Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
Thursday, March 30, 2006
9:00 a.m. Session

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

09:05:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:05:29 The chair will yield to Mrs. Mary Alvarez.
09:05:31 >> Thank you, Madam Chairman.
09:05:32 This morning, I am so pleased to present the president

09:05:40 of the West Tampa Chamber of Commerce, and also
09:05:43 president of the mechanical services.
09:05:47 I have known Rickie for many, many years when he was a
09:05:50 little squirt.
09:05:52 (Laughter).
09:05:54 And he's a fine young man who turned a business into
09:05:59 something that makes Tampa proud.
09:06:02 So I'm so pleased to present him.
09:06:05 So please stand for the invocation.
09:06:07 And stay standing for the pledge of allegiance.
09:06:24 (Invocation)
09:06:26 (off microphone)
09:06:42 (Pledge of Allegiance).
09:06:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
09:06:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
09:07:01 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
09:07:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ:
09:07:05 >>KEVIN WHITE: At this time.
09:07:08 >> At this time I will yield to Mr. John Dingfelder
09:07:11 who will do a commendation.
09:07:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Good morning.
09:07:38 It's always a thrill and an honor to make these

09:07:42 commendations.
09:07:43 And then it's always sad when we're bidding good
09:07:48 people farewell.
09:07:50 The first commendation I would like to give today on
09:07:53 behalf of City Council is to Thomas Capell.
09:08:00 Steve, come over and help me with this.
09:08:02 I've only known Tommy for a couple of years, but to me
09:08:07 he's just one of those go-to guys in our city
09:08:11 administration.
09:08:12 I had a question about Westshore improvements, or
09:08:15 Manhattan improvements or any of the other many
09:08:18 projects that he's worked on.
09:08:21 Don't be shy.
09:08:22 You know, Tommy is one of those guys you can call and
09:08:24 you know you are going to get a straight answer.
09:08:27 It's been an honor and a pleasure to work with him
09:08:29 over the last few years.
09:08:31 Steve, we'll have a few words from you.
09:08:33 >> This is unfortunately a bad day for 40th Street
09:08:37 because Tommy has been the mover and the shaker behind
09:08:39 the scenes keeping 40th Street on track, making sure
09:08:44 the design and money and the legal things and the

09:08:46 property and all those things are coming together.
09:08:50 We really hate to see him go.
09:08:52 But luckily he's not going too far so hopefully we can
09:08:58 keep in touch with him.
09:08:59 >> With that, Tommy, I would like to give you the
09:09:01 commendation that reads as follows: For the past 25
09:09:04 years Tommy Capell has played an important role in the
09:09:07 development of numerous projects in the City of Tampa.
09:09:09 Since your arrival September 1982 you provided
09:09:12 invaluable contributions to the city.
09:09:15 In your determination, experience and guidance have
09:09:17 been instrumental in the planning, and completion of
09:09:20 such project as the TECO street, 40th Street corridor
09:09:24 improvement project, in addition critical capital
09:09:27 improvement, improvements such as the widening of
09:09:30 Westshore Boulevard and the Cass Street and Laurel
09:09:33 street bridge rehabs, Davis Island and Ben T. Davis
09:09:37 rehabs all were accomplished under your leadership
09:09:41 skills.
09:09:41 These projects and many more benefit greatly the
09:09:46 resident of the City of Tampa.
09:09:48 Tampa City Council recognizes Tommy Capell for your

09:09:50 many contributions to our city.
09:09:52 And we wish you good fortune and good health.
09:09:56 And we thank you for your loyal performance.
09:10:00 (Applause).
09:10:06 >> I've worked with council members, Mr. Harrison, Ms.
09:10:10 Ferlita, Ms. Alvarez, on and off for a good course of
09:10:13 the years and I have always enjoyed the relationship I
09:10:16 have had with all the council members.
09:10:18 Working for the city has been a fun experience.
09:10:20 It's been invaluable as far as my own personal and
09:10:23 professional growth is concerned.
09:10:25 The hardest thing is walking away from fine people
09:10:28 that you have known and garnered relationships over
09:10:31 the years.
09:10:33 As councilman Dingfelder said I've only moved two
09:10:35 blocks down the road.
09:10:37 I have taken a job at Hillsborough County.
09:10:39 We are trying to make our relations a little bit
09:10:41 better between both organizations, and started again
09:10:46 this week.
09:10:46 I have gotten some calls, requests from the city and
09:10:49 also the county.

09:10:50 Some city information.
09:10:51 I'm hoping that what little things I can do, to help
09:10:55 bring the city and county closer together, does work,
09:10:59 and I will certainly do my best.
09:11:01 And I have a lot of good friends here and I applaud
09:11:03 you all.
09:11:04 Thank you.
09:11:04 (Applause).
09:11:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And Mahdi.
09:11:19 If you pan the camera you can see we have quite a few
09:11:22 staff people to support Mahdi and Tommy as well.
09:11:26 I'll probably get a little choked up.
09:11:28 Mahdi and I seemed to hit it off right away.
09:11:31 And I don't know exactly what it was.
09:11:35 But personally and professionally.
09:11:40 So I'll just jump into the commendation before I get
09:11:45 sloppy.
09:11:46 Mahdi Mansour has served the City of Tampa since
09:11:49 January 1988.
09:11:51 During the past 18 years, your contributions to the
09:11:53 city have been both numerous and significant.
09:11:56 You have shown guidance and leadership in managing the

09:11:58 growth of more than 10,000 acres which our city has
09:12:01 grown during that time.
09:12:03 This increase included developments such as Tampa
09:12:05 Palms, meadows, Grand Hampton, K-bar ranch among
09:12:10 others.
09:12:11 Obviously Mr. Harrison's territory there.
09:12:13 Utilizing your highly developed work planning skill,
09:12:16 Mr. Mansour has supervised land acquisitions for the
09:12:19 proposed east-west roadways, as well as many other
09:12:23 high profile roadway improvements.
09:12:26 We present him -- in presenting a professional
09:12:29 approach, in dealing with the public.
09:12:33 Mahdi Mansour has served well the City of Tampa and
09:12:35 its residents.
09:12:36 Therefore it is both fitting and proper that the Tampa
09:12:38 City Council recognizes your contributions to your
09:12:41 fellow citizens.
09:12:42 We wish you well in all your fought endeavors.
09:12:44 And we thank you for your many years of service.
09:12:48 (Applause).
09:12:57 >>> Between the -- between the two goes a whole lot of
09:13:01 corporate knowledge.

09:13:02 Certain Mahdi has been just an outstanding
09:13:05 representative for the City of Tampa in every venue
09:13:08 that he's participated.
09:13:09 And we are certainly going to miss his leadership and
09:13:12 all of the knowledge that he has about the city.
09:13:15 So we wish him well.
09:13:17 Again he's not going too far.
09:13:18 And hopefully we can still keep in touch with him and
09:13:21 pick his brain when we need to.
09:13:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm going to jump in.
09:13:34 Mahdi was intern public works director since Jack left
09:13:39 and just did a Yeoman's job.
09:13:42 Unfortunately the private sector snatched him away and
09:13:46 we know he's going to do great things in the private
09:13:48 sector.
09:13:49 And we know he's not going to be far when we do have
09:13:52 our questions.
09:13:52 But again, Mahdi is the kind of guy as the public
09:13:56 works chairman, and so many traffic and transportation
09:14:01 issues in South Tampa, I knew if I wanted the straight
09:14:04 answer, this was the go-to guy and the one I would
09:14:07 always call on, on pretty much a weekly basis.

09:14:11 He will probably miss those calls. Anyway, I'll miss
09:14:14 you and the city will miss you.
09:14:20 >>> Thank you, John.
09:14:21 Thank you all.
09:14:22 I really appreciate all of this.
09:14:25 It's really a tremendous honor for me to receive this
09:14:27 great commendation from the city.
09:14:29 It's really been an honor to work for the City of
09:14:31 Tampa and work for the community.
09:14:33 I really appreciate your help your support and
09:14:36 friendship over the years.
09:14:37 And John said I will be around.
09:14:42 Thank you very much and God bless.
09:14:45 (Applause).
09:14:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mahdi and Tommy, I have been working
09:14:55 especially with Tommy on the streetcar board.
09:14:58 And he's been an invaluable asset to that board,
09:15:02 keeping us informed as to the progress and the
09:15:04 construction that was going on many, many years ago.
09:15:09 If it wasn't for him, and his team, I don't think we
09:15:12 would have had streetcar tracks.
09:15:14 But he's done a great job.

09:15:17 And I'm going to miss him.
09:15:20 He's become more than just a streetcar buddy but a
09:15:24 friend, and we are going to miss you, Tommy.
09:15:27 Please don't that far.
09:15:29 And Mahdi, we have been seeing each other for a long
09:15:33 time now, seven years, as you have been coming to our
09:15:36 City Council meetings, and you have always been very
09:15:39 professional.
09:15:41 And I've enjoyed working with you tremendously.
09:15:44 And you have been a valuable asset to the City of
09:15:46 Tampa.
09:15:48 There's been a lot of years, I can't remember how many
09:15:51 years, but it's been a lot of years, and certainly is
09:15:55 not going to be replaced very easily.
09:15:58 Thank you very much for all you have done for us.
09:16:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:16:02 I echo the comments of my colleagues.
09:16:04 And I just want to tell you that you both represent a
09:16:07 wonderful blend of professionalism and integrity that
09:16:12 is just such a pleasure to work with.
09:16:16 On a personal level, on a professional level, you're
09:16:18 so bright, and you have given such energy to your work

09:16:24 with the city.
09:16:24 Both of you have very challenging roles and I thank
09:16:27 you for the years you have spent.
09:16:28 And I really enjoyed working with both of you.
09:16:31 I respect you greatly.
09:16:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I'm losing two personal friends here
09:16:37 today.
09:16:38 And this is -- it's been tough for me to see this
09:16:41 happen.
09:16:42 I do think that we have a huge void to fill in our
09:16:45 transportation and public works department, because of
09:16:48 this departure.
09:16:49 What Tommy said about the improvement relations with
09:16:53 the city and county, I think that that's actually
09:16:56 quite possible.
09:16:57 My impression has always been it's not the staff that
09:17:00 ever has a problem working with each other from the
09:17:03 city and the county.
09:17:04 It's those of us that sit up here that seem to have
09:17:06 the problems.
09:17:07 So hopefully, Tommy, you can help bridge that gap.
09:17:11 I look forward to continue to work with you on the

09:17:13 MPO.
09:17:14 We won't be far away.
09:17:16 And Mahdi has become a personal friend over the last
09:17:19 several years.
09:17:22 We have enjoyed car pooling to work together, talking
09:17:24 about things, not only work-related but our families
09:17:28 and religious backgrounds, and all kinds of things
09:17:31 that you just never would really expect to have
09:17:33 between people like that.
09:17:37 So it's been a great honor to know, you Mahdi.
09:17:40 I know you are not going far either.
09:17:41 You will still be a neighbor, still be a friend, and
09:17:44 you can bet that we will never forget your cell phone
09:17:49 number and you will always be in the Rolodex.
09:17:52 All right?
09:17:53 >>ROSE FERLITA: I thought it would change the tone
09:17:56 here and maybe make this a roast but I truly cannot
09:18:00 think of anything sarcastic to say.
09:18:02 That's surprising.
09:18:03 Mahdi, as quickly as you were leaving towards that
09:18:06 door with all the institutional knowledge you brought
09:18:10 to us leaves.

09:18:11 So I said when we ran into each other, it is
09:18:16 certainly, certainly, absolutely our loss and their
09:18:18 gain.
09:18:18 And I wish you well and I thank you just like the rest
09:18:21 of the colleagues.
09:18:21 You're always there when I'm requesting you.
09:18:24 You have always been very, very helpful and you have
09:18:26 been quite the professional.
09:18:28 Congratulations to you on your new endeavor.
09:18:30 And we will miss you.
09:18:31 And Tommy, I don't know what we can do about helping
09:18:33 you with that relationship with the city and the
09:18:36 county.
09:18:36 But hopefully somehow we will be able to do that.
09:18:40 You won't be very far away.
09:18:41 So look forward to seeing you soon.
09:18:44 Thank you as well for the all the help you have given
09:18:46 me.
09:18:46 You are always quietly there.
09:18:48 And if I need to talk to you, ask you about some issue
09:18:50 that I have, that you have got the answers for me,
09:18:53 very forthcoming.

09:18:54 Thank you to both of you gentlemen.
09:18:57 Thank you very much.
09:18:58 (Applause).
09:19:06 >>GWEN MILLER: At this time Mr. Kevin White will go
09:19:09 and do a commendation.
09:19:36 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:19:37 Fellow colleagues, it is my pleasure this morning,
09:19:41 this being the third commendation for the morning.
09:19:43 And I was just adding it up.
09:19:45 The three people that are leaving, we are losing over
09:19:48 80 years in institutional knowledge with the city.
09:19:51 And Mr. Davis's retirement, I think it's a wonderful
09:19:59 day for him.
09:20:04 He's here every day now.
09:20:06 I'm going to read this commendation first before I
09:20:08 make some comments.
09:20:09 But the city of Tampa City Council commendation
09:20:13 presents George A. Davis, Tampa City Council would
09:20:16 like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on a
09:20:19 successful career with the City of Tampa.
09:20:21 Throughout your tenure, your professionalism and
09:20:23 dedication has always been evident to your peers,

09:20:26 co-workers and employees.
09:20:28 Your commitment to city government was aparent early
09:20:31 on when you started as a vocational advisor with the
09:20:35 community relations and currently been serving as the
09:20:38 manager of women and minority business enterprise
09:20:41 office currently known as the WMBE program.
09:20:44 We extend to you our thanks and appreciation for your
09:20:47 38 years that you contributed to the City of Tampa and
09:20:52 wish you our best in your retirement.
09:20:58 He started with the city when I was two years old.
09:21:00 (Laughter).
09:21:06 And when I first became elected, I went and toured Mr.
09:21:13 Davis's office.
09:21:14 And not only did he tell me what he did but he took me
09:21:17 around and showed me and made me look at what
09:21:20 everybody else did in this department and showed me
09:21:23 some of the things that we seriously need to look at,
09:21:28 city ordinances and things of that nature we need to
09:21:31 continue to follow.
09:21:32 And took me under his wing so to speak and wanted to
09:21:35 make sure that I was always very adamant about making
09:21:40 the city and all of its residents included in

09:21:44 everything that he would do.
09:21:46 And for that, George, I want to say thank you very
09:21:48 much.
09:21:49 Since then, we have also initiated this study which
09:21:56 the city contributed $200 that you to thanks to you
09:22:00 and your department.
09:22:01 We will be getting results of that very shortly.
09:22:03 And I just want to say thank you for your service to
09:22:05 the City of Tampa.
09:22:06 Thank you for your friendship.
09:22:08 Thank you for your guidance.
09:22:10 (Applause).
09:22:16 >>> First of all, let me give thanks to my Lord and
09:22:21 savior Jesus Christ for sustaining me through these
09:22:25 years, that it has been a tremendous experience.
09:22:28 Sometimes challenging.
09:22:29 But I would have given anything for this experience
09:22:33 that I had with the city for a long period of time.
09:22:35 And let me just say, you mentioned the start study and
09:22:41 you realize how long it has taken to us get to this
09:22:43 point.
09:22:44 But I want to pay thanks to the mayor of this city who

09:22:48 brought that to fruition.
09:22:49 You know, all of the things that we've gone through,
09:22:51 we finally arrived.
09:22:53 And let me give all the thanks to this council for
09:22:56 supporting that effort.
09:22:57 And with that, I just want to say thanks to all of
09:23:00 you.
09:23:00 It's been a real pleasure.
09:23:02 And I won't forget you.
09:23:04 But I will remember you.
09:23:07 Thank you very much.
09:23:16 >>> Good morning.
09:23:16 I would just like to say that I had the council of --
09:23:19 pleasure of working with George Davis.
09:23:21 My first 17 years with the city.
09:23:24 And he and Bobby Bowden were my mentors.
09:23:27 Almost all that I know I owe to them.
09:23:30 I am going to miss him but thankfully we will keep him
09:23:33 as a friend.
09:23:34 I want to get your phone number, George, and wish you
09:23:36 many, many years of successful retirement.
09:23:39 (Applause).

09:23:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Davis, come back.
09:23:44 You said you had some challenges.
09:23:46 But you kept right on moving.
09:23:49 And I'm very proud of you for the things that you have
09:23:52 done with this city.
09:23:53 And I know you are going to be missed a lot.
09:23:55 Because I'm going to miss you.
09:23:57 And I came on and we worked together, trying to get
09:24:01 the study going.
09:24:02 We didn't give up on that.
09:24:03 You finally got it going.
09:24:05 I thank you for that.
09:24:06 Continue doing the things you want to do now that you
09:24:08 are retired.
09:24:09 I know you are going to enjoy your retirement.
09:24:14 (Applause).
09:24:15 At this time we need to move the agenda for the public
09:24:18 comments.
09:24:20 Comes up after the agenda.
09:24:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So moved.
09:24:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Also, I believe you had a request
09:24:25 from the clerk to move the committee reports to

09:24:28 immediately following the approval of the agenda.
09:24:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
09:24:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
09:24:34 (Motion carried).
09:24:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Do any other council members have any
09:24:38 items to be removed?
09:24:42 If we don't, we will now go to Mr. LaMotte.
09:25:10 >> Case number B-06-18 special use for a church.
09:25:15 After I spent this, the petitioner requested to amend
09:25:18 the petition to a PD, to request a waiver from the
09:25:21 council.
09:25:22 So I would like to request to amend that petition to Z
09:25:26 06-72 to be scheduled May 11th as well.
09:25:32 That would be it.
09:25:35 >>GWEN MILLER:
09:25:42 >> I got the petition.
09:25:44 >>GWEN MILLER: There's nothing we need to do, clerk?
09:25:48 >>THE CLERK: We don't need to do anything with that.
09:25:50 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Ms. Lamboy.
09:25:58 Now we need to move to approve the agenda.
09:26:01 >> So moved.
09:26:01 >> Second.

09:26:01 (Motion carried)
09:26:04 >> Is there anyone in the public that would like to
09:26:06 speak on any item of the agenda that's not set for a
09:26:08 public hearing?
09:26:10 Anyone in the public like to speak at this time?
09:26:24 >> I think on today's agenda is the discussion of
09:26:26 the -- I asked the administration.
09:26:39 I think there's some people to speak on it and I don't
09:26:41 think they know this is the time.
09:26:42 It's item 9.
09:26:46 I just want to let people in the audience know that
09:26:49 this is the time if they wanted to speak on item 9
09:26:51 which is the Kiley Gardens.
09:26:57 This is the time.
09:26:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
09:27:03 >> I like your hat!
09:27:04 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 2902 East Ellicott
09:27:10 street three nights a week.
09:27:11 Then I just thank God for his grace and his mercy.
09:27:18 You all don't know what many to me, for me to be
09:27:20 standing here this morning.
09:27:21 And what really got me this morning, I want to talk

09:27:23 about Mr. Davis awhile ago.
09:27:25 I came here years ago, you people weren't even around
09:27:30 years ago, but Mr. Perry, he went to school with my
09:27:37 children.
09:27:38 But I want to say, though, that is a great black man,
09:27:42 and he went out with clean hands.
09:27:45 And that's the truth.
09:27:47 I don't know nobody in this town can say anything
09:27:49 negative about that man and I really appreciate it.
09:27:52 I used to be on every board in this town, property
09:27:54 rights, civil rights, human rights, civic association
09:27:58 and everything.
09:27:59 But that man, every time he sees me he always shakes
09:28:03 my hand and says, Mr. Knott, you doing a good job.
09:28:06 You don't get that from some people.
09:28:08 And they don't say you did a good job.
09:28:11 But I want to say the man went out with clean hands
09:28:14 and that's what I call a great black man.
09:28:16 I don't know anything ever said anything against him.
09:28:22 And, you know, this morning, I wish to God, bringing
09:28:28 all the department heads that speak this morning,
09:28:30 because you don't know what the agenda is all about

09:28:34 until the department heads come up and I am not going
09:28:37 to have a chance to come back and speak.
09:28:39 But would you all please do that?
09:28:42 You all always done that.
09:28:44 And that's my beef about speaking behind department
09:28:47 heads.
09:28:47 But it's kind of like for me, I come here for prayer
09:28:52 and then speak under department heads.
09:28:59 You know, I wish I can come back and speak on some of
09:29:03 that unfinished business.
09:29:04 Because I know you all said this morning like the
09:29:07 trees, you know, and some people come here and speak
09:29:10 on things and some people can't.
09:29:12 Thank you.
09:29:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:29:13 Next.
09:29:14 >>KEVIN WHITE: I think Mr. Harrison wants to borrow
09:29:18 your hat.
09:29:18 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes, that will complete the outfit.
09:29:32 >>> Ann borrow.
09:29:35 Kiley Gardens has met formally with City of Tampa
09:29:41 officials twice, March 8, 2006, both times have

09:29:46 expressed the following information: One, regarding
09:29:49 human, national local historic recognition, Kiley, the
09:29:53 designer of Kiley Gardens has been recognized
09:29:56 internationally as a master of landscape architecture.
09:30:01 Letters encouraging the gardens has been documented
09:30:06 from more than 30 design luminaries.
09:30:09 Kiley Gardens includes the New York Times, September
09:30:13 2005, March 2006, and land, the American society of
09:30:18 landscape architects, March 2005.
09:30:20 The designer and the design itself make Kiley Gardens
09:30:24 eligible for national registrar placement and historic
09:30:29 park status.
09:30:29 Even with current amendments, Kiley Gardens is
09:30:33 eligible.
09:30:34 The completed application has been with the mayor
09:30:35 since July 2005 awaiting only her signature to begin
09:30:39 the process.
09:30:41 Please visit Kiley for more information,
09:30:46 media coverage.
09:30:46 Two, regarding the Riverside garage complex.
09:30:49 Damage has been sustained to the Riverside garage due
09:30:53 to faulty waterproofing, your landscape installation

09:30:57 and general neglect that has exacerbated the problem.
09:31:02 The project will be undertaken whether or not the
09:31:04 gardens will be saved.
09:31:06 Chi friends of Kiley Gardens have offered research and
09:31:09 resources needed to do the project correctly.
09:31:12 If the project is handled correctly Kiley Gardens will
09:31:14 be eligible for public and private revenue.
09:31:17 It is also the hope to fund an endowment releaving the
09:31:20 City of Tampa of maintenance costs for -- for their
09:31:24 maintenance costs.
09:31:25 Our volunteers have been meeting for more than a year
09:31:27 now, once a month, to clean the garden, have a Kiley
09:31:32 Gardens clean-up.
09:31:35 We are -- didn't meet the 25th of March because
09:31:37 there was nothing to clean up.
09:31:49 Okay, I'm not finished yet.
09:31:51 Like I said, we did not meet the 25th because
09:31:54 there was nothing to clean up.
09:31:58 Our volunteers are committed, hard working, they are
09:32:01 professional.
09:32:01 We have invested our time.
09:32:02 We have invested our resources and our credibility

09:32:08 into the project.
09:32:09 We work with the City of Tampa.
09:32:12 Our continued efforts to save the gardens will
09:32:15 continue.
09:32:15 Thank you.
09:32:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:32:16 Next.
09:32:22 >>> Good morning.
09:32:23 My name is sue Thompson, 5098 creekside turretle,
09:32:29 Sarasota.
09:32:29 I have been before you all before and it's good to see
09:32:31 you again.
09:32:32 Thank you for indulging me for a few moments.
09:32:34 There's some confusion and also some discussion about
09:32:36 what needs to be happening in order to move this
09:32:39 forward.
09:32:41 We currently have a list of historic preservation
09:32:43 specialists who deal in historic landscapes and also
09:32:49 specialists who can assist the city in ensuring this
09:32:53 be put back so we are not ripping it out again 20
09:32:56 years later.
09:32:57 We do have the information available and can make it

09:32:59 available to Linda Saul-Sena and to the city as well.
09:33:03 Also the issue of the national register, we have been
09:33:06 talking with the Tampa Art Museum, and the adoptive
09:33:10 review of the park does not eliminate it from national
09:33:14 register nomination or status.
09:33:15 If you would like to make it a sculpture garden, if
09:33:18 you would like to update the technology for what's in
09:33:20 the garden today, that is all something that can be
09:33:22 done under the national register and that's something
09:33:25 that everyone should know, and it shouldn't eliminate
09:33:28 that.
09:33:29 So just a heads up to all of you.
09:33:31 Technology, materials are something that is looked
09:33:33 upon by the register as something that's necessary to
09:33:36 do sometimes.
09:33:37 Also, in working with the city, the concern that
09:33:43 obviously the crepe Myrtles, we had a frantic call
09:33:49 from someone.
09:33:49 We are trying to get a time line of when this is going
09:33:52 to occur, get a schedule in place that we can work
09:33:55 with the city, and quite frankly at every opportunity,
09:33:57 it's really been quite difficult to do.

09:34:00 They really haven't given us any information to let us
09:34:02 know what's going on, when things will occur, where
09:34:05 they might need input, and we are still here with our
09:34:09 handout.
09:34:10 We are still trying to help.
09:34:11 We are still trying to do what can be done.
09:34:13 Even if it means to help out to have review of
09:34:19 historic preservation specialists, who specializes in
09:34:23 this type of work to come here to Tampa, we would be
09:34:25 happy to help.
09:34:26 Thank you.
09:34:26 >>GWEN MILLER: thank you.
09:34:27 Would anyone else like to speak?
09:34:29 We go to our committee reports.
09:34:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I know we are going to get a report
09:34:39 from Mr. Daignault a little later.
09:34:41 I was going to encourage the friends of Kiley to stay
09:34:45 for his report.
09:34:46 Thank you.
09:34:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Public safety, Ms. Rose Ferlita.
09:34:49 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move resolutions 21 and 22, please.
09:34:53 >> Second.

09:34:53 (Motion carried).
09:34:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Public works, Mr. John Dingfelder.
09:34:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I didn't know we were moving those
09:35:05 ahead.
09:35:08 I move items 23 through 38.
09:35:15 >> Second.
09:35:15 (Motion carried).
09:35:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Finance Committee, Mr. Kevin White.
09:35:19 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to move 39 through 45.
09:35:23 >> Second.
09:35:23 (Motion carried)
09:35:25 >> Building and zoning.
09:35:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You're going too fast.
09:35:37 I need to recuse myself from 44 and 45.
09:35:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I will prepare the appropriate form
09:35:42 for you to file if you could state for the record what
09:35:44 the conflicts are and if we could have it revoted so
09:35:47 the record will properly reflect the vote.
09:35:53 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a conflict as to 44 and 45.
09:35:55 >>GWEN MILLER: 44 and 45.
09:35:57 Now building and zoning.
09:35:59 Linda Saul-Sena.

09:36:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like --
09:36:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So council would know based on your
09:36:07 motion last week I did provide a memorandum I put up
09:36:12 on the dais for you to look at.
09:36:14 I didn't have a chance for you to look at it but just
09:36:17 a requirement that when you do abstain, publicly state
09:36:21 to the assembly the nature of your interest in the
09:36:22 matter from which you are abstaining from voting, and
09:36:25 then within 15 days after that it will be filed with
09:36:29 the clerk.
09:36:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Inures to a special private gain of
09:36:36 a family member.
09:36:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:36:38 Mrs. Saul-Sena?
09:36:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move resolution 46 through 51.
09:36:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:36:46 (Motion carried).
09:36:47 Transportation, Shawn Harrison.
09:36:49 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move items 52 through 56.
09:36:54 >> Second.
09:36:54 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
09:36:57 Opposed, Nay.

09:36:58 (Motion carried).
09:36:59 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Move to set the public hearing items
09:37:01 57 through 59, substitution on 60, and 61 through 68.
09:37:09 >> Second.
09:37:10 (Motion carried).
09:37:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just for clarification, just for
09:37:14 clarification purposes with regard to the abstention,
09:37:19 madam clerk, the record does reflect that council
09:37:21 member Dingfelder did abstain from those two items?
09:37:21 Thank you very much.
09:37:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Shelby, item 61. Colonial Bank.
09:37:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 61?
09:37:41 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
09:37:42 My husband works for the Colonial Bank.
09:37:47 Do I have to abstain from that?
09:37:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: He's an officer of the bank?
09:37:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
09:37:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It would be my recommendation,
09:37:55 without having discussed the particular facts, but
09:37:58 knowing what I do know, it would be my recommendation
09:38:00 that you do abstain from that.
09:38:03 And I would file the -- submit to you the appropriate

09:38:08 paperwork to file.
09:38:15 >>GWEN MILLER: It's just setting the public hearing.
09:38:18 It's not the hearing yet.
09:38:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you for clarifying that.
09:38:22 For setting the petition, it would be my advice and my
09:38:26 recommendation that as a procedural matter that is
09:38:31 required to be set by law, setting the hearing does
09:38:39 not inure to your husband and therefore this matter
09:38:42 setting the hearing does not require.
09:38:44 Just a reminder when it does come before you, you
09:38:49 should sustain from the vote.
09:38:51 Thank you.
09:38:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Back to page 2.
09:38:54 Item number 3.
09:38:57 Bonnie Wise.
09:39:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I missed the discussion at the very
09:39:06 beginning.
09:39:06 Why did we jump to committee reports when some of this
09:39:13 staff --
09:39:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Going to approve the agenda.
09:39:15 We moved committee reports up.
09:39:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Because of the rationale for that is

09:39:26 the fact there are so many items under staff reports.
09:39:29 And to move it along.
09:39:36 To move forward on those items during the day.
09:39:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay?
09:39:44 Mrs. Wise.
09:39:44 >>BONNIE WISE: Director of revenue and finance.
09:39:46 I appreciate you giving me the opportunity today to
09:39:49 talk about the community investment tax process.
09:39:52 As you know, the CIT is --
09:39:58 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Bonnie, hang on.
09:40:00 Make sure the microphone is on.
09:40:01 It doesn't sound like it's on.
09:40:05 >>BONNIE WISE: I can speak louder.
09:40:07 I'm here today to talk about the CIT, the community
09:40:10 investment tax.
09:40:11 And as you know, the citizens of Hillsborough County
09:40:13 voted to approve this tax September 3rd, 1996.
09:40:17 Many of you have already been through this process.
09:40:20 We were talking about it today because we are now
09:40:23 embarking on the third five-year capital improvement
09:40:26 program.
09:40:28 The tax began December 1st, 1996, and as you know,

09:40:33 the revenues are distributed to the school board,
09:40:37 Sports Authority, to the county, and consequently to
09:40:39 the various municipalities within the county
09:40:43 proportionately based on population.
09:40:45 And what we have, we have a process where we are going
09:40:51 to have a series of public meetings.
09:40:53 I do have an overhead to talk a little bit about the
09:40:55 timetable.
09:40:56 This next five-year period will cover the years '07
09:41:00 through 11.
09:41:01 And what we'd like to do is provide the opportunity
09:41:04 for you as council members and for the citizens to
09:41:07 have input into that process.
09:41:09 So there are certaintiesing requirements.
09:41:12 But we have anticipated at this time are four public
09:41:16 meetings in the four single-member districts, starting
09:41:21 April 18, April 20, April 26, and May 3rd.
09:41:25 We have been coordinating that with each of your
09:41:27 schedules.
09:41:29 After we have those public meetings -- I'm sorry, if I
09:41:33 can backtrack a little bit.
09:41:34 After those public meetings and prior to, we will be

09:41:37 providing to you and to the citizens information about
09:41:40 what we have used the prior year's CIT money for, and
09:41:44 some ideas of means as we go forward with capital
09:41:47 improvement projects needs for the city.
09:41:49 We'll have those four community meetings.
09:41:53 And then there will be a requirement for an additional
09:41:55 public hearing.
09:41:56 And we want to give time to receive information from
09:42:01 the public, get your input, and then advertise for
09:42:04 that public meeting.
09:42:06 And right now we have that scheduled for June
09:42:09 15th.
09:42:10 That public hearing and than final meeting does need
09:42:15 to occur by June 29th.
09:42:17 That all gets incorporated into our budget, which
09:42:21 begins our fiscal year for October 1st.
09:42:23 So during this next few months it really is going to
09:42:25 be a time where we want to provide you and the public
09:42:28 with information regarding previous expenditures and
09:42:32 needs for the future.
09:42:37 And we will provide handouts at that meeting.
09:42:40 We'll have a PowerPoint presentation separately.

09:42:44 I have meetings set up on each of your calendars to
09:42:46 meet with each of you individually to go through it in
09:42:49 a little more detail.
09:42:50 But I wanted you and the public to know what is going
09:42:53 to be in store over the next few months, and the time
09:42:56 period for which those moneys we'll be addressing.
09:42:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions?
09:43:00 Mr. Harrison?
09:43:01 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Bonnie.
09:43:02 This is helpful.
09:43:04 What happens to money that was earmarked the last five
09:43:08 years that hasn't been spent by the time we get to the
09:43:12 end of this five-year cycle?
09:43:14 >>BONNIE WISE: That does happen sometimes.
09:43:16 In fact it even happened in the first five years,
09:43:19 several years ago.
09:43:20 And what we do is we bring those resolutions to you.
09:43:28 For example, in the first five years stormwater was a
09:43:31 big part of that first five-year program.
09:43:34 As we have other stormwater needs we bring that
09:43:36 resolution to you, earmarking those moneys for that
09:43:39 purpose.

09:43:40 We always have to use the moneys for the purpose in
09:43:42 which it was intended in each five-year period.
09:43:45 And this, for example, as revenues come in a little
09:43:48 bit greater than what we had budgeted.
09:43:51 We have those moneys available for you.
09:43:53 But it does require a resolution to come back before
09:43:55 you in order to spend the money.
09:43:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
09:44:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Could you give us pretty much an
09:44:03 overview of what it is that we collect the money on in
09:44:05 the last five years?
09:44:06 I know some of it would be parks.
09:44:08 But I don't recall the rest of it.
09:44:14 >>> Right.
09:44:15 Parks and rec.
09:44:16 In fact that was going to be my separate meeting with
09:44:19 you individually.
09:44:20 I'm not really prepared to talk about that today.
09:44:22 But a lot of investing in neighborhoods type projects.
09:44:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That is for sidewalks and things like
09:44:28 that?
09:44:29 >>BONNIE WISE: Yes, ma'am.

09:44:30 Yes, a lot of public works projects.
09:44:34 Fire.
09:44:38 Actually police and fire was very much in the first
09:44:40 five-year program.
09:44:42 And of course have debt service on our bonds.
09:44:46 We have a very expense -- extensive vehicle
09:44:52 replacement program.
09:44:54 I will be able to give you detail.
09:44:56 And what we want to hear from the citizens is what
09:44:58 kind of playground, what needs they need addressing.
09:45:03 Those are the kinds of things we want to hear.
09:45:05 >> Could we do another bond issue if we see that the
09:45:09 projects for the various parks need more moneys?
09:45:14 Could we do another bond issue?
09:45:17 >>> We have bonding capacity.
09:45:18 Of course, we have about $4 million in debt service
09:45:21 now for the bond issue that we have outstanding.
09:45:24 >> Which was about $17 million?
09:45:26 >>> The whole bond issue is about 54 million.
09:45:29 >> But 17 million went to the parks, if I recall
09:45:32 correctly.
09:45:33 >>> That could be.

09:45:34 20 million of course, 27 for the museum.
09:45:38 And then various projects.
09:45:40 We did have the capacity.
09:45:42 But I think it will be helpful for you if I show you
09:45:45 some of the needs of the department since we are going
09:45:47 through the whole CIP process to see some of the input
09:45:51 we have been getting from the department, fire, for
09:45:53 example, is going to be one that we really are going
09:45:55 to need to put some moneys forth on the CIT, really
09:46:01 have some fire station improvements to the station as
09:46:04 well as new station.
09:46:08 >> When does this CIT program end?
09:46:10 Or is it --
09:46:12 >>> It is a 30-year program.
09:46:15 >> Are we in a 15-year program now or --
09:46:18 >>> We are in the third of the five-year.
09:46:23 The first phase began September 1st, 1996.
09:46:27 >> Is there any possibility of extending that once we
09:46:29 get to the 30-year?
09:46:31 >>> When I read these documents they always called it
09:46:34 an initial 30-year program.
09:46:37 And you certainly would have to have legal look at

09:46:39 that.
09:46:40 But that is how they worded it.
09:46:41 Yes, ma'am.
09:46:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Bonnie might have mentioned this at
09:46:45 the beginning.
09:46:45 But what's your projection, ballpark, for the next --
09:46:51 and no pun intended, ballpark -- for the total amount
09:46:56 you think might be available?
09:46:59 >>BONNIE WISE: we are looking at about $16 million
09:47:01 total for the city, that we would have in the city
09:47:05 portion.
09:47:06 >> And for those folks, this was originally the
09:47:12 infamous stadium tax, but obviously it went and is
09:47:17 going to a lot of other things other than stadium.
09:47:20 >>> Yes, sir.
09:47:21 Of course it goes -- the bucket goes to the school
09:47:24 board, to the stadium, to the county, to the
09:47:27 municipalities, and we have done -- we get a quarterly
09:47:31 report from my office that talks about how we use
09:47:33 those CIT funds and everything from stormwater to fire
09:47:37 improvements, police, parks and rec, investing in
09:47:42 neighborhoods type projects.

09:47:43 We have really spread it throughout the city.
09:47:45 So it has been a great --
09:47:48 >> I don't think any of us can stress enough to our
09:47:50 neighborhoods and to our community folks the need to
09:47:54 come to these meetings and hopefully these dates will
09:47:57 flashback up on the screen, and then we'll have some
09:48:00 locations.
09:48:03 It should be on the city web site.
09:48:05 But to come to these meetings and give us their input
09:48:08 on, you know, what the community thinks that we should
09:48:10 be spending this money on.
09:48:12 Because it is the community's money.
09:48:14 Comes from the half-cent sales tax and we need your
09:48:18 input.
09:48:18 Thank you, Bonnie.
09:48:19 >>> Thank you for mentioning that because we don't
09:48:20 have our locations finalized just yet but we are of
09:48:23 course on mailing lists.
09:48:26 We will be advertising that in the newspaper as well
09:48:27 as on CTTV.
09:48:29 We really do want to get the word out where those
09:48:31 meetings will be held.

09:48:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: To piggyback on what Mr. Dingfelder
09:48:39 said, the last time we went through this, what
09:48:42 happened was when we had these public meetings there
09:48:45 were people there that were lobbying for specific
09:48:48 proposals that had already been floated out there to
09:48:50 the public.
09:48:51 And so rather than coming to us with their own ideas,
09:48:55 what we really had were people that were there arguing
09:48:58 on either side of what had already been proposed.
09:49:00 And hopefully this time around, we don't have quite as
09:49:03 much money to spend.
09:49:04 So we'll be looking at some smaller neighborhood-type
09:49:08 projects.
09:49:08 And if we could, just make sure, as Mr. Dingfelder
09:49:13 said, that this is the public's opportunity, don't
09:49:17 come to argue about something you might have heard is
09:49:19 going to be there, come to tell us about what you want
09:49:21 to see.
09:49:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: One more question.
09:49:26 We are not planning any more moneys to go for the
09:49:29 Museum of Art, are you?
09:49:33 >>> No, ma'am.

09:49:33 >> Because that would be a real contentious thing a
09:49:36 couple years ago.
09:49:37 >>> No, the discussions that we had internally so far
09:49:40 are really getting these out to the community, parks
09:49:44 and rec.
09:49:45 Investing in neighborhoods, as I mentioned.
09:49:48 Fire.
09:49:49 Really, those, I see, as the main needs in our
09:49:52 community at this time.
09:49:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
09:49:57 Thank you, Ms. Wise.
09:49:59 Item number 4.
09:50:14 >>> Good morning.
09:50:15 For the record, I'm Lee Huffstutler, the city's chief
09:50:21 accountant, bringing you the 2005 comprehensive annual
09:50:27 financial report of the city.
09:50:28 I would like to thank bill Ladd of my office and Alan
09:50:33 in the printing office who printed it and the other
09:50:35 departments, ITS, budget, housing, who did a good,
09:50:40 great job helping us put this together and the
09:50:42 auditors who I said last week, we got our money's
09:50:45 worth.

09:50:45 They did an excellent job.
09:50:46 We have with us today Lori Nissen of KPMG and Lisa
09:50:52 Connor who will speak when I'm finished.
09:50:54 I would also like to thank the mayor and for the
09:50:58 leadership and the council for the questions that you
09:51:00 posed to me this week, and to Bonnie.
09:51:02 You have some good, tough questions and some good
09:51:05 comments, and I appreciate your patience.
09:51:07 As I said in my memo to you, the report is good.
09:51:10 The city is growing well.
09:51:12 Assets are up.
09:51:13 Liabilities are down.
09:51:14 Revenues are strong.
09:51:15 Expenditures under control.
09:51:16 We had a good audit.
09:51:18 And I'm pleased with the results and I look forward to
09:51:21 continuing those results in the future.
09:51:23 With that let me introduce to you Lori Nissen.
09:51:29 >>> My name is Lori Nissen, a partner with KPMG.
09:51:32 And I'm going to distribute, in case you didn't retain
09:51:35 your copy from last week, what we call our required
09:51:39 communication letter.

09:51:43 We have completed our audit of the city's fiscal 2005
09:51:47 year.
09:51:48 We have met with the mayor and certain members of her
09:51:51 staff.
09:51:51 And we discussed the results in detail and responded
09:51:55 to their specific questions.
09:51:57 I passed out to you now required communications.
09:52:02 These are what's required by the auditing professional
09:52:05 standards.
09:52:06 And it's pretty boilerplate letter just to point out a
09:52:10 couple of things in there.
09:52:11 The fact that we have no difficulties in completing
09:52:13 the audit.
09:52:14 There were no disagreements with management over any
09:52:17 accounting issues.
09:52:19 We have no significant adjustments as a result of the
09:52:22 audit either.
09:52:25 The objective of our audit is actually to issue an
09:52:28 opinion on your financial statements that you received
09:52:31 last week.
09:52:32 And that was an unqualified or claim opinion that we
09:52:36 issued on your financial statements.

09:52:38 We also are required under government auditing
09:52:40 standards to issue a report on the city's internal
09:52:44 controls over compliance and financial reporting.
09:52:48 And that too was an opinion.
09:52:52 We did not identify any material weaknesses or
09:52:54 reportable conditions in the city's internal control
09:52:57 structure.
09:52:58 We also have the responsibility to perform what are
09:53:01 called single audits.
09:53:03 And these are over the city's federal and state grants
09:53:10 you received.
09:53:11 We audited several programs and that covered about 56%
09:53:16 of the city's total expenditures.
09:53:19 We also audited for state programs and that covered
09:53:22 about 80% of the city expenditures.
09:53:25 We did have some fundings and location locations of
09:53:29 the results of those audits.
09:53:31 Many of them again were in the housing area.
09:53:33 And unfortunately due to the time of management
09:53:36 transition in that department a lot of the things that
09:53:39 we identified were things that happened early in the
09:53:44 fiscal year.

09:53:45 There was some noticeable improvement in that overall
09:53:48 department towards the transactions we tested in the
09:53:50 latter half, and certainly that we would have minimal
09:53:54 if any findings in that area next year.
09:53:57 We also issue a management letter.
09:53:59 This is required by the auditor general.
09:54:01 And typically those are things that we bring to your
09:54:05 attention, suggestions for improvement in the
09:54:07 accounting area.
09:54:08 We did have a few insignificant items that we included
09:54:12 in there that we discussed with management, and
09:54:17 received very positive response on.
09:54:18 And then there's also some items in that letter that
09:54:21 are required to be included by the auditor general.
09:54:24 And one of those is called a financial condition
09:54:27 assessment.
09:54:28 And just to reiterate the points that Lee mentioned
09:54:33 when he first spoke was the fact that overall the
09:54:35 city's financial trends are positive.
09:54:38 You had an increase in your General Fund balance this
09:54:40 year.
09:54:41 And that was even after keeping your property tax

09:54:43 millage rate consistent.
09:54:46 And your unreserved General Fund balance is about 18%
09:54:50 of your General Fund expenditures, which is a
09:54:53 relatively healthy percent.
09:54:55 We see anything averaging from 15 to 25.
09:54:58 So you're right there in the middle, relatively
09:55:01 strong.
09:55:02 And then most of your other governmental fund balances
09:55:05 and enterprise funds increased as well.
09:55:08 And that's all I have for my prepared statements.
09:55:11 But I would be happy to respond to any questions that
09:55:12 you may have after reading the.
09:55:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Nissen.
09:55:21 Ms. Wise, I have a question for you.
09:55:24 Thank you.
09:55:24 A great job.
09:55:25 On KPMG's part.
09:55:28 Ms. Wise, the housing department issues a sort of
09:55:39 residual form but it sounds to me like the accountant
09:55:42 has okayed we are making good strides and next year
09:55:45 will even be better but what have you and the other
09:55:48 administrators done in regard to those type of issues

09:55:52 in cleaning up some of those financial issues with the
09:55:55 federal government?
09:55:57 >>BONNIE WISE: Well, I would really like to give a lot
09:56:00 of credit to Sharon Watts and Cindy miller who had to
09:56:04 really develop significant policies and procedures
09:56:06 that they are now implementing in that particular
09:56:08 area.
09:56:09 When didn't really have very good documentation, and
09:56:13 they really have developed those programs going
09:56:15 forward.
09:56:16 The other thing that we need to do with some
09:56:19 coordination amongst other departments, for example,
09:56:21 the revenue and finance department which does monitor
09:56:24 some grants, developing some policies and procedures.
09:56:27 So it's not only how the housing department works on
09:56:31 its own, it's how they interact with other
09:56:33 departments.
09:56:34 So that is really is significant improvement in that
09:56:37 area.
09:56:39 >> You feel very optimistic about the future?
09:56:41 >>> I do.
09:56:42 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We talked something about the bodies

09:56:53 in question, cost and so on, and there was some
09:56:56 question in there about the ship program.
09:57:01 And others.
09:57:02 But mostly mainly the ship programs.
09:57:06 Has anything been implemented on those that will keep
09:57:10 us away from the risk they are talking about?
09:57:15 >> That is one of the programs that they have seen,
09:57:20 issued some findings.
09:57:21 >> Did they revise the 2005 Ship report?
09:57:28 >>> Something typically when we come back next year we
09:57:31 follow up on the findings and we haven't been back for
09:57:34 in our own procedures.
09:57:35 I honestly don't know the answer to that.
09:57:46 >> Keep KPMG and of course Ms. White have done a great
09:57:51 job with these financial reports.
09:57:52 I did have some questions.
09:57:54 And they answered them to my satisfaction.
09:57:58 And I was pleased that the state of the city is in
09:58:03 such good shape.
09:58:05 And I want to congratulate you, also, you're doing a
09:58:09 great job.
09:58:09 Of course, you know, you did mention the housing

09:58:13 program.
09:58:13 And we know that we need a little bit more help on
09:58:16 that.
09:58:16 But I think like we said, Sharon west sitting on it,
09:58:22 they are bulldogs.
09:58:23 So they will continue to make our city whole as far as
09:58:27 the auditing department is concerned.
09:58:28 So I want to thank you again for all your hard work.
09:58:31 Thank you, Lori.
09:58:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
09:58:34 Thank you, Ms. wise.
09:58:38 At this time, item number 5 is asking to be continued
09:58:41 to May 11th.
09:58:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
09:58:45 I asked about this because I was very concerned when
09:58:48 there was a huge loss of trees.
09:58:51 And I thought the obligation of the corporation to cut
09:58:59 down the trees illegally was the largest that the city
09:59:02 had ever put on anyone.
09:59:04 And I was very curious to see if we had actually
09:59:07 followed through.
09:59:08 And it appears that we have begun -- and I'm glad that

09:59:13 I brought this up because maybe it will get us off the
09:59:15 dime in terms of actually implementing the penalty
09:59:18 that was levied previously.
09:59:25 >> Look forward to this report.
09:59:28 >>THE CLERK: I think the memo we received from legal
09:59:30 department is dealing with item number 72, the
09:59:32 continuation of the closure public hearing.
09:59:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But my question -- the people who
09:59:42 want to do the closure thing, I said before we move
09:59:44 ahead with that, I want to know where we are in paying
09:59:47 the fine on the trees that they cut down, and believe
09:59:50 it's germane.
09:59:52 >>THE CLERK: On item 5 they had provided a response to
09:59:57 council yesterday, March 28th, from city attorney
10:00:04 Jorge Martin.
10:00:06 They indicated it was not an issue of code
10:00:08 enforcement.
10:00:09 It was actually between the Parks Department, and that
10:00:11 Mr. Graham had indicated to plant to replace the
10:00:20 trees.
10:00:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm aware of that.
10:00:24 What I'm saying is, if I hadn't brought this up, I

10:00:27 don't know if it if we would be pursuing it and I'm
10:00:30 really eager for us to get some resolution to this.
10:00:33 And because this is something that's related to the
10:00:36 other issue before us, and because we haven't dealt
10:00:41 with it, I don't feel necessarily comfortable dealing
10:00:43 with the other issues before us yet.
10:00:46 I'm saying I'm creating a nexus between these two and
10:00:50 this has been ongoing for over a year.
10:00:53 >>> Rebecca Curt, legal department.
10:00:55 I think it's appropriate to have an update on the
10:00:57 status of the settlement agreement and I will be happy
10:00:59 to supply that to you.
10:01:01 I would just caution City Council from tying these two
10:01:04 items because the vacating petition when it comes
10:01:07 before you is to be judged solely upon that.
10:01:11 However, it is certainly appropriate for City Council
10:01:13 to be briefed and updated on the settlement agreement.
10:01:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Gina Grimes will come up and speak.
10:01:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Grimes, welcome back.
10:01:37 Nice to see you.
10:01:38 >>GINA GRIMES: Hill, ward, Henderson, 101 East
10:01:42 Kennedy.

10:01:43 I'm here this morning appearing on behalf of John
10:01:46 Grandoff.
10:01:46 As you know, John handled this matter.
10:01:49 He has a personal situation which has prevented him
10:01:52 from being in the office all week.
10:01:54 And I just yesterday spoke to Rebecca Curt for the
10:01:59 first time regarding this matter.
10:02:01 And I'm not fully up to speed on it.
10:02:04 And initially, I was going to come in and request that
10:02:08 discussion on this item be continued.
10:02:09 But I do know this, that Kimens has progressed very
10:02:14 substantially with respect to compliance on the
10:02:17 settlement agreement.
10:02:18 And while I can't give you the full details on where
10:02:22 it stands at this point in time as far as full
10:02:25 compliance with that settlement agreement, I do know
10:02:27 that they have substantially complied.
10:02:29 There's an issue that we are working with staff on
10:02:31 right now.
10:02:32 But I definitely believe that it should be separated
10:02:37 and not considered with the other items that you have
10:02:39 on the agenda.

10:02:40 There should not be a nexus between the two.
10:02:43 This is a separate, stand-alone settlement agreement.
10:02:46 And while we are in the -- aren't in a position to
10:02:49 tell you this morning there's full compliance, when do
10:02:51 believe there's substantial compliance with this item.
10:02:58 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mrs. Grimes, it looks like you were
10:03:01 given this at the last minute.
10:03:02 I'm more than happy to continue and then if Mr.
10:03:05 Grandoff is able to respond to it, fine.
10:03:07 But at least that gives you enough time to get more in
10:03:11 tune with what's going on if that will be helpful.
10:03:13 >>GINA GRIMES: and I know that staff is ready to come
10:03:17 up and say we have been working with them and we have
10:03:19 installed a substantial number of trees already.
10:03:22 I don't know if you are aware of that.
10:03:24 I saw the report from Mr. Martin.
10:03:26 They have I am stalled a substantial number of trees
10:03:29 on Kennedy and on Florida.
10:03:31 I know the report does not say that.
10:03:33 And again, while I can't tell you there's full
10:03:37 compliance with the agreement, there's substantial
10:03:38 compliance.

10:03:39 But Ms. Saul-Sena, this issue should not be connected
10:03:42 with the other matter that's on the agenda this
10:03:45 morning.
10:03:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Okay, we won't connect the two.
10:03:50 But this letter that Jorge says they put they owe 1600
10:04:00 inches, which to my math is less than 20% and I don't
10:04:04 think you can actually characterize as substantial.
10:04:08 20% I would say is not.
10:04:10 So why don't we hold this up for three weeks, get more
10:04:12 report back and see where we are?
10:04:15 >> That's fine.
10:04:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
10:04:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Are we going to continue number 5 until
10:04:22 May 11th?
10:04:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm talking about number 5.
10:04:27 Where we are in the settlement.
10:04:29 >>GWEN MILLER: They want May 11th.
10:04:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: May 25th.
10:04:39 >>THE CLERK: The legal department has a closure public
10:04:42 hearing.
10:04:46 I believe the memo from legal department is dealing
10:04:48 with the closure petition which is item number 72.

10:04:50 The request from Jimmy Cook for that to be conned to
10:04:54 May 11.
10:04:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Substitute --
10:05:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we hold number 5 for four
10:05:02 weeks?
10:05:03 Which is a report back from our city on how it's
10:05:06 coming.
10:05:09 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman?
10:05:16 How does that interact with this memo that we got on
10:05:20 agenda 5 that Jimmy Cook asked to answer to May
10:05:25 11th?
10:05:27 Madam Chairman?
10:05:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Curt said not to put the two
10:05:34 together.
10:05:38 >> There had been a requested petition for May 11.
10:05:41 These two items do not need to be tied together and
10:05:43 come back on the same date.
10:05:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It would be my recommendation they do
10:05:48 not.
10:05:49 I would be inclined to suggest that Ms. Saul-Sena's
10:05:52 would be the appropriate one and separate the two.
10:05:56 In advance of the public hearing, even though the two

10:05:58 are not related, would still have an opportunity to
10:06:00 allow the city to deal with the issues.
10:06:08 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to continue
10:06:11 item number 5 for four weeks?
10:06:14 Four weeks.
10:06:15 We changed to the four weeks.
10:06:16 All in favor of that motion say Aye.
10:06:18 Nay?
10:06:19 Okay.
10:06:19 Item number 6.
10:06:22 The public hearing is closed.
10:06:23 It's for first readingment
10:06:26 Mr. White, would you read that, please?
10:06:28 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance vacating, closing,
10:06:29 discontinuing, and abandoning a certain right-of-way,
10:06:32 a portion of north 36th street between east
10:06:35 1st street and east 2nd Avenue, to vacate an
10:06:38 unimproved remnant of right-of-way which was
10:06:41 inadvertently excluded from the previous vacation
10:06:44 petition, ordinance number 2005-159, which was
10:06:47 approved on June 9, 2005, in second revision east bay
10:06:52 park, a subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough

10:06:55 County, Florida the same being more fully described in
10:06:57 section 2 hereof providing an effective date.
10:06:59 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
10:07:03 (Motion carried)
10:07:03 Item number 7.
10:07:04 Transportation.
10:07:06 >>ROY LAMOTTE: Transportation manager.
10:07:16 I believe you received our report.
10:07:17 And highlighted the facts that you got relative to the
10:07:21 undergrounding of utilities on 40th Street.
10:07:24 We have a representative of TECO here with me this
10:07:27 morning as well.
10:07:27 They projected the project cost 5.5 million and there
10:07:32 are a number of significant issues and costs, up and
10:07:36 above the five million, the approximated four years to
10:07:41 complete such a project.
10:07:42 Again as you know the cost of each of the remaining
10:07:44 40th Street subject to increased cost as we have
10:07:48 experienced in other construction projects.
10:07:50 We are very close to that time when we'll be able to
10:07:53 advertise the date.
10:07:54 And our bid package has been approved by the local

10:07:57 Florida Department of Transportation, move to
10:08:00 Tallahassee for home review, and then it goes to
10:08:02 federal highway for final review.
10:08:04 I'll take any questions, or if you have any questions
10:08:08 to ask of TECO, they are here this morning.
10:08:13 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. LaMotte, if we were to choose to
10:08:16 pursue this undergrounding, what impact would that
10:08:22 have on our imminent bid letting for segment B?
10:08:30 >>ROY LAMOTTE: It would be significant.
10:08:31 Right now we are scheduled, as you know, cycle B is in
10:08:34 the process outlined and to put in additional
10:08:37 constraints on the contract would not only delay our
10:08:42 project, it would add significant cost to it.
10:08:47 I would not recommend that option at this time.
10:08:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
10:08:53 Thank you, Mr. LaMotte.
10:08:55 Item number 8.
10:09:00 >>ROSE FERLITA: Before we go to that, Mr. LaMotte, I
10:09:04 just want to make a comment to you.
10:09:06 We received this e-mail and also a call not too long
10:09:13 ago from one of the constituents in that area,
10:09:19 Terry Neal.

10:09:20 After sending the e-mail looked at the agenda.
10:09:23 It's in the agreement that any 40th Street agenda item
10:09:25 to come before council would be conveyed through
10:09:29 Shannon Edge to me to convey to my neighborhood
10:09:32 association.
10:09:33 So he called and I guess you're not doing that
10:09:37 presentation.
10:09:38 It looks like it.
10:09:39 Right?
10:09:42 I'm just relaying what came in to us.
10:09:45 Just ask Shannon if she would to keep them informed
10:09:47 when you do come up for anything.
10:09:52 >>> I apologize.
10:09:53 >>: You don't need to apologize.
10:09:54 It actually was coming through Shannon and it somehow
10:09:57 was, you know, a break in communications.
10:10:00 I'll give you this.
10:10:08 >> Actually, council, related to number 7, during this
10:10:13 legislative session, I wanted to share with council
10:10:15 members that there are some bills before the Senate
10:10:21 and the house to look at encouraging electric
10:10:26 utilities to bury, to look at cost sharing, and the

10:10:29 City of Tampa is monitoring this, and will let you
10:10:32 know how these proceed.
10:10:33 But particularly where they have so much additional
10:10:36 devastation by hurricanes, and they have had to put up
10:10:39 the poles three times, they are trying to get their
10:10:43 utilities to participate financially in the
10:10:45 undergrounding of them.
10:10:46 And, in fact, Florida Power and Light has agreed to
10:10:53 take 25% of the cost which is a great start and I'm
10:10:56 hopeful as we progress in our negotiation was Tampa
10:10:59 Electric Company that they will see the light and
10:11:04 consider some participation.
10:11:07 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chairman, what Mrs. Ferlita
10:11:11 said about the Temple Crest civic association, Mr.
10:11:13 Neal not being informed, I was not aware of that.
10:11:17 Mr. LaMotte, if you would please provide this report,
10:11:20 whatever this information that you have from TECO is,
10:11:23 to the president of the Temple Crest civic
10:11:26 association, and the business alliance that they have
10:11:30 there, and let them know if they wish to comment on
10:11:36 this, to come back to next week's City Council
10:11:39 meeting.

10:11:40 And the reason I say that is because wave not let this
10:11:44 for bid yet, if they think that 5.5 million is
10:11:48 something that they would like us to see happen and
10:11:54 are willing to let this project be delayed by that
10:11:58 amount of time, that we think it will take, then it
10:12:01 will give them the opportunity to try to get some sort
10:12:04 of meeting together and come back in and advise us of
10:12:08 that.
10:12:08 Not saying that's something we would instruct you all
10:12:10 to do.
10:12:10 But just so they have the information so they have got
10:12:12 an opportunity to respond to it.
10:12:16 And so there's this full disclosure on behalf of
10:12:20 everyone.
10:12:20 Because I am concerned that there is no one here from
10:12:22 Temple Crest.
10:12:23 And that typically they would be if they see that
10:12:26 something like this is on the agenda.
10:12:29 I'm not suggesting that we delay the bid process
10:12:31 whatsoever.
10:12:32 I just want them to be aware of the fact that happened
10:12:36 today, and if they want to respond to this that next

10:12:38 week will be their time to get in and do it.
10:12:42 >>> STEVE DAIGNAULT: Absolutely.
10:12:42 Council members, we typically -- and we try very hard,
10:12:47 whenever we know there's something from 40th Street
10:12:49 coming to get that word out, and we are probably in
10:12:52 the 95% accuracy.
10:12:56 Right now we are a little short in the transportation
10:12:58 area and I apologize for not catching all of these.
10:13:01 However, this particular item was discussed at our
10:13:04 last 40th Street meeting.
10:13:05 We meet with them monthly.
10:13:07 We go over these items.
10:13:08 At that time, we did not have this letter from TECO.
10:13:14 We did, however, have a discussion with the task force
10:13:18 regarding delays.
10:13:20 They are unanimous in not wanting to delay this.
10:13:23 We will nevertheless do as you say, get this
10:13:26 information to them, if they would like to come before
10:13:28 council next week and address it further, we'll make
10:13:30 sure they know about that.
10:13:31 But the task force was unanimous at our last meeting
10:13:36 with not wanting to delay this.

10:13:37 We are so close with getting it.
10:13:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Daignault, first of all.
10:13:45 when I say something and it's inaccurate I need to
10:13:48 apologize immediately and that apology goes to Shannon
10:13:51 Edge.
10:13:52 In conversation with Della Curry right now she was
10:13:55 never told by transportation.
10:13:56 So what I said awhile ago is absolutely wrong, Mr.
10:13:58 LaMotte.
10:13:59 Had she known she probably would have disbursed that
10:14:01 information back to them.
10:14:02 And whether or not you knew that information or
10:14:04 somebody represented the transportation department
10:14:07 knew that information after that last meeting I think
10:14:09 it wouldn't have taken much effort to just turn around
10:14:11 and call Mr. Neal or one of their representatives to
10:14:14 let them know about today.
10:14:16 Number one, I apologize to Shannon publicly because if
10:14:19 she doesn't know she certainly can't disburse it as
10:14:22 our neighborhood liaison.
10:14:23 So it's back to you, sir.
10:14:24 And I think we need to do a little better job of

10:14:27 communicating to them, okay?
10:14:28 >>> Council member --
10:14:29 >> And I know you are running short on personnel right
10:14:31 now.
10:14:32 That's a bad thing.
10:14:33 But still, if Shannon is charged with putting
10:14:36 information out in the community, and she doesn't get
10:14:37 it, you can't do it.
10:14:39 So Shannon, if you're listening, I apologize.
10:14:50 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We work very hard to get that
10:14:53 information out and will continue to do so.
10:14:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Why don't we take item 7 out and
10:14:56 continue it for one week?
10:14:57 It will be on the agenda.
10:14:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 8?
10:15:01 >>SHAWN HARRISON: No, 7.
10:15:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:15:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to continue item
10:15:06 number 7 for one week.
10:15:08 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
10:15:09 Opposed, Nay.
10:15:10 (Motion carried).

10:15:11 Okay.
10:15:12 Item number 8.
10:15:17 >>RANDY GOERS: Strategic Planning and Technology.
10:15:20 Mr. LaMotte has graciously allowed me to stand in for
10:15:26 this item. I'd also like to speak to item 14 because
10:15:27 they are both related.
10:15:27 Hopefully my report will take care of both items.
10:15:30 There are a number of things going on with the TCEA
10:15:33 and the review and the planning board.
10:15:35 And we went through all the items.
10:15:37 I can answer some questions that may tie them all
10:15:42 together.
10:15:42 The first is the comprehensive plan requires us to
10:15:47 produce and evaluation of the TCEA for the last five
10:15:50 years or the time the last plan was completed.
10:15:53 That evaluation has been completed answer transmitted
10:15:56 to the Planning Commission and they have incorporated
10:15:57 that into their final draft which was produced last
10:16:00 week.
10:16:01 That is available.
10:16:02 We can make that available to you if you would like to
10:16:04 see that.

10:16:04 We can get that from the Planning Commission staff.
10:16:07 Senate bill 360 which was approved last year in the
10:16:10 legislature requires all TCEA existing and new TCEAs
10:16:16 to comply with new requirements and new procedures for
10:16:19 the plan update.
10:16:21 We are required to amend it to comply with new
10:16:29 regulations during the next plan update which will
10:16:31 start in the next few months.
10:16:34 Guidelines, although the legislation requires new
10:16:37 procedures and requirements, the guidelines have not
10:16:39 been produced as to exactly what that means to us and
10:16:42 how we would amend our TCEA.
10:16:44 DCA working with the University of Florida, is
10:16:48 producing new a for local governments to amend their
10:16:51 TCEA.
10:16:54 Those are supposed to be available in March.
10:16:55 I spoke with -- e-mailed it to someone at DCA last
10:16:59 week.
10:17:00 They are now looking at early April for those
10:17:01 guidelines.
10:17:03 There will be draft guidelines that will come out in
10:17:05 early April.

10:17:06 DCA working with University of Florida will take those
10:17:09 guide liens and apply those guidelines to three
10:17:11 communities for a pilot project to assess the -- they
10:17:16 want to know how well their guidelines are going to
10:17:18 work and actually assessing the TCEA.
10:17:20 We requested that we be considered as one of the pilot
10:17:23 communities that when would like to get assistance
10:17:25 from those that are actually working with the state.
10:17:28 Wave not heard anything back yet from the University
10:17:33 of Florida or DCA.
10:17:35 The final a will be produced and made available to
10:17:38 local governments in September.
10:17:40 In September that's when the local government will be
10:17:42 looking at TCEAs and updating them.
10:17:45 Regardless if we get a pilot project or not, when the
10:17:48 draft guidelines come out in early April we are going
10:17:50 to start looking at the TCEA, bringing together
10:17:54 technical staff within the city and commission and
10:17:56 will go at what we need to do to update the TCEA.
10:18:00 One constraint that affects the successful development
10:18:04 of TCEA is that the TCEA is not a transportation
10:18:09 initiative, even though it focused on transportation.

10:18:12 It's a redevelopment in-fill tool, which is designed
10:18:15 to help reinforce development or support development.
10:18:18 So in order for it to be effective we have to get
10:18:21 through this growth strategy.
10:18:23 The conversation that you had with the Planning
10:18:24 Commission a few weeks ago about where growth should
10:18:27 go, how it should go, how fast, we need to get that
10:18:31 working in tandem in order to make the TCEA work and
10:18:35 support that.
10:18:36 So we can only get so far with the analysis of the
10:18:39 TCEA at some point in time, how does the TCEA relate
10:18:44 to it and work from that?
10:18:46 So those are the things that are going on. The good
10:18:48 news is that we are moving forward on the TCEA and
10:18:51 evaluation and the updated TCEA but we are still
10:18:53 probably a few months away from jumping into it and
10:18:56 having some results about the future.
10:18:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think you need to work on a
10:19:01 translation of this for the public.
10:19:03 I think a member of the public hearing this would
10:19:05 really find it very confusing.
10:19:07 There are a lot of acronyms, it's very, very hard to

10:19:11 understand.
10:19:12 So the next time when discuss this if you could like
10:19:16 provide examples and translate, that would be helpful.
10:19:19 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dingfelder?
10:19:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Getting back to basics, Mr. Gore,
10:19:26 the bottom line is the transportation concurrency,
10:19:31 section area of TCEA, creates an exemption from
10:19:34 transportation concurrency for everything in the city
10:19:38 south of Fowler.
10:19:39 Is that my understanding?
10:19:42 >>> Fletcher.
10:19:43 >> Fletcher, thank you.
10:19:44 Even farther up.
10:19:46 And as a result, I agree that it was probably put in
10:19:51 place a number of years ago to encourage growth.
10:19:54 But I think as a result it's now encouraged traffic
10:19:59 congestion especially in my district.
10:20:01 And if anybody else wants to complain about their
10:20:03 district or city-wide, feel free to jump in.
10:20:08 And as a result, I think that's why this council
10:20:10 started the discussion more than a year ago with
10:20:14 asking staff, without even knowing that the state was

10:20:17 will go at it, really, but asking staff to say, let's
10:20:21 get a little more aggressive, to do our own thing, and
10:20:24 to amend or modify the TCEA.
10:20:29 So it's just Tampa.
10:20:30 Obviously one size is not going to fit all across the
10:20:32 state.
10:20:32 And I think we have unique needs and unique issues.
10:20:35 Now, when don't want to stop growth in terms of growth
10:20:39 in the appropriate locations like downtown and
10:20:41 Channelside and Ybor City, and maybe East Tampa or
10:20:44 West Tampa.
10:20:45 But I do know that we need to get a handle on the
10:20:49 traffic issues and the transportation concurrency.
10:20:52 That goes hand in hand with that growth.
10:20:53 And I'm not fussing at you, Randy, and you know it.
10:20:56 But I am saying that I don't want us to wait around
10:21:00 for the state to go through all their processes.
10:21:03 I would like us just to be right there out on the
10:21:05 forefront and say, you know what?
10:21:08 We're Tampa.
10:21:09 We have bright people like Randy Goers and legal staff
10:21:12 and everybody else.

10:21:13 And this is what we're going to do to address it in
10:21:15 our city because we need to do it now.
10:21:17 Because if we wait another three or four years until
10:21:21 after we have done the plan update and the state
10:21:23 process and everything else, we are going to be
10:21:25 chasing the train.
10:21:26 And I feel lick we have been chasing the train for the
10:21:29 last five years.
10:21:30 So that's my little thing.
10:21:33 Mr. Harrison, you're the transportation guy.
10:21:39 Do you have any feelings on that?
10:21:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison?
10:21:42 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I agree with Mr. Dingfelder.
10:21:46 I'm not sure how the growth management legislation
10:21:48 that you have described necessarily fits in to a local
10:21:52 decision about what should be transportation con on
10:21:55 currency exception and what isn't.
10:21:57 I think what he's saying, and I think probably what we
10:21:59 all agree with, it's time to take a look at whether
10:22:08 everything south of Fletcher Avenue which is
10:22:10 everything but New Tampa should be in the exception
10:22:12 area.

10:22:12 Look at what's happening downtown and Channelside and
10:22:14 all over the place in South Tampa, start to happen now
10:22:17 in East Tampa.
10:22:21 And West Tampa.
10:22:22 I'm not sure there's any area of the city that still
10:22:24 ought to be exempt.
10:22:25 But we ought to start that process.
10:22:27 And I think what we are seeing is probably now is the
10:22:32 time.
10:22:33 So how do we start that process?
10:22:38 How do we?
10:22:39 I agree that I'm not sure waiting until September
10:22:41 until we know what the growth management act means
10:22:44 really serves a purpose in that.
10:22:48 >>> We have already started the process of looking at
10:22:50 the TCEA.
10:22:51 One thing I want to clarify is the TCEA, agreement
10:22:55 with DCA, we did not see it as an alternative for the
10:23:02 city.
10:23:02 Itself was given to us as a choice by FDOT during the
10:23:05 last planning stage, because the level of service on
10:23:10 the interstate, their level of service on the

10:23:12 interstate could not be accommodated by our growth.
10:23:14 We would have had to shut down development on major
10:23:16 corridors.
10:23:17 So FDOT in the settlement agreement says implement
10:23:20 TCEA.
10:23:22 That will allow development to occur, and move
10:23:24 forward.
10:23:27 Now the state -- I don't want to speak too much on
10:23:29 behalf of the state -- but the regulations for a TCEA
10:23:32 or the requirement are very broad.
10:23:35 They allow local governments to establish what their
10:23:37 goals and objectives are.
10:23:39 And then monitor and evaluate.
10:23:40 And over the last favor years, the growth has been far
10:23:44 greater than the growth that we anticipated at the
10:23:47 beginning.
10:23:47 And that is why now you are getting sort of, I would
10:23:53 say a pushback from your constituents.
10:23:55 There are four things we need to be aware of in our
10:23:57 TCEA.
10:23:59 We know that new growth makes for traffic.
10:24:03 We also know the City of Tampa within the region

10:24:06 brings traffic because people coming in from Pinellas
10:24:07 County through the city into Polk County or other
10:24:10 counties.
10:24:10 We also know that because we are such a huge
10:24:13 employment center, people from outside the areas are
10:24:18 coming into the city creating demands for traffic so
10:24:21 we have all these different areas of traffic that are
10:24:23 coming in.
10:24:23 We also -- also the tourist industry.
10:24:27 We know certain times of the year our economy
10:24:29 generates the demand for traffic
10:24:37 We don't know how much of the Curren -- concurrency or
10:24:42 exemption and what we can do about it.
10:24:45 That's the part we've to move forward in.
10:24:47 Unfortunately we have to depend on the growth strategy
10:24:50 which we are will go forward to Planning Commission in
10:24:53 bringing that discussion together, about where growth
10:24:55 should go or shouldn't go.
10:24:58 Then we say it shouldn't go someplace.
10:25:00 There will be some other people saying it should go
10:25:02 there and we have to -- in place afterwards.
10:25:09 The other part is that we have to rely on

10:25:12 transportation metropolitan planning organization, the
10:25:17 model and we can do that and work with them.
10:25:22 I can tell you that we finished the first stage of the
10:25:25 evaluation, create a report.
10:25:27 We are now ready to move onto the actual development
10:25:29 of the TCEA, update.
10:25:33 The only thing I'm bringing forward is trying to get
10:25:35 through this school concurrency, will get through the
10:25:40 first part of April, and then we are going to pull
10:25:42 together the internal city staff and begin working on
10:25:46 it.
10:25:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We see the results of this in the
10:25:52 rezone owings that come before us and it's really
10:25:55 obvious to council the only way we can address both
10:25:57 growth and dealing with transportation is some kind of
10:26:00 funding for transit and we need the tools now because
10:26:03 we have the rezonings come before us on a weekly
10:26:06 basis.
10:26:06 We need to be able to ask developers to contribute in
10:26:09 a meaningful way toward our transit symptom.
10:26:12 We don't have that structured now because we have
10:26:14 exempted the entire City of Tampa south of Fletcher.

10:26:17 So I see Mr. Smith in the audience.
10:26:22 We, council, need the city staff to provide us with
10:26:24 the tools to help transit be part of our
10:26:27 transportation solution so that we can allow growth to
10:26:31 continue.
10:26:31 Otherwise, as one council member, I don't feel
10:26:34 comfortable allowing growth to continue where I know
10:26:38 that the transportation system is at level of service
10:26:42 F.
10:26:42 >> City attorney.
10:26:46 David Smith.
10:26:47 Part of what we are going to accomplish with
10:26:49 revisiting the TCEA is to provide council more tools
10:26:52 to deal with transportation.
10:26:55 What we have to do under the new growth management act
10:26:58 is if we are going to have a TCEA -- and I think we
10:27:01 are going to have to or you are going to have no
10:27:03 development -- you are going to have to show ways in
10:27:05 which we are mitigating impacts.
10:27:07 We are not doing the level of service A, B, C or maybe
10:27:11 D, but you have to have a program to work on the
10:27:14 programs problems.

10:27:15 And if you are not working on the problems then you
10:27:17 don't have an adequate solution and you will not be
10:27:19 approved by DCA.
10:27:22 So what we are looking at now is what can we do to
10:27:25 give you the tools that allow to you deal with
10:27:27 mitigation issues other than impact fees?
10:27:29 There may be the ability to establish a mass transit
10:27:32 impact fee that we can then accumulate the funds to
10:27:35 solve some of these problems in a pre-emptive way.
10:27:38 So we are looking at those issues.
10:27:39 The problem is it's complex.
10:27:41 But we understand, both transportation and certainly
10:27:46 Randy, that what we want to do out of this process is
10:27:49 help you guys provide for growth in Tampa, but start
10:27:52 to mitigate and work against those problems that are
10:27:55 already backlogged.
10:27:56 So we are going to be coming to you with this, create
10:27:59 a set of solutions that we can get by the DCA.
10:28:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When?
10:28:05 >>DAVID SMITH: Part of the problem is what Randy
10:28:07 indicated, and that is the new growth management act
10:28:10 requires that you do this pursuant to an acceptable

10:28:13 methodology.
10:28:15 The Florida Department of Transportation is developing
10:28:17 a methodology.
10:28:19 One of the advantages that when we can use as lawyers
10:28:24 if we have an approved methodology that's an easy
10:28:26 place to start.
10:28:28 We won't necessarily be completely limited by that.
10:28:30 But that is sort of one of the first hurdle.
10:28:32 So I would anticipate that we'll have, according to
10:28:36 what Randy is telling me, we'll have that information
10:28:39 from Department of Transportation by mid April.
10:28:41 Hopefully we'll have digested that significantly, and
10:28:45 come back maybe starting this process with workshops
10:28:48 in May and move forward.
10:28:50 I know that doesn't help with you the zonings that
10:28:51 happen between now and then.
10:28:52 But as soon as we can get it we will because we
10:28:55 understand the problems.
10:28:59 >> We watch you gays deal with it every meeting.
10:29:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Daignault?
10:29:07 Thank you, David.
10:29:11 You are seeing this probably from a different

10:29:13 perspective in terms of ultimately being the head of
10:29:15 public works and transportation and everything else.
10:29:18 And I think council is seeing some sense of urgency
10:29:29 and frustration and I don't think that's being
10:29:31 reflected by the administration.
10:29:34 I want to get your take on that in regard to the fact,
10:29:37 are we alone on this concern?
10:29:44 Or are we a team on this concern?
10:29:46 >>> I hope we are always going to be a team.
10:29:48 We're looking for a basis and a way to getting you
10:29:51 some ammunition and give us some ammunition.
10:29:55 Among the things we are trying to do, as you know, is
10:29:57 south of Gandy area, transportation study, and these
10:30:05 things all take time because and it takes time to get
10:30:07 the money -- we are looking at doing a downtown whole
10:30:11 parking traffic circulation study.
10:30:13 Then we'll have a basis for all of the transportation
10:30:18 impacts that the growth is providing to us to
10:30:22 evaluate, a basis to say whether or not it works with
10:30:26 the circulation study, or with the flow.
10:30:29 Right now, we have to deal with the traffic study that
10:30:34 the developer provides, and whether or not we think

10:30:37 it's adequate and whether or not it fully describes
10:30:41 what's going on.
10:30:42 But that's really not a basis for saying, no, or that
10:30:44 it's got to change, or that we have to do something
10:30:49 else for traffic to mitigate it.
10:30:52 I think we all do share your concern about increased
10:30:59 traffic throughout the city.
10:31:00 Again, those are our thoughts on how we can start
10:31:04 coming up with a baseline to balance those concerns
10:31:07 against.
10:31:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As Ms. Saul-Sena said, the mayor
10:31:11 has been very, very forthright talking about mass
10:31:14 transit, and I think many of us agree with her in that
10:31:18 regard.
10:31:19 But it's not just about mass transit.
10:31:22 I mean, there are other mechanisms, there's other
10:31:25 mitigation, there's other funding, that development
10:31:29 and developers need to be looking at.
10:31:31 And I know we are a team but we need to get on the
10:31:41 same page.
10:31:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I defer to you.
10:31:47 >>ROSE FERLITA: Randy, first of all thank you for your

10:31:50 presentation.
10:31:51 I know you have heard the complaints and frustration.
10:31:55 Obviously it's not your fault.
10:31:57 We have a dilemma we have to work through.
10:31:58 When we decided to make this an exception area
10:32:00 everything south of Fletcher to now, things have
10:32:03 changed.
10:32:04 Although we want you, Mr. Daignault, to come up with
10:32:07 studies, and updates on the TCEA, it's a problem that
10:32:11 we want it yesterday, so when we evaluate good
10:32:15 development, but at the same time if you do it too
10:32:17 rapidly, then it's not going to be a good enough
10:32:19 comprehensive study for us.
10:32:21 So you're kind of caught between a rock and hard
10:32:24 place.
10:32:25 So given everything that you're dealing with I'm
10:32:26 anxious to see something that we can use to show the
10:32:31 judgment up here.
10:32:32 But I think that's the dilemma for all much us.
10:32:34 Mr. Smith, thank you for your comments, too.
10:32:38 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I would like to see us take a little
10:32:40 bit more action here today.

10:32:43 While we are waiting for DCA and state and everybody
10:32:47 to figure out what it is that growth management means,
10:32:51 I think the frustration we are all having here is when
10:32:56 we don't know what it means, and we are faced with
10:32:59 development projects that we all know are going to
10:33:02 have major impacts on transportation, and the only
10:33:07 remedy that is available right now is just pay your
10:33:10 impact fees and produce your study and that's all you
10:33:14 have to do.
10:33:15 And a lot of times, I think that we in the public feel
10:33:18 like that's just not going to be good enough, that you
10:33:20 are going to create some major things, some major
10:33:23 issues.
10:33:24 So are there some things that council can do in the
10:33:27 code to increase some sort of participation by
10:33:37 large-scale developments until we get this all figured
10:33:43 out, this ball, and just look at what other
10:33:47 jurisdictions do, have legal take a look at, are we
10:33:51 solely limited to impact fees?
10:33:53 You pay your impact fees and that's all you have to
10:33:56 do?
10:33:56 Or are there other things that we can mandate for PDs,

10:34:00 for instance, putting in Hartline bus stops or helping
10:34:03 to fund a circulator route for Hartline for that
10:34:07 particular location or things like that?
10:34:09 We all sit up here and we tray to be creative when we
10:34:12 are faced with these things.
10:34:14 And sometimes being creative can get us into a little
10:34:18 hot water.
10:34:19 And we don't want to do that either.
10:34:20 So some direction from legal would probably be helpful
10:34:23 as to what our options might be.
10:34:25 If legal could take a look at that and report back in
10:34:28 a month about some of the things we could consider,
10:34:31 that would be great.
10:34:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:34:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
10:34:36 Any questions on the motion?
10:34:39 (Motion carried)
10:34:39 Thank you.
10:34:40 We now go to item number 20 which was set for a time
10:34:42 certain at 10:30.
10:35:02 Mr. Tony Garcia.
10:35:07 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.

10:35:32 I handed out for you, and I don't think you are going
10:35:34 to be able to read it for the best of those behind us,
10:35:44 comprehensive plan calculations.
10:36:10 What I have given you regarding floor area ratio that
10:36:13 I think are pertinent at this juncture.
10:36:16 Floor area ratio, the first sentence and the last
10:36:19 sentence, the ratio relative to the area of the lot.
10:36:25 Specified for each land use category within the text
10:36:27 of the comprehensive plan so basically what that means
10:36:29 is for each land use category that we have, we have a
10:36:33 respected density calculation which for example CMU
10:36:36 35.
10:36:38 It means you have 35 on the other.
10:36:41 But you also have an FAR for that land use category of
10:36:45 1. 5ment for the purposes of 1.5, I'm going to give
10:36:49 you a much more simplified explanation of F.A.R.
10:36:53 versus what we have currently within the comp plan.
10:36:56 But before I do that I want to go down to where it
10:36:59 talks about intensity calculation, which is
10:37:03 nonresidential development shall be controlled by the
10:37:05 F.A.R.
10:37:07 That's true in most of the residential categories but

10:37:09 the mixed use categories allow you to use your density
10:37:12 calculation or your floor area ratio so beginning at
10:37:18 CMU 35 allow you to use F.A.R. or density.
10:37:23 Did you have a question?
10:37:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I did.
10:37:25 I wonder if you have any pictures or model to show us.
10:37:28 Becausies just not doing it.
10:37:33 >>TONY GARCIA: I do.
10:37:36 I'm leading into that.
10:37:43 What's important to realize, also, is this second
10:37:46 paragraph regarding intensity calculations although a
10:37:50 maximum floor area ratio has been established by each
10:37:53 land use category, maximum floor density radios are
10:37:57 not guaranteed.
10:37:58 It depends on zoning district, the applicable plan
10:38:02 provisions and regulations to review and process which
10:38:08 is why this is a collaborative effort which is why
10:38:11 Cathy Coyle will be right behind me to talk about
10:38:13 F.A.R. as relates to land development regulations.
10:38:25 Let's look at a 10,000 square fountain lot.
10:38:28 Let's look at 1.0 as just being --
10:38:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is that a CMU or residential?

10:38:36 >>> It's nothing but a 10,000 square foot lot.
10:38:38 We are not talking about a land use category.
10:38:40 We are just going to talk about --
10:38:44 >> Go ahead.
10:38:45 >>> Specific land use designation.
10:38:47 This is a 10,000 square fat lot designated a 1.0 floor
10:38:51 area ratio.
10:38:52 That basically means if you have a 1.0 F.A.R. that
10:38:55 allows you 100% of the use of the 10,000 square feet.
10:39:00 So that means from zero line to zero line you can do
10:39:05 10,000 square feet, a 10,000 square foot structure on
10:39:08 a 10,000 square fat lot.
10:39:10 That's what the F.A.R. maximum allowable potential
10:39:13 will allow to you do in this scenario.
10:39:21 Here's a different example but we are using the same
10:39:23 thing.
10:39:23 This is 10,000 square feet but 1.0 F.A.R.
10:39:27 But now instead of using the entire 10,000 square
10:39:31 feet, you are going -- it represents the actual
10:39:34 structure on the site so we are using 5,000 square fee
10:39:36 of the site.
10:39:37 And when you look at this, from the -- when you look

10:39:41 at this from the ground, you now have two stories, and
10:39:44 each story is 5,000 square feet.
10:39:46 So we still have 10,000 square feet.
10:39:48 And we still have an F.A.R. of 1.0.
10:39:56 Same situation.
10:39:57 10,000 square feet.
10:39:58 1.0 F.A.R.
10:40:00 But all we are doing now is using 25% of the entire
10:40:04 lot.
10:40:06 Which results in a four-story building with each story
10:40:11 being 2500 square feet in size.
10:40:15 So there are a variety of ways to structure a
10:40:20 building, while still staying within the parameters of
10:40:26 the F.A.R.
10:40:28 As far as the particular form, what's interesting
10:40:30 here, we are showing all things being equal here.
10:40:33 What we are showing is an equal amount of square
10:40:37 footage but theoretically you could take just the
10:40:41 bottom floor, could be 2500 square feet, and each one
10:40:44 above it could be -- the next one could be 1500 square
10:40:48 feet which would be 4,000 and then you could build
10:40:52 thee creditly six more stories and still be under the

10:40:56 F.A.R. because you have 10,000 square feet with a lot
10:40:59 more storage.
10:41:00 This is where Cathy can explain more. The comp plan
10:41:05 does not speak to height but just what is allowed
10:41:07 within your F.A.R.
10:41:08 The guiding principles of how our city is structured
10:41:14 is your density calculation and your F.A.R.
10:41:17 calculations.
10:41:18 Think of that as just a big block of marble.
10:41:25 Now how do you form that into a finished product with
10:41:27 the statute is where your land development
10:41:29 regulations, where they are going to chip away at the
10:41:33 F.A.R. and chip away based on your bulk and height
10:41:36 requirements for your perspective zoning districts and
10:41:40 come up with a finished product for what you are going
10:41:42 to have.
10:41:42 So we looked at taking this block and forming it into
10:41:47 what it needs to be.
10:41:48 We have to look at the streets, whether this is next
10:41:50 to an arterial or collector, we have to look at what
10:41:53 the actual surrounding character is oft area, the
10:41:57 environment, whether there are similar structures to

10:41:59 what the applicant is proposing.
10:42:02 As said earlier you do have height restrictions within
10:42:05 the zoning districts but if you do a PD of course you
10:42:07 can waive that and it's up to your discretion how high
10:42:11 you are going to let that go based on what the
10:42:14 applicant is presenting based on the caliber that is
10:42:16 not going to be impacting the area, that it may be
10:42:18 something that would be amenable to the area, and it's
10:42:22 also in character with the surrounding uses of the
10:42:25 area.
10:42:25 Do you have a question?
10:42:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes.
10:42:29 The 5,000 square foot you are talking about or the
10:42:32 2500 -- no, 5,000, right?
10:42:35 >>> This is all 10,000 square feet.
10:42:37 >>MARY ALVAREZ: All right.
10:42:41 You're saying they chip away.
10:42:43 So the chipping away could be the sidewalks that are
10:42:46 going to be chipped away?
10:42:49 >>> When I say chipped away I'm talking about whatever
10:42:51 the finished product is going to be, okay, my analogy
10:42:55 was you have got a block of granite, you can chip away

10:42:59 and come up with the finally form.
10:43:00 But what I'm saying here, you may not have, depending
10:43:03 on the height and the building is ultimately going to
10:43:08 be determined by land development regulations.
10:43:10 So whatever you come out with is going to be set by
10:43:14 your own land development regulation.
10:43:18 >> Okay.
10:43:18 >>> Did you get that?
10:43:20 >> Keep going.
10:43:21 >>> Basically what I'm saying, someone may come in and
10:43:23 ask for certain height.
10:43:24 They may ask for something that's 70 feet high, may
10:43:28 ask something for 100 feet high, may ask something, a
10:43:32 large segment that particular lot.
10:43:34 But if it's too much, and you have done this time and
10:43:38 time again in many of your zonings hearings, if the
10:43:42 massing, if the actual size of the building is too
10:43:44 much related to an adjacent building or the adjacent
10:43:47 buildings in the area, you are going to want to shrink
10:43:50 that.
10:43:50 And in shrinking that you may allow them to go a
10:43:53 little higher or you may allow them to actually

10:43:55 decrease that, not only the height, but the actual
10:43:58 massing of the entire building.
10:44:01 >> Is that where the F.A.R. comes in?
10:44:04 >> We are not even talking about bonuses.
10:44:06 We are just talking about basic F.A.R.
10:44:08 All bonus means is you can exceed -- it's only allowed
10:44:12 in one particular instance where you can have a bonus.
10:44:15 You have bonus allowed in the Ybor City zoning
10:44:19 district where you can exceed your standard F.A.R.
10:44:22 And then of course you have a periphery bonus within
10:44:24 your CBD periphery.
10:44:27 All that basically means is you can exceed whatever
10:44:29 the existing F.A.R. cap is for that particular land
10:44:32 use category.
10:44:33 And we only have one land use category that's
10:44:36 applicable and that's the RMU 100 which allows a 3.5.
10:44:40 So you can exceed that in that one particular land use
10:44:44 category because throws a provision that allows for
10:44:46 that.
10:44:50 As far as specific questions regarding how F.A.R. is
10:44:52 applied, if you have questions regarding that, Ms.
10:44:55 Coyle is here to answer any of those questions.

10:44:59 Does council have any other questions regarding the
10:45:01 basics for floor area ratio calculation?
10:45:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This evening at 6:00, are we going
10:45:09 to have a model showing the proposed minimum and
10:45:12 maximum F.A.R.s in the four different areas?
10:45:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think that's a question for --
10:45:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I think --
10:45:32 >>> In a meeting about two weeks ago with USF who is
10:45:35 doing the model you were pretty specific about the
10:45:40 model for this evening's session.
10:45:43 We are working with USF to determine the probability
10:45:46 of doing that.
10:45:47 And we will be in touch.
10:45:49 It wasn't completed as of just a couple of days ago.
10:45:55 But we will tray to keep current.
10:45:56 Again this was a fairly specific direction that you
10:45:58 had given USF in that meeting about two weeks ago.
10:46:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Because I was thinking if it were
10:46:04 available tonight it might be available now, some of
10:46:07 the models could show the F.A.R. in three dimensional
10:46:11 form to council.
10:46:12 I think that it would be a helpful tool for us.

10:46:18 >>> And we understood that was the purpose of your
10:46:19 wanting the model and why we are trying to get that
10:46:22 for you as soon as possible.
10:46:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I had a question, something that
10:46:27 Tony said at the very end about not being able to
10:46:30 exceed F.A.R. accepting the RMU 100 land use category.
10:46:35 Could you expound on that a little bit or maybe Cathy?
10:46:40 Somebody.
10:46:40 >>TONY GARCIA: you have an F.A.R. bonus in your
10:46:46 comprehensive plan which allows to you exceed the 3.5
10:46:49 F.A.R. which is the given F.A.R. calculation for RMU
10:46:52 100.
10:46:53 You can go up to 7.0.
10:46:57 Based on a variety of -- and be provided over and
10:47:03 above what's already requested in in your regulations.
10:47:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: and that is force of law under the
10:47:11 code?
10:47:11 I mean, council can't waive that?
10:47:17 That's, I guess, more of a legal question.
10:47:23 >>> Traffic department.
10:47:26 >> Are you saying to go above 7?
10:47:29 >> To go above 7.

10:47:39 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
10:47:40 Obviously you know I'm not an attorney.
10:47:41 I can't say whether or not you can waive a comp plan
10:47:44 provision.
10:47:44 It says specifically in that section in the CBD
10:47:48 periphery that you are allowed to exceed the bonus of
10:47:50 the F.A.R. provision up to 100%, which would be a 7.0
10:47:54 F.A.R.
10:47:55 And there are a list of probably eight or nine
10:47:57 different amenities that we can score on a point
10:47:59 system.
10:48:00 We do not have a point system currently for that
10:48:03 provision.
10:48:05 We don't actually have the mechanism in our codes.
10:48:08 Whether or not you can waive that provision of the
10:48:09 comp plan I would have to defer.
10:48:10 I don't know that you can.
10:48:15 >> It seams to me that's sort of an important question
10:48:17 when it comes to one of the projects that we have been
10:48:20 dealing with down on Channelside, right?
10:48:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: And that was in the staff report as
10:48:27 well.

10:48:28 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I would like to hear from legal on
10:48:30 that, maybe not right this second but maybe for
10:48:32 tonight?
10:48:38 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department.
10:48:39 I will look into that.
10:48:40 I am not familiar with the exact language in our
10:48:42 comprehensive plan.
10:48:42 I would have to believe that in order to go above the
10:48:47 F.A.R., you would have to fall into the bonus
10:48:51 provisions.
10:48:51 But I will be happy to low at that this afternoon for
10:48:54 tonight's meeting.
10:49:01 >> We have a town hall.
10:49:04 >> It looks like Mr. Chen is chomping at the bit like
10:49:11 he had the answer to that.
10:49:11 >> CHEN: I also don't want to represent myself as an
10:49:15 attorney but I have sat in on a number of these
10:49:18 hearings where it has been explored.
10:49:19 The comp plan allows you latitude to go up to 100% of
10:49:23 the base which is from 3.5 to 7 but that you are not
10:49:26 allowed to exceed that 100% limit.
10:49:34 Again, it is appropriate that legal can express their

10:49:37 opinion on this for you later today.
10:49:40 But in many conversations that I've witnessed that
10:49:44 have 100% limit, it's pretty rigid.
10:49:53 >>ROSE FERLITA: Just a question about tonight's
10:49:57 meeting, Mr. Chen.
10:49:58 Some of the council members have done, and I finally
10:50:01 did, watched that area Monday night and we talked a
10:50:05 little about the meeting tomorrow.
10:50:07 You will be chairing this meeting?
10:50:10 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I will be there.
10:50:11 I will make any introductions and so forth related to
10:50:15 that.
10:50:15 The front end of the meeting will start with Wilson
10:50:19 Miller, being able to restate some of their
10:50:23 alternatives to height and F.A.R., as they are going
10:50:26 to describe to you this morning.
10:50:27 And I understand the bulk of the time is actually an
10:50:31 opportunity for you to get engaged with public
10:50:35 testimony and information.
10:50:38 So I don't know that there's a lot of guidance other
10:50:41 than how you manage, I guess, a -- how you minimize
10:50:50 chaos as passion and opinions can emerge in this.

10:50:56 >>ROSE FERLITA: Okay.
10:50:57 And not that it's urgently important for anybody to
10:51:01 know that I'm not going to be there but it's important
10:51:03 for me because I think this is an issue that has been
10:51:05 going back and forth in any direction, so that first
10:51:10 part of the meeting I have had something that -- and I
10:51:13 want to know I'm on record today and hopefully you
10:51:17 will read 24th into the record tonight.
10:51:19 I have a conflict because I had something probably
10:51:21 scheduled three and a half months ago so I obviously
10:51:23 can't be there.
10:51:24 Some of the concern that the neighborhood was
10:51:26 expressing to you, that she didn't have enough notice
10:51:31 that this was going to be there tonight and that
10:51:33 maybe it wasn't maybe as productive as it might be
10:51:36 under different circumstances had we waited later.
10:51:38 Subsequent to that, Mrs. Alvarez showed me a memo from
10:51:41 you, I believe, that -- Ms. Shannon, I'm sorry -- that
10:51:48 thanks to Mr. Staltenberg some contacts were notified
10:51:53 and maybe you will have a better attendance.
10:51:56 All that being said, I personally didn't know what the
10:51:59 urgency was that we had to have it tonight.

10:52:01 And I think what reinforces my opinion or
10:52:04 substantiates my opinion is the fact now you are
10:52:06 telling me there's going to be a maybe yes, maybe no
10:52:09 on the model.
10:52:09 And I think starting with Mrs. Saul-Sena and ending
10:52:12 with many of the other council members up here, I this
10:52:14 I the model is a wonderful tool and I'm sorry to hear
10:52:17 that it may be there and it may not be, and I don't
10:52:19 think that that's going to fare well in terms of
10:52:22 understanding what's going to be the subject matter
10:52:24 tonight.
10:52:25 So just wanted to make those comments and put that on
10:52:27 record and hopefully I'll give you a memo that you
10:52:30 will read it tonight.
10:52:30 >>MICHAEL CHEN: If I may respond to some of the things
10:52:33 that you said.
10:52:34 I think that there's any number of communications
10:52:40 going around the city regarding this, and there's
10:52:43 certainly a number of concerns expressed by many of
10:52:47 you as individuals, as well as people who are
10:52:50 stakeholders in the district.
10:52:53 As far as notice, I did respond to some e-mails, and

10:52:59 some concern regarding notice.
10:53:01 And, in fact, after hours, yesterday I received a
10:53:06 formal letter from chair Miller with the attachment of
10:53:13 an e-mail that addressed a concern about public notice
10:53:17 on this meeting.
10:53:19 It was received so late I have not had a chance to
10:53:21 respond to you on that.
10:53:24 But I can tell you that this has been treated as a
10:53:28 formal public meeting of the CRA.
10:53:30 And all appropriate notices and typical notices have
10:53:34 been done.
10:53:36 Staff has provided additional effort to provide notice
10:53:41 beyond what the legal provisions are.
10:53:45 Most specifically, that e-mail suggested that there
10:53:48 should have been a mailing, I guess a mass mailing, to
10:53:54 indicate the time and date and location of this
10:53:59 meeting.
10:54:00 This is not within the current policies and practices
10:54:04 of the city.
10:54:05 I'm sure this is something you could dictate a change
10:54:09 on, if you desire to, although I would suggest you
10:54:12 really need to give that some serious thought.

10:54:15 Because it has major implications, considering that
10:54:18 probably most of our communities have some sort of
10:54:21 planning effort going on at any given time.
10:54:24 We will be filling the post office with mailed notices
10:54:27 if we go to that type of practice.
10:54:33 With that, we certainly want this to be a successful
10:54:37 meeting, want you to have a chance to engage with the
10:54:40 public.
10:54:42 I think first of all the setting came from council.
10:54:47 This is not a date that was selected by or urged by
10:54:52 staff.
10:54:53 But rather it was generated there at your council
10:54:56 table and we have tried to be responsive to your need,
10:54:59 your feeling for need to have more public interaction
10:55:05 regarding discretion on this plan.
10:55:07 >>ROSE FERLITA: Just a couple follow-up comments.
10:55:10 You're right about the fact we can't notice everybody
10:55:12 every time we go around the block.
10:55:14 But this is a CRA area, high end discussion, and I
10:55:19 think in terms of better notification, not necessarily
10:55:21 mandated, but it's not hard to find the players that
10:55:25 are involved in that area.

10:55:26 I think that would be a decision that should be
10:55:28 finalized by our chairman, Ms. Alvarez, and maybe
10:55:32 discussed with her at any time some of our
10:55:35 constituents, particularly in CRA matters, think
10:55:37 there's not enough communication.
10:55:39 I don't think that means to ripple into every single
10:55:42 thing that's done so that we spend a ton of money on
10:55:44 mailings and send something to everybody each time.
10:55:47 And you're right, you're absolutely right, that we are
10:55:50 the ones that suggested this particular date.
10:55:53 I wasn't in favor of it for the reasons I said
10:55:55 earlier.
10:55:55 But when you say responsive, to me responsive, with
10:56:00 all due respect to you, would have meant to either get
10:56:04 the model there or let us know that it was going to be
10:56:09 maybe Fy whether or not you could get it.
10:56:11 That to me would be responsive.
10:56:13 That's like giving me a tool to make a decision after
10:56:15 I have made a decision and that's not a God way to do
10:56:18 business.
10:56:18 >>> Actually I would agree --
10:56:20 >>GWEN MILLER: One second.

10:56:21 Councilmen, do you have any more questions of Mr. Tony
10:56:24 Garcia?
10:56:25 Okay, Mr. Garcia, you may leave.
10:56:28 Now Mr. Chen.
10:56:29 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Actually, I would agree with you.
10:56:32 However, USF in their proposal to construct this model
10:56:36 had identified a minimum of six weeks period to
10:56:42 construct that.
10:56:43 And that was known at the time that this date was
10:56:47 selected.
10:56:48 And frankly, this date is an acceleration from the
10:56:52 projection of six weeks that USF had.
10:56:56 We have been trying to work with them to try to find
10:56:58 ways to accelerate his efficiency in doing the model.
10:57:03 >>ROSE FERLITA: I think we don't need to debate this,
10:57:08 sir, but maybe this is a more important issue for us
10:57:11 than the USF group these working on it and I think if
10:57:14 you would have had somebody checking on it you would
10:57:16 have given us an idea it may or may not be ready for
10:57:19 tonight.
10:57:19 I suspect it won't be ready. Anyway, just a
10:57:22 difference of opinion.

10:57:23 Thanks.
10:57:23 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
10:57:27 I have been in contact with Mr. Chen about the
10:57:31 meetings, and we have exchanged e-mails on exactly
10:57:34 what will be happening tonight.
10:57:36 We don't have a set agenda because it was mainly going
10:57:40 to be a question-and-answer period, once Mr. English
10:57:46 presented the alternative plan to the Channelside
10:57:50 residence.
10:57:52 And can't blame Mr. Chen for everything because he has
10:57:55 been trying.
10:57:58 He tried up to two days ago to see if this model was
10:58:01 going to be ready.
10:58:01 I wasn't even aware it was going to be there.
10:58:03 But be that as it may.
10:58:07 I'm satisfied with the response that we are getting
10:58:10 back.
10:58:12 We can't reach everybody.
10:58:13 I think that our neighborhood, Shannon Edge, has done
10:58:20 the best she can with reaching the people in there.
10:58:26 As Mr. Stall tenberg said he put out a thousand and
10:58:33 said let's see how many show up.

10:58:35 There's a lot of residences, a lot of development
10:58:38 going on.
10:58:39 We'll see what the response is.
10:58:44 We will have this meeting and hope that we can
10:58:46 start -- in my case, I want to know what the
10:58:53 development is going to be like.
10:58:54 And there's been a lot of discussion.
10:58:58 We have been on tours.
10:58:59 We have had a lot of discussion with some of the
10:59:01 neighbors in there.
10:59:03 So we have done everything that we possibly can.
10:59:07 So we are just going to give Mr. English and his plan
10:59:10 a chance to respond to some of the questions, and some
10:59:14 of the questions that we have for him tonight.
10:59:17 I'm sorry that not all of us can make it.
10:59:20 But this has been set for awhile now.
10:59:24 And so let's go forward and my question to you, Mr.
10:59:28 Chen, you put a time limit on this.
10:59:31 At 6:00 -- I certainly don't want to thereby till
10:59:34 11:00 o'clock.
10:59:36 >>MICHAEL CHEN: I don't think that we noticed an end
10:59:38 date to this or end time to this.

10:59:44 But I would not expect to the last much more than
10:59:47 maybe an hour to hour and a half.
10:59:49 But you can elongate that conversation to whatever
10:59:55 extent you see fit.
10:59:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to see maybe from 6:00 to
10:59:59 8:00.
11:00:00 And go home.
11:00:03 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mrs. Alvarez, as chairman maybe you
11:00:05 can ask to loan us his model.
11:00:13 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And the agenda, too, if I were you,
11:00:15 Mary, otherwise it's going to be chaos.
11:00:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It's going to be question and answer,
11:00:25 after the presentation.
11:00:25 These all I'm anticipating.
11:00:27 We'll see where it goes.
11:00:33 Maybe you can bring back your video and show them, you
11:00:37 know, that video that you showed us. That virtual
11:00:41 reality thing.
11:00:43 Are you saying yes or no?
11:00:47 (Laughter).
11:00:48 Well, anyway, that's all I think we need to respond.
11:00:54 So now, Mr. Dingfelder, then I would really like to

11:00:58 hear from Mr. English.
11:01:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
11:01:02 Just briefly, in regard to more than a year ago, like
11:01:08 two years ago, this council and the CRA, we said, we
11:01:10 are going to go out into the neighborhoods, we are
11:01:12 going to go to the CRA and we are going to be, you
11:01:14 know, out there once a year.
11:01:16 And it sort of never happened.
11:01:18 So now it's just starting to happen and that's a good
11:01:21 thing.
11:01:21 We are not doing a good enough job of communicating in
11:01:25 every direction.
11:01:25 Okay.
11:01:26 I got an e-mail from staff.
11:01:28 Did you all get it about the Tuesday YCDC meeting?
11:01:31 And that was crazy because the e-mail said none of
11:01:35 council showed up for the YCDC meeting.
11:01:38 It was like we didn't even know that we were really
11:01:40 supposed to be there.
11:01:41 I didn't.
11:01:41 And it appears the rest of council really didn't know.
11:01:44 So when need to do a better job, Mike, of

11:01:47 communicating with you on those issues, and
11:01:49 communicating with the various CRAs.
11:01:52 The other thing we need to do is that when we are
11:01:55 going out to the CRAs, it's a once a year deal,
11:01:59 needs to be a bigger deal.
11:02:00 You need to put up some banners, just like when the
11:02:02 mayor goes out for a town hall meeting this city knows
11:02:06 how to do banners for the mayor.
11:02:07 They can do it for us in the CRA.
11:02:09 Put up a banner in the neighborhood that says your
11:02:11 CRA, your City Council will be here, at such and such
11:02:14 place and night.
11:02:15 You don't have to do mailings to 50,000 people in East
11:02:18 Tampa.
11:02:18 That's crazy.
11:02:19 Just put up some signs.
11:02:21 And that way there's good notice.
11:02:23 We need to do a better job of public relations and PR
11:02:27 and then all this will be moot.
11:02:29 But we have to improve our communication.
11:02:31 >>> We certainly will accept your observations, and in
11:02:38 terms of criticism of effort put into this, I will

11:02:40 tell you, we have tried to make the advisory
11:02:44 committees aware of the significance of your wanting
11:02:47 to come into their environment, and witness what they
11:02:51 are doing.
11:02:52 So we have done that already.
11:02:54 We will continue.
11:02:55 And we'll try to find ways to elevate the public's
11:02:59 awareness of where you will be from schedule to
11:03:02 schedule.
11:03:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The other thing is channel 15 is
11:03:05 there to use and you guys can use channel 15 and you
11:03:07 can run the banner, run the scrolls that says
11:03:10 blah-blah-blah, this is where council is going to be.
11:03:13 That's another vehicle as well.
11:03:14 >>> And we'll certainly explore ways to create higher
11:03:18 awareness and visibility of your interest and your
11:03:22 schedule of being out there.
11:03:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
11:03:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Two weeks ago when we set the date
11:03:28 for this I asked you specifically to do the kinds of
11:03:29 banners that John had done for the meetings on Gandy.
11:03:32 We can get these banners made there's a CRA meeting

11:03:37 and then you change the date and time.
11:03:38 I not really a suggestion, it's really a mandate for
11:03:41 the future.
11:03:41 Thank you.
11:03:45 >>KEVIN WHITE: Just a brief comment.
11:03:46 We are talking about the -- when don't know what the
11:03:52 time frame was.
11:03:53 We asked the developer, someone up here asked the
11:03:55 developer specifically was there any time constraint
11:03:57 or was it going to be any financial hardship if we
11:04:00 prolong the meeting?
11:04:02 And the developer said, we have time constraints on
11:04:07 funding, that's why we are pushing this date so quick.
11:04:09 And that's why we are here at this point.
11:04:12 Rush-rush.
11:04:14 Also, at the time that we were looking for the model
11:04:19 and Mrs. Saul-Sena said we were going to be using USF
11:04:22 architecture, the developer we had at that time, we
11:04:25 just had another Channelside project come up, and they
11:04:27 did not offer, but the developer here at this
11:04:31 particular project juncture said I can have it done in
11:04:33 a week and I'll pay for it at my expense.

11:04:36 And the same one that we saw the developer again went
11:04:39 over and above and beyond the call of duty to bring
11:04:43 the project to light, you know.
11:04:45 But we disregarded that at that time waiting on the
11:04:50 USF study as well.
11:04:52 Not saying that we don't need input from all sides.
11:04:55 But we had developers and we had petitioners that are
11:05:00 coming up willing to provide us with all the
11:05:01 information that we as a council request, and to go
11:05:06 over and above and beyond the work we are continuing
11:05:08 to push this thing further out.
11:05:10 And to come under the gun because of our own action.
11:05:14 And I don't know.
11:05:18 I think we could have passed this crossroad and passed
11:05:22 this hurdle a longs time ago with the evidence that
11:05:26 was put before us weeks ago at council because -- and
11:05:32 we are still unclear, unless I'm mistaken or missed
11:05:35 something, unclear whether there's going to be a model
11:05:40 tonight.
11:05:41 And so where are we going to go from there?
11:05:47 Are we going to continue this again?
11:05:49 We have a wonderful replication of what is and what

11:05:52 could be, as well as the CD, I think, even if we don't
11:05:58 have the model for USF tonight, I think it's time to
11:06:02 move on one way or the other for the project up or
11:06:05 down.
11:06:05 So if we can move on with our vision of the Channel
11:06:07 District and this particular developer can move on
11:06:11 with the vision of his project, whether it moves
11:06:14 forward or not, I think we need to just move open
11:06:17 the -- off the dime.
11:06:20 >>> We would certainly support your expeditious
11:06:22 handling of zoning issues.
11:06:25 This study, while certainly being peripheral to that
11:06:30 issue is not directly associated with the zoning
11:06:34 before you.
11:06:34 But I know there's a fair amount of effort to try to
11:06:38 figure out how or if this proposed study has ties and
11:06:43 standards that should be applied to your
11:06:45 consideration.
11:06:46 >>KEVIN WHITE: Absolutely.
11:06:49 >>MICHAEL CHEN: And I would like to state because I
11:06:51 know there has been so much focus in terms of study in
11:06:53 its description of height and F.A.R.

11:06:57 I have to make sure that you're aware that there is so
11:07:00 much more in this study that is related to a project,
11:07:08 contained the public elements that it needs to present
11:07:10 to our city.
11:07:12 These are very, very important peaces, and in fact
11:07:15 just in your earlier discussion regarding public
11:07:17 transportation and some of the other issues, there are
11:07:20 elements of this study that also address some of those
11:07:23 things.
11:07:23 So not withstanding where transportation and public
11:07:28 works are engaged, urban development is trying to take
11:07:31 a responsible and comprehensive approach to its
11:07:35 advocacy for economic development as well.
11:07:39 So this study has a lot of that into it for you.
11:07:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Chen.
11:07:44 We need to go back to number 8.
11:07:46 Ms. Cathy Coyle, you have something to say on number
11:07:49 8?
11:07:51 I mean number 20.
11:07:52 I'm sorry.
11:07:53 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
11:08:00 It's up to you if you have any more questions about

11:08:02 F.A.R.
11:08:02 I was just supposed to follow Tony.
11:08:05 But these fine.
11:08:06 You understand what F.A.R. is, basically?
11:08:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Floor area ratio.
11:08:14 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Very good.
11:08:15 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We understand that it's 3.5 and it
11:08:18 can go up to 7 if you meet certain criteria.
11:08:20 But we don't have criteria.
11:08:23 Right?
11:08:24 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Correct.
11:08:26 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And we know it can't go above 7.
11:08:28 Although we are maybe not sure --
11:08:31 >>> It definitely cannot go before above 7.
11:08:35 LEFT1: No questions asked.
11:08:36 At least we have that figured out.
11:08:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 20.
11:08:42 Mike.
11:08:42 >>MICHAEL ENGLISH: Lish
11:08:51 Mike English?
11:09:09 >>> Good morning.
11:09:10 It's always a pleasure to be here.

11:09:14 We are hoping we can move it forward to its
11:09:17 implementation, passage and implementation in the near
11:09:22 fought.
11:09:23 Before I Guinea would like to give a little context.
11:09:25 You know, the Channel District, I wrote the Channel
11:09:28 District CRA plan and I helped the city write the
11:09:33 study.
11:09:34 Development really started earlier than anyone thought
11:09:37 it would in the Channel District.
11:09:38 And your commission to do these strategic plans,
11:09:46 you're running behind the curve, as you know.
11:09:48 There's more development occurring there than I would
11:09:53 have ever guessed would happen this quickly and you're
11:09:56 on your way for better or worse having the densist
11:10:00 neighborhood in the city's history developing before
11:10:02 your eyes.
11:10:05 Mr. Chen made a point I want to just reiterate, and
11:10:08 that is this plan is really isn't about
11:10:12 infrastructure, it's really about capturing TIF
11:10:14 revenue and building public improvements.
11:10:18 It's really not about height and F.A.R., not at the
11:10:20 end of the day.

11:10:21 It's about creating a vibrant community.
11:10:26 I'm hoping that after the debate -- and you will hear
11:10:29 from people who think our plan has a height limit, and
11:10:38 some people think it's too low.
11:10:40 You will hear -- I can assure you we did not.
11:10:44 I have lived in Tampa for a very long time.
11:10:47 Reputation and integrity.
11:10:49 By the way, we handle them all equally and fairly and
11:10:55 we handle people that are not our clients and treat
11:10:57 them with respect.
11:10:58 I hope to not have to answer any further questions
11:11:00 about that.
11:11:01 But I would be happy to do so if you wish.
11:11:04 What we have done at the request of the city
11:11:06 administration --
11:11:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: One second.
11:11:10 I think it's important, Mike, that you did bring up
11:11:12 that question.
11:11:13 And I think council needs to clarify what our action
11:11:15 was in response to that issue.
11:11:20 That wasn't directed at you per se, at least from this
11:11:23 council member, and I think I can speak on behalf of

11:11:25 my colleagues.
11:11:26 I think that the key issue there is that -- and again,
11:11:31 we don't have the requirement to disclose potential
11:11:36 conflicts like that within our documents.
11:11:38 Then we can't criticize you or anybody else for not
11:11:41 disclosing it in writing.
11:11:43 And so I think that's what we are trying to do, is we
11:11:45 are trying to tweak up our procedures down the road to
11:11:48 make sure that anybody who responds to RFDs or any
11:11:51 other type of business with the city makes full
11:11:54 disclosure about potential conflicts.
11:11:56 And that's good for the city.
11:11:57 And you know that and I know that.
11:11:59 >>> I think that's fine.
11:12:00 And you should know that when we presented, they asked
11:12:05 the question, we said yes, we had many --
11:12:08 >> And that was the verbal communication we were not
11:12:11 privy to so we are going to ask those kind of
11:12:13 conflicts be put in writing that is going to apply to
11:12:16 you and every consultant and business person in town.
11:12:19 >>> I think that's reasonable.
11:12:20 I really wasn't referring to you.

11:12:21 I was referring to several of the developers who chose
11:12:24 to attack me rather than simply address the issues.
11:12:28 >> We'll move on.
11:12:29 >>> Okay.
11:12:30 I'd like to -- so that you have them to refer to.
11:12:37 This is about height and F.A.R. this morning.
11:12:39 It's not about the rest of the plan.
11:12:41 So let me just explain to you that we do have several
11:12:44 alternatives to discuss with you, if you could put the
11:12:47 camera on the board, please.
11:13:05 We went through a large process of height and bulk and
11:13:09 there were many issues how to control or limit or in
11:13:11 what alternative do not particularly control or limit
11:13:15 a development in the Channel District.
11:13:17 The first proposal that we put forth in the plan was
11:13:21 to create varying hit limits by subdirecting the
11:13:25 neighborhood, and there were four sub districts
11:13:28 included.
11:13:30 The outside.
11:13:31 East and south of Channelside Drive.
11:13:33 And three neighborhoods on the inside of the district.
11:13:37 We went through a long process of analysis about why

11:13:42 we thought that was rational and why we thought that
11:13:46 it would result in the neighborhood with interesting
11:13:51 and I did verse architecture and different building
11:13:53 types, and at the end of the day, we still think
11:13:56 that's a viable option.
11:13:59 However, it was really based on several key factors,
11:14:06 one everything to do with our demand for housing that
11:14:11 we see in the future, we think our demand projections,
11:14:14 you are now familiar with the 6500 dwelling units and
11:14:17 the 12 million square feet of space, which we think is
11:14:19 possible in the Channel District, although there are
11:14:23 those who believe that it's half again as many square
11:14:28 feet as you currently have in your entire central
11:14:30 business district. So the idea that you can do a CBD
11:14:35 and a half, in 20 years in the Channel District, which
11:14:36 is less than 200 acres including the right to waive
11:14:39 the water, is we think very aggressive.
11:14:42 We also looked very hard at decisions you have made in
11:14:45 the past about government.
11:14:46 We have looked at the environmental, the buildings
11:14:49 that people live in, most of which are not high-rise
11:14:52 at this moment.

11:14:53 We looked at buildings under construction.
11:14:54 We looked at buildings being proposed.
11:14:58 So you have got that alternative.
11:15:09 Talking to Mr. Huey and Mr. Chen about, we would like
11:15:12 to present to you as an alternative that may take some
11:15:15 of the sting out of this part of our plan.
11:15:17 And it is to establish a common height throughout the
11:15:20 district of 175 feet.
11:15:24 If you recall, we had a base F.A.R., we call it F.A.R.
11:15:28 by right of 3.5 in the Channel District.
11:15:31 That means if you set up a nice project, you provide
11:15:35 the design elements that we are suggesting you
11:15:38 provide.
11:15:38 You can add 3.5.
11:15:41 We suggest 175 is a reasonable height by right in the
11:15:45 Channel District as well.
11:15:47 We chose that number for several reasons.
11:15:49 The lowest of the height limits that we originally
11:15:51 selected.
11:15:52 And we have done enough modeling to understand that
11:15:57 under most circumstances you could develop the maximum
11:16:00 5 F.A.R. at 175 feet.

11:16:04 However, we also believe, and it's important, that
11:16:10 individual projects, additional height, and you have a
11:16:16 number of them before you and you will have a number
11:16:17 of those before you in the future, and you have
11:16:20 already approved several of those in the past, recent
11:16:24 past.
11:16:25 We believe that based upon the context, the
11:16:27 compatibility of the surrounding land uses, the
11:16:30 quality of architecture, and the provision such as
11:16:36 additional building setbacks, in return for that
11:16:38 height, that you should be able to consider any
11:16:41 heights up to the F.A.R. limits.
11:16:46 That gives you a by-right height of 175, which is a
11:16:52 starting point or ending point depending on land
11:16:54 development reviews and design reviews, process, and
11:16:58 your decision in a public hearing, or you can approve
11:17:01 additional heights anywhere in the district.
11:17:05 That makes it a level playing field to all of those
11:17:08 who believe that the different height limits what was
11:17:12 not a level playing field.
11:17:14 We are also suggesting that you keep the 5.0 F.A.R.
11:17:19 document on the inside of your district and allow the

11:17:21 7 outside.
11:17:22 Let me just be very clear about why we are sticking
11:17:24 with that.
11:17:26 We are sticking with it because he would don't think
11:17:28 the neighborhood needs a different F.A.R. throughout
11:17:33 the district.
11:17:33 We think our development projections in this district
11:17:36 by allowing a maximum of 5 and those developers will
11:17:41 go for that 5.
11:17:42 Those will be very dense projects.
11:17:46 What we are afraid of is if you keep it at 7 you will
11:17:49 end up with very, very God projects that will absorb
11:17:52 demand just as it has happened in downtown for the
11:17:54 last 30 years.
11:17:56 So you built one big building, and it absorbs all the
11:17:59 demand from the marketplace for six or seven years.
11:18:02 That's why we have 35 empty blocks in downtown in the
11:18:06 year 2006.
11:18:10 So four or five empty blocks.
11:18:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: You just made a cogent argument for
11:18:19 why the F.A.R. is everyplace but the edge should be
11:18:22 five.

11:18:22 Why are you still recommending 7 on the perimeter,
11:18:28 port?
11:18:28 >>> It isn't just the port.
11:18:31 It's much larger property.
11:18:32 It's deeper property.
11:18:33 Some of it is privately owned.
11:18:35 Some of it is owned by the port.
11:18:37 Some of it is owned by the city.
11:18:38 >> But the argument that you just used was it would
11:18:41 allow big projects to suck up all the demand in the
11:18:46 future.
11:18:46 >>> Well, we think that -- that's a decision you're
11:18:49 going to have to make regardless of the decision you
11:18:52 make about height and F.A.R. in the plan.
11:18:54 You are going to have to modulate development
11:18:57 proposals in this district, and no one has the ability
11:19:02 to do that but the Tampa City Council.
11:19:04 What we are doing on the outside is we have a lot of
11:19:08 things we need in the district, and only the
11:19:11 properties on the outside are big enough to offer
11:19:13 them.
11:19:13 A master stormwater system is one of them.

11:19:16 A two-acre community park is another.
11:19:18 A grand upland riverwalk, Promenade, next to the
11:19:23 streetcar line, as well as serious security
11:19:27 considerations for all the port facilities.
11:19:29 So there will not be a wall of buildings.
11:19:31 And if the posture is to presume there will be or
11:19:35 buildings along Channelside Drive, there will be big
11:19:38 buildings, but there will also be views to the water,
11:19:41 preserved by views that have access to the water.
11:19:45 There is a third alternative I would like to discuss.
11:19:48 So that's our rationale second alternative that you
11:19:53 can have any height you want happen from a base height
11:19:55 of 175, keep the F.A.R.s the way we recommended them
11:19:58 at 5 and 7.
11:19:59 The third alternative is do what you want, if you
11:20:02 don't like these.
11:20:03 If you want to leave it like it is, you may do so.
11:20:06 You are in charge.
11:20:07 This is your city.
11:20:08 It's the mayor's city.
11:20:10 It is not my city.
11:20:12 I'm making a recommendation.

11:20:13 You have to decide.
11:20:15 You can leave the F.A.R. limits at 7.
11:20:17 You can leave the heights negotiable up to F.A.R.
11:20:21 limits which are going up by the way, so the 350 will
11:20:24 no longer be relevant.
11:20:25 The heights will get well over 400 feet in the very
11:20:28 near future.
11:20:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:20:32 >>> So those are my recommendations.
11:20:33 I just want to make it clear that I, my team, and Mr.
11:20:37 Jacob and the administration have tried very hard to
11:20:41 offer rational alternatives, and please be very
11:20:44 careful in your consideration of them, and please
11:20:46 understand that if we have people complaining things
11:20:51 are too high, things are too low, you may be doing
11:20:54 something right if only by accident.
11:20:57 I'll be happy to answer any questions.
11:20:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A quick comment.
11:21:00 Excuse me.
11:21:01 Just a quick comment.
11:21:03 I'm very pleased that you all came forward with this.
11:21:05 I'm very pleased that there are some alternatives that

11:21:09 as professionals you are proposing to us.
11:21:11 I am also pleased the recognition that at the end of
11:21:14 the day, council's decision as to what we do and we
11:21:18 can mix and match and we'll have deliberations,
11:21:22 extensive deliberations on this, as well as the rest
11:21:25 of your good work.
11:21:26 You have done good work.
11:21:28 The book is very impressive.
11:21:30 It's not just about height and F.A.R.s.
11:21:33 There's a lot of meat to that text.
11:21:35 And I urge everybody to take a look at it.
11:21:37 Thank you.
11:21:37 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Mr. English.
11:21:42 I think these alternatives, I think it's probably what
11:21:45 we were looking for.
11:21:47 At the end of the day it is our decision.
11:21:49 So I appreciate that you come forward with something,
11:21:52 and you will be able to continue this tonight when
11:21:58 discussions and so on, see where we go with it.
11:22:03 >>> Let me ask you, Ms. Alvarez, we can bring anything
11:22:05 you want.
11:22:08 This is really an opportunity for the public to talk

11:22:13 to you.
11:22:14 I would say we are prepared to come with our
11:22:16 PowerPoint.
11:22:16 If you would like 3-D I will have it.
11:22:20 It's there.
11:22:20 I will have a brief explanation of alternatives and
11:22:23 then turn it over to you all in the public
11:22:29 I am not interested in getting into a shouting debate
11:22:31 with anybody.
11:22:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We are not going to have a shouting
11:22:35 debate, I assure you.
11:22:36 I will have security there in case.
11:22:38 But Mickey, I'm glad you brought it over to us.
11:22:41 And I'm looking forward to tonight and putting some of
11:22:45 these questions to rest and getting on with this
11:22:48 strategic action plan.
11:22:49 Because as far as I'm concerned, this is the very
11:22:53 first neighborhood in the City of Tampa that -- other
11:22:58 than real north Tampa that we'll actually hands-on.
11:23:06 When the subdivisions over there in New Tampa were
11:23:08 built, they were just subdivisions, and we really
11:23:12 didn't have much to say about it.

11:23:13 But this was here.
11:23:17 >>> You are very close to having a grip on it.
11:23:20 And there's another thing I want to say, by the way.
11:23:22 We are hoping that you will accept this plan as a
11:23:24 policy guide.
11:23:24 But be careful how you use it.
11:23:26 Because you have to still go back and there will be
11:23:30 lots of time to talk about that.
11:23:31 It has to go back to the Planning Commission.
11:23:34 You have workshops.
11:23:35 And anything that would be a land development kind of
11:23:38 change.
11:23:38 It's really important that you can adopt as a policy
11:23:41 guide.
11:23:42 We begin working with the cities to do the
11:23:44 engineering, for the business structure, and get TECO
11:23:49 undergrounded and all of those things that are
11:23:50 critical.
11:23:51 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I'm anxious to get on with the
11:23:54 Planning Commission and anxious to get it on council
11:23:57 so we can go ahead with something that's going to
11:24:00 benefit the people that are going to live there.

11:24:06 I am not going to live there.
11:24:07 They are.
11:24:08 So we want to be sure they are happy with it.
11:24:09 Of course there's going to be people that are not
11:24:11 happy and people that are going to be really happy.
11:24:13 So let's go forward tonight and answer all the
11:24:17 questions and have a good debate about it.
11:24:20 Thank you.
11:24:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The best part, I think this is
11:24:27 great.
11:24:27 I think these alternatives will satisfy a lot of the
11:24:30 concerns of the community.
11:24:31 I know I have my favorite that I'm eager tonight to
11:24:34 hear from the public.
11:24:35 And Mrs. Alvarez, the one critical thing I think we
11:24:38 need is a three-minute time limit.
11:24:40 >>MARY ALVAREZ: You bet.
11:24:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: But the University of South Florida
11:24:45 will have the model there tonight.
11:24:47 And the best part of your work, the streetscape design
11:24:53 requirements that you put in.
11:24:54 That is really key to making this a walkable, livable

11:24:59 area.
11:25:00 And you have done that with the help very specifically
11:25:06 and it will make it the nicest streetscape in our
11:25:09 community if we implement all the recommendations.
11:25:10 And 90% of them come with a 3.5 F.A.R. as sort of the
11:25:17 basic package, like getting a luxury car for a base
11:25:20 price.
11:25:20 And I'm looking forward to that.
11:25:22 And the other good point you made is that the CRA plan
11:25:27 in the first place, we are going to start to have
11:25:30 revenues and we need to spend it on infra structure,
11:25:33 make sure the infrastructure is there so that the
11:25:36 people who live in the Channel District will have
11:25:38 stormwater needs met, will have water, basic
11:25:43 infrastructure in place by the time the development
11:25:44 occurs.
11:25:45 And with this plan we'll be able to do that in a
11:25:47 systematic way.
11:25:48 So thank you.
11:25:49 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And who knows?
11:25:51 Maybe I will move there after I get through.
11:25:53 (Laughter).

11:25:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:25:56 We are now on item number 9.
11:26:00 Oh, 17?
11:26:01 We go to 17.
11:26:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chen, tonight we need to have
11:26:16 color copies for all the people.
11:26:18 If someone on staff -- Mr. Smith.
11:26:23 The thing we got today, I don't believe those were
11:26:26 passed out to the audience today.
11:26:27 We need to have copies for everybody.
11:26:29 In the future, anytime something is given to council,
11:26:32 and it's a public meeting and the public wants to know
11:26:34 what's going on, it's important to have copies for the
11:26:36 public.
11:26:37 Thanks.
11:26:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, Mr. Smith.
11:26:43 >> Darrell Smith, chief of staff, here in response to
11:26:46 a council motion to address item 17, 18 and 19 that
11:26:52 pertain to the status of the conversation and
11:26:55 classification study for the City of Tampa.
11:26:58 I would like to give a few brief introduckry remarks
11:27:02 and then I'll introduce Dr. Ling who will go into the

11:27:06 results of the study or findings to date.
11:27:09 Since day one of this administration we have been
11:27:11 committed to ensuring that our employees are fairly
11:27:13 and equitably compensated for their work.
11:27:17 We recognized early on that there was a problem with
11:27:21 our retirement plan in relation to the retirement
11:27:23 plans of other jurisdictions that we compete for,
11:27:27 employees with, and we took steps to immediately
11:27:29 reduce our retirement plan from ten years to six
11:27:34 years.
11:27:35 We have also made a commitment to work toward
11:27:39 increasing the retirement multiplier, which was 1.1
11:27:43 when we took office, it's at 1.15 now.
11:27:47 We have the legislative proposal before the state
11:27:50 legislature at this point to increase it to 1.2.
11:27:54 The objective being to increase our multiplier to 1.6
11:27:58 so that it is the same as the state Florida retirement
11:28:05 system.
11:28:06 In addition to the benefits program,.
11:28:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How long do you think that will
11:28:11 take?
11:28:12 >>> We have to take an incremental approach to that.

11:28:14 Actually it's going to take until the mayor's second
11:28:16 term, and the commitment from this administration is
11:28:19 that it will be at 1.6 by the time she completes her
11:28:23 second term.
11:28:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
11:28:28 >>> Addition to the benefits program it's also
11:28:29 important to have a competitive and equitable salary
11:28:32 pay plan so that we can reward our current employees
11:28:36 and compete favorably in the marketplace for new
11:28:40 employees when we have vacancies.
11:28:41 And in order to size up or have an indication of where
11:28:46 our salary plan is in relationship to other markets
11:28:51 that we compete in, we needed to have a classification
11:28:54 and pay study.
11:28:55 And such a study has not been accomplished by an
11:28:59 outside, independent contractor in over 20 years with
11:29:04 the city.
11:29:04 And the objective was to use an independent, unbiased
11:29:10 expert in this field to come in and look at our salary
11:29:14 structure and provide us a recommendation on what, if
11:29:18 any, changes needed to be made in order to make it
11:29:22 competitive with the other marketplace.

11:29:24 We were very fortunate in that Hillsborough County
11:29:29 recently completed a very similar study last summer.
11:29:32 The consultant that completed that was MGC of America,
11:29:37 and in particular Dr. Ling, and we were able to
11:29:40 contract with Dr. Ling to do our study, also.
11:29:43 And that has proved very beneficial from the
11:29:46 standpoint of the knowledge and experience that they
11:29:49 gained at the local marketplace, that they applied to
11:29:54 what they have found here in the City of Tampa.
11:29:56 At this point I would like to introduce Dr. Jeffrey
11:30:00 ling.
11:30:03 >> Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the council.
11:30:06 I can very briefly take you through a short PowerPoint
11:30:09 that summarizes some of our findings to date.
11:30:14 Very, short, a few comments as to the approach, I
11:30:18 think many of you are aware we reached out to about
11:30:21 230 of your employees, conducted focus groups and
11:30:24 interviews and also asked each employee to take the
11:30:26 time to Croat or answer a questionnaire that would
11:30:29 tell us more about their individual jobs and what they
11:30:32 do on a day-to-day basis.
11:30:34 We collected salary data from some of your peers, as

11:30:37 Mr. Smith referred to, we did utilize some of the
11:30:39 targets that were in Hillsborough study, included in
11:30:43 the Hillsborough study, but we custom designed for the
11:30:45 City of Tampa as well.
11:30:47 We developed by combining that recommendation from the
11:30:51 market in conjunction with what we learned about the
11:30:54 individual jobs here.
11:30:55 At this point in phase one we are prepared to present
11:30:58 to you draft findings and recommendation.
11:31:00 If we take a look at the two phases the projects
11:31:03 divided up between phase one which we are now
11:31:06 completing and including your attorneys and legal
11:31:08 staff, your managers as well as your appointed staff
11:31:11 which includes DAs, executive aides in the city and
11:31:16 through April, to about October, we'll be looking at
11:31:19 your supervisory employees, professional employees and
11:31:22 general employees.
11:31:23 Some of the local benchmarks to the need of final
11:31:26 analysis, we started off with the I-4 corridor and
11:31:29 with the three counties, three cities and two school
11:31:31 districts that are contained within what we felt like
11:31:33 was the Department of Labor defines to be in the city.

11:31:39 In addition we looked at a variety of other public
11:31:42 benchmarks, various cities around the state,
11:31:44 additional county, as well as the cities around the
11:31:46 country that were of similar structure and size to the
11:31:48 City of Tampa.
11:31:49 All of the dollars Hoe and this is for salary that we
11:31:52 incorporated into our analysis, were City of Tampa
11:31:56 dollars meaning we control for cost of living so we
11:31:59 would be comparing apples to apples in the analysis we
11:32:02 conducted.
11:32:02 Some of the key points to keep in mind before we take
11:32:05 a look at the results from the analysis first being
11:32:07 that the results are primarily driven by the average
11:32:09 salary ranges, not actual pay.
11:32:11 We are not looking so much at what a certain person
11:32:16 would make in one jurisdiction versus another.
11:32:19 We are log at the minimum to the maximum.
11:32:21 In addition total compensation with a small component
11:32:24 of phase one will be a much larger component of phase
11:32:27 two meaning we have some preliminary things to share
11:32:29 with you in regards to benefits and total
11:32:31 compensation, and one of the primary areas being,

11:32:34 what's more what was alloweded to previously, that the
11:32:37 City of Tampa seems to be slightly behind or slightly
11:32:39 less generous in benefits compared to other
11:32:42 jurisdictions particularly in the retirement area.
11:32:44 I'll come back to that and visit that more.
11:32:47 The third point being that no two jurisdictions are
11:32:49 exactly alike.
11:32:51 As you go through a process like this with any
11:32:53 organization, public or private, you attempt to
11:32:54 maximize the similarities that exist between those
11:32:57 organizations, but typically they are different.
11:33:00 There is not another City of Tampa here in Florida
11:33:03 that's exactly like the City of Tampa.
11:33:04 There's not another City of Tampa anywhere else in the
11:33:08 country.
11:33:09 Finally we don't focus on the person as I alluded to
11:33:13 before so you will not see anything in our supporting
11:33:15 documentation where we are looking at Mr. Smith at one
11:33:18 location and Mr. Jones at another.
11:33:24 Pay range to clarify what that would include in
11:33:26 essence, we have the minimum pay level, what is the
11:33:31 midpoint, what is the maximum?

11:33:34 The dollar amounts.
11:33:35 Then we produced averages based on those dollars.
11:33:37 In addition we asked the number of employees that they
11:33:39 had in that classification as well as we asked them to
11:33:42 provide supplemental information on how someone needs
11:33:44 to be that range.
11:33:46 And they come in at the minimum, how do I end up at
11:33:50 the maximum in that process?
11:33:51 Here's an example to illustrate why we use ranges
11:33:55 versus the actual salary levels.
11:33:58 Sol I waste director for example, ranges for
11:34:01 Hillsborough County, 93,000 at the minimum to roughly
11:34:04 139,000 at the maximum.
11:34:06 City of Tampa 77,000 approximately to 122,000 at the
11:34:10 maximum.
11:34:11 The actual salaries for single incumbents, 105 for
11:34:16 Hillsborough County.
11:34:18 If we took only that last box the actual salary, we
11:34:20 might determine the City of Tampa was actually ahead
11:34:23 of the marketplace size in this single comparison.
11:34:26 However, when you look at the details with the ranges,
11:34:28 we find that actually the range of the City of Tampa

11:34:30 is behind what Hillsborough County would be.
11:34:33 In addition looking at the next level down, what we
11:34:36 found, that the job duties are different.
11:34:39 Hillsborough County outsources much of its function,
11:34:42 utilize the city staff, 200 city staff perform this
11:34:46 function.
11:34:46 In addition the two individuals from different levels
11:34:48 of years of service.
11:34:50 And the person I believe the City of Tampa has been
11:34:53 here three or four years.
11:34:55 So that's why we don't use -- that's why we don't use
11:34:59 simply the actual salaries in making our comparisons.
11:35:03 If we take a look if he results, and probably this is
11:35:06 one of the most important slides in the presentation,
11:35:10 this is what we found when when looked at the complete
11:35:12 public market, that previously appeared on the slide,
11:35:15 the local market in conjunction with the other
11:35:16 benchmarks, we find that the city is slightly ahead of
11:35:19 the 50th percentile at the minimum, the midpoint
11:35:22 and the maximum.
11:35:23 The private sector and surprisingly we find that you
11:35:26 start off people close to the initiation point of the

11:35:30 public sector but someone who has a career in the
11:35:33 private sector are outpaced.
11:35:35 Finally the competing market what we find is that
11:35:38 roughly between 3 and 4% of the maximum being
11:35:41 approximately 5% are above the 50th percentile.
11:35:45 What does this mean overall?
11:35:47 What it means is you are slightly above the average
11:35:49 for the marketplace.
11:35:51 What it means is you are exactly in line where you
11:35:53 should be.
11:35:54 As an organization in order to recruit staff.
11:35:56 One caveat that I would adhere.
11:35:59 For many organizations especially in Florida, the
11:36:02 competition that exists in regards to labor, it's
11:36:05 important to determine where you want to be in the
11:36:07 marketplace, because typically as you move above the
11:36:10 50th percentile you are able to recruit a little
11:36:13 more aggressively for the best and brightest
11:36:15 candidates.
11:36:16 Typically as an organization lags behind that
11:36:20 percentage they have greater and greater pressure with
11:36:23 recruitments and also retention in order to retain

11:36:26 employees over a period of time.
11:36:28 If we take a look at the next slide we made a series
11:36:31 of recommendations that specifically relate to
11:36:32 classification that is were identified that should
11:36:34 receive a pay grade move.
11:36:36 I want to clarify or add the of a caveat here, doesn't
11:36:40 imply that pay increase will occur for individuals,
11:36:42 simply indicate that based on the market data these
11:36:45 classifications appear to be more than 5% behind or
11:36:47 greater.
11:36:49 Than your peer organizations that we take a look at.
11:36:52 Parks director, public arts manager, chief engineer,
11:36:57 auditor, chief executive office manager are among
11:37:00 those included in that analysis.
11:37:02 In addition we found you have redundancy.
11:37:04 A part of our review looked at the overall structure
11:37:07 of the pay plan, not so much individual jobs but how
11:37:09 you organize these jobs from a pay standpoint.
11:37:11 We saw that your pay rates where your aides are
11:37:15 located, unclassified staff, has a lot of overlap with
11:37:19 your pay rates, including your professional and
11:37:23 supervisory.

11:37:24 That group is contained in phase two.
11:37:26 However based on the results received in phase one we
11:37:29 felt it was appropriate that these two plans be
11:37:33 combined.
11:37:34 So we made a series of recommendations, we approved
11:37:37 the recommendations here -- by the groups of employees
11:37:40 based on their duties, the position of their job,
11:37:45 highest level of complexity being the executive office
11:37:47 manager, then moving into your legislative aids,
11:37:50 administrators, executive aide, the department aide,
11:37:53 our executive aide, finally your office support aide.
11:37:56 And we have indicated from across what standpoint
11:37:59 their current grade in the AU pay plan and then the
11:38:02 proposed grade they would fall within as they would be
11:38:05 moved over into the pay plan.
11:38:15 It this would simply be the ranges that person falls
11:38:18 within.
11:38:18 To take a look at a couple of key points for
11:38:20 implementation, no major pay plan changes should occur
11:38:23 until the end of the study.
11:38:25 So at this point we are not recommending to you to
11:38:27 move forward with the recommendation.

11:38:28 What we are asking you to do is take a look at them
11:38:30 for your consideration.
11:38:32 And as we move through this process we will be keeping
11:38:34 them in mind essentially updating them based on things
11:38:36 that we learn.
11:38:37 In addition, no employee would receive a base cut.
11:38:42 So if an employee were to move into a lower grade than
11:38:45 previously, that employee re-- application resided, no
11:38:49 dollars would be taken away from that employee as a
11:38:51 result.
11:38:51 And finally, there may be some additional
11:38:53 recommendations that come out of the second phase that
11:38:55 would impact the first phase.
11:38:57 And let me give you an example.
11:38:59 Typically if you find that lower level employees are
11:39:02 undercompensated and the lower levels are moved up or
11:39:06 grades moved up as a result of that analysis there's a
11:39:08 ripple effect or secondary effect that occurs in the
11:39:11 high ranking employees, the other pay plan.
11:39:13 We want to leave the option open once we look at the
11:39:15 direct report, some of the managers that we reviewed,
11:39:18 as well as we look at your other pay plan to make

11:39:22 adjustments once we have the whole picture sometime in
11:39:24 the month of October of this year.
11:39:26 Some of the next steps, we really move into the bulk
11:39:28 of the study from this point forward.
11:39:31 2800 employees will be involved in the next phase.
11:39:34 As I mentioned before our target date is October to
11:39:36 complete that phase.
11:39:37 Once that component is finished the results are merged
11:39:40 between phase one and phase two and brought together
11:39:43 and we are sure they are valid as well as there is not
11:39:47 overlap that a person could move through your pay
11:39:49 plan, to begin a career with the city in a low level
11:39:52 position but with higher level position in the system.
11:39:56 In addition we will have more total compensation,
11:39:58 total benefit data.
11:39:59 Be able to make recommendation to you in regards to
11:40:01 your benefit plan.
11:40:03 And we'll provide some guidance on potential scenarios
11:40:06 of implementation.
11:40:11 >> I appreciate your attention and will answer any
11:40:15 questions you might have.
11:40:16 >> Dr. Ling, when you briefed me on this yesterday, I

11:40:19 asked, you had listed several of the benchmarks that
11:40:24 we looked at.
11:40:25 But you mentioned to me that there were many that you
11:40:27 request information from but chose not to give it.
11:40:30 Do you have any sort of listing of that that's
11:40:33 available for council members?
11:40:35 >>> We do.
11:40:39 >> And just out of curiosity, have you done these
11:40:42 things for other municipalities before?
11:40:45 >>> We have.
11:40:46 Throughout my career I have probably worked with 40
11:40:48 municipalities or counties per year.
11:40:49 I work only in the public sector.
11:40:52 And currently I'm working with somewhere between 18
11:40:55 and 20 depending on the phase of the project that we
11:40:57 are prepared to complete.
11:40:59 I did lead the project with Hillsborough County,
11:41:02 working with Seminole cot, Titusville, city of
11:41:04 Gulfport, worked with a variety of entities throughout
11:41:07 the state.
11:41:08 Lake Worth, Boynton beach.
11:41:11 So we have worked in the State of Florida.

11:41:14 In addition we have worked in other parts of the
11:41:17 country, along the southeastern see board.
11:41:20 >> Do you know how many of the cities you have looked
11:41:23 at in the past either as the study itself, that city
11:41:27 or else the other cities, as part of their studies,
11:41:32 how many of those have council members that are
11:41:34 part-time versus full-time?
11:41:40 >>> Throughout my career the majority had part-time
11:41:43 versus full-time.
11:41:44 There are some exceptions to that, that had full-time
11:41:47 council members.
11:41:49 There has been a mix.
11:41:50 And what we have seen in the past.
11:41:51 Probably four years ago, the Florida legislature asked
11:41:54 me to look at elected officials in the state and their
11:41:57 compensation levels, partially to determine where the
11:41:59 pool of these images were coming from, but also to
11:42:02 look at what could be done that would encourage more
11:42:04 individuals to enter public service through the form
11:42:06 of elected office.
11:42:07 And when looked at not only the State of Florida but a
11:42:09 variety of other southern states to give feedback, and

11:42:15 we did find that mix and that was ironically one of
11:42:17 the issues that could be a detriment, or one of the
11:42:20 determine @ on whether someone would compete for
11:42:25 public service or not.
11:42:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Alvarez?
11:42:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Dr. Ling.
11:42:30 Yesterday we had a very inning conversation, as you
11:42:32 showed us your report.
11:42:37 One of the questions that I didn't ask you was, what
11:42:39 would preclude us from raising the classification for
11:42:45 the council members?
11:42:48 Would that be something that would come from the
11:42:51 administration?
11:42:52 Or would that -- sorry.
11:43:01 Forget the eight council members.
11:43:04 We're just part-time.
11:43:06 (Laughter).
11:43:07 But what would preclude them from going to another
11:43:11 grade level?
11:43:15 >>> We looked at this issue knew quite a bit of
11:43:17 detail.
11:43:17 And I came up personally and met with the aide, spent

11:43:21 time reviewing the material that they prepared for me.
11:43:24 They did a wonderful job providing supporting
11:43:26 materials.
11:43:26 They completed the JCQ as part of the process.
11:43:29 I guess to answer your question.
11:43:32 In reference to what we found here in the City of
11:43:34 Tampa you're extremely competitive, with the range
11:43:37 that you're compensating the aides.
11:43:39 What we found around the state, the maximum average
11:43:42 was 55,000.
11:43:44 I believe they are at 65,000.
11:43:47 And as a result using the same rules and methodology
11:43:50 that we applied to the other employees that were
11:43:52 included in the study, that would not warrant an
11:43:55 increase of the grade for the aide based on the
11:43:57 results that we received.
11:44:03 I guess to make a change, it would take an action on
11:44:05 the part of the administration that would go outside
11:44:07 of the market data.
11:44:07 In essence, a decision to ignore the market data and
11:44:10 to make a change in order to make that adjustment.
11:44:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, I think my reason for asking is

11:44:17 because the cost of living goes up, has gone up
11:44:21 extremely -- gas, food, living conditions, everything,
11:44:28 stormwater fees, all these things that, you know, when
11:44:32 you get an employee that's up at that range there,
11:44:35 well, they are actually looking for some relief
11:44:41 because of the cost of living going up.
11:44:43 And if you keep them at that range even though you are
11:44:45 giving them the cost of living increase, whatever it
11:44:47 is, which is very low, what incentive does that give
11:44:52 them?
11:44:53 >> I do believe it's three and a half.
11:44:55 As you alluded to, that takes place that would move
11:44:59 them, and in some years might keep pace with the cost
11:45:01 of living in the city.
11:45:06 Probably the most important thing a person in
11:45:09 organization can if it wants to take a market approach
11:45:12 like the city has in the past would be to offer
11:45:14 promotional opportunities or other opportunities
11:45:16 outside of the classification that the aides are
11:45:20 currently doing.
11:45:21 For example, I might be an aide for the city and I
11:45:23 might spend time in that classification.

11:45:24 Maybe I have been in another classification before but
11:45:27 there would be other promotional opportunities outside
11:45:29 of being a legislative aide that would be available to
11:45:32 to me within the city and would be able to move within
11:45:35 the classification as part of my career development or
11:45:38 part of my tenure with the city.
11:45:40 We see that in a variety of jurisdictions not only at
11:45:42 the local level but at the state level where a person
11:45:44 gained those expertise that an aide does possess and
11:45:48 then goes and applies them in other parts of
11:45:50 government.
11:45:51 And typically, as they make that move, there's an
11:45:53 additional compensation as they move through the other
11:45:55 parts of the system.
11:45:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
11:45:58 >>KEVIN WHITE: Mr. Ling, I appreciate our conversation
11:46:01 yesterday, too.
11:46:02 It was enlightening.
11:46:05 I just want to real quickly, there's one question I
11:46:08 had.
11:46:09 Well, a couple of questions.
11:46:10 The first question, the executive office manager, I

11:46:13 see that classification has changed, and all of the
11:46:17 classifications have changed.
11:46:18 One has been reduced.
11:46:25 That's the only one that has decreased.
11:46:27 What is the definition of the executive office
11:46:29 manager?
11:46:31 >>> We are looking at the equivalent of the mayor's
11:46:35 executive aide.
11:46:36 That person has direct report and it's our
11:46:39 understanding in the past in previous administration
11:46:41 that person was actually classified higher than
11:46:44 currently a classification that person hold.
11:46:46 When we did the review and we looked at the JCQ of
11:46:50 that person as well as other supplemental information
11:46:53 we were able to get it from other jurisdictions,
11:46:55 typically that position is not apart from the other
11:47:01 position and if there's direct oversight duty,
11:47:01 managerial duty, it's compensated on the managerial
11:47:04 pay plan, vis-a-vis employment or professional people.
11:47:10 >>KEVIN WHITE: Then your phase one and phase two will
11:47:12 be looking at supervisory, professional and dual
11:47:15 employees.

11:47:16 Are you going to be looking at the exact same city as
11:47:18 you did for phase one, for phase two?
11:47:20 Or are you going to go out and pick different cities
11:47:22 again for phase two?
11:47:25 >>> That's a very gad question.
11:47:26 Typically, when we do the phase two, if we are able to
11:47:29 provide the sample, we do select a larger sample, to
11:47:34 begin with, because it's reaching out to a much larger
11:47:39 group of employees, 2800.
11:47:41 There are a lot of additional classes included in
11:47:43 phase 2 versus what's included in phase 1.
11:47:47 However, we will include everyone that was included in
11:47:49 phase 1 and we will supplement that with additional
11:47:53 county or other organizations.
11:47:54 >>KEVIN WHITE: I won't say that I agree and or
11:47:58 disagree with that approach.
11:48:00 I just find it -- because it seems that, as I on the
11:48:05 bonus, when you change your random sampling poll, it
11:48:11 tends to skew the numbers any which way you want them
11:48:14 to because you can put in the numbers that are the
11:48:19 highest or the lowest, because we'll never know what
11:48:23 you pick until what you pick.

11:48:25 You can pick your top best or your top worst or --
11:48:33 especially by the administration, whatever the
11:48:36 administration wants to see.
11:48:37 I'm not saying that that's the direction.
11:48:41 I'm just saying input of what the payee is seeing.
11:48:51 I just want to express my interest or my concern, and
11:48:57 not use the same ramdom sampling pool that we used for
11:49:01 phase one that we use for phase two, that it's good
11:49:05 enough for all of the other attorneys and legal staff,
11:49:10 managers.
11:49:19 >>> I would like to respond. The question that you
11:49:21 raise is a question that we receive all over the
11:49:23 country, typically.
11:49:24 One of the reasons, not so much -- I guess I'll add
11:49:30 the caveat that our reputation is based on
11:49:33 objectivity.
11:49:34 Because we work with so many jurisdictions over and
11:49:36 over again, and we look to be a major provider in the
11:49:39 market, we have come to provide the most objective and
11:49:43 the most defendable that we can of our peers that are
11:49:48 present in the marketplace.
11:49:49 One of the reasons why we typically have to supplement

11:49:51 the larger group is because of the uniqueness of some
11:49:54 of the jobs.
11:49:55 And to have sufficient amount of respondents that have
11:49:59 that specific job sometimes requires that we
11:50:01 oversample in this classification.
11:50:03 An example would be, for the county study, we
11:50:09 specifically oversampled employees to make sure we had
11:50:12 a sample for fire and police, and we had a different
11:50:16 sample frame than the managers to ensure we were
11:50:18 pake -- picking up some of the mid-level staff that
11:50:21 would be in engineering positions, would be in
11:50:24 planning.
11:50:24 >>KEVIN WHITE: I don't have a problem with
11:50:27 oversampling.
11:50:27 The potential problem that I would have is the cherry
11:50:31 picking of the oversampling.
11:50:43 It is what it is.
11:50:44 It's nothing you have to defend at this time.
11:50:47 I'm just making that comment.
11:50:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:50:50 I thought that our conversation yesterday was very
11:50:52 productive, and it gave me a great understanding of

11:50:56 the direction which you are looking, and I think
11:50:59 something that might be useful for the leadership of
11:51:01 council members is a number that you shared with me,
11:51:07 the number of employees who are at the top of their
11:51:10 pay grades.
11:51:10 You said it was very significant that there's so many
11:51:13 who were impacted by that.
11:51:17 You can share that.
11:51:18 >>> I believe Darryl shared that with us yesterday and
11:51:22 I believe the number was close to 50%.
11:51:25 Necessary the maximum or at the maximum of individual
11:51:27 ranges.
11:51:27 So there will be a large number of individuals that
11:51:29 will be in a position that the cost of living increase
11:51:34 they will not be receiving increases unless phase two
11:51:38 is something different than what we have learned up to
11:51:40 this point.
11:51:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just quickly.
11:51:49 As to your objectivity and professionalism I have no
11:51:52 reason to doubt either.
11:51:53 I guess the key question is, when you brought back the
11:51:57 results of your analysis to the administration, is it

11:52:02 pretty much the same thing that we're just hearing
11:52:05 today?
11:52:06 Or did the administration modify it so we would have a
11:52:09 different presentation?
11:52:12 >>> When we present our initial findings to the
11:52:13 administration we ask them for feedback.
11:52:15 And we typically -- typically the feedback would
11:52:19 involve first the factual errors.
11:52:21 Have we utilized data from the city that's incorrect?
11:52:24 So in essence, have we included something that's going
11:52:26 to give us the wrong result?
11:52:28 There were several individuals that had left city
11:52:30 employment from the December database to the point at
11:52:33 which we completed our analysis.
11:52:36 The second phase we go through with the city are we
11:52:39 typically ask, are we comparing apples to apples?
11:52:42 Can we receive clarification information related to
11:52:44 some of the jobs?
11:52:45 There were several of the jobs that were identified
11:52:47 two us -- to us that appeared similar to the City of
11:52:50 Tampa but once we received further information from
11:52:54 the administration and some employees affected by the

11:52:56 study we were able to clarify and make some
11:52:58 adjustments based on our records.
11:53:01 The third round typically is when do the reality
11:53:03 check.
11:53:04 Does it make sense versus other clients that we have
11:53:06 encountered in other jurisdictions?
11:53:08 The City of Tampa has been gad enough to complete
11:53:10 surveys for us for years, for other studies that we
11:53:13 have done.
11:53:13 So we have a database, track pretty well what where
11:53:18 the city has been and where the city is going.
11:53:20 Those are the checks and balances that we go through.
11:53:22 At no point do city officials, administrators, come to
11:53:25 me or any staff and indicate, I don't like what you
11:53:28 found, I want something different.
11:53:29 If that were to be the case, we would have asked to
11:53:31 end the engagement at that time.
11:53:38 >> But you don't play by those rules.
11:53:40 And we appreciate that.
11:53:41 And going back to my initial comment, I think it's a
11:53:45 fine summary.
11:53:46 In speaking to you and Mr. Smith yesterday, the

11:53:49 ultimate document you must be working off of is, what,
11:53:52 100 pages or 200 pages, something like that.
11:53:55 We look forward to receiving that.
11:53:58 >>> I believe you will receive that today.
11:54:00 We wanted to have the briefing first.
11:54:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Usually -- it's a little bit of the
11:54:05 horse before the cart because frankly I know all of us
11:54:09 would rather see the document and then get the
11:54:11 summary.
11:54:11 But I guess if we have any more questions you will be
11:54:15 available.
11:54:15 >>> I will be more than happy to answer.
11:54:17 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Adjusts one more question, Dr. Ling.
11:54:20 When you mention 50% of the employees were at their
11:54:23 maximum range, did that include the employees that
11:54:26 were newly employed?
11:54:30 >>> It would only include the newly employed if the
11:54:33 person was hired at the maximum.
11:54:36 If the person was not at the maximum they should not
11:54:38 be at the maximum currently.
11:54:39 I do believe there are a few examples where because of
11:54:42 market pressures, the amount of time it's taken the

11:54:46 city to hire someone into a classification, the city
11:54:48 is paying at the maximum.
11:54:50 But I believe -- I don't have that exact number in
11:54:54 front of me.
11:54:55 That would not be at the more senior levels.
11:54:58 Would you pay anywhere within your range in order to
11:55:00 pay the candidate you require but the majority of
11:55:03 those individuals have been here for a period of time.
11:55:07 >>ROSE FERLITA: Dr. Ling, I think back to one of the
11:55:10 comments that Mr. White made, I didn't meet you this
11:55:15 time around purposefully.
11:55:17 And I'll briefly explain that.
11:55:20 But I don't think -- and certainly I won't speak for
11:55:22 Mr. White -- that the insinuation was it is skewed.
11:55:27 But depending on what depending on what the growth
11:55:34 patterns are for the particular city, that that's the
11:55:37 reality, and these the concern.
11:55:41 What did you pick?
11:55:42 Where did you get them?
11:55:43 Who made the decision about what city?
11:55:45 That's kind of rhetorical question.
11:55:47 So that certainly effects the figures we are going to

11:55:50 look at.
11:55:51 I purposely didn't want to meet with you or anybody
11:55:54 else at this point because to me my concern was more
11:55:57 focused on the hourly wage.
11:56:01 Now based on that, hopefully at the end of this study,
11:56:03 we will have a little bit more mature conversation
11:56:05 about that.
11:56:06 But you're saying that there will be no pay cut
11:56:09 regardless of what is going to happen in terms of data
11:56:12 received and data coupleulated.
11:56:14 Is that right?
11:56:15 >>> Yes, ma'am.
11:56:15 The future potential earning could be lost as a
11:56:18 result.
11:56:21 If I'm not at my maximum, no one will lose take-home
11:56:30 pay.
11:56:30 >> But if you are at the max an the max stays the same
11:56:33 or gets lower you are not going to get cut as an
11:56:36 hourly employer.
11:56:37 However, other than the CPI or the CODA, however you
11:56:43 want to tag it, where is the consideration going
11:56:47 that's taking away incentive for the hourly wage?

11:56:51 For me that's my focus.
11:56:52 I really don't care as much as the rest of what we are
11:56:55 doing because those are controlled.
11:56:57 But what do you think is the way to handle that?
11:57:01 We have taken -- I think we talked about this at the
11:57:04 beginning of our conversation.
11:57:05 If you remember, I do, and it's been awhile.
11:57:07 Tau away that incentive.
11:57:08 What makes me want to be an excellent employee as
11:57:11 opposed to a good employee, just get the 3%?
11:57:16 I am going to get it anyway.
11:57:17 What happens if we want to get some benefit out of
11:57:19 this study?
11:57:20 What is your suggestion for that?
11:57:22 I know it's an administration decision.
11:57:24 But what do you think?
11:57:26 >>> We have probably identified one of the most
11:57:29 important issues in the 21st century for public
11:57:32 sector compensation.
11:57:33 In many ways the public sector -- and I think we
11:57:36 touched on this the day that we met -- the public
11:57:38 sector has moved toward wanting to cap in essence what

11:57:42 the maximum value of the job would be.
11:57:44 So combination skills capabilities, is worth a certain
11:57:49 dollar and tide to market in that jurisdiction.
11:57:51 However, once the person reaches whether it be over a
11:57:53 five-year period, ten-year period, 15-year period,
11:57:56 that maximum, or whether they are hired in the first
11:57:58 day of that maximum, there is a motivation reduction,
11:58:01 or potentially can be when the research has shown as a
11:58:04 result of that. Where a lot of public entities are
11:58:08 going is looking at some tape of pay for perform form
11:58:13 answer or bonus that would operate as a supplemental
11:58:17 to the pay ranges if it's a nonrecurring compensation
11:58:20 plan that would allow an organization to reward their
11:58:23 employee.
11:58:24 But it wouldn't go into their base pay.
11:58:26 If you add that into the base pay you are rewarding
11:58:28 that person for work they did in a previous year
11:58:30 throughout their career.
11:58:31 Maybe you have a star performer for several years and
11:58:36 after that they are an average performer.
11:58:37 They still have a cumulative effect if you add that
11:58:41 into the base salary versus if you make it a one-time

11:58:44 payment.
11:58:45 There's no holy grail, there's no perfect solution
11:58:47 here.
11:58:48 A lot of organizations are experimenting with what
11:58:50 combination could be utilized to still provide
11:58:53 incentives for the employee.
11:58:55 They are fully competent, high performers, but not do
11:58:58 it within the context of the base salary range.
11:59:02 >> Well, that would be valid and I would agree with
11:59:04 you except I think the expectation and hope of an
11:59:06 hourly waged employee here is grim to none in terms of
11:59:09 getting a bonus or some sort of a compensation other
11:59:13 than a salary.
11:59:14 The second component of that, in deference of the
11:59:17 hourly wage, if we find they are not as high as they
11:59:20 should be paid because this compensation has taken a
11:59:23 long time to be comprehensive -- and I understand
11:59:25 that.
11:59:26 I have a problem don't have a problem with the Tim
11:59:29 frame -- if there's some consideration to doing a
11:59:31 retroactive adjustment for the hourly wage.
11:59:34 Not for to you decide.

11:59:36 But has that been brought up in conversation?
11:59:39 >>> We typically with every client we work with
11:59:41 provide a retroactive set of numbers, as well as we
11:59:43 provide future, data implementations.
11:59:47 So we typically run a variety of different
11:59:49 implementation strategies.
11:59:52 Has that been something we discussed with the
11:59:53 administration?
11:59:54 No.
11:59:55 We have not discussed that.
11:59:56 Specifically we run a variety of approaches that could
11:59:58 be used from a cost standpoint.
11:59:59 >> And my last comment, and please don't take this as
12:00:03 negative but it's reality to me.
12:00:05 Again I didn't want to meet with you at this juncture
12:00:07 because my focus again is on hourly wage.
12:00:11 They don't have any control or very little control
12:00:14 about what's going to happen to their hourly wage or
12:00:17 their salary.
12:00:18 I'm sure you didn't do this because it probably
12:00:22 wouldn't apply at this point but I think if I remember
12:00:25 correctly -- and please correct me if I am wrong --

12:00:27 whenever there is preliminary discussion, it showed,
12:00:31 or did it not show, that upper management was at least
12:00:35 as much of other municipalities or higher?
12:00:39 >>> I believe the article indicated --
12:00:44 >> Well, what does your data indicate?
12:00:46 >>> Well, thank you, that will be easier for me to
12:00:48 answer.
12:00:48 My data, the data that we collected over the course of
12:00:50 the study indicates that management would be slightly
12:00:53 higher than the 50th percentile. The
12:00:55 interpretation of that in each organization is
12:00:58 slightly different, i.e., maybe aware that the county
12:01:00 has a policy that commission put into place that they
12:01:03 want to be at the 50th percentile and their goal
12:01:06 is to be there, and their study depending on which cut
12:01:09 of the data ware looking at, we found they are
12:01:11 somewhere between 3 and 4% ahead of that 50th
12:01:14 percentile.
12:01:15 As a result, they made some adjustments in what they
12:01:18 are doing in regards to merit the next two years.
12:01:21 Where you are at, as well as being slightly ahead of
12:01:23 the 50th percentile, there's a plus or minus

12:01:27 factors that goes into this.
12:01:28 On average most jurisdictions in Florida get somewhere
12:01:30 between 5 and 7%.
12:01:32 Not only to the high level employees but the lower
12:01:35 level employees each year.
12:01:36 The fact that the city is within that 5 to 7% range
12:01:39 plus or minus the 50th percentile simply means you
12:01:43 are in that average area.
12:01:44 And so you are not paying dramatically more.
12:01:47 Nor are you paying dramatically less.
12:01:50 >> The comparisons said that we were at the high end
12:01:53 executive staff level on her report.
12:01:55 >>> I believe her report used actual salaries.
12:01:58 That's exact.
12:01:59 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's why my closing comment here.
12:02:02 Please again don't misconstrue this.
12:02:04 But I really don't care or don't care much about where
12:02:07 we are at this point, because when we get to the
12:02:09 hourly wage person again, they don't have any
12:02:12 mechanism to make sure they are getting treated
12:02:14 fairly.
12:02:17 Whether or not the salaries of the executive staff

12:02:18 were more in keeping before the administration made
12:02:21 some adjustments or not, that we are talking about
12:02:27 this study, and we are using your expert and
12:02:30 everything that you are bringing to the table, but the
12:02:32 mayor, without the benefit of this study, without the
12:02:35 benefit of the study, if you go back, I think I'm
12:02:37 accurate, she adjusted the pay range, not the pay
12:02:42 scale but the pay range of her executive staff,
12:02:44 several times.
12:02:46 So that kind of makes me focus on the hourly wage
12:02:49 person that doesn't have the benefit of that executive
12:02:52 decision.
12:02:53 So that's why it certainly was not discounting meeting
12:02:57 with you again.
12:02:57 I'm sure we'll have that opportunity.
12:02:59 But so far,ies not the nuts and bolts for me, the
12:03:04 hourly wage that I need some discussion about.
12:03:14 >> Point of order.
12:03:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Point of order is council rule is
12:03:18 we stop at 12.
12:03:20 I think this council is oh-discussion is not going to
12:03:23 be another ten five minutes, it's going to be another

12:03:26 ten minutes.
12:03:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before the point of personal privy
12:03:28 wanted to recognize my mother, Azeele.
12:03:35 A Dell.
12:03:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to make a motion that --
12:03:49 >>> Madam Chair, if I may, I would be glad to come
12:03:51 back after lunch when Ms. Ferlita is available to
12:03:53 provide a response.
12:03:57 >>GWEN MILLER: We will break for lunch and come back
12:04:00 at one.
12:04:04 Want to come back early?
12:04:05 1:15.
12:04:06 We will recess until 1:15.
12:04:11 (Tampa City Council recess.)
13:11:24 -=-
13:22:07 [Sounding gavel]
13:22:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
13:22:10 order.
13:22:10 Roll call.
13:22:14 [Roll Call]
13:22:17 >> we are going back to item number -- what is it,

13:22:23 number 17?
13:22:24 18?
13:22:25 Mr. Darrell Smith is up.
13:22:36 >> Good afternoon Madam Chair and council members.
13:22:39 I appreciate the opportunity to come back up to
13:22:42 further discuss the classification study.
13:22:44 I would like to bring up a few points, and take a
13:22:49 limited amount of time to provide some input that I
13:22:53 felt we needed to address especially with regard to
13:22:59 our managers as well as hourly employees.
13:23:01 One of the first things I would like to point out to
13:23:03 council is the reason that we are taking a two-page --
13:23:09 two-page study approach, we are in phase one focusing
13:23:13 on managers and department heads as we go through the
13:23:17 study, because we realize that trees there's going to
13:23:20 be a learning curve during this process, that our
13:23:23 managers and department heads need to be aware of
13:23:25 before we expand the study into the 2800 employees
13:23:29 that are going to be involved in phase two.
13:23:33 So there's a lot of learning. There's a lot of
13:23:35 knowledge that needs to come out of phase one in order
13:23:38 for us to go forth and respond appropriately to

13:23:42 inquiries that we get from employees, whether they be
13:23:44 hourly employees or manager employees or supervisors
13:23:48 in phase two.
13:23:49 So it is disappointing that we do not have all members
13:23:55 of council taking the opportunity to hear with him,
13:24:00 meet with him and get the opportunity to get the
13:24:03 additional information that we are trying to provide
13:24:05 as a foundation for phase two of the study.
13:24:09 Now the hourly employees in the city, they do the real
13:24:17 hard work in the city.
13:24:18 They are invaluable.
13:24:19 And the pay and classification, compensation study, is
13:24:23 exactly what they need in order to determine whether
13:24:26 or not their current pay grades are accurate in
13:24:30 relationship to the market.
13:24:33 What I mentioned before was our pay grades have not
13:24:37 been updated especially by an outside independent
13:24:41 source in over 20 years.
13:24:42 Updating those in relationship to the market and using
13:24:44 other jurisdictions to compare what we have with what
13:24:49 they have is a great opportunity for the hourly
13:24:52 employees to potentially raise their maximum range

13:24:56 above what it currently is today and what it has been.
13:25:00 It also provides the opportunity for those phase two
13:25:04 employees as hourly employees to demonstrate through
13:25:07 the completion of the job content questionnaire
13:25:10 exactly what their duties and responsibilities are,
13:25:14 and to show the independent, unbiased consultants what
13:25:19 is required of their job, and to try to demonstrate
13:25:22 that they do deserve a higher maximum range or
13:25:25 possibly a different pay range, gray grade altogether.
13:25:29 So it's very important that they complete the job
13:25:32 content questionnaires to have that potential to
13:25:34 increase pay grade.
13:25:37 Now, those that are at max -- and there will be folks
13:25:42 after they complete phase two of the study, that the
13:25:45 determination will be made that there is no change in
13:25:47 their pay grade and they are still at max.
13:25:50 The question was, what incentive do they have in order
13:25:53 to continue to perform and continue to perform at an
13:25:57 excellent level?
13:25:59 The incentive that they have is to demonstrate their
13:26:02 capability and to document their capability in the
13:26:06 evaluation process so that they can be considered for

13:26:10 promotion to hair pay grade.
13:26:13 So it's not only the merit pay in your existing grade
13:26:16 that you're worried about having the opportunity to
13:26:18 move up.
13:26:19 It is demonstrating through the personnel evaluation
13:26:22 process that you are ready, qualified and able to move
13:26:27 to higher pay grade.
13:26:28 So that's a very important motivator for all employees
13:26:32 in the city.
13:26:34 Now, one of the things that I would like to
13:26:36 reemphasize, and the independent nature of this study
13:26:41 and the need for objectivity in the study and the need
13:26:48 not to bring bias into this study based on what we
13:26:49 have heard, what we have been told or what we think.
13:26:52 That is exactly the reason why we went to an outside
13:26:55 source, is to get someone that is not biased by what
13:26:59 we have done in the city over the years, and that can
13:27:02 come in here and use industry-accepted standards,
13:27:06 methods and techniques, and provide us findings and
13:27:09 recommendations that we can use to readjust our salary
13:27:12 scale.
13:27:13 So the objectivity provided by Dr. Ling and his group

13:27:17 is very important aspect to this study.
13:27:21 And certainly the media reports, as we all know,
13:27:24 should be not used as an indicator, and certainly
13:27:28 preliminary media reports, not be used as an indicator
13:27:32 of where we are within the salary ranges, or what the
13:27:36 study results are going to show.
13:27:37 In fact, what Dr. Ling's PowerPoint presentation shows
13:27:42 here today, with regard to the comments about the
13:27:46 higher level employees in the city being overpaid,
13:27:48 what it showed is that we are online with other
13:27:52 jurisdictions that are comparable to us.
13:27:56 50% of them, approximately, are paying higher, 50% are
13:28:02 lower.
13:28:03 I submit to you that's a good position for the city to
13:28:05 be in.
13:28:07 Not anywhere close to the position where we would be
13:28:09 considered to have the higher ranked paid being
13:28:13 overpaid or the higher pay ranges being overpaid.
13:28:16 With regard to the mayor's action that were
13:28:19 referenced, the comment was made that the mayor has
13:28:23 made pay range changes several times.
13:28:26 I submit to you that the mayor, this mayor, and the

13:28:30 previous mayor, made pay ray changes every October 1.
13:28:37 Every October 1, and this administration and the
13:28:40 previous administration, all pay ranges were increased
13:28:44 as a result of the across-the-board pay increase to
13:28:48 about 3% or 3.5% higher.
13:28:51 So pay range increases are the normal every
13:28:55 day-approach to our annual across-the-board increase.
13:28:59 Now what may have been referred to is our actions to
13:29:03 add a pay grade.
13:29:06 That in fact did happen.
13:29:08 We, by executive order, added a pay grade N.
13:29:13 Actually the pay grade N.
13:29:18 We have had up to pay grade Ns for managers
13:29:22 throughout the previous administration and prior to
13:29:23 that time, meaning that we haven't added a pay grade
13:29:28 in over 10 to 12 years in the city.
13:29:33 I would submit to you that the local pay market has
13:29:36 changed dramatically in the last 10 to 12 years, and
13:29:39 it was perfectly justified and needed to add an
13:29:42 additional pay grade to accommodate the pay for our
13:29:46 city attorney and our director of revenue and finance.
13:29:54 Madam Chair, council members, pay and compensation and

13:29:57 classification is a very complex area.
13:30:00 It is not an area that is easily understood by those
13:30:07 that are outside the process, and that is why we need
13:30:10 to rely on the experts that have the knowledge, have
13:30:13 the training, and have the industry standards for
13:30:15 which to make those independent and objective
13:30:19 recommendations to the administration.
13:30:22 Media reports and comments based on conjecture should
13:30:25 not be necessarily interpreted as factual or accurate.
13:30:33 And I would like to point out that our view from the
13:30:35 administration is this is a very positive initiative
13:30:38 for the city.
13:30:39 We are taking the opportunity to update an outdated
13:30:44 pay plan for the benefit of all employees.
13:30:47 And we are updating that pay plan in order for the ski
13:30:51 and the employees to get an accurate picture of where
13:30:55 we stand in comparison to the other municipalities.
13:31:00 And I would submit to you that the results in phase
13:31:04 two will show what needs to be done, especially with
13:31:07 regard to the hourly employees.
13:31:10 So with that, I would like to encourage you to work
13:31:13 with us during phase two.

13:31:14 I'd like to encourage employees to contact the H. R.
13:31:18 department if they have any questions as we begin that
13:31:21 phase.
13:31:21 And we certainly will be taking a very proactive
13:31:24 approach to providing information to employees
13:31:27 involved in phase two, and will certainly keep council
13:31:29 members informed as we go through that process.
13:31:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Alvarez?
13:31:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Smith, thanks for some
13:31:36 clarifications in there.
13:31:41 When the phase two is completed, and there seems to be
13:31:46 maybe some changes that could be done, or could not be
13:31:50 done.
13:31:51 We don't know.
13:31:52 But could there be a possibility of maybe thinking
13:31:56 about merit or bonuses, as incentives, especially to
13:32:01 the aides and stuff like that?
13:32:03 Because if they reach their potential, or their level,
13:32:10 like there's problems with that at that point, this
13:32:14 point, is because they feel like, okay, we're done,
13:32:17 now the next thing is CODA.
13:32:22 And with the cost of living as high as it is it's just

13:32:27 not enough.
13:32:27 So I'm asking, is there a potential that in the.
13:32:30 In the future there could be merit or bonuses for
13:32:33 these type of employees?
13:32:36 >>> I would defer what we are going to do as a result
13:32:38 of phase two obviously until we get the results and
13:32:40 see what we are actually dealing with.
13:32:42 But I would say that the light is there for the
13:32:46 possibility of considering that, as just one of the
13:32:48 tools in the compensation tool kit that can be used.
13:32:53 But I also will provide input that the employees are
13:33:02 getting an across-the-board increase every year in the
13:33:05 range of 3 to 3.5% in comparison to other
13:33:08 jurisdictions, and certainly in comparison to the
13:33:11 private sector, that is a very good move up through
13:33:16 the pay scale.
13:33:17 So it's not like the individual is frozen completely.
13:33:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No, and I understand that.
13:33:22 But it's a cost of living wage.
13:33:25 It's a cost of living.
13:33:26 It's not -- and I'm not talking about a lot of money.
13:33:30 I'm talking something to show the gratitude.

13:33:35 Because even though they are being paid for working.
13:33:41 Well, for instance, I guess two employees of the city
13:33:46 were given merit raises by executive order.
13:33:49 Well, they were at their highest pay scale but they
13:33:56 were given merit raises.
13:33:58 >>> You may be referring to bonuses for the
13:34:01 managerial?
13:34:02 >> Bonuses.
13:34:03 Yes, that's what I'm talking about.
13:34:05 >>> And for situations where the employee is at the
13:34:07 maximum, and the performance is far above
13:34:13 expectations, and the bonus program is in effect for
13:34:18 that.
13:34:19 >> Okay.
13:34:19 Well, suppose we as council feel the same way for our
13:34:23 employees, our aides.
13:34:26 We don't seem to have the option of saying, you know,
13:34:30 you're at your level now.
13:34:33 I think that you've really worked hard this year, I
13:34:37 think that you deserve a bonus.
13:34:39 We don't have that option to do that.
13:34:41 We can barely get an option to pay ourselves for

13:34:43 anything.
13:34:43 So --
13:34:46 >>> It's very important that we --
13:34:52 >> I'm sorry?
13:34:53 >>> It's very important that we take an approach that
13:34:55 provides equity across the city, not just for one
13:34:57 segment of the employee population.
13:35:03 So we will look at that.
13:35:04 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes, we will go down that path, okay?
13:35:08 Thank you.
13:35:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena?
13:35:13 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
13:35:14 I think the administration is to be commended for
13:35:16 creating a rational, objective, professional approach
13:35:19 to this.
13:35:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita?
13:35:25 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, thank you.
13:35:27 I wholeheartedly agree with Mrs. Alvarez and that was
13:35:31 one of my first points about the bonuses or rewards
13:35:33 for upper management, and hopefully -- Dr. Ling, do
13:35:38 you first of all, let's not construe what Mr. Smith
13:35:41 has misconstrued.

13:35:42 Not that I don't want to benefit from your study.
13:35:44 I would just prefer to see the comprehensive end
13:35:48 result.
13:35:49 So I think you and I are on the same page.
13:35:52 But in terms of that bonus issue, we are rewarding
13:35:58 them, the upper management employees who got this
13:36:01 bonus or reward or whatever you want to call it, for
13:36:03 doing an outstanding job.
13:36:06 To me, getting a salary, that I think in some cases is
13:36:10 higher than the mayor, and I believe that that's the
13:36:12 first time ever in the history of the city, is reward
13:36:15 enough, and her salary, I know, is dictated by the
13:36:18 charter but when they are making salaries that
13:36:21 sometimes exceed that I don't really see a need to
13:36:23 reward them for a job well done.
13:36:25 The salary that they are getting should be reward
13:36:27 enough for the job well done.
13:36:28 And Mary, I would agree with you, we have nothing to
13:36:31 say, thank you, because there is no bonus program in
13:36:36 place.
13:36:37 You know, again you're talking about the fact that Mr.
13:36:41 Smith said look at objectivity.

13:36:45 I'm really trying. But even when you say they are at
13:36:48 the top of their salary, then their incentive is not
13:36:51 necessarily an increase in their pay over and above
13:36:54 the COLA but that they can look to something else.
13:36:57 Well, I'm looking at the thing closest to our
13:37:00 legislative aide and that would be AU 4 executive
13:37:03 officer manager, that bumps it up to 78,000 and I
13:37:05 guarantee you all seven of the aides are not going to
13:37:08 be able to look at that in terms of employment to move
13:37:10 up because they are at the maximum level for their
13:37:12 grade.
13:37:12 So I still think -- and that's why to you, Dr. Ling,
13:37:17 don't expect an answer to this, it's just observation,
13:37:20 I believe where we need to Fock fuss we want to have
13:37:22 the objectivity that Mr. Smith is referring to, where
13:37:26 we need to look, what needs to be fixed most, in my
13:37:30 opinion -- and everybody has their own.
13:37:32 So it's not an argument.
13:37:33 It's just an opinion.
13:37:35 Where we need to look is for the hourly waged
13:37:38 employee, to keep them motivated, to keep them going,
13:37:41 to keep them looking at something in their same field.

13:37:44 Because some of them maybe don't want to move to
13:37:46 another job that requires new training.
13:37:49 They want to do as well as they can right back here
13:37:51 behind our cameras but they want to have somebody say
13:37:54 thank you.
13:37:55 And thank you like good evaluations don't do it by
13:37:58 themselves.
13:37:59 They want some financial or some monetary reward for a
13:38:01 job well done.
13:38:03 That's my focus.
13:38:04 And I think everybody on this council and the city,
13:38:07 administration, has different reasons for this study.
13:38:09 But that is mine.
13:38:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White?
13:38:14 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you.
13:38:14 To Dr. Ling and Darrell Smith, just a comment.
13:38:19 Dr. Link, one of the things that Ms. Ferlita just
13:38:22 pointed out and I just thought about, I'm very excited
13:38:25 to see how you are going to end up with the second
13:38:27 phase of the study.
13:38:28 And we need to move forward with that.
13:38:30 I don't have a problem with that.

13:38:31 But Darryl, when you were speaking about motivation
13:38:33 and how do we keep our hourly waged employees
13:38:38 motivated, I think it's a huge demotivator when they
13:38:44 see top-level administration who is making more than
13:38:48 the mayor receive a huge bonus, when the hourly waged
13:38:53 employee is out here doing the best job they can, in
13:38:58 most instances, and even if they are at the top of
13:39:00 their pay grade or everyone at the bottom of their pay
13:39:03 grade there's still no, wow, here's 500 bucks, great
13:39:07 job.
13:39:07 And that would be a wonderful motivator for the man or
13:39:11 woman out here digging a ditch in Tampa, cleaning out
13:39:14 our stormwater.
13:39:17 In any capacity.
13:39:19 That that doesn't happen.
13:39:20 That when average John Q. worker for the city sees
13:39:25 someone that's making more than the mayor, and then
13:39:27 all of a sudden, wow, here's a 5 or $10,000 bonus they
13:39:31 got for doing a job well done, well, I do a job well
13:39:34 done every day, too.
13:39:35 My supervisor -- I bust my butt every day.
13:39:39 And that's a demotivator.

13:39:42 And we need to look at some way, some type of reward
13:39:47 system, for hourly-waged employees as well.
13:39:53 I don't know what -- I don't know the exact
13:39:56 compensation.
13:39:58 It may even be an award recognition type.
13:40:02 I don't know.
13:40:02 I'm just saying, the top always getting the reward,
13:40:08 and not the subordinates.
13:40:11 That's a problem.
13:40:14 >>> Yes, sir, as a follow-up to that, if I may.
13:40:17 We're talking about bonuses, that we are limited to
13:40:23 4.6% of the person's salary.
13:40:26 So typically these going to be a maximum even for the
13:40:29 high figures of about $6,000.
13:40:33 One way to look at the bonuses is that they are
13:40:37 Band-Aids that we need to get through the interim
13:40:40 period of time when our paid salary range is not
13:40:43 competitive with the market.
13:40:46 And they do apply to the managers, also.
13:40:49 It's not just to the top level department heads.
13:40:51 Because we have had managers level employees receive
13:40:56 bonuses.

13:40:57 And I would emphasize that a bonus is not here for an
13:41:00 outstanding rating and maximum pay grade.
13:41:06 It's for outstanding performance and only in those
13:41:09 cases where the performance has been extraordinary
13:41:12 will a bonus be considered.
13:41:13 >>KEVIN WHITE: I understand.
13:41:16 I'm sure if we look hard enough we can find some
13:41:19 hourly salaried employ that's have gone over and above
13:41:22 the call of duty.
13:41:23 >>> In a doubt.
13:41:25 >>KEVIN WHITE: That should or would be considered for
13:41:28 some type of compensation, whether it's monetary or
13:41:30 just some type of other reward system.
13:41:35 >>> Yes, sir, I agree.
13:41:35 >>KEVIN WHITE: That's all I'm saying.
13:41:37 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, I think Mr. White
13:41:39 brings up a good point.
13:41:41 And if it is just limited to 4.6%, I think probably
13:41:44 hourly waged or salaried employees at the top would
13:41:48 greatly appreciate that, just doing a few calculations
13:41:51 I'm sure each of our aides would love to have $4,000
13:41:54 at Christmas to do some shopping, and if that's what

13:41:56 the maximum is, then we can bring that maximum to each
13:41:58 of the levels of different categories.
13:42:03 I remember one time, I don't want to bring up the
13:42:07 person's source because it was somebody on the
13:42:08 administration side that one time an employee had been
13:42:12 praised by constituents, and I was going to bring them
13:42:15 here to give them a commendation, and I was told that
13:42:18 we prefer not to do that.
13:42:20 And so I went out to our site at spruce and delivered
13:42:24 the commendation to Mr. McCary.
13:42:27 I don't think we need to be counterproductive to
13:42:29 saying thank you.
13:42:30 We need to do everything we can to keep them here.
13:42:32 You see people leaving by the droves.
13:42:35 I think if we want some benefit out of this study,
13:42:37 again for the fourth and last time, we need to focus
13:42:41 on the hourly waged people.
13:42:43 Those people may have an opportunity to move to
13:42:46 something else.
13:42:46 But you know, Mr. Smith?
13:42:48 Just like you probably like your job and I dearly like
13:42:51 mine, some people want to stay right where they are.

13:42:53 Some people want to be that guy that takes care of
13:42:56 stormwater and sewers, et cetera.
13:42:57 But to to say thank you tore for say staying there
13:43:04 because everybody can't move up all the time.
13:43:06 So I am hopeful.
13:43:07 I am very, very impressed with Dr. Ling.
13:43:09 And I think if there's good that anybody can bring to
13:43:11 the table he will.
13:43:12 But that's the first stage.
13:43:13 The second stage is for you, the administration, to do
13:43:15 the best you can with the information that is
13:43:18 delivered.
13:43:18 And again I hope it's projected to the hourly wage
13:43:23 people that don't get much recognition and certainly
13:43:25 don't get as much money as some.
13:43:28 >>> I appreciate your comment.
13:43:29 And certainly phase two is where we are going to be
13:43:31 taking a very close look at exactly that segment.
13:43:33 Employee population.
13:43:34 >> I look forward to that, Mr. Smith.
13:43:36 Thank you.
13:43:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison?

13:43:38 >>SHAWN HARRISON: A couple of comments have been made
13:43:40 about staff members making more than the mayor so the
13:43:44 easy thing to do is raise the mayor's pay and we won't
13:43:46 have that problem anymore.
13:43:48 And I say that tongue in cheek.
13:43:53 Was the mayor's salary going to be included in phase
13:43:55 two?
13:43:56 >>> No, sir.
13:43:58 There is no inclusion of the mayor's salary in phase
13:44:01 one or two.
13:44:01 >> I thought we had talked about that at some point in
13:44:03 the past.
13:44:07 >> We did, and the mayor asked to be pulled out of it.
13:44:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions?
13:44:15 Thank you, Mr. Smith.
13:44:21 Item number 9.
13:44:22 >>ROSE FERLITA: Dr. Ling, thank you as well.
13:44:25 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator pup works and utility
13:44:37 services.
13:44:37 Speaking on item number 9.
13:44:38 You asked some questions about how we were proceeding
13:44:41 with the Kiley Gardens and the garage repairs.

13:44:45 First of all, I need to remind you, when the mayor
13:44:48 came and presented the plan for the sale of the garage
13:44:51 and the purchase of the pavilion she addressed the
13:44:56 need to totally disassemble the Kiley Gardens so that
13:45:01 when could make the repairs, and it will have to be
13:45:05 entirely disassembled, and it will not be restored as
13:45:08 it was, that we will put the pieces back, they will
13:45:11 not be restored at this part of the operation.
13:45:17 We are anticipating three contracts, consulting
13:45:22 contracts, to get us through this process.
13:45:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did you write the time frame?
13:45:36 >>> Dy not because it is too early.
13:45:38 You're catching me too soon in the process.
13:45:42 Again we anticipate three consulting contracts, one to
13:45:46 document Kiley as it exists, to include doing a
13:45:55 recordation of this, and doing a catalogue of all the
13:45:59 parts in there, so when we take it apart we are able
13:46:02 to put it back together.
13:46:03 We are expecting the second consultant to do the
13:46:06 design for the drainage and the waterproofing, and we
13:46:11 are expecting a third consultant for which we will
13:46:13 have to go through a CCNA selection process to

13:46:17 actually give us design documents for the repairs
13:46:21 within the garage.
13:46:24 You all will recall that the letter of intent talked
13:46:28 about 24 months.
13:46:29 So that's the time frame that we have to deal with.
13:46:32 We are anticipating that it will take us between four
13:46:35 and six months for the design documents for the
13:46:39 repairs in the garage and the repairs, the
13:46:43 waterproofing and the drainage for the roof of the
13:46:47 garage which is Kiley, and then we are expecting about
13:46:50 an $18 -- an 18-month construction period so it will
13:46:55 sit in there.
13:46:56 Those consultant contracts will be coming back to
13:46:58 council for your approval.
13:47:01 When we have them done, we are currently improving
13:47:04 them.
13:47:04 We got the first stab from the consultants with their
13:47:09 numbers.
13:47:14 They have not given us exact time lines.
13:47:15 We need to refine the scope, refine the price, and
13:47:18 refine the schedule.
13:47:20 We are expecting to have them to council in the April

13:47:23 13th to 20th time frame.
13:47:26 At that time we'll have a better picture of the
13:47:28 schedule for everything.
13:47:30 But that's pretty much where we are at this time.
13:47:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Daignault.
13:47:43 I'm going to make a motion that we receive back from
13:47:46 you in two weeks a tame line.
13:47:49 Because frankly, I have written -- I have a memo of
13:47:55 March 9th after what I thought was a very
13:47:58 productive meeting and it was before the tree
13:48:00 massacre, which was a surprise, said it's going to be
13:48:04 four to six months before the design documents are
13:48:06 ready to go.
13:48:07 It would be nice if the trees had been there.
13:48:12 Ultimately, I think the removal was first of all
13:48:15 premature, and secondly it was without informing the
13:48:18 people who participated in the March 9th meeting.
13:48:20 I have developed a list of really basic questions,
13:48:24 like the time line, who is going to be part of the
13:48:28 design team, will people hired be familiar with
13:48:34 technology, who will be in charge of the $1.5 million
13:48:38 earmarked for the Kiley garden renovation, and I'll

13:48:43 share these with council members, submit them to you,
13:48:45 and in two weeks, when you come back to us, I'd like
13:48:48 to have answers to these.
13:48:50 And be as specific as you can about the time lines.
13:48:54 But my motion would be that we schedule in two weeks
13:48:58 an update on this.
13:48:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I second the motion but want to add
13:49:03 a friendly amendment, if I could, Madam Chair.
13:49:07 Mr. Daignault, even though I'm public works chair, and
13:49:11 Mary is parks and rec's chair, I think Mrs. Saul-Sena
13:49:20 clearly has the most passion on this issue, so I am
13:49:20 going to add a friendly amendment that she be point
13:49:25 person for the Kiley Gardens issue although that
13:49:29 straddles some other things, and doesn't seem that
13:49:31 Mary has a problem with it and I don't have a problem
13:49:33 with it.
13:49:33 So that will just give her perhaps a little more
13:49:35 blessing from council to just say, this is the person
13:49:38 that you and your staff need to work with closely, not
13:49:43 even in front of council, but clearly behind the
13:49:45 scenes as well, so that her comfort level is good, and
13:49:49 then she'll report back to us regularly.

13:49:53 >> Thank you.
13:49:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: There was some talk earlier in
13:49:56 public comments about making Kiley Gardens a historic
13:49:59 designation.
13:50:00 Is there any plans in the works to do that?
13:50:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I can speak to that, Madam
13:50:08 Chairman.
13:50:09 The documents, believe me it's a lot of work to
13:50:12 prepare this documentation, and private sector
13:50:14 volunteers have done all the work, and all it needs is
13:50:18 the city signature.
13:50:19 And while I volunteered to sign that, I think what the
13:50:24 mayor didn't understand that signing that doesn't mean
13:50:27 we are going to put it back the way it was because we
13:50:29 can't.
13:50:30 But what it says, if we sign it, it then allows us to
13:50:34 go after money, which we could use.
13:50:39 So I'm hoping that you will reconsider it.
13:50:44 >> The city?
13:50:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The city.
13:50:47 We are the owner.
13:50:48 The city is the owner and I'm encouraging as building

13:50:51 zoning and preservation chairman, encouraging the city
13:50:53 to go forth with it but I believe people told me it
13:50:59 wasn't my counsel or council call, it was the
13:51:01 administration call, and these something to look at.
13:51:05 Whether it's --
13:51:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Daignault, do you know if the
13:51:14 city administration has a thought on that on making it
13:51:18 a historic designation?
13:51:20 >>> My understanding is there's not a plan to do that
13:51:22 at this time.
13:51:22 And certainly from a construction standpoint, we would
13:51:28 not want a historic designation interfere in the
13:51:32 24-month period with our ability to correct the items
13:51:38 in the garage, and the drainage, and the
13:51:41 waterproofing.
13:51:42 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you, Mr. Daignault.
13:51:48 I think we just heard volumes about our historic
13:51:50 designation process.
13:51:51 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I Ned to say, one item if I could,
13:51:56 the reason the trees were taken down has to do with
13:52:00 where they were, which is the foliage had not come on
13:52:04 them for this spring season yet, and it was an

13:52:07 opportunity to take them down, and they would have to
13:52:10 come down anyway before we get into this process.
13:52:12 An opportunity to take them down at a significant cost
13:52:15 savings both in weight and volume of stuff we had to
13:52:18 remove.
13:52:19 So that was the reason, the decision to get out there
13:52:24 and take care of those quickly.
13:52:26 And I think it opens the view up pretty nicely.
13:52:29 >> I think the direction, it shouldn't be a surprise
13:52:34 to Mrs. Saul-Sena, and that she can proceed
13:52:37 accordingly as council's representative.
13:52:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
13:52:44 floor.
13:52:44 (Motion carried).
13:52:45 Thank you, Mr. Daignault.
13:52:47 All right.
13:52:48 Item number 10.
13:52:59 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney here to speak very
13:53:01 briefly on item number 10.
13:53:04 You should have received yesterday or this morning a
13:53:06 summary from Jorge Martin, a memo from me, he walks
13:53:12 you through the different options in this regard.

13:53:14 Very briefly you have the code enforcement option.
13:53:16 I think you are very familiar with how this process
13:53:18 works.
13:53:18 That is not a quick procedure when you are talking
13:53:20 about something that may be an impediment or safety
13:53:23 hazard.
13:53:23 You have to go in front of the Code Enforcement Board.
13:53:28 There's an opportunity to be heard.
13:53:30 Code enforcement and Tampa police have a right to
13:53:32 remove obstructions in the right-of-way.
13:53:34 That is a quicker process.
13:53:36 But that is literally in the right-of-way, not on
13:53:38 private property.
13:53:39 Construction services has the ability to deal with
13:53:44 tree removal when trees and shrubs become an
13:53:46 obstruction.
13:53:50 There is only a no notice ability however when it's on
13:53:54 right-of-way.
13:53:55 In private property we are limited.
13:53:57 The concepts, looking at the basic tone, if there are
13:54:02 other ways to take action we can take action
13:54:05 immediately.

13:54:05 If it's on private property we have to provide notice
13:54:07 in what's known as a tree deprivation hearing.
13:54:10 The amount of hearing can vary slightly depending on
13:54:13 the contracts but that's exactly where we are.
13:54:15 And the summary provides you with additional detail in
13:54:17 that regard.
13:54:20 Unfortunately we don't have easy remedies when we have
13:54:22 a problem that's been generated from private property.
13:54:29 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Smith, you're saying that the
13:54:32 problems that we were experiencing on Florida Avenue
13:54:35 and Nebraska would be right up to the right-of-way and
13:54:40 obstructing with that accident that happened just a
13:54:43 few weeks ago.
13:54:45 We have in a recourse on that?
13:54:48 >>DAVID SMITH: The specific -- I'm not familiar with
13:54:52 which one.
13:54:52 But presupposing that's accurate if they violate the
13:54:55 requirements we can enforce that.
13:54:57 And notice the agent.
13:54:59 If they are grandfathered in, however, your answer is
13:55:02 no.
13:55:06 If they are not violating the setback requirements,

13:55:08 what we can do is we have the other remedies I talked
13:55:11 about.
13:55:13 We have the nuisance abatement board, code
13:55:16 enforcement, things of that nature.
13:55:18 But we have to at least give them know.
13:55:22 >> Well, I think we give everybody notice, more than
13:55:25 they should get.
13:55:26 >>> Right, but what we were hoping for is in an
13:55:28 emergency situation, in a notice would be necessary
13:55:30 and that's accurate when the obstruction is on public
13:55:33 private.
13:55:34 Right-of-way or sidewalk or roadway.
13:55:37 Otherwise, there's notice and opportunity to be heard.
13:55:45 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Smith, doesn't that bring up a
13:55:47 huge liability potential?
13:55:49 We give them time and we go through the process,
13:55:53 someone else gets killed.
13:55:58 That does not immediately trump the grandfather issue,
13:56:02 if there is a visibility issue, that doesn't --
13:56:08 >>> I think you have a couple of questions there.
13:56:10 There is a huge -- it is a huge liability risk I think
13:56:14 for the property owner.

13:56:15 >> No, if somebody says I reported this to code
13:56:17 enforcement and you guys went through this long
13:56:20 process to give them due process, due warning, in the
13:56:23 meantime there's an accident and there is no sight
13:56:27 obstruction maybe that doesn't occur.
13:56:29 Isn't that kind of lumping us into the liability part?
13:56:32 >>> I think that would be a difficult case to make, if
13:56:34 our ability to take remedial measures is limited, and
13:56:38 as long as we are pursuing matters, I don't think we
13:56:41 would be liable.
13:56:43 Your other question is --
13:56:45 >> No, but wait a minute.
13:56:46 But there's nothing we can do to change that process,
13:56:50 so there is not sufficient -- such a lag time, if they
13:56:53 are grandfathered in, when they are warned, and when
13:56:56 they have to do something about the sight obstruction?
13:56:58 >>> Unfortunately not because enforcement rights are
13:57:03 pretty much decided by statute so we have to get the
13:57:05 legislature to help us there, and we will look at
13:57:07 those issues.
13:57:08 And the second set are primarily Constitutional
13:57:12 rights, and we can't change those.

13:57:15 The due process would probably guide those issues.
13:57:20 >> Where are we then.
13:57:24 >>> We have at least two or three different agencies
13:57:26 that can get involved.
13:57:27 But if it's on private property there's going to be a
13:57:29 notice and an opportunity for that property owner to
13:57:31 take remedial action first.
13:57:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: Okay.
13:57:35 Thank you.
13:57:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
13:57:37 Thank you, Mr. Smith.
13:57:38 Item number 11.
13:57:41 Transportation.
13:57:41 >>ROY LAMOTTE: Transportation manager.
13:57:49 I'm here to address -- actually, you asked for a
13:57:53 written report.
13:57:54 I'll submit that to you now and apologize.
13:58:08 The first question you asked is safety zones for hey
13:58:14 schools.
13:58:15 The guidelines for school zones and safety standards
13:58:20 which is in your memorandum, which is provided by the
13:58:22 Florida department of transportation.

13:58:24 School zonings and signalized internexts are
13:58:27 independently justified at control intersections,
13:58:31 either requires or precludes the use of another, that
13:58:37 a school zone should not be established simply because
13:58:39 a signalized intersection is near a school.
13:58:43 We have nine high schools in the City of Tampa, and
13:58:43 basically, based on the industry standards for
13:58:49 establishing a school zone and considering the age of
13:58:51 the pedestrians at the high school level, the creation
13:58:53 of school zones appears unnecessary.
13:58:57 To back up that particular statement, we did accident
13:59:00 research for the past five years surrounding the
13:59:03 city's high schools, and it revealed no significant
13:59:06 pedestrian conflicts.
13:59:08 We conclude from that that the existing traffic
13:59:10 control devices while limited are sufficient and
13:59:15 appropriate in controlling pedestrian activity.
13:59:18 Failure to use such controls when available can
13:59:21 contribute to tragedy as we have recently witnessed
13:59:26 especially when it's crossing multi-lane highways.
13:59:31 In respect to your second question, could we add an
13:59:33 additional usage is the?

13:59:37 I assume you meant crossing along Dale Mabry between
13:59:40 Neptune and Bay to Bay.
13:59:42 And again, we have the optimal crossing right now in
13:59:48 front of the Plant High School.
13:59:51 Again, it is directly opposite the high school.
13:59:53 And this is really the place that we want pedestrians
13:59:55 to cross.
13:59:56 We don't want them crossing further up on the
13:59:58 corridor.
13:59:59 We have crosswalks at the location.
14:00:03 I might add that the Dale Mabry Highway, again, is
14:00:06 under the jurisdiction of FDOT and not the city.
14:00:09 So anything that we do in that particular area
14:00:12 requires their consent related to traffic control.
14:00:15 I'll take any questions that you have.
14:00:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. LaMotte, thank you for this
14:00:22 comprehensive report.
14:00:26 Is there a button there, a pedestrian button there at
14:00:28 the plant Steak 'n Shake?
14:00:33 >>> There is.
14:00:33 >> Is it functional?
14:00:34 >>> To the best of my knowledge it is.

14:00:36 >> Okay.
14:00:46 I guess the only thing I would ask is to inquire with
14:00:49 FDOT the possibility of -- and I don't know exactly
14:00:53 what the best lights or whatever.
14:00:57 But it seems to me that when the children push the
14:01:03 button, maybe there's some additional, you know,
14:01:06 street-level, you know, warning signs or some kind of
14:01:09 flashing things to, you know, to get people to slow
14:01:14 down or get a little more plugged into the fact that
14:01:18 there are children around and children crossing.
14:01:22 I don't know.
14:01:22 You know, you're the expert.
14:01:24 Maybe there's some creative ideas for that corner.
14:01:27 >>ROY LAMOTTE: Well, there is a particular technique
14:01:30 that is used in high accident location that is may be
14:01:33 adopted here, and that's the use of what they call a
14:01:39 split in the signal and when it's activated it not
14:01:43 only displays a red display but displays a flash
14:01:46 within the -- scope flash within the red signal and
14:01:49 it's more of an eye catching measure but I can ask
14:01:53 them if they would consider the adoption of such a
14:01:56 device.

14:01:57 >> Okay.
14:01:58 I appreciate that.
14:01:58 You can let us know in writing what their response is.
14:02:03 >>> I will glad contact council in that regard.
14:02:08 >>SHAWN HARRISON: As now the MPO is now implementing a
14:02:10 new funding source called the safe routes to school
14:02:13 program.
14:02:13 It's been a state program, primarily designed for
14:02:16 elementary schools.
14:02:20 I don't know that we would be excluded from using some
14:02:22 of those funds for high school locations.
14:02:25 But my assessment at some of these new speed zones,
14:02:30 these new signs that we put up that have your speed
14:02:34 flashing on when you go through, they are very
14:02:38 effective, at least in some of the zones out in the
14:02:41 New Tampa area.
14:02:42 So I wonder if this might be a location for one of
14:02:45 those.
14:02:45 That seems to be a relatively cheap remedy, and there
14:02:51 might be some existing sources of funds that we can
14:02:53 use specifically in school zones for some of those
14:02:57 signs.

14:02:57 I don't know if they work here.
14:02:59 But it's just a suggestion.
14:03:01 Along those lines, we put these -- we put four of
14:03:06 these locations in six months or so ago.
14:03:08 Maybe not quite that long ago.
14:03:10 Could you all come back in two weeks -- that may not
14:03:15 be long enough -- in 30 days and report on the
14:03:18 effectiveness that you all have seen as a result of
14:03:21 putting those new signs in?
14:03:25 >>> I will be glad to do that, and give you feedback.
14:03:28 >> That's right.
14:03:29 So I don't want to jam you up but if you can do it in
14:03:33 30 days that would be fine.
14:03:34 If not a little more time would be fine, also.
14:03:37 But you have to go out and probably do some speed
14:03:40 studies where those signs are located.
14:03:42 But I'm very interested to find out what effect, at
14:03:44 least some of the gut level reaction I've gotten from
14:03:48 my constituents out there is that they have been very
14:03:50 effective.
14:03:50 >>ROY LAMOTTE: I appreciate the feedback and will do
14:03:55 that evaluation.

14:03:55 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. LaMotte, the schools we are
14:03:59 talking about, did the school district weigh in on
14:04:02 these decisions that we do especially with traffic
14:04:05 controls?
14:04:06 >>> Yes.
14:04:06 Annually the school, within the community in which it
14:04:11 lies, would do evaluations to make sure there are safe
14:04:14 crossings for the population.
14:04:16 So they do weigh in.
14:04:17 We interact with the Hillsborough schools.
14:04:26 >> I notice on page 3 of 6 of the procedures, it says
14:04:30 here that traffic control devices are not normally
14:04:33 needed at the high school.
14:04:34 But when special circumstances occur they should be
14:04:37 addressed on a case-by-case basis only used when
14:04:40 needed and justified by an engineering study.
14:04:45 Actually, that would be a case-by-case basis.
14:04:49 It doesn't happen all the time over there, right?
14:04:51 >>> That's correct.
14:04:52 A special situation which granted the traffic signals
14:04:55 to be installed in front of plant.
14:04:57 >> And also --

14:04:59 >>> Long before the incident took place.
14:05:00 >> Right.
14:05:01 And then also, not to belabor that, but I believe the
14:05:07 young lady that crossed the street did at her own
14:05:10 peril.
14:05:11 >>> She failed to use the control butt opens, that's
14:05:17 correct.
14:05:18 >>KEVIN WHITE: Totally off the subject, a point of
14:05:20 order for Mr. Dingfelder.
14:05:21 I was just notified since this is especially his
14:05:23 district, just notified that a barge struck the Gandy
14:05:26 bridge and has caused some serious damage.
14:05:30 And the -- right now.
14:05:33 In the eastbound portion of the Gandy bridge is now
14:05:40 closed.
14:05:55 >>> That particular is scheduled to have one as soon
14:05:56 as the state provides the materials this coming month.
14:06:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Reporters have left the room.
14:06:09 Now we can really talk about what you want.
14:06:11 (Laughter).
14:06:13 >>ROSE FERLITA: Announce anything you want.
14:06:15 Hurry.

14:06:23 >>> That is one of our recommendations.
14:06:25 In addition to that I did add that particular close
14:06:28 crossing and we will be adding some additional walk
14:06:30 time to it.
14:06:31 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
14:06:32 Other questions by council members?
14:06:33 Thank you, Mr. LaMotte.
14:06:35 All right.
14:06:36 Item number 13.
14:06:38 Number 12.
14:06:40 We are moving fast.
14:06:41 Number 12.
14:06:44 Do we have the resolution?
14:06:47 We need to move the resolution?
14:06:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Hold on, Madam Chair.
14:06:52 Let me catch up to you.
14:06:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 12.
14:06:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move number 12.
14:06:57 >> Second.
14:06:58 (Motion carried).
14:06:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 13.
14:07:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move number 13.

14:07:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
14:07:04 (Motion carried).
14:07:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 15 is closed public
14:07:09 hearing.
14:07:10 We just have to read it for first hearing.
14:07:14 Mr. Dingfelder.
14:07:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move ordinance an order rerepealing
14:07:21 ordinance number 2005-39 making lawful the sale of
14:07:25 beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight
14:07:29 and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless
14:07:32 of alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2(COP-R) for
14:07:35 consumption on the premises only in connection with a
14:07:38 restaurant business establishment on that certain lot,
14:07:41 plot or tract of land located at 223 South Howard
14:07:44 Avenue Tampa, Florida as more particularly described
14:07:47 in section 3 hereof waiving certain restrictions as to
14:07:50 distance based upon certain findings, providing an
14:07:56 effective date.
14:07:57 (Motion carried).
14:07:59 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
14:08:00 I did want to explain the ordinance that's before you,
14:08:05 because there was some question about the motion, how

14:08:07 it was made.
14:08:08 At that public hearing, I indicated that I was
14:08:12 deleting the light industrial land use classifications
14:08:19 from 15th to 22nd south of second Avenue,
14:08:23 south of second Avenue is the corridor that was being
14:08:26 studied by the Planning Commission.
14:08:32 Today Mr. Williams's agent have asked that council not
14:08:37 continue but basically reschedule this vote for next
14:08:39 week so that it follows the second public hearing to
14:08:43 allow them to have time to review the legal
14:08:46 description that's being presented before you.
14:08:49 I would not as staff have an objection with that,
14:08:53 rescheduling of this.
14:08:56 That way it would allow at that second public hearing
14:08:58 for council to add additional input from both parties.
14:09:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby.
14:09:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I don't believe at next week there
14:09:13 would be the second public hearing.
14:09:14 It would be a first reading.
14:09:17 Council could decide to reopen and take testimony.
14:09:21 >>GLORIA MOREDA: No, there is a scheduled second --
14:09:26 scheduled second public hearing for this.

14:09:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I did understand, then I didn't, and
14:09:31 now I do.
14:09:32 What would happen would be, council would then have --
14:09:36 so we understand -- council would have a second public
14:09:39 hearing.
14:09:39 And I believe that Tampa has done this before,
14:09:42 although I have not experienced it, where you have the
14:09:46 second public hearing when it's scheduled, but you
14:09:49 have the first reading of the ordinance at that time.
14:09:52 Is that correct, clerk?
14:09:55 And then two weeks subsequent you have a second
14:09:57 reading, having already had the second public hearing.
14:10:00 It's rather unusual in my experience but I have been
14:10:05 told it's been done before.
14:10:06 >>ROSE FERLITA: I'm sorry to interrupt but I was out
14:10:09 of the room and I thought we were just continuing
14:10:11 this.
14:10:11 Can you give me a little brief scuff summary of what
14:10:14 you just said?
14:10:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Yes.
14:10:16 There are several ways council can go with this.
14:10:18 If council wishes to have this continued a week,

14:10:22 council can have first reading brought back next week.
14:10:25 >>ROSE FERLITA: Okay.
14:10:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: And it's advertised for a second
14:10:31 public hearing previously, has been previously
14:10:34 advertised for next week.
14:10:36 That was because it was previously -- last week was
14:10:39 supposed to be the first reading.
14:10:41 What you have been brought back with is, with the
14:10:45 public hearing closed, the ordinance as it's been -- I
14:10:48 understood it -- by Ms. Moreda and presented to you
14:10:52 today for first reading.
14:10:54 And I have been told this has been done in Tampa
14:10:55 before, although I have not experienced it.
14:10:57 You will have next week the opportunity for a first
14:11:01 reading at the same time you have a second noticed
14:11:05 public hearing, at which time you would then close the
14:11:07 public hearing, and then two weeks subsequent to
14:11:10 that -- am right so far, madam clerk?
14:11:13 You would then have it on the agenda for a second
14:11:15 reading.
14:11:15 The other way you could do it is to just bring it back
14:11:20 next week for a first reading, and then the second

14:11:25 public hearing that's been previously scheduled, you
14:11:28 could continue that two weeks, and to have the public
14:11:30 hearing and the second reading at the same time.
14:11:31 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Shelby, I would like to know what
14:11:35 you would like to do.
14:11:39 Imconfused now.
14:11:40 Sorry I asked.
14:11:42 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Next week when it is the second
14:11:43 public hearing you can take additional input, as to
14:11:47 this proposed ordinance, and decide whether or not you
14:11:52 want to move on it or not.
14:11:59 67 Mrs. Alvarez needs to read something into the
14:12:01 record.
14:12:01 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I need to read this into the record.
14:12:04 Please be advised that at the March 28th meeting
14:12:06 of the Ybor City Development Corporation Board of
14:12:09 Directors, the board voted unanimously to support the
14:12:14 Adamo corridor rezoning position taken by City Council
14:12:17 at its March 23rd, 2006 public hearing.
14:12:19 So we are on record for that.
14:12:22 >>CHAIRMAN: We need a motion to continue for a week.
14:12:26 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.

14:12:27 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
14:12:28 (Motion carried).
14:12:30 >>ROSE FERLITA: Before we go to the next thing,
14:12:32 Gloria, congratulations.
14:12:33 I can't imagine how they would have chosen anybody
14:12:35 else.
14:12:35 But you well deserve it.
14:12:37 And -- yes, she took Thom's place.
14:12:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Did you get your bonus?
14:12:43 (Laughter).
14:12:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We'll talk about that, Gloria.
14:12:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
14:12:48 We are going to our public hearings for second
14:12:50 reading.
14:12:51 Item number 69 and 70.
14:12:54 Does anyone in the public want to speak on item 79 and
14:12:57 70?
14:12:58 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
14:13:01 None, okay.
14:13:02 We need to open the public hearing.
14:13:06 We have a motion and second.
14:13:08 (Motion carried).

14:13:12 Mrs. Alvarez, read number 69, please.
14:13:13 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to adopt the following ordinance
14:13:16 upon second reading, an ordinance repealing ordinance
14:13:19 number 2001-154 making lawful the sale of beverages
14:13:22 containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight and not
14:13:25 more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of
14:13:27 alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2(COP), for
14:13:30 consumption on premises and in sealed containers off
14:13:34 premises at or from that certain lot, plot or tract of
14:13:37 land located at 2506/2508 South MacDill Avenue, Tampa,
14:13:42 Florida, as more particularly described in section 3
14:13:45 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as to distance
14:13:49 based upon certain findings, imposing certain
14:13:52 conditions, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
14:13:54 conflict, providing an effective date.
14:13:55 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:13:58 Question on the motion?
14:14:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The public has been now opened.
14:14:03 I would ask now is the time that you would ask if
14:14:05 there is anybody --
14:14:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Again?
14:14:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: There's nobody there.

14:14:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Nobody wanted to be sworn in.
14:14:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That may be but just for the record
14:14:14 the opportunity to speak.
14:14:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone want to speak on item 69?
14:14:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
14:14:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to close.
14:14:20 >> Second.
14:14:20 (Motion carried).
14:14:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Now the motion and second.
14:14:23 Voice roll call.
14:14:28 (voice roll call).
14:14:30 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder voting no.
14:14:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the public want to speak
14:14:41 on item 70?
14:14:42 >> Move to close.
14:14:43 >> Second.
14:14:43 (Motion carried)
14:14:46 >>ROSE FERLITA: I would like to adopt the following
14:14:47 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance making
14:14:50 lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol beer,
14:14:53 wine and liquor 4(COP) for couples on premises and in
14:14:57 sealed containers for consumption off premises in

14:14:59 connection with a hotel on that certain lot, plot or
14:15:02 tract of land located at 4835 West Cypress street,
14:15:06 Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described in
14:15:08 section 2 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as to
14:15:11 distance based upon certain findings, providing for
14:15:13 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
14:15:16 effective date.
14:15:18 >>CHAIRMAN: I have a motion and second.
14:15:20 Voice roll call.
14:15:23 (voice roll call).
14:15:25 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder absent.
14:15:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 71.
14:15:31 We need to open the public hearing.
14:15:32 >>KEVIN WHITE: So moved.
14:15:36 >> Second:
14:15:36 (Motion Carried).
14:15:49 >>> Legal department.
14:15:50 It's not even a conduit bond.
14:15:52 It's something less than that.
14:15:54 They are issuing bonds in Pinellas County.
14:15:56 The IRS code has a provision that says bonds issued in
14:16:00 one county, some of the money which will be spent in

14:16:02 another county, that county has done a public hearing
14:16:05 on it.
14:16:05 We are not even issuing these bonds with St. Joseph
14:16:09 hospital.
14:16:10 It's just got to be spent in this county. The IRS
14:16:14 says the public shall have an opportunity to be heard
14:16:16 on it and ware not even involved in any way
14:16:18 whatsoever.
14:16:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to move the resolution.
14:16:21 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Need to move the resolution.
14:16:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to close first.
14:16:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: close.
14:16:28 (Motion carried).
14:16:29 >>CHAIRMAN: Now move the resolution.
14:16:31 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move the resolution.
14:16:33 >> Second.
14:16:33 (Motion carried).
14:16:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the that wants to
14:16:36 speak on item 72 through 77?
14:16:38 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
14:16:40 >>THE CLERK: Do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell
14:16:45 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

14:16:48 Thank you.
14:16:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
14:16:51 Item number 72 is a continued public hearing.
14:16:56 >> Move to continue.
14:17:00 >>THE CLERK: We had a request from --
14:17:03 >> Yes, ma'am.
14:17:04 We have a request to continue to continue to the
14:17:06 25th rather than the 11th.
14:17:08 >> So moved.
14:17:08 >> Second.
14:17:09 (Motion carried)
14:17:13 10 a.m. Okay.
14:17:15 Move to open number 73.
14:17:17 >> Move to open number 73.
14:17:19 >> Second.
14:17:19 (Motion carried)
14:17:26 Ron Beeler, historic preservation, urban planner.
14:17:29 I will be addressing 73 through 76.
14:17:31 And I do have packets to be submitted.
14:17:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you want us to open all at one time?
14:17:37 >>> That's up to you.
14:17:38 >> So moved.

14:17:39 >> Second.
14:17:39 (Motion carried)
14:17:40 >>This is for the ad valorem tax exemption.
14:18:00 The first one is 73.
14:18:03 The structure.
14:18:05 And I'm putting on the Elmo.
14:18:06 Prior to renovation.
14:18:10 The structure is a contributing structure located at
14:18:12 1206 south Albany Avenue located in Hyde Park historic
14:18:16 district, built in 1924 and owned by William and
14:18:20 Alliston dur Aye.
14:18:23 DUREYEA.
14:18:27 A couple of photos.
14:18:30 This is on the local and national historic places.
14:18:33 It shows the structure being platted in aluminum
14:18:37 material.
14:18:37 You can see the condition of it.
14:18:41 After rehabilitation.
14:18:43 Some details on the exterior.
14:18:48 If you look at the bracket you can see how it's
14:18:53 pierced off.
14:18:57 Upon renovation, they put the historical element back

14:19:01 on.
14:19:02 Interior photo.
14:19:03 Double window.
14:19:07 And after rehabilitation.
14:19:10 And the last photo I have for this application is the
14:19:15 flooring in the kitchen of what was existing.
14:19:19 And how they reinstalled the hardwood floors.
14:19:24 I am going to go through all the applications.
14:19:36 This is a contributing structure also in Hyde Park's
14:19:40 district, 1712 west his.
14:19:44 The structure was built in 1912 and is owned by Albert
14:19:49 and Myrna Lopez.
14:19:51 This is the existing structure, the front.
14:19:54 This is after rehabilitation with an addition in the
14:19:56 rear.
14:19:56 I got A.R.C. approval.
14:20:00 Prior to rehabilitation of the kitchen.
14:20:07 And after.
14:20:09 A couple of photos of the bathroom.
14:20:14 As it existed.
14:20:22 And after renovation.
14:20:25 The appropriate tile.

14:20:28 The subway tile on the walls.
14:20:30 And the tub.
14:20:37 Moving onto the third one.
14:20:39 Prior to rehabilitation.
14:20:47 This is in Ybor City, existing structure at 2209 east
14:20:51 5th Avenue.
14:20:51 >>ROSE FERLITA: I think I have this confused with
14:20:54 another.
14:20:54 Was this moved to that site?
14:20:56 Or was it always at that site?
14:20:58 >>> This has always been at that site.
14:21:00 >>: This is not one that has a little garage in the
14:21:02 back that some TV station did something about tunnels
14:21:08 with it?
14:21:09 Is this the one?
14:21:10 >>> This is not that. Was down the street.
14:21:13 That one is on fifth but west of 22nd, east of
14:21:16 22nd.
14:21:16 >> It looks like this.
14:21:19 >>> It's almost a sister house to this house.
14:21:20 Once again, this is at 2209 east fifth.
14:21:24 This is building 1913.

14:21:25 And this is owned by Donald Palmer.
14:21:36 This is after rehabilitation.
14:21:39 This is the condition of the interior.
14:21:44 Showing the floor.
14:21:46 After rehabilitation.
14:21:47 You can see the flooring.
14:21:50 The correct baseboard and walls.
14:21:56 Some of the interior trim. This is face block around
14:21:58 the baseboard.
14:21:59 And they kept that to detail and repaired it.
14:22:05 And the final one that we have today, this one here.
14:22:15 This structure is at 2604 east Hanna Avenue, a local
14:22:19 landmark known as the Robles house, built in 1900.
14:22:24 This structure is on the national register of historic
14:22:28 places as well.
14:22:29 This is prior to rehabilitation.
14:22:31 And than side.
14:22:39 Moving to the interior.
14:22:47 And then after rehabilitation.
14:22:49 This is used as a commercial use.
14:22:52 You see the wider door for the ADA.
14:22:55 You see the sink and the appropriate tile.

14:22:57 And then the last series of photos I'm going to show.
14:23:09 And then after rehabilitation.
14:23:10 All of these structures that I have shown meet the
14:23:13 secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation.
14:23:16 In reviewing the project it meets the criteria of the
14:23:19 1200 space and the improvements exceed $10,000.
14:23:22 The recommendation, consistent with the Tampa historic
14:23:30 tax exemption property as submitted. That's then of
14:23:33 the presentation.
14:23:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone in the public want to speak
14:23:35 on 73 through 76?
14:23:37 >> Move to close.
14:23:38 >> Second.
14:23:38 (Motion carried).
14:23:39 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: 73.
14:23:43 This is such a pleasure.
14:23:45 These are gorgeous rehab jobs.
14:23:50 Move an ordinance approving an historic preservation
14:23:53 property tax exemption application relative to the
14:23:55 restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of certain
14:23:57 property owned by William and Alliston D. DURYEA,
14:24:04 located at 1206 south Albany Avenue Tampa, Florida in

14:24:07 the Hyde Park historic district based on certain
14:24:10 findings, providing for notice to property appraiser
14:24:12 of Hillsborough County, providing for severability,
14:24:14 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
14:24:17 providing an effective date.
14:24:18 >> Second.
14:24:19 (Motion Carried).
14:24:20 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Harrison, read 74, please.
14:24:22 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I move to adopt the following --
14:24:25 first reading.
14:24:26 >> Move an ordinance approving a historic preservation
14:24:29 property tax exemption application relative to the
14:24:31 restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of certain
14:24:34 property owned by Albert S. and Myrna V. Lopez located
14:24:38 at 1712 west Hills Avenue Tampa, Florida in the Hyde
14:24:42 Park historic district based upon certain findings
14:24:44 providing for notice to the property appraise ir of
14:24:47 Hillsborough County providing for severability,
14:24:48 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
14:24:51 providing an effective date.
14:24:52 >> We have a motion and second.
14:24:53 (Motion carried).

14:24:54 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. White, read 75, please?
14:24:57 >>KEVIN WHITE: 75?
14:25:00 Move an ordinance approving an historic preservation
14:25:05 property tax exemption application relative to the
14:25:07 restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of certain
14:25:09 property owned by ODANNYBOR, LLC located at 2209 east
14:25:18 5th Avenue Tampa, Florida in the Ybor Historic
14:25:19 District based upon certain findings, providing for
14:25:24 notice to the property appraiser of Hillsborough
14:25:26 County providing for severability, providing for
14:25:28 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
14:25:30 effective date.
14:25:31 >> Second.
14:25:31 (Motion Carried).
14:25:32 >>MARY ALVAREZ: An ordinance approving an historic
14:25:35 preservation tax application application relative to
14:25:38 the restoration, renovation or rehabilitation of
14:25:41 certain property owned by grand oaks LLC located at
14:25:47 2604 east Hanna Avenue, Tampa, Florida a local
14:25:50 landmark based upon certain findings providing for
14:25:52 notice to the property appraiser of Hillsborough
14:25:53 County providing for severability, providing for

14:25:55 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
14:25:57 effective date.
14:25:57 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
14:26:01 (Motion carried).
14:26:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:26:05 Bob Harrell told me about this.
14:26:08 He said the developers for the ones we just adopted
14:26:10 are to be commended because not only did they save
14:26:12 this historic house but the property had a number of
14:26:15 grand trees on it and they built around the trees, and
14:26:18 they built affordable housing.
14:26:20 So like three for three.
14:26:22 Historic preservation, savoring trees, providing
14:26:24 affordable housing.
14:26:25 And I think these people deserve a commendation.
14:26:31 I would like to bring them up here.
14:26:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Is that a motion?
14:26:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's a motion.
14:26:39 >>MARY ALVAREZ: All right.
14:26:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
14:26:42 (Motion carried).
14:26:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And I'll write it up.

14:26:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Can I just ask council -- I don't
14:26:48 know whether the clerk received all four?
14:26:50 Thank you very much.
14:26:51 All right.
14:26:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
14:26:53 Item 77, conned public hearing.
14:26:56 >>THE CLERK: On item 77 we have received a letter from
14:27:00 Mark Bentley originally requesting April 6th but
14:27:02 now asking it be continued to May 11th.
14:27:06 He's meeting with representatives of the Parks
14:27:08 Department next week and asks for it to be continued.
14:27:11 >> So moved.
14:27:11 >> Second.
14:27:12 (Motion carried).
14:27:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I had some conversation with some of
14:27:16 the property owners in that area, and I don't know
14:27:20 whether they were away from the requirement but they
14:27:26 said they were not noticed on any meetings that they
14:27:28 had with Mark Bentley.
14:27:31 And this river view property.
14:27:34 So Marty, when I get through, I would like to see your
14:27:38 list of property owners that were noticed.

14:27:42 >>MARTY BOYLE: Land development.
14:27:44 Can I ask the clerk if you received a letter to April
14:27:47 6th, did you speak further about the further
14:27:53 correspondence that we have had?
14:27:57 I didn't hear what was said.
14:28:00 >> Had received a letter from mark Bentley asking for
14:28:02 April 6th, this morning asked it to be continued
14:28:05 to May 11th.
14:28:06 They are requesting additional time to work with Parks
14:28:09 and Recreation Department to discuss comments
14:28:12 contained in their new report that was presented last
14:28:14 Thursday night.
14:28:14 >>MARTY BOYLE: Thank you very much.
14:28:17 That's what I wanted to make sure was in the record.
14:28:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: But what about checking the notice,
14:28:23 the notices to the property owners?
14:28:27 >>THE CLERK: The original public hearing was set back
14:28:29 on October 20th.
14:28:30 And public hearing has been continued.
14:28:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Of the time?
14:28:42 >>THE CLERK: Back on October 20th it was continued
14:28:46 to February 9th.

14:28:48 And then February 9th, I believe continued to
14:28:50 March 23rd.
14:28:52 And petitioner is not required to provide notice
14:28:55 unless directed by council to continue the public
14:28:59 hearing.
14:29:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: If I could just peruse the list I can
14:29:07 tell you if she was noticed or not, this particular
14:29:10 one.
14:29:13 Okay.
14:29:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This particular site has at least
14:29:20 one grand tree that was in question.
14:29:23 The petitioner is requesting to put it off again.
14:29:25 What I would like him to do is two things.
14:29:27 I would like him to repost a sign with the new date
14:29:30 and time of the hearing.
14:29:31 And I would like him to renotice.
14:29:35 This is the third time.
14:29:36 >>GWEN MILLER: We have continued it it.
14:29:38 They didn't --
14:29:40 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We continued it today.
14:29:42 Because they asked for a continuance to another day.
14:29:46 I mean, you would have to be a scholar to keep on

14:29:48 track.
14:29:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. O'Dowd?
14:29:55 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: I think it was continued actually
14:29:58 from last week at their request because we didn't have
14:30:00 a full council.
14:30:01 So as long as we have got additional time to include
14:30:05 the proper notice -- we do, don't we?
14:30:09 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We do.
14:30:10 May 11th.
14:30:14 >> Who will notice?
14:30:16 >> Petitioner.
14:30:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is there a requirement they do so
14:30:19 absent them acceding to it on the record?
14:30:24 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: If it's continued by council and
14:30:26 council would like it renoticed I think council has
14:30:28 that ability.
14:30:29 It's not something that petitioner would have to
14:30:31 consent to.
14:30:32 I want to make sure we have sufficient time.
14:30:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That would be fine.
14:30:37 I want to make sure we have time, today to 11:15 which
14:30:41 is a time certain.

14:30:44 I wonder if council wishes to have that date.
14:30:46 I don't believe it was set.
14:30:47 >>GWEN MILLER: May 11 in the morning.
14:30:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The first reading.
14:30:54 Maybe at 10:00.
14:30:55 >>GWEN MILLER: 10:00.
14:30:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That would be part of this motion
14:31:01 then?
14:31:02 That was previously made to continue it?
14:31:03 >>THE CLERK: When council continued to a day session,
14:31:08 and scheduled it after 10:00.
14:31:13 >> I just wanted to be clear.
14:31:15 Thank you.
14:31:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move we schedule may 11th at
14:31:20 10:00 and petitioner renew their sign and reissue
14:31:24 notice.
14:31:26 >> Second.
14:31:26 (Motion carried).
14:31:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
14:31:32 Information from council members.
14:31:33 Mrs. Saul-Sena.
14:31:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Nothing, Madam Chairman.

14:31:36 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, yes.
14:31:38 I just wanted to make sure that my smart alacky remark
14:31:44 earlier today about the mayor's salary wasn't taken in
14:31:46 the wrong way.
14:31:46 I didn't mean any disrespect by that.
14:31:48 I was just trying to make a joke.
14:31:51 However, I will say this: It's been several years
14:31:55 since that has been looked at.
14:31:57 And I think it's probably time should the
14:32:01 administration want to look at that, that we would
14:32:04 include that in the second phase of the study.
14:32:07 Totally up to their discretion.
14:32:08 But if they want to, I don't think that we are too far
14:32:11 along in the study to take a look at that.
14:32:16 >>KEVIN WHITE: I think it is too late to put it in the
14:32:19 study but not too late to put it in this upcoming
14:32:22 budget cycle.
14:32:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?
14:32:25 Mrs. Alvarez?
14:32:28 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to honor the Italian club
14:32:32 for the first annual Italian heritage which will be
14:32:35 tomorrow.

14:32:36 Yes, tomorrow.
14:32:37 I would like it to be scheduled for next week.
14:32:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
14:32:41 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
14:32:42 Opposed, Nay.
14:32:43 (Motion carried).
14:32:45 Anything else?
14:32:45 Anything else?
14:32:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have a question of Mrs. Alvarez.
14:32:53 It's not clear whether we had a meeting about Drew
14:32:55 Park and CRA presentation today at four in Drew Park
14:32:58 or if we are going to hear it some morning.
14:33:01 Could you clarify?
14:33:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, what it is, the URS is coming
14:33:07 back with the questions and set up all the boards and
14:33:14 they come back with responses to what they had over
14:33:19 there and we can ask, and we probably will have --
14:33:25 >> Schedule it for us.
14:33:26 >>> Well, we will, but let's wait and see because it's
14:33:28 not going to happen that quick.
14:33:29 We'll just wait and see what URS comes back with.
14:33:32 But we will, from what Mr. Chen told me yesterday when

14:33:36 I had my meeting with him, was that he was going to
14:33:39 ask us to schedule some more CRA meetings, so we could
14:33:44 listen.
14:33:48 So that's what I'm waiting for.
14:33:49 But thanks for your suggestion.
14:33:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Ferlita?
14:33:55 >>ROSE FERLITA: Just in keeping with what Mr. Harrison
14:33:57 said, you know, maybe there are some opportunities to
14:33:59 look at salary scales of mayors versus other
14:34:02 municipalities, and some percentile they fall in.
14:34:06 Also, to try to be more efficient we ought to look
14:34:08 look at the organizational chart and see if there's
14:34:10 some positions that have been created that perhaps are
14:34:12 not doing what they should do, and maybe as time goes
14:34:15 on we can eliminate those positions and take that same
14:34:19 money and filter it back to accommodations for hourly
14:34:24 wage employees or whoever else is going to be
14:34:26 underpaid, if anybody is underpaid at the end -- you
14:34:30 know, another comprehensive move that we can look at.
14:34:33 I think our organizational chart is heavy.
14:34:35 And I think that certainly what he's in at the bottom
14:34:37 of that employment staff.

14:34:40 Madam Chairman, in June, I think we had scheduled
14:34:44 something for working lunch and I believe that's the
14:34:49 same day as the heros luncheon.
14:34:52 I'm sorry, it's May 4th.
14:34:54 Did we talk about that already?
14:34:56 No.
14:34:56 So I think I'm going to attend the heros lunch.
14:34:59 I don't know what anybody else is going to do.
14:35:01 But if you are going to talk about a parity study or
14:35:04 whatever it is.
14:35:05 It was scheduled at noon.
14:35:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Planning Commission comprehensive
14:35:09 plan.
14:35:09 >>ROSE FERLITA: Whatever was scheduled, Madam
14:35:11 Chairman, I want you to know since we have gotten the
14:35:13 invitation for the heroes luncheon I will be attending
14:35:16 that.
14:35:19 Usually do.
14:35:20 The luncheon on the fourth at the convention center.
14:35:22 >>GWEN MILLER: all we can do is reschedule the
14:35:26 Planning Commission.
14:35:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think I said that initially

14:35:30 before.
14:35:36 >>> We discussed the invitation, that's it.
14:35:40 >> How about the 18th? We don't have an evening
14:35:43 meeting.
14:35:44 I would like to move we schedule a unanimous to 1:30
14:35:48 of the comprehensive plan in the Mascotte room, May
14:35:51 18.
14:35:53 >> Second.
14:35:55 (Motion carried).
14:35:55 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chair, I'm not sure.
14:36:01 I'm sure we'll all attend if we don't have a conflict.
14:36:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. White?
14:36:06 >>KEVIN WHITE: Nothing.
14:36:07 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like --
14:36:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to have a commendation for
14:36:12 Bright House for volunteer week.
14:36:14 And the third week of April be the 20th.
14:36:17 9:00.
14:36:18 Have a motion and second.
14:36:19 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
14:36:20 Opposed, Nay.
14:36:21 Clerk?

14:36:22 >>THE CLERK: Just receive and fail.
14:36:26 >> So moved.
14:36:27 >>KEVIN WHITE: Second.
14:36:27 (Motion carried).
14:36:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
14:36:30 Okay.
14:36:31 Now we go to our audience portion.
14:36:41 (Meeting adjourned 2:39 p.m.)