Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


Tampa City Council
Thursday, April 13, 2006
9:00 a.m. Session

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

[Sounding gavel]
09:05:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:05:41 The chair will yield to Mr. Shawn Harrison.

09:05:44 >>SHAWN HARRISON: It's my honor this morning to
09:05:47 introduce my friend reverend David Shuler from St.
09:05:50 Andrews Presbyterian church in New Tampa.
09:05:54 He will give the invocation.
09:05:55 If we could stand and remain standing for the pledge.
09:05:59 >>> Please pray with me.
09:06:01 Gracious almighty God on this first day of Passover,
09:06:06 we remember how you heard the cries of your people,
09:06:11 and answered with liberation and hope.
09:06:14 On Sunday, with Easter, we remember how in the face of
09:06:19 violence and the abuse of power, you responded not
09:06:24 with more violence but with divine love that life may
09:06:28 come from death.
09:06:30 We pray, gracious God, in the memories of ancient acts
09:06:33 in faraway places that you will bring them to bear to
09:06:36 this place, and this time.
09:06:39 We pray your blessing, therefore, God, on this City
09:06:42 Council and its members.
09:06:44 May you pour out your spirit and truth and justice and
09:06:49 quality that the decisions may be full of your way and
09:06:53 your will.
09:06:56 In the same way, we pray for our mayor and for all

09:06:59 city workers, firefighters and police officers and
09:07:02 sanitation workers, and office workers.
09:07:06 We pray especially for the citizens of this city,
09:07:10 whether they are in Tampa Palms or Tampa Heights or
09:07:13 Ybor or Harbor Island, that you will bring us all
09:07:17 together under your watchful eye and your careful
09:07:20 love, that you may create a wonderful city by the --
09:07:28 by the way, that you will bring them together today in
09:07:32 love and peace and justice.
09:07:33 Amen.
09:07:35 (Pledge of Allegiance).
09:07:51 >>CHAIRMAN: Roll call.
09:07:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Here.
09:07:55 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:07:56 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Here.
09:07:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Here.
09:07:58 >>ROSE FERLITA: Here.
09:07:58 >>KEVIN WHITE: Here.
09:07:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:08:00 At this time, we need to approve the agenda.
09:08:10 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chair?
09:08:12 I'm sorry, trying to get organized here.

09:08:14 Before we approve the agenda, what I would like to
09:08:16 request is that we pull number 36 and place it for
09:08:19 discussion under staff reports, or maybe under legal
09:08:25 department.
09:08:26 I have a few questions of concern.
09:08:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other?
09:08:30 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's all for me, thank you.
09:08:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other council members like to pull
09:08:43 anything?
09:08:47 >> Last week we discussed whether we wanted the
09:08:49 audience to speak.
09:08:54 I couldn't remember what our stance is.
09:08:57 >>GWEN MILLER: We have that on the agenda, if you want
09:08:59 to pull that for discussion, we can pull that.
09:09:01 That's item number 4, I think it is.
09:09:03 Number 4.
09:09:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That is on the agenda for item number
09:09:07 4.
09:09:07 If council wishes to leave the agenda the way it is
09:09:09 today, I can -- county choose to do so. If council
09:09:13 wishes to move the public comment as it has been the
09:09:15 past several weeks, which is what is contemplated in

09:09:19 number 4, you may choose to do so but it's council's
09:09:22 pleasure.
09:09:25 >>GWEN MILLER: What is council's pleasure?
09:09:29 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would like to move it -- the way we
09:09:32 used to do it after 9.
09:09:43 >> Second.
09:09:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So I'll move to move the agenda
09:09:48 with the exception of the issue that Mrs. Ferlita
09:09:51 raised.
09:09:52 >>KEVIN WHITE: One other.
09:09:55 Number 25.
09:10:04 >> I can speak to it but I'm happy to pull it.
09:10:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Would you like to pull it for
09:10:09 discussion?
09:10:13 During staff reports or after the consent docket?
09:10:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We can do it when we get there.
09:10:20 Maybe by that time somebody will be here.
09:10:25 Any others?
09:10:27 Okay.
09:10:27 We go to our staff reports.
09:10:31 We have Rebecca Kert.
09:10:36 >>> Rebecca Kert, legal department.

09:10:38 I'm hear to request that City Council place the Tampa
09:10:41 technology CRA agreement and the Tampa technology east
09:10:46 agreement for consideration on its agenda on April 27.
09:10:49 Council previously approved these agreements on March
09:10:52 9th.
09:10:52 However, since that time one of the parties to the
09:10:55 agreement has requested some minor additional changes,
09:10:57 which necessitated being considered by council again.
09:11:00 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.
09:11:03 >> Second.
09:11:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:11:04 (Motion carried).
09:11:07 At this time I would like to bring up Mr. Daignault.
09:11:10 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you, council members,
09:11:18 chairman.
09:11:19 I just wanted to introduce Mr. Brad Baird, bringing
09:11:24 him to you for confirmation.
09:11:26 He is the mayor's selection for the water department
09:11:30 director.
09:11:33 For the folks that are watching on TV who don't know
09:11:35 Brad, he's a graduate of the University of Florida,
09:11:38 with civil engineering degree.

09:11:40 He's a registered professional engineer in the State
09:11:42 of Florida.
09:11:42 He's been a city employee for 23 years.
09:11:45 For ten years he has been the deputy director in the
09:11:48 wastewater department.
09:11:49 He's been instrumental in our optimization project.
09:11:54 And he's caused everybody on the 6th floor to wear
09:11:57 a black arm band today because he's transferring to
09:11:59 the water department.
09:12:01 (Laughter).
09:12:01 But if you have any questions, again, Brad is here.
09:12:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just wanted to welcome Brad.
09:12:10 Of course, we all know Brad, and know him to be a
09:12:13 wonderful city employee, and it's welcome time now
09:12:20 that you are department head.
09:12:21 Congratulations.
09:12:22 Congratulations to you, mayor, and Mr. Smith on your
09:12:27 good taste.
09:12:27 On a substantive note, Brad, I know you got off to a
09:12:31 rip roaring start last week with Mrs. Saul-Sena and
09:12:38 the mayor over the water over the dam issue.
09:12:41 But on a very serious note, are you prepared today to

09:12:44 talk about where we are in terms of our water needs as
09:12:48 related to this?
09:12:49 I won't call it a drought, but to this lack of rain
09:12:52 that we have been having?
09:12:56 >>> I am not in detail.
09:12:57 I would be happy to return in a week and provide a
09:13:01 report as to the levels of the dam and where we are in
09:13:07 the dry season, and recommendations associated with
09:13:11 conservation efforts that we need to put in place.
09:13:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's my understanding, Brad, from
09:13:19 our discussion yesterday, that there are discussions
09:13:20 going on in the region, that we are participating in?
09:13:26 >>> Brad Baird: There are.
09:13:27 There is a regional conservation group.
09:13:31 And all the governments in the Tampa Bay area
09:13:33 participate as well as Tampa Bay water.
09:13:35 And Southwest Florida Water Management District.
09:13:39 And they are working together to make sure that those
09:13:42 decisions are made in concert.
09:13:44 And I'm talking about decisions regarding water
09:13:48 restrictions and conservation measures.
09:13:51 And I'll be happy to report back on those decisions,

09:13:56 where we stand, and what that means to the City of
09:13:58 Tampa.
09:13:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't want to rush you guys.
09:14:03 Is a week enough time?
09:14:06 >>> A week will be plenty of time, yes.
09:14:08 >> I move to get a report back on those water
09:14:10 conservation issues next week.
09:14:11 >> Second.
09:14:12 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion and second.
09:14:13 Question on the motion?
09:14:17 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, in conversation with the
09:14:20 clerk's office, just to be aware that tomorrow is a
09:14:24 legal city holiday.
09:14:26 And with preparation of the agenda, it puts a
09:14:29 tremendous burden on the clerk's office to set it for
09:14:32 one week.
09:14:32 And I am not going to speak to that.
09:14:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think there's any
09:14:37 background material.
09:14:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks?
09:14:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nothing will happen between now and
09:14:41 two weeks?

09:14:46 >>> Brad -- we might get --
09:14:52 >> Have a report next week and see what happens.
09:14:57 >>> Two weeks will be just fine.
09:14:58 >>GWEN MILLER: Two weeks.
09:14:59 All in favor of the motion for two weeks say Aye.
09:15:01 Opposed, Nay.
09:15:02 (Motion carried).
09:15:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I feel like there's nothing like a
09:15:11 dry spell to renew interest in "star," for the place
09:15:17 that people haven't signed up yet.
09:15:18 I wonder if you plan to do a little marketing to
09:15:21 remind people who are eligible because they live in an
09:15:23 area where it's available that haven't signed up.
09:15:26 I mean, a postcard campaign, something.
09:15:28 Have you thought about it?
09:15:30 You have been on the job, what, four days now.
09:15:34 >>> That's all right, with the short break-in period I
09:15:36 have already gotten used to that.
09:15:38 But yes, we are working on some efforts to step that
09:15:40 up.
09:15:41 As a matter of fact, we're already seeing increased
09:15:45 sign-up in star, which is a good thing.

09:15:48 And I can include that in a report when we come back
09:15:51 in two weeks.
09:15:52 >>CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
09:15:55 Ms. Ferlita?
09:15:56 >>ROSE FERLITA: Brad, I would love to give you a hard
09:15:58 time on television but somebody would think I'm
09:16:00 serious.
09:16:01 I'm very, very excited you have this position.
09:16:03 Steve, couldn't have a better choice, obviously.
09:16:06 Despite the University of Florida.
09:16:08 For those people who are not from the University of
09:16:10 Florida.
09:16:11 But as well, I have got a few questions as vice chair
09:16:14 of public works.
09:16:15 And when you can fit it in your schedule, if you would
09:16:18 call me, I'd love to sit down and ask you a few
09:16:21 questions.
09:16:22 So that wouldn't take as long maybe when you come back
09:16:24 because I think there's things that you can resolve
09:16:26 for me or explain, now, to me before -- or two weeks,
09:16:32 whatever.
09:16:33 To clear up. Anyway, congratulations and certainly

09:16:35 happy you're in the position you're in.
09:16:37 Not that you haven't done an incredible job where you
09:16:40 have been before.
09:16:41 But you bring that institutional knowledge.
09:16:45 >>> Thank you, all.
09:16:46 I would like to thank the mayor and Darrell Smith and
09:16:48 Steve for having faith in me, and to step up to the
09:16:53 challenge.
09:16:53 I appreciate that.
09:16:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One other thing if you could bring
09:16:58 it in two weeks, is what our water costs per unit and
09:17:01 what other people's water costs, other Tampa Bay water
09:17:06 users.
09:17:07 Because I think that's important information.
09:17:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the key question is, how is
09:17:13 Ralph surviving?
09:17:15 Pulling out what little hair he had left.
09:17:21 >>> Ralph is doing just great.
09:17:22 And obviously, you know, Ralph and I will continue to
09:17:25 work together.
09:17:29 Water and wastewater departments are sister
09:17:31 departments.

09:17:31 We work together on a lot of issues.
09:17:34 And we will continue to do that.
09:17:35 >>ROSE FERLITA: That doesn't mean you have to be happy
09:17:38 about this.
09:17:41 (Laughter).
09:17:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Congratulations.
09:17:44 Thank you.
09:17:45 Now we need to approve -- Julie, ready?
09:17:52 Come on.
09:17:53 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
09:17:55 I understand there's a question regarding item 36.
09:17:57 >>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you.
09:18:02 Rather than make you wait till later.
09:18:05 I'm very, very confused and somewhat uncomfortable
09:18:07 with going forward with this until I have an
09:18:09 explanation that maybe makes sense.
09:18:11 I know there was some conversation with citizens and
09:18:19 land development.
09:18:19 But why is it that we are setting a public hearing on
09:18:22 a development agreement for April 27 and May 11 and
09:18:31 then going forward with the rezoning tonight?
09:18:33 >>JULIA COLE: This was brought forward as a result of

09:18:37 the rezoning going forward which you are going to hear
09:18:39 tonight.
09:18:40 And at the time that it was scheduled, it was believed
09:18:42 it was necessary in order to allow certain bonus
09:18:48 density credits for this particular rezoning.
09:18:50 I've researched that issue, and we're not sure that
09:18:52 that is necessary.
09:18:53 But quite frankly this was scheduled -- this is
09:18:58 requested to be scheduled in abundance of caution and
09:19:01 pursuant -- throws an ordinance that relates to
09:19:04 development agreements in the code.
09:19:06 We could do this -- as long as they are done in a
09:19:11 similar, timely fashion, they can be done concurrent
09:19:13 in the way it was originally set up.
09:19:15 But quite frankly, our research is indicating that we
09:19:18 may not need to do it this way.
09:19:20 I would still request that you go ahead and schedule
09:19:22 it so that if it's necessary we can deal with it.
09:19:25 But quite frankly, we don't necessarily need to.
09:19:28 And it may be appropriately done and some of the
09:19:32 issues addressed.
09:19:33 I don't want to get into too much of what you're

09:19:35 rezoning this evening.
09:19:36 We could probably address them in a different manner.
09:19:39 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's still my confusion, Julia.
09:19:42 We are going to look at this, to set this hearing on
09:19:44 these dates.
09:19:46 And it seems like that's not the appropriate time.
09:19:49 >> Well, the development agreement and our issues that
09:19:53 would have been on the rezoning, it's hard to talk
09:19:56 about it without getting too much into it.
09:19:59 >>ROSE FERLITA: I understand.
09:20:00 >>JULIA COLE: If you're uncomfortable scheduling --
09:20:04 >> I am, I am.
09:20:05 >>> We could deal with the issues tonight, and if it's
09:20:09 deemed necessary we can reschedule it after this
09:20:12 evening.
09:20:12 >> And I had a brief conversation with Mr. Shelby, and
09:20:14 he understood my concerns about this.
09:20:16 I think that that would be something that would make
09:20:18 me more comfortable.
09:20:19 I can't speak to the rest of my colleagues but it
09:20:21 doesn't seem to make sense in terms of how we are
09:20:23 doing it.

09:20:23 >>JULIA COLE: Maybe what we could go ahead to do is
09:20:27 move this item for this evening and if it seems
09:20:29 necessary to go ahead and schedule the public hearing
09:20:32 on the development agreement after this evening's
09:20:35 hearing, we could do it at that time.
09:20:37 If it's not deemed necessary, then we can go ahead and
09:20:40 just withdraw that request.
09:20:41 >>ROSE FERLITA: I guess that's an okay answer till
09:20:46 tonight.
09:20:50 So that being said I'm not sure that I'm satisfied
09:20:51 with the answer but I'm satisfied with it for now.
09:20:55 And I know that puts you kind of in a compromise, and
09:21:00 I understand what you can and can't talk about but at
09:21:03 least, colleagues, we can consider that.
09:21:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was going to be my suggestion,
09:21:06 we just defer this till tonight after the rezoning.
09:21:09 >>JULIA COLE: Very good.
09:21:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move that.
09:21:13 >> Second.
09:21:13 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:21:15 (Motion carried).
09:21:23 >> I was going to thank you, Ms. Ferlita, for bringing

09:21:26 that forward.
09:21:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: Before I take credit for this, I do
09:21:29 want to tell you that my office is in contact with
09:21:31 Vicki Pollyea, and she had concerns, and I did talk to
09:21:34 Mr. Shelby.
09:21:35 So let's give credit where credit is due.
09:21:38 I'm sorry.
09:21:40 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move the agenda.
09:21:42 >> Second.
09:21:42 (Motion carried).
09:21:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Now item number 1.
09:21:50 Need to receive and file.
09:21:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Receive and file.
09:21:56 >>KEVIN WHITE: Second.
09:21:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that Robin Nigh is here.
09:22:02 And, yes, the reason that we discussed this was to see
09:22:07 if buildings, for example, like the old hotel, the
09:22:15 Floridan, if it's redone or if other buildings are
09:22:18 redone, do they have to put in public art?
09:22:21 This is pretty timely because we are kind of in the
09:22:24 midst of these things.
09:22:25 I wonder why we are deferring it.

09:22:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record, please.
09:22:32 >>> Robin Nigh, City of Tampa public arts program
09:22:34 manager.
09:22:39 This is substituting approximate partnership and the
09:22:42 set-up to their board and the conflict is the set-up,
09:22:46 portable public art, with major renovation.
09:22:51 There is a possibility that perhaps some of the
09:22:54 historical garnishments and architectural enhancements
09:22:59 perhaps could be considered if they restore those,
09:23:03 part of that particular project.
09:23:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: According to a letter from Ms.
09:23:10 Burdick, she says she wouldn't like to see any new
09:23:13 requirements put on.
09:23:14 It could be a disincentive to the building and costs,
09:23:18 and I kind of agree with her.
09:23:20 It's kind of becoming a burden to some of these
09:23:22 developers.
09:23:23 We certainly don't want to discourage development in
09:23:27 here.
09:23:27 So I concur with what Ms. Burdick says.
09:23:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to receive and file.
09:23:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So moved.

09:23:36 >> Second.
09:23:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
09:23:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just an update.
09:23:39 When we had this discussion, the issue also came up
09:23:42 about the possibly expanding this to the Westshore
09:23:47 area.
09:23:49 And somehow or other I volunteered to go ahead and
09:23:54 contact the Westshore group.
09:23:56 And their opinion on it, surprisingly enough, they
09:24:00 came up with the same opinion, that they didn't want
09:24:03 to be necessarily burdened with any of these public
09:24:06 art ordinances at this time.
09:24:08 They felt like they were doing some of their own
09:24:11 public art voluntarily, in their defense. Anyway, I
09:24:16 wanted to give you that report and update, that they
09:24:18 weren't particularly interested.
09:24:19 I think that the reality is, to me it's kind of like
09:24:25 the fox and the hen, guarding the hen house S. that
09:24:31 the expression?
09:24:32 When we ask these questions to the development
09:24:34 community, we don't need to bother asking.
09:24:36 We know what the answer is going to be.

09:24:38 They are not going to want any additional regulation
09:24:41 or any additional imposition on them.
09:24:43 I think the bigger question is, should we do it
09:24:45 because it's the right thing to do?
09:24:47 That's probably a discussion for another day.
09:24:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The truth is that the aggressive
09:24:56 developers are putting in public art because they
09:24:58 realize it's good business and makes their project
09:25:00 more valuable, more attractive and more competitive.
09:25:04 In a sense, as you would say, the market is correcting
09:25:06 itself.
09:25:07 I mean, the people who recognize the value of public
09:25:09 art are taking the initiative and doing that.
09:25:11 My question, is this holding anything up?
09:25:16 >>> Robin Nigh: No, ma'am.
09:25:17 I do believe -- and again I am not from the legal
09:25:19 department so I'm not the best -- but I do know it is
09:25:23 prepared to go to the Planning Commission and then it
09:25:25 will come back to you for discussion and approval.
09:25:29 >> Which is a regular ordinance without including this
09:25:30 additional thing?
09:25:32 >>> Yes, ma'am.

09:25:32 >> And the additional ordinance just raises the cap on
09:25:35 city buildings and the private sector?
09:25:38 >>> Well, it includes the Channelside.
09:25:40 It raises the cap to the 2006 area, $200,000.
09:25:51 >> Do you know what the timing is to go to the
09:25:53 Planning Commission and back to us?
09:25:54 >>> I don't feel comfortable speaking to that.
09:25:57 >> Does anybody from legal know?
09:25:59 I guess when it comes back it comes back.
09:26:01 But given that there are projects that are underway
09:26:03 now that would benefit from being -- having this in
09:26:08 place, I hope -- thank you.
09:26:12 So what is going to come back, the buildings will not
09:26:15 include renovation, it will only address downtown and
09:26:18 the Channelside.
09:26:20 Thank you.
09:26:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Alvarez, you may move to receive
09:26:23 and file.
09:26:24 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Yes, move.
09:26:28 >> Second.
09:26:28 (Motion carried).
09:26:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What are we --

09:26:35 >> Number 1.
09:26:35 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Can I ask a question?
09:26:39 Robin, is there any sort of waiver or consideration
09:26:41 given for someone that was going to come in and do
09:26:44 affordable housing or workforce housing or things of
09:26:49 that nature?
09:26:50 >>> I do believe that those are exempt.
09:26:52 And again, I do not feel comfortable speaking with
09:26:55 complete authority to that issue.
09:26:56 I'm not from the legal department but my understanding
09:26:59 certainly and other models around the city and around
09:27:01 the country, affordable housing and those type of
09:27:04 development projects are exempt.
09:27:05 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I would like to have that answered.
09:27:11 >>> Absolutely.
09:27:11 >> At some point quickly because if it's not there we
09:27:14 need to address it.
09:27:17 >>> When we come back we will confirm it.
09:27:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 2.
09:27:19 Mr. Daignault.
09:27:30 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I provided some information about
09:27:31 two weeks ago and was asked to respond further.

09:27:34 I provided a written response to the questions that
09:27:36 Mrs. Saul-Sena had.
09:27:37 And I'm available to answer any questions on that
09:27:40 issue, if you have any.
09:27:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Mr. Daignault.
09:27:46 I have a question of timing.
09:27:48 Have we hired any of these folks yet?
09:27:52 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: We have not.
09:27:53 We are still again clearing up the scope and nailing
09:27:56 down the scope.
09:27:57 Since the time that I read this, we have received a
09:28:00 revised proposal again from Reynold, Smith and hills.
09:28:05 We have not gotten the second round from Walter P.
09:28:08 Moore.
09:28:09 As soon as I have those they will be clarified and
09:28:11 we'll get them to council.
09:28:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I feel so strongly that before --
09:28:17 there needs to be a conversation of the museum people,
09:28:20 with the round building -- I guess we are waiting on
09:28:23 the due diligence to go through.
09:28:25 But with everybody who is involved, and what's
09:28:28 ultimately going to be on shall we say the roof of the

09:28:30 parking structure, because what you do to remedy the
09:28:34 cracks below is going to have an impact on what you do
09:28:37 above.
09:28:39 So the two are completely integrated.
09:28:42 What I would like to do is to work with your office
09:28:44 and to see if we can set up some kind of meeting so
09:28:46 that everyone understands what their concerns and
09:28:49 needs are and have some direction for the roof level,
09:28:52 so that we don't do something below that, that would
09:28:55 preclude what can be done on top.
09:28:58 >> I understand.
09:29:00 >> So I would like council to work with Mr. Daignault.
09:29:02 And by the way, I believe that you are asking for an
09:29:05 extension on the 60 day due diligence?
09:29:09 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: The city attorney is working that.
09:29:12 And you have to ask them.
09:29:13 I am not aware.
09:29:16 >> Conveniently.
09:29:18 >>DAVID SMITH: David Smith, city attorney.
09:29:24 We have not yet spoken about a specific extension.
09:29:30 We are trying to do everything we can to keep on the
09:29:32 current schedule.

09:29:33 We have issues, however, that look as though they are
09:29:37 going to require some additional time.
09:29:38 We have broached the subject in our negotiations.
09:29:41 These have been fairly intense negotiations.
09:29:45 So wouldn't want to say too much but I do believe we
09:29:48 are going to need some time.
09:29:51 I think the other side has begun so I believe we will
09:29:55 have additional time.
09:29:57 What it will be or what limitations is yet to be
09:30:00 determined.
09:30:00 Sorry to be vague but unfortunately we don't have it
09:30:02 nailed down yet.
09:30:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just want to make sure before we
09:30:07 move ahead with any kind of design under the roof that
09:30:09 we figure out what's going on in the park.
09:30:12 Smith
09:30:13 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: I understand.
09:30:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Daignault.
09:30:16 Mr. Shelby, do you want to say anything on item 4?
09:30:19 Item 3?
09:30:20 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 3?
09:30:23 >>CHAIRMAN: 3 and 4.

09:30:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I provided a memo to council of
09:30:31 background material regarding the possibility of
09:30:34 allowing public comments on both first reading and
09:30:37 second reading on items.
09:30:40 And as council knows, sometimes, depending on what the
09:30:44 subject matter is, it appears on the consent docket,
09:30:48 and council has certain options as to whether it
09:30:51 wishes to continue to do that.
09:30:53 I looked at three alternatives.
09:30:55 That's not an exact list.
09:30:58 Council can choose during approval of the agenda pull
09:31:01 particular items for discussion, and council can
09:31:03 choose to set them for workshops if they wish
09:31:06 discussion.
09:31:06 Council can choose to set them for as a general
09:31:10 policy, to set them for first reading during the
09:31:12 10 a.m. public hearing.
09:31:14 Or council can create a new section on the agenda if
09:31:16 it wishes called "other legislative matters" and call
09:31:20 each item individually.
09:31:21 However council wishes to address the issue of
09:31:24 discussing items for changes, possibly, prior to first

09:31:31 reading.
09:31:31 I believe that was the issue that council was
09:31:34 concerned about.
09:31:35 Because as you know, once you have a first reading,
09:31:38 you cannot make any material changes.
09:31:40 At second reading it has to then go back to first
09:31:44 reading.
09:31:44 I believe councilman Dingfelder made the motion to
09:31:47 look at this issue.
09:31:48 There are several issues if council wishes to address
09:31:51 the issue.
09:31:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
09:31:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, ma Madam Chair.
09:31:57 In going back to when Mr. Massey was here, he always
09:32:00 used to chastise us very strongly that we can't change
09:32:05 anything substantive between -- after first reading,
09:32:09 and it has to go back.
09:32:11 And then it came to my attention, I guess, that we
09:32:14 weren't doing public comment until second reading.
09:32:16 Then if we wanted to change something we had to go
09:32:18 back again.
09:32:19 And we had a few of those situations.

09:32:20 So I think at a minimum we should have public comment.
09:32:24 I think we should have public comment at first reading
09:32:26 and second reading.
09:32:28 It's an ordinance, a piece of legislation that the
09:32:30 community should have input on at both readings.
09:32:33 I think that's what a public hearing is about.
09:32:35 That's why it's called a public hearing, I think.
09:32:37 And that's why we should have public comment at both
09:32:40 first and second reading.
09:32:41 The other suggestion that I would have is I think it's
09:32:47 a great idea that Marty suggested as one of the
09:32:50 alternatives that we create a separate part of the
09:32:52 agenda, I not consent but called the legislative
09:32:57 agenda, and put any ordinance changes or new
09:33:00 ordinances or what have you in the legislative part of
09:33:02 the agenda.
09:33:03 And then that way it would be clearly identifiable.
09:33:06 Yes, ma'am.
09:33:07 >>CATHLEEN O'DOWD: Legal department.
09:33:10 One comment I have with regard to creating a separate
09:33:13 section in your agenda entitled legislative matters is
09:33:16 I'm not sure that all ordinance that is are before you

09:33:19 for first reading are necessarily legislative.
09:33:22 Some ordinances begin with regard to vacating that are
09:33:27 quasi-judicial in nature.
09:33:28 But that would just be --
09:33:32 >> Maybe semantics.
09:33:34 >>> I believe historically, though, when there are
09:33:36 ordinances on first reading as part of the consent
09:33:39 agenda, that had an opportunity to address those
09:33:45 during the public comment section, and then if council
09:33:50 was seeing that perhaps we had to pull it off the
09:33:54 agenda because there was a lot of interest in it,
09:33:56 would you waive your rules and allow that to be
09:33:59 discussed separately so the public could -- you could
09:34:02 hear from the public on it.
09:34:04 Because of course the last thing you want is to be
09:34:06 changing an ordinance between first and second reading
09:34:09 and then going back to first reading at second
09:34:11 reading.
09:34:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I appreciate those comments.
09:34:16 I think that ordinance changes are consent, if we look
09:34:20 at what's on the consent.
09:34:21 It's a lot of contracts that are sort of run of the

09:34:24 mill contracts that we do year in and year out and
09:34:27 lots of times we may not focus as much on those
09:34:30 particular items.
09:34:30 But I think that there's a good reason to pull
09:34:33 ordinances and yank them into a separate section so we
09:34:38 all focus a little bit more on those ordinances.
09:34:41 And as far as the public is concerned, I think that as
09:34:46 opposed to kind of just -- the public could have
09:34:48 spoken on that ordinance, and then two hours later we
09:34:51 could get to that ordinance.
09:34:53 And there's a -- there would be a big disconnect, and
09:34:56 there probably is a big disconnect if we treated it
09:34:59 that way.
09:35:00 So I would be leaning toward the other approach.
09:35:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:35:03 My goal would just be to have Mae maybe the staff
09:35:07 explain something.
09:35:09 The public comment on it.
09:35:10 And then council take action.
09:35:12 I feel like it's foolish to have the public speak
09:35:17 before the staff had an opportunity to explain the
09:35:19 content of something.

09:35:19 And I certainly don't want to take action and then
09:35:22 hear from the public that they have concerns and
09:35:26 questions that might have changed the action we took.
09:35:29 So it seems to me that the sequence, I think, is that
09:35:33 public and council action.
09:35:35 And I really look to Mr. Shelby to help determine the
09:35:39 most expeditious way to accomplish that.
09:35:41 >>DAVID SMITH: You sort of brought number 4 up into
09:35:47 number 3, but they are related.
09:35:48 And if you don't mind I would like to say a couple
09:35:51 things about number 4.
09:35:52 And Mr. Shelby -- and we have spoken.
09:35:57 And what we would like to do is encourage what you
09:35:59 just described for a couple of reasons.
09:36:02 We are kind of understaffed.
09:36:04 And we sometimes have sometimes 3, 4 and 5 lawyers
09:36:08 down here for long periods of time.
09:36:10 And although we watch upstairs and come down when you
09:36:12 need us, it's much more efficient for to us try to
09:36:16 provide you the input up front so that you get the
09:36:19 context.
09:36:19 Hopefully we will provide some explanatory context

09:36:22 which makes more sense out of what you are looking at,
09:36:24 allows the public to understand the full import of
09:36:26 what they can then comment on.
09:36:30 So we think staff early is a very good way to do it.
09:36:32 Used to do it to that extent.
09:36:34 I think if you have occasionally a staff person who
09:36:37 signs up for 30 seconds and appears to want to read
09:36:40 "war and peace" but hopefully that won't happen.
09:36:44 But our preference would be that you go to that
09:36:47 approach that you used to use.
09:36:50 And I think that will also help.
09:36:52 One other comment I would make, Mr. Shelby and I spoke
09:36:55 about this as well, I think it's helpful for the chair
09:36:57 or some of the periodically remind people where we
09:37:00 are.
09:37:01 Because a lot of people don't follow where we are in
09:37:03 the agenda.
09:37:04 I'm talking about bright people like Janet and Ellen
09:37:08 who are here every time and really are smart.
09:37:10 So if they can't follow it, I know the public is
09:37:12 having trouble.
09:37:22 >>KEVIN WHITE: I want to address Mr. Smith and Mrs.

09:37:25 Saul-Sena.
09:37:25 That's one of the exact reasons I brought this up last
09:37:27 week, not only from a staff perspective, but from the
09:37:30 public perspective as well, having to speak before
09:37:34 even hearing staff comment and or hearing council's
09:37:37 comments, they have to speak before they heard the
09:37:42 staff comments.
09:37:43 And then they don't know which direction staff is
09:37:45 coming from.
09:37:46 And that's one of the main things that I think some of
09:37:50 our listening public comes down here and wants to take
09:37:54 an active participatory part in the process, which
09:38:01 they think because they can't come back and rebut and
09:38:05 or correct some of the things because they have
09:38:08 already spoken before we heard from staff.
09:38:10 So I think that is definitely a direction I would like
09:38:15 to go.
09:38:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could just ask council for
09:38:19 clarification.
09:38:19 Because there's a concern that I have that was raised
09:38:22 early on when we discussed the order of business.
09:38:29 There are times when there are staff reports, that

09:38:33 council makes motions before the public even has an
09:38:36 opportunity to address them.
09:38:37 And there have been several motions that have been
09:38:40 made today where the public has not, A, has noticed,
09:38:44 and, B, an opportunity to comment.
09:38:46 So that was, I guess, one of the reasons why I have a
09:38:50 concern where it's something on the agenda and council
09:38:54 takes action without having the opportunity for the
09:38:56 public to speak.
09:38:57 So I'm looking for direction from council how best to
09:39:00 address that.
09:39:00 There are some jurisdictions that allow public comment
09:39:04 on each individual item, say is there anybody who
09:39:08 wants to speak and then open it from the floor F. it's
09:39:10 a particular subject matter with at least some kind of
09:39:14 consistency so at least people have notice.
09:39:16 But I'll take direction from council, however council
09:39:19 wishes to go in this matter.
09:39:22 >>KEVIN WHITE: One of the things, Mr. Shelby, so far
09:39:25 that we had done in the past that someone in the
09:39:27 audience has a comment we often open a public hearing
09:39:34 back up as a courtesy.

09:39:35 I don't think anybody in the audience has ever had a
09:39:38 serious concern about an item that we moved forward
09:39:41 on, since I've been here.
09:39:42 I don't think we have ever not been courteous at least
09:39:46 to opening back up and rediscussing it and going on
09:39:49 and moving on with an issue that way.
09:39:51 I think anything we passed this morning other than
09:39:55 receiving files and things, as far as Brad is
09:39:58 concerned, hadn't moved that consent agenda yet.
09:40:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's fine, and I want to be sure
09:40:09 anything substantive that you give the people an
09:40:11 opportunity to speak before you take action.
09:40:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Shelby, what did the Largo
09:40:17 commission do when you were on it?
09:40:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: They had sections where they had a
09:40:22 separate section of the agenda where they opened it
09:40:24 for public comment individually.
09:40:27 That was created while I was on the commission.
09:40:31 Each jurisdiction does it differently.
09:40:35 And it's really -- as long as there's in a legal
09:40:39 requirement.
09:40:39 Of course I should point out that Florida statute does

09:40:43 not require for legislative matters that there be a
09:40:46 public hearing at first reading.
09:40:49 That's only for zoning issues.
09:40:52 So council can add additional opportunities for the
09:40:56 public to speak that exceeds the minimum statutory
09:41:00 requirement but can't go below the minimum statutory
09:41:02 requirement.
09:41:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I think the problems that have come up
09:41:06 in the past are minimal.
09:41:08 They are nothing that -- I mean, that made us sit up
09:41:11 and take notice, but I don't think it's anything we
09:41:14 really need to change.
09:41:15 We are giving the public their due process, and we are
09:41:19 allowing them to speak, and we do have the waiver
09:41:21 rights.
09:41:22 So I'm comfortable with just being like it is,
09:41:27 alternate 1.
09:41:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could follow up with a comment.
09:41:31 You raise two interesting points.
09:41:33 Number one, council always has the opportunity by
09:41:35 unanimous vote to waive the rules.
09:41:37 And council also, if it realizes it's an issue early

09:41:40 on during the approval of the agenda, or an individual
09:41:43 council member may have a problem or issue with an
09:41:45 item, they can always remove it from the consent
09:41:47 docket and open it for discussion during the approval
09:41:50 of the agenda.
09:41:50 However council wishes to choose.
09:41:52 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And we need to be consistent about
09:41:56 this.
09:41:56 Because it seems like we keep changing rules in the
09:42:00 middle of the road, or we just seem to be changing.
09:42:02 And it's got everybody confused including me.
09:42:05 And you.
09:42:06 So I think we need to be consistent about this.
09:42:10 And set a policy and go forward on it.
09:42:12 I don't really see that many problems that we have in
09:42:16 the past.
09:42:18 There were a few.
09:42:19 But nothing that we need to, you know, continually
09:42:22 change our agenda for.
09:42:25 That's my opinion.
09:42:27 Have been else has their opinion.
09:42:28 But I'm set with no changes.

09:42:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: An example just for council's
09:42:36 information.
09:42:39 My understanding is when the administration, there are
09:42:41 going to be things coming to council that is going to
09:42:43 need to be in a sense workshopped that's presented to
09:42:46 council in advance, for instance, the chapter 27
09:42:48 revision are coming to council on May 4th not for
09:42:51 first reading but for presentation.
09:42:53 And if that's a direction that council wishes to ask
09:42:56 the administration to do that on a regular basis, in
09:43:00 advance of first reading, then it might give the
09:43:04 public the notice and the opportunity for changes
09:43:05 before it actually comes to first reading.
09:43:12 >> I think we have done that.
09:43:13 >>ROSE FERLITA: That's something, Mr. Shelby, we need
09:43:15 to stick with because I think that works.
09:43:17 When I hear different colleagues their sentiment is
09:43:20 the same but we are talking about getting to the in
09:43:23 different ways and different mechanisms.
09:43:25 We want to make sure the public is heard before we
09:43:27 take action.
09:43:27 Because if they are going to talk about it after the

09:43:29 fact, it's ineffective.
09:43:32 I know that in the past we have made some exceptions.
09:43:35 And I think Mr. White for the right reasons is saying
09:43:40 it has some substantive -- I can't say that word --
09:43:45 >>GWEN MILLER: We know what you're talking about.
09:43:47 >>ROSE FERLITA: -- all right.
09:43:48 Concerns, then we make an exception, we let them
09:43:51 speak.
09:43:51 Well, what we think might be important reasons for
09:43:53 them to speak and what they think is an important
09:43:55 reason might be subjective.
09:43:59 So, you know, let's have a mechanism that works.
09:44:04 I mean, one person's ideas versus somebody else's
09:44:08 ideas, whether one person thinks it's important or
09:44:10 not, is really the issue.
09:44:12 If we are going to let people come up then we need to
09:44:15 make sure that everybody comes up and not big it a big
09:44:17 deal that, oh, they have a really important point.
09:44:21 Everybody's point is important.
09:44:22 The simplest way to do that, I don't know.
09:44:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, you raise an interesting
09:44:27 point, that regardless of what council does, it's

09:44:29 important to treat everybody fairly and consistently
09:44:33 in whatever process it uses so there is no question as
09:44:36 to the clarity of treatment.
09:44:38 >>ROSE FERLITA: And maybe, Mr. Shelby, could you think
09:44:41 about this more.
09:44:42 And if you think of an easier way to do this and more
09:44:45 efficient way to do this, then fine, bring it back.
09:44:47 I think the only point we are all making in our
09:44:50 different ways, you know, Mr. Knott's idea or comment
09:44:54 is just as important as Mr. Smith's idea someplace
09:44:56 else but that's what we have to do, just encourage and
09:45:00 engage the public in being able to tell us what they
09:45:02 think before he would make our decisions.
09:45:04 Otherwise, it's counterproductive.
09:45:07 That's it.
09:45:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Let's see if we can get something
09:45:10 done here.
09:45:12 Madam Chair, I would move that we stop moving the
09:45:19 agendaed public comment to the front after approval of
09:45:21 the agenda and we stick with the way the agenda is
09:45:24 written which is agendaed public comment after staff
09:45:29 report.

09:45:34 But I think what we are hearing is that people -- I
09:45:45 would just say strike --
09:45:49 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Neither resolution.
09:45:50 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Either way.
09:45:51 Just strike.
09:45:52 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor?
09:45:54 (Motion carried).
09:45:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And I think councilman Dingfelder
09:45:58 did raise a good point about ordinances and maybe what
09:46:00 you can do, Marty, is putting something on the agenda
09:46:03 that says, just ordinances, and then the public would
09:46:08 be then able to speak on the ordinances section,
09:46:14 whether it's first reading or second reading, and
09:46:16 ordinances, remove them from the consent docket.
09:46:24 >> Second.
09:46:24 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Maybe you can tweak that a bit but
09:46:26 maybe that might solve our problem.
09:46:31 >>GWEN MILLER: There's a motion, Mr. Harrison?
09:46:35 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Yes.
09:46:36 Look into it and see if that works and report back.
09:46:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay.
09:46:40 In the meantime, if you wish to have ordinances

09:46:43 removed from the consent docket, that can be a request
09:46:48 to the clerk, and they can just put that on I guess
09:46:52 unfinished business.
09:46:53 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Not do anything with it.
09:46:55 You look at it and see if you think --
09:46:58 >>MARY ALVAREZ: May I ask why we put ordinances in the
09:47:01 consent docket?
09:47:02 I never understood that part of it.
09:47:04 Do you?
09:47:27 Alvarez
09:47:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think number 3 is a good point
09:47:30 but we need to afford the public the opportunity.
09:47:33 I think Mr. Harrison's suggestion is great.
09:47:36 You need to do this as quickly as you can and bring it
09:47:39 back.
09:47:39 I know it takes a couple of weeks to get it, read it
09:47:42 and put it off for two weeks.
09:47:43 It will take awhile for it to actually kick in but I
09:47:46 think the public should have an opportunity to speak
09:47:49 both at the first hearing and at the second.
09:47:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Was that part of the motion then?
09:47:57 >>GWEN MILLER: That is another motion.

09:47:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, no.
09:48:02 That we are supporting --
09:48:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Bring it back in two weeks?
09:48:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I don't mind the public comments if
09:48:13 they come up but according to what Mr. Smith said, or
09:48:15 somebody said in the memos that we got, if you change
09:48:21 the ordinances, if you have problems with the
09:48:26 ordinances they go back to first reading.
09:48:28 Does that mean.
09:48:33 >> That's the way it is now.
09:48:34 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I know.
09:48:35 Why are we changing?
09:48:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Get their comments at the first
09:48:39 reading and we can catch it earlier.
09:48:41 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Which is what we do now.
09:48:45 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's not.
09:48:47 >>MARY ALVAREZ: We do.
09:48:48 If we are having a public hearing we are having the
09:48:50 comments then, right?
09:48:51 Okay.
09:48:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: To make that distinction, when it
09:48:55 involves a zoning matter, then what you have, it's

09:48:59 advertised differently in the state statute, noticed
09:49:02 differently.
09:49:02 And also there are two opportunities for a public
09:49:05 hearing.
09:49:05 And that's what happens traditionally at your evening
09:49:10 meetings.
09:49:11 The first meeting is when you raise all these issues
09:49:13 and it comes back, gets continued and an ordinance or
09:49:16 whatever.
09:49:17 With non-zoning matters, you don't necessarily have
09:49:22 that -- you don't have to have two public hearings.
09:49:25 Normally.
09:49:34 >> This is only for the consent docket we are talking
09:49:36 about.
09:49:38 >> Because if you are doing the ordinance, if we have
09:49:43 done the public hearings already, and we have done it
09:49:45 first reading, then what we have already taken all the
09:49:48 public comments, and then somebody comes back on the
09:49:51 second reading, the public hearing is closed at that
09:49:54 point.
09:49:55 Right?
09:49:56 The second ordinance?

09:49:59 >>KEVIN WHITE: For public comment?
09:50:03 >>THE CLERK: On zoning issues and other public
09:50:07 hearings where an ordinance is required to be placed
09:50:11 on first reading it does come back to council at 9:30
09:50:15 on second reading.
09:50:15 That is where public comments can be taken.
09:50:18 We have had changes made at second reading.
09:50:22 >>GWEN MILLER: For clarification, what are we
09:50:24 changing?
09:50:24 We hear public comment when they come first reading
09:50:28 and second reading.
09:50:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If it's a change to an ordinance that
09:50:33 does involve -- something that changes, I'm trying to
09:50:40 think of an example, fees, may not be fees, something
09:50:47 that would not have to be advertised twice for
09:50:50 nonzoning issues.
09:50:52 Do you have any examples that you recall?
09:50:58 >>THE CLERK: Usually pertains to -- there are certain
09:51:02 code changes that do not require second readings.
09:51:09 You also have ordinances that will come back.
09:51:11 You also have ordinances that do come back if there's
09:51:13 a scrivener's error, maybe a zoning ordinance or wet

09:51:16 zoning or closure that will come back and be placed on
09:51:18 the consent agenda to correct that scrivener's error.
09:51:21 But most of the time your closure is your zonings,
09:51:23 your wet zonings, your ordinances are presented during
09:51:26 public hearing for first reading.
09:51:33 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So where is the change?
09:51:38 Okay, Miss Clerk, you see no change.
09:51:42 >>SHAWN HARRISON: If I could just clarify what I'm
09:51:44 trying to do.
09:51:45 I'm not suggesting that we have two public hearings on
09:51:47 every ordinance.
09:51:48 I'm just saying that there needs to be two sections
09:51:51 where the public can comment on ordinances that will
09:51:55 be coming forth.
09:51:56 So hopefully what Marty will come back is a section on
09:52:01 the agenda that will just say ordinances, or
09:52:03 ordinances for first reading or second reading or
09:52:06 however we do it.
09:52:07 Because right now if we have an ordinance that's not a
09:52:09 zoning ordinance and it shows up on the consent
09:52:11 agenda, then people really don't understand when they
09:52:14 have the ability to come and talk to us, and if they

09:52:17 confuse it with a zoning ordinance, where they know
09:52:20 that they can speak twice, then they may miss their
09:52:23 opportunity at the public comment section at the
09:52:26 beginning of the agenda to speak.
09:52:27 And that is their only agenda time.
09:52:30 And when we get to the consent agenda, people are
09:52:33 sitting in the audience thinking they are going to
09:52:35 have an opportunity to speak about it because it's an
09:52:37 ordinance, no matter whether it's on the consent
09:52:41 agenda or not and then they miss their opportunity
09:52:43 because they didn't get it at it at first.
09:52:46 I don't think this is going to have any serious impact
09:52:48 on the flow of the council meetings.
09:52:50 And I think it will improve some of our audience
09:52:54 participation, because it would be clear to them.
09:52:56 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Mr. Harrison, how many times -- you
09:52:59 know, I'm going the average.
09:53:01 Give me an average of when this happens?
09:53:05 >> Noise ordinance.
09:53:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Noise ordinance, one.
09:53:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't know, Mrs. Alvarez.
09:53:11 I can't quantify that now.

09:53:13 But I do know --
09:53:15 >>MARY ALVAREZ: It's not something that's disruptive
09:53:20 or anything.
09:53:21 And we hear them and we give them the chance.
09:53:24 But to go ahead and arbitrarily change everything
09:53:27 because we are not giving the audience their due
09:53:30 process, I think we are giving them their due process.
09:53:33 I think we are giving them more than their due
09:53:35 process.
09:53:36 You know, we are the council.
09:53:37 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman?
09:53:43 >>SHAWN HARRISON: All I said is hey, Marty, take a
09:53:46 look at it and come back in two weeks.
09:53:52 >>ROSE FERLITA: Look how much time we have spent.
09:53:55 We clearly --
09:53:58 >>GWEN MILLER: We want --
09:54:01 >>ROSE FERLITA: There are some areas that they are
09:54:02 confused about when they have the opportunity to
09:54:05 express their opinion.
09:54:06 You're going to come back and clarify that.
09:54:08 So maybe the mechanism changes.
09:54:10 But the process is the same.

09:54:13 Make sure if they don't understand things on the
09:54:15 consent agenda that are per ordinance they don't have
09:54:18 the opportunity to speak, then reconfigure that.
09:54:23 They have the opportunity to be heard and we move on.
09:54:30 >> Don't give the option.
09:54:31 >> Mr. Harrison suggested you look at it.
09:54:34 When you come back your suggestions will be more
09:54:36 defined so we don't take another hour of the public's
09:54:38 time.
09:54:39 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I will take Mr. Harrison's motion.
09:54:43 And I would like to set up a meeting with the clerk
09:54:47 and the city attorney so that when we do come back, it
09:54:50 will be a recommendation that is acceptable to all
09:54:55 parties and present that to council.
09:54:56 >>GWEN MILLER: One recommendation.
09:54:58 All right.
09:54:58 We got a motion on the floor.
09:54:59 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
09:55:01 Opposed, Nay.
09:55:03 Item number 5 is the closed public hearing.
09:55:06 Mr. White, would you like to read that?
09:55:07 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you.

09:55:19 Move an ordinance providing for an area rezoning east
09:55:25 of 14th street, south of 9th Avenue, west of 26th
09:55:28 street and north of Adamo drive in the city of Tampa,
09:55:30 Florida for zoning classifications IG industrial
09:55:33 general to YC-6 community commercial to YC 2
09:55:41 residential and from CI commercial intensive to YC
09:55:44 community commercial providing for repeal of all
09:55:47 ordinances in conflict, providing for severability,
09:55:50 providing an effective date.
09:55:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion?
09:55:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Madam clerk, I don't see the
09:55:57 notation on here about the vote, the votes last time.
09:56:03 I'm sorry, at the bottom.
09:56:04 I apologize.
09:56:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This is number 5.
09:56:12 I do have a point that I would like to make to
09:56:14 council.
09:56:14 I do apologize for not notifying that they'll be
09:56:19 coming back today.
09:56:20 If council is prepared to take this vote I would
09:56:22 recommend do you so, if council is not prepared to
09:56:24 take this vote then I would request a continuance.

09:56:27 This being a quasi-judicial matter, council, if any
09:56:31 other written communications relative to today's
09:56:33 hearing that has been available to the public and
09:56:35 received since the last meeting, has anything been
09:56:39 received?
09:56:40 >> I have not received anything.
09:56:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder to council if there
09:56:44 has been any ex parte communication that is have taken
09:56:46 place between the last time it was heard and this
09:56:48 vote, would you please disclose that prior to taking
09:56:51 the vote?
09:56:52 Thank you.
09:56:55 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I had an ex parte communication
09:56:56 yesterday with Mark Huey, and really trying to figure
09:57:02 out what is the administration's position on this?
09:57:07 And I think it's been clarified.
09:57:11 But that was a point of confusion last week.
09:57:14 And quite honestly, I wish there was someone from the
09:57:18 administration here to talk about it.
09:57:24 >> Gloria.
09:57:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I'm thinking about maybe someone
09:57:27 that was going to say we think it's a good idea,

09:57:29 council, or we don't think it's a good idea.
09:57:38 I was actually thinking about either Mr. Huey or Mr.
09:57:41 Chen, because it was Mr. Chen last week that sort of
09:57:44 created the confusion in my mind.
09:57:46 And I would like to hear from either him or Mr. Huey
09:57:49 about this.
09:57:49 And I don't know if they are available.
09:57:50 >>ROSE FERLITA: Well, they should be able to be made
09:57:54 available.
09:57:54 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
09:57:56 I can certainly see if I can get them to come over.
09:57:59 But I do know that the administration is supportive of
09:58:02 this amendment.
09:58:04 And the study that Mr. Chen is going to be pursuing
09:58:09 with historic preservation is related to the density,
09:58:13 and height issues related with historic district and
09:58:17 its relationship.
09:58:18 He's going to be working with the historic
09:58:22 preservation to come to an agreement on that
09:58:25 appropriateness.
09:58:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
09:58:30 I think Mr. Shelby wants us to reopen the public

09:58:32 hearing.
09:58:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you are going to take any
09:58:34 testimony.
09:58:36 I'm sorry.
09:58:38 >> So moved.
09:58:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So moved.
09:58:43 >> Second.
09:58:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Are we allowed to open the public
09:58:47 hearing only to hear from staff?
09:58:48 That would be my preference.
09:58:49 >>ROSE FERLITA: No.
09:58:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Because we told the public it was
09:58:55 closed.
09:58:55 And I feel like --
09:58:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Then my suggestion is two fold.
09:59:00 Number one, the answer to the first question, if you
09:59:02 reopen the public hearing and new testimony is
09:59:04 introduced, then I don't believe it would be
09:59:08 appropriate to just limit that without giving people
09:59:10 the opportunity to rebut it.
09:59:11 But if it's new information.
09:59:14 And number two, if it's not appropriate, and council

09:59:20 is in the posture in that it's closed, you can
09:59:28 continue it.
09:59:28 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Harrison brought up a good point
09:59:31 about confusion and wanted an opinion about the
09:59:34 position of the administration.
09:59:35 I am not going to try to guess what their thinking is
09:59:39 or why it is.
09:59:40 But it's important for to us know that but it's also
09:59:42 important to be able to bring other people in and
09:59:44 rediscuss a few things that might be contributory to
09:59:47 their opinion.
09:59:48 For instance, hearsay, I understand some people are of
09:59:52 the opinion that, well, we should move forward with
09:59:55 this because waiting for this study is going to do no
10:00:01 good because it's going to be done by some students at
10:00:04 USF that really, you know, they are not going to give
10:00:07 us a very comprehensive study or snot able to give a
10:00:15 study that's substantive.
10:00:16 I think the study done by USF is going to be a
10:00:20 document that weighs heavily on my opinion and that's
10:00:23 why I am not going to support it anyway until we get
10:00:26 that study back.

10:00:26 I think somebody is going to just put a bunch of
10:00:30 students at USF to do this and then the quality of the
10:00:33 study is going to be nothing.
10:00:34 I don't think that's what Mr. Williams was explaining
10:00:36 to us.
10:00:37 So if we are going to open this again, and Mr. Shelby,
10:00:40 you tell me what the process is, but if we are going
10:00:42 to open this again so Mr. Huey can come and say we
10:00:44 support you moving forward with this, then I want
10:00:46 somebody from the opposite side to say, well, if that
10:00:49 opinion is based on the inaccuracy or the inefficiency
10:00:53 or the lack of a comprehensive study from USF, that
10:00:56 what he's in.
10:00:57 And I think that's something that I have kind of
10:00:59 understood from administration.
10:01:02 But that study is not going to be that big a deal.
10:01:05 And I don't think that's fair.
10:01:06 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I wasn't hear for the vote last week.
10:01:13 I was absent.
10:01:14 I didn't have a chance to look at the tape.
10:01:16 So I'm not ready to vote either way or the other.
10:01:19 >>ROSE FERLITA: No, that takes care of that, Mary.

10:01:25 >>GWEN MILLER: I would need a motion then to continue.
10:01:27 >>ROSE FERLITA: So moved, Madam Chairman.
10:01:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me withdraw my motion to open
10:01:31 the public hearing.
10:01:32 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can.
10:01:33 I just want to be clear on what council wishes because
10:01:36 it may be appropriate -- right now the public hearing
10:01:39 is closed.
10:01:47 Review the tape, be prepared to take and next week
10:01:50 just take a vote without further comment.
10:01:51 If council wishes -- and it sounds like there are
10:01:53 issues here -- and if council wishes to have
10:01:55 addressed -- I'm not speaking for council but if
10:01:57 that's the case, my recommendation would be to reopen
10:02:00 the public hearing, continue it for a time certain
10:02:02 next week, and request the information that council
10:02:05 wishes in order to make its decision that it feels
10:02:09 Mary to make its decision.
10:02:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Hearing what everyone said I would
10:02:14 like to move to reschedule this for next week as a
10:02:17 closed meeting, and in the interim time allow the
10:02:19 other council members to review the tape and to chat

10:02:22 with staff, which is not an ex parte communication if
10:02:25 you are chatting with staff.
10:02:27 That would be my motion.
10:02:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was my comment.
10:02:30 I second that.
10:02:30 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
10:02:32 Question on the motion.
10:02:32 >>ROSE FERLITA: I'm not going to support in the that
10:02:35 context because then we are going to be able to talk
10:02:37 to staff, or the administration, so we are going to
10:02:40 get additional emphasis on what their position is, but
10:02:43 at the same time, if there's something that's weighing
10:02:45 in to make them decide if that's their position, we
10:02:47 are not able to hear from the opposite side about
10:02:50 the -- the effect of the study.
10:02:53 So if we are going to continue it, and we are going to
10:02:56 be talking to staff, I don't think that that should
10:02:59 preclude us from the opportunity to talk to other
10:03:01 people.
10:03:02 I mean, staff is staff.
10:03:03 But everybody's rights are the same.
10:03:07 I think we should continue it but I think we should

10:03:09 open it again and have everybody --
10:03:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Other parties are here.
10:03:13 Why don't we just open it now?
10:03:15 >>ROSE FERLITA: Because Mrs. Alvarez has not had the
10:03:17 opportunity for personal reasons to look at --
10:03:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are going to go through it all
10:03:21 again.
10:03:22 >>ROSE FERLITA: I don't think that's sufficient in
10:03:24 terms of time.
10:03:24 Look how much time we had already.
10:03:26 I think Mrs. Alvarez should look at it and she's had
10:03:28 very ample reasons for not having looked at it.
10:03:31 And then next week in the meantime if we want to talk
10:03:33 to staff we can.
10:03:34 But in the meantime we've to extend the opportunity to
10:03:38 the audience to be able to come back again.
10:03:40 I'm sorry.
10:03:41 Either talk to nobody or talk to everybody.
10:03:42 >>KEVIN WHITE: I would support Mrs. Saul-Sena's motion
10:03:50 based upon -- it seems that most of the council's
10:03:56 questions are based on what staff's recommendations
10:03:59 are.

10:04:00 If that is it, and if Mrs. Alvarez has the opportunity
10:04:03 to look at the tape, if she has questions of staff
10:04:06 she can ask them between now and next week.
10:04:08 And we heard everything from the public, over two
10:04:11 hours, and we can vote on it at that point in time.
10:04:15 If it's just staff questions that we need answered, we
10:04:20 can continue this for a week, continue it for a week,
10:04:23 have Mrs. Alvarez have the opportunity to review the
10:04:25 tape, and then move on like we normally do.
10:04:29 Because we can keep opening this every other week on
10:04:32 and on and on.
10:04:33 But I think it was a motion.
10:04:37 I don't know if it's seconded.
10:04:39 >>ROSE FERLITA: Alabama.
10:04:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
10:04:43 floor.
10:04:44 All in favor?
10:04:44 Opposed?
10:04:46 >>ROSE FERLITA: Nay.
10:04:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So the motion is just to continue
10:04:50 it.
10:04:50 >>GWEN MILLER: It will be put -- come back under

10:04:54 unfinished business.
10:04:56 Mrs. Ferlita.
10:04:57 >>ROSE FERLITA: But if somebody wants to talk to us,
10:04:59 as long as we dollar it next week we can still do
10:05:03 that, right?
10:05:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Right.
10:05:04 >>GLORIA MOREDA: I just wanted to indicate, item 46 is
10:05:07 the text amendment related to height.
10:05:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to continue one week.
10:05:14 >> Second.
10:05:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to continue item 46.
10:05:19 (Motion carried).
10:05:20 Is there anyone in the public that would like to ask
10:05:22 for reconsideration?
10:05:25 Would anyone in the public like to ask for
10:05:28 reconsideration?
10:05:29 Okay.
10:05:36 >>> Elizabeth Johnson.
10:05:38 I don't know if it's considered reconsideration.
10:05:40 But I would just caution you that if you do have true
10:05:43 ex parte communications on the matter that you just
10:05:48 consider, so I think it is reconsideration.

10:05:49 If you have true ex parte communication, and the
10:05:53 hearing is closed, next week when you take that up,
10:05:58 that not only you disclose that, but you give the
10:06:03 public if necessary, if you have those ex parte
10:06:05 communications, not talking about with staff, I'm
10:06:07 talking about with outside people, that you give
10:06:10 members of the public the opportunity to respond to
10:06:12 it.
10:06:13 So you are not in a situation where you are in a
10:06:15 continued public hearing.
10:06:16 But you haven't really just sat here.
10:06:18 You have had a lot of outside communications.
10:06:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's fair.
10:06:22 Thank you.
10:06:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:06:24 would like to speak at this time on any item on the
10:06:26 agenda not set for public hearing?
10:06:47 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 2902 east Ellicott
10:06:50 three nights a week and I thank God for his grace and
10:06:52 mercy.
10:06:53 And always hear people coming up and people going
10:06:58 crazy always showing where Jesus heal all them people.

10:07:04 All times people told me I was going to die and Jesus
10:07:08 healed me.
10:07:09 I already know that.
10:07:10 And I want to speak on this article 5 here this
10:07:12 morning.
10:07:13 And I want to thank you all this morning.
10:07:16 You know, I do a lot of play praying.
10:07:19 I'm a loner.
10:07:23 You can get off by yourself and talk to him.
10:07:26 But like Dr. Martin Luther King one day everybody
10:07:31 would be free to speak and have an opinion.
10:07:34 Dr. King was a property rights and human rights man.
10:07:36 But anyway, though, every time I go to call somebody's
10:07:41 name, they move.
10:07:42 And I hate to talk behind somebody's back.
10:07:47 But Mrs. Saul-Sena, that lady amaze me.
10:07:50 Just like this morning, I know she -- let the people
10:08:00 speak.
10:08:01 There's no harm in it.
10:08:04 I thank all of you, though.
10:08:08 I really appreciate that.
10:08:10 Back to this zoning.

10:08:11 I hope you people will hold this aside.
10:08:14 Because, see, when you all sit there and change the
10:08:20 zoning on people's property that means when you buy
10:08:23 that property you cannot do what you want to do it
10:08:25 with.
10:08:25 That is totally against human rights.
10:08:27 And I'm a human rights man.
10:08:31 I'm a property rights man.
10:08:35 But what I want to do before I die, I want to make
10:08:39 sure that you all don't bring nobody else behind the
10:08:43 same thing.
10:08:44 You're downgrading people's property.
10:08:49 You bought that property, day one, one day you are
10:08:51 going to build a big building on it and make awe lot
10:08:54 of money, and then somebody going to -- you downgrade
10:09:02 all this commercial property and build houses and you
10:09:04 go to affordable house, cost $150,000 a day.
10:09:09 Now people in -- all the things, no plans, no
10:09:21 politicians talking.
10:09:26 Okay.
10:09:26 Now, this is the red flag for me.
10:09:30 Why would the city put all this on the poor and change

10:09:33 these people's properties and when a poor man comes
10:09:36 and wants to put a business in and come to you all for
10:09:38 zoning, you got to go talk to the neighbors, you got
10:09:41 to go do this here, and we don't like it.
10:09:43 One man said take a sign down.
10:09:47 We ain't going to let you have this zoning until you
10:09:49 take that sign down, go to code enforcement.
10:09:53 Code enforcement said, yeah, you got a sign.
10:10:01 I know that you all would do the same thing, there's
10:10:06 something you cannot take.
10:10:07 Don't ever do that.
10:10:09 That's bad policy.
10:10:11 In the Bible says do unto others as you want them to
10:10:16 do to you.
10:10:19 But the same thing, like I say, this IG, one property,
10:10:28 knock it down, again to YC-6 where you can build
10:10:33 houses.
10:10:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone else that would like to
10:10:39 speak?
10:10:41 We now go to our committee reports.
10:10:43 Public works.
10:10:45 Public safety.

10:10:46 Ms. Ferlita.
10:10:51 >>ROSE FERLITA: I'd like to move resolutions 6 through
10:10:53 9, please.
10:10:56 >> Second.
10:10:56 (Motion carried).
10:10:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Parks and recreation, Mary Alvarez.
10:11:00 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I would like to move item 10 with a
10:11:03 substitute resolution, an item 11, and item 12.
10:11:09 >> Second.
10:11:09 (Motion carried).
10:11:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Public works, Mr. John Dingfelder.
10:11:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before I move my items I wanted to
10:11:18 thank Swiftmud.
10:11:20 Year after year they give us very nice grants to do
10:11:23 education projects around the community about water
10:11:25 conservation including in this agenda.
10:11:27 Move items 13 through 18.
10:11:30 >> Second.
10:11:30 (Motion carried).
10:11:35 >> Finance Committee, Mr. Kevin White.
10:11:38 >> Move 19 through 23.
10:11:40 >> Second.

10:11:40 (Motion carried).
10:11:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Building and zoning.
10:11:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: They are going into a building in
10:11:52 the Channel District that the developer has -- the
10:12:02 developer has offered them free space if they build it
10:12:05 out.
10:12:05 And so what this is is they are being named as an
10:12:12 enterprise zone.
10:12:13 A mini enterprise zone to support this integration of
10:12:18 this nonprofit organization into the bottom of a
10:12:20 for-profit residential condo development.
10:12:25 And I hope that this is a model for many more
10:12:28 public-private partnerships in the Channel District
10:12:31 and in downtown where we have arts, active arts in the
10:12:36 bottom of residential and office development.
10:12:38 That's what that is.
10:12:38 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I don't mind supporting it but I
10:12:47 have never seen anything like this on the agenda where
10:12:49 we are certifying somebody as doing something
10:12:52 appropriate without any sort of public hearing or
10:12:53 evidence to that effect.
10:12:55 It's just sort of a resolution, okay, whose word are

10:12:59 we taking about that?
10:13:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I'll take their word for it
10:13:07 but I ask somebody from Cindy Miller's department to
10:13:11 come over and speak.
10:13:12 So if you would like me to hold that, or maybe Ginny
10:13:18 white can speak to it.
10:13:19 But if you would like to hold that until I get
10:13:21 additional staff explanation, I'll be happy to.
10:13:25 >>ROSE FERLITA: Something I didn't catch but did
10:13:29 somebody just -- who decided we certify what they do
10:13:32 as opposed to somebody else?
10:13:33 No disrespect to them but -- do you know how it came
10:13:41 about?
10:13:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
10:13:43 Stageworks.
10:13:45 But, no, if you think about it there's never been a
10:13:50 nonprofit organization that's built a stage or theater
10:13:53 in the bottom of a for-profit.
10:13:57 But if you would like additional staff explanation on
10:13:59 it, I would be happy to.
10:14:00 >>ROSE FERLITA: It's not that we are not, you know,
10:14:05 complimenting them on doing a good job and certifying

10:14:08 what they do.
10:14:09 But by certifying them and not certifying 300,000
10:14:12 other not for profits, that's not a fair process.
10:14:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think the way the resolution is
10:14:19 worded does not do an adequate job of explaining what
10:14:21 they are asking for and what they are getting and how
10:14:23 it fits in.
10:14:27 Why don't I pull it, and then we'll get staff over
10:14:30 here to provide an additional explanation.
10:14:32 >>ROSE FERLITA: Because we want to compliment it if
10:14:34 it's correct but we don't want to --
10:14:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Of course.
10:14:38 >>ROSE FERLITA: Slight somebody else.
10:14:45 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The administration monitors the
10:14:47 approval of the agenda asking people to come over and
10:14:50 I don't know whether anybody is monitoring today.
10:14:52 You can ask but I don't know whether it would be
10:14:53 possible.
10:14:54 Council may be more inclined to see if they do come.
10:14:59 If not, then continue it.
10:15:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we wait till the end of
10:15:03 the meeting to see if anybody watched this?

10:15:05 I also made a call over there about 30 minutes ago.
10:15:08 >>ROSE FERLITA: They can run down here if they want
10:15:10 to, so let's see.
10:15:11 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to Roff move
10:15:14 resolution 24.
10:15:18 >> Second.
10:15:18 (Motion carried).
10:15:19 >> Move an ordinance number 26, speaking to the
10:15:26 question of ordinances and the fact they are buried in
10:15:28 our consent agenda.
10:15:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: This is on Baker's property.
10:15:35 >> Move an ordinance authorizing an encroachment of an
10:15:38 existing decorative feature metal canopy being
10:15:42 preserved as part of renovation of historic building
10:15:45 over a portion of the public right-of-way Howard
10:15:48 Avenue and Beach Street generally located at the south
10:15:50 west corner of Howard Avenue and Beach Street in the
10:15:53 City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, as more
10:15:55 particularly described herein subject to certain
10:15:58 terms, covenants, conditions and agreements as more
10:16:01 particularly described herein providing an effective
10:16:02 date.

10:16:02 (Motion carried).
10:16:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Because tomorrow is a legal holiday,
10:16:08 I believe that as a matter of practice, all second
10:16:12 readings that are normally scheduled for two weeks
10:16:15 hence will be advertised, I believe, for three weeks
10:16:17 from today, and that goes for any public hearings that
10:16:22 are scheduled for -- at first reading will not be
10:16:27 heard in two weeks but will be heard in three weeks.
10:16:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Transportation, Shawn Harrison.
10:16:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I move items 27 through 34.
10:16:37 >> Second.
10:16:37 (Motion carried).
10:16:39 >>SHAWN HARRISON: And Madam Chair, I move to set the
10:16:41 new items 35 through 39.
10:16:48 67 I have a motion and second.
10:16:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What happened to 36?
10:16:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Moved till tonight.
10:16:58 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I didn't catch the 36.
10:17:00 Are we holding 36?
10:17:02 >>GWEN MILLER: tonight, we will hold that for tonight.
10:17:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We did that as a motion.
10:17:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll hold it till tonight.

10:17:11 We have a motion and second.
10:17:12 (Motion carried).
10:17:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the audience that wants to
10:17:24 speak on items 40 through 47, you need to stand and
10:17:26 raise your right hand.
10:17:46 (Oath administered by Clerk).
10:17:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would ask that everyone who speaks,
10:17:54 please when you state your name, reaffirm the fact
10:17:56 that you have been sworn.
10:17:59 Madam clerk, have you received any documents to be
10:18:02 received and filed?
10:18:03 No, thank you.
10:18:04 Then finally I ask council as a reminder to disclose
10:18:06 any ex parte communications relative to any of today's
10:18:09 hearings prior to votes.
10:18:10 Thank you.
10:18:16 >> Move to open 40 through 45.
10:18:22 >> Second.
10:18:22 (Motion carried).
10:18:23 >> Would anyone like to speak on item number 40?
10:18:25 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
10:18:27 >> Read that, please.

10:18:30 >> Move an ordinance vacating, closing, discontinuing,
10:18:33 abandoning a certain right-of-way a portion of north
10:18:35 46th street between east first and east second
10:18:38 Avenue to vacate an unimproved remnant of right-of-way
10:18:47 which was inadvertently excluded from the previous
10:18:51 vacation petition ordinance number 2005-159 which was
10:18:54 approved in June 9, 2005 in second revision east bay
10:18:58 park a subdivision in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough
10:18:59 County Florida the same being more fully described in
10:19:02 section 2 hereof providing an effective date.
10:19:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Voice roll call.
10:19:06 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried ...
10:19:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:19:18 would like to speak on item 41?
10:19:25 >> Move to close.
10:19:25 >> Second.
10:19:25 (Motion carried).
10:19:25 >>ROSE FERLITA: I would like lake to adopt the
10:19:27 following ordinance on second reading, an ordinance
10:19:29 approving an historic preservation property tax
10:19:33 exemption application relative to the restoration,
10:19:35 renovation and rehabilitation of certain property

10:19:38 owned by William M. and Alliston Duryea located at
10:19:44 1206 south Albany Avenue Tampa, Florida in the Hyde
10:19:47 Park historic district based on certain findings
10:19:50 providing for notice to the property appraiser of
10:19:53 Hillsborough County providing for severability,
10:19:55 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
10:19:57 providing an effective date.
10:19:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Voice roll vote.
10:20:04 789.
10:20:05 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Harrison being
10:20:06 absent.
10:20:07 >>CHAIRMAN:
10:20:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:20:08 would like to speak on item 42?
10:20:11 >> Move to close.
10:20:11 >> Second.
10:20:12 (Motion carried).
10:20:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Move to adopt the following ordinance
10:20:16 on second reading, an ordinance approving an historic
10:20:20 preservation property tax exemption application
10:20:22 relative to the restoration, renovation and
10:20:25 rehabilitation of certain property owned by Albert S.

10:20:29 and Myrna Lopez located at 1712 west hills Avenue,
10:20:34 Tampa, Florida in the Hyde Park historic district
10:20:37 based upon certain findings providing for mow to the
10:20:40 property appraiser of Hillsborough County providing
10:20:41 for severability, providing for repeal of all
10:20:43 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
10:20:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Voice vote.
10:20:51 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and
10:20:53 Harrison being absent.
10:20:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:20:56 would like to speak on item 42? -- 43?
10:21:00 >> Move to close.
10:21:01 >> Second.
10:21:01 (Motion carried)
10:21:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following
10:21:04 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance approving
10:21:07 an historic preservation property tax exemption
10:21:11 application relative to the restoration of certain
10:21:14 property owned bio Dannybor LLC located at 2209 east
10:21:20 5th Avenue, Tampa, Florida in Ybor City historic
10:21:23 district based upon certain findings, providing for
10:21:25 notice to the property appraiser of Hillsborough

10:21:27 County, providing for severability, providing for
10:21:29 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
10:21:31 effective date.
10:21:31 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
10:21:34 Voice roll call.
10:21:39 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena and
10:21:41 Harrison being absent.
10:21:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:21:45 would like to speak on item 44?
10:21:47 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
10:21:49 >> Second.
10:21:49 (Motion carried).
10:21:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to adopt the following
10:21:53 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance approving
10:21:56 an historic preservation property tax exemption
10:21:58 application relative to the restoration, renovation or
10:22:02 rehabilitation of certain property owned by grand oaks
10:22:04 LLC, 2604 east Hanna Avenue, Tampa, Florida a local
10:22:08 landmark, based upon certain findings, providing for
10:22:11 notice to the property appraiser of Hillsborough
10:22:13 County, providing for severability, providing for
10:22:14 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an

10:22:17 effective date.
10:22:17 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
10:22:20 Voice roll call.
10:22:21 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Harrison being
10:22:26 absent.
10:22:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:22:29 wants to speak on item 445?
10:22:34 Item 45?
10:22:35 >> Move to close.
10:22:36 (Motion carried).
10:22:42 >> Move to adopt on second reading an ordinance
10:22:44 repealing ordinance 2005-39 making lawful the sale of
10:22:48 beverages containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight
10:22:51 and not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless
10:22:54 of alcoholic content beer and wine 2(COP-R) for
10:22:57 consumption on the premises only in connection with a
10:22:59 restaurant business establishment on that certain lot,
10:23:01 plot or tract of land located at 223 South Howard
10:23:04 Avenue -- the last was very short lived.
10:23:16 >>ROSE FERLITA: Where is it?
10:23:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I on the northwest corner of Howard
10:23:25 and --

10:23:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Across the street from the Chinese
10:23:29 restaurant.
10:23:32 >> Choy?
10:23:33 >>: And more particularly described in section 3
10:23:36 hereof waiving certain restrictions based upon certain
10:23:39 findings and present certain conditions providing for
10:23:41 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
10:23:43 effective date.
10:23:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
10:23:47 Voice roll call.
10:23:48 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Harrison being
10:23:54 absent.
10:23:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 46 is a continued public
10:23:58 hearing.
10:24:03 >> We continued that.
10:24:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Make a motion to continue.
10:24:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Already been done.
10:24:07 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.
10:24:08 Item number 47 is a continued public hearing.
10:24:12 >> Move to close.
10:24:13 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to make a motion to continue.
10:24:17 >> So moved.

10:24:18 >> Second.
10:24:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to continue item 47.
10:24:21 All in favor?
10:24:23 (Motion carried) item number 48.
10:24:26 Required public hearing.
10:24:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 47 is June 15 at 10 a.m. for
10:24:34 anybody watching.
10:24:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is Mr. Chen here?
10:24:38 If he is able to provide an explanation for the
10:24:40 issues.
10:24:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Maybe he'll come back in.
10:24:48 Is there a staff report, anyone to speak on item 48?
10:24:59 >> Zoning staff.
10:25:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Outside?
10:25:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 48.
10:25:08 Anyone to speak on item 48 through 51, would you
10:25:17 please stand and raise your right hand.
10:25:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 48 through 51.
10:25:23 (Oath administered by Clerk).
10:25:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again please state if you have been
10:25:36 sworn after you state your name.
10:25:38 Thank you.

10:26:36 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
10:26:36 The developer and staff worked together in the last
10:26:39 few weeks trying to -- essentially nail down the
10:26:45 amenities of this project, and what that really means
10:26:47 and how we equate that.
10:26:49 And you do have a copy of exit C before you,
10:26:51 development conditions.
10:26:53 You will note in the first two paragraphs that it
10:26:55 highlights exhibit B is the site plan.
10:26:57 Exhibit C are the development conditions, exhibit D is
10:27:00 the booklet that you have, the design booklet.
10:27:03 Exhibit C, the development conditions, are written as
10:27:07 such that they are on the site plan, that they cannot
10:27:13 be deviated from by staff through any kind of
10:27:15 administrative review.
10:27:16 They have to meet these conditions specifically for
10:27:18 the letter.
10:27:19 Otherwise they will come back to council for another
10:27:21 site plan control rezoning.
10:27:23 You will notice there are five pages, 22 pages of
10:27:25 conditions, or 22 conditions, rather.
10:27:30 What we did in an effort to essentially lock in was to

10:27:35 identify what the public benefit is of these
10:27:39 amenities.
10:27:41 You will note that we went through and -- the bone of
10:27:57 contention here was policy A-.04 and it highlighted
10:28:05 items that we can review for, for F.A.R. And it
10:28:09 ranges from housing, transportation, open space,
10:28:13 cultural contribution, other innovative -- it is
10:28:18 pretty well stated because it is comp plan.
10:28:20 What we did was reading the intent of the comp plan we
10:28:26 drew from that what it would be and identify those
10:28:30 items.
10:28:32 The main point of our objection was that they very
10:28:34 broadly stated what they were going to do.
10:28:36 They said that they would coordinate with the
10:28:39 greenways and trails department bringing up signage
10:28:42 for the trail.
10:28:42 What we locked in was that they are actually going to
10:28:45 purchase and install one scanner which -- do you
10:28:50 understand what that is?
10:28:51 Oh, you haven't seen that.
10:28:52 Oh, they are very pretty.
10:28:54 The city parks and rec department actually

10:28:57 commissioned an artist to design these.
10:29:01 They are metal and they have these waving flags, a big
10:29:05 metal sculpture and attaches to light poles or sign
10:29:09 poles and painted in very bright colors.
10:29:12 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Like on Meridian.
10:29:14 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Sort of.
10:29:16 They are similar but solid.
10:29:17 You can't see through them.
10:29:18 But it was designed specifically for the city by an
10:29:20 artist.
10:29:21 We as a city could only buy 16 of them to.
10:29:24 So they are going to be spread out through the city.
10:29:26 This developer has actually agreed to purchase and
10:29:29 install one designed, put one in the Channel District
10:29:32 and they are going to coordinate so that we have one
10:29:34 in the Channel District.
10:29:37 The fourth item is they are going to put in beverages
10:29:40 and shelters for a Hartline staff.
10:29:43 The design is going to be approved by Hartline.
10:29:46 They are going to provide a pedestrian crossing and
10:29:48 signal with decorative pavers connecting off-site to
10:29:53 the trolley system which creates that pedestrian

10:29:55 streetscape improvement and transportation linkages.
10:29:59 They are going to be providing through phase one of
10:30:02 the project the pedestrian connection, connecting
10:30:06 Channelside Drive and 12th street.
10:30:10 It does have continuous overhead lighting and pattern
10:30:13 pavers.
10:30:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can you tell us what number you are
10:30:18 on?
10:30:20 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm sorry.
10:30:21 Item number 7.
10:30:22 I'm getting over a bad cold so I'm a little -- I
10:30:26 apologize.
10:30:27 Page 3, item number 8.
10:30:30 The developer is going to provide paver art work
10:30:33 pattern around the street level perimeter.
10:30:35 We do -- in our design standards.
10:30:39 The pavers are subject to approval of transportation.
10:30:47 They are going to put them in at their sole expense
10:30:52 and they will be decorative.
10:30:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Can we hold our comments?
10:30:58 >>CATHERINE COYLE: The sidewalks around this project,
10:31:05 where they could set the building in and out, you will

10:31:08 notice in your design booklet pages 1 and 2 you will
10:31:11 see the layout of the project.
10:31:12 The sidewalks do get as wide as 25 feet along
10:31:16 Channelside Drive.
10:31:17 They did develop various view corridors and visual
10:31:22 buffers, because phase one is much lower scale than
10:31:25 phase two.
10:31:26 Phase two itself, I mentioned it on the site plan,
10:31:30 measures the building itself about 180 feet wide by
10:31:33 about 105.
10:31:35 If you were to compare that to a downtown project
10:31:37 which is 200 feet square for one of the buildings,
10:31:40 it's about half, a little less than half of what a
10:31:43 downtown building would be.
10:31:49 That would be number 10.
10:31:50 Number 11, the street level retail, and they noted
10:31:55 exactly the square footage, they will be doing street
10:31:58 walk cafes along those retail spaces as well.
10:32:01 Number 12, the display art cases, you will notice that
10:32:07 on the site plan also, and in exhibit D.
10:32:11 Those are being made available free of charge to the
10:32:13 public.

10:32:14 For local artists.
10:32:16 They will be commissioning a two-story mural along the
10:32:21 Washington street facade of phase 1.
10:32:24 It will be commissioned -- be completed prior to the
10:32:28 issuance of the final certificate of occupancy so it
10:32:31 will be in when that building is complete and will be
10:32:34 painted.
10:32:38 There will be two additional murals along Washington
10:32:41 street and Channelside Drive on phase two of the
10:32:44 building.
10:32:45 It's depicted on page 5 of exhibit D.
10:32:47 You will notice, it looks like it's almost in the
10:32:54 glass of the structure.
10:32:55 It's very reflective of what the port is.
10:32:57 It's got cruise ships, large sail ships in it.
10:33:07 Number 15, the developer shall provide illuminated
10:33:10 sculpture, outdoor feature.
10:33:11 You will note in the booklet that you have, you have
10:33:15 day views and night views.
10:33:17 That corner piece that goes up along Channelside and
10:33:20 Washington.
10:33:23 Number 16 is a decorative lighting element at the top

10:33:27 of the structure, phase 2, and it will essentially
10:33:31 mirror, be similar to the one at the corner that I was
10:33:33 describing.
10:33:35 Number 17 is a water feature.
10:33:36 You will notice a blow-up of that along the street, in
10:33:40 that design booklet as well.
10:33:42 I believe it's on page 7.
10:33:48 Number 18, the developer is going to adhere to the
10:33:53 self-sustainable green building.
10:33:55 They will apply for certification and actually include
10:33:57 all of that documentation along with construction
10:34:00 documents to the city.
10:34:05 The next two are pretty big for public benefit.
10:34:08 They are going to relocate all of their facilities,
10:34:11 all of their underground facility, all of their
10:34:14 utilities underground on their site.
10:34:16 They are also going to be doing all underground
10:34:19 facilities across the street on all sides of their
10:34:22 project, which is a huge benefit for the public,
10:34:24 especially you know the dollars that it takes to do
10:34:26 that.
10:34:27 And that has been a big issue across the city.

10:34:32 They are also constructing parking in excess of code
10:34:36 requirements.
10:34:37 They have a special bay of parking on the first level,
10:34:40 for retail, and visitor parking.
10:34:42 And finally, they noted in number 22 just for your
10:34:46 benefit with the brownfields redevelopment act, they
10:34:49 noted the port statute for that, zoning should be
10:34:57 given to brownfield development.
10:34:58 With that I believe we have developed a menu of items
10:35:03 that fit the framework, the items spelled out to meet
10:35:06 the public benefit.
10:35:07 We are Rae moving our objections at this point.
10:35:09 We do believe it meets the spirit of the comprehensive
10:35:12 plan.
10:35:14 If you have any questions.
10:35:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Alvarez?
10:35:19 Mrs. Saul-Sena?
10:35:20 >>MARY ALVAREZ: In these 20-some items that you talked
10:35:28 about, I didn't see anything, or I haven't heard
10:35:31 anything about hurricane, wind resistant, is there
10:35:37 anything in there that they have to comply with?
10:35:42 >>CATHERINE COYLE: They have to meet the standard

10:35:43 building regulations.
10:35:46 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Can you tell me what the wind
10:35:48 resistant forces --
10:35:51 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I'm not a building person.
10:35:54 Miles per hour?
10:35:56 120 miles an hour.
10:35:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: 120 miles an hour?
10:36:00 You're on the water.
10:36:09 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I would defer to the architect.
10:36:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ms. Coyle, one of the conversations
10:36:17 that we have had in the past about this was -- first
10:36:22 of all I want to compliment the city and the developer
10:36:25 for getting these things nailed down.
10:36:27 They are much more specific than they have ever been
10:36:30 and I think this should be a model in the future for
10:36:32 how specific we need to be instead of saying like
10:36:35 studios for artists, but really spelling it out.
10:36:39 I think that's excellent and what we need to do.
10:36:41 But if you anywhere designate which of the provisions
10:36:48 having previously promised and accepted as part of
10:36:50 previously approved presenting, and which commitments
10:36:55 are new with this rezoning?

10:36:58 Did you put asterisks?
10:37:01 >>> I didn't mark them on here.
10:37:02 I can go through and mark them.
10:37:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think again this is a real
10:37:06 precedent-setting rezoning.
10:37:08 Because what the proponent, what the developer has
10:37:13 done, they already had something that was approved,
10:37:16 and they have come in and asked for more.
10:37:18 And I think that is very possible that that will
10:37:20 happen again in the future on other sites.
10:37:22 So we need to be real clear about what commitments
10:37:26 were made or previously approved rezoning, and what is
10:37:31 gnaw.
10:37:34 >>CATHERINE COYLE: I can mark that and then come back.
10:37:39 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Cathy, there is one provision that
10:37:41 causes great concern to me and these number 2.
10:37:44 That's the inclusionary zoning that we are starting to
10:37:46 hear a little bit about.
10:37:48 For providing workforce housing.
10:37:50 Could you just explain a little bit about how that
10:37:53 provision came to be in here, and are we going to
10:37:57 have --

10:37:59 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Well, to be quite honest with you,
10:38:02 as part of phase one, the developer had kind of given
10:38:05 that up.
10:38:09 Provide some units at a lower rate.
10:38:11 What he's committing here is across the entire project
10:38:13 phase two that he's going to reach 3.5% of the total
10:38:16 units which is approximately 16 units under 200,000
10:38:20 dollars.
10:38:21 The issue of workforce housing is you have to put kind
10:38:25 of a time frame.
10:38:26 That's something we are working through in the
10:38:28 ordinance now.
10:38:29 You can provide first time for 200 you this or less
10:38:32 but how do you make sure it stays that rate?
10:38:34 We are not doing that through this provision for any
10:38:37 time limit.
10:38:38 Mainly because when we talk to the developer, and the
10:38:41 attorney, phase one is sold out, it's difficult to go
10:38:45 back and place that condition on those contracts,
10:38:47 because they have been sold, and it will be a smaller
10:38:52 number of units in phase two that are sold at this
10:38:55 rate.

10:39:00 This doesn't necessarily address the workforce housing
10:39:03 in the inclusionary zoning mechanism that we are
10:39:06 looking to do in the future.
10:39:07 It just does it on the initial sale.
10:39:09 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
10:39:11 Well, that's my concern.
10:39:13 That we are not somehow setting a precedent for other
10:39:16 developments that are looking to come into our city,
10:39:19 that they are going to be required to set aside a
10:39:23 percentage of their units as basically subsidized
10:39:28 housing.
10:39:29 Because what that does is increase it is praise for
10:39:31 everyone else.
10:39:32 And you get market forces that are sort of out of
10:39:36 whack that way.
10:39:37 So if this is something that the developer here
10:39:41 volunteered and said -- and I understand they have to
10:39:44 go above and beyond what's required to get the
10:39:47 additional F.A.R. requirement.
10:39:48 So I don't have as big a problem with it.
10:39:51 But if this is going to be a precedent where we are
10:39:54 going to start doing this on all of our cases, I think

10:39:56 it's a very bad precedent to set.
10:40:02 >>> I don't see it as a precedent setting item.
10:40:04 I see it as a menu item just as the comp plan spells
10:40:08 out a menu of amenities.
10:40:10 I view this document as a menu of items that frame the
10:40:14 bonuses for this particular project.
10:40:16 There is no mechanism to keep it for 30 years.
10:40:18 There's in a additional sales transaction documents or
10:40:22 anything reported for the city.
10:40:23 And that it was a volunteer effort on behalf of the
10:40:27 developer.
10:40:28 >>SHAWN HARRISON: How will we make sure that these 16
10:40:30 units are actually going to go for workforce housing
10:40:33 as opposed to somebody that just wants to get a great
10:40:36 deal on a unit?
10:40:39 >>> I don't know that the city can guarantee that.
10:40:41 It would be up to the developer to do something else
10:40:44 with the condo documents.
10:40:48 >> The intention is going to be to provide workforce
10:40:51 housing.
10:40:51 Then we have got to make sure that we follow through
10:40:54 with that intention.

10:40:55 >>> Okay.
10:40:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions of Ms. Coyle?
10:41:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think Mr. Harrison brings up a
10:41:02 great point.
10:41:03 And frankly, I think it should be included in the
10:41:06 conditions, that is workforce housing, that it's not
10:41:11 just a smaller unit or that sort of thing.
10:41:15 Because it's part of the trade-off.
10:41:16 It's not just a completely voluntary thing.
10:41:20 It's part of the trade-off mechanism associated with
10:41:22 the increased F.A.R.
10:41:26 >>> I'll defer.
10:41:27 >> No, that's fine.
10:41:28 And probably have the next half hour to come up with
10:41:30 some language that would include that, that staff and
10:41:33 legal would be happy with.
10:41:35 But I think it is a good precedent.
10:41:36 I think it's important that one of the trade-off
10:41:40 mechanisms that we use when folks are looking for
10:41:42 increased F.A.R. in the downtown area is some type of
10:41:45 workforce housing.
10:41:46 So the other question I had, Cathy, is even though we

10:41:50 haven't adopted the Channelside plan, apparently staff
10:41:55 and our consultant went to great lengths to establish
10:41:59 numerical, mathematical calculations associated with
10:42:05 the trade-off mechanism in the Channelside plan which
10:42:10 you are well familiar with.
10:42:11 So has anybody gone to the exercise to calculate, if
10:42:16 this project came in under the new Channelside plan --
10:42:19 and I know this is just sort of kind of an esoteric
10:42:22 discussion -- but if it came in under the new
10:42:24 Channelside plan, would they meet for the total site
10:42:29 for all the units in both buildings, would they meet
10:42:33 the new Channelside plan?
10:42:35 >>> We did run through that exercise.
10:42:37 We did.
10:42:38 And it does meet the spirit of that plan.
10:42:41 Because we haven't nailed down the development
10:42:43 regulations and had to calculate each item
10:42:45 specifically because it is a visionary strategic plan.
10:42:48 We did run through the exercise in a very general way
10:42:51 with very general rounded-off dollars and it does meet
10:42:55 the spirit of that plan, absolutely.
10:42:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So it's close perhaps.

10:42:59 Thank you.
10:42:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
10:43:17 >>> Land development.
10:43:18 The city's housing group is going to monitor and track
10:43:22 affordable housing of this project.
10:43:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But it needs to be in the site
10:43:27 condition.
10:43:27 Otherwise as you know -- there needs to be some kind
10:43:31 of qualifying or something.
10:43:32 Otherwise, as Mr. Harrison pointed out, anybody can go
10:43:35 in looking for the cheap units.
10:43:39 But they can work that out.
10:43:41 Thanks, Thom.
10:43:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Mr. Harrison, you brought up a point
10:43:49 about the workforce housing, and Ms. Valdez has been
10:43:57 working with the Hillsborough County task force on
10:44:00 housing.
10:44:01 And she may have some answers for you, especially on
10:44:05 the inclusionary zoning.
10:44:07 So would you like to hear from her?
10:44:11 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Well, it's not really germane to
10:44:13 this particular rezoning.

10:44:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Well, it would give you some insight
10:44:19 as to what's happening, and may be an answer to this
10:44:24 problem here.
10:44:25 It's up to you.
10:44:25 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
10:44:31 >>> Desiree Valdez, City Council representative to
10:44:33 Hillsborough County affordable housing task force.
10:44:36 Inclusionary zoning is something that the city is
10:44:39 looking into.
10:44:41 At this time we are looking at it as an incentive to
10:44:44 the developer, not as a viable thing like other
10:44:51 counties have, Sarasota, et cetera.
10:44:53 It's an incentive housing situation at this point.
10:44:58 There's one thing that the task force is also looking
10:45:03 at, not mandatory.
10:45:05 I want to make that point.
10:45:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
10:45:08 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you, Desiree.
10:45:12 >>> Rhea Law with Fowler White representing the
10:45:16 applicant.
10:45:20 Just briefly, as you know, this is a continued hearing
10:45:24 from the March 9 hearing.

10:45:27 Since that time you have had a town meeting in the
10:45:29 Channelside district.
10:45:30 And I want to point out that you had some 14
10:45:33 individuals who spoke, who own property within the
10:45:38 Channel District and all of whom supported this
10:45:40 particular project.
10:45:41 And I think these somewhat unprecedented, and I think
10:45:44 that also says that this particular developer has done
10:45:48 a phenomenal job of reaching out to tray to identify
10:45:51 what's important for the people of Channelside.
10:45:53 Among those individuals was the president of the
10:45:56 Channel District --
10:45:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ms. Law, I apologize for interrupting
10:46:01 but I'm just concerned that what you are doing is
10:46:03 bringing in something that was outside the purview of
10:46:05 the public hearing.
10:46:08 >>> Well, as I recall, and as I read the transcripts
10:46:11 from our last meeting, we talked about the fact that
10:46:13 there would be a town meeting and that that would be
10:46:16 put on the record.
10:46:16 So that's essentially what I'm doing.
10:46:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Is Cathy here?

10:46:26 Cathleen O'Dowd, are you here?
10:46:31 >>> I'm sorry, I was not paying attention, I was
10:46:34 speaking with the developer's attorney.
10:46:35 Can you --
10:46:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The issue, I guess, was the CRA
10:46:40 special meeting that was held.
10:46:43 And the issue was, I believe, at the time that we had
10:46:47 the last public hearing here, that the evidence that
10:46:51 was to be adduced there, for theed evidence or
10:46:55 whatever they were going to hear there, did not
10:46:57 really -- was not part of the record of this public
10:46:59 hearing and was not to be waived, as part of this.
10:47:08 If I misunderstood, I apologize.
10:47:10 But what's happening is, I'm concerned, Ms. Law, that
10:47:13 you're making reference to something that took place
10:47:16 outside the purview of the -- of this particular
10:47:18 public hearing.
10:47:22 >>> Law: Let me clarify.
10:47:24 I thought you were going to bring that in as part of
10:47:27 this hearing.
10:47:29 >> It is what it is.
10:47:29 >>KEVIN WHITE: Those same people that were at the CRA

10:47:33 meeting were the same people that with here at the
10:47:36 last public meeting here.
10:47:37 So you can speak about the last public hearing that we
10:47:39 had here, and we don't have to bring the CRA in.
10:47:48 >>> Law: Okay.
10:47:50 Thank you very much.
10:47:50 I appreciate that.
10:47:55 Council members, just a couple of things to respond to
10:47:57 the questions that you have raised.
10:47:59 We are prepared to make a full presentation.
10:48:01 But as you know, we have done that and you may not
10:48:03 want us to do that all over again.
10:48:05 We are happy to answer any questions.
10:48:08 You have raised at least three at this point.
10:48:10 So let me quickly answer those for you.
10:48:11 First of all, as you come to exhibit 6, I want to
10:48:16 publicly say that I really appreciate the staff
10:48:18 working with us on this in order to come up with this
10:48:24 list of amenities.
10:48:25 What I would like to do is quickly walk through them
10:48:27 and tell you which ones are phase one, which ones
10:48:31 phase two and which ones are both which I think is

10:48:34 something that was not quite understood.
10:48:35 I didn't say it appropriately last time.
10:48:37 There were things that were done in phase one that
10:48:40 will be continued in phase two for an additional cost
10:48:44 and additional amenities.
10:48:45 So I want to run through them quickly. The first is
10:48:49 the artist work studios that will be made available at
10:48:52 75% of the rental rate.
10:48:57 Those are in phase one.
10:49:02 The number 2, which is the workforce units that you're
10:49:05 talking about -- and they are working on some language
10:49:07 for you right now on that -- is in phase one and two.
10:49:12 Number three, which is the greenways trail compliance,
10:49:17 that is in phase one and two.
10:49:19 Number four, which is the benches and shelter, is in
10:49:23 phase one.
10:49:24 Number five, which is the pedestrian crossing to
10:49:28 connect it up is in phase two.
10:49:33 Number six, which is the enhanced lighting fixtures
10:49:36 and the nighttime environment enhancement, those are
10:49:40 in phases one and two.
10:49:43 Number 7, which is the pedestrian connection between

10:49:48 12th street and the Channelside Drive to allow
10:49:50 pedestrians to move back and forth in the middle of
10:49:52 the block, instead of being blocked by a total
10:49:56 building, that's in phase one.
10:50:00 Number 8 is the paver art work that is both phases one
10:50:05 and two because it surrounds the building.
10:50:07 Number 9, which is the wider sidewalks, are in phases
10:50:11 one and two, because now they are continued around the
10:50:15 entire project.
10:50:16 Number 10, which is the view corridor, the buffers,
10:50:20 the stair stepping of the height, relates to both
10:50:23 phase one and to phase two, stepping back toward a
10:50:27 higher Point Tower.
10:50:28 And you will recall that the Point Tower only takes up
10:50:31 8.5% of the project area.
10:50:35 So it is very small compared to the project as a
10:50:38 whole.
10:50:38 So that is one and two.
10:50:40 Number 11 is the street-level retail.
10:50:45 That's in both phase one and two.
10:50:49 On the five art display cases that are going to be
10:50:51 made available at in a cost to the artists in the

10:50:54 community, that's phase one.
10:50:57 The two-story mural, which is Washington which is
10:51:03 phase one.
10:51:03 And that is being commenced prayer to the issuance of
10:51:07 the final CO for phase one.
10:51:10 The next two murals which are on Washington street and
10:51:13 Channelside Drive on the facade, those are in phase
10:51:18 two.
10:51:19 And again they are going to commence prayer to the
10:51:21 COs of phase two.
10:51:24 Number 15, this has to do with the outdoor illuminated
10:51:28 feature.
10:51:29 Essentially we were calling it a lantern originally.
10:51:33 It's a very large lighted area at the top of the
10:51:35 building.
10:51:36 That's phase two.
10:51:38 Number 16 is -- I'm sorry, I did the wrong one, excuse
10:51:43 me.
10:51:44 Number 15 is the 8-story lighted sculpture which is
10:51:50 further down on the building.
10:51:51 That's in phase two.
10:51:52 Then the one at the top is also in phase two.

10:51:54 That's number 15.
10:51:56 Number 16 is also phase 2.
10:52:00 And it's similar in appearance to number 15.
10:52:06 The water feature at Washington and Channelside number
10:52:09 17 is phase two.
10:52:11 18 is the sustainable green building standards.
10:52:19 We added it at phase two but it will apply to the
10:52:22 entire project.
10:52:24 Number 19 is the relocation of the underground
10:52:27 overhead utilities.
10:52:29 And providing the additional -- providing that to the
10:52:35 project.
10:52:35 That's phase two that impacts the entire project.
10:52:38 Number 20 is the new public wastewater gravity line,
10:52:42 that increases by some 400% capacity of which we are
10:52:46 only using 40% of that.
10:52:48 We are putting that in as phase two but it applies to
10:52:51 the entire project.
10:52:52 Number 21 is our parking, that is for phases one and
10:52:57 two.
10:52:58 This is an integrated project.
10:52:59 And finally, the brownfields relate to phase one and

10:53:03 two.
10:53:04 So that is how the calculations are done.
10:53:09 As it relates to hurricanes, there is a current code
10:53:13 that requires you to prepare the building to 120 miles
10:53:20 an hour, I believe it's going to 140, we'll comply
10:53:23 with whatever the standard is.
10:53:25 And if you have more questions on that, we have, of
10:53:28 course, our architect that's here that can speak to
10:53:32 that.
10:53:33 The last question that you have raised, at least at
10:53:35 this point, has to do with the workforce housing and
10:53:39 also to see if we have any responses.
10:53:45 That's being worked on.
10:53:46 Do you have any other questions?
10:53:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions?
10:53:48 Mr. Dingfelder?
10:53:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just wanted to get clarified for
10:53:54 the record.
10:53:56 We have got a lot of different documents kind of
10:53:58 floating around, in terms of what is the formal
10:54:00 submission.
10:54:01 I think it's important for prosperity, because I guess

10:54:09 the fail over there, this document which is labeled
10:54:12 SPA 001 and SPA 005.
10:54:15 Could you go through what the formal documents are and
10:54:19 where the conditions are codified?
10:54:21 It's sort of an unusual --
10:54:24 >>> Law: I'm not sure what you have there.
10:54:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just tell me.
10:54:29 >>> What we have now is the site plan, which is
10:54:31 exhibit B in your ordinance.
10:54:33 Then Cathy made these development conditions that she
10:54:36 passed out today, exhibit C.
10:54:38 And then the Booker dated April 6th, 2006, with
10:54:41 the pictures, that's exhibit D.
10:54:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So you're skipping some of the
10:54:49 documents?
10:54:53 >>ANDREA ZELMAN: I think you have older documents.
10:54:55 I think what we have now are the complete and final
10:54:57 product.
10:54:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We haven't been passed around the
10:55:00 site plan lake we usually get.
10:55:01 >>> It hasn't changed.
10:55:02 It's the same one, dated February 24th.

10:55:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I wasn't here that day, as you
10:55:07 remember.
10:55:09 All right.
10:55:09 And the other question I have is, on some of the
10:55:13 downtown projects -- and I don't know if this applies
10:55:16 to Channelside.
10:55:18 Wilson Stair chimes in on periodic review of the
10:55:23 drawings as they progressed.
10:55:25 Mr. Stair, in it front row.
10:55:29 Is in a part of the conditions?
10:55:30 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Land development.
10:55:31 He has reviewed as part of the development review
10:55:33 committee.
10:55:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's not the question.
10:55:37 Is the 30%, 30%?
10:55:40 >> 30, 60, 90.
10:55:42 >>WILSON STAIR: Urban design manager for the city.
10:55:44 I have not been sworn in.
10:55:45 >>CHAIRMAN: Raise your right hand, please.
10:55:48 (Oath administered by Clerk)
10:55:59 No, that condition was not put on the site plan.
10:56:05 But I think it would be a very good idea to add it.

10:56:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
10:56:13 Ms. Law, you are familiar with that condition that we
10:56:15 put it on a couple of other projects downtown.
10:56:17 And I think we put it on some of the other projects in
10:56:19 Channelside.
10:56:21 >>> As I understand, it is the requirement that as you
10:56:23 are going through the design process that Wilson gets
10:56:26 an opportunity to look at it at 30, 60 and 90%.
10:56:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Reviewing comment, whatever our
10:56:31 standard condition is.
10:56:33 Cathy, you have a standard condition on that, don't
10:56:35 you?
10:56:39 >>> We'll be happy to comply with them.
10:56:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
10:56:42 would like to speak on this item, 48?
10:56:45 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close.
10:56:46 >> Second.
10:56:48 68 motion and second to close.
10:56:50 All in favor of the motion.
10:56:56 48.
10:56:56 We are on item 48.
10:57:05 >>> Council members, we have a condition here that

10:57:08 relates to the workforce housing.
10:57:12 Shall I read that into the record?
10:57:15 It is phase 2 units sold at the rate of less than
10:57:18 $200,000 shall be required to be owner occupied for a
10:57:23 minimum of two years.
10:57:24 This language shall be required to be placed in the
10:57:26 closing documents of each unit, sold pursuant to this
10:57:30 condition and shall be copied to the director of
10:57:37 business and housing development upon recording.
10:57:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: What we are trying to do is make
10:57:45 sure that people like people working at the downtown
10:57:50 fire station have access.
10:57:52 So there should be some language that talks about the
10:57:56 people who were eligible to purchase these are people
10:57:59 whose income -- and I don't have the language.
10:58:08 Maybe someone from legal can look it up.
10:58:10 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Absolutely.
10:58:11 Otherwise all you have to do is agree to live there
10:58:14 for two years and then you can flip it and make a ton
10:58:16 of money regardless what your income is.
10:58:18 >>CATHERINE COYLE: What you are lag for is the range,
10:58:21 the percentage of area median income.

10:58:23 Currently affordable housing is 40 to 80%. I did
10:58:28 speak with the director this morning and it appears
10:58:30 that the department is going to be raising sales
10:58:33 price, approximately $230,000 for an affordable unit.
10:58:37 Per our regulations of how they sell units, actually,
10:58:40 this is under the cap.
10:58:44 But, I mean, if there are agreements to put into range
10:58:47 the percentage of the area of median income, don't
10:58:50 mind putting language in there.
10:58:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Coyle, Mrs. Alvarez has a question.
10:59:05 Law: I think that means we would modify the language
10:59:13 to say units raised less than $200 that you shall be
10:59:18 required to be owner occupied by individuals with an
10:59:21 area median income of between 80 to 120% of -- no?
10:59:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Let me make a suggestion.
10:59:33 >>CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Alvarez had a question first.
10:59:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: I was going to say normally when you
10:59:38 have affordable or obtainable workforce housing, it's
10:59:40 usually first-time home buyers.
10:59:45 Which they would be able to apply for assistance.
10:59:51 And down payment assistance and all of that.
10:59:54 And usually it's within a range.

10:59:58 And also you could put -- they could put a stipulation
11:00:01 in there that they would keep this house for at least
11:00:04 three years before they flip it.
11:00:05 That would help.
11:00:07 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
11:00:09 I'm a little concerned about the legal ramifications
11:00:11 of that type of condition, typically that kind of
11:00:13 program is tied into a federal program and that gives
11:00:15 you the authority to do that, but as a general matter
11:00:18 we can't place a condition on a site plan which would
11:00:20 create a situation where there may be some housing
11:00:23 discrimination.
11:00:25 Unless it's tied into some kind of federal program.
11:00:28 And without researching and determining whether or not
11:00:30 that's appropriate, I feel concerned about placing
11:00:34 that condition at this time.
11:00:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have some other hearings.
11:00:39 Why don't we defer this --
11:00:43 >>GWEN MILLER: No, no.
11:00:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, the language needs to be
11:00:46 worked out.
11:00:47 The language needs to be worked out.

11:00:48 >>GWEN MILLER: The federal government is part of the
11:00:52 affordable housing.
11:00:54 It's not these other parties' problem.
11:00:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But we still can have standards.
11:01:02 >>> The issue is you don't want someone to come in and
11:01:04 speculate and then turn around and flip this.
11:01:06 I think the language that was proposed to start with
11:01:08 would require them to live in the unit for at least
11:01:10 two years would at least accomplish that goal.
11:01:14 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Two years is not enough.
11:01:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That is one of the goals. The
11:01:20 other goal is to make sure it's available to folks who
11:01:22 are in a certain income bracket.
11:01:24 I thought that's what attainable housing was all
11:01:27 about.
11:01:28 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, I have a suggestion
11:01:31 that everyone will find perfectly reasonable.
11:01:33 Just put in there that it will be reviewed by the City
11:01:37 of Tampa, whatever this goal is, to provide workforce
11:01:44 housing will be determined by review, by the City of
11:01:49 Tampa's business housing department or legal
11:01:54 department or whoever.

11:01:55 Just basically whatever the city says is, yes, you are
11:01:58 meeting this criteria.
11:02:02 That's it.
11:02:06 >> I'll second that.
11:02:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Did you get that?
11:02:10 Now is there anyone in the public that would like to
11:02:12 speak on item 48?
11:02:13 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close again.
11:02:15 >>GWEN MILLER: They did not want to speak. I did ask.
11:02:23 >>MARY ALVAREZ: She did ask.
11:02:27 >>GWEN MILLER: I asked several tames D. anybody want
11:02:29 to speak on item 48?
11:02:30 Nobody moved.
11:02:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Excuse me, there's somebody coming
11:02:33 up.
11:02:34 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, Madam Chairman.
11:02:38 Ma'am, excuse me, let me just say.
11:02:42 Mrs. Saul-Sena, I agree with you.
11:02:43 We talked for an hour this morning about people being
11:02:45 able to come up and speak.
11:02:47 But in all fairness to our chairman, she did ask, they
11:02:51 didn't respond, he closed it because we thought there

11:02:54 was no one.
11:02:55 That doesn't mean that Ms. Miller didn't ask.
11:02:58 She absolutely did.
11:02:58 >>GWEN MILLER: I asked several times.
11:03:01 >>ROSE FERLITA: I know that, Mrs. Miller.
11:03:02 >>GWEN MILLER: I will ask one more time.
11:03:04 If anyone else is going to speak on number 48 please
11:03:07 stand up and line up if you are going to speak.
11:03:09 We have one person.
11:03:10 We will hear from you now.
11:03:11 >>> Thank you.
11:03:12 I reside at 101 south 12th street in the Channel
11:03:15 District.
11:03:15 Yes, I have been sworn in.
11:03:17 I do have a question.
11:03:18 I did speak at the first hearing.
11:03:20 Does that preclude me from speaking?
11:03:23 >> In a, you may speak.
11:03:24 >>> Okay.
11:03:25 In light of the occurrences over the past few moments
11:03:28 that the project, the decision on the project will be
11:03:30 held, I hope that the decision will be made right now.

11:03:36 And I think that the developer has been more than
11:03:38 accommodating in dealing with both the city and the
11:03:44 residents, and I think that the project does need to
11:03:47 move forward at this moment.
11:03:49 And the wording has been generalized, yeah.
11:03:56 But I'm sure that the specifics of it will be worked
11:03:59 out.
11:03:59 And I really do hope that a decision will be made
11:04:02 right now.
11:04:04 Both the residents, developer and the city can move
11:04:06 forward from this moment on.
11:04:08 It takes a lot of effort for the residents to be able
11:04:11 to come to these daytime hearings, and to participate
11:04:15 in giving you all the information that we have and our
11:04:20 experiences in living in Channelside in living in our
11:04:24 properties the last years.
11:04:27 So a decision made now would really help residents,
11:04:30 the developer and the city.
11:04:31 And I think it's very difficult to be able in one
11:04:34 second here at the City Council meeting to make a
11:04:37 definitive legal description over what will affordable
11:04:42 housing mean.

11:04:44 Both Mace, other residents and a lot of people on City
11:04:48 Council have spoken to the developer and people within
11:04:50 the city.
11:04:51 And I know we can come to an agreement, and it will be
11:04:54 something that will be held to.
11:04:56 So I really do urge to you make a decision at this
11:04:58 moment right now.
11:04:59 Thank you.
11:04:59 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to close the public hearing.
11:05:02 >> Second.
11:05:03 (Motion carried).
11:05:04 >>GWEN MILLER: What is the pleasure of the council?
11:05:06 >> Move it.
11:05:08 >> Move the resolution.
11:05:11 >>THE CLERK: I have an ordinance that shows the site
11:05:14 plan dated March 7th.
11:05:17 >>ROSE FERLITA: Ms. Zelman, the site plan has not
11:05:21 changed, correct?
11:05:21 I think that's what you said.
11:05:30 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Read it.
11:05:33 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move an ordinance --
11:05:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Question first?

11:05:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Lag to see what the date of the
11:05:43 document is.
11:05:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: For clarification, when I said I
11:06:09 wanted to wait a few moments minutes, I meant wait a
11:06:12 few minutes so they could work out these details
11:06:14 because that's what council is here about.
11:06:15 We are here about the details.
11:06:16 And we can't just leave things loosey goosey and say
11:06:19 we'll work these things out some other time because
11:06:21 this is a very important issue.
11:06:23 So Mrs. Cool --
11:06:26 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
11:06:27 If you will give us 20 minutes.
11:06:28 Apparently there's a glitch on the ordinance and we
11:06:30 need to work out this condition and we can bring it
11:06:33 right back to you.
11:06:34 >>THE CLERK: Also clarify the date of the site plan.
11:06:37 I have a site plan dated March 7th.
11:06:39 >>> We need to clarify the date of the site plan and
11:06:42 put that in the ordinance and go ahead and have that
11:06:44 back down here in 20 minutes.
11:06:45 >>GWEN MILLER: We will go to item 49.

11:06:47 We need to open 49.
11:06:48 >> So moved.
11:06:49 >> Second.
11:06:49 (Motion carried)
11:06:51 >>JAMES COOK: Land Development Coordination.
11:07:06 Petitioner is requesting to vacate maxwell Avenue and
11:07:09 Aurora street north of Kennedy Boulevard, south of
11:07:12 Twiggs Street, east of Crosstown expressway and east
11:07:15 of Meridian Avenue.
11:07:17 It's on the Elmo.
11:07:19 Beaumont bow
11:07:21 This is just inside the business district.
11:07:23 Property owner owns everything highlighted in red.
11:07:25 This is Aurora, running east and west.
11:07:29 Maxwell.
11:07:30 Crosstown authority.
11:07:32 This is the new Meridian project.
11:07:36 It's open now.
11:07:38 The proposed vacating -- can you go back to me?
11:07:42 >> Proposed vacating is what?
11:07:44 >>> Highlighted in yellow.
11:07:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And doesn't connect anything or

11:07:51 what?
11:07:52 >>> It does not connect anything.
11:07:53 There was a separation of Kennedy at the railroad
11:07:58 tracks.
11:07:59 Even the new -- it's almost like a little bridge
11:08:03 there.
11:08:03 So it does not go all the way through to Kennedy.
11:08:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How about a Aurora?
11:08:12 >>> Unimproved right-of-way.
11:08:20 This building right here.
11:08:29 Cars parked here between the building.
11:08:31 This is actually Crosstown property.
11:08:33 They are going to get the petitioner an easement to go
11:08:35 over.
11:08:42 This is south from the Crosstown overhang towards
11:08:44 Kennedy.
11:08:50 A nice shot of Maxwell looking south in the middle of
11:08:53 the block towards Kennedy.
11:08:54 The bridge embankment right there.
11:09:02 This is Maxwell looking north from Kennedy Boulevard.
11:09:06 Petitioner's property is on the east side.
11:09:14 This is a shot of Maxwell towards the Crosstown

11:09:18 overhang.
11:09:25 This is looking north towards the Crosstown overhang.
11:09:32 This is a shot of Aurora street lag east from Maxwell
11:09:36 towards the CSX railroad.
11:09:38 Just on the other side of the railroad is the new
11:09:42 Meridian Avenue off the Crosstown.
11:09:45 That's one of the new projects developed in the
11:09:47 Channel District.
11:09:50 And this is Aurora looking west from CSX railroad
11:09:54 towards Maxwell.
11:09:58 This is a shot of petitioner's property just south of
11:10:02 Twiggs.
11:10:07 This is another shot of petitioner's property, Maxwell
11:10:11 to the east.
11:10:13 Another shot of petitioner's property on Maxwell,
11:10:19 Aurora on the north.
11:10:22 A shot of property of Maxwell to the east and Aurora
11:10:25 to the south.
11:10:26 This is Crosstown property, Maxwell on the west side.
11:10:34 Another shot of Crosstown authority property on the
11:10:37 west at maxwell.
11:10:41 Just a couple more.

11:10:42 Crosstown authority property at Maxwell on the west.
11:10:45 This is just south of Twiggs.
11:10:47 And that's another shot of Crosstown.
11:10:52 Staff has no objections to vacating as long as
11:10:54 easements are reserved.
11:10:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Mrs. Saul-Sena?
11:10:57 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Cook, are there any brick
11:11:01 streets in this area?
11:11:02 It's kind of hard to tell.
11:11:03 >>JAMES COOK: Yes, one photo here.
11:11:09 It starts off pavement and then turns into brick.
11:11:21 I believe they are going to use it to continue access.
11:11:24 I'll let the developer talk about that.
11:11:25 You do see in this photo here, the first part of
11:11:28 Maxwell which comes off of Twiggs, then it turns into
11:11:31 brick, then turns into dirt.
11:11:33 A provision in the ordinance to protect the bricks.
11:11:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:11:37 I didn't know -- I know if it's our brick street we
11:11:40 have to protect it.
11:11:41 I didn't know if we are giving it to somebody else
11:11:43 if -- I'm thrilled that --

11:11:47 >>> During the vacating.
11:11:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I don't need to hear from the
11:11:50 petitioner.
11:11:50 If it's in the ordinance that's great.
11:11:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
11:11:55 >>> Dennis Vanelli, I represent the petitioner Gaspar
11:12:01 properties.
11:12:02 We are in total agreement with staff.
11:12:03 We have been working with them a long time on this.
11:12:05 And it's working out to our satisfaction.
11:12:08 And we are in agreement with Mr. Cook's presentation.
11:12:12 I really have nothing to add but we are happy to
11:12:16 answer questions, the owner of the development is
11:12:19 here.
11:12:19 If you have questions we are available.
11:12:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
11:12:22 Mr. Harrison?
11:12:24 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Are you also involved in the
11:12:26 brownfield designation, item 50?
11:12:29 >>> No.
11:12:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:12:32 would like to speak on item 49?

11:12:34 >> Move to close.
11:12:35 >> Second.
11:12:35 (Motion carried)
11:12:39 >> Question.
11:12:39 I stepped out for a second.
11:12:41 Dennis, welcome.
11:12:43 Did you identify, what is the proposed project?
11:12:47 >>> The proposed project is office, maybe some retail,
11:12:52 light commercial.
11:12:56 Hamilton Jones is here to talk about it if you would
11:12:58 like to hear from him.
11:12:59 >>> Hamilton Jones, Gaspar property.
11:13:01 A rendering of the project that's currently kind of
11:13:04 dilapidated warehouse, commercial warehouse space, we
11:13:08 are going to convert that to upscale office space.
11:13:13 We have an artist rendering.
11:13:15 >> So you are going to rehab it?
11:13:16 >>> Correct.
11:13:18 This right-of-way for some reason, sandwiched between
11:13:22 the building and expressway authority.
11:13:25 Essentially a driveway for 50 years.
11:13:30 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.

11:13:32 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:13:34 Nay?
11:13:37 (Motion carried).
11:13:38 >>ROSE FERLITA: Move an ordinance vacating, closing,
11:13:40 discontinuing, abandoning a certain right-of-way
11:13:43 portion of Aurora street and Maxwell Avenue generally
11:13:47 located between maxwell Avenue and tangent Avenue, in
11:13:50 Finley and stillings subdivision, a subdivision in the
11:13:53 City of Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the same
11:13:55 being more fully described in section 2 hereof,
11:13:59 providing an effective date.
11:14:00 >> Motion and second.
11:14:01 (Motion carried).
11:14:01 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open 50.
11:14:04 >>CHAIRMAN:
11:14:05 >>: Second.
11:14:05 (Motion carried)
11:14:11 Staff for number 50?
11:14:32 >>> Cathy Ginster, assistant city attorney
11:14:37 representing office of environmental coordination.
11:14:40 I have been sworn.
11:14:41 This is the first of two public hearings scheduled for

11:14:46 proposed brownfield designation, area located in the
11:14:49 city's Channel District.
11:14:52 The city's process is to designate an area as a
11:14:56 brownfield by council resolution.
11:15:01 Once it's designated by council, the Florida
11:15:03 department of environmental protection is responsible
11:15:06 to oversee environmental clean-up activity.
11:15:11 The purpose of the state brownfield designation is to
11:15:14 make available financial incentives to parties that
11:15:17 are interested in remediating and redeveloping
11:15:20 abandoned or underutilized properties.
11:15:23 The details of the application and proposed
11:15:26 development have been outlined in a document entitled
11:15:28 staff report, Kennedy property application for
11:15:33 brownfield area designation, which is available for
11:15:37 public review at the city clerk's office.
11:15:40 At the conclusion of the second public hearing, which
11:15:42 is scheduled for April 27th, at 5:30 p.m., before
11:15:47 council, council has an opportunity to pass a
11:15:50 resolution designating the grand center at Kennedy
11:15:54 property a brownfield area as specified in chapter
11:15:59 376, the Florida statutes, better known as brownfield

11:16:03 redevelopment.
11:16:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Question by council members?
11:16:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Is there any financial obligation
11:16:09 that encourages the city by this designation?
11:16:15 >>> No.
11:16:15 Not that I'm aware of.
11:16:20 He was an engineer for the office of environmental
11:16:24 coordination.
11:16:25 >>> I have been sworn in.
11:16:26 No, there's none.
11:16:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else in the audience like
11:16:32 to speak on item 50.
11:16:34 >> Move to close.
11:16:34 >> Second.
11:16:35 (Motion carried).
11:16:35 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to open 51.
11:16:42 >> Second.
11:16:42 (Motion carried).
11:16:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Staff?
11:16:51 >>> Good morning again.
11:16:52 I'm here on item 51.
11:16:54 The public hearing as well.

11:16:55 This is again the first of two public hearings that
11:16:57 are scheduled for proposed brownfield designation for
11:17:01 an area located in the Ybor City area.
11:17:04 And council will again be asked to approve a
11:17:07 resolution designating this area as a brownfield.
11:17:11 And there will be a second public hearing scheduled on
11:17:13 April 27th at 5:30 p.m. before council is
11:17:18 requested to approve the resolution, and a copy of the
11:17:20 plan, which is outlined, staff report, on Third
11:17:26 Street, bay drum site application, for brownfield area
11:17:30 designation is available for public review at the city
11:17:34 clerk's office.
11:17:35 Thank you.
11:17:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You answered one of my questions.
11:17:39 The last one we are all familiar with Grand Central at
11:17:42 Kennedy.
11:17:43 But what is the proposed future use on the bay drum
11:17:46 site?
11:17:46 I know that was a pretty controversial site for a long
11:17:50 time.
11:17:55 >>> We do have the development applicant here if you
11:17:58 have some very specific questions.

11:18:00 But basically it's going to be a staging area for
11:18:04 materials and equipment for the recycling of
11:18:07 demolition material.
11:18:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Still heavy industrial use?
11:18:14 >>> Yes, it is.
11:18:15 >> How does the brownfield designation fit had?
11:18:18 N?
11:18:18 Typically on the previous brownfields we have been
11:18:20 seeing were more like redevelopment, and housing, and
11:18:23 that sort ever thing going on old brownfields, which
11:18:27 is fine.
11:18:27 How does this work going from an industrial use
11:18:29 brownfield to more industrial?
11:18:31 >>> Well, it is going to be reused.
11:18:33 There is some environmental clean-up that's going to
11:18:36 be required.
11:18:36 So there are some financial incentives as far as tax
11:18:44 certificates for percentage of the assessment of
11:18:46 clean-up.
11:18:47 >> So it just encourages, what, continued use, I
11:18:51 guess, of the property as opposed to just mothballing
11:18:55 it?

11:18:55 >>> Exactly.
11:18:56 And incentive to move forward with the clean-up and
11:18:59 reuse of the property.
11:19:00 >> Do they have to actually get to the reuse stage in
11:19:05 order to take advantage of those tax benefits?
11:19:07 >>> They can apply for the tax benefits at the end of
11:19:09 each calendar year, up to $250,000 cap.
11:19:15 That occurs in the previous calendar year.
11:19:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:19:20 would like to speak on item 51?
11:19:22 >> Move to close.
11:19:23 >> Second.
11:19:23 (Motion carried)
11:19:28 >>GWEN MILLER: At this time, come in and speak on item
11:19:33 25, stageworks, Mr. Chen.
11:19:36 He was here.
11:19:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Probably went upstairs.
11:19:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Is he upstairs?
11:19:49 We'll go to information from council members.
11:19:50 Mr. White, do you have anything?
11:19:52 >>KEVIN WHITE: Yes, a couple things real quick.
11:19:57 With our upcoming budget session, we need to schedule

11:20:00 a brief workshop from staff, Ms. Bonnie Wise and her
11:20:11 staff, should not take more than 20 minutes.
11:20:13 I would like to make a motion that we move that on
11:20:15 regular council day, Thursday, the 25th of May.
11:20:24 At a time certain of 11 a.m.
11:20:27 No more than 20 minutes.
11:20:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
11:20:30 (Motion carried).
11:20:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: (off microphone).
11:20:39 >>KEVIN WHITE: We can change the time if you need to
11:20:42 leave earlier or later.
11:20:44 11:00 o'clock.
11:20:45 Time certain of 11:00.
11:20:49 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
11:20:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Chen, will you explain number 25
11:20:52 for us, please?
11:20:53 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Yes, I can, thank you.
11:20:55 I don't know if it requires it but I haven't been
11:20:57 sworn in.
11:20:58 >>GWEN MILLER: No, you don't need to be sworn.
11:21:00 We are going to take your word on this one.
11:21:02 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Thank you.

11:21:04 I have also done some research in this brief time
11:21:06 between your initial discussion and so forth to make
11:21:08 sure I understand the subject fully.
11:21:11 This actually is the city's roll in assisting the
11:21:14 state to administrate the enterprise program, mainly
11:21:19 when a company makes an application to the state
11:21:23 enterprise program, the city has to certify that the
11:21:27 company, in its land use, and its position, location
11:21:34 and so forth, that is compliant to the city land use
11:21:37 zoning and comprehensive plan, so in this role, this
11:21:41 actually has been a land use department situation.
11:21:46 Our resolution is simply saying to the state, yes,
11:21:49 they comply with our land use.
11:21:57 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Our resolutions are findings of fact
11:21:59 that compliance has been made, and as the ultimate
11:22:01 trier of fact in this case, what evidence are we
11:22:08 basing this on?
11:22:09 >>MICHAEL CHEN: If you would actually refer, I think
11:22:11 there's the fourth whereas clause of the resolution.
11:22:13 It actually, I think, clarifies the question that you
11:22:16 have asked.
11:22:17 It states: Whereas to enable eligible entities to

11:22:21 take advantage of the authorized tax credit benefits
11:22:24 and program, the local governing body must certify by
11:22:30 resolution that the proposed project is consistent
11:22:31 with local plans and regulations, including local
11:22:35 governments adopting comprehensive plan.
11:22:38 That is a certification to the land use as opposed to
11:22:42 anything about their operation or otherwise.
11:22:46 >>SHAWN HARRISON: That says what we have to do.
11:22:48 It doesn't say what we base this finding on.
11:22:51 And we have nothing.
11:22:52 I would suggest an affidavit, or something, you know,
11:22:55 some proof that someone has actually reviewed what it
11:23:00 is this company is doing, and they are complying, as
11:23:04 we are finding that.
11:23:05 >>MICHAEL CHEN: Actually, that has been done.
11:23:07 And this is where I said this has actually been -- the
11:23:10 technical piece of this has been handled in the land
11:23:12 use and comprehensive plan departments of the city.
11:23:15 This was sent with their address and so forth to
11:23:18 verify that it is compliant to the zoning and the land
11:23:22 use and so forth, as administered by them.
11:23:26 So Gloria and Thom Snelling through their department

11:23:28 have reviewed it for its compliance, and that's why we
11:23:31 forwarded to you for that.
11:23:34 >> Is that part of our backup?
11:23:36 >>> I understand that it was.
11:23:42 >> We didn't receive it.
11:23:43 I don't have it.
11:23:44 >> This is one of the things that was moved forward to
11:23:46 you.
11:23:46 It -- it was, with the review and approval of the land
11:23:53 use and zoning departments, that this was moved
11:23:56 forward to you.
11:23:57 But if you wish, I can see if I can do anything more
11:24:02 with that.
11:24:03 But it is compliant to the zoning and it was reviewed.
11:24:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Mr. Chen, if you could make copies
11:24:10 of that and make it available to council, and explain
11:24:14 what we are looking at is the specific location of
11:24:16 stageworks that it is located within an enterprise
11:24:19 zone.
11:24:19 It's not the -- that's what this is directly, is a
11:24:26 physical location.
11:24:27 If you could make that available to council and maybe

11:24:29 bring it up at 5:00 tonight.
11:24:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: It's really not that big of a deal.
11:24:37 You know what?
11:24:37 You get sworn in and say they are fully compliant
11:24:40 that's all we need because that's evidence.
11:24:43 >> Have you been sworn in?
11:24:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Obviously it was or it wouldn't come as
11:24:47 a resolution to us.
11:24:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Resolution that is don't have
11:24:54 adequate background.
11:24:58 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Based on the testimony provided by
11:25:00 Mr. Chen I would like to move the resolution number
11:25:05 25.
11:25:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Second?
11:25:07 We have a motion and second.
11:25:08 All in favor say Aye.
11:25:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Wait, wait, wait.
11:25:12 Mr. Harrison had a good point.
11:25:13 Swear him in.
11:25:14 Then we have record evidence.
11:25:15 And then -- then we have completed the circle.
11:25:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Swear him in.

11:25:22 (Oath administered by Clerk).
11:25:25 ROSE FERLITA: He told the truth.
11:25:30 >>MICHAEL CHEN: And that I have told the truth, yes.
11:25:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
11:25:34 floor.
11:25:34 All in favor say Aye.
11:25:36 Opposed, Nay.
11:25:40 (Motion carried).
11:25:42 >>CHAIRMAN: Anything else?
11:25:43 >>KEVIN WHITE: Yes, Madam Chair.
11:25:45 Following up.
11:25:45 I was speaking with commission chair Jim Norman
11:25:49 yesterday.
11:25:50 And just wanted to follow up on something that Mr.
11:25:53 Harrison made a motion on that was unclear, and he
11:25:56 asked me as finance chair for the city back on August
11:25:59 25th of last year, I thought, as well as the
11:26:03 county thought that the City Council passed a motion
11:26:08 to go ahead and take care of the $1500 property tax
11:26:12 exemption for all military personnel that resided
11:26:16 inside of the city limits of Tampa, and we gave the
11:26:22 county taxing authority to go ahead and do that, and

11:26:27 then send the city a bill, and we would reimburse them
11:26:31 from those exemptions.
11:26:33 I spoke yesterday to Sandy Marshall, our city clerk,
11:26:37 and she pulled up the record, and based upon that
11:26:40 record she read to me that she thought it was just a
11:26:44 recommendation that we asked the administration to
11:26:48 look into that.
11:26:49 And it was my understanding that we took decisive
11:26:53 action on that particular issue, and that the county,
11:26:58 from my understanding, in speaking with commissioner
11:27:00 Norman on yesterday, is not log for a check today, so
11:27:04 to speak, but they would like a firm process in place
11:27:08 now that we are coming up with our budgetary -- our
11:27:12 budget for next year to say that there is X amount of
11:27:15 dollars in the budget for the next fiscal year to
11:27:20 reimburse the county.
11:27:22 It can be $100,000 per se.
11:27:24 But the budget amount could vary based upon the actual
11:27:30 bill received.
11:27:31 But in all fairness, unless I was -- I misconstrued
11:27:38 Mr. Harrison's motion in what we voted on, I think we
11:27:41 probably owe him that for this year as well.

11:27:45 The motion is attached.
11:27:48 I have a copy of the transcript -- -- I have the
11:27:53 actual transcript here.
11:27:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Read the motion.
11:27:58 >>KEVIN WHITE: Well, I'm just trying to get down to
11:28:00 the last part.
11:28:03 If the personnel is going to pay for it it's going to
11:28:06 take -- this is Mr. Harrison, I'm sorry -- if the
11:28:08 personnel is going to pay for it, they are going to
11:28:11 take their time to figure out whether you are in the
11:28:14 city or the county, then we ought to reimburse all of
11:28:16 them as well, so I'll make that in the form of a
11:28:19 motion.
11:28:21 And I think that's a good idea, there's a lot of
11:28:24 previous conversation here.
11:28:26 But Mr. Dingfelder started it off, asked for a motion
11:28:31 came from Mr. Harrison, basically get it off the dime
11:28:34 at that point in time.
11:28:36 That was August 25th, Mr. Shelby, at the morning
11:28:40 meeting.
11:28:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Miller and I have had some
11:28:46 conversation busy this and I also talked to staff

11:28:49 about it.
11:28:49 There's a lot of confusion about this and I'm glad Mr.
11:28:52 White brought this up.
11:28:53 We are as patriotic as the county commission and every
11:28:56 other municipality in this county.
11:28:58 We believe in our soldiers, and I think we want to
11:29:01 help our soldiers.
11:29:02 And I think it's very important that we make that
11:29:03 clear to the public.
11:29:04 Because there's been some allegations perhaps that
11:29:06 were we are less patriotic.
11:29:09 We're not.
11:29:10 We want to do this.
11:29:11 And that was the tenor of that motion.
11:29:14 We want to do whatever we can to help.
11:29:15 I filed this with staff over the last, as you say,
11:29:18 almost a year.
11:29:19 Is that they kept going over to the county to
11:29:21 negotiate something.
11:29:22 The county said, okay, we want to use our MFTU which
11:29:26 is their own unincorporated tax, we want to use that
11:29:30 tax, and then you guys chip in with your portion, and

11:29:33 that sort of thing.
11:29:34 What the administration here suggested was, instead of
11:29:38 having four different programs or four different tax
11:29:40 sources or this or that, why doesn't the county just
11:29:43 use the countywide tax.
11:29:45 Okay, the countywide tax is paid by all residents just
11:29:48 as much as it's paid by the folks out in Valrico in
11:29:51 the unincorporated county or Lutz or anywhere else and
11:29:55 that is what ultimately county commission did last
11:29:57 Wednesday.
11:29:58 Mr. Norman even though he did it grudgingly, I think,
11:30:01 at the end of the day, he and the rest of the
11:30:02 commission went forward with this program on a
11:30:05 countywide basis using countywide taxes.
11:30:07 So everybody, no matter if they live in South Tampa,
11:30:10 New Tampa, or move to Valrico or Temple Terrace or
11:30:14 Plant City, is paying the same portion of their little
11:30:16 millage to support the soldiers.
11:30:19 And that is a wonderful way to accomplish this goal.
11:30:22 That's where ware today.
11:30:24 I don't think the city is turning its back on this at
11:30:27 all.

11:30:28 We are just saying we support this 100%.
11:30:30 We can put that in a resolution.
11:30:31 We can ask the mayor for a proclamation.
11:30:34 We support it 100%.
11:30:36 But they have done it the right way.
11:30:37 They put it into a countywide tax and therefore it's
11:30:39 fair.
11:30:39 Let me just show you something else.
11:30:41 It's my understanding that 20 military families have
11:30:44 put forth an application who live in the city.
11:30:48 400 folks have put forth application who live in the
11:30:51 unincorporated county.
11:30:53 So if anything, the city taxpayers are actually --
11:30:57 today paying a disproportionate share to support it in
11:31:03 the unincorporated county.
11:31:05 We are not complainings but I think it's a point that
11:31:06 should be well taken across this community.
11:31:10 >>KEVIN WHITE: I just think that the reimbursement
11:31:13 mechanism just needs to be addressed.
11:31:21 67 they are paying it already, you say.
11:31:23 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We are paying it.
11:31:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Everybody is paying it through the

11:31:28 countywide tax and it's available to any military
11:31:30 family no matter where they live in the county.
11:31:32 I don't know what needs fixing.
11:31:36 Including all the cities.
11:31:38 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Reimbursement mechanism.
11:31:40 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The county is running the program.
11:31:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
11:31:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it's very fair.
11:31:47 Jim and I are old friends and I know we don't
11:31:50 necessarily agree on this.
11:31:51 But a lot of programs are run to -- the health
11:31:54 department is run, you know, the health department is
11:31:56 run by the county, because -- on a countywide millage.
11:32:01 Lots of those departments over there are run by the
11:32:03 county on a countywide millage.
11:32:12 >>GWEN MILLER: You look like you want to say
11:32:14 something.
11:32:14 >>KEVIN WHITE: Just trying to formulate a thought
11:32:16 there.
11:32:17 I hadn't quite thought about it in the context that
11:32:19 Mr. Dingfelder just described it.
11:32:24 I was under the context of military families in

11:32:30 particular were going to apply for this exemption, if
11:32:35 they lived within the city, then that was the only
11:32:39 portion that the city was going to be responsible for,
11:32:43 or the county -- I'm sorry, was going to ask for
11:32:47 reimbursement for the city for the city showing their
11:32:53 patriotism, I guess if you will for lack of a better
11:32:56 word.
11:32:57 Like I said, I hadn't had it described as it just was.
11:33:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Somebody working for the city --
11:33:11 >>KEVIN WHITE: Yes, I understand that.
11:33:13 >>GWEN MILLER: The point of information we got.
11:33:19 >>KEVIN WHITE: Well, I would just like to right now
11:33:22 just -- if that's the general consensus of the board,
11:33:25 do we need to drop it?
11:33:26 That's the way it is?
11:33:27 I would like to have some information, either go back
11:33:30 or forth just as a follow-up basically.
11:33:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you want to look into it further and
11:33:35 feigned out?
11:33:36 >>KEVIN WHITE: There was a motion made to do that.
11:33:41 And I would just like to know where we are with the
11:33:44 motion that we have been voting on.

11:33:49 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I think that, as I recall vaguely,
11:33:53 the conversation that took place in the spirit of my
11:33:56 inquiry, my motion, was there's going to be some costs
11:34:01 to administer this, and we ought to figure out what
11:34:03 the city's portion of administering the cost is, and
11:34:07 shift that in.
11:34:09 If it's only -- I'm surprised it's only 20 families.
11:34:13 We can provide a full refund of ad valorem taxes they
11:34:16 paid.
11:34:17 It wouldn't even make a dent in the city's budget.
11:34:19 But it would be a huge symbolic statement of support.
11:34:23 And I'm glad you raised it, Councilman White.
11:34:28 I'm glad Mr. Dingfelder has an explanation for how
11:34:31 it's being done.
11:34:31 I don't know if it's fair.
11:34:33 But at least we're thinking about it.
11:34:36 And why don't you have continued dialogue with the
11:34:39 county commission, Mr. White?
11:34:41 And if they think that we're still not doing our part,
11:34:45 you let us know.
11:34:47 >>KEVIN WHITE: Fair enough.
11:34:48 >>GWEN MILLER: And bring it back.

11:34:50 Okay.
11:34:51 Anything else, Mr. White?
11:34:53 >>KEVIN WHITE: No, ma'am.
11:34:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: Madam Chairman, I am satisfied with
11:34:57 Mr. Dingfelder's explanation.
11:34:58 I think in this case nobody wants to define or
11:35:01 redefine the parts of the county that are city and
11:35:06 parts of the county that are not city.
11:35:08 I think it's a collective effort.
11:35:09 I think that's a simple way to get this done.
11:35:11 And I don't think anybody is slighting the military.
11:35:15 So hopefully that's going to be acceptable, maybe not
11:35:20 prevention but maybe acceptable to commissioner
11:35:22 Norman.
11:35:22 But if you have anything different that conflicts with
11:35:25 what he's saying, then, Kevin, come back and we'll
11:35:28 rediscuss it certainly.
11:35:30 Madam Chairman, just three items here.
11:35:32 I met with Hal Jeffries, the chairman of the annual
11:35:37 leadership prayer breakfast, originally known as the
11:35:39 mayor's prayer breakfast.
11:35:41 That's coming up on Tuesday, April 25th at the

11:35:46 Raymond James executive suite 6:55 a.m. The speaker
11:35:49 will be Wayne high zinger, the owner of the Miami
11:35:53 dolphins.
11:35:54 He has asked -- has to pass these out to each council
11:35:58 member, and they are reserving a table for each of us,
11:36:02 or table for us, in the event that we want to attend.
11:36:05 How we each handle the price of the ticket is
11:36:07 certainly a personal issue.
11:36:09 But I committed to him to bring that up.
11:36:12 The second thing, Madam Chairman, I think we all
11:36:15 received this memorandum from code enforcement a long
11:36:18 time ago.
11:36:19 I had requested that we have a quarterly report.
11:36:21 And when I first looked at this, I was pretty excited.
11:36:24 There is a Tribune reporter -- is it Mike Solinero
11:36:32 that's been working very aggressively on environmental
11:36:36 fines and illegal dumping, et cetera.
11:36:38 When I looked at this, in the report of 2006, January
11:36:42 to the end of March, out of 13,000 violations by
11:36:45 category, 9,339 were environmental.
11:36:49 And I thought that that was pretty good.
11:36:51 And I was surprised.

11:36:52 So I asked Ms. Curry, my legislative aide to check
11:36:56 with Mr. Dougherty and in fact it's not what it
11:37:00 appears.
11:37:00 It's deceiving.
11:37:02 They categorize environmental violations as, junk,
11:37:05 trash, debris, inoperative vehicles, excessive
11:37:08 vehicles, animals, or fire burning, or pool trees,
11:37:13 illegal dumping, on and on and on.
11:37:15 So it's not really a good representation of what I
11:37:19 think is environmental crime.
11:37:22 Surprisingly enough, we did ask Mr. Dougherty if he
11:37:24 can give me the percentage of that category of
11:37:27 environmental crime, but that is actually illegal
11:37:30 dumping.
11:37:31 And he offered to be cooperative and helpful but he
11:37:33 can't give me that percentage for a couple of weeks.
11:37:37 My suspicion is, and my speculation is, that because
11:37:40 of the fact that Hanson is not where it should be, we
11:37:47 can't get it.
11:37:49 I'm not sure what good these reports do because the
11:37:51 data that substantiates what they report is very
11:37:54 lagging behind because of the lack of an efficient

11:37:57 Hanson system or something.
11:37:59 Similar.
11:38:00 So this is lick a waste of time, you know.
11:38:04 I just wanted to bring that forward.
11:38:06 Now this is what I think is very is, very important as
11:38:09 well.
11:38:09 And I thought about this for awhile and I had
11:38:11 conversation with Mr. Shelby.
11:38:13 And I think it addresses some of the concerns that we
11:38:15 talked about earlier.
11:38:16 We started this morning by taking about an hour to
11:38:19 talk about we all want in our own way to have
11:38:22 everybody to discuss what they feel is fair and have
11:38:24 equal representation or presentation.
11:38:30 Without talking about the merits of any particular
11:38:31 zoning that's coming back for reconsideration,
11:38:33 sometimes neighborhoods -- and we all get e-mails and
11:38:36 letters, et cetera, from them.
11:38:38 The neighborhoods get concerned because the developer
11:38:41 has the opportunity or the mechanism to come back and
11:38:44 ask for reconsideration.
11:38:45 And if it's different or it looks like something that

11:38:48 might be a little more agreeable to both sides, we
11:38:49 grant them that reconsideration opportunity.
11:38:53 The first of May -- E -- and correct me if I am wrong
11:38:56 because I think we talked about this -- May fourth,
11:39:00 council would discuss proposed changes up to chapter
11:39:03 27.
11:39:03 I want this not just as a suggestion but a strong
11:39:06 motion in whatever way I need to put it out here, that
11:39:09 legal department first of all be prepared to talk
11:39:12 about what I'm going to say and also make
11:39:14 recommendations.
11:39:14 And that being if the developer has the opportunity to
11:39:17 come up and ask for reconsideration, so too should
11:39:22 representatives of civic associations and
11:39:25 neighborhoods -- and I think sometimes they feel very
11:39:27 slated and rightly so.
11:39:30 This is something that's inadequate part of chapter 27
11:39:35 and I think we need to make some recommendations so
11:39:37 both sides have a right to do it and the legal
11:39:39 department tells us how to put that in place.
11:39:42 I think this will be well received and it's fair.
11:39:45 Mr. Shelby, if you can add to that, then I'll just put

11:39:49 out a motion here.
11:39:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Without going into detail if council
11:39:54 wishes something to be looked at and presented on May
11:39:57 4 for review I will work with Mr. Smith to be able to
11:40:00 do that.
11:40:01 >>ROSE FERLITA: And my recommendation is simply that
11:40:03 they do that.
11:40:03 I am not asking anybody to support anything they don't
11:40:05 want to.
11:40:06 So my motion will be that on May 4th the legal
11:40:09 department and the city attorney in conjunction with
11:40:12 your intercession, Mr. Shelby, will be prepared to
11:40:16 discuss and make recommendations how to address the
11:40:18 problems with the reconsideration process and how that
11:40:20 relates to neighborhood representation as well.
11:40:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:40:25 Question on the motion?
11:40:26 Mrs. Alvarez.
11:40:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Ms. Ferlita, some of these
11:40:29 neighborhoods don't have an association.
11:40:31 Do you have any recommendation to that?
11:40:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: Then what about anybody who lives --

11:40:37 maybe you can work something out -- within a
11:40:39 reasonable boundary from where the development is.
11:40:43 >>MARY ALVAREZ: A lot of times, they put down
11:40:46 neighborhood associations that have nothing to do with
11:40:48 the area that the zoning is coming from.
11:40:53 >>ROSE FERLITA: Well, you're right, Mary.
11:40:55 And if there is a civic association that is actually
11:41:00 involved in that neighborhood, then fine.
11:41:02 If not, I think the individual citizen has the right
11:41:04 to do that.
11:41:05 Marty, you are going to have to help us simplify that,
11:41:08 so you don't have somebody from the other side of town
11:41:10 come in and say, I don't like -- because they will be
11:41:14 here forever.
11:41:15 All I am saying is however you want to craft the
11:41:19 boundaries or craft the qualifications of who comes up
11:41:21 for reconsideration, from the developer's side and on
11:41:24 the neighborhood side, then look let's look at
11:41:27 something that sets the criteria, and both sides have
11:41:30 equal time before us about reconsideration concerns.
11:41:34 >>SHAWN HARRISON: I'm very surprised.
11:41:37 If you have standing to appeal, you ought to have

11:41:40 standing to ask for reconsideration.
11:41:41 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's a very interesting observation.
11:41:44 >>ROSE FERLITA: At least they don't know that they do.
11:41:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This has come up a lot.
11:41:49 I discussed this with David Smith, city attorney, as
11:41:52 an example, at the next regular meeting, normally
11:41:56 somebody who has standing can come back and ask for
11:42:00 reconsideration.
11:42:02 If somebody has their petition denied and there's
11:42:05 nothing out there, then council has jurisdiction and
11:42:09 right to come back and ask for reconsideration.
11:42:11 If, however, something is passed, it goes to the mayor
11:42:15 for the mayor's signature and she signs it, then
11:42:18 council no longer has jurisdiction to reconsideration.
11:42:22 So if somebody has standing but something is passed
11:42:25 and comes back to council, they lose that opportunity
11:42:27 to pass for reconsideration so there's an equal
11:42:30 protection question in here.
11:42:31 And the treatment that Mr. Smith and I have been
11:42:35 talking about, to address it.
11:42:40 >>ROSE FERLITA: Absolutely.
11:42:41 Otherwise it's dead.

11:42:42 So I think we need to look at all of that.
11:42:45 And just be very fair about that process.
11:42:47 So that would be my motion.
11:42:48 Sandy, do I need to restate it?
11:42:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:42:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just comment on the motion if I
11:42:53 could
11:43:03 He brings up a good point but I would elaborate and
11:43:06 say any member of public regardless of standing or
11:43:08 anything else should have the right to stand in front
11:43:11 of that podium and ask us to reconsider any vote we
11:43:13 have taken the following week, because a lot of times,
11:43:16 what might happen is they might not have -- they might
11:43:19 not have come down here for the matter, but all of a
11:43:21 sudden, you know, they saw it on TV or whatever, and
11:43:25 they said, well, I better get down there, and ask
11:43:28 council to reconsider.
11:43:29 So they make their three-minute pitch to us or however
11:43:33 long we give them and we take it or leave it.
11:43:36 But I think it should be as broad as possible.
11:43:39 Doesn't mean we are going to do anything.
11:43:40 But --

11:43:44 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Would you elaborate on that, please,
11:43:47 about any member?
11:43:48 If we have a person from Ybor City coming and talking
11:43:52 about something that happened in West Tampa, is that
11:43:54 what you're talking about?
11:43:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it's a member of the
11:43:58 public, period: It doesn't matter whether they are in
11:44:01 the notice zone.
11:44:02 I think if they are a member of the public, everybody
11:44:04 has their three minutes.
11:44:06 We can limit it to two minutes or one minute if we
11:44:08 want.
11:44:09 But I think everybody should have an opportunity to
11:44:10 ask to us reconsider the vote we take.
11:44:13 >>ROSE FERLITA: I don't think that Mr. Dingfelder, my
11:44:16 motion was specific, so I agree with you, but we don't
11:44:19 want to spend another hour on this.
11:44:22 Neither you or I do.
11:44:24 That's my motion to Mr. Shelby, come back with
11:44:26 something that's fair, then once it's in front of us
11:44:29 we'll see however we need to do it.
11:44:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Broaden the discussion.

11:44:35 >>ROSE FERLITA: Yeah, that's fine.
11:44:35 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, but that's beyond the
11:44:38 scope of what's coming on May 4th.
11:44:40 May 4th is specific to chapter 27.
11:44:42 And chapter 27 section 398, City Council
11:44:46 reconsiderations that codify the procedure, I'm saying
11:44:49 that the party seeking reconsideration shall pay an
11:44:52 amendment fee and advertising cost, I believe.
11:44:54 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Shelby, you need to come back and
11:44:56 tell us what we can and can't do based on the
11:44:58 discussion of chapter 27, period.
11:45:01 So you may come back and say, no, you can't do this.
11:45:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But we can amend chapter 27.
11:45:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's the context.
11:45:08 >>ROSE FERLITA: But we are not taking any action, Mrs.
11:45:11 Alvarez.
11:45:12 All I am asking Mr. Shelby to do is come back for
11:45:15 informational purposes.
11:45:15 Let us know what we have, what we can do, let us know
11:45:18 what's fair, so that everybody walks away reasonably
11:45:20 happy with the process.
11:45:21 And I think there's some things that need to be

11:45:23 changed and that's one of them.
11:45:24 That's my motion anyway.
11:45:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: May 4th.
11:45:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
11:45:31 floor.
11:45:31 (Motion carried).
11:45:33 >>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you, that's all.
11:45:35 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Just a report on my daughter that
11:45:38 she's doing really well, and I appreciate all the
11:45:41 e-mails and cards and letters that you all have sent.
11:45:47 We are happy with the progress.
11:45:54 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Nothing.
11:45:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Couple of things.
11:45:56 Number one, if somebody wakes you up at 7 a.m. with
11:45:58 construction noise on a Sunday morning there's no
11:46:01 number in the Booker to call.
11:46:02 So I would like to request that in 30 days we get a
11:46:06 report back from code enforcement about what number
11:46:08 people should call for code enforcement violations on
11:46:10 the weekend.
11:46:12 And request that they look into publishing that in the
11:46:14 phone Booker and beginning where they have

11:46:16 governmental offices so people know who to call.
11:46:20 So they don't call council members at 7 a.m
11:46:23 (Laughter).
11:46:27 That's a motion to hear back in 30 days about a number
11:46:31 for code enforcement.
11:46:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:46:34 (Motion carried).
11:46:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Secondly, next Thursday is the
11:46:38 Thursday before earth day, and I wondered if at the
11:46:42 end of the meeting we could have a three-minute
11:46:44 discussion on making Tampa a green city.
11:46:47 I would like to schedule that for 11:00.
11:46:51 A 3-minute discussion.
11:46:53 If there's a green building, would lake Tampa to move
11:46:57 ahead, there's a quote by Mr. Harrison saying it's a
11:47:01 no brainer.
11:47:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
11:47:03 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Paint the building green or something?
11:47:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, no, it's environmental.
11:47:13 >> Should we ask they fly the flag?
11:47:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mary.
11:47:18 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Don't they on the building?

11:47:22 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
11:47:25 floor.
11:47:25 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
11:47:26 Opposed, Nay.
11:47:27 (Motion carried)
11:47:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thirdly, I'd like to make a motion
11:47:31 to have a three-minute PowerPoint presentation on
11:47:35 cigar factories, and if council would prefer to do it
11:47:38 at the end of our meeting.
11:47:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Wait, wait, wait.
11:47:41 >>GWEN MILLER: No, next week is too crowded.
11:47:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The legal discussion that's going
11:47:49 on.
11:47:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It was a request from the public to
11:47:52 me to say can we do this PowerPoint presentation?
11:48:00 >>ROSE FERLITA: I'm so glad we can come back for
11:48:03 designation and stuff.
11:48:04 But that seems to be not appropriate at this time.
11:48:10 Why don't we have somebody come in for three minutes
11:48:12 and talk about property rights?
11:48:13 I don't think we better touch that until we come up
11:48:15 with a decision.

11:48:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two housekeeping matters.
11:48:28 One is tonight, apparently, we have a busy zoning
11:48:31 night.
11:48:31 And as we look out in the audience, we have lost
11:48:35 chairs.
11:48:35 We have lost one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,
11:48:38 eight, nine.
11:48:40 Why did we lose those chairs?
11:48:45 >>GWEN MILLER: The ADA so we can have wheelchairs.
11:48:48 We haven't completed but -- they haven't finished
11:48:53 their job.
11:48:54 Some chairs are being ordered.
11:48:58 >> What is the finish?
11:49:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: A mezzanine.
11:49:04 (Laughter).
11:49:08 >>ROSE FERLITA: Why would we listen to this?
11:49:10 We made that motion last term.
11:49:12 You weren't here!
11:49:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When are we getting a gnaw voting
11:49:28 machine for us?
11:49:36 >>THE CLERK: We have been using the voice roll call
11:49:38 because of the length of the meetings to cut it down

11:49:41 to have to wait for it to come up on the sign.
11:49:43 But I can initiate it back up again next week if you
11:49:45 want.
11:49:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have had comments from people in
11:49:50 the public that say they would like to see how we are
11:49:52 voting as opposed to just sort of a yes-no, vote.
11:49:56 There seems to be confusion in the public.
11:49:58 >>SHAWN HARRISON: We used to have that thing up there
11:50:01 that told everybody.
11:50:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I thought it was broken.
11:50:10 >>ROSE FERLITA: Not working very well.
11:50:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, Mr. Dingfelder?
11:50:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No.
11:50:14 I la forward to us getting more seats permanently.
11:50:16 >>GWEN MILLER: They are on order.
11:50:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Oh, one other thing.
11:50:30 They got a memo from Gloria about front yard parking.
11:50:35 Is that coming up on our agenda?
11:50:40 >> Next week.
11:50:42 >> Okay. Front yard parking.
11:50:44 Making it possibly illegal.
11:50:46 In other words, don't park on your grass.

11:50:52 There's a memo here.
11:50:55 >>ROSE FERLITA: We had that discussion last term, too.
11:50:59 >>THE CLERK: A motion to have that come up next
11:51:01 Thursday.
11:51:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Clerk, do you have anything?
11:51:03 >>KEVIN WHITE: Move to receive and file.
11:51:09 >>THE CLERK: I have two requests.
11:51:10 We received a request from MOSI wanting to schedule
11:51:15 presentation on April 20 to announce the name of the
11:51:18 recipient of the 2006 national Hispanic scientist of
11:51:21 the year award.
11:51:23 They are wanting it scheduled for next Thursday.
11:51:25 We currently have two commendations scheduled already.
11:51:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:51:35 (Motion carried).
11:51:36 >>MARY ALVAREZ: CRA is 8:30 in the morning.
11:51:43 >>ROSE FERLITA: Remind everybody, not 8:45.
11:51:45 >>THE CLERK: I do have another request from Jan
11:51:47 Washington in public works.
11:51:50 They are requesting a presentation to be scheduled on
11:51:52 April 27th for five minutes.
11:51:56 Requesting Gloria mills and Arizona Jenkins, council

11:52:04 agenda, to discuss the intergovernmental task force
11:52:06 recommendations to approve access to Hartline bus
11:52:11 route.
11:52:12 The task force discussion was led by Rhonda Storms,
11:52:15 Hillsborough County commissioner, recommendations will
11:52:17 include ADA requirements and better coordination
11:52:20 between governmental agencies, to participate, be
11:52:25 about favor minutes and there will be citizens wanting
11:52:27 to speak also.
11:52:29 >> So moved.
11:52:30 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
11:52:33 >>SHAWN HARRISON: It's going to be more than five
11:52:34 minutes.
11:52:34 >>THE CLERK: She's asking for five but there will be
11:52:38 citizens speaking.
11:52:40 Five minutes for that presentation but it is indicated
11:52:43 there may be citizens wishing to speak.
11:52:50 >>MARY ALVAREZ: No.
11:52:51 Withdraw.
11:52:51 I made a motion but didn't get a second on it.
11:52:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I seconded it.
11:52:57 >>MARY ALVAREZ: What do we have on April 27th?

11:52:59 >>THE CLERK: On April 27th, as of right now you
11:53:03 have nothing specifically scheduled for time certain
11:53:06 on that date.
11:53:07 >>MARY ALVAREZ: That's fine.
11:53:10 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
11:53:12 All in favor say Aye.
11:53:13 Opposed, Nay.
11:53:14 Anything else, clerk?
11:53:15 All right.
11:53:16 Who is coming up?
11:53:17 Mr. Smith or Cathy Coyle?
11:53:19 Mr. Smith?
11:53:26 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
11:53:29 We have gone over the language.
11:53:31 It's important to set the context.
11:53:33 This is not part of the calculus that Cathy Coyle
11:53:38 engaged in in determining density.
11:53:40 This is not a density bump-up issue.
11:53:43 This is something that was volunteered by the
11:53:45 developer.
11:53:46 It's important you know that when you start. The
11:53:47 language that we are talking about substituting for

11:53:49 paragraph 2 is the following.
11:53:52 The developer has volunteered to sell no less than
11:53:54 3.5% approximately 16 units of the total number of
11:53:58 dwelling units for less than $200,000, in order to
11:54:02 provide housing units at a price point attainable to
11:54:06 downtown workers.
11:54:06 The developer shall develop a process subject to
11:54:09 review by the City of Tampa to market phase two units
11:54:13 and to the extent possible to limit their sale to
11:54:17 qualified members of the downtown workforce, period.
11:54:21 That is the proposal we are suggesting for paragraph 2
11:54:25 in lieu of what you have before you.
11:54:27 We think that accomplishes the goal, gives us the
11:54:30 flexibility we need to make sure we develop a process
11:54:33 that complies with all the various legal requirements,
11:54:36 and there's many, and we think will encourage downtown
11:54:39 workforce housing.
11:54:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, David, your testimony, I'm
11:54:46 assuming you were sworn --
11:54:49 >>> I wasn't.
11:54:50 >> Just teasing.
11:54:51 Your testimony conflicts with Cathy's testimony

11:54:53 because Cathy's testimony said the housing issue was
11:54:56 part of the comp plan -- the provisions in the comp
11:55:00 plan that allow to you exceed the F.A.R.
11:55:02 So there's a little bit of discrepancies there.
11:55:05 >>DAVID SMITH: We should clarify it.
11:55:08 >> Well, you're welcome to. But I'm comfortable with
11:55:10 the language you have here.
11:55:11 I guess in this case we'll have to trust the developer
11:55:14 to do his best to limit the sale to qualified members
11:55:16 of the downtown workforce.
11:55:19 The developer is shaking his head.
11:55:20 He seems like an honorable man and on this particular
11:55:23 issue I'm willing to go with it.
11:55:25 >>MARY ALVAREZ: And my question is, the period to keep
11:55:31 the condo.
11:55:32 I don't see anything in there.
11:55:34 Did we talk about that?
11:55:38 >>DAVID SMITH: The goal indicated here is to the
11:55:40 extent possible to limit their sale and resale to
11:55:44 qualified members of the downtown workforce.
11:55:48 So we are going to be speaking with the developer.
11:55:50 There are a variety of different ways.

11:55:51 We have been looking at it in order to come back to
11:55:53 you with amendments in chapter 27, et cetera.
11:55:56 There are a variety of different approaches to
11:55:58 affordable housing, to workforce housing, et cetera.
11:56:02 >>MARY ALVAREZ: What does that mean, limit their sale?
11:56:04 Only to the qualified members.
11:56:06 I agree with that.
11:56:07 But it's the period for them to keep this.
11:56:10 >>DAVID SMITH: This is indefinite.
11:56:17 There's no minimum time period.
11:56:19 >>MARY ALVAREZ: So if they buy this unit tomorrow and
11:56:21 then they want to sell it in a year, they can do that?
11:56:23 Is that what it means?
11:56:25 >>> No.
11:56:25 Let me clarify what we are doing.
11:56:27 What we are doing is we are going to write up a very
11:56:29 elaborate set of requirements in conjunction with the
11:56:31 developer that's going to spell out how this is going
11:56:33 to happen.
11:56:34 It's going to include among other things receiving
11:56:36 documentation associated with closings.
11:56:39 What we are not doing is getting into elaboration at

11:56:44 this stage.
11:56:45 I think that elaboration requires a lot of attention
11:56:47 to a lot of detail including what federal requirements
11:56:49 are, how we can avoid running afoul of discrimination,
11:56:55 state sponsored discrimination in housing.
11:56:57 This is a heavily regular you willed area.
11:56:59 What I am encouraging you to do is to allow us at the
11:57:04 level with the developer to work out a program that
11:57:06 accomplishes the goals. We understand what your goals
11:57:08 are.
11:57:09 And to work with the developer to try to accomplish
11:57:11 those.
11:57:12 It is counterproductive, I think, to try to be too
11:57:15 elaborate at this stage for a variety of reasons, some
11:57:18 of which I would really rather not go into.
11:57:22 As Alvarez I'll accept your explanation.
11:57:23 >>KEVIN WHITE: I was going to say based on what we had
11:57:30 before us, I wanted to applaud Mr. Harrison and Mr.
11:57:34 Dingfelder for bringing up the issue.
11:57:37 But there is a distinct difference between workforce
11:57:39 housing and affordable housing.
11:57:41 Now, this is a private development.

11:57:43 And I heard someone a little bit earlier allude to
11:57:47 what was going on in West Tampa with in-kind homes --
11:57:52 intown homes.
11:57:54 This was a specific organization that the city was
11:57:56 giving up certain properties, and this was a
11:57:59 development that was encouraging affordable and
11:58:03 workforce housing.
11:58:05 This is a private for-profit development.
11:58:10 This is a different scenario.
11:58:13 Although we as a council, and politicians in this
11:58:21 area, we need to look at for everybody, all of the
11:58:25 citizens, the people, and we need to encourage it.
11:58:27 I think this developer has gone over and above, and is
11:58:31 doing the very best he can to bring a quality
11:58:35 development project to our area.
11:58:38 But I didn't see any mandates for workforce housing at
11:58:46 New Port Tampa Bay, so to speak, and down in the
11:58:49 Westshore and Gandy area, and this like that is a
11:58:54 private development, that they are not asking us for
11:58:56 any city land, this is all private, but this developer
11:59:01 has gone over and above to try to meet all of the
11:59:03 minimum standards.

11:59:05 And not minimum but gone over the minimum standards.
11:59:08 And I think that's to be applauded.
11:59:10 But we need to continue it, keep in mind the workforce
11:59:14 and affordable housing situation, because it seems
11:59:17 like the affordable housing situation is becoming less
11:59:21 and less prevalent, where we are demolishing
11:59:26 affordable housing and public housing and building
11:59:30 multi-million dollar condos, where people go because
11:59:35 everyone in Tampa cannot unfortunately afford to live
11:59:38 in channel, and portions of north Tampa.
11:59:42 So I'm very comfortable with this, willing to move
11:59:45 forward.
11:59:45 Thank you all for bringing up that issue.
11:59:47 It's a very important issue for me especially in the
11:59:50 district that I represent.
11:59:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Harrison?
11:59:52 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Thank you.
11:59:53 As long as it's voluntary, that's fine.
11:59:55 Because some people would define "volunteer" a little
11:59:59 differently than others might.
12:00:00 So if it was at the suggestion of the developer that
12:00:03 this is what I would like to do, then that's fine.

12:00:07 And I do think we have to leave it sort of open-ended
12:00:10 as far as what the ultimate requirements are going to
12:00:15 be because we just don't know what that might be.
12:00:17 David, how do we this is a private project.
12:00:26 So how do we ensure that the pictures and the drawings
12:00:28 and the models and everything that we have seen that
12:00:32 have gotten this community so intrigued by this
12:00:37 project and so interested in this project, that that
12:00:39 is what is going to be built?
12:00:44 There's color pictures in here, and everyone is
12:00:46 looking at this, and they are saying, this is great,
12:00:50 and they are saying this is so great that we have been
12:00:52 willing to essentially do away with the height
12:00:55 restrictions in Channelside.
12:01:01 So we ensure this is the product that's going to be
12:01:03 built and by this developer or if something happens
12:01:06 and he has to sell this property, and developer coming
12:01:08 in behind them is going to build this project, what
12:01:11 assurance do we have?
12:01:14 >>DAVID SMITH: Very good question.
12:01:15 And I will let Cathy answer that because she has much
12:01:17 more familiarity with the other conditions than do I.

12:01:21 >>CATHERINE COYLE: Your reference does also reference
12:01:28 exhibit D which is the booklet you have before you.
12:01:30 The packet that was submitted to the clerk as a the
12:01:33 final site development plan package is B, C and D.
12:01:37 B is the site plan.
12:01:39 D is other conditions which only council can change.
12:01:42 D is the booklet which Wilson will review his designs,
12:01:45 the 30, 60, 90% construction.
12:01:48 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Okay.
12:01:50 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to close the public hearing.
12:01:52 >>: So moved.
12:01:53 >> Second.
12:01:53 (Motion carried).
12:01:53 >>KEVIN WHITE: It is my pleasure to move an ordinance
12:01:57 rezoning the property in the general vicinity of 910,
12:02:00 918, 934 and 940 Channelside Drive and 105, 109, 113
12:02:05 and 117 north 12th street in the city of Tampa,
12:02:08 Florida as more particularly described in section 1
12:02:10 from zoning district classifications CD-1 mixed use
12:02:14 retail multifamily to CD-3 mixed use multifamily,
12:02:19 providing an effective date.
12:02:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second?

12:02:22 >> Second.
12:02:22 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
12:02:27 Mr. Dingfelder.
12:02:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
12:02:30 First off, I really have not had a problem with this
12:02:34 project or any other project recently in terms of
12:02:37 increasing the height or the F.A.R.
12:02:40 As long as the citizens, as long as our community gets
12:02:45 things in exchange, gets public amenities in exchange
12:02:48 for that increased hate and the F.A.R.
12:02:50 And especially in the downtown and the Channelside
12:02:53 area.
12:02:53 I think that's sort of fallen back.
12:02:56 The other thing I wanted to point out, and I have
12:02:58 repeated this probably a dozen times now, is that this
12:03:02 is another great opportunity to increase the
12:03:05 residential density downtown, which will take some of
12:03:07 the redevelopment pressure off of my district in South
12:03:10 Tampa.
12:03:11 And I can't say that enough.
12:03:12 Because folks in South Tampa are tired of getting all
12:03:15 the redevelopment.

12:03:17 And now we are seeing some of that redevelopment shift
12:03:19 over to downtown and to Channelside into Ybor where
12:03:23 the infrastructure is in place to handle it, and South
12:03:26 Tampa will hopefully some of the pressure will get off
12:03:29 of South Tampa.
12:03:30 So thank you.
12:03:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This project has been a real
12:03:38 struggle for me personally because it represents a
12:03:40 commitment by council, by the community, to a
12:03:43 different profile for Channelside.
12:03:46 It says that Channelside, which originally when
12:03:50 developed plan was envisioned as a lower density,
12:03:54 smaller scale, more intimate area, neighborhood, is
12:03:57 going to be a real, dense urban neighborhood.
12:04:01 But with tremendous public art, public amenities,
12:04:05 crosswalks, commitment to artist housing.
12:04:07 It's based on those additional amenities, and the fact
12:04:11 that they lose the neighborhood, that I am eager to
12:04:15 support this.
12:04:16 And I just hope it ends up being as beautiful as the
12:04:18 plans indicate because I think it's going to be really
12:04:20 spectacular architecture.

12:04:23 And I think the beauty is something that Tampa needs.
12:04:25 And I look forward to setting a quality standard for
12:04:28 future structures.
12:04:29 Thank you.
12:04:32 >>SHAWN HARRISON: Madam Chair, I'm going to support
12:04:34 the project as well.
12:04:35 I think that the community has rallied around the
12:04:39 project, and that was not something that the last
12:04:44 public hearing we had had yet occurred.
12:04:45 And I think that our trip out to Channelside that
12:04:48 evening was quite instructive and I think this process
12:04:53 is an example of how many people would consider it a
12:04:58 defeat, if you don't get a vote that you want on the
12:05:02 particular night that you're you will all here.
12:05:04 But we have seen project after project where we slow
12:05:08 down a bit, we make sure that we're doing the right
12:05:10 thing, and we get wide scale community buy-in that
12:05:14 everyone wins.
12:05:15 And I think at the end of the day, a project has been
12:05:18 presented that everyone wins with.
12:05:20 And so I'm happy to support this.
12:05:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Other council members?

12:05:25 Mrs. Alvarez?
12:05:27 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Thank you.
12:05:28 A -- I feel the same way, at the beginning it was
12:05:33 quite large for me.
12:05:35 I mean, the height was more than I thought that the
12:05:39 Channel District could handle.
12:05:41 But with the tours that we have taken, and people in
12:05:48 the Channel District speaking out for it especially at
12:05:51 that CRA meeting that we had a couple of weeks ago, it
12:05:54 kind of brought everything together.
12:05:55 And Mr. Sedar really has tried to do the right thing
12:06:01 for the district, and also it's going to help the
12:06:04 downtown area.
12:06:04 And I couldn't help but see the beautiful pictures of
12:06:10 the site itself, and I think it's going to be
12:06:13 wonderful.
12:06:14 I think that it's going to put Tampa on the map.
12:06:17 And I want to applaud Mr. Sedar for hanging in there,
12:06:21 and being patient with us, because what we wanted to
12:06:24 do was the right thing for the Channel District, and
12:06:28 if we do the right thing for the Channel District, we
12:06:30 are doing the right thing for the City of Tampa.

12:06:32 So I want to thank you for being -- and I want to
12:06:36 thank the residents, the people that live in there,
12:06:38 the stakeholders in there, that hung in there with us
12:06:42 and made us realize that this was a good thing for us.
12:06:45 So again I applaud everyone for this beautiful
12:06:48 project.
12:06:50 And good luck with it.
12:06:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Ferlita?
12:06:52 >>ROSE FERLITA: Thank you.
12:06:54 I will add my comments, too.
12:06:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry.
12:06:58 I just want to make a comment just to clarify the
12:07:00 record, that the tours that council may have taken and
12:07:04 the CRA meeting, my understanding was for general
12:07:09 informational purposes and the bases for which council
12:07:11 is making its decision is based on testimony and other
12:07:14 evidence that's been adduced at the public hearing.
12:07:16 I just wanted that to be clear for the record.
12:07:21 >> Absolutely.
12:07:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Ideally, it would be best if you said
12:07:25 it.
12:07:27 But consistent with that just for the purposes of --

12:07:32 >>ROSE FERLITA: Mr. Shelby, absolutely it was.
12:07:34 In addition to that it was good to see firsthand
12:07:36 review of the area that was continuing to develop.
12:07:39 I think this from the beginning had maybe some hidden
12:07:43 formulas for success because we saw frustration on the
12:07:46 part of the developer, frustration on the part of the
12:07:48 neighborhood, frustration certainly on the part of
12:07:50 this council.
12:07:52 I again want to say on record the only reason I was
12:07:54 not at that meeting in Channel District is because I
12:07:57 had something that was already scheduled a long time
12:08:00 before and I apologize for that and I have read that
12:08:03 into the record.
12:08:04 But in order to get a good view and good sense of what
12:08:06 was going on, I did join Janell and saw the area as
12:08:10 well.
12:08:12 Mr. Sedar, I saw you sometimes very frustrated bass
12:08:15 you felt you were giving enough or more than enough
12:08:17 you want to walk away and some of the people
12:08:20 supporting you were just as frustrated.
12:08:21 Some of the people who didn't like the complex were
12:08:24 frustrated.

12:08:25 The fact that this same audience that were almost
12:08:28 belligerent against each other awhile back are sitting
12:08:31 and the only thing they want to us do is keep quiet
12:08:33 and hurry up and I'm trying so we can get it approved.
12:08:36 But I think it's been a win-win.
12:08:38 Think the ultimate product of all the discussion and
12:08:40 all is the animosity and sometimes agreement is what
12:08:44 we have got.
12:08:44 I think it's great.
12:08:45 I think this is the time for it.
12:08:47 I think that's the area for it.
12:08:48 That is an area that residence as they come are going
12:08:51 to choose when they want urban, dense living.
12:08:54 That's what it is.
12:08:56 And specific comments to your project, although we
12:08:59 want that, we don't want ugly looking project
12:09:04 acknowledges and certainly none of yours -- yours is
12:09:07 none of the above.
12:09:07 I think it's a win-win.
12:09:09 I agree with Mr. Dingfelder.
12:09:11 I live off of Bayshore.
12:09:12 It's wonderful to support this and wonderful to

12:09:14 encourage continued development so they don't look at
12:09:16 South Tampa as their first shot.
12:09:17 So I'm wholeheartedly in agreement.
12:09:20 I wish everybody well in this process.
12:09:22 >>KEVIN WHITE: Thank you, Madam Chair.
12:09:24 I think it shows that this decision must be very
12:09:27 important for me, Mr. Sedar, because we have gone past
12:09:31 the lunch hour and I have not said anything.
12:09:33 Real briefly, though, I was in support of the project
12:09:36 from the very beginning because not oftentimes do we
12:09:41 have two things that go hand in hand, one a developer
12:09:46 that's willing to bend over backwards to accommodate
12:09:49 each and every one of the neighborhoods' needs, wants
12:09:53 and desires.
12:09:54 And then bring a quality to us and then pack the room
12:09:59 with people that actually live there, that are
12:10:01 stakeholders, that have invested their blood, sweat
12:10:04 and tears and live in an area that say we want this as
12:10:07 well.
12:10:08 I want to applaud you for that.
12:10:09 I want to applaud the residents of the Channelside
12:10:12 area for taking up for your area knowing what you

12:10:16 want.
12:10:16 I didn't take the tour with the rest of the council
12:10:19 members, but me and Janell took me for a one on one to
12:10:27 where she beat me up for a little over an hour and she
12:10:28 made sure I knew of the concerns you all had; of
12:10:31 course, I'm down in Channelside at least twice a week
12:10:34 myself.
12:10:34 But one of the other main factors that made me in
12:10:37 support of this project, I don't want Channelside at
12:10:40 the end of the day to end up being another Ybor City,
12:10:43 where it starts flopping because we don't have the
12:10:47 people to support all the amenities that we have
12:10:50 there.
12:10:50 It takes density to support the retail.
12:10:54 It takes density to support the coffee shops, the
12:10:58 movie theaters, the restaurants.
12:11:01 Without that, it's going to fail.
12:11:02 When you have density, it creates opportunity and it
12:11:07 creates just more economic development for everyone.
12:11:12 And Mr. Sedar, this is a wonderful project.
12:11:16 I'm glad we are at this point.
12:11:18 I'm sorry personally it took so long to get to this

12:11:21 point but it is a quality point and I am in full
12:11:24 support.
12:11:25 >>ROSE FERLITA:
12:11:27 >>GWEN MILLER: My colleagues said it's a win-win and
12:11:30 everything wonderful.
12:11:31 I'm going to call for the vote.
12:11:32 All in favor say Aye.
12:11:33 Opposed, Nay.
12:11:35 (Motion carried) anything else?
12:11:36 (Applause).
12:11:37 Is there anything else to come before council?
12:11:44 >>THE CLERK: I have another item.
12:11:48 It has been requested to schedule an update of a
12:11:51 PowerPoint presentation by Desiree Valdez, legislative
12:11:55 aide and representative on the Hillsborough County
12:11:56 affordable housing task force, for April 22nd for
12:11:59 three minutes.
12:12:00 >>MARY ALVAREZ: Second.
12:12:04 First.
12:12:04 Whatever.
12:12:06 >>CHAIRMAN: Motion and second.
12:12:07 (Motion carried)

12:12:10 Okay.
12:12:13 At this time we go to our audience portion.
12:12:16 (Meeting recessed at 12:14 p.m.)
12:14:22