.
What we have right now is nothing and it's obviously legal and we need to do something to make it safer.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I would just like to make one final comment to Ms. O'Dowd.
I agree with Ms. Alvarez to a point I think it would go above and beyond if we try to enforce. This I believe the balcony drinking, and the balconies are half of the ambience of Ybor.
Way would like to see in a more simple solution is just to let the bar owners know that they are not in compliance now, and let them know what they need to do to come into compliance.
And because like I said, half of the ambience there is the balcony.
Going out onto the balcony.
But let them know they are operating illegally.
By the same token by Mrs. Saul-Sena's motion be able to provide some security to keep people that had too much to drink and hanging off of the balconies, to keep from falling.
I'm not necessarily an advocate of off-duty police officers.
But by the same token when you have a bunch of drinking patrons, they don't tend to pay as much attention to non-law enforcement personnel as they do for regular security.
>>GWEN MILLER: I see Mr. Vince Pardo.
Did you want to comment on that?
>>VINCE PARDO: Ybor City Development Corporation.
A very healthy we are discussion having on balconies.
We have not had a lot of discussion on balconies, a separate issue altogether.
As far as frequency it's not been an issue.
I think definitely we need to look at having the business owners take responsibility for balconies as they would any space within their business, as far as any illegal activity, containers in that situation.
For whatever reason, and discussion we have had, we are very in a strict process where if somebody asks for cafe ordinance, once they get approved to use part of our sidewalk, as part of their business, the second step of that automatically is they are advised then if you want to serve wine or beer in that area, you have to then go through the second process.
For whatever reason, not talking about never, never happened with the air space.
We encourage balconies in Ybor City.
Years ago the city gave perks to people if in fact you put a balcony on your building.
For whatever reason it just came to light at this meeting.
I think I'm probably the one that brought it up.
In doing this what about the air space?
Talking about balconies.
I just don't want to give the impression everyone out there is operating legally.
We do need, Mr. White, to go through and advise them to do that as we have done with some of the people with the sidewalk cafe allowance and for whatever reason didn't take the next step to go through the wet zoning process as well.
It does extend their wet zoning.
It needs to be approved by the city as well as the state which involves a footprint of the particular property.
And it did read that if you look at security, I think if you were to require it, still considering off-duty or something, no one with the special exception of a special event, no one would have a balcony operation.
To pay an off-duty officer for the amount of hours they are operating with the few people that may go out there on Thursday, Friday, Saturday night as opposed to maybe a parade night, it would shut down the balconies, in essence.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Off-duty officers are to have table.
They are not part of the discussion.
The motion that I'd like to make is to ask the city attorney's office to look at drafting some -- when balcony wet zonings are requested, that the club making the request provides not off-duty, but a security person to be out there to make sure that the balcony is managed in a healthy way.
And I have to say not only I do love balconies, I love cafes.
I love balconies.
I just want it to be safe.
And I have been so upset at the loss of life and the potential danger that's occurred that I think this is a modest request to ensure safety for our citizens.
>>GWEN MILLER: Lack of a second.
Mr. Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm considering seconding it but what are we responding to?
I don't want to see us knee jerk to a problem that's not necessarily there.
And, I mean, I know we had a tragedy.
It was a horrible tragedy and it can't be undone.
And I heard you say a minute ago it happens every --
>> every six months.
>> Somebody falls off a balance con? I we haven't heard about that.
I don't know.
What happens?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Somebody gets a severe head injury.
They don't necessarily die.
But they fall and have a severe head injury.
Sometimes it's from a balcony.
Not always.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: That's a statistic I want to see.
How many fell off the balcony?
I only heard of one.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You know what?
I don't have the papers.
They have been doing a collection of -- head injuries over five years in Ybor City, two heads, have fallen.
And I don't know if they have been quantified as to off balconies or just off the street.
But I know if you fall off a balcony there's a lot greater chance of sustaining severe injuries.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: My concern is Ybor has problems in terms of -- I mean lots of problems.
We deal with them regularly, in terms of not enough people wanting to go down there.
And that sort of thing.
And I'm very concerned that if we keep putting more and more regulations on top of it, that we are hindering the atmosphere.
And so if the police department is coming to us and saying you have got to do something, like they did with the youth curfew and all.
But don't see them here.
Scott still hasn't testified but is that a strong recommendation from the police department that we have to address this and we do something?
I know they are concerned about beads being thrown from the balcony, and Ms. Alvarez, you mentioned the beads being thrown.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: It's the medalions on the beads that become dangerous missiles.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Tampa Police Department again.
That is something that we are concerned of, the officers that work in that area, for glass containers on balconies.
Certainly the ability to injure someone in the street by throwing a bottle, or throwing a bottle at police officers while they are attempting to break up a fight.
I can't give you incidents of that happening but certainly that could happen, the beads that you referenced before, that's something that we have had to deal with during parades, thrown off balconies and we had to close the balconies, telling bar owners if you are not able to regulate it we will.
So just because of the public safety issues.
We have done that.
But as far as a policy from the department, I'm going to defer that to the chief's office.
And talk about it next week coming before you with some other statistics.
Certainly the police department will be able to do that as well.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I'm real curious about the bead from the balcony issues.
Why are beads from balconies any more than dangerous from beads on the crowd on the sidewalks?
Is it that we can't get to those people as easy to stop them from doing it because they can retreat into the building or something?
I did watch the major during the last parade and he was very, very concerned about beads from the balcony.
But I was just trying to figure out why.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: I think if someone is just tossing something off the balcony to people down below that's not an issue but unfortunately we have now people that are more hurling things, and with the intent to injure, and quite honestly that does happen occasionally.
Like I said, next week if you would like the department to come back certainly we can do that and give you some more incidents of what we are concerned with that takes place on the balcony.
>> I think we just have to be cognizant, we want to the be a fun place but we want to the be a safe place and we have to balance it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Pardo, you are at the YCDC meetings all the time.
Have you any more concerns about people on the balconies and people falling off?
>>VINCE PARDO: No.
In fact, when I spoke with a reporter on the scene a day or two afterwards, that was a concern from the article in Ybor and they said, no, this is the first time we are aware of this happening, we are not going to go there.
So we are very pleased to see that.
>> As far as the severe head injuries, that happens because they are probably walking down the street and somebody is hit on the head -- or they were fighting?
>>> I never heard a statistic so I can't respond on that.
But the issue about security, definitely glass should be outlawed totally.
Without a doubt.
Seven days a week.
Put it that way.
As we are in a mind-set of thinking about parades, we know what happens and what needs to be there.
And probably have something where there is that kind of situation, where creating through a special event permit to look at additional security.
But I would encourage to you think about 7th Avenue, and think about the balcony -- I can't think of the name of the restaurant.
But, for example -- Barney Hoppers.
Part of central Ybor.
It over the sidewalk.
The restaurant in Centro Espanol.
Very small property.
Require somebody to be out there.
In fact, you attended the visioning meeting we had, the community meeting.
The consultant I have and I went to dinner, had a cigar, so we went there, sat on the balcony, and it would have required a staff member to be posted there for the evening.
Because we were sitting there at the table.
And this particular instance dent happened, I think the person was alone on the balcony or possibly one other person on the balcony so it wasn't like a crowd situation.
As we were talking, maybe over a certain number may be required.
But the one incident we have had was the person was solo or perhaps one other person he on the balcony.
So safety is number one.
And we are having a YCDC meeting the next Tuesday.
I plan to bring this issue up depending on how your conversation went today.
What we have done, we have had a discussion in the community other than being very -- we are very sorry of the incident that did occur in Ybor City.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. O'Dowd, as I listen to the different interpretations of what we want to do and not want to do in Ybor City, and I think every colleague here as given us valid points around the dais.
Obviously along with them and everyone else, we want an already handicapped neighborhood or business arena to come back and do well in terms of success.
But at the same time, I don't think we want to accidentally fall into the issue of subjective interpretation of what's going on.
As you have stated, what they are doing now, if it has not been wet zoned, it's illegal, in terms of liquor being consumed on a balcony, right?
>> Correct.
>> So we want to have the best of both world so we have to look at this very comprehensively.
We want the bar owners and the restaurants, et cetera.
We don't want to give them any additional hardships that they have to absorb given the history that they have had to go through.
But, at the same time, quite frankly -- and no disrespect to anybody who is asking for the stat from Officer Guffey or councilwoman Saul-Sena.
I don't care if they are often, few, infrequent, one every so often.
We have had a death on a balcony.
And whether the person was more to blame or the establishment, et cetera, it brings to light the fact that what is going on on those balconies is illegal.
And we can say we want to try to go easy on this, because we want to maintain that ambience.
You bet.
So do I.
But at the same time if we objectively say, like Mr. White said -- and I'm sorry he's not here because I don't want to talk behind his back -- but he's saying, let's tell them they are operating illegally.
Well, somebody else from another area that wants to create, maintain or preserve their idea of ambience can say, well, you're allowing them to perform illegally simply because of the ambience.
So, you know, each side, what everybody is on here, has some validity.
But I think what we have to do is recognize the fact that there's some illegal procedures going on.
Maybe not intentional but now that it brought to the service by just one death.
One death is enough for me.
Then we have to look at this again.
Let's work with the bar owners.
We don't want to do anything that intentionally causes them to fail.
But at the same time let's look at the process.
Perhaps Scott is going to come back with some information.
You and the legal department can look at this again.
Let us just try to do the best that we can to make this an easy process, to give those bar owners the opportunity to go through the process of wet zoning that balcony, if that is feasible, and then we do both things.
We help them try to maintain that ambience and succeed.
And at the same time we don't act subjectively about something that is obviously illegal.
We have to do both.
We can't do either or.
Otherwise, I would submit to you that we are looking for trouble, because somebody else is going to come up and say, we need to protect our business and we want to do it's kind of illegal, maybe not.
But our intent is not to hurt the bar owners but we need to address it in the simplest way possible.
I think that would be the charge for to you look at.
>> If council is supportive of this, we can work with establishing an approval process similar to the sidewalk cafe approval process, since again it would be consumption of alcoholic beverages, in an area that encroaches into the public right-of-way.
So if that is council's desire, I can work with staff on that and come up with --.
>>ROSE FERLITA: A reasonable way to approach it.
And I will be happy to make that motion.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
>>ROSE FERLITA: And the second thing is obviously in concern of the projectiles, et cetera, and abusive glass containers, et cetera, that comes back to again enforcement.
And I think once we craft this to make this legal, to have the bar owner keep us where we need to be, then we'll talk about enforcement.
If we don't to do it, if they violate the wet zoning requirement, that would be an inducement of not monitoring what's going on on their balconies, we'll go from there in terms of enforcement.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Ms. Ferlita, for I think a very reasonable request.
My question is what the appropriate -- we certainly can't tell the administration what to do. But we could ask the administration what they intend to do about this new realization that all these balconies are not currently wet zoned.
I guess my motion would be to ask legal -- it would be legal or it would be the police force?
I would defer to Martin Shelby.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I would think it would be appropriate to ask the administration and they would determine which department would best be revolving the request.
>> Given what we now know about the balconies not being wet zoned, I would like the administration have, I guess, a week.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That may not be enough time.
>> Two weeks to respond back to council in terms of what steps are going to take to address that.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Council, council, we have a special meeting on Tuesday night.
And we have the representative here, Andrea Zelman wants to speak to us.
We need to waive the rules.
>> So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do we get a second?
>> Second.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I see representatives from the civic association to speak on the same issue.
>>GWEN MILLER: It's all the same thing.
All in favor say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
Ms. Zelman, you may come up now.
Three minutes.
Come to the mike so we can hear you.
>>JORGE MARTIN: Also, before he's recognized, just a reminder to the council.
This is noticed for Tuesday night at 6 p.m. as a public hearing.
The public hearing is not open.
It is not ripe to discuss any issues on the merits at this time.
If this is purely a procedural matter or something, then that is ripe for discussion but I would caution council to allowing issues specifically related to the facts of the case that would be more appropriate for the public hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: You may speak now.
>>> Thank you.
My name is Steve Stanley, president of the Davis Island civic association.
And what I'm here to speak about is the procedural aspects of the scheduled meeting.
It's interesting coming over here I ran into Mayor Iorio on the street as we were crossing the street.
She asked me in a nutshell what was going on.
And I told her that from the Davis Island civic association point of view there was going to be so many people that wanted to come to this meeting from both sides that this auditorium wasn't going to be big enough.
And our concerns are that the people wouldn't be able to get in.
They would be shut off after the fire code numbers allowed.
I have been told they could be in another room and watch it on a monitor or something, possibly, but it still not the same thing as being in the room.
And being recognized to speak.
And then the other issue, and the mayor was aware of this, a couple of the council members may not be able to be here.
She said, why don't you ask for a continuance?
And I'm not trying to put the mayor on the spot.
But that's way told her I came down here for.
I understand there's some rules, and typically petitioner is the one that's supposed to ask for the continuance.
And I'm not asking you to actually rule on this today.
I'm asking you to think about this.
And I guess you would have to rule on the 26th.
But rather than springing it on the 26th, I wanted to air it out in the public forum of what the concerns are.
So we're concerned that the facilities are aren't going to be big enough.
And we are concerned that a couple council members won't be able to attend that very important hearing.
So that's our concerns.
And I appreciate giving me the opportunity to express them today.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Ms. Zelman.
>>ANDREA ZELMAN: Fowler White, 501 East Kennedy on behalf of Tampa General.
Tampa General very, very, very strongly objects to continuing this hearing.
As you will recall it was back on March 3rd that we picked this date.
The application has been filed at the end of June.
Again, as you all know, it was delayed when a garage sale went on.
In March we looked at a lot of dates, one conflicted with a Planning Commission dinner, one with the mayor's town hall and so forth.
Tampa General doesn't like the fact we are going to be missing two council members either.
But we are as disadvantaged and handicapped as everyone else.
And we are willing to go forward with that.
And I also think the issue about the size of the auditorium, this is a small chambers.
But we have all been here nights when you have had the overflow down in the Mascotte room.
And everyone can still come up and wait in lane and speak.
It doesn't mean that they can't speak.
I just don't see that as a problem.
I was here, I think it was, March 10th when you had only five council members, and you had a number of small scale plan amendments on your agenda that require a super majority.
You had a lost applicants asking for continuances and made them go forward with the hearing.
I don't know why then and not now.
There's no case law to support the fact that you have to have a full council, you have to have a quorum, and that's why we are flexible about the quorum.
Again, I think we have all had adequate time to prepare for this hearing.
We want to two forward.
It's time.
Every delay is costing Tampa General money.
They have got ongoing construction that's being affected by this.
And again, we worked very hard to agree on a date, the dates agreed on.
We have asked a lot of people to come, yes.
So has the Davis Island civic association.
They have sent two mailers that I'm aware of to every resident on the island, you know, asking them to come Tuesday night.
So everyone is ready to go.
Again, we strongly object to this continuance.
And I understand you're not going to rule on it today.
But the one thing we do agree on is I think both sides would like to have some idea what's going to happen Tuesday night on this issue.
On the continuance, I mean.
Obviously we'd like to know the rest.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question for our attorney, which is we're not allowed to do anything about this today because it's not ripe because it isn't a public hearing which is the 26th.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.
>> So what can we do say?
>>GWEN MILLER: Nothing but say we'll meet on the 26th.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Just to respond to Ms. Zelman's question saying both parties, I guess, would like to know what's going on.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
It's the petitioner's request for a continuance or not.
I think we can all be in agreement here with what you're saying.
You want your petition to go forward, if you're not planning to ask for a continuance, I think that says it all.
We're moving forward.
And hearing the case.
So there's no ambiguity there at all.
That's your position.
It's your prerogative on the 26th of whether you're asking for continuance or moving forward.
If you're saying you're moving forward, that clears it up right there.
You're moving forward.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I agree 100% with that, Councilman White, on that.
And I will say that in speaking just for this councilman, the decision will not be made based on who has the most people here.
I want to know what the facts are.
I want to know what the administration's position is.
And that's where we are going to come down.
So you all are free to bring people in by the plane load if you want.
But that's not going to be the determining factor.
It's going to be what is the evidence presented?
And I think that evidence can be presented in a relatively quick manner at the beginning of the hearing by the applicant, and by the very professional response, the evidence that's put on the record by those who disagree.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Since I'm one of the two that aren't going to be here I'm not going to speak to the continuance one way or the other.
I'll let you all deal with that.
But I will say that in regard to the venue and location, there is some precedent, as you remember last summer, when we were renovating the room, we were a little behind schedule so we opened the hearing here and then we said, Okay, the meeting is now continued and moved to the convention center, and we all trucked over to the convention center.
I'm not suggest you all do that.
I'm saying there is some precedent for that in case you get on a bind on the size of the crowd.
The other thing I was going to say about the crowd -- and I'm just suggesting this for crowd management -- is I have seen an e-mail that says come down early and make sure we get all the seats so the other side doesn't get any seats.
I have seen that e-mail and it's not pretty.
So what I am going to suggest -- and you all do what you want to do -- but I suggest maybe you split the room, since it's a special hearing and nothing else is going on that night, split the room and say, one side, half the room is for one side reserved, and half the room for the other side, and then if they can figure it out.
But at least that way could you keep some order and keep people thinking that at least it's fair that half the room is one side and half the room for the other.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
We will not continue.
We will see you all Tuesday night at 6 p.m.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to request reconsideration?
We now go to our audience portion.
Anyone in the audience that would like to speak to any item on the agenda that is not set for public hearing.
Okay.
We go to our committee reports.
Rose Ferlita, public safety.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I'd like to move resolution 21, please.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Parks and recreation, Ms. Mary Alvarez.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I'd like to move items 22.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Public Works Committee, Mr. John Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move items 23 and 24.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Finance Committee, Mr. Kevin White.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I'd like to move item 25, 27, 28, 29.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
It looks like 29 we already did.
That's the Poe issue.
>>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
Motion and second through 28.
(Motion carried)
>>KEVIN WHITE: And legal is requesting a three-week continuance on 26, reset for May 12th.
>>GWEN MILLER: And second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Building and zoning.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Did you want to say something?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Is it delayed, 26?
I'd like to address very quickly item 26.
I discussed this with the clerk.
And with all the things that have been happening lately, we are putting into place today hopefully with the council's approval the order of business, which will take effect shortly, once it's able to be put in the system, with the change-over to doc agenda, and we are in the process of a lot of changes.
I would like the opportunity, two fold, number one to work with the administration to review changes, and number two, delayed in getting to council that breakdown in list of the specific changes that you would be required, I think, that you would need to have before you vote on this.
So I would like a little more time to do it.
That's why I made that request.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Saul-Sena, I just want to make mention of an item under your committee, item 36.
I simply want to make mention, a lot of clarification on what's happening here.
This is a resolution for vacation of an alley.
The petitioner is Bruce curry.
As all of you recall I was a co-petitioner of a vacation on an alley as well and I cited case law said whim I'm here I'm obligated to put this on the agenda to be heard at whatever time it's going to be heard.
Checking with council and whether Mr. Massey would like to weigh in on this or Mr. Shelby, that's fine.
But I think it's not my option but my obligation to vote on this in terms of putting it on, at the point that it comes on on the agenda to be discussed and voted upon, I think in an abundance of caution I will certainly fill out the appropriate form and recuse myself.
But I just wanted some clarification as we go forward on this.
Mr. Shelby -- that's all I have to say.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have to June 2nd.
Okay, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move resolutions 30 through 41.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 42, move to set appeal hearing for no earlier -- earlier than June 9th.
[Motion Carried Unanimously]
>>GWEN MILLER: Transportation.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move 43 through 47.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move new business 48.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: We now go to public hearings for second reading.
Is there anyone in the audience going to speak on items 3, 4, 5 or 6?
If you are, would you please stand and raise your right hand.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>GWEN MILLER: We now need to open the public hearing.
(Motion carried)
Anyone in the audience want top speak on item 3?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White, would you read 3?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move the following ordinance after second reading, move an ordinance vacating closing discontinuing and abandoning an easterly portion of that right-of-way known as Eunice Avenue lying and situated between Morgan Street on the west and Jefferson street on the east in Hendry and knight's map of the garrison, a subdivision of the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the same being more fully described in section 2 hereof, reserving certain easements and conditions, providing an effective date.
>>GWEN MILLER: Oral role call.
Mr. Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I believe this is the vacating with the trees, letting you know.
>>GWEN MILLER: Roll call vote.
Clerk having to do roll call vote.
Clerk.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: (No response.)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Yes.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Yes.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder and Saul-Sena voting no and Harrison absent.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone to speak on item number 4?
>> Madam Chairwoman, members of council, my name is Luke Lirot, Tampa, Florida.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: You brought three attorneys.
Should we get a few down here to counter that?
>> I think Mr. Shelby is probably good for a half dozen.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Have you been sworn?
>>> We have been sworn.
Yes, I have.
I'm here to speak in opposition total proposed repealing of the sections of chapter 16 dealing with the criteria for dog parks.
I think just as a matter of background, I appeared in front of a special town meeting, and I know that councilwoman Ferlita, councilman Dingfelder were in attendance on March 17th, and it was the day after we had filed a complaint on behalf of several property owners that live in the vicinity of the Palma Ceia park.
I think that what was alleged in the complaint is indicative of the reasons that this section should not be repealed.
The gist of what we had filed was to seek an injunction against the operation of what we allege was an unlawfully established dog park in Palma Ceia park.
As part of our complaint we allege that there were characteristics of the operation of the park because it had become so popular and because of its location and a very quite residential area, it was starting to show characteristics of what would otherwise be considered a nuisance, traffic had increased substantially, there were significant parking problems, the popularity of the park had taken on characteristics of what we allege was almost a kennel, and I think that as part of the zoning code, the City of Tampa does not allow kennels in a residential area.
So it was on that basis, and also the requirement in section 16-8 that says if you want to establish a dog park, you have to comply with a variety of different rules and regulations.
One of those being that the minimum area to establish such a facility is one acre.
And it was our position that this facility in Palma Ceia park had been established.
It didn't meet the minimum square footage.
And really posed a number of different problems that we felt justified the filing of our action in an effort to try to enjoy the continued use of that particular area as a dog park.
What this does is this really steps backward, and respectfully, I think that this is really, if adopted, the council is shirking its responsibility.
If you take a look at the actual proposed legislation there are a number of different provisions and restrictions and criteria that are crossed out.
The size of the park, the rules and regulations applicable to a park.
And you would be left without any regulation.
Now, we have done some research, and I have asked that some of the documents I am going to refer to be received and filed as part of the file on this matter.
If the City of Tampa does this it's I unprecedented and it would be moving in the wrong direction, certainly in contrast to what other municipalities in the country have done.
The city of Los Angeles did an extensive report back in January of 2005, and in doing this it got to be a half inch thick. This was for the Herman park off-leash dog exercise area project.
They did an extensive study.
And they looked exactly at those areas of concern that my clients want the council to be familiar with, and to embrace.
I talked about parking issues.
They did an extensive traffic study.
They talked about noise.
They did a noise study.
They talked about the smell and all of the different characteristics.
And they found --.
(Bell sounds)
And I have three people that have committed their time to me, if I could continue.
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you have those waivers?
>>> I don't have a waiver form but I have their names.
I can provide that.
Ms. Merrill.
Mr. Moriadi.
They are in the audience.
And before they established a dog park they found it was far enough away from residential areas that it had adequate parking, that it didn't pose any kind of threat, or in any way exacerbate the noise and the other characteristics, they truly do interfere with my client's quiet enjoyment.
Now the issues that have arisen in Palma Ceia park have gotten heated, they have gotten controversial, they have gotten personal.
And that need not be.
We don't want to the get that way.
But it certainly appears to my clients that the effort to repeal the provisions of the code, which showed that the establishment of this dog park was unlawful and is not in conformity with the regulations that are on the books.
It seems like there's almost an effort being made to adopt the viewpoints of people that want this park regardless of its impact on my client's sensitivities.
The other studies that I have here are also indicative of what municipalities have done.
I have one from Raleigh parks in Raleigh, North Carolina.
They have an extensive list of dog park rules.
They again identify the rules they have for children in the area.
And far more than even the City of Tampa had that it's considering repealing, they have an extensive list of rules, regulations, talking about the parking, the noise, they require an 8-foot fence with enough of vegetative buffer that it doesn't have an adverse effect on the people that live in the area.
The other study I have is from Wisconsin.
And this was in the Madison community center, and the Fort Ethan Allen Park.
Again you are talking about inches and inches of research and study.
You have look to look at this as a zoning issue.
The characteristics of a dog park are exactly the same as any other kind of popular commercial use.
Of you have increase in traffic.
You have a clear increase in noise.
I think cases going back to the 1800s have shown that barking dogs, even a couple of barking dogs, can pose nuisance characteristics that interfere with the quiet enjoyment of people's properties.
And I think that what we have shown is that the City of Tampa need not repeal this.
I think what you should do is adopt the same methodology that other communities have adopted.
I have materials that you can look at.
I have an extra copy for council, one for the clerk.
But I think that this requires study, and the city should involve itself in trying to implement legislation that takes a good hard look at the characteristics of a popular dog park.
We would request that you not repeal the provisions that are the only protection that exist now in the city.
I haven't seen anything proposed by parks and recreation.
So really what you would be doing is you would be withdrawing one form of regulation and leaving it open ended as to when if ever parks and recreation would ever adopt any rules and regulations that would adopt these concerns.
But the biggest problem is we don't feel that the parks and recreation department has the authority to adopt regulations that would meet all of the concerns that these types of facilities generate.
The parking.
The noise.
You need to come up with a legislative policy that identifies that certainly in an area like the City of Tampa, there is a need for dog parks.
But there has to be some consideration that the impact of these dog parks justifies their being separated from quiet residential areas.
There are four other dog parks that are huge, huge parks, they have many acres, 80-acre parks, 100 acre parks out on Davis Island beach.
(Bell sounds)
So we would submit that it's not the right thing to do to repeal this ordinance.
Study what I have given you. Take a look at what the City of Tampa can do to adopt a proper zoning for vision that deals with these characteristics.
But don't just take away the rules that are on the books now without having to replace those.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Lirot, you talked about zoning rules that address this.
Some of the ordinances from on the Mu nice -- municipalities that you are going to share with us.
Does it outline those?
>>> In Los Angeles it does.
Los Angeles has a specific set of criteria that they look at.
And again it's like any kind of zoning consideration.
It buffers the impact of the popularity of the dog park from residential areas.
They make sure that there's enough parking.
They make sure that there's enough of a buffer.
I think -- I don't know fountain was Raleigh or Los Angeles but one of the criteria was there be an 8-foot privacy fence with vegetation that would muffle, I guess, the sound.
Again my clients don't dislike dogs.
It's just like anything else.
If it takes on too much popularity, too much of a good thing can have an impact on residential areas.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
Next.
>>> Good morning, council members.
For the record the name is Brandon cull, we have offices at 112 east north street, suite B, same building as Mr. Lirot, and representing some of the same clients that Mr. Lirot represents.
And they wanted me to speak on a little different concern that they have with your proposed revocation of this ordinance.
And, yes, for the record I have been sworn.
Thank you, counselor.
Four years ago this council considered whether or not there was a need to establish dog parks.
When they did that, they held public hearings.
They viewed evidence.
And determined that because of the potential harms to the public, there was a need for dog parks.
There was a need to have a place to take dogs to exercise.
And because of the inherent problems of having congregations of dogs in one area, there was reason to come up with a whole bunch of other regulations as far as where to put them, how much area to give them, how much protection to give from the public.
I'm sure your counselor can inform you that now that you have established the dog parks and you have established them based on the fact that you're trying to provide a service to the public, and you're trying to preserve -- provide protection to the public, you have now assumed a duty to keep that protection up.
And if you can't justify lessening the amount of protection that you are giving to the public, then the city is opening itself up to liability in the future.
If you to away with the regulations for the dog parks, do away with the protections, based on the case law, it would be akin to getting rid of lifeguards at public pools.
If you do that, and someone drowns, the city is going to be opening the door to litigation from the victims or their survivors.
The same is going to be true here, through the same case law.
If you get rid of the dog parks, you get rid of the protections that the dog parks offer, the city is quite possibly opening itself up for liability for every dog bite in the city.
And that would be an extreme case.
But the fact of the matter is that now you have assumed a duty to protect the public with these dog parks, if you don't live up to that duty, you're opening the city up to a lot of litigation.
I prepared a memo, and some case law, which I will provide to your attorney to go over it.
My clients just want to make sure that you consider what you're doing for the good of the city.
They don't want you to do away with dog parks.
They don't want you to subject the city to any liability that would come about because of doing away with the dog parks.
They ask you to consider this, and just as Mr. Lirot asked that you not repeal the authorization for the dog parks.
(Bell sounds)
>>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak on item 4?
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm not going to get into the litigation that was referenced because as part of our rules, we shouldn't be discussing litigation, and frankly neither should anybody from the podium.
But I will say in support of this proposed ordinance that there were some interesting points brought up by council.
For example, lifeguards.
I've got -- I'm going to guess -- and I might be totally wrong but I'm going to guess that there's no ordinance, city ordinance that says that City Council describes how many lifeguards we put in any particular facility.
I believe that we probably delegate that to staff to make those sound decisions in regard to the management of any of our water related facilities.
Likewise, little league fields, I mean, for people that live near and across the street from little league field, they have a huge impact on their lives in terms of noise, and traffic, and all that.
When you move near a little league field, you probably know that that's part of the game, so to speak.
And at the same time, Ms. Palus has testified to us that City Council has never adopted any ordinances that say that -- that regulate the little league, when the games will be played, and how many teams there will be, and all that sort of thing.
So the bottom line is that we delegate those type of management issues to staff, that's an appropriate delegation, it not that we are shirking our responsibility, and that we are making a dangerous or unsafe situation.
We just are delegating those management issues to staff and I believe it appropriate.
With that I'll be glad to move it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Would you read item 4, please?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Yes, Madam Chairman.
Move an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida -- after adoption, after second reading.
What is it I'm supposed to say?
I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading.
An ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida repealing and deleting all provisions of the City of Tampa code pertaining to dog parks amending City of Tampa code chapter 16, article I, section 16-8 by repealing and deleting subsection C and D pertaining to the establishment of dog parks, criteria for selecting dog park locations, promulgation of rules for dog parks, amending subsection E pertaining to responsibility for damage or injury to public and dogs in park, providing for severability, providing -- repealing other ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
>> Second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I thought Mr. Lirot gave some valid points on impact to neighborhoods.
And while we certainly allow staff to make decisions about appropriateness of uses, I think that it's very appropriate for council, which is the group that the public is allowed to come to, to voice their opinions, to weigh in on things that affect the quality of life in their neighborhoods.
And because of that, because I think that as our density increases and the proximity of people and public facilities becomes more intense, this is going to be more controversial.
I won't support the deletion of this.
I think that it's something that our parks and rec should come back to us with, with additional built-in safeguards for neighborhoods, in regards to dog parks, as well as all our parks, specifically to deal with parking issues.
I think that transportation issues do have impacts on neighborhood parks.
And I think it's something we need to consider.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I hear Ms. Saul-Sena, and I think that there is a reason to be conflicted about this, because, you know, obviously this park by started with the greatest of intentions has turned into quite a nuisance.
But we are here today generally to talk about going forward with siting dog parks, putting dog parks in different locations of the city.
And as land becomes more and more scarce, I think that it is a bit arbitrary to impose a one acre restriction on the size of dog parks, if they can be put in appropriate places.
So I'm in favor of the ordinance, that whatever action we take today on retooling our ordinance, I don't think, has an impact on the legal proceeding that exists with respect to this one park.
So I'm going to support the motion.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Just a couple of words, too, because obviously I was hard pressed for a decision about which side I was going to support.
Ms. Palus took the lead about trying to restructure and recraft the existing ordinance.
And Ms. Saul-Sena brings up some valid points, but I think transportation tried to address the parking issue.
And with the reconfiguration of the dog area of the park.
And I don't know, how far along are we with that?
Palus: We have not moved forward at this point.
>> But we have he have intention?
>>> We are putting together all the pricings and up such for that maneuver, yes.
>> I'm assuming from what Ms. Palus said and the meetings with the rest of my colleagues that that's going to be done in an effort to relieve the neighbors that are in closest proximate to the location now.
And as we have looked in the past, and this is not talking about the litigation or not, in the event that the recon figs figure ration causes somebody problems we are going to go to department heads who I think we respect the efforts and time that you put into this.
And let's see if that relieves it.
We are going to have this issue knew terms of many other, and Mr. Lirot is right that this is a situation that maybe shouldn't have beings as baited because of differences of opinion.
But if we have some problems like we have many times before then, look at the ordinance again and perhaps change the language and based on that I obviously support it since I read it.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of clarification.
Mr. Harrison, I just want to see if a clarification might be appropriate.
You used the term nuisance.
You didn't specify any particular part but you said this part obviously has become, quote, a nuisance.
I don't think that you are making any finding of nuisance at this he -- at this point.
It would be more appropriate to say that this has become very controversial as related to any of these particular parks?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, I appreciate the cross-examination.
(Laughter)
>>.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I think council should be talking about the ordinance and not any factual situation.
>>GWEN MILLER: We are going to --.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I wanted to ask Mr. Harrison --.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ware not supposed to be discussing.
Let's go to the vote.
Mr. Harrison I think would answer that question what he said.
Let's move on.
We are going to call for the roll call vote.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Aye.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Yes.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Yes.
>> Motion carried with Saul-Sena voting no.
>> Is there anyone to speak to item number 5?
>> Move do to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>> I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading.
An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 422 Channelside Drive in the city of Tampa, Florida and more particularly described in section 1 from zoning district classification CBD-2 vacant land and warehouse to CBD-2 high-rise multifamily, retail, restaurant, providing an effective date.
>> Second.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Yes.
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being absent.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone that would like to read 6?
>> Move to close.
(Motion carried)
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to adopt the following ordinance upon second reading.
I'm going to try this on the brand new computer system here.
An ordinance rezoning property in the general vicinity of 1405 and 1413 South Howard Avenue, 2307 west Mississippi Avenue and 1316 south Alabama Avenue in the city of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly described in section 1, from zoning district classifications CG and RM-16 to PD, retail, professional office, restaurant, commercial parking, providing an effective date.
>> I have a motion and second.
Roll call vote.
>>THE CLERK: (Roll call)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: (No response.)
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
>>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder absent and Saul-Sena voting no.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anyone who wants to speak on item number 7 please stand and raise your right hand.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open number 7.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>DAVID MECHANIK: 101 East Kennedy Boulevard, Tampa, Florida.
Here on behalf of the University of South Florida research foundation.
We're asking for a two-week continuance.
The transportation staff asked us this week to consider a different transportation mitigation alternative.
And we wanted a couple weeks to look at that approach before we came forward with the hearing.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to continue for two weeks.
What time?
>> 10:00.
>>GWEN MILLER: May 5th.
Item number 8.
Need a motion to withdraw.
We have a motion and second to withdraw number 8.
(Motion carried)
Item number 9.
>> Motion to open.
(Motion carried)
>>THOM SNELLING: Land development coordination.
What you have in front of you is four businesses that have either failed to report or late in reporting of their annual semiannual reports.
The Sangria's Tapas bar, although they were late, technical violation, they did file it and they did pay the $100.
Kahunaville filed.
They should be on the bottom.
They also filed $800. The reason that all four of these businesses are here is that this is not the first time that they have come in front of you or that they have filed late.
Sangrias, this is the third time in two years they filed late.
Kahunaville filed late before.
Miami subs, this is the third time that they have failed to file.
And obsession we have no history on them.
Council has shown an increased interest in trying to become a little more strict as evidenced in along discussion about Ybor City.
It does evolve around alcohol and wet zonings and bars, et cetera, et cetera.
Council wants to take a lot more serious manner which these things are dealt with and how they are tracked.
This T reason they are here now is we are trying to establish some type of additional paper trail, record, that shows continual abuses or council has more reasons to look at them and saying, you know what?
You're not living up to your end of the bargain.
And that's what this process is.
So what our recommendation, staff recommendation is to go ahead, allow my staff to write a letter to code enforcement saying to please issue them the appropriate citation, code violation, and Vermont run through the process.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I have a question from a legal perspective.
And I don't know whether Kate or Thom would handle this.
With regard to sending it to code enforcement, for which purpose?
Under this ordinance, section 3, does this council require not to take any action relative to this, to this particular late files, or no files?
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: We are required under the code under section 3-80 of the code to report to council all of those violations of that section.
So that is what's occurring today.
Council, because we have revised section 3-100 revocation criteria within the last year, we changed the process, and reading those two sections together, what we have been doing is asking that for those establishments that are in violation of the code, that they be directed to the Code Enforcement Board for the issuance of a citation and allow that process to conclude.
If at that point Code Enforcement Board finds these establishments guilty, then when we show a pattern of practice where they have failed to consistently report, then we can bring that back before council for consideration of revocation.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you for the clarification.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: Excuse me, I'm hear on behalf of Sangria's Steve Michelini.
I would urge the City Council -- I have been sworn -- before you make any motion sending these to code enforcement that you hear what the conditions were that precipitated their late filings.
Because you're presuming somehow that code enforcement is going to be able to sort this out in a better manner than City Council.
In this particular case with Sangria's, we had a number of hurricanes, the power was out, his ability to file his reports were effected by his ability to retrieve information from his electronic system.
And as you know, Hyde Park was out of power off and on for a number of days.
So to hold him, essentially sending him to code enforcement through another process where he has to again hire someone else to come represent him, is going to extend and cost him money.
And he's a small business owner.
He doesn't have the time to do this.
He hasn't committed some offense by the construction of this restaurant or something else like that.
It's a paper trail of his report which was filed late, and he paid the fee, which was proscribed for in the ordinance.
So we urge you not to find him guilty, to allow him to proceed.
He's on notice now not to have anything late happen in his report filing again.
And that's really the prerogative of council, to make that determination, not to hold him to two separate hearings where he potentially could be paying the $100 fee here and being held to another code enforcement violation somewhere else.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: This is now before council -- not before council today for finding of guilt that. Determination will be made by the Code Enforcement Board.
What we have before you are technical violations of the code where these reports were not filed in a timely manner.
These reports were due to be filed January 15th of this year.
And with regard to Sangria's, that was filed outside of that period.
And as Thom mentioned earlier, this is an establishment that has failed to report in a timely manner previously.
All those issues are to be addressed by the Code Enforcement Board and their finding of fact, during a public hearing.
That is not before you today.
The only issue is whether or not to refer these to the Code Enforcement Board so they can go through that process.
Thank you.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just thought the issue of the hurricanes that this is the third time this came up and as Ms. O'Dowd said, it's not up to us to find fact.
One is pretty understandable but three times is sort of a pattern.
And I think that ware not taking away his license.
We are just saying he needs to go to code enforcement and explain to them why this happened.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I agree with you, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
I can see that the hurricanes were probably in September, and they were supposed to be filed in -- for January.
So I think that he was just late.
I think going to the Code Enforcement Board is the way to go at some time.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I think this council historically has been reasonable about that.
And I agree as well with Mrs. Saul-Sena that three times, I think we need to make a statement by sending this to code and letting them take this issue up.
>>GWEN MILLER: It still open, yes.
>>STEVE MICHELINI: I think the owner want to address council.
>>> Victor Perez, South Howard.
I talked to Mrs. James the lady in charge of this situation.
The paper, how often you have to file, what's the consequences if you don't.
So in the beginning, when I filed twice late, by the third time is when she told me, this is the situation you're going to face.
So by then it was too late.
And any kind of paper I do with the city, if I am late, it just going to be a fine.
I'm not disrespecting you in any way.
But personal matters and things like that.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: How long have you been in business, sir?
>>> Three years.
>> This is the first time you ever had to file reports?
>>> No, ma'am.
Twice before.
>> You knew about reports being filed.
Do you have an accountant?
>>> No, ma'am.
Because I'm a small business owner, I have to do everything myself.
I clean toilets, and do all --
>> you don't vice-president to get explicit but the fact is you have been in business for three years, and you knew the procedures.
They may not be explicit.
But then already filed three times.
>>> The paperwork when you file with the city to get this license,
>>ROSE FERLITA: With all due respect, first of all we are not taking it personal because this is not something against us.
However, everybody else who has to go through the guidelines and requirements of having a small business, with a license-w a liquor license, has to do that.
I think for the general public it's explicit enough and it should be explicit to you.
And the second point with all due respect to being a small business owner, I do some of the same things you do as small business owner but the rules are the rules and the rules.
And depending on how many times you violate it any board that governs that in their purview is understanding the first time.
Not so understanding the second time.
And the third time, if we didn't make a statement and send this to code enforcement then everything this council has done about supporting code enforcement and their authority would be down the drain.
Personally, don't think there's any more discussion I need to hear.
You have done it three times.
Hopefully you won't be back here again.
That's my sentiment.
>>THOM SNELLING: Just one last comment.
As you know, the whole wet zoning process just was relatively recently transferred over to Land Development Coordination.
How things have been done in the past, I don't know.
But what I'm obligated to do is follow the code.
And I have worked very closely with Ms. O'Dowd in trying to go through that because there has been previous history of some things, maybe it is, maybe it isn't.
But the point here is that with the administration and City Council want the regulations and the codes to be followed more closely.
And that's every intent that we are doing.
The process we are in now clarifying chapter 3 is all about that.
And as you say, if this was the first time, I can't speak to that.
What I can speak to is that it's now Land Development Coordination's job to present the code, clarify it and bring it in front of you when something isn't followed right.
Again, the guilt is decided at the code enforcement board.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thom, one quick comment.
I thought I was finished.
Long before I was on council I dealt with Pam James, where she was before instead of in your department.
I want to tell you as a private citizen she made every single attempt to make everything very, very clear: So that being said, and knowing the fact that she is just an incredible lady that knows her job up and down A to Z about what goes on with wet zonings and their requirements, as a private citizen I got all the explanations I needed as many times as I needed.
So between working for you and you having her as an employee there's no excuse.
It's very clear and everybody needs to follow the rules.
It's plain and simple.
>>GWEN MILLER: Next.
>> My name is Michael Dennis on behalf of Kahunaville.
While I appreciate the situation of the past, please consider mine separately.
We acquired the space that Kahunaville was in late October, I believe October 30th.
Of just last year. The business was failing.
Todd Mall worked with them before.
We came in, as I said, first of November was our first revenues incurred as a business there.
We had no past history there. The past history would be on behalf of the owners who were there before us.
I think you will see a clear change in liquor license and all appropriate licenses with the city and the state confirming that.
And all attempts to contact the folks at Kahunaville, the past people, at the point where I had contacted Ms. James to find out what was going on, we responded very timely, paid immediately, and I can assure you there will be no late filings for myself or Kahunaville in the future.
And if you would just be kind enough to maybe speak with Ms. James to confirm that we did have to go through quite a bit of process to try to get the numbers from the previous people who were going out of business, that we are required -- were required to be filed on that statement, combined with ours, I would sure appreciate it.
If you have any other questions, I would be happy to answer those.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question is for our attorney or the city attorney.
What is the appropriate thing to do in the case of a change of ownership like this?
What precedent is there?
The sums of a blank slate when there's a change of ownership?
Just on the basis of like basic fairness, doesn't seem fair to make this guy responsible for the previous two.
It seems like it's one strike rather than three.
But what is the legal department's response?
>> The code doesn't really address that specifically.
But if we do have a change of ownership, clearly we can't hold one person, the current owner responsible for a previous violations by another owner.
But again, I think those are issues that the Code Enforcement Board could address as to the appropriateness of any action at that point.
Are there mitigating factors that they should take into consideration.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. O'Dowd, where the -- were the previously owners obligated to file the report from -- was it June 30th?
July 1st through --.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: The report was due January 15th.
And that would have been from July 1 through December 31st, the previous year.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Since he was the current owner now, took over in October, October 31st, I guess you said, were they still obligated to pick up from July 1st?
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: I would submit they would be required to show their reporting requirements as of the date they took ownership of the property.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So that's where he should have started at.
>>> So it would have been from that date in October through December 31st.
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
Motion and second to close the public hearing.
(Motion carried)
What's the pleasure of council?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to send all of them to code enforcement.
>>GWEN MILLER: And second?
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: We need to open item number 10.
I have a motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>> Eric cotton, Land Development Coordination. The first case on the agenda is -- not on the agenda.
I'm thinking of the VRB.
This is petition WZ 05-42, Khadar Incorporated, located in council district number 5.
1811 east 23rd Avenue.
The petitioner is requesting a 2(APS).
This is for a property that was approved back in 1982 for a roughly 1300 square foot market with zero parking when approved.
The petition der apply for same wet zoning back in February of 2004.
And at that time the council denied the request.
No other wet zoning property within a thousand feet.
They are adjacent to residential property.
And there are two institutional uses within a thousand feet.
One is 24th Avenue church of Christ.
And the other is a public housing park, Tampa public housing which is to the north of them.
This pinkish box is the property in question.
The surrounding property basically is zoned RS-50.
To the north is the Tampa housing authority site.
And this way is the church in question.
>>GWEN MILLER: Officer Guffey.
>>SCOTT GUFFEY: Tampa Police Department.
Like Mr. Cotton said, this was before you last year.
It was voted down.
The department did not object to it last year, nor do we have anything to stand on to object to the zoning this year.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
>>> Good morning.
My name is Fariti.
We opened.
We have food.
And it not doing well because we didn't have beer licensing.
And too many ask us like when we can get it, you know?
And nobody like have no problem with it.
That's it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak on item number 10?
Anyone in the audience like to speak?
>> Move to close.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>KEVIN WHITE: I move an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer and wine 2(APS), in sealed containers for consumption off premises only from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 1811 east 23rd Avenue Tampa, Florida as more particularly described in section 2 hereof waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.

I have a motion and second.
Question on the motion.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, I don't particularly remember this petition from last year, but obviously it was voted down.
There must have been some reason for doing that.
Does anyone recall?
>>KEVIN WHITE: Yes, Mr. Harrison.
I remember when the petitioners came, there were three neighbors in opposition.
And they said once the petition got denied, they were opening a new business at the time, and when we denied it, they came -- one of the petitioners, and I don't know which one of the two, or another petitioner's representative, said they were going to open and try to be good neighbors, and they would be coming back in a year.
There was two elderly women, and I remember -- and a gentleman.
And they weren't necessarily opposed to it but their biggest concern was beer bottles in the neighborhood and things of that nature, because the previous store, I believe, did have alcohol here.
>>> Yeah.
>>KEVIN WHITE: But that was their concern.
And they said, let's see how they do.
And I'm sure they were noticed this time but I'm not -- I just don't see anyone in opposition.
Is this going to be a one-year conditional as well?
That would be the way I would like to go with this, a one-year conditional giving the petitioner an opportunity to prove themselves, and that way if there are any neighborhood concerns after that, the neighbors would have an opportunity to come back and voice their concerns at that time before we turn this into a permanent wet zoning.
But I think petitioners have been there and have proven themselves to be good patrons to the neighborhood, deserve an opportunity.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I realize that they have not had anything that they have to account for from the standpoint of negative issues.
But whether those ladies were able to come, and retestify or oppose, I am still strongly concerned about the institutional uses within a thousand feet, precious bundles day care, church of God and Christ and the public housing park.
So I am not going to support it even on a condition.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita feels that elderly people couldn't get here this morning and I have been in the area and I know public housing lot a lot of people, it's a big nursery and a church and I can't support it either.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Rate now there is not even a conditional on the table.
>>GWEN MILLER: So either vote it up or down.
All in favor of it say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
Motion fails.
Is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak on item 11?
11 and 12.
You need to stand and raise your right hand.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open.
>> Second.
(Oath administered by Clerk)
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to open number 11.
(Motion carried)
>>> Eric cotton, Land Development Coordination.
Yesterday we received a fax from Orlando Boras.
He's the petitioner.
His company is the petitioner, leaving notice that his corporation is no longer existing.
He's asking for a one-month continuance in order to reincorporate.
And then come back in May as a corporation and petition the council on that as a corporation versus as an individual.
>>THE CLERK: Requesting the public hearing be continued to May 19th.
>>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a motion?
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>GWEN MILLER: 10:00.
(Motion carried)
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, I have a question.
Are there a couple of citizens here?
>>GWEN MILLER: Do you want to speak to the continuance?
You may come speak on the continuance.
>>> Just to the continuance?
>> Yes.
Dealing with the continuance.
>>> My name is Diana Bower, reside at 8403 North Packwood Avenue and I have been sworn in.
I respectfully request that you deny the continuance.
This is the second one.
I have taken now two days off of work.
I have put in a lot of hours working with my community, presenting presentations to the mayor, to the City Council.
I have another one here that I would also like to submit to City Council for review and/or to be put on public record that addresses the police calls and/or the traffic accidents for this particular property.
I personally myself have endured the last year of hell.
He has had no respect for his neighbors, the City of Tampa or any of its officials.
And I don't see why we should give him a continuance at this time.
We have done all the right things.
We have been patient as a community.
We have had enough.
He has done nothing to even try to meet with his community and try to resolve any of his problems.
Everything he has done has resulted borderline illegal resulting in fine after fine after fine, cutting down trees.
Right now, his building permit is in question because possibly his submission of his building permit was on false pretenses as far as the lot is considered.
He also owns the adjoining property at 1711 which shares the parking lot of 1701.
And he did not submit that he did that.
I do not think that it is fair.
It is disrespectful to our neighborhood to have to wait yet again and have to take yet another day off of work.
I don't see him here today asking on his own behalf for a continuance.
I am here asking on behalf of the neighborhood to say no to this continuance.
Thank you, Madam Chair person.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I remember this petition well.
This lady was here and she was very passionate about the disturbances that he's caused her neighborhood.
She is absolutely accurate.
I don't even see the petitioner he or she here.
And if somebody is seeing that I have not seen, I would love to know what the hardship is that would even make us think about considering a continuance.
Can somebody -- Ms. O'Dowd, can you clarify?
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: The reason as I understand it, the reason he's requesting a continuance, I had raised the issue back in March that the corporation under which the petition was filed was administratively dissolved a few years ago.
So technically we don't have an active corporation that can file this petition.
And he is asking for a one-month continuance in order to straighten that out with the department of state.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you, Ms. O'Dowd, for that.
>>> May I?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Well, I'll probably ask you because I definitely agree with why you are here for not the first time but the second time and a potential of a third time.
I think that the background we are looking at, the issues coming before us are just -- it's unconscionable to me that we are going to give this gentleman another month to come back with a real corporation, to do this again, when he hasn't been a good citizen, he hasn't been a good corporate member, he hasn't been a partner to the neighborhood, under no conditions will I support a continuance.
I think he's had his chance.
I think he's had the opportunity to do better.
He hasn't.
To me by continuing this all we are doing is inconveniencing the neighborhood.
And helping him do this in the way that he's been doing it, which is not in a very professional manner.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: May I inquire?
Is that a motion to reconsider the continuance?
>>GWEN MILLER: A question on the motion.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe there was a motion.
>>GWEN MILLER: We didn't vote.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes, did you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Oh, we voted on it?
Collect.
>>THE CLERK: You had you had a question.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: And the public spoke.
>>ROSE FERLITA: May I make a motion now to reconsider the continuance?
I do that.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
>> I'm lost.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Now would the appropriate thing to be to make a motion for denial?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Do you want to do that, Mrs. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Second.
I don't care.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second for denial, will not be continued.
So we have a motion and second not to continue the petition.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: So motion to deny.
>> And I second the motion.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: May I give for the record, just to give the petitioner an opportunity to speak to that motion?
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner is not here.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: He is not present.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
Opposed, Nay.
It will not be continued.
We are not giving him the opportunity to continue.
It's denied.
>>> So does that mean --.
>>ROSE FERLITA: It means hopefully you don't have to come back.
>>> You are not giving the wet zoning at all.
Bless you.
Should I submit this to you?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: My question was for Ms. O'Dowd.
It seems like the petitioner, he never had standing to file petition in the first place.
So I'm not even sure how we got to the point where we were being asked for a continuance today.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: I can't speak for Land Development Coordination when this was accepted.
It was accepted by someone who is no longer with us.
I don't know if Eric knows the situation.
I caught the discrepancy when I was reviewing the application when it was originally scheduled last month.
And last month it was determined that there was a misnotice, which is why it was scheduled for today.
And I thought in that interim if they can correct that discrepancy with the application, we would be able to go forward.
But it was with the understanding that that had to be addressed before this hearing could be held.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
There's no legally recognized petition that was ever before us.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: That's the issue.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To follow up on the code enforcement issues -- I can't ask you.
You wrote a really good letter about it.
What I would like to do is, in City Council's efforts to get serious about code enforcement, one of the things that we have always found troubling is when people have multiple infractions, they cut down trees without permits, they do work without permits, and this petitioner is very much in practice.
But the city staff doesn't tell us that.
It's up to the neighborhood to tell us that.
So I would like us to look at our -- when somebody applies for a liquor zoning, I would like to get a report from code enforcement on the address, if there are any outstanding code enforcement issues.
Because I think that's really relevant.
>> History?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Or history.
Because it really bothers me when people come in and they have been behaving in a completely uncommitted way in the past.
I think that should have some bearing on our consideration of whether to grant them this license.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: If I may address that briefly.
Currently that is not included in the criteria for your review on application.
But we are going to be doing a wet zoning workshop in May and we can discuss it at that point as to what type of criteria to add to the code.
But until it's in the code I don't think we have basis to deny.
>>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
We need to open item number 12.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>> Eric cotton, Land Development Coordination.
This is a request from central Ybor associates, WZ 05-65.
1600 east 8th Avenue, suite 8123.
They were originally wet zoned under ordinance 2003-194.
The property has never been utilized.
They never utilized that wet zoning.
Given time to file for continuance.
Petitioner requested continuance in order to continue to be able to market the site as a restaurant.
That's what's before you today.
>>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner.
Come up to the mike.
>> Irene: Central Ybor.
We are requesting the continuance to continue to talk about the space.
It makes it easier to lease the space if it got a wet zoning.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Generically speaking, not speaking of Centro or any particular establishment, generically speaking if I thought we had an opportunity to dry up a COP in Ybor I might jump at the chance but this is a (COP-R).
In light of that I'm comfortable with it.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
What's the pleasure of council?
Always Alvarez so moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second to move the resolution.
(Motion carried)
Unfinished business item 18 we need to make a motion to set a public hearing for May 26.
Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Item 19 we have an ordinance to read.
Ms. Saul-Sena, would you read that, please?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move an ordinance approving a special use S-2 approving a drive-in window for convenience store/restaurant in a PD-A mixed use zoning district in the general vicinity of 10960 Cross Creek Boulevard in the city of Tampa, Florida, Florida, and as more particularly described in section 1 hereof providing an effective date.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: Number 20.
Mr. Dingfelder.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2(APS) in sealed containers for couples off premises only at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 10960 Cross Creek Boulevard, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described in section 2 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
>> Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>THE CLERK: On item number 13, you did have the corrected agreement but wave not moved the reso.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move that resolution.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Grandoff, you wanted to speak?
Okay.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want odd to thank you very much for the cooperation of your client.
And I think it will really beautify the city and I thank you.
>>> They were delighted to do that and wanted me to convey that to you, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
Thank you.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Mr. Massey, are you standing up for something?
We go to information by council members.
>>THE CLERK: We still have item number 14 to address.
That's the issue regarding the transaction of business.
>> So moved.
>> It has to be read.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'd like to move a resolution amending rule 4 of the rules of procedure governing meetings of City Council City of Tampa modifying order in transaction of business.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>THE CLERK: Item number 14 we'll try to see how quickly we get the changes made to the agenda and get that reflected for next week.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: On item 17, can we put that back -- is Ms. Ferlita here?
Should we put this back on like two or three weeks on the agenda for discussing?
We already did it?
>>GWEN MILLER: We already did it.
>>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: There's a motion to work on that.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Request administration in two weeks.
>>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White, information?
>>KEVIN WHITE: One quick item.
During budget process we come through -- last we are year we voted as a council to do the six-month revenue and expenditure, and it is about that time again.
And if council members choose to do that once again, find a midway point, we have a couple of days, which is a Tuesday and Wednesday, May 24th or May 25th.
At any time in council's discretion either one of those days are fine, if you do it early, maybe at 8:00, 8:00 30, 9:00, whichever council's preference.
I'm wide open.
Over in police headquarters, back in the main conference room.
I don't know if it's easier at 8:00 or 8:30.
It doesn't matter.
And one day we need to let staff know, Tuesday or Wednesday, those two days.
Preference anybody?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The state figured out they had $2 million more than anticipated.
I would love to get that.
>> It won't be quite that much.
I had a promise they had good news.
Tuesday, May 24th if in a one else has any preference, 8:30, TPD conference room.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, one thing and then a comment.
I think that Chief Jones of Tampa Fire Rescue is interested in acknowledging the help that we have gotten from Mr. Paine, Rocky Point.
And I'm not sure of the time.
Shirley Foxx-Knowles was trying to figure that out.
We don't have a time, is that your understanding?
In conjunction with that because of the fact he has been such a good corporate citizen to help us in terms of fire rescue, I would like to concurrently give him a commendation.
>> So moved.
>> Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>> And just very quickly, Madam Chairman, just to clarify the record, this morning I was kind of kind sided right before we gave the Officer of the Month award.
Danny Lewis from bill Currie Ford introduced me to a gentleman who represents inner vision and we are aggressively welcoming sponsors and corporate members to come in and acknowledge our police officers.
But that being said, in the future, I would ask if anybody is willing to come on board and give some recognition or certificates or something, to please check with me before two minutes before.
I don't want it to be an attempt or perceived attempt to show their wares or services as opposed to saying thank you in subtle ways to the police officers.
I don't want to take away the limelight from the police officer because that's what those commendations are about.
So just wanted to say that.
Because this morning I was a little uncomfortable with how that was presented to me by Danny Lewis.
>> You were out and Bright House wants to give a one-year cable service.
They are going to contact you.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That's incredible.
I think the chairman of the committee should know what's going on prior to two minutes or one minute before.
Thank you.
That's fine.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
That's all I have.
>>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Alvarez.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, colleagues, I guess you saw this last week the legislature, they are putting on the ballot to extend term limits to 12 years.
And I was wondering if you all want to have a conversation on doing that, not necessarily for me because I probably will be retiring after my eight years but I think it might behoove a conversation on this and see what goes.
It would be put on the ballot in November 2006 to extend the term limits to 12 years.
>> For council?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: The council and the legislature.
Legislators are doing it for themselves.
But I think if we did it -- we should do it for the mayor, and of course the council.
Something that we should talk about and see if it something that we want to do.
Of course, it would be up to the voters to extend the limits.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Want to talk about it more in two weeks so we have a chance?
>>ROSE FERLITA: I think we need time to think about it.
It caught me by surprise as well.
But if that's on the ballot in November does that apply to this next election?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: To the following.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I think if it's on than on November 2006 would it apply for March 2007 election?
>>ROSE FERLITA: And what would be the procedure we would have to do up or down before that time?
>> There would be a charter.
>>ROSE FERLITA: But what it would be process to go through in order to get that in terms of time and stuff?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't know.
I would like to look at it within the two weeks.
>>GWEN MILLER: We'll bring it back.
Anything else, Ms. Alvarez?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: No. But I will make some copies of this so everybody will have it.
Okay?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Nothing, Madam Chairman chair.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Two things.
Last week I brought up that the Planning Commission staff wanted to work with us and the question was how much time we need to take and I have some time estimates.
One is on May 19th, one hour.
And on June 23rd, 30 minutes.
So --.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: June 23rd?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Correct.
So I'd like to move that -- it's a workshop that would be on issues that are part of the Tampa comprehensive plan, on May 19th, which is a regular council meeting.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it our workshop day?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No. It's not a workshop day.
But it's also not a time we have a night meeting.
So we could make it at 1:30.
June 2nd we have wet zoning issues and impact fees.
Oh, sorry.
That's all about the historic preservation.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: If we have an afternoon workshop on a workshop day.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We could do that.
But I just think that we are going to need -- we are going to need two hours for this.
I just wonder how long council members are willing to work.
I would prefer to do it on the 19th at 1:30.
It's issues that would become the base of the updated comprehensive plan, we propose May 19th as the date of the workshop, perhaps council would prefer an afternoon schedule.
The 19th, which is the day that they are proposing, we have a CRA meeting at 11, based on today it's a quarter of 12 and we haven't yet gotten to our CRA meeting.
I do think that 1:30 is more realistic than, say, 11:30.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: My only question, Madam Chairman, would be they are telling us what the basis is of the plan update will be and what we are looking at, I'm not sure that we really need a separate time.
Couldn't we just schedule them for a time certain?
And it takes 20 or 30 minutes --.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move that we schedule this on May 19th at 10:30 and I'll talk to them about being as succinct as possible.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
Anything else, Mrs. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wanted to make everyone aware because of the beautiful weather we have a lot of activities.
Saturday are the dragon boat races and Asia fest adjacent to Harbor Island.
Saturday is also earth day at Lowry Park.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just a few things.
I wanted to propose a commendation to WMNF.
They have been in this community for 20 years and they recently opened a new building, multi-million dollar building totally built by community funds and donations.
And I would like to give them a commendation for all the hard community spirited work.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Secondly, Mike Bennett has suggested that we proclaim the week of May 1st through May 7th as drinking water week, along the mayor is already doing it.
And I would think City Council should do it, too.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: Matter of clarification.
I believe the appropriate request would be to of -- to have a declaration -- a resolution declaring.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I declare.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's good.
That's the motion.
>> Second.
(Motion carried)
>>GWEN MILLER: I would like to present a commendation to the nurses they have in nurses week next week, the 28th.
And I would like to present them a commendation on the 28th.
(Motion carried)
Clerk, do you have anything?
>>THE CLERK: I have several items today.
First to receive and file the documents.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
(Motion carried)
>>THE CLERK: Last week council had continued the landmark designation public hearings for the cigar factories and St. Peter Claver.
That meeting day was canceled because of Yom Kippur.
I addressed it and they said October 20th.
>> Move to rescind.
>>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to rescind.
(Motion carried)
>>MARTIN SHELBY: I just have a concern about that.
And the concern would be the fact of taking an action that moves a public hearing date.
Maybe I can consult with Morris about that.
It would be appropriate to post something or ask them to forward it or to ask them to renotice in advance of that date?
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I would prefer to Ms. Wysong but probably in abundance of caution renotice that date since the public hearing was opened and we continue to the 13th.
The public hearing is not open today.
>>THE CLERK: It was actually a continued public hearing last week and --.
>>GWEN MILLER: It was already a continued public hearing.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: But what I am saying is those people who were present at the last public hearing left with the notice of it being --.
>>GWEN MILLER: It will be noticed anyway, wouldn't it?
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That's the question.
>>MORRIS MASSEY: I think if we can get with staff.
We will renotice that date.
>>GWEN MILLER: The date will be in October.
>>MARTIN SHELBY: That would alleviate the concern that I have.
>> So moved.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
>>THE CLERK: The motion of the 20th.
>>GWEN MILLER: All in favor say Aye.
At 10:00.
Anything else?
>>THE CLERK: I have several other items.
I think Steve Daignault, the first one he's asking council to schedule a presentation by him for the Tampa Bay water.
I have discussed it with him per the request of Chairman Miller.
He would like to schedule the one for Tampa Bay water if possible April 28th for 20 to 25 minutes.
He would also like to schedule a presentation the same day for 40th street on the same day for approximately 15 minutes.
And then he would also requested that council consider scheduling a workshop during the week of May 16th, and did not specify the date.
He would prefer to do a special discussion meeting to discuss the utility rates for water and wastewater.
And anticipated that should last probably about an hour or more, that issue.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm sure these are all valid discussions.
I'm just wondering, we set up this workshop afternoon, one day a month.
I thought for these purposes.
So I'm just wondering why we are not using those dates and those afternoons to do this.
>>GWEN MILLER: You can make the motion that we use them.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't I talk to Mr. Daignault and bring it back next week.
Or I'll let him direct it to you next week but I'll talk to him in the meantime because I won't be here.
>>THE CLERK: So for now leave it as is.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: The suggestion we schedule these but for a different time than suggested.
>>THE CLERK: That's it.
>>GWEN MILLER: Anything else by council?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
I have not moved ahead with the June 23rd for 30 minutes.
I would like to move that we have the follow-up discussion on this public hearing on the issues to be included in the Tampa comprehensive plan on June 23rd at 10:00.
>>GWEN MILLER: 30 minutes.
Rather than having everybody sitting through 30 minutes, and items move quickly, to sit through 30 minutes of presentation.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you want it under unfinished business?
>>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move we put it under unfinished business.
June 23rd.
>>THE CLERK: That's just to discuss further issues pertaining to the update to Tampa comprehensive plan?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Right.
>>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
Any questions?
(Motion carried)
We now go to CRA.
>>THE CLERK: Do you want to do general audience first?
>>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone if we go to the public for the general audience?
Now we go to CRA.
(City Council adjourned at 11:53 a.m.)

Community Redevelopment Agency
(Called to order at 11:54 a.m.)

>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: City of Tampa, city clerk.
Roll call.
>>JOHN DINGFELDER: (No response.)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>GWEN MILLER: Here.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: We will now conduct election for chairman and vice chairman for the Community Redevelopment Agency.
Here are the guidelines.
The election of chairman will be first.
Nominations do not require a second.
Please wait to be recognized before nominating a candidate.
I will open the nominations and close them after all nominations have been made.
Votes will be counted by raising the hand.
The vote will be taken in the order of the nomination beginning with the first name nominated.
The vote will cease as soon as there is a majority which requires four votes.
Having said that, nominations are now in order for chairman.
Ms. Miller.
>>GWEN MILLER: I nominate Ms. Mary Alvarez.
>> Second.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Are there other nominations?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I want her to commit that we will spend more time in the course of our year on CRA business.
In the past, City Council -- this is a serious, serious conversation.
City Council has enormous legislative latitude and responsibilities as a CRA.
We have the ability to reshape all of the areas that are CRA areas and we have not committed enough time as sitting as a CRA to thoroughly address the planning, the budgeting, and the oversight responsibilities that are ours.
And if we need to reschedule it on a different day or different time, I am all for it.
But I think that we have not spent enough time as a CRA addressing the CRA issues.
And I hope that this year we will commit to spending more time on this tremendously important responsibility.
>>ROSE FERLITA: Should we continue to make comments?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I had a comment, too.
And I want a campaign promise from Ms. Alvarez that we will have a CRA in north Tampa sometime before we leave office.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Okay.
>>ROSE FERLITA: I just want -- Ms. Saul-Sena, what you're saying is a serious conversation.
Friday and Saturday I attend add seminar for an advance course for elected officials or something.
But, anyway, one of the big issues that they talked about is the CRA.
And in most municipalities, the City Council sits as a CRA, but the resounding theme there was that every council in this state that sits as a CRA body does not realize the power that we have.
We have incredible amount of power.
I think we like the CRA involvement, with all the CRAs we have with TIF and delegations of those powers, I agree with you, and sometimes we find because we are tired at then of the council agenda that we kind of squeeze Ms. Alvarez's agenda.
I think whatever we have to do we have to make this a group effort to give it more time because it's a very powerful position, and should be acknowledged that CRA needs more time and attention.
I agree.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Are there any other nominations?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Should be reelected by acclimation.
I'm sorry.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Properly moved and seconded.
All in favor.
Congratulations.
Would you like to say a few words?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Ms. Saul-Sena, Ms. Ferlita, thank you.
I do take this job very seriously.
I have been doing this now for two years.
And I do -- a lot of the CRA meetings are noticed.
Everybody is welcome to go.
As far as the visioning plan was concerned, I think Mr. Dingfelder was the only one there a couple of weeks ago where we had it.
Needless to say, yes, we need to get more involved.
But the CRAs are just now coming into line.
Now is when we are going to be -- where we really need to be attentive to all of this stuff.
And I will commit to you that when I put out a notice that we are having a CRA meeting, I want everybody there.
Because we are the CRA council.
And so it's important.
And like I said, I do take this job seriously.
I go to as many meetings as I can.
I have gone to the Drew Park CRA meetings every time they have them.
I meet with Mr. Huey constantly about these things.
And maybe we are not bringing it forward.
But we are really trying.
And how many times have we done that ware not doing a CRA meeting?
So, you know, it takes a joint effort, not just the chairman, but the whole body here to help out.
And I appreciate -- and I feel honored that you all have elected me again to do this job.
Because I really, really want to continue what I've started.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to suggest that every time, we now have five CRA areas -- that in addition to the usual overview, that once a month when we have a CRA meeting, we spend at least 45 minutes of our committed CRA time, and we commit 45 minutes to an intense debriefing by the staff person who is responsible for that area on where things are.
And if we do that, in the course of the year, we should get to each area at least twice.
Because -- and I think that we should start scheduling these as soon as possible.
And I just question whether 11:00 is a really tick time given the length of our council meetings.
I think that we should consider as a CRA setting up our meetings at 1:30.
Because realistically, 11:00 rarely are we done with council.
And council members seem to want to continue with the council meeting before embarking on the CRA meeting.
And the staff people we have do so much work, but we sitting as CRA do not give them adequate time to really delve into the time and for us to make more meaningful decisions.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Thank you, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
And congratulations, Mrs. Alvarez.
Nominations are now in order for vice chair.
Is there a nomination?
Ms. Miller.
>>GWEN MILLER: I nominate Rose Ferlita.
>> Second.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Properly moved and seconded.
All in favor.
There are any other nominations?
Ms. Ferlita, would you like to say a few words?
>>ROSE FERLITA: Certainly.
Madam Chairman, thank you very much for the nomination.
And the second from you, Mr. White.
Actually as the chairman was happy to turn the gavel over to her because I thought she would do an incredible job.
In hindsight now she's done a wonderful job.
It's my pleasure to work as her vice chair.
And my location of the business is closest in proximity to Mr. Johnson's area.
So good luck, Ed.
I'm going to be looking at you.
I look forward to working with you.
Thank you for your support.
>>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Congratulations to the new chairman and vice chairman.
I'll turn it over to the newly-elected chairman.
Thank you.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you very much.
We are now going to have a discussion on the -- regarding the recommendation of CRA mention financial policies and administration.
And I believe Mr. Mark Huey is coming up to the podium.
>>MARK HUEY: good morning.
Economic development administrator for the city.
I have not been sworn in.
>>GWEN MILLER: We don't swear you in for CRA.
>>> I actually have a number of things that I was going to speak with you about today really in the context of some of the caveats you have just shared about your involvement in CRA activities, update you generally about activity incurring in CRAs, in addition to reviewing the financial policy.
I wondered if we might do the heights, the next item on the agenda, the next business item, which is the amendment to the CRA plan for the old police station site, and sort of get that done.
And then I can come back.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: That will be fine.
You have an amendment of that plan before you.
I think you dealt with this issue as well earlier this morning during your council meeting.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you sum rides it?
>>> Essentially we would like to amend the current plan to allow the creation of a TIF district in what's called the old police station site.
On that matter, I know there's been some discussion.
Councilman Dingfelder had suggested the renaming of the CRA area to something more like Tampa Heights South.
And that's something we can do in a future plan amendment.
But most importantly right now, what we would like to bring forward is an amendment to the current plan.
The current plan stated that we would not be creating a TIF district in that area.
And what we are suggesting now is we would in fact do that.

>>SHAWN HARRISON: Does that require county commission approval?
>>> No.
It is covered in the interlocal agreement that we currently have with the county, that there were a number of potential TIF district covered in that.
And this was one of those.
Did I summarize that correctly?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a resolution.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: So moved.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Before we vote, I wanted to make sure that council sitting as the CRA will be involved in the development of a plan for spending those TIF revenues.
And it will be two years before we get anything.
Do we have to do a plan to establish the baseline funding to figure out what the increment will be?
>>> Yes.
We are on a track to be able to establish 2004 as the base year.
So, yes, going forward, you will be -- we would anticipate doing a more significant modification to the CRA plan that you would be part of, that would create a vision for what's now the old police station site which we might rename.
Yes, then going forward like each CRA be involved in the use of TIF proceeds going forward.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Will we use our own staff for this or hire consultants to figure it out?
>>> It will be a combination.
Of both.
>> So probably we get money generated then.
I mean, we would actually see revenues in '06 or '07?
>>> Yes, would you see them next year, revenues.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion on the floor and second to amend the resolution -- or to forward the resolution.
All in favor please indicate by saying Aye.
Nays?
Motion passes.
Okay.
Mr. Huey.
>>> Yes.
Wade intended to talk about today is the next item.
Really three items I would like to go through, answer any questions you have about the financial policy which was the other new business item.
Then I wanted to give you a general update on the CRAs and then follow along with the conversation you were just having about how we as your staff for the CRA can better serve you.
So with that in mind, first, if we could talk about the financial policy that was something that has been before you in draft form.
The intention of the policy was really three-fold.
We were number one wanting to create clarity with our neighborhood partners about the way TIF proceeds will be used.
Secondly, we were wanting to create consistency among all of the CRAs about our policies for spending TIF resources.
And thirdly, within the administration, having a policy that the financial department and the CRA, the urban development department, are together on, so as we project out four- and five year plans we can do that in reliance on consistent policy. The policy was worked out over a six-month period, maybe even longer, that involved quite a bit of interaction within the city, and with all of the advisory groups in each of the CRAs and came forward with all of those folks' support.
So I would be happy to answer any questions about the policy that you might have.
But we -- that's the -- we would like for to you move for that to be adopted.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
My question is this.
I didn't see it specifically spelled out.
But is it codified what the ability from the neighborhood, or the organization representing the T neighborhood, like downtown we have the downtown partnership and Drew Park we have the civic organization, East Tampa we have a civic organization.
All the areas have entities.
Is it codified where their input will be?
>>> Yes.
The very critical part of the whole policy was clarifying how each community would be involved in the development annually of the TIF budget.
And this policy.
We do expect this policy to evolve as we go along, and the policy itself speaks to that and speaks to the fact that we would continue to involve in the community in that as well as the TIF budget process.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Because I didn't actually see it in here that the community group has a role.
I just need to be reassured.
>>> Okay.
If you would look at really the very first paragraph.
The city in conjunction with the various community-based CRA TIF groups has developed the following policies, in order to establish, so on and so forth.
And if you look down at the next -- the very first bulleted section, each CRA organization has or will have a committee identified to interact with the city staff.
Then if you look at the next section it talks about the annual TIF budgeting process and how we'll be working jointly with the communities, the respective communities to be involved collaboratively in developing the TIF budget.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that's really key that that's in the establishing document because their input is going to be so central to this.
>>> Absolutely.
Absolutely.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Any other questions?
Mr. Parkinson, did you have anything you wanted to add to this?
No.
Okay.
Did you want us to --
>>> this would need to be adopted.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: To adopt this.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion and second to adopt the CRA financial policies and administration.
All in favor indicate by saying Aye.
Motion passes.
Okay.
And let me explain -- let me say a few words, too, about the Drew Park.
Drew Park has been a real challenge, as Mr. Huey knows.
They have a community in there, and we did have some leadership at one point when we started doing the CRA.
And we thought we had people that were going to come to this set-up and be part of the community and everything.
But unfortunately that broke apart.
So we don't have a civic organization.
But we have a CDC, which will act as part of the Westshore alliance.
And three or four, mark, of the members?
>>> Of the board of the proposed CDC would be from the community.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: yes.
And Mr. Lewis Miller is very -- very much into this mix.
So is Bob from HCC.
We have some heavy hitters that are in this Drew Park area.
Especially with Ron Rotella is pretty much heading up the CDC boards, and until they get themselves, will we have enough support from the neighbors and the community.
And on May 17th we are having -- this is a good place and time for to you come -- May 17th we are having a general public meeting in the Drew Park area for everybody that's interested.
And it will be held at HCC, room L-106, 6:30.
So not only will we have input from our staff, but we are looking for people to come actually say, yes, I want to be part of this, and take ownership of their area.
Because that's what we have been lacking in there.
Draw park has been neglected for so, so long that people just don't believe the administration anymore.
They don't believe -- not this administration but prior administrations.
They just don't have that warm and fuzzy feeling about the administration, about anything that's happening with the city.
So I think once we get that under way, and hopefully we'll have 75 to 100 people at this meeting, it will give us a little more -- they will give us a little more comfort.
And they will take ownership that they really deserve.
So I just needed to say that.
Mr. Huey.
>>> Okay.
What I wanted to do at this point was really just give you an update on the CRAs and what the urban development department has been doing.
I'll put this on the Elmo.
Just to remind you about the mission of this department.
Remember, this is a new department.
This is our first year.
We are still getting our legs under us and appreciate your patience in that regard.
But this is our mission, to take actions that generate sustained and widespread private market reaction, which improves the quality of life of affected communities, CRA areas, thereby making them more attractive, convenient, environmentally healthy and economically strong.
That's what we are about, day in and day out.
And I wanted to share with you exactly what that means.
At the first level it means being responsive to development interests that are currently looking at our CRAs.
We spend a lot of time trying to attract private investment.
And when it comes to our door, our very first priority is to work with that private investment opportunity.
I have for you -- have they been distributed, aerial maps of each CRA?
We'll didn't them now.
It's not my intention to go through them in great detail.
But to give you an idea of this, these are tools we keep in front of us every day.
They reflect our knowledge of private investment activity occurring in each CRA.
And we monitor each of these projects from the first time that they might come into the regulatory approval process all the way through permitting, and construction.
And do everything we can to make sure these sorts of initiatives by the private sector succeed.
The first one is one downtown.
And again you can see the number of projects being tracked.
About $2.5 billion in private investment.
That is looking at our downtown.
And all of those projects again consume a lot of our time and attention.
In addition, in the downtown area, of course, we have been working on the Central Park redevelopment project that you're aware of.
And recently you heard about the work that we have been doing relating to the art museum and the role that it might play now in the redevelopment of our downtown.
So a lot of things happening in downtown.
There's a map of East Tampa.
And again you can see the kinds of projects happening there.
Just to highlight three of them.
Number 1, 4 and 14.
Significant multifamily projects, collectively representing some $50 million of private investment that is looking to come to East Tampa.
And Ed Johnson and his team do a great job working with those developers.
Ybor City, you can see that the activity there.
Lots of smaller in-fill housing projects, very exciting time for Ybor as we see residential development increasing.
And Vince Pardo and his teamwork there.
Then the final chart is Drew Park.
And you can see the major opportunity there is the work that Hillsborough community college is doing to create a master plan that would bring in private investment into that CRA.
In addition, of course, on the west side of that CRA, the aviation authority is investigating significantly.
And we are looking forward to doing things that are complimentary to the redevelopment that they'll be doing.
Let me give you a feel for way mean when I say we come alongside these developers.
In the paper today there was an announcement about the Floridan hotel.
Very exciting for our downtown.
And let me just use that situation as an example of what the urban development team does day in and day out on your behalf.
The developer came to us, Mr. Marcopolis, informed he had it under contract and we had a 20 day due diligence appeared to assist him.
During the 20 days the following items were resolved and confirmed for him in writing, for he and his team.
First of all that they were grandfathered in under Land Development Code with respect to density, parking, setback, and encroachments and height.
Secondly, that we would be agreeable to removing parking meters on Florida and Cass.
Thirdly, that we would assist in providing curb cuts both on Florida Avenue, which is a DOT right-of-way and Cass, for entrance top that hotel.
We would agree to curb realignment, accommodate guest drop-off and pickup.
Canopies would be allowed on the city right-of-way.
We work with DOTs so a canopy could be done on Florida Avenue.
We counseled them on historic preservation, tax credits.
We counseled them on historic preservation, redevelopment guidelines, and how they would effect his redevelopment plan.
Reconfirmed his ability to restore the awnings above the hotel entrances, and restore rooftop signage.
We gave release from existing code violation cases and fines.
We dealt with him on fire escapes.
The fire marshal achieved building inspector gave numerous code interpretations.
We confirmed wastewater, water, fire supply installation, capacity fees.
And there's four or five other items.
All of that was done in a 20-day period with a whole group, a team across the city, that was rallied through temperatures of the urban development department to allow Mr. Metropolis on the Floridan hotel and those folks included Steve Daignault, Cindy Miller played a critical role, Sammy Sedolla, Dave Parkinson here, Roy LaMotte, Gloria Moreda, Del Acosta, Annie Hart and many other as cross the city.
That I might not even know, all rallied to come along side that private market opportunity and make it happen.
And that's what these folks do day in and out.
>>ROSE FERLITA: That same group that rallies, you know, I can't speak for anyone else, and I don't know what amount of contact you had with my colleagues, but, gosh, sometimes this City Council and CRA body would love to be part of the group that rallies.
It's always distasteful to me to read about this in the paper instead of having a heads-up from you, or the administration, or some representatives, say, hey, guys, this is what's going on.
Obviously we would be excited.
And I don't know what else we could extend or add to what has already been done in incredible teamwork.
But I continue to emphasize, not in an add very serial way, but team effort is what it's all about, legislative, why don't you let us know before the Times and Tribune let us know?
Can you respond to that?
>> Again, we'll we just keep getting better on communication and to talk today would be how to better serve you.
>> That would be a good example.
I'm sure if you had served that with Ms. Alvarez, she gets excited about CRA issues and CRA districts.
I guarantee she would have made an stream effort to lend communication to us in an appropriate way that this was coming our way.
We really have not gotten better at that.
We continue to read it in the paper.
And I love the Times and Tribune but, gosh, I would love somebody from across the brick way to tell us things are going on.
It's a team effort.
That's what it's about.
So kind of think about that.
I appreciate it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Continue.
>>> Again, that's one part of what your team here is doing in terms of complementary private sector investment.
Any other questions about that, about any of the activity occurring?
Privately?
Yes?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that council learns about things when they are presented to us as rezoning applications.
But I think that Ms. Ferlita's comments are really on point.
Both about imminent projects and about the kind of strategic planning that the city, I know, is engaging in or trying to bring residential development here, or mixed use development there.
And I think the more conversation, the better.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
And, you know, I do have to agree with my colleagues here, Mr. Huey.
I did have a meeting with you last Monday.
And nothing was brought up about this.
Especially we talked about other things but we didn't talk about what was happening with the Floridan or anything else.
But, anyway, before we lose our quorum, I think we need to -- I think Mr. Carter needs to talk to us about the visioning plan for a second because we need to do some clean-up.
>> Yes.
What are the time limitations? Are you needed to break away in three minutes?
That is important.
Or recess.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Maybe we should take a recess.
>>KEVIN WHITE: We can take a recess and reconvene at 1:30.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Do you want to do that?
>>> Because we were looking forward to dialoguing.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think it's really important, we should get the council members who are not here now to be contacted and ask if they can meet.
Ask the chairman to let us reconvene.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We'll reconvene at 1:30.
(CRA in recess at 12:25 p.m.)
Tampa City Council
CRA continued
April 21, 2005
Afternoon session

DISCLAIMER:
The following represents an unedited version of realtime captioning which should neither be relied upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim transcript.
The original of this transcript may have been 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.


>>MARY ALVAREZ: Roll call.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
Okay, Mr. Huey, you're on again.
>>MARK HUEY: Economic development administrator.
I was going over the presentation with you this morning.
I was reminding you about our mission and was going to discuss that with you in three phases.
The first phase, I talked to you about how we work with private developers on a day-to-day basis.
The second thing is kinds of activities that we are engaged in are putting to use every redevelopment tool at our proposal to try to have more private investment.
What I'm handing out is a working document that our team uses to keep abreast of those sorts of activities.
And you can see at the top of that each CRA listed.
And then on the left side, we think of our tools as three tools.
We can make public investments.
For example, in a street improvement.
Secondly, we can take regulatory actions.
For example, we can as noted there effect transportation impact fees in an area.
And thirdly we can create incentives to encourage private investment.
And it's not my intention to go through this matrix with you in detail.
But again it reflects things, again like transportation impact fee, ordinances that we have been working on, overlay, zonings.
Presently, we are proposing in Tallahassee an expansion of our enterprise zone.
As you know, that's a very important tool for our city to encourage job creation, and we are working to expand that, particularly to benefit East Tampa.
If we are successful, the enterprise zone will now include all of the East Tampa CRA.
So in addition to working with private developers, we are very proactive, trying to use every redevelopment tool that we have in the tool box to incent and encourage private investment.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Before you go on, Mr. Huey, will you explain to my colleagues here about the CRA bill that's presently up in Tallahassee and what's happening with that?
Are you keeping up with that?
>>> Yes, I am.
And it's a moving target.
There are many variations.
This is somewhat of an annual event in Tallahassee, where the counties and cities reconsider how CRAs are created, and the mechanics of that.
And there are presently bills being considered on both sides of Tallahassee that would significantly impact cities' abilities to create CRAs as a redevelopment tool.
We are working on the ground through our own staff in Tallahassee in those matters, as well as cooperating with the League of Cities, and have been for the better part of this year, anticipating that there would be some legislation like this.
Again, there's a lot of variations to it.
And I didn't come prepared today to share with you all.
But I would say there are things being proposed that you as the City of Tampa CRA board, it would limit your abilities in the future.
And so those are things we are very sensitive to, and wanted to interact with in Tallahassee.
I don't know what the outcome will be.
Again it's a moving target.
But we are engaged with it.
And particularly through the League of Cities.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
I also want to report that being a member of the Tampa Bay regional planning council legislative committee, I encouraged the regional planning council to go ahead and send a letter in opposition to the two, the Senate and the house bills.
They unanimously approved that and went ahead and sent the letter.
Go ahead.
>>MARK HUEY: Thank you.
Again, we work constantly trying to put whether it's brownfields, impact fees, working with city staff departments, to bring city budget for road improvements and other things into the CRAs.
And it's a constant bit of activity.
Ms. Saul-Sena?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have some questions about these but I might be the only one interested.
So we can make appointments with you.
>>> Yes.
>> After this to go over this in greater detail?
>>> Yes.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes, I'm sorry, a specific question.
We need to offer a waiver of impact fees in the downtown district at this time, do we?
>>> There's an impact of impact fees in the schedule particularly to incent residential development so there's a reduced impact fee that supports a public policy of encouraging residential in downtown.
>> But none for commercial?
>>> No.
There's an impact fee schedule for downtown.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: And I believe Mr. Parkinson is looking into putting a waiver for the commercial -- well, for the CRA districts but especially for the new parking area.
>>MARK HUEY: Yes.
We are lag forward to moving forward shortly on a transportation study that would -- the end result of which would be a recommendation to you on a reduced impact fee schedule for Drew Park that would incent some of the kinds of redevelopment that we would like to start seeing in Drew Park.
So that's part of the TIF budget that you just approved for Drew Park is the funding for that study.
>> So you can well see what's going on in Drew Park, very little, and that's because it's been a challenge trying to get the residents and the businesses in there to take ownership, like I said before, that nothing has been happening.
So you can see the only one that's doing anything is the aviation authority.
And so we are looking forward to the May 17th meeting.
Go ahead.
>> Salvatore: (off microphone)
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If you look at what we have done in Ybor City, we have invested in parking structures to relieve the burden of providing parking, to encourage the redevelopment.
I think the downtown -- I thought we were doing that, also.
I know one of the things, that four blocks of state land on Franklin Street and get the state to give us, what I would hope is that we would ask the private sector to redevelop that, and it would be parking to conserve not only their proposal on those four blocks, but, you know, that portion of downtown.
Because right now, if you look at downtown, the amount of surface parking is ludicrous and it's not the best way to use it.
And I know right now, the impact fees are very, very high.
I think it's been successful in Ybor using TIF money for parking, to help spur redevelopment.
Maybe that's a policy that we'd like to look at in other CRA areas.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Something that we need to consider.
But we'll let Mr. Huey get to that.
>>MARK HUEY: Again, that's just an example of thinking about public investment, and the regulatory tools that we have as a redevelopment authority, and as a council, and putting those in place in an appropriate way.
So again those are the tools that we have.
Can you read that at all?
No, not really.
I'll talk you through it.
The third thing that we do, and that we are about doing, is planning.
So the first thing we do is just work with the private opportunities right in front of us.
Then even absent a plan, we have trying to use whatever regulatory tools that we have, whatever tools we have to encourage redevelopment.
But now we are also about trying to create five year strategic action plans in each of our redevelopment areas.
And the TIF budgets that you recently approved include funding for those.
Last year we worked on the plan for downtown, and you will be having a workshop on the plan that we have done for the Ybor vision plan.
And all of those are part of an effort for us to bring a tool into each CRA that allows us to dialogue with the community, and have an agreement with the community about the direction that we are going, and the best way to bring our TIF resources and our other regulatory abilities to help move the neighborhood forward.
And in addition, a plan that the private sector can rely upon and know the direction that the CRA is taking.
So these are very important planning processes for us.
When you talk about planning, everyone has different ideas of what plans are, don't they?
And so what I wanted to share with you now is the skeleton of how our team thinks about planning.
And as we are working with planning teams now that are in the process of being awarded scopes of services and contractings, the framework for the dialogue that we are having about the scope of services for the planning that they'll be doing, and get your feedback on that.
And again I'm sorry that this is hard for to you read. The three boxes in the purple are the first part of the process.
In each CRA area, we have CRA plans where we have received tremendous community input as to where they would like to see the neighborhood go.
And we continue to dialogue with the neighborhoods about what they want to see happen in their neighborhood.
The planning process that we're about really is geared toward bringing also market intelligence to that discussion.
What are the places where the private sector sees as opportunities in each CRA?
As you can imagine in each CRA it's very different.
Channelside, the private sector interest there, is very different than it is in East Tampa, and then that it is in Drew Park.
So part of what our planning process is, we are trying to look out five, six years, are what are the places where we can maybe invest that will complement where the market in the near term would like to invest?
So we want to be good at doing that.
And that helps establish for the CRA board, the neighborhood, and our staff team, a planning focus going five or six years out.
The pink boxes reflect another part of the planning exercise, which is to understand the current conditions in a CRA.
In particular, with what are the impediments to private market investment occurring in any neighborhood.
And the interest of the neighborhood, their goals being accomplished.
And so in that case we'll be looking at land use and zoning issues.
We'll be looking at infrastructure issues.
City services.
Other barriers to development.
And other available resources.
And again each CRA is very different in that regard.
For example, in Channelside, the most significant planning issue that we have is infrastructure.
Tremendous amount of private interest in coming into Channelside, but a number of significant infrastructure issues.
So you will see that plan particularly try to provide guidance on what the infrastructure needs exactly are, and how we can bring available resources including the TIF to the table to be able to help finance that infrastructure in partnership with the private sector.
East Tampa, very different situation.
There, for example, one of the key things we identify is a public service issue -- public safety.
And so they are increasing through the new district, police district, our attention to public safety as an important planning issue.
Drew Park has a major barrier to redevelopment with adult use businesses.
And that is something that we are going to have to address that's unique to that CRA.
So, again, each CRA, we are looking at what are the opportunities we have?
What are the barriers?
And in those current conditions.
And then the yellow box is just a bringing that together, and bringing it together in an action plan, and the second box down again reminds us of public actions.
Every plan that we will be bringing to you will talk about what are the investments that we can make?
What are the regulatory actions that we can take?
And war the incentive programs that we can put in place?
And you will get the first real feel of that when you see the Ybor vision plan.
The visit actually breaks out all the consultant's recommendations in those categories.
And we would expect that then to complement what the private sector is going to be doing, and other agencies that will affect the redevelopment area, whether that be DOT or Hartline or the University of South Florida or others who can be part of the redevelopment effort.
And part of that is also a financial plan, of course, that allows us to all have a comfort, that what we are putting in a plan is actually executable and that the private sector can in fact rely on.
We are working right now in the Channelside district and in East Tampa and in Drew Park to work with those consulting teams that have been selected with this planning skeleton to finalize their scopes of services, and then begin to move forward on each of those plans.
So that's the third major category of work that your urban department engaged in that I wanted to update you on.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Any questions for Mr. Huey?
I think that's great.
Thank you, Mr. Huey, for bringing us all these things that are happening.
I know some of my colleagues are a little frustrated.
But it's the behind-the-scenes work that needs to be done before it comes to us, because that's where our questions will be then.
>>> Yes.
And one of the reasons I wanted to come before you personally today was because of the discussion that occurred at the last CRA board meeting where you all began to feel the weight of more work, and that we have many more CRAs in place, and your workload has more than doubled really at the last year.
And it is a significant responsibility.
And we certainly are feeling that on the staff side.
I will assure you, as we have trade to get our arms around all of this activity.
And we want to again -- if there are some things that we can talk about now, I certainly heard loud and clear more communication about critical projects that are going on in CRAs.
And in that regard, would the aerial maps, the tracking maps that we have, if we sent those to you on a monthly basis updated, would that be helpful in that regard?
>> Great.
>>MARK HUEY: What other things can we be doing?
Again, there was quite a bit of discussion about having longer meeting, maybe meeting more often.
There was some discussion, as I recall, about meeting within the CRA areas.
I really wanted to continue that dialogue and get the input that maybe we can work with to craft an improved communication and coordination and help you feel like you're on top of a bigger workload.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I love the idea of meeting within the CRA area itself, and perhaps council as CRA could go on a tour of some of the projects.
I think that that, in addition to regular meetings, would be very valuable.
>>> I think one way -- and it was mentioned earlier -- the CRAs meet all the time in the communities.
And one idea is to really try to take time during the course of the year for each of you to visit, as a participant, not as sort of the authority coming in as City Council, but as Mary and others of you, Kevin often comes into East Tampa events and each of you participate in different CRA events.
And I think that's a great way for you to be visible as council.
And we want to continue to encourage that, and maybe encourage you to do more.
It means a lot to residents when they see you come in.
Not in your sort of decision making role but as a concerned public servant, and wanting to just sit in on a meeting and be part of the dialogue.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: You will have your chance May 17th.
>>KEVIN WHITE: I was going to suggest as well, you're asking for input.
When you have your staff going out to the area CRA meetings, if they could come up with some sort of meeting summary, maybe key issues, key points, that either staff brought up and/or the community brought up.
And disseminate it to all of the council members via e-mail or memo.
In that case, then we'll know the things that are of interest to you, your department as well as the constituents.
And then if it's something that piques our particular interest that we feel as an individual council member that we need to get involved with immediately, then that helps us out a lot.
And when they say when is that meeting for that particular district I want to be involved.
>>> So digest.
>> Just a brief synopsis.
Absolutely.
Not a ten-page document.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I'd like to ask Mr. Territo to look into that 1982 document, see what we can do about that, maybe amending.
Sal: I'll have to loop if that was one of the quality or not.
It was done in '82.
It was readopted as recent as 2003.
I can look at that particular provision.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Maybe what you ought to do is just take a look at it again and bring it back to us.
And then we can make a decision when we have a full body.
And staff of course.
I'm sure Mr. Territo will talk to them about that.
>> Sal Territo: The language is more than just mandatory.
If the CRA wants administration to not consider that, but it wasn't a mandate.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
>>MARK HUEY: One of the things I might suggest if weigh could work with you to change the agenda.
We haven't given a lot of attention to the CRA board meeting agenda.
There were some suggestions earlier.
I think the idea of taking care of our action items at the beginning of the meeting is good.
But then there was a suggestion of having updates.
And I think what I'd like to do is maybe have a place on the agenda where any of our CRA managers can come and give you sort of a mini-update of current activities that are going on that they think are of importance.
And then also having a place where, if there's something more in-depth in a CRA, that weigh would like to brief you on, that we would have a place on the agenda for that as well.
Like a planning exercise that we're about to go through or some important recommendations that we think are beginning to come out of a planning process that would like to have you begin thinking about.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Colleagues, why don't you let me meet with Mr. Huey on that, and to form some ideas on that.
Would that be all right with you?
Okay.
That's good.
Are you going to bring up the business plan?
>>> The Ybor visioning conference is coming to foreclosure and we are excited to bring that in front of you.
It hasn't happened before in Ybor where there's been such an effort to try to bring so many people together and build consensus about the future of Ybor.
And there's been nearly some 20 meetings between focus groups and larger meetings to try to create that widespread community involvement.
And Vince has been leading that charge and we appreciate your efforts.
>>VINCE PARDO: Thank you.
Congratulations for the election.
Vince Pardo, Ybor City Development Corporation.
Of course, if we have questions I would be glad to address it.
I gave you a proposed time line, would like to discuss with you.
And I know all of you have received your own copy of the vision plan, which is on our web site.
Every generation has been updated on our web site and continue to advise the community of that.
We had a very good community meeting last Tuesday.
Two of our council people, the chairman being one of them, attend to hear the community's feedback about the consultant to the plan.
And we have also had a lot of individual meetings, as Barbara has indicated, with focus groups, with geographic groups, with special interest groups.
Last Friday, we had a meeting with preservation round table which she co-chairs that. Was a very good dialogue.
So every one of these is going to be an open dialogue of this sort.
We have the April 5th addition which is the final addition up to this point.
The next step is to bring to this council.
We realize we talked with staff.
In fact, the reason she has been hanging around -- Cade has been hanging around is she has on a calendar to come back on the 5th with a wet zoning workshop, and we thought for two reasons, one, since I servo -- on a committee, with usually a little more time, to get the information you really want to get into, but more importantly, we thought it was important, because a lot of the wet zoning issues are city-wide.
A lost them we know are going to be based on Ybor, that you receive and comment back to us on the vision plan for Ybor before you make some firm decisions on modifying any of the wet zoning policies than we currently have in the city especially processing and how things dry up as we talked a little about this morning.
Because of that, what we are doing is asking that you consider the timetable I put together here.
In order to have the vision plan and workshop, and we can get the consultant back in town on that date on the 5th, we are asking that technically the CRA make a recommendation to City Council that council postpone their wet zoning workshop, which is scheduled at 1:30 on the 5th, in order to have the vision plan workshop first and give the council then time to reschedule the wet zoning workshop.
That's a consideration we are doing as a CRA to council recommendation.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So the motion then, Mr. Pardo would like, is to have the visioning workshop on May 5th at 1:30, and it shouldn't take more than an hour, and it should take place prior to the public hearing.
So that way we have the chance to discuss any points that we want to.
>> Would we still have the wet zoning at 2:30 then?
>> You already have something at 2:30.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: How about 3:30?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: 2:30 is the impact fees workshop.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Wet zoning we have been putting off for some time.
>> I know.
But we have to wait till our City Council meets because we can't move that.
City Council workshop, until we meet as City Council.
So I think --
>> can we do that after this?
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Reconvene again?
>> We could.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Or wait until April 26th to do it.
Sal: There's a regularly scheduled City Council meeting if you would like to do it at that time.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: But it's important that we get this visioning workshop out of the way.
That way, everybody will be comfortable with it.
And then we can open it up to the public.
And then we can vote on it, right, Vince?
>> Yes.
Looking at your schedule, we would suggest the 19th which would be two weeks after the 5th might be the perfect time for your schedule.
Again it's your calendar.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: May 19th we have CRA?
>>THE CLERK: You have CRA at 11:00 o'clock.
>> According to Ms. Saul-Sena she would like to reschedule now to 1:positive 30th?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
Because I think we are going to have a lot of discussion.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Should we do that first?
>>THE CLERK: Would you need to make a motion to change the timing of the meetings.
>> So moved.
>> Second.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We have a motion to reschedule the CRAs, always to 1:30?
No?
>> No.
>>KEVIN WHITE: Sometimes we get out of City Council meetings a lot earlier and we can jump right into CRA.
And the other thing, maybe we ought to meet at 11.
If we can get to it we can get to it.
But if it runs later, we can always reschedule.
Just like we did today.
Because if it's scheduled for 1:30, and we get done with City Council at 10:30 or 11:00 in the morning, then we have to come back.
We can always put it off rather than having a time certain for a later time.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What I would like, if we haven't completed council by noon, I'd like to put off the CRA till 1:30.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: We can do that on a case-by-case basis.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I withdraw the motion.
>>KEVIN WHITE: But by the same token, the same thing we did last week, I don't want to the become a problem, just in case we run over in City Council at noon, and we can wrap up City Council in the next 20 to 30 minutes, or say up to 12:45, because it's on the last issue.
Then all of a sudden we end up cutting ourselves short to be back by 1:30, you know, to pick up on the CRA, or any other meeting.
1:30 is fine.
Like I said, it's fine if it's later.
But we just can't do it earlier.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: So you withdraw that motion.
Would you like to make the motion to schedule the visioning workshop for May 5th at 1:30?
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
I move that we schedule that for May 5th at 1:30.
I think that an hour is slightly optimistic.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, since I went to the workshop that they had at the YCDC, it took about an hour.
It wasn't that much longer.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that based on the conversations we had about the preservation, there's a lot of concern about what the content of it is.
And I think a lot of people will come.
I think there's a lot of interest on it.
>> We'll make it for May 5th at 1:30.
Is there discussion on that?
We have a motion and second to move the visioning workshop to May 5th at 1:30.
All in favor please indicate by saying Aye.
Motion passes.
Did you want to say something?
Okay.
Then the next thing we have to do is, we'll still have the impact fee workshop at 2:30.
Or right after that.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, if I had to choose between the importance and timeliness of wet zoning issues or impact fees, I'd go with wet zoning.
I think we as council have grappled with wet zonings a lot more and I think the impact fees, wet zonings is more important significantly.
If we had to choose one, I would rather reschedule the wet zonings for 2:30.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Then we have to wait till April 26th to do those two.
Because as it stands right now, May 5th at 1:30 is our visioning workshop.
April 26th we are going to try to change the 2:30 impact fee workshop and the wet zoning workshop to another date.
Well, one of them is going to stay.
Okay?
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I appreciate your asking, Madam Chair.
Again, I say sort of tongue in cheek.
There is no CRA in north Tampa.
I'm a district rep.
And so I have got the focus of what, you know, you all have CRAs, and it's more of a germane issue to you.
So I will make as many meetings as I can.
But please don't tray to work the schedule around me.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: I'm not.
I just want your input on this.
And I appreciate your comment on that.
But you are CRA member.
>>SHAWN HARRISON: I am.
And I appreciate that.
I would prefer, if there is a way for us to not schedule Thursdays, the entire Thursday for meetings.
Now, I realize that is not an important issue to some council members.
But for me it is.
And even coming back at 1:30 is sometimes a struggle for me.
This is an important meeting. The May 5th Ybor visioning process is important.
And I think we need to do that at 1:30.
But to say we are now going to have another meeting at 2:30 that day, I would prefer weigh not go down that route.
>> Okay.
We'll wait until April 26th.
>>> let's see what happens on the 26th.
>>VINCE PARDO: I just want you to understand -- I appreciate your getting time to discuss this because it is very important.
But what happens after the 5th?
The reason we are taking this as the CRA, because you are the agency that has the responsibility for this through state statute, is to pretty much sanction the plan as is, or with your input.
Following that, we will then have authority, so to speak, to get with the other departments and with the community to then deal with the next phase, which is to develop the five-year action plan.
Part of the recommendation was proposed five-year action plan.
And we have had that in there.
And he's done that the best job in the community as possible.
One of the reasons we came to Ybor, there's a lot of nitty gritty we need to have in there.
The year one event plan, every year as it moves, the upcoming budget year, what comes out of that is the folks from year to year it's very important.
We are looking at May -- and it's rather aggressive to do this.
We are looking at from the month of May to have a series of meetings, which you would be included as well.
All of these meetings, I just remind you, are in fact publicly advertised meetings.
And to develop with each one of the committees, each one of the sections of the vision plan, to come up with those sections as Mark described.
And then come back to you in June as City Council for the CRA as the implementing agency to contract an agreement between the CRA and council, come back to you as City Council, with the five-year action plans to present to you to sanction.
And you will just be beginning to look at your budgets for the upcoming year and some of these will have implications on budget city-wide.
We we'll have a budget to do everything in here as well as the private sector.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: You aren't talking about the TIF.
>>> I'm talking about beyond the TIF.
If there are things in there for public works.
It could be as you see, the plans develop for East Tampa, Drew Park, as it talks about the parking department, there may be implications in policy, on budget, and the five-year action plans that each one of the CRAs will have.
>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Originally I'm glad you brought that up.
One of my problems with the list much projects is that some things are ordinances, some things are cabinet position and some things are things we'd love for the private sector to do but we don't have any ability to make them do it.
And I think it would be easier for council to digest all of this or the CRA to digest it, if you clump things together, wearing a legislative hat, wearing our CRA hat, things that are in the regular city budget and things that the private sector is going to do by the grace of God.
Well, Hartline, for example.
We would like them to do things to help Ybor but we can't sitting as counsel or CRA to direct them to.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Did you get that?
>>VINCE PARDO: I got it.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Anything else that you all want to talk about?
>>VINCE PARDO: I appreciate it.
Thank you.
>>MARY ALVAREZ: Any other?
Okay.
We are adjourned.
(CRA adjourned at 2:20 p.m.)