Help & information    View the list of Transcripts



08:57:34 Tampa City Council meeting
09:01:04 Thursday, August 2, 2007
09:01:16 9:00 a.m. session
09:05:33 [Sounding gavel]
09:05:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:05:36 The chair will yield to Reverend Scott.
09:05:39 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
09:05:41 It is indeed my pleasure and honor to introduce the
09:05:48 pastor this morning to give our invocation, the
09:05:51 reverend Kenneth Scarborough, born in South Carolina,
09:05:54 educated at South Carolina, masters in public health,
09:06:02 and health service administration, university of South
09:06:05 Carolina, master of divinity, and seminary in Denver,
09:06:10 Colorado, married to Linda Cox.
09:06:12 He is also on the ministerial staff at the First
09:06:15 Baptist Church of College Hill under the leadership of
09:06:17 pastor Abraham brown.
09:06:19 So indeed we are delighted to have reverend Kenneth
09:06:24 Scarborough to give our invocation this morning.
09:06:26 So if you stand for the invocation and pledge of
09:06:31 allegiance.
09:06:32 >>> Let us pray.
09:06:33 Dear God, how excellent is your name in all the earth.

09:06:36 In your excellence, you have given authority through
09:06:40 government, therefore we give wisdom in making
09:06:44 decisions that you will give justice to do the right
09:06:47 thing, understanding for those who disagree,
09:06:50 cooperation in working together for the good of all,
09:06:54 humility to serve without wanting to serve and
09:06:58 compassion in those who are not forgotten.
09:07:05 In our prayer we remember this morning those in our
09:07:07 extended community of Minneapolis and their tragedy.
09:07:12 Give them peace and comfort as you will guide this
09:07:15 meeting and future meetings because of who you are,
09:07:18 God.
09:07:18 We thank you this morning.
09:07:20 Amen.
09:07:22 [ Pledge of Allegiance ]
09:07:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
09:07:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:07:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:07:44 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:07:47 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:07:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:07:49 At this time we go to the approval of the agenda.

09:07:55 I would like to pull item number 26, continued for one
09:07:59 week.
09:08:00 And I would like to file the documents that will go
09:08:03 along with this.
09:08:04 You will be receiving instructions later on today.
09:08:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
09:08:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want to confirm, is that item 26?
09:08:12 >>THE CLERK: 29.
09:08:14 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Item 29?
09:08:22 Consolidated plan fiscal year for the action plan.
09:08:24 I believe council members will be receiving the copy
09:08:26 individually this morning so you will have the
09:08:31 opportunities to review it prior to next week's vote.
09:08:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Are there any other items that need to
09:08:36 be pulled?
09:08:40 Ms. Mulhern?
09:08:41 >>THE CLERK: Were you going to vote on that motion?
09:08:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there a second?
09:08:47 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I second.
09:08:48 (Motion carried).
09:08:50 >> Which number was that?
09:08:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 29 continued for one week.

09:08:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to pull item number 16.
09:09:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
09:09:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's very clear to me that it's a
09:09:16 portion of the funds that are needed to continue the
09:09:18 process with the downtown riverwalk and the master
09:09:24 plan.
09:09:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Should I ask my question?
09:09:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Go ahead.
09:09:28 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to know what those
09:09:32 limitations are on the local options, the typical
09:09:42 expense that that goes toward.
09:09:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Well, you have to ask the
09:09:46 administration that.
09:09:47 I have read this.
09:09:48 I see nothing wrong with it.
09:09:50 If you want to proceed with it.
09:09:52 And --
09:09:59 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
09:10:00 It's not an easy question to answer because there are
09:10:03 different tactics with different pennies and go to
09:10:06 different subjects.
09:10:07 I don't know which one this is one.

09:10:09 I assume it is correct.
09:10:10 We reviewed it.
09:10:11 Administration has reviewed it.
09:10:13 So I have to assume what they are using the money for
09:10:15 is the correct purpose. The limitations are statutory
09:10:18 and they quo depend which penny of the sales tax it
09:10:21 happens to be.
09:10:21 >>MARY MULHERN: All right.
09:10:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Has to be relative to transportation
09:10:31 needs such as sidewalk or traffic, pot holes.
09:10:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Another item?
09:10:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:10:42 Number 23.
09:10:43 And I see Mr. Smith in the audience.
09:10:45 He can probably address it.
09:10:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Smith?
09:10:56 >> It's about did T $50,000 to de la PARTE and
09:11:04 Gilbert.
09:11:05 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:11:07 We retained that law firm to assist with us respect to
09:11:09 some litigation that is currently pending.
09:11:12 The litigation deals with a permit challenge, Tampa

09:11:18 Bay water filing a permit request, SWFWMD filed their
09:11:22 responses, and Tampa Bay water challenged the
09:11:25 conditions that Southwest Florida Water Management
09:11:28 District wanted to put on the permit.
09:11:31 The city entered in because we are an interested
09:11:33 party.
09:11:34 There's also a corollary action to our minimum flows
09:11:38 and levels. This is an area that requires not only
09:11:40 expertise in the water area like Jan McLean has but
09:11:44 also someone who has background and experience in
09:11:46 litigation in this arena.
09:11:48 And so Chip Fletcher and obviously Mr. De La Parte if
09:11:53 necessary will be assisting us in this regard.
09:11:55 We hopefully won't go the full route but you cannot go
09:11:58 into these kinds of arenas without adequate
09:12:00 preparation and professional assistance.
09:12:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
09:12:04 The reason that I wanted to bring this to council's
09:12:06 attention is because if we are spending money pursuing
09:12:09 something which I think is appropriate, but I think
09:12:11 that it's appropriate for council being asked to
09:12:13 approve this contract, be brought up to speed and

09:12:17 discuss it at a shade meeting or some sway way of
09:12:20 getting us up to speed.
09:12:22 I feel out of the loop.
09:12:24 Our only information at this point is basically the
09:12:26 newspaper and since I am being asked to spend money on
09:12:28 lawyers for something for the city I think it's time
09:12:30 for us to schedule a more in-depth conversation,
09:12:34 however you think it's appropriate, but in a very
09:12:36 timely way so we know what we are doing.
09:12:41 >>> And your request is timely.
09:12:42 As a matter of fact Marty and I have been talking
09:12:45 about when we come to you and request a closed
09:12:47 session, because it is in litigation, and because I
09:12:50 believe settlement discussions are going to be
09:12:53 imminent, we do believe that is appropriate.
09:12:55 I didn't want to -- I also thought about it last week
09:12:58 but that was premature and I think this week is
09:13:01 premature but I think by next week we'll be coming to
09:13:04 you requesting a closed session.
09:13:05 In the interim, I believe Jan McLean has set up
09:13:09 meetings with each of you to bring you up to date on
09:13:11 what has transpired procedurally.

09:13:13 The problem is, there has been a lot of discussion and
09:13:17 a lot of spinning in place, if you will, which I think
09:13:21 is going to begin to move in a direction that we can
09:13:24 then come to you and say, here's where it looks like
09:13:27 it's headed.
09:13:28 And he would want to know what your views are on these
09:13:30 types of solutions.
09:13:33 >>GWEN MILLER: I think it's important for council to
09:13:35 have a shade meeting because even though Jan can bring
09:13:37 us each up to speed individually we need a chance to
09:13:40 chat among ourselves.
09:13:42 We are being asked to approve at this point just
09:13:44 $50,000 with a private law firm but the point is we
09:13:47 need to understand what the issues are, what our role
09:13:50 is as a council because I do believe we do have a role
09:13:54 in this.
09:13:54 And I would like us this to be scheduled if you can as
09:13:59 quickly as possible.
09:14:00 >>> We are going to do just that and it will be this
09:14:02 month.
09:14:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Other items?
09:14:04 Need a motion to approve the agenda.

09:14:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
09:14:08 >> Second.
09:14:08 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:14:09 (Motion carried)
09:14:11 We now go to our staff reports, unfinished business,
09:14:14 item number 1.
09:14:34 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Land development.
09:14:35 Machines changed.
09:14:36 I'm her to discuss item number 1 concerning the
09:14:38 interim parking lots in Ybor City.
09:14:40 I wanted to give council a little history, since you
09:14:42 have some new members, that predates the code
09:14:49 adoption. The code was amended in 1998 to provide for
09:14:51 interim and special event parking lots.
09:14:55 The interim lots were created for the ability to
09:14:59 utilize property for off-street parking without having
09:15:02 to make the level of improvements required for
09:15:06 principal parking lots.
09:15:07 Once established, the interim lots would be able to be
09:15:10 used for five years, and at that time, they would have
09:15:15 to be brought up to permanent status, if they were in
09:15:18 a district would allow for a principal use parking

09:15:21 lot.
09:15:21 That would include pavement, landscaping, stormwater
09:15:25 improvements.
09:15:28 Last week, the YCDC staff and code enforcement
09:15:31 identified nighttime paved parking lots were located
09:15:37 in this historic district, and that is illustrated in
09:15:39 the map that I have given you.
09:15:43 I have one for the Elmo here, too.
09:15:51 Now those are just showing where the paved parking
09:15:53 lots are in the weekend hours.
09:15:59 >> The yellow?
09:16:00 >>> The yellow ones, yes.
09:16:02 The red is the zoning one.
09:16:03 The majority of them are located south of 7th
09:16:06 Avenue, the site identified nighttime parking.
09:16:12 I looked at the sites and found that five had been
09:16:14 reviewed by the Barrio Latino commission for parking
09:16:18 use.
09:16:18 Staff, though, has not been able to find that they
09:16:21 actually went through the proper permitting process to
09:16:26 get all the inspections required and everything else.
09:16:29 Code enforcement and the interim parking lot issue has

09:16:31 been very difficult.
09:16:34 Residents, residences have been very vocal complaining
09:16:44 about nighttime parking by the patrons.
09:16:47 I have been contacted by Jason acardi who is with 717
09:16:52 parking, and a property owner in the area, and they
09:16:55 are concerned about the elimination of interim parking
09:16:58 use and how that would affect the commercial interests
09:17:03 in the area.
09:17:04 I also met with the YCDC parking committee last month
09:17:09 who expressed concern about the cost of bringing
09:17:12 parking lots into compliance with the permitted
09:17:17 parking standards for paving and stormwater
09:17:19 requirements and things such as that.
09:17:23 It is my understanding, however, that the two city
09:17:25 parking lots that numbered 2400 parking spaces, the
09:17:30 street parking and accessory lots in the districts, do
09:17:35 provide adequate number of parking spaces for the
09:17:37 typical weekend.
09:17:40 However, the elimination of the interim lots would not
09:17:44 prevent the establishment of principal parking lots.
09:17:48 The second illustration or information that I have for
09:17:52 you, the information concerning where lots are allowed

09:17:58 to be located, the principal parking lots.
09:18:00 I think you can see that in really all except the
09:18:05 residential district, which is like the two YC 8 and
09:18:12 also YC 7 which is a mixed use district, those are the
09:18:15 only districts that does not allow for the principal
09:18:17 parking lot.
09:18:19 If you look back at the map, is in a YC 7 district.
09:18:36 So the elimination of the interim parking lot will not
09:18:40 necessarily mean these parking uses will go away.
09:18:44 I just wanted council to be aware of that.
09:18:47 I would like -- my recommendation is that you allow me
09:18:50 to work for maybe 90 days with the barrio as well as
09:18:55 the YCDC and other city departments to see if maybe we
09:18:59 can look to the code and see if there could be some
09:19:04 improvements on how to deal with this issue.
09:19:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for taking a look at
09:19:12 this.
09:19:17 It's been a problem in the inconsistency and I think
09:19:19 the idea that you have time to develop some kind of
09:19:22 plan.
09:19:23 It bothers me when we say, okay, you have five years
09:19:26 to bring your property up to code and our code

09:19:28 enforcement has been unable to enforce the code.
09:19:31 So hopefully you will be able to come up with
09:19:33 something.
09:19:33 My feeling is that we need to get sort of a baseline
09:19:38 on what's legal, what's not legal, who needs to come
09:19:42 into compliance, and then once we determine different
09:19:44 things, to enforce what we need to, because the days
09:19:50 of the allowing property to just be in the terrible
09:19:54 shape and put out a sign on Saturday night, now, $15
09:19:57 for parking, those days need to draw to a close.
09:20:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano?
09:20:03 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Moreda, to your knowledge are
09:20:07 there any of those parking lots that have out standing
09:20:09 code violations against them?
09:20:11 >>> I am not aware of them.
09:20:13 I know code enforcement is very active in the historic
09:20:17 districts, but I'm not sure if they have been
09:20:20 specifically cited for violation of the interim
09:20:22 parking lot issue.
09:20:23 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I got a report this week that I
09:20:26 requested on code violations, out standing debts, and
09:20:30 one of them is very substantial.

09:20:33 And I don't know where this is at but I was told it's
09:20:35 a parking lot, okay?
09:20:38 If they are in code violation, and they are not paying
09:20:40 their fines, their license should be pulled.
09:20:44 They shouldn't have a right to run a business and be
09:20:46 in violation.
09:20:50 >>> That's really a legal department issue.
09:20:53 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Well, I'm not positive but I was
09:20:56 told it's perhaps a parking lot but I will check in
09:20:59 further and find out definitely.
09:21:00 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Yes, over the next few months I will
09:21:02 try to gather more information on the code enforcement
09:21:05 activity in the area.
09:21:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
09:21:08 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just to refresh council's
09:21:11 recollection, this issue came up about two years ago,
09:21:15 related to interim parking lot, specifically with
09:21:16 regard to not consensual towing and there were
09:21:22 complaints that relate to council members to parking
09:21:27 lots and the nonconsensual towing.
09:21:30 I don't know whether the barrio will address that or
09:21:33 YCDC or Gloria.

09:21:35 But if that is part of one of the concerns it may be
09:21:39 appropriate to address that issue again, because it
09:21:42 hadn't been resolved.
09:21:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Nonconsensual time, that's when you
09:21:48 don't -- what's nonconsensual time?
09:21:54 [ Laughter ]
09:21:57 What's consensual time?
09:22:01 >> That involves -- no.
09:22:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What I would like to do if there are
09:22:07 any council members that are not familiar with the
09:22:08 issue, what I will do in the interim between the time
09:22:11 that council has this issue back, I'll just bring you
09:22:15 up to date on what information that I have been
09:22:18 provided.
09:22:20 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, I thought this issue came up
09:22:23 recently because we were concerned about some of the
09:22:27 problems in the lots, some of those clubs and the
09:22:33 crime that was occurring.
09:22:35 Isn't that how this came up?
09:22:38 >> Yes.
09:22:40 >> So my question for you, Ms. Moreda, is the yellow
09:22:42 parking outlines on the map.

09:22:44 Are those all temporary parking lots, or are they --
09:22:48 >>> Parking lots where there was money collected over
09:22:50 the weekend for parking.
09:22:52 >>MARY MULHERN: So that's both permanent and
09:22:55 temporary?
09:22:56 >>> Yes.
09:22:56 It is not indicating which are interim versus Central
09:23:01 Parking lots.
09:23:02 >> And the interim lots get five years?
09:23:04 Is that it?
09:23:06 >>GLORIA MOREDA: Once approved, and the code allows
09:23:08 for interim lots to operate for five years.
09:23:11 At the end of the five years, they can ask for a
09:23:13 one-year extension.
09:23:14 But beyond that, they have to then come in for parking
09:23:21 status which would require the paving of the parking
09:23:23 lot, and improvements to that higher level.
09:23:27 An interim lot only can stay as grass.
09:23:30 I think they do have to pay for their handicapped
09:23:33 parking requirement, and minimal landscaping along the
09:23:37 perimeter.
09:23:38 But once you become that permit status, you have to

09:23:41 pay -- you have to comply with chapter 13 landscape
09:23:43 requirements, in the Ybor area you are talking about
09:23:47 SWFWMD requirements for water retention, if the parcel
09:23:52 is large.
09:23:52 Those standards would then be triggered.
09:23:56 >> Well, as you talk about.
09:24:02 About the code that seems like a long time, five
09:24:04 years, possibly six years.
09:24:06 That might need to be shortened and also the
09:24:08 possibilities of, you know, much less, one year, two
09:24:16 year, and I would say also, as Mr. Caetano said,
09:24:19 putting something in there that would require if you
09:24:21 are in code violation, you should be able to have that
09:24:26 permit revoked.
09:24:27 I mean, I don't know if that's a possibility legally.
09:24:30 But that might cut down on the problem.
09:24:35 >> To answer in a nutshell councilwoman Mulhern's
09:24:43 question, several years ago several council members
09:24:45 received complaints with regard to interim parking lot
09:24:47 where they had stated that they had paid their parking
09:24:51 fee but when they returned at the night in Ybor City
09:24:53 they found their car had been towed and they were

09:24:56 looking to council for some sort of redress or some
09:24:58 way to address that issue.
09:25:05 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Many years, and four scores ago, in
09:25:08 fact they called.
09:25:11 You probably recall the mayor's car was towed.
09:25:16 >> Yes.
09:25:17 Nonconsensual.
09:25:18 [ Laughter ]
09:25:20 >> Or caught in the shuffle.
09:25:21 Don't know which.
09:25:22 But I remember that.
09:25:24 So ten years later, we are back to square 1-A and I
09:25:28 understand that.
09:25:30 I think the extension of time was to allow those
09:25:34 individuals that were doing that time for business to
09:25:38 gather the funds necessary to pave their lots and
09:25:41 landscape their lots.
09:25:43 And I agree that ten years is a lot longer than five
09:25:47 or six.
09:25:48 And it's just fair and it should be addressed.
09:25:51 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So what I would like to do is move
09:25:55 in 90 days we get a report back on the status of these

09:26:02 unpaved lots.
09:26:03 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:26:07 Mr. Dingfelder.
09:26:07 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: And then I want to make another
09:26:11 motion.
09:26:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You want a detailed status for
09:26:13 identifying each lot and what each lot status is in
09:26:16 terms of, you know, where they are and are they legal,
09:26:20 are they not legal, are they conforming, are they not
09:26:23 conforming?
09:26:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes.
09:26:25 And if they are nonconforming when they would need to
09:26:28 come into conformance.
09:26:29 And then in terms of if they are nonconforming, and
09:26:33 they haven't done anything, when we will begin to take
09:26:36 some action.
09:26:38 That's one motion.
09:26:40 Then I will do another motion.
09:26:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Another question on the motion?
09:26:45 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Do you know if there's a sales
09:26:47 tax on parking in a parking lot?
09:26:50 >>GLORIA MOREDA: No, I don't.

09:26:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: You don't.
09:26:53 Can you find that out?
09:26:54 The times I have been down there it seems like a money
09:26:56 pit, handing out cash and you get a little piece of
09:26:58 paper, and doesn't look like there's any
09:27:02 accountability there.
09:27:03 And maybe we need to set up a system where they get
09:27:06 their tickets from City Hall, some sort of printed
09:27:09 ticket, and hand this to the patron that's going to be
09:27:12 using that parking lot.
09:27:14 Because I think there's a lot of so-called money under
09:27:18 the table there.
09:27:19 That's the way I am going to put it.
09:27:20 >>GLORIA MOREDA: I will look into that.
09:27:24 But in terms of the tax part of it, I'm really
09:27:29 focusing on the zoning aspect of the issue.
09:27:31 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.
09:27:33 Thank you.
09:27:33 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:27:34 (Motion carried).
09:27:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just spoke with Jason Arcuri
09:27:44 about this issue.

09:27:47 It turned out that it was also on our city lots and
09:27:51 his concern was that we don't have enough personnel,
09:27:53 not just strictly around, but stationing themselves on
09:27:59 the city lots and surface lots behind the city lots,
09:28:10 between midnight and three.
09:28:11 And based on the fact that we have had issues with it,
09:28:14 I would like to request that parking -- the parking
09:28:17 department, I guess they provide the security
09:28:19 personnel, report back to council on our meeting on --
09:28:24 is it the 23rd? -- on what the status security is
09:28:29 on those two lots, with an encouragement that they
09:28:33 don't have people drive through, that they have
09:28:37 somebody stationed there for those three hours.
09:28:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:28:41 (Motion carried).
09:28:44 We go to item number 2.
09:28:52 >>DAVID SMITH: I guess that falls to me, David Smith,
09:28:57 city attorney.
09:28:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nobody else gets up on this one.
09:29:02 >>DAVID SMITH: I get stuck in the front.
09:29:04 Let me start by giving you background.
09:29:06 I know several of you have been here and through this

09:29:09 discussion before but others have not.
09:29:11 What you received recently, I understand, was
09:29:13 essentially for lack of a better term was -- what you
09:29:16 got was all the information in the system regarding
09:29:19 possible liens and let me make sure he would correct
09:29:22 some of the information, to at least help you
09:29:25 understand some of the context. The of $66 million
09:29:28 figure included homestead property. The Constitution
09:29:31 forbids, does not allow us to foreclose on homestead
09:29:35 property so that number is irrelevant for any
09:29:37 consideration of foreclosure and collection.
09:29:39 The number that you got that is the better selling
09:29:43 point is the $43 million number which of course is not
09:29:46 a small number either.
09:29:47 But let me caution you against considering that in the
09:29:49 accounts receivable, because it isn't.
09:29:51 What it essentially is, is a composite of all of the
09:29:56 fines that have been assessed and have accrued and
09:29:59 have continued to accrue what really should be
09:30:05 retained.
09:30:06 Some of these liens are very old liens and are not
09:30:10 collectible.

09:30:11 Some of the liens have accrued, whether it's $100 a
09:30:16 day or whatever the number happens to be.
09:30:19 so we have properties that have fines in excess of
09:30:21 100, 200, $250,000, and worth something like 5 or
09:30:27 $10,000.
09:30:28 Unfortunately the way this process has to work in
09:30:29 order to be effective is you need to have title
09:30:33 information.
09:30:34 And the process proceeds as it does without doing a
09:30:39 title report on every piece of property.
09:30:41 And that's cost effective, because ownership can cost
09:30:45 anywhere from 250 to $500.
09:30:48 So sometimes liens accrue on properties that are not
09:30:52 going to be collective.
09:30:54 In a review of the data that Ernie and I got the other
09:30:57 day, I think it was either Tuesday or Wednesday,
09:31:00 something like ask $340,000 worth of the liens we
09:31:04 looked at on just the first couple of pages were
09:31:07 against FDOT property.
09:31:08 Well, we don't foreclose on the state either.
09:31:11 So the problem is -- and I think you may have read my
09:31:15 comments in the paper -- is one of getting the right

09:31:17 information, and that is absolutely essential.
09:31:19 And we need to develop a process that goes through all
09:31:23 of the various sources and sorts it out.
09:31:27 I think you may have noted the county with their $51
09:31:30 million figure expects that maybe 5% of that or 2.5
09:31:33 million is -- excuse me, 2.5 million.
09:31:38 No.
09:31:38 Yes.
09:31:40 My math is off and my head is fuzzy.
09:31:43 What we are going to do, if I had a discussion with
09:31:45 Darrell Smith and Santiago Corrada, this is an
09:31:50 endeavor that expands over the departments.
09:31:52 Code enforcement, Santiago department, they are
09:31:55 literally the people who go in the field, find the
09:31:58 problem, cite them, bring back information about the
09:32:01 property.
09:32:02 Then that information is inputted into the system.
09:32:08 Therein lies most of the problem.
09:32:09 Those of you who are here remember we had the Hanson
09:32:13 solution.
09:32:13 Hanson was a software company that was creating code
09:32:17 that would help us do this much more efficiently.

09:32:19 Unfortunately, that never worked.
09:32:23 We had something like $800,000 into the contract and
09:32:27 the system failed.
09:32:28 We were able to obtain all of that money back.
09:32:31 Gary glassman, Darrell Smith and I worked on that and
09:32:35 we are very happy to have that back.
09:32:36 But the problem was that data was not being inputted
09:32:40 while the system was going to be implemented.
09:32:42 So you had a lot of data that didn't get inputted
09:32:45 because why input it twice?
09:32:47 You have some data that wasn't going to be corrected,
09:32:49 because they were going to correct it when they put it
09:32:51 into the new system.
09:32:52 So you have a quagmire that was not God to begin with
09:32:56 that got even worse.
09:32:58 The real question is what are we going to do about it?
09:33:01 That's what you want to know, what is the solution?
09:33:03 The solution is that we are going to take the property
09:33:07 that's identified in the $43 million figure, and
09:33:10 there's no other way to do it other than to go do it.
09:33:15 And take those liens that have attached like the
09:33:18 school board or FDOT or whom of, those who may be

09:33:21 exempt, school boards and others, those that may be
09:33:24 exempt and take them out of there.
09:33:25 Another thing that we need to do is quit accruing
09:33:28 liens at the rate of $100 a day on a piece of property
09:33:31 that's worth $10,000 because it overstates the number,
09:33:34 which causes problems.
09:33:35 Obviously, when we are in a tight budget cycle it
09:33:39 looks like we have $43 million that's going
09:33:42 uncollected, that would appear to be a travesty.
09:33:45 Unfortunately that's not a real number.
09:33:46 We need to have a real number.
09:33:48 You need to have a real number.
09:33:49 So the administration is going to be working on a
09:33:51 system that will give us a real number.
09:33:53 So I think we have a solution in the offing.
09:33:55 It's not a very good situation.
09:33:58 But that's pretty much where we are.
09:34:01 One of the problems is, the process is cumbersome.
09:34:05 Unlike a mortgage foreclosure where you have an
09:34:09 indebtedness and essentially all you have to do is
09:34:11 establish it hasn't been paid.
09:34:12 When we go to foreclose these code liens the first

09:34:15 thing that's done is I took care of the problem, the
09:34:18 code enforcement officer told me I was okay, why are
09:34:20 we here?
09:34:22 Guess what that does.
09:34:24 Three minutes, I'll stop.
09:34:25 No.
09:34:26 What that does is generates a fact issue.
09:34:28 Those of you who are lawyers, I guess, John, you are
09:34:30 the only lawyer now.
09:34:31 But that creates a fact issue which can require a
09:34:33 trial.
09:34:34 You can't get a summary judgment when you have a fact
09:34:36 issue.
09:34:37 So it's not like a foreclosure mill.
09:34:39 And I need to -- my law firm when I had a private
09:34:43 firm, we used to do foreclosures.
09:34:45 It was a lot easier.
09:34:46 We filed those things every day.
09:34:48 Here, you have to make specific allegations regarding
09:34:50 the property, once you get the title report, and you
09:34:53 identify the lien or you are going to foreclose, you
09:34:56 need to make sure you identify the nature of the code

09:34:59 breech and how it's come to be a fine and then you may
09:35:03 have to defend that actually in front of a judge.
09:35:05 And the last component of the foreclosure problem is
09:35:10 judges don't particularly like these things.
09:35:14 Sometimes look at our code liens as not warranting a
09:35:18 forfeiture of property.
09:35:19 We are working on that problem.
09:35:21 We have taken one foreclosure to fruition.
09:35:26 We foreclosed.
09:35:27 The problem is the debtor went into bankruptcy.
09:35:29 And the bankruptcy which is winding its way through
09:35:33 that.
09:35:33 When need to get to try to get the property owner out
09:35:37 of bankruptcy. Anyway, maybe more information than
09:35:40 you want.
09:35:41 The point is the list, what does it say and what can
09:35:44 we do with it?
09:35:44 The list you have unfortunately is not very useful for
09:35:48 the reasons I explained.
09:35:49 The administration is working on getting you a list
09:35:52 that will allow the legal department to more
09:35:54 effectively pursue its remedies.

09:35:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.
09:35:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, David.
09:36:00 What I'm curious about is, and it's hard to tell from
09:36:04 the article per se, and I haven't seen the report
09:36:06 itself.
09:36:06 But I don't know if it would be enlightening or not.
09:36:09 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: It won't fit on your desk.
09:36:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I heard it's pretty large.
09:36:16 What I'm confused is when you talk about liens, in the
09:36:19 process, okay, we just had one of these in my law
09:36:24 office and I did some research associated with that.
09:36:26 But in the process basically the code enforcement
09:36:28 issues an order, and that certified order is then
09:36:32 turned into after 90 days, then turned -- you file as
09:36:37 a claim of lien, filed as a claim of lien on the
09:36:41 property.
09:36:41 Then after 90 days you can then file the foreclosure.
09:36:44 That's the basic stuff in the statute.
09:36:46 What I'm wondering about is when we talk about, let's
09:36:50 say, the $43 million, do we automatically file claims
09:36:57 of liens when we have the order from the Code
09:36:59 Enforcement Board?

09:37:03 Because my point being, and you can help me on this,
09:37:06 David, because you're a dirt lawyer and I'm not, my
09:37:11 question is, as long as you have that claim of lien
09:37:13 sitting on property, okay, you don't necessarily even
09:37:16 have to foreclose because eventually when that
09:37:19 property is sold, that claim of lien has some value,
09:37:23 whoever is going to try and transfer title and get a
09:37:26 title search going to pop up and they are going to
09:37:29 have to try to come to us to deal with it, is that
09:37:32 correct?
09:37:33 >>> That is absolutely correct.
09:37:34 And dirt lawyer is simply a real estate lawyer.
09:37:45 [ Laughter ]
09:37:45 That is a large part then sufficient, because the
09:37:49 foreclosure process is cumbersome and expensive, and
09:37:53 we are doing it primarily to make sure people know we
09:37:56 mean business.
09:37:58 Ernie can give you a little more on that.
09:38:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: But I think we need to get
09:38:04 information back to the council because it is very a
09:38:06 large to -- alarming to us and to the community when
09:38:09 you see those numbers superficially.

09:38:13 You know, we need to get information back.
09:38:15 Does it suffice just to have that lien on there?
09:38:19 How much money does that generate, not just money, but
09:38:21 how many claims of lien do we clear each year through
09:38:25 that process quantitatively, you know?
09:38:30 That's the kind of information that I think is really
09:38:32 important.
09:38:33 And if we do have to send this thing over to the
09:38:38 community then we should be more aggressive on the
09:38:40 foreclosure.
09:38:41 I know we started talking about this about three
09:38:43 yourself ago and you guys were going to beef up that
09:38:46 department and I'm sure you have with a paralegal and
09:38:51 maybe an additional attorney to do that but I really
09:38:53 think we need some updates on that.
09:38:55 And I don't know.
09:38:58 I don't want to volunteer for too much, but I think
09:39:00 this might come under the realm of Finance Committee,
09:39:03 which I chair, and I can be glad to work with you on
09:39:07 that to funnel that information back to council.
09:39:09 >>DAVID SMITH: Be happy to do that.
09:39:13 And by way of context, for the last four years that we

09:39:15 have, and let me go back just a second for history.
09:39:19 When we got here, there had been a policy adopted by
09:39:21 the prior mayor. The prior mayor's policy was, you
09:39:24 pay $250 if you are a homestead property, 500 if you
09:39:28 are nonhomestead property.
09:39:31 Whether you paid it 90 days after, 120 days after, or
09:39:34 20 years after.
09:39:35 So essentially they use entirely the lien on the
09:39:40 property, when you sell it, you will pay us to get
09:39:42 your lien released and it was a number that wasn't
09:39:45 threatening so most people would come in and pay their
09:39:47 250 or $500.
09:39:49 We cannot foreclose on homestead property.
09:39:52 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Lien homestead property.
09:39:57 I wonder if we do.
09:39:59 >>> We feel a lien on it.
09:40:01 We just don't foreclose on it.
09:40:03 >>> It gets recorded but that lien cannot be
09:40:07 foreclosed on homestead property.
09:40:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: As long as it stays homesteaded.
09:40:11 >>> Correct.
09:40:12 If it transfers, the law is the transfer is free and

09:40:15 clear, that Code Enforcement Board lien, if it's
09:40:19 homestead.
09:40:22 >>DAVID SMITH: Essentially exempt from judgment. The
09:40:24 only way you can lose your homestead is by consensual
09:40:29 lien, a mortgage.
09:40:31 We encourage the mayor to have a sliding scale.
09:40:34 Given the 250 for a period of time, make it 500 for a
09:40:38 period of time, but have it escalate so that people
09:40:40 wouldn't sit on these liens forever.
09:40:44 And she did that.
09:40:45 And it's a fairly mild.
09:40:47 But after a year it starts to double and can pretty
09:40:50 quickly get up to a big number but that has caused
09:40:52 people to pay their liens, which is the point.
09:40:55 And let me give you an example.
09:40:57 In 2004 total collections were 614,000.
09:40:59 When I got here, when we encouraged the new policy.
09:41:02 The next year, fiscal year 2005, it was $820,000.
09:41:07 In fiscal 2006 it was 1,321,000.
09:41:12 So if you were to apply that 5% number to a realistic,
09:41:15 not the 43 million but maybe something closer to that
09:41:18 between 3 and 5, you can see we are pretty close to

09:41:21 the ballpark.
09:41:22 So I think we are doing that.
09:41:24 And the last thing I'll tell you -- and you are
09:41:26 absolutely right, John, that is how the process works.
09:41:29 That's when it gets to the point where we look at the
09:41:31 property to decide who to foreclose on.
09:41:33 And the only thing we did rather than take the little
09:41:36 old lady to the wood shed, we asked code to identify
09:41:39 the most egregious offenders.
09:41:41 People who were scofflaws, played the system, they
09:41:46 would get their fine, they would get their citation,
09:41:48 they would get the order and cure it before the lien,
09:41:53 and basically play the system.
09:41:54 So we were trying to go after those kinds of people.
09:41:58 Compliant being the objective, not taking the property
09:42:00 back.
09:42:02 But for the people that were really working the system
09:42:04 we wanted to try to go after those people with
09:42:06 foreclosure.
09:42:07 So code enforcement had H to identify those people for
09:42:10 us.
09:42:10 All we see is what they send us.

09:42:12 So they went through the process of identifying those
09:42:15 types of candidates.
09:42:16 That's just the first step.
09:42:18 After that, you have to get title work because you
09:42:21 have to file a foreclosure complaint and you have to
09:42:23 know who to name.
09:42:24 And you can only foreclose -- I know this is
09:42:28 scintillating stuff but the devil is in the details
09:42:31 and that process takes awhile.
09:42:32 Then we need to file the complaint and we need to
09:42:35 serve it.
09:42:35 Sometimes these are ab ten -- absentee owners so we
09:42:40 have to get a process server in Wyoming, wherever they
09:42:44 might be, because you can't take the owner's property
09:42:46 without noticing due process.
09:42:48 I just want you to understand it's not quite as simple
09:42:51 as it appears.
09:42:51 And then I already told you what happened sometimes
09:42:54 when we get to court.
09:42:55 And we have some pre-trials set.
09:42:58 Downtown typically have pre-trials in foreclosure
09:43:01 action.

09:43:02 You prove they didn't pay, they foreclose, end of
09:43:05 story.
09:43:06 It's a different ballgame here.
09:43:07 I may have given you more information than you want
09:43:09 but I hope you have a better context where we are and
09:43:11 the administration will be back with some better
09:43:13 numbers so you can understand the true nature of the
09:43:17 problem.
09:43:17 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Smith and Mr. Mullet did a
09:43:22 great job of getting all this stuff together, and when
09:43:25 I got a call from the newspaper -- because I was
09:43:27 originally told it was about $21 million, and I didn't
09:43:31 know the report was out, and I was told it was $66
09:43:38 million.
09:43:38 And I think the first thing we need to do, we need to
09:43:42 get a program similar to that Hampton program so that
09:43:46 we can interact with the property appraiser's office
09:43:48 and perhaps the clerk of the district court here who
09:43:51 takes all the recordings, and looking at some of these
09:43:55 outstanding debts.
09:43:56 Here's one for 11700.
09:43:59 The owner name has been changed.

09:44:01 In other words, they sold the property.
09:44:02 So that wipes out that lien if it was homesteaded.
09:44:07 >>DAVID SMITH: If it was homesteaded, right.
09:44:11 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I said originally I don't want to
09:44:13 attach homeowners who are homesteaded but in looking
09:44:16 at this report we don't need a code enforcement
09:44:20 bureau, if our policemen are out there giving tickets
09:44:22 on the highway for speeding and they never go to the
09:44:25 court, they are going to keep on driving.
09:44:27 There's no penalty until they are brought in on a
09:44:30 summons or a warrant.
09:44:32 We need something that's going to be strict.
09:44:34 I mean, some of these figures, one of them is 610,000.
09:44:38 And I was told that's a parking lot.
09:44:42 That's why I asked that question of Ms. Moreda.
09:44:45 That's a parking lot.
09:44:46 They shouldn't be in business.
09:44:47 But I know we'll get to the bottom of it.
09:44:51 This report will probably be cut in a third, because a
09:44:54 lot of them are public property, like Florida highway
09:45:01 bought some of it, school district, and it's just
09:45:04 tremendous.

09:45:04 And I know we'll get to the bottom of it.
09:45:06 And with that system, we'll have a better handle on
09:45:10 it.
09:45:10 Because right now we have no handle at all.
09:45:13 >> You are absolutely correct.
09:45:14 And the key here is, Ernie works here, goes to court,
09:45:19 comes back here.
09:45:19 He doesn't look at the property.
09:45:20 We need somebody to tell us when we have a property
09:45:24 like that, that's a parking lot, for example, that if
09:45:28 it's an egregious violator, so that we know that
09:45:31 property needs to be on the list for foreclosure.
09:45:34 Then we need to do the title work to find out if we
09:45:37 can.
09:45:39 >>> You're absolutely correct.
09:45:40 It's a complicated communication issue as well.
09:45:42 >> One follow-up like I told Ernie yesterday.
09:45:44 I think Ernie makes $150,000 a year.
09:45:48 >> He wishes.
09:45:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: So I wouldn't want to see Ernie
09:45:53 or anybody in your legal department tied up to
09:45:55 something like this.

09:45:56 Perhaps we can get bounty hunters if you want to call
09:46:00 them that, outside people.
09:46:01 I understand we have done that in the past.
09:46:03 And perhaps maybe we can get somebody that's
09:46:07 aggressive, that's going to work instead of having
09:46:09 some of your staff employed doing this.
09:46:12 >>DAVID SMITH: We have done that in the past.
09:46:15 And one of the problems we had, they basically work on
09:46:17 a contingency.
09:46:21 For example, in this instance where it was a million
09:46:23 three for last year, unfortunately, Ernie doesn't make
09:46:26 150.
09:46:27 >> I realize that.
09:46:28 >>> But with two parallels collecting a million three
09:46:32 it costs us a lot less than a million three.
09:46:35 >> I understand.
09:46:35 >>> And the other problem is the entity that we hire
09:46:38 comes to us with the information so we are stuck with
09:46:40 the same problem.
09:46:41 We need to solve the information problem.
09:46:43 We are making progress.
09:46:45 But it needs to have a better solution.

09:46:47 And then I think the system will work a lot better.
09:46:50 But we are not opposed positive to it.
09:46:52 If we believe it will be more efficient and more
09:46:54 effective to go outside, then we can certainly do
09:46:56 that.
09:46:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I understand yesterday we had 100
09:46:59 cases before code enforcement and only 20 of them
09:47:02 showed up.
09:47:03 So we need better enforcement.
09:47:07 Because people know nothing is going to happen to them
09:47:09 and that's why this report is so humongous.
09:47:13 And this is what we need.
09:47:14 Thank you, Mr. Smith.
09:47:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder has one more for you,
09:47:19 Mr. Smith.
09:47:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We'll talk follow-along in terms of
09:47:24 time tables and reports back and that sort of thing.
09:47:26 I'll look for a little guidance from you on that.
09:47:30 The other thing, David, I think part of this problem
09:47:32 is, the volume, you know, somebody said that six-inch
09:47:36 tall stack of paper or something like that, to list
09:47:39 these things. The volume is so daunting, okay, that

09:47:42 even with three people full time looking at it,
09:47:45 working on it, you know, it's got to be just crazy.
09:47:48 So I think if we have a plan, and at least we are
09:47:54 working on the most recent ones, and then, you know,
09:47:57 if we have a good plan and we are enforcing the most
09:48:00 recent ones the last two or three years, whatever,
09:48:03 then as long as we continue that over the next four or
09:48:06 five years, you know, we'll be in good shape.
09:48:09 I think we look at this huge daunting mess from ten
09:48:14 years back, you know, I can understand why we get
09:48:18 frustrated and spin our wheels.
09:48:20 >>DAVID SMITH: We need to get the current data, data
09:48:25 that's too old to do anything with is irrelevant.
09:48:28 And we do have a system.
09:48:29 It is working.
09:48:33 It's a regular process now, where code enforcement
09:48:36 identifies property.
09:48:37 It goes to a foreclosure committee.
09:48:39 It goes to real estate once the properties have been
09:48:42 selected for foreclosure.
09:48:43 Real estate gives us the information we need to
09:48:46 foreclose.

09:48:47 Sometimes, it comes back from real estate, and two of
09:48:50 the ten properties that are identified end up being
09:48:52 homestead.
09:48:56 The information process is difficult.
09:48:57 But we are progressing.
09:49:00 It seems very slow, and it is, but I think we will be
09:49:03 able to accelerate this as we get better information.
09:49:06 >> Well, Mr. Hart comes back to us with a monthly
09:49:10 report.
09:49:11 I'm thinking every 90 days we get some updates on
09:49:14 this?
09:49:15 >>DAVID SMITH: That's a good idea.
09:49:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Caetano?
09:49:20 Every 90 days, see how we are progressing on that?
09:49:24 >> I would say so.
09:49:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I guess my concern is -- and Mr.
09:49:29 Caetano stated about getting, what do you call it,
09:49:34 outside firm, agency to take a look at that now.
09:49:37 I know what you're saying in terms of staff and all
09:49:39 that.
09:49:40 But better to collect some money than no money.
09:49:45 That's where I am.

09:49:47 You have $43 million out -- million out there and I
09:49:51 understand what you are saying, and you don't have the
09:49:53 staff to do the time, or if you have someone, outside
09:49:58 agency, law firm or whatever, that can do that, even
09:50:01 if they get up there or whatever, it's best to collect
09:50:05 some of those dollars as opposed to not having any
09:50:08 dollars, like we have now pretty much when you say we
09:50:11 got 43 million.
09:50:13 I realize collecting a million and all that.
09:50:15 But still that's opportunity for more.
09:50:16 Secondly, I know the county got into the same
09:50:20 discussion several years ago, and you may want to talk
09:50:23 with them about what system they are using.
09:50:26 We went to an outside firm at one time.
09:50:29 So you may want to look at that.
09:50:34 >>> We would love to have your computer system.
09:50:37 It works a lot better.
09:50:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: One quick question.
09:50:41 Are we precluded from using public shame as a method
09:50:44 of encouraging people to pay?
09:50:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Flowing?
09:50:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I mean if people are a slumlord and

09:50:53 allow their properties to be in constant disrepair, I
09:50:56 think the community standards and making people aware
09:50:58 that these people ever egregiously noncompliant is
09:51:03 something we can do.
09:51:03 I'm asking legally if we can do that.
09:51:05 >>DAVID SMITH: The limitation would be the limit aces
09:51:08 contained in the collections act.
09:51:12 I have not looked at that law in about ten years but I
09:51:14 know there are some limitations.
09:51:16 You may have noticed in clubs -- they don't have a
09:51:20 gunning list anymore, now.
09:51:22 Fred Johnson, you haven't paid, those kinds of things.
09:51:25 And, unfortunately, I suspect we are very limited in
09:51:27 what we can do but we'll look at it.
09:51:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to make a motion.
09:51:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano?
09:51:33 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Perhaps the St. Pete Times could
09:51:35 take some of the higher offenders and put their name
09:51:38 and address and what they owe, being that they are so
09:51:41 interested in this.
09:51:41 And bring somebody to the table.
09:51:43 >>DAVID SMITH: Nothing exempts the press from

09:51:49 exercising their first amendment rights.
09:51:54 >> When I see the press I'll tell her.
09:51:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like to make a motion the
09:51:58 legal department and administration get back with us
09:52:00 90 days from now and every 90 days henceforth for
09:52:04 awhile, with updates on this issue, and we'll see how
09:52:07 we are progressing.
09:52:10 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Dingfelder, the
09:52:11 administration make provisions to have some money to
09:52:15 buy a system at this budget time coming up.
09:52:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we take that as a
09:52:25 separate motion?
09:52:26 My motion is pretty simple and straightforward.
09:52:28 Let's deal with that separately.
09:52:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay.
09:52:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:52:31 (Motion carried).
09:52:32 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I'd like to ask the
09:52:33 administration to try to put a package together to buy
09:52:38 something similar to the Hansen system that they were
09:52:42 buying for $650,000.
09:52:45 Perhaps we can have a better handle on this

09:52:48 collection, and the administration of these fines.
09:52:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
09:52:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:52:55 (Motion carried).
09:52:56 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 3.
09:52:58 Mr. Rodriguez.
09:53:07 >>> Tony Rodriguez, here to speak to you on item 3
09:53:10 this morning, which is the issue of the bumps on
09:53:13 Bayshore Boulevard, and feasibility of an inexpensive
09:53:17 way of repairing them.
09:53:20 By way of reminder, Bayshore Boulevard is a county
09:53:24 roadway within the city limits of Tampa.
09:53:26 And while the city has an agreement with the county to
09:53:32 perform typical maintenance on the roadway, the repair
09:53:37 in this case exceeds the scope for this typical
09:53:41 maintenance agreement.
09:53:43 So we are working with Hillsborough County on this
09:53:46 issue.
09:53:47 And they are in the process developing a scope of work
09:53:50 to use an epoxy base system along the joints of the
09:53:57 slabs.
09:53:58 And the examination of the roadway actually slows the

09:54:02 slabs themselves are in very good shape.
09:54:04 Why we get the bunching is at the connection of the
09:54:07 slabs.
09:54:07 So in the past, and if you have grown up like I have
09:54:12 in Tampa, you always remember that kind of clackity
09:54:16 clack going down Bayshore.
09:54:18 That's something those always been there.
09:54:20 In the past, the public works department has tried
09:54:25 kind of an asphalt remedy to this.
09:54:27 Asphalt does not adhere very well to these concrete
09:54:30 slabs.
09:54:31 So the county believes that they are going to get a
09:54:33 better result out of this epoxy-based system.
09:54:37 So they are currently preparing a scope of work.
09:54:40 They are looking at a start date of approximately
09:54:44 November, December of this year, to get the
09:54:46 construction going.
09:54:48 So we are moving along on this issue, and hopefully
09:54:52 will have the solution to it.
09:54:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions?
09:54:55 Mr. Dingfelder?
09:54:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Tony.

09:54:59 Do they grind down -- will they also grind down the
09:55:03 slabs where they meet?
09:55:05 I haven't been out there with a ruler but I'll bet
09:55:07 some of them are an inch or two high or low where they
09:55:10 are.
09:55:15 >>> Like I said the county is working on this specific
09:55:17 slope, if they deem that necessary they will most
09:55:21 likely be put into the work but for right now we kind
09:55:26 of discussed this epoxy to bridge the two slabs.
09:55:29 But if we do have that much of a differential I'm sure
09:55:32 they are going to have to come up with a different
09:55:34 method on a case-by-case basis.
09:55:36 >> How much will we be participating in that scoping?
09:55:40 >>> Oh, we will be integrally involved in working with
09:55:43 the county on that.
09:55:44 And the details of the scope become available, we will
09:55:50 certainly share them.
09:55:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:55:53 Item number 4.
09:55:54 Mr. Gregory Hart.
09:56:03 >>> Gregory Hart, manager minority business
09:56:06 development, here to update you on minority business

09:56:09 draft ordinance as relates to the disparity study.
09:56:12 Most recently, a draft of the ordinance has been
09:56:15 circulated on a couple of occasions by the law
09:56:18 department.
09:56:19 Most recently, my office has conducted an
09:56:22 administrative review of the draft.
09:56:25 This most recent draft included some updates based on
09:56:30 some legal opinions which the law department has been
09:56:33 reviewing and processing, and therefore my office, in
09:56:39 addition to other stakeholder departments like
09:56:42 purchasing and contract administration, has reviewed
09:56:45 this most recent draft, and provided our comments back
09:56:49 to Mr. Smith's office, and he is doing due diligence
09:56:52 on that.
09:56:54 And upon completion of this most recent circulated
09:56:58 draft, I would imagine that the law department will be
09:57:01 prepared to push that out for your review as well as
09:57:05 our stakeholder task force, external stakeholder task
09:57:08 force.
09:57:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Council members?
09:57:12 Chairman Scott?
09:57:16 >>THOMAS SCOTT: In terms of this report now, I look at

09:57:18 the date of this disparity study was April 2006.
09:57:26 From information based on the disparity report.
09:57:29 April 2006.
09:57:32 >>> That sounds about right, sir.
09:57:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, that's what it says, April 2006.
09:57:39 Since April 2006, how have we done?
09:57:41 I know we have an administrative order, right?
09:57:47 Two, our report on analysis or breakout, how many
09:57:51 projects in terms of total hours and how much of that
09:57:58 have MBEs and FDAs were awarded.
09:58:03 Follow what I'm asking for?
09:58:05 >>> Yes.
09:58:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And then lastly, Mr. Smith, on the
09:58:12 record, can you come forward, sir?
09:58:15 When can this council again expect us to get an
09:58:20 ordinance in terms of voting on the ordinance?
09:58:22 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:58:23 As Mr. Hart indicated, I went through Greg Spearman's
09:58:27 comments and his comments this week and I've made the
09:58:30 changes, most of the changes suggested by the
09:58:34 gentlemen, and that was, I believe, ready to go out
09:58:37 yesterday.

09:58:38 And I don't know that Greg got it.
09:58:40 In fact I don't think he has yet so I'll make sure he
09:58:42 has it.
09:58:43 I think we should get confirmation that's ready to
09:58:45 come to you for your review.
09:58:47 We would like to get it to you obviously before you
09:58:49 have a public meeting.
09:58:51 I was mentioning to you earlier, I'm hopeful that will
09:58:53 be no later than the end of the day Friday, which is
09:58:56 tomorrow.
09:58:57 And then I think what you are going to want to do is
09:59:01 we want to get the task force to have an opportunity
09:59:04 to view it.
09:59:05 And then you are going to probably want to have a
09:59:07 workshop, to have kind of free ranging discussion
09:59:11 before you start your public hearing process for
09:59:13 adoption.
09:59:14 So I don't know how long you want to -- how long that
09:59:19 process will take after you draft, say, tomorrow.
09:59:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My whole issue, though, is April 2006,
09:59:26 and this is August 2007, pretty much we are just
09:59:33 operating on, I guess, executive administrative order,

09:59:35 is that right?
09:59:37 >>> The effect of that would be the same as what the
09:59:39 ordinance proposes, that we are using an SBE program
09:59:42 to encourage the use of small business enterprises
09:59:46 which are predominantly benefiting minority and women
09:59:50 businesses.
09:59:50 So the consequence -- I understand why it takes so
09:59:54 long, and secondly what the impact in the interim.
09:59:57 I think the impact in the interim is minimal to
09:59:59 nonexistent because what you are going to ultimately
10:00:01 do when you adopt a new ordinance is you are going to
10:00:04 have a race and gender neutral ordinance for about 12
10:00:08 months. The executive order essentially does the same
10:00:10 thing.
10:00:11 But it's really important in my opinion that we get
10:00:13 that into an ordinance form so that people who want to
10:00:16 challenge can't say executive orders don't count.
10:00:19 So I don't think it will have much if any impact on
10:00:23 contracts.
10:00:26 As far as the additional time, unfortunately, this is
10:00:28 a heavily contested area.
10:00:30 We have a recent supreme court opinion.

10:00:32 But I think now we ought to be ready, this ought to be
10:00:35 pushed out, and start the community process.
10:00:38 There's a lot of discussion that needs to be had.
10:00:41 There's a lot of comment that needs to be included.
10:00:43 So hopefully we are ready to start that process now.
10:00:45 >> And again, keep in mind, I know the issue is trying
10:00:52 to protect the city from being sued.
10:00:55 You know and I know people can sue you for any reason.
10:00:58 >>> That is correct.
10:00:59 >> So I don't want to keep this continuing because we
10:01:01 don't want the city to be sued.
10:01:03 Because in all probability they are going to be sued
10:01:07 anyway, and it's almost like football, the team, the
10:01:12 coach, as opposed to playing to win they play not to
10:01:18 lose.
10:01:25 I think we have to move this ordinance forward.
10:01:28 And the county, since 1989, had an ordinance in place
10:01:31 and tested and proven, stood the test in court.
10:01:34 So that's why I keep suggesting taking a look at the
10:01:37 county's, what they have.
10:01:40 Maybe some of that can be duplicated into the city.
10:01:44 Again, that's since 1989.

10:01:48 And it's been tested.
10:01:50 And it stood the test in court.
10:01:54 I just want to state that.
10:01:56 So Mr. Hart, again, you understand the information I
10:01:59 would like to have?
10:02:01 >>> Yes, sir.
10:02:02 >> So you can bring that back to us.
10:02:04 You come every month?
10:02:05 >>> Every month.
10:02:06 >> So next month, if I can get info, I would
10:02:10 appreciate it.
10:02:10 >>> Will do.
10:02:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, Mr. Hart.
10:02:14 Do number 8 since you are already up there.
10:02:19 >>> Number 8 is a dressing the draft program.
10:02:23 On June 21st at your council meeting there were
10:02:26 two contracts that were before you for approval which
10:02:29 you did, you did pass, and at that time, myself and
10:02:32 Mr. Spearman, spoke to you about the concept of Jack.
10:02:38 We also had an opportunity to informally meet with
10:02:41 each of you to explain the JOC program further.
10:02:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we dealt with that

10:02:47 adequately, anybody else has any further questions.
10:02:50 I'm comfortable that you explained this and this item
10:02:52 8 is redundant.
10:02:54 >>> Yes, sir.
10:02:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Cornerstone and Hayes?
10:03:04 >>> That's correct.
10:03:05 >> In Zephyrhills and Hayes is in Connecticut.
10:03:08 I remember discussing things with you.
10:03:10 And if I did the right information looking it up and I
10:03:13 remember discussing it, I said I'll get back with you
10:03:15 on June 11th of 2008.
10:03:21 >> I believe so.
10:03:22 >> Because those things carry a 4% program fee for the
10:03:25 computer system.
10:03:26 And 4% of $2 million is $80,000, if my figures are
10:03:29 right.
10:03:30 I want to see where the offset and cost is between the
10:03:33 additional 80,000 in expenditures or doing it the
10:03:36 old-fashioned way but I have no problem with the
10:03:41 program until I find out what's going on.
10:03:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to go back and make a motion
10:03:46 that the information I'm requesting, put that in the

10:03:49 form of a motion I think will be better.
10:03:56 (Motion carried).
10:03:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Speaking of motions on the Bayshore
10:03:58 Boulevard, Mr. Rodriguez indicated that they have more
10:04:04 information about 90 days from now, so let's get a
10:04:07 report back from Mr. Rodriguez on Bayshore Boulevard
10:04:09 and his work with the county on this issue in 90 days.
10:04:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is that a written report or
10:04:16 appearance?
10:04:17 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, an appearance, counsel.
10:04:21 >> Second.
10:04:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Just a question on that.
10:04:24 The county is working with, I guess, administration on
10:04:28 that issue.
10:04:29 One of the things I suggested to the mayor is they
10:04:32 want to consider updating that interlocal agreement,
10:04:34 too, because it took so long, and the cost of
10:04:39 maintaining the roads now will probably far exceed the
10:04:47 interlocal agreement.
10:04:47 So I suggested that to the mayor and you may want to
10:04:50 consider that, on all of those county roads coming to
10:04:52 the city, that the city maintained, and you may want

10:04:55 to go back and look at your local agreement.
10:04:57 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Administrator, public works, city
10:05:04 services.
10:05:05 Council member, that agreement actually has to be
10:05:07 updated every two years.
10:05:08 And we are in the process of doing exactly that right
10:05:11 now.
10:05:11 Thank you.
10:05:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
10:05:13 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
10:05:15 Opposed, Nay.
10:05:17 Item number 5, we want to continue to August 23.
10:05:26 (Motion carried).
10:05:28 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: Thank you for this opportunity to
10:05:29 just update you on the east-west road.
10:05:32 I think most of you are aware of the east-west road
10:05:35 project.
10:05:36 The east-west road would go from I-275 to commerce.
10:05:44 Then additionally there would be a bridge over I-75
10:05:47 which is the T city would build that would connect to
10:05:49 New Tampa Boulevard and then it would connect to Bruce
10:05:51 B. Downs.

10:05:54 Some time back, the city acquired the right-of-way for
10:05:58 that east-west road.
10:06:00 At that time, we had no idea how we were going to pay
10:06:03 for that construction.
10:06:04 But we acquired the right-of-way.
10:06:06 We acquired other properties that were necessary for
10:06:08 retention areas, and wetland mitigation, and we moved
10:06:13 forward with the permitting.
10:06:16 By that, I mean the IJR and PD and E which is an
10:06:22 environmental issue, and then a connection issue to
10:06:24 I-275.
10:06:26 We moved forward with the planning for both of those
10:06:29 documents.
10:06:30 We also were moving forward separately with the bridge
10:06:34 project.
10:06:37 As a result of the Crosstown, the expressway authority
10:06:43 coming forward with a public-private partnership that
10:06:46 could fund the east-west road, all of a sudden we had
10:06:49 a potential opportunity to have the east-west road
10:06:53 constructed.
10:06:54 That came along a lot sooner than we had anticipated
10:06:58 because we had anticipated that the bridge would be

10:07:00 built long before the east-west road.
10:07:04 In submitting our documents, our IJR and PD and E to
10:07:09 FDOT and federal highway administration, they
10:07:11 responded with comments and questions, and their
10:07:14 questions are, why hasn't it gone all the way over to
10:07:18 Bruce B. Downs?
10:07:19 We have met with federal highway folks.
10:07:21 We have written letters to them.
10:07:23 We have tried to convey to them that the situation --
10:07:27 again we have always thought the east-west road would
10:07:30 be built after the bridge.
10:07:31 We are building the bridge separately with city
10:07:34 dollars, not federal funds.
10:07:35 And again that the logical termini would be I-275 and
10:07:43 commerce.
10:07:43 They disagree.
10:07:45 We have now received a letter from them saying we
10:07:47 disagree, the termini needs to go all the way to Bruce
10:07:53 B. Downs.
10:07:53 I need to make you aware.
10:07:55 I have copies of my letters, the response that I will
10:07:58 put out in your boxes out there.

10:08:00 There will be again an impact on the time that we can
10:08:06 provide these permitting items.
10:08:09 We have been talking with the expressway authority, as
10:08:12 you know, in their RFP.
10:08:16 They have selected plenary, and they begin discussions
10:08:18 with plenary group to again build that east-west road.
10:08:23 Still lots of hurdles to go over.
10:08:25 We are not sure exactly how we are going to proceed at
10:08:28 this time.
10:08:28 We want to make sure we get in touch with FDOT and
10:08:31 make sure that they are still on board with us.
10:08:33 We need to make sure with FHWA, for example, that we
10:08:39 could modify our existing PD and E and not have to go
10:08:43 back to the beginning and start over.
10:08:44 So again I want to make you aware of where you are.
10:08:48 Again, the city has stepped up to the plate and done a
10:08:52 lot of work in this regard.
10:08:55 Again, acquiring that right-of-way is very difficult.
10:08:58 Again, we have got the other properties that are
10:09:00 needed.
10:09:01 We have moved forward.
10:09:03 These environmental studies, by the way, are in the

10:09:06 order of $2 million, and they have taken about four or
10:09:10 five years to do.
10:09:10 So again, it's pretty considerable what we have done
10:09:13 to this point.
10:09:15 And again, I can't tell you today exactly how we are
10:09:17 going to proceed forward.
10:09:19 But I want to make you aware of that.
10:09:21 And again I'll put copies of their letter, my letter
10:09:23 and actually have another sheet in that they're just
10:09:26 to show you what the city has done to this point.
10:09:28 And I'll put that in your box out here.
10:09:31 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you for giving us an update.
10:09:33 I believe that one of the environmental studies shows
10:09:37 that this is a really important area, and that the
10:09:40 plan that we are projecting to get over it is to so
10:09:45 we'll have as little disruption as possible to the
10:09:47 land underneath and I just want to hear from you that
10:09:50 that's still the way we would --
10:09:53 >>STEVE DAIGNAULT: That's correct.
10:09:54 There's a number of breached areas.
10:09:56 They are not going to be high bridges but bridging
10:09:59 wetlands.

10:10:00 >> The underlying wetlands as possible.
10:10:05 >>> Yes.
10:10:05 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Good.
10:10:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think there are two environmental
10:10:11 key issues because this does border the Cypress Creek
10:10:14 watershed, and the action network has spoken very
10:10:18 loudly about this.
10:10:21 But the other issue in addition to what Ms. Saul-Sena
10:10:23 raised about elevating is, is to ensure that this is a
10:10:27 non-stop road, that this is a road to get from point A
10:10:31 to point B, and nothing in between.
10:10:33 And I think -- and the plans I have seen have always
10:10:38 shown that.
10:10:39 But I think the legal language that would involve the
10:10:41 city eventually needs to be abundantly clear, that the
10:10:46 city is not going to participate unless that's a
10:10:50 guarantee forever, that this would just be a non-stop
10:10:53 road without any possibility of exists forever.
10:10:59 >>> I understand.
10:11:00 >> Is that the administration's understanding?
10:11:02 >>> That is my understanding, you are correct.
10:11:03 And if it were constructed by private company or by --

10:11:11 you never know what's going to happen but if it were
10:11:14 constructed by the Florida turnpike association, for
10:11:16 example, it would be a toll road.
10:11:18 So there would not be any connections on and off.
10:11:22 There's no other roadways out there.
10:11:24 We certainly can't build to the north of it.
10:11:26 So again, I think you have a pretty good expectation,
10:11:29 and we would say expectation at this time, it would go
10:11:34 from A to B and this would not be any other
10:11:37 intersections.
10:11:38 >> I just think the city does have a role.
10:11:40 I think we are deeding over land related to this, and
10:11:43 we definitely have strong interests.
10:11:46 >>> Absolutely.
10:11:46 >> And we'll be involved in this.
10:11:48 I think whatever document we do, just make sure that
10:11:51 we put those caveats in there, that we make sure that
10:11:54 it's significantly elevated throughout, and that it
10:11:57 has no opportunity forever in perpetuity for any type.
10:12:03 Thank you.
10:12:03 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Daignault, in the area of
10:12:06 white hall where the city bought those lots, off the

10:12:09 developer for retention ponds --
10:12:12 >>> Yes, sir.
10:12:13 >> Has there been any consideration for a wall behind
10:12:16 homes that are there?
10:12:19 >>> There has been discussion previously, both with
10:12:23 the plenary group about the folks who back up to where
10:12:29 the road will go, one near sand hill and that has been
10:12:37 the discussion.
10:12:40 It turns out like sidewalks half the people want them,
10:12:42 half don't, but it will have to be addressed, yes.
10:12:45 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Thank you.
10:12:46 >>CHAIRMAN: Item number 7.
10:12:49 We continue to August 23rd.
10:12:54 (Motion carried)
10:12:58 We have a resolution we need to pass.
10:13:01 >>THE CLERK: Number 9, they have submitted a
10:13:03 substitute.
10:13:05 I think that's the reason why this is continued.
10:13:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you have the substitute?
10:13:11 Make a motion on the new substitute motion.
10:13:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
10:13:15 >> Second.

10:13:15 (Motion carried).
10:13:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 10, a resolution.
10:13:21 We have a substitute?
10:13:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 10 and 11 are walking hand in
10:13:28 hand and I pulled these last week.
10:13:30 And I provided council with a copy of this memo, and
10:13:33 you subsequently got a memo from the administration
10:13:36 about their position.
10:13:42 I don't know what sequence we want to go.
10:13:45 I know Mr. Spearman is probably here, if he wants to
10:13:48 speak, he's welcome to.
10:13:49 If he doesn't, that's fine, too.
10:13:59 And I know Mr. Steenson has given up time with his
10:14:02 grandchildren to come speak to us as well.
10:14:06 I think he probably deserves the opportunity.
10:14:10 >>> Greg spearman --man, parks.
10:14:15 We have provided a response to item 10 and 11 on the
10:14:19 agenda today.
10:14:19 The concern is that we do not know whether or not the
10:14:22 data will be eligible for the tax credit, and even if
10:14:26 it were available for tax credit, what amount of the
10:14:29 tax credit on hybrid vehicles would actually come back

10:14:32 to the city.
10:14:33 That's one item that's in question.
10:14:35 Then to identify the tax credit eligibility to the
10:14:37 city in the bid documents.
10:14:40 In the bid documents we did not ask for that because
10:14:43 we were not aware of the tax credit at the time the
10:14:45 bids were issued.
10:14:46 And so now to ask the dealer to consider giving us a
10:14:49 tax credit, would, in a sense, be altering the bid
10:14:54 terms and conditions.
10:14:55 So we just don't think as a matter of good business
10:14:57 practice it's something we should do.
10:15:00 The other concern is, we really would not recommend
10:15:06 bidding these vehicles back out because that really
10:15:08 does present another problem for the city.
10:15:10 The manufacturer typically does not announce what the
10:15:15 cut-off date is going to be.
10:15:16 So if we were to reissue the bids, we do stand a
10:15:20 chance of getting next year's models as substantially
10:15:25 higher prices not to mention the fact we would have a
10:15:27 longer delivery time in getting the vehicles.
10:15:30 So based on those particular points we are strongly

10:15:32 encouraging council to go ahead and approve items 10
10:15:35 and 11 on today's agenda.
10:15:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
10:15:38 I want to start by complimenting Mr. Dingfelder for
10:15:41 his research.
10:15:42 And when I had an opportunity to speak with Darrell
10:15:44 Smith this morning about this issue, he said, well,
10:15:47 this might put us back a month and a half.
10:15:49 And I said, Mr. Smith, I brought this issue up over a
10:15:52 year ago that we should start buying hybrids.
10:15:55 I think if we need another month and a half to save
10:15:58 $24,000 I think it's worth it.
10:16:01 I think all the potential bidders recognize that the
10:16:04 city is looking for this $3,000 to be passed through,
10:16:06 that it will make it part of their contingency.
10:16:09 And I want to compliment Mr. Dingfelder and Mr.
10:16:12 Steenson for looking at this and bringing it back to
10:16:14 us.
10:16:15 And I would encourage my colleagues to reject this
10:16:19 item on the agenda and rebid it with the expectation
10:16:21 that we'll save some money.
10:16:23 >>MARY MULHERN: I agree with Linda 'n and John and I

10:16:26 also think it would be in the interest of whoever won
10:16:32 the bid, Bill Currie Ford?
10:16:37 Orville?
10:16:37 It would be in their interest to allow us to have
10:16:41 that, for them to apply for that tax credit for the
10:16:44 city in order for them to keep the bid.
10:16:47 So I don't see why they aren't going to want to work
10:16:52 with us, and ask for that tax credit.
10:16:59 Cat data cat the first three bidders
10:17:03 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: The first three bidders who were
10:17:05 apparently nonresponsive, do you have any inside scoop
10:17:08 on why nonresponsive?
10:17:11 >>> They didn't bid according to specifications.
10:17:16 I can't remember the third items but there were items
10:17:19 left out in the bid and that's actually an excellent
10:17:21 point, Mr. Caetano, because if we were to go back out
10:17:25 and we were to have a similar situation happen with if
10:17:29 the bids came back nonresponsive for whatever reason,
10:17:32 then we would still be faced with not having a
10:17:34 contract award.
10:17:35 So that is a possibility it could happen on a rebid.
10:17:40 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair. This has

10:17:43 nothing to do exactly with the bid.
10:17:44 It has a lot to do with the word "hybrid."
10:17:49 There is a credit or was a credit, and how that works
10:17:52 is that you buy a certain vehicle with a hybrid
10:17:57 ability or hybrid engine or hybrid mechanism.
10:18:01 The government, federal government, would like you
10:18:03 like a $3,000 tax credit at the end of the year when
10:18:07 you went to pay your taxes.
10:18:09 What happens here is a phenomenon that a city or
10:18:13 government doesn't pay tax through the federal
10:18:15 government, so therefore the questions that should be
10:18:17 asked are basically, is the dealer entitled to the
10:18:23 credit?
10:18:24 I don't have that as an answer.
10:18:27 I'm not in this business.
10:18:29 In fact I'm in very little businesses right now.
10:18:32 But when you look at it, of the $3,000 credit, at the
10:18:35 time of the bid, is the dealer participating in the
10:18:38 credit or not participating in the credit?
10:18:41 Or is the dealer, he or she entitled to credit or not
10:18:44 entitled to the credit because they are not the
10:18:46 consumer?

10:18:47 They were the seller.
10:18:48 So I think this is more than just a bidding thing.
10:18:50 It's something that has to be looked at, legally, to
10:18:53 determine in the future when the city goes out to bid
10:18:56 that this be made part of the bid presentation when
10:19:00 they go out, that it's specified very plainly what
10:19:05 happens when you bid for a hybrid.
10:19:07 If there's a rebate on not only the hybrid but any
10:19:09 other vehicle, who is entitled to the rebate?
10:19:12 Is it the seller?
10:19:13 Or is it the consumer?
10:19:14 And in this time the consumer happens to be the City
10:19:16 of Tampa.
10:19:19 If in fact -- and I am going to use hypothetical
10:19:23 numbers here -- if in fact the vehicle costs $30,000
10:19:26 and if in fact you multiply that by 5% increase from
10:19:30 one year to the next, that would be roughly $1500.
10:19:33 And if in fact you are buying eight vehicles, let say,
10:19:37 just for the thought of it, you multiply then eight
10:19:40 times 15, and you come out with about $12,000.
10:19:44 If in fact that's the case, then I understand that the
10:19:48 department that does this under the quite able

10:19:52 leadership would be making adjustments in the future
10:19:54 to understand what type of bidding process we have or
10:19:57 we don't have.
10:19:58 This comes down to expediency of the different changes
10:20:06 and the bid process.
10:20:07 Not that the bid process is incorrect, but that the
10:20:10 hybrid is a special animal to deal with, when you bid
10:20:14 out and you ask for the hybrid because of the rebates
10:20:16 that are involved.
10:20:17 So, therefore, I can count that of the seven council
10:20:23 members, three have spoken, that meaning that the city
10:20:25 would have to get 100% of the remaining four.
10:20:30 So I understand the problem that we have.
10:20:33 But I don't see a great loss of time or money based on
10:20:40 projected increases in the future, because of Mr.
10:20:43 Dingfelder's -- if Mr. Dingfelder is correct -- and we
10:20:46 don't know if he's correct, I agree with everything
10:20:48 that's been said, but let's determine first when this
10:20:50 is brought back here, who is entitled to the rebate,
10:20:54 if anyone is entitled, did that rebate become null and
10:21:00 void if you are not the consumer?
10:21:01 I don't know.

10:21:02 So these are questions that have to be asked between
10:21:05 Mr. Hart's department and the legal department to
10:21:08 determine the sources of the city as to how the
10:21:11 bidding process is going to be handled.
10:21:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I could?
10:21:21 I don't think it's a question.
10:21:22 Is it a question?
10:21:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No.
10:21:24 I just brought it up.
10:21:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I do have a question.
10:21:28 Mr. Steenson indicated that he had done some looking
10:21:30 at this issue.
10:21:31 And I would like to ask him what he found out.
10:21:36 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to make a motion.
10:21:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's not a motion, it's a question
10:21:40 to --
10:21:40 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to see if council --
10:21:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to waive the rules.
10:21:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Before you move to waive the rules.
10:21:49 Just like I asked Mr. Spearman a question or I might
10:21:52 ask Ms. Grimes a question, if she had knowledge in
10:21:54 this community, I'm not moving to waive the rules to

10:21:56 let him have his three minutes.
10:21:58 I'm asking him a specific question.
10:22:00 And --
10:22:02 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby?
10:22:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know if we ever dealt with
10:22:05 that specific issue in terms of the rules.
10:22:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It usually is not the case except
10:22:18 during a public hearing, at this point in time during
10:22:24 staff reports and unfinished business, I don't think
10:22:26 it was contemplated to take testimony from people
10:22:28 outside the staff, unless council wishes to do so.
10:22:32 I'll research it in the meantime.
10:22:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I second Mrs. Saul-Sena's motion.
10:22:42 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Generally, if a council permission or
10:22:47 commissioner wants to ask a question of someone in the
10:22:49 audience, they generally are allowed to do that,
10:22:51 unless we have a motion to prevent that from
10:22:55 happening.
10:22:56 Generally that's the rule.
10:22:57 I mean --
10:22:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, council.
10:23:00 This is why it is my strong opinion that agendaed

10:23:03 public comments should be taken first, because then
10:23:07 the public has an opportunity to make a comment before
10:23:11 council takes officials action.
10:23:12 You will be taking action on this.
10:23:14 You will be moving this resolution.
10:23:17 It is on your agenda today.
10:23:18 It is wholly appropriate for the public to be able to
10:23:20 speak to an agenda item, particularly a resolution,
10:23:23 before you vote on it.
10:23:24 That's why when I come back, I will be presenting you
10:23:26 with that alternative.
10:23:29 My strong suggestion to move the order of business to
10:23:31 allow agendaed public comments.
10:23:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
10:23:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have to agree and disagree on a
10:23:39 couple of fronts and let me explain. If you take
10:23:41 public comments in the beginning, and nothing is
10:23:45 heard, those individuals that are here leave, and then
10:23:48 we listen.
10:23:48 We make our decision without the public being here,
10:23:51 and the public is gone in most cases.
10:23:55 However, all we have to do to simplify, to meet all

10:23:58 the requirements, and I know Mr. Steenson, he's a
10:24:01 great individual, does fantastic work not only in his
10:24:04 neighborhood in, South Tampa but all over the city.
10:24:06 But let me say this.
10:24:07 It's my time to get even.
10:24:09 Not with Mr. Steenson.
10:24:11 When we go past 12, you have to have unanimous vote.
10:24:14 And I get shot down.
10:24:15 Well, guess what, I'm going to vote on this one and
10:24:17 they are going to get shot down, because I think Mr.
10:24:21 Steenson, all we have to do is hold 10 and 11 for a
10:24:24 minute, go back to public agenda, let Mr. Steenson
10:24:27 speak and we go back and everything is satisfied and
10:24:31 done properly.
10:24:32 But we don't think that far in advance.
10:24:33 So if we can do that, and we get the project done,
10:24:36 everybody is satisfied, we don't have to take a vote,
10:24:38 we don't have to embarrass each other, and it's done
10:24:41 properly.
10:24:42 That's my recommendation, Madam Chair.
10:24:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I withdraw my second.
10:24:46 I like that solution.

10:24:47 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to hold item number 10 and
10:24:50 11.
10:24:52 Would anyone in the public like to request a
10:24:54 legislative --
10:24:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are we doing 12?
10:24:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Not yet.
10:25:02 Reconsider legislation.
10:25:05 >>GINA GRIMES: Law firm of hill, ward, and Henderson,
10:25:09 here to request reconsideration of an item that was on
10:25:11 your agenda last Thursday.
10:25:13 I would like to hand out to you just the agenda page
10:25:17 that it was on, and then a copy of the item.
10:25:29 It was item 48 on your agenda last week, an item
10:25:31 related to a resolution to approve a contract for
10:25:36 construction of the Bayshore sidewalk project.
10:25:42 And the reason I'm here this morning, and the reason
10:25:44 that we were not here last week when this item was on
10:25:46 the agenda, and we request reconsideration, is because
10:25:50 we have been given some what I believe is inconsistent
10:25:53 and possibly even inaccurate information regarding
10:25:57 this matter.
10:25:59 I represent Harry and Linda Teasley.

10:26:01 They own a piece of property on the southern portion
10:26:04 of Bayshore Boulevard between coachman and Bayshore
10:26:07 court.
10:26:08 And they have been interested in the city Bayshore
10:26:11 sidewalk project, specifically the project that
10:26:14 relates to installation of sidewalks on the west side
10:26:16 of Bayshore.
10:26:18 And when they were first informed by the city that
10:26:22 there was the possibility that they would go forward
10:26:25 with construction of the sidewalk on the portion of
10:26:28 Bayshore Boulevard in front of their homes, they
10:26:30 engaged our firm and asked to us do some research and
10:26:33 investigation.
10:26:34 And when we did so, we contacted the city sidewalk
10:26:37 construction supervisor and also their program
10:26:40 coordinator.
10:26:41 We were told a couple things.
10:26:43 And one of the things we were told was that sidewalk
10:26:47 project in front of the Teasley home, and on this
10:26:51 entire segment of Bayshore, was delayed because there
10:26:54 were some issues relating to design of those
10:26:57 improvements.

10:26:57 And it wasn't just related to that segment but it was
10:27:00 related to various different segments along Bayshore
10:27:02 Boulevard.
10:27:04 We were also informed via an e-mail from Ms. Jan
10:27:09 Washington with transportation division who is the
10:27:13 sidewalk, I believe, streetlight program coordinator,
10:27:16 that in fact the sidewalk would not be constructed in
10:27:21 front of the Teasley property as a result of a problem
10:27:23 in funding.
10:27:24 What I would like to do at this point is just hand to
10:27:26 you a copy of that e-mail, and also a copy of a
10:27:30 newspaper article that appeared in yesterday's paper,
10:27:34 and is sort of the genesis of me being here this
10:27:36 morning.
10:27:53 What the newspaper article said was the city approved
10:27:56 this project last Thursday and you were going to move
10:27:59 with the sidewalk project on Bayshore and included
10:28:02 several segments along Bayshore Boulevard.
10:28:04 One of them was the segment on Bayshore between
10:28:06 coachman and Bayshore court.
10:28:08 On the second page of that document that I handed you
10:28:11 is the e-mail correspondence that we received a copy

10:28:14 of from Ms. Washington, and I'm going to read directly
10:28:20 from that.
10:28:21 It says that, our hopes were to complete this task.
10:28:26 Unfortunately the budget will not allow that.
10:28:28 Due to the constraints we will not be building in
10:28:30 front of the Teasley home this year.
10:28:32 However, I do not know the plans for FY 08 or FY 09.
10:28:37 And my question is, is the newspaper article correct,
10:28:40 or is Ms. Washington correct?
10:28:42 Because there's a direct inconsistency between the
10:28:45 two.
10:28:45 And what we would like to know simply is, is this
10:28:49 segment of Bayshore Boulevard -- is this segment of
10:28:53 this sidewalk on Bayshore going to be constructed or
10:28:56 not?
10:28:56 Is there funding or not?
10:28:57 The resolution and the contract that you approved last
10:29:00 week seems to indicate there's funding available and
10:29:02 that they are moving forward with it.
10:29:04 The information we received in the e-mail says that
10:29:07 they don't have the funding.
10:29:08 The information in the newspaper article says that

10:29:11 they do.
10:29:12 And the reason why this is important to the Teasleys
10:29:14 is because the status of this project affects their
10:29:19 options, their alternatives, and what action they need
10:29:21 to take.
10:29:22 And we are simply asking you to consider delaying this
10:29:26 until we can get more accurate information about the
10:29:29 status of this project.
10:29:30 We did try to go, when we read the newspaper article
10:29:33 yesterday, went to transportation, tried to obtain a
10:29:36 copy of the contract, we were told there was some
10:29:38 issue but we couldn't see it just then, maybe we
10:29:41 should request in writing and submit to the them.
10:29:45 We tried to do that.
10:29:47 One of the e-mails wouldn't go through last night.
10:29:51 We were told we would be able to get a copy of it but
10:29:54 we couldn't pay cash.
10:29:56 As of this morning couldn't pay cash, we would have to
10:29:58 pay for in the some other form.
10:30:00 At this point, I don't have a copy of the contract.
10:30:03 I don't know what it says.
10:30:04 I don't know if the funding includes this segment.

10:30:07 We would just like to have this information.
10:30:09 And one other point that's very important, and I do
10:30:11 want to give each one of you a copy of the letter that
10:30:14 we sent this week before the newspaper article even
10:30:16 came out, and a copy of the letter that Mr. Teasley
10:30:20 and I sent to the city regarding this whole issue.
10:30:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How much right-of-way is there --
10:30:30 how much city owned right-of-way is there between your
10:30:33 clients' property line and the curb?
10:30:36 >> 9.2 feet.
10:30:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And the typical sidewalk is 6 feet?
10:30:42 >>> Yes.
10:30:45 >> And a lot of people up and down Bayshore have
10:30:48 mumbled and moaned and groaned about sidewalks in
10:30:51 front of the building but the city has gone ahead and
10:30:54 built them, and frankly I have heard on several
10:30:56 occasions they want to build, the residents seem okay
10:31:00 with it, but it's not their property, it's the city's
10:31:04 property, and I think the city has made a policy
10:31:06 decision to build the sidewalk on that side of the
10:31:11 Bayshore.
10:31:11 And I know that it changes the norm. The Teasleys

10:31:18 have been there a long time.
10:31:21 I'm sure there are reasons why the sidewalk is not
10:31:23 appropriate but it's not their property, it's the
10:31:25 city's property.
10:31:26 So I don't know exactly where this is --
10:31:30 >>> Before you make up your mind on that would you
10:31:31 please at least hear me out on this point because this
10:31:34 is somewhat of a different situation.
10:31:38 I have given you a copy of the letter and attached to
10:31:40 the letter are pictures and they are set forth in the
10:31:43 letter and we anticipated, Mr. Dingfelder, given the
10:31:46 opportunity we had to sit down with the city and
10:31:48 discuss this, we did not intend to be here this
10:31:50 morning to ask you to delay this project in this
10:31:53 manner and to request reconsideration.
10:31:55 I know that's something that's out of the ordinary.
10:31:57 But this section of Bayshore and the circumstances
10:32:01 that relate to that right-of-way are different maybe
10:32:03 than what occurred on other portions of Bayshore.
10:32:07 And it's my understanding other people were in
10:32:08 objection to it for very good reasons.
10:32:11 And we say this in the letter, the objective of safety

10:32:16 is necessarily going to be accomplished by simply
10:32:18 putting sidewalks all up and down on the west side of
10:32:20 Bayshore.
10:32:21 That's one issue.
10:32:22 The second issue is the allocation of resources.
10:32:24 This contract is for $233,000.
10:32:29 I believe that's about the amount the city allocates
10:32:31 on a yearly basis to sidewalks city-wide.
10:32:34 Bayshore Boulevard already has more sidewalks than any
10:32:36 other area of the city, and uses resources and most
10:32:43 important, really the legal issue, this portion of
10:32:46 Bayshore Boulevard was improved with significant
10:32:50 landscaping in conjunction with the Parks Department,
10:32:54 about 15 years ago.
10:32:56 There was a palm tree planting program on Bayshore
10:32:58 Boulevard.
10:32:59 And Mr. Teasley and the Parks Department worked
10:33:01 together, public-private partnership.
10:33:04 That's something that we always want to promote.
10:33:06 But fact of the matter is those partnerships are based
10:33:09 on trust.
10:33:10 And we think in this instance to now violate that

10:33:12 trust, to go back into this area, rip out this
10:33:15 substantial landscaping, including trees, including
10:33:18 some of those trees are protected trees, and to
10:33:21 install a sidewalk 15 years later because 15 years
10:33:24 later we are no longer interested in Bayshore
10:33:27 beautification programs, we are more interested in
10:33:29 sidewalks, does not make sense, it's inequitable and
10:33:32 it's a violation of the agreement between the Teasleys
10:33:34 and the Parks Department.
10:33:36 Mr. Teasley actually received a mayor's beautification
10:33:38 award for that.
10:33:39 Another important point.
10:33:40 Had he known that this landscaping was only going to
10:33:43 be temporary, he could have very easily, Mr.
10:33:46 Dingfelder, since I sense that you are not in
10:33:50 agreement with me, he could have very easily installed
10:33:52 this landscaping on his side of the property line.
10:33:55 He has a substantial amount of property.
10:33:57 It could have just as easily been installed outside of
10:34:00 the right-of-way, and inside his property line.
10:34:02 But instead he was asked to fit in the city's
10:34:07 beautification efforts on Bayshore and he installed it

10:34:10 on the outside.
10:34:11 We finds fundamentally unfair is for the city now to
10:34:14 come back 15 years later and rip it out.
10:34:17 And this won't be the only location where trees and
10:34:19 landscaping will be ripped out.
10:34:21 There are other segments on Bayshore that don't have
10:34:23 sidewalks yet where the same thing will occur.
10:34:25 All we are asking for is some time to look, evaluate
10:34:28 this contract, maybe I don't have the facts correct or
10:34:32 maybe the facts told to us aren't correct.
10:34:35 Maybe they are not going to move forward with this at
10:34:37 this point and we'll have time to address it and work
10:34:39 out an amicable resolution with the city and that's
10:34:43 what we proposed to do in our letter was to work it
10:34:45 out amicably.
10:34:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Since Ms. Grimes mentioned my name
10:34:51 could I respond?
10:34:51 Gina, don't get me wrong.
10:34:53 I think you are getting some misinformation that I
10:34:56 would favor a delay, okay?
10:34:58 So you can get it sorted out, so staff can respond and
10:35:03 give you the proper information, because your client

10:35:05 deserves that.
10:35:07 As a taxpayer just like everybody else and deserve it
10:35:09 is appropriate information.
10:35:11 I don't have a problem with pulling this approval
10:35:13 back, and requesting staff come back two weeks from
10:35:17 now and tell us and tell you exactly what the real
10:35:20 story is on timing of this project.
10:35:24 So I'm okay with that.
10:35:26 In the bigger picture, I think there should be a
10:35:29 sidewalk all the way from downtown to Gandy on that
10:35:32 side of the road, okay?
10:35:33 That's just -- the Bayshore task force agreed on that
10:35:39 two years ago after the woman got killed, crossing the
10:35:41 road and that sort of thing.
10:35:43 So that's a big policy decision.
10:35:44 But in terms of your own specific, I don't have a
10:35:47 problem -- I'll make a motion to, you know, pull back
10:35:53 on the approval from last week, and give you the
10:35:56 reconsideration, and hand in hand with that, ask
10:36:00 staffer to come back from weeks from now with a full
10:36:03 explanation related to the Teasley project.
10:36:05 I'm okay with that.

10:36:06 >>GINA GRIMES: I appreciate that.
10:36:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are talking a two week delay.
10:36:12 I can support that.
10:36:13 Of course, my question is, that this involves also
10:36:15 East Tampa, which East Tampa is always asking,
10:36:20 requesting, fighting for sidewalks.
10:36:21 I want to make sure that we are just talking about two
10:36:27 weeks.
10:36:27 Now if you are talking longer we have a problem.
10:36:30 Because the 230,000 includes also East Tampa, not just
10:36:35 Bayshore.
10:36:37 >>> Correct.
10:36:37 And it has that intended consequence.
10:36:40 You are right about that.
10:36:41 I know of no other way since they were included in the
10:36:43 same -- it's not our intent to delay that.
10:36:47 >> Would that delay the work in East Tampa, can they
10:36:49 continue to go ahead and pull the Bayshore out of it
10:36:51 and go ahead and work with East Tampa?
10:36:53 Mr. Shelby?
10:36:55 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, just a concern before you
10:36:57 entertain any sort of motion, just that you are aware.

10:37:00 Two weeks from today, council will not be in session.
10:37:03 It's the break.
10:37:04 And council had previously scheduled beginning of the
10:37:06 year for the Florida League of Cities.
10:37:08 The other thing is -- and I had an opportunity very
10:37:11 briefly to discuss this with Ms. Grimes before she
10:37:13 raised this issue.
10:37:14 Obviously if this contract has been signed, council
10:37:17 does not have jurisdiction.
10:37:19 It was her belief and understanding that it had not
10:37:23 been signed.
10:37:23 >>GINA GRIMES: It was my understanding it had not but
10:37:26 I did not get a direct answer on that either.
10:37:29 >>MARTIN SHELBY: So council may or may not presently
10:37:30 have jurisdiction.
10:37:31 You can go under the assumption that you may not in
10:37:34 fact.
10:37:35 Also I had an opportunity to speak briefly with Mr.
10:37:37 Ter right O.there is the issue this has to do with a
10:37:41 contract for a project that looks like it had been
10:37:43 bid.
10:37:45 Council made this in council's best interest to give

10:37:50 the administration an opportunity to look at the
10:37:52 consideration, if it has a position that it wishes to
10:37:56 raise that may affect this particular contract.
10:37:59 I cannot say whether that's appropriate or not.
10:38:01 But it is just -- this is not just purely a
10:38:07 legislative decision.
10:38:07 It relates to a contract of an award, of a bid, so it
10:38:12 may be a little more complicated.
10:38:14 And I just advise a little bit of caution before
10:38:17 council moves very quickly to act especially if it
10:38:19 delays, would either have to be one week or three
10:38:24 weeks.
10:38:24 >>GINA GRIMES: I think there were a couple items on
10:38:27 your agenda that you postponed for a week that were in
10:38:30 the exact same procedural posture, bids for contracts.
10:38:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: If we want to give the administration
10:38:39 time to respond to it, that's what I would suggest.
10:38:43 And continue on.
10:38:44 But we don't have all the information, all the facts.
10:38:47 It's probably best to just delay it for a little
10:38:49 while.
10:38:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I withdraw it for now and see if

10:38:54 the administration can come back in an hour.
10:38:55 >>MARY MULHERN: We would like to hear, if we can add
10:38:58 to that, when administration comes back, how this is
10:39:01 broken down, 233,000 between projects in East Tampa
10:39:05 and Bayshore Boulevard, and also what portion of it is
10:39:11 for the area, if this would be for going in front of
10:39:17 the Teasley house.
10:39:18 So if we could have all that information.
10:39:20 Kind of remind me of earlier when Linda asked when we
10:39:23 are asking to approve budget, we know exactly what
10:39:29 it's going toward.
10:39:32 We would have had no idea.
10:39:34 We actually had no idea where exactly this was going
10:39:37 when we voted.
10:39:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Weaver going to hold that item, let
10:39:50 administration come back.
10:39:52 >>> Thank you.
10:39:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I understand what's happening with
10:39:54 the 233,866.70.
10:39:57 It's incumbent to continue harping on this because the
10:40:01 district that I represent, most of it you can't build
10:40:05 a sidewalk, because you have got ditches.

10:40:07 And on days like today, if you have an automobile
10:40:11 accident and you fall in one ditch, especially the one
10:40:13 on cherry street -- and you may not find the car.
10:40:18 So what I am saying is the fact of the matter, is this
10:40:22 an emergency situation?
10:40:22 I don't think it is.
10:40:23 However, since we are on a topic of sidewalks, how
10:40:26 much money is in the fund?
10:40:28 I don't have that figure.
10:40:29 I know there's a number, but I don't know what that
10:40:31 figure is.
10:40:33 Where does the money go?
10:40:34 How is it distributed?
10:40:39 Is it as you build and you don't want to put that
10:40:41 sidewalk money in, you give it to the fund, does it go
10:40:44 back to that same area where that money came from?
10:40:46 Or is it expended at somebody's will?
10:40:51 I don't know.
10:40:53 And I would like to have those things included, the
10:40:55 total number of dollars, the information, where the
10:40:59 expenditures go to and where the income comes from.
10:41:02 I think those are very pertinent questions to ask.

10:41:04 And I ask if we make a motion to please include those.
10:41:08 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: The sidewalk program, I don't
10:41:10 think, is fair, and I have been to the New Tampa area,
10:41:14 in front of Lee Roy Selmon's.
10:41:18 There's a piece of sidewalk, I don't know what it cost
10:41:20 to put in but it was a waste of money.
10:41:22 There's nothing else there.
10:41:24 Now with the fly-over that they are putting in, this
10:41:28 whole sidewalk is going to be ripped up.
10:41:30 And there are no other sidewalks here.
10:41:32 Furthermore, Charlie is talking about his district.
10:41:36 Go down in the southern part of my district and see
10:41:38 how much ditches and homes get flooded on days like
10:41:41 today.
10:41:42 There was one house, I said, how come he has a little
10:41:47 curb in front of his house?
10:41:48 He says, well, he went to the City Council and he got
10:41:50 a curb put in front of his house, okay?
10:41:56 That's not fair to the guy next door.
10:41:57 I don't know who did it.
10:41:58 But, anyway, I think the sidewalk program is a sham.
10:42:02 It's a way to collect money.

10:42:05 When I was walking in front of some of these houses,
10:42:07 brand new houses, sidewalk, 15 houses on each side, no
10:42:12 sidewalk.
10:42:12 I mean, it serves no purpose.
10:42:15 Thank you.
10:42:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, the best sidewalk
10:42:21 system we have was Nick Nuccio.
10:42:24 He billed built them all, stamped his name on them,
10:42:27 and it worked.
10:42:29 >>GWEN MILLER: We now go to audience portion.
10:42:30 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak
10:42:33 to any item on the agenda not set for a public
10:42:34 hearing?
10:42:42 >>> Al Steenson: 4100 west Delilah Avenue, and I
10:42:51 reside here seven nights a week.
10:42:53 [ Laughter ]
10:42:54 I have a copy -- I hope you all received the e-mail I
10:42:57 sent yesterday arch, Mr. Shelby and Mrs. Marshall, I
10:43:02 apologize for omitting you, but I corrected that this
10:43:04 morning.
10:43:07 If you have that.
10:43:07 If you all have seen it, there's no sense in me

10:43:10 sitting here reading it into the record.
10:43:12 I would like, if copies are required, there it is.
10:43:18 I looked over the memos from Mr. Darrell Smith, from
10:43:23 John, and I concur with Mr. Dingfelder, 100%.
10:43:29 My position, our staffer is responsible for keeping up
10:43:32 with the rules and regulations when they are dealing
10:43:34 with public funds.
10:43:38 And in my view, as long as you. Signed a contract
10:43:43 yet, so the city is under no obligation to complete
10:43:47 that contract.
10:43:50 In my view, we should pull this contract and rebid it,
10:43:53 and let's take advantage of it.
10:43:55 There's no reason for us to spend $24,000 we don't
10:43:59 need to spend, in what's happened the last two to
10:44:04 three weeks here in the administration we have pink
10:44:06 slips going out, we have cutbacks going out, and
10:44:10 ignorance of the law is no excuse in this case.
10:44:13 These people should be kept up to date with these
10:44:16 rebates and things like that.
10:44:17 This is our money.
10:44:19 And it needs to be handled in a fiscally responsible
10:44:24 and proper manner.

10:44:25 So I support withdrawing this bid on these and rebid
10:44:29 them, and get to the bottom of the hybrid credits.
10:44:35 Thank you very much.
10:44:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:44:40 >>> Good morning.
10:44:40 Madam Chair, I want to thank you for the privilege.
10:44:46 This is a two-part concern of mine.
10:44:49 You're moving on to item 29 where you are going to --
10:44:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Put your name on the record.
10:44:56 >>> I'm sorry.
10:44:56 Laura Harris, 1515 west union street, Tampa 33607.
10:45:04 Number 720.
10:45:07 This two-part concern is that you are ready to approve
10:45:12 and authorize the submission of the consolidated plan
10:45:17 for the fiscal year 2008-2012.
10:45:23 Now any businessman that I have been exposed to has
10:45:28 been filled with allegations of actions and misnomer
10:45:34 and misrepresentation.
10:45:36 I want to congratulate you, however, at least you are
10:45:39 able to communicate with HUD, any attempt that I have
10:45:44 made, as a resident living in public housing.
10:45:54 We are decorating.

10:45:55 We are spring cleaning.
10:45:58 Someone is out and won't be back for the next 25 days,
10:46:01 and I'm wondering if that office actually functions
10:46:05 here in Tampa.
10:46:06 The other thing is, has not anyone been concerned,
10:46:11 because in this city there is a street called Martin
10:46:15 Luther King Boulevard, and never is there a
10:46:18 celebration and it seems to be condensed and enclosed
10:46:26 in the downtown area.
10:46:27 We will be holding awareness meetings where we can
10:46:29 come together and request that the man be regarded by
10:46:33 celebrating that this be.
10:46:43 Thank you.
10:46:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:46:45 >>> Pete Johnson, 301 Druid hills road.
10:46:48 As you know I have been very active for many, many
10:46:51 years with code enforcement.
10:46:52 This figure of 66, 44, whatever, I brought to you back
10:46:58 when Gina Grimes was sitting up there.
10:47:01 Okay.
10:47:01 And nothing has happened.
10:47:04 Okay.

10:47:05 I am very in favor of Pam Iorio and what she's done
10:47:08 for code enforcement.
10:47:10 I thank you very, very much for trying to get a little
10:47:14 bit more enforcement.
10:47:15 But we have got to come to a solution.
10:47:17 No one cares about code.
10:47:20 I can show you thousands of cases, homestead and
10:47:24 nonhomestead, that they simply laugh at code.
10:47:28 We have got do have some enforcement.
10:47:30 Either the instant citations which is used in the city
10:47:35 of Sarasota, which shortening up the time, requiring
10:47:42 them to comply much shorter than Curtis Lane has
10:47:45 already done.
10:47:46 And the city of Temple Terrace.
10:47:48 A note is put on your front door and the time starts
10:47:52 then.
10:47:53 And that's a posted note.
10:47:54 Why can't we do that here?
10:47:57 I mean, our system is so antiquated that I literally
10:48:02 moved out of the City of Tampa because I couldn't deal
10:48:05 with the code violations in my neighborhood.
10:48:08 And that's why I moved to Temple Terrace.

10:48:10 Pam has done a wonderful job in financing and whatnot,
10:48:14 getting the computers.
10:48:15 But that is minimal.
10:48:17 I'm also tired of the real estate department, the
10:48:20 legal department, and the code enforcement department
10:48:23 arguing among themselves and passing the buck back and
10:48:27 forth.
10:48:28 This is ridiculous.
10:48:29 I called this department.
10:48:31 They said, well, this department hasn't made this
10:48:33 decision.
10:48:33 This department is holding up.
10:48:34 This department is that.
10:48:36 When is the administration and the people that are
10:48:38 running the city going to sit down and work this
10:48:41 problem out?
10:48:42 This is ridiculous.
10:48:43 It's been going on for ten years if not more.
10:48:47 Thank you for bringing it up on the agenda.
10:48:49 But I really, you know, I got a meeting tomorrow.
10:48:52 We are going to learn why we can't foreclose.
10:48:56 Well, if we can't foreclose on homesteaded properties,

10:48:59 why can't we come up with a different solution?
10:49:02 I mean, we have been spinning our wheels for years.
10:49:05 And I'm sorry, but I will not move back into the City
10:49:09 of Tampa until such time as code has been enforced.
10:49:15 I'm sorry.
10:49:15 Thank you.
10:49:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:49:16 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: Good morning.
10:49:27 I reside at 2902 East Ellicott street three nights a
10:49:32 week.
10:49:32 And I thank God for his grace and his mercy.
10:49:40 You know, I believe in prayer.
10:49:42 And I also live in the hood, where I live at.
10:49:48 I want to speak on article 1 and article 2.
10:49:51 This article 2 here, you know, I'm going to tell you,
10:50:01 y'all treat this code enforcement and taking land from
10:50:04 people like the drug dealers do.
10:50:06 Drug dealers got the same system.
10:50:13 We are selling drugs but if you don't pay us enough
10:50:15 money, the penalty is death.
10:50:17 Every time you buy a truck load of goods you buy a
10:50:21 truck load of guns.

10:50:22 So you all go out there to take land and you all are
10:50:27 money hungry.
10:50:28 Just like this morning, you all need to get some
10:50:33 people to go out there, code enforcement.
10:50:36 But let me tell you something.
10:50:37 They go track these people down through the years.
10:50:41 I'm going to go through here and go back to another
10:50:43 subject.
10:50:44 And back to the same thing.
10:50:45 Okay.
10:50:47 One thing about it.
10:50:49 Maybe Freedman created what they call neighbor halos.
10:50:56 And God said, how can you love me and hate your
10:50:59 neighbor?
10:51:02 Now, I pray to God for those people up there. The
10:51:09 biggest disaster, because God is angry with people
10:51:11 hear in Tampa.
10:51:12 I told you all that.
10:51:14 People come into town and you can smell it.
10:51:16 Neighbors hate one another.
10:51:17 Mayor Freedman started that mess.
10:51:20 You all don't even know it.

10:51:22 All the phone calls you all get, these are neighbor
10:51:27 haters.
10:51:27 You know, I am going to go back here.
10:51:31 This morning you all spoke about 150, $200.
10:51:34 And when you all put this black man named lane over
10:51:38 that code enforce; 1,000 a day.
10:51:46 Okay, you all broke into another category.
10:51:49 I ain't heard none of you all saying things about what
10:51:52 you call prevention.
10:51:56 You spoke many, many times about that.
10:51:57 You get those low-income people fix their house.
10:52:02 You all never talk about that.
10:52:04 Never talk about it.
10:52:07 I Wen with Ms. Miller many times, years ago when I was
10:52:12 with the property rights commission.
10:52:19 And the people told me, I want to get them to come out
10:52:24 here and fix up these houses.
10:52:26 Anybody make under 8, $10,000 a year we'll come in and
10:52:30 fix your house whether you are old or young, and
10:52:32 nobody did anything about it.
10:52:34 But I want to say that this knob hating thing, that is
10:52:40 the worst thing to ever happen.

10:52:42 I used to own five or six blocks of city land, five or
10:52:46 six blocks, whole blocks.
10:52:50 The seven lots that a white man died, left me
10:52:57 everything.
10:52:58 (Bell sounds).
10:52:59 And another thing I want to say.
10:53:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
10:53:09 We now go back to items 10 and 11.
10:53:13 Mr. Dingfelder.
10:53:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's been an interesting
10:53:16 discussion.
10:53:16 I want to point out something in response to Mr.
10:53:18 Miranda.
10:53:19 Mr. Miranda says, you know, we are not sure what the
10:53:23 law is, and I appreciate all that.
10:53:25 I gave you a copy last week of the IRS code.
10:53:31 I'm not a CPA and I'm not a tax lawyer but the good
10:53:34 news is, as Mr. Smith and Mr. Spearman in their memo,
10:53:38 okay, specifically said in paragraph 2 -- and Charlie,
10:53:42 you got a copy of it?
10:53:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I read it yesterday.
10:53:45 >> It says, quote, IRS rules specify that the car

10:53:48 dealer who sells the qualifying hybrid to the city is
10:53:51 eligible to claim the credit.
10:53:53 But only if the dealer clearly discloses in a document
10:53:56 to the city the amount of the credit.
10:53:57 In order for the city to receive the tax credit the
10:53:59 dealer must, one, agree to pass it on, on all or a
10:54:03 portion of the available tax credit amount, and, two,
10:54:06 disclose the amount of the credit in purchasing
10:54:08 documents.
10:54:08 Okay.
10:54:09 So the great news is, and I deserve no credit for
10:54:15 this.
10:54:15 Mr. Spearman and his staff deserve the credit for it
10:54:18 and I said that in last week's memo. They are the one
10:54:21 whose found this.
10:54:21 Kudos to them.
10:54:22 The problem is we found it after we bid it.
10:54:25 Well, I also provided you with a copy of the bid, the
10:54:28 front of the bid sheet.
10:54:30 That's the single page.
10:54:31 If you look at that, three bidders out of the four got
10:54:36 thereon out. This has nothing to do with the hybrid

10:54:38 issue but three of the four bidders got thrown out for
10:54:42 technicalities.
10:54:43 They didn't meet the speck fund.
10:54:45 Guess what.
10:54:47 Orville Beckford Ford, they got the award.
10:54:55 They are out of Milton Ford.
10:54:58 Anyone know where that is?
10:55:03 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, I do.
10:55:04 It's in ex-to highway 10.
10:55:08 >> It's out of Pensacola.
10:55:10 >> Well, that's highway 10.
10:55:12 >> But you know what?
10:55:13 Their $689 thousand bid is 26,000 higher than the
10:55:17 local bidder Bill Currie Ford.
10:55:19 That's neither here nor there but something to point
10:55:22 out. If we threw out all bids, okay, based upon this
10:55:25 hybrid issue, we might have an opportunity to get one
10:55:28 of our local bidders in at a $20,000 cheaper price but
10:55:33 that's neither here nor there.
10:55:35 The bottom line is this.
10:55:36 Nobody can argue that there isn't an opportunity for
10:55:42 this city to save $24,000 with the purchase of these

10:55:45 eight vehicles.
10:55:46 And guess what.
10:55:46 I called a local Ford dealer yesterday.
10:55:48 I did something that the administration refuses to do.
10:55:53 I called a local Ford dealer yesterday, just picked up
10:55:55 the phone book, flipped open the phone book, called
10:56:00 afford dealer in this town and I explained what this
10:56:03 issue was that we were bouncing around about.
10:56:06 He says let me call you back, I am going to talk to
10:56:08 our accountant.
10:56:09 He called back with his accountant on the phone.
10:56:11 And he said, absolutely.
10:56:12 He said, we would be glad to pass that credit through.
10:56:16 We weren't aware of that credit.
10:56:17 Just like the city wasn't aware of that credit.
10:56:21 Had to go all the way up to Michigan to find one city
10:56:25 that found this, and they put it out on a bulletin, on
10:56:27 the government purchasing bulletin.
10:56:29 They found this.
10:56:30 They shared it with the rest of the world.
10:56:32 Greg and his people found it and now we have an
10:56:35 opportunity to take advantage of it.

10:56:37 Shame on us.
10:56:38 Shame on us.
10:56:39 Shame on us if we would consider tossing $24,000 out
10:56:43 the window, especially, especially in this time of
10:56:46 budget cuts.
10:56:49 Okay?
10:56:49 Maybe in prior years, we should never throw away
10:56:55 $24,000 under any circumstances but a month from now
10:56:58 we are getting ready to go in into budget, with budget
10:57:01 cuts and layoffs.
10:57:02 We are laying off people who only make $24,000, and we
10:57:05 are getting ready to potentially -- and I heard
10:57:08 somebody to my right say might support $24,000, you
10:57:13 know.
10:57:13 If I misspoke, that's fine, Charlie.
10:57:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I can't wait to speak.
10:57:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The staff has not encouraged any
10:57:24 hurry or any emergency.
10:57:25 We do not have people out there walking because they
10:57:27 don't have cars to drive.
10:57:28 This is just about replacement vehicles.
10:57:31 The bottom line is -- and sorry, Charlie, I apologize

10:57:33 if I misunderstood where you were going on this.
10:57:36 But it sounded to me like you didn't want to support
10:57:39 this.
10:57:39 I recommend that we throw out all bids, which frankly
10:57:42 is only one bid, because there's only one responsive
10:57:45 bidder, we throw out all bids, and that we recommend
10:57:48 to the administration that they go back, rebid this
10:57:51 very quickly, and by the way, how long does at that
10:57:53 time them to get back to us?
10:57:55 30 to 45 days.
10:57:56 That's what the memo says.
10:57:57 Get back to us in 30 or 45 days after you rebid it
10:58:00 with the clause that says the dealer would deal with
10:58:04 the tax credit and pass it through to this city as we
10:58:06 deserve.
10:58:07 We deserve it just like the private citizen deserves
10:58:10 it.
10:58:10 And we'll save $24,000 at the end of the day.
10:58:13 >> Second.
10:58:14 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
10:58:15 Since my name was mentioned in kindness, I don't raise
10:58:19 my voice.

10:58:20 I don't point at people.
10:58:22 I say what I said.
10:58:24 And if you check the record -- and I'm not going to
10:58:26 mention any names much.
10:58:28 You don't have an opportunity to speak again before
10:58:30 somebody else.
10:58:30 You will see way said was if you get a price of
10:58:34 $30,000 and you multiply it by 5%, increase in costs
10:58:38 of operation for the year of the new vehicle, you come
10:58:42 up with, what, $1500.
10:58:44 If you multiply that times 8, comes out to $12,000.
10:58:48 I said then, and even at that point that if you do
10:58:52 that, you are still going to save half of the $24,000.
10:58:56 I don't get my blood pressure up.
10:58:59 I have no reason to do that.
10:59:01 I have a pretty good memory.
10:59:02 And what I also said earlier than that, sir, is that
10:59:06 in the event that these things were bidded out, no one
10:59:10 in this room, not on that side or this side, knows a
10:59:16 dealer at that time of the bid included the rebate.
10:59:20 I said that specifically when I spoke earlier.
10:59:23 So you can pick on the district 6 all you want.

10:59:27 I'm. Org not doing this for political reasons.
10:59:29 I do the agenda.
10:59:30 I do my homework.
10:59:31 I read your memo.
10:59:33 But there's nothing in any memo that I received that
10:59:37 states that the rebate was obtained and the dealer
10:59:40 kept it.
10:59:41 It was stated that there is a point of law -- and I
10:59:44 read that point of law, of course, to the IRS code.
10:59:48 And by the way, if you go back in history, the Toyota
10:59:55 corporation themselves put out ads for a year or two
10:59:58 prior to this event saying you were entitled to a
11:00:00 $3,000 rebate and that those rebates will become less
11:00:04 every year, in the year of October of that year.
11:00:07 So those things I remember.
11:00:10 And I'm saying that right now, to state to everybody.
11:00:14 I'm not raising my voice.
11:00:15 I'm not spreading my arms.
11:00:16 I'm not pounding on no table.
11:00:18 The facts are that if they blundered in some way or
11:00:22 mishap, it was to be corrected.
11:00:25 And that's what the debate is all about, is not

11:00:28 nothing exaggerated.
11:00:30 Is there a mistake here?
11:00:32 Maybe.
11:00:33 I don't know who got the rebate.
11:00:35 I don't know if the dealer got the rebate.
11:00:38 I don't know if the dealer picked it and gave it to
11:00:42 the customer.
11:00:42 I can't tell you what happened.
11:00:43 And go back to the bid.
11:00:45 And if you look at those four bids, again I'm going by
11:00:48 memory.
11:00:48 It states that two of them, if I recall, didn't meet
11:00:52 the WMBE certification.
11:00:54 Am I right, sir?
11:00:56 >>> One other.
11:00:56 >> One.
11:00:57 One.
11:00:57 And it states that two of them, the cargo area, there
11:01:02 was a discrepancy, and the bid process under 11.1.
11:01:06 Am I correct in that?
11:01:07 >>> That's correct.
11:01:08 >> So I can remember the section of 11.1 that was

11:01:11 quoted from the administration to this honorable body.
11:01:14 So I don't know why anybody is picking on me.
11:01:17 That's exactly what I said.
11:01:18 The media is here.
11:01:20 You can rerun the TV thing and look at it again.
11:01:22 But if you want to pick on me, you got the wrong guy.
11:01:31 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me -- I was concerned because it
11:01:36 went through the whole bidding process last week on
11:01:38 the housing.
11:01:39 I'm sewage you used the same process.
11:01:41 Remember last week, when we talked about this, and --
11:01:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That was an RFP.
11:01:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, still a bid process.
11:01:54 Either way, if I'm not mistaken, because other bidders
11:01:59 were disqualified, you still have a right to go back
11:02:01 to persons who actually won the bid to negotiate with
11:02:06 them on the hybrid rebates.
11:02:13 >>> Councilman Scott, that's only true if you are
11:02:15 dealing with a request for proposal with an invitation
11:02:18 to bid, you either meet the specifics or you don't.
11:02:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So with the new information, perhaps
11:02:29 they didn't know about, and now that you are -- you

11:02:35 don't think they would be willing to grant that rebate
11:02:38 to the city?
11:02:39 >>> We don't know that for certain because councilman
11:02:41 Dingfelder pointed out the dealer has to agree to do
11:02:44 that.
11:02:44 They even have to determine, number one, their
11:02:46 eligibilities to do it and secondly they have to
11:02:48 disclose individual firms, if they are willing to
11:02:52 offer the rebate to the city.
11:02:55 And also I want to comment on another statement that
11:02:57 councilman Dingfelder made with regard to some local
11:03:00 dealer.
11:03:02 Anytime a bid is disclosed and everybody knows what
11:03:04 the prices are, they will come back and say, yes, I
11:03:08 can do that, yes, I'll do that.
11:03:11 Because this is a perfect example.
11:03:14 That is not the way the bid process --
11:03:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And that's my question, once you open
11:03:19 bids everybody knows what the prices are.
11:03:22 Okay.
11:03:23 But my issue, though, still, Mr. Spearman, the
11:03:26 opportunity still is to say -- if I'm in business, if

11:03:31 I was doing this, I would much rather say if the city
11:03:34 came to me and said we discovered that the rebate
11:03:36 opportunity.
11:03:37 You told me that, I would much rather give that to you
11:03:40 than to lose the whole deal is what I'm saying.
11:03:46 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Spearman, was this rebate
11:03:49 disclosed in the first bidding process?
11:03:52 >>> No, it was not.
11:03:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: So, therefore, I don't think
11:03:56 under the bid specifications they would have the right
11:03:59 at the present time to turn around and say we are
11:04:01 going to give you $3,000 per vehicle.
11:04:05 I think it's illegal.
11:04:08 >>> And that's really the concern of the
11:04:09 administration, to go back and ask the low bidder now
11:04:12 to make a change, after you use specifications, opened
11:04:17 the bids, you made -- you are at the point of making
11:04:19 an award.
11:04:20 That's something you typically do not do that.
11:04:23 That's more than a minor formality.
11:04:25 This is pretty significant.
11:04:28 To ask them to change their pricing after the bid is

11:04:31 opened and issued and accepted by the administration.
11:04:33 That's something we typically do not do.
11:04:36 >> Personally, I don't feel it would be a fair process
11:04:39 when two of the people declined to bid and maybe that
11:04:41 was one reason they didn't submit a bid.
11:04:43 I think it should have to go out and rebid it.
11:04:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a point of order.
11:04:50 I need to clarify the motion on the floor.
11:04:52 I agree with Greg.
11:04:54 We are not going back and talking about renegotiating.
11:04:57 They have made it clear they don't feel that's
11:04:58 appropriate.
11:04:59 Legal made it clear they don't feel it's appropriate.
11:05:01 The motion on the floor is to toss out all bids which
11:05:05 is really the one bid,s to out all bids, come back 30
11:05:09 to 45 days late we are a new bid, ask staff to come
11:05:12 back to rebid it.
11:05:13 So I just want to clarify that.
11:05:15 So I said point of order, not to confuse on where we
11:05:18 are. The motion is to throw out that bid, okay, to
11:05:20 give all bidders the opportunity to look at the credit
11:05:25 rebate issue, to look at it and see if we can save

11:05:28 that money.
11:05:29 And I have a question on that but I'll hold off in a
11:05:32 second because I want to make the point of order.
11:05:35 I want to clarify.
11:05:37 That's my motion.
11:05:38 Throw out all bids.
11:05:39 Rebid.
11:05:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Now you are you finished, Mr. Caetano?
11:05:46 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
11:05:47 >>MARY MULHERN: I think we should just votes on this
11:05:50 because it would send it back to the bid process but I
11:05:52 would like to point out that if we do go and have a
11:05:54 new bidding process, some of my -- someone like Bill
11:05:58 Currie Ford who failed to meet the cargo area cover,
11:06:02 isn't that just that little piece of fabric that you
11:06:05 pull over?
11:06:06 We are talking about those little SUVs, right?
11:06:09 >>> That's correct.
11:06:09 >> So we could potentially save $23,000, in addition
11:06:15 to the $24,000 on the tax rebate.
11:06:17 So I think we don't need to debate anymore it seems
11:06:23 pretty obvious to me.

11:06:24 But I am also wondering about this whole bidding
11:06:27 process where something can happen where there's a
11:06:29 much lower bid, and a minor thing that's missing.
11:06:34 Can they call you and say, well, are they saying to
11:06:37 you, we don't have those available?
11:06:44 >> Apparently, they just forgot to include in the
11:06:46 their bid.
11:06:47 So at this point to allow them to go back and modify
11:06:50 their bid to include the cargo cover for modification
11:06:53 to bid --
11:06:55 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, so we are not talking about
11:06:57 going back and modifying the bid.
11:06:58 I'm questioning now this whole process where you
11:07:01 forget to put something in there, even though your bid
11:07:05 is the lowest bid.
11:07:11 >> The deal.
11:07:12 >> It's the deal.
11:07:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.
11:07:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I only want to say one thing.
11:07:17 I want to again apologize to Mr. Miranda.
11:07:20 I do get excited about issues and I apologize to you,
11:07:23 chairman, and your entire district, because I do raise

11:07:26 my voice.
11:07:26 My wife tells me, she says, don't get excited.
11:07:29 I feel passionate when issues come up like this, when
11:07:32 we have an opportunity.
11:07:35 And Al Steenson said it.
11:07:37 It's not our money.
11:07:38 At this time taxpayers money.
11:07:39 Al Steenson stood there and said he resented the
11:07:42 facts, he said that his money is everybody out there
11:07:45 money, it's not our money to play with.
11:07:47 We wouldn't waste that money at home if it was our
11:07:49 money, to say $24,000 at home when we are buying X, Y
11:07:57 or Z.
11:07:57 It's $35 to 40 days delay.
11:08:02 They are doing this on computer now.
11:08:04 Greg kicks these bids out on computer.
11:08:06 You kick this last bid out and you get bids back in
11:08:09 three weeks, okay?
11:08:10 That's why he's estimating 30 to 45 days to come back
11:08:14 to us with an opportunity.
11:08:15 I'm not going to belabor this anymore.
11:08:18 We can't waste this money.

11:08:20 It's not our money.
11:08:21 Let's vote on this and be done with it.
11:08:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
11:08:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No, I don't want to say anything.
11:08:26 I have been waiting to vote for an hour and a half.
11:08:28 >>GWEN MILLER: motion on the floor.
11:08:32 (Motion carried).
11:08:35 >>> I notice you have taken the vote to rebid this.
11:08:37 Since we are only talking about the hybrid vehicles,
11:08:39 could we go ahead and award the portion that is
11:08:43 non-hybrid, and then rebid the hybrid portion of it
11:08:46 only?
11:08:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, let me ask you a question.
11:08:50 And I thought about that for a long time.
11:08:51 I thought about this for a long time and I was
11:08:54 thinking about making that motion.
11:08:56 My only concern on that is if we split this out, and
11:09:00 then they come back and they say, well, this is only
11:09:03 about eight hybrids, we are not going to give them as
11:09:05 good a price, okay, as they did for the total package
11:09:08 of escapes with the hybrid. That scares me because
11:09:13 then it could all blow up in my face six weeks from

11:09:16 now when this comes back at a higher price for the
11:09:18 hybrids.
11:09:19 So I thought blood pressure that long and hard and I
11:09:21 was going to talk to you about it and I forgot, we had
11:09:24 so much issues.
11:09:24 I would rather leave it bundled together with the
11:09:27 regular escapes and the hybrids because I wants to
11:09:30 make sure we get that good, good price.
11:09:36 >> I remove my motion.
11:09:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Linda withdrew her motion.
11:09:48 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
11:09:49 We are going to move on to committee reports.
11:09:52 Parks, recreation.
11:09:54 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to ask the staff, I
11:09:57 want to move this but I have a question for legal
11:09:59 about this.
11:10:00 Two out of the three things before us are resolutions
11:10:03 approving licensed contracts for the use of the Tampa
11:10:06 convention center.
11:10:07 I think this is a waste of council's time.
11:10:09 I think it should be done administratively.
11:10:11 And I don't see why we don't.

11:10:13 And what does council need to do to put this in the
11:10:17 administration's court?
11:10:19 >> I think we need to either put it in an ordinance
11:10:23 association kind of process you use to delegate that
11:10:25 authority to the administration with guidelines.
11:10:27 >> How long would it take you to come back to with us
11:10:29 a recommendation on that?
11:10:35 30 days?
11:10:39 >>> I think come back in 30 days.
11:10:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may -- and I hate to interject
11:10:43 this and I understand and appreciate her concerns, Ms.
11:10:47 Saul-Sena's.
11:10:48 Sometime back in 2000 or sometime between '99 and 2003
11:10:53 that was addressed.
11:10:54 I remember signing that, working with the prior
11:10:56 administration, or there was an issue of a minor
11:11:00 change, and that change was in pennies.
11:11:05 Somebody called.
11:11:07 Then said we got a 5-cent reduction per square foot in
11:11:11 Las Vegas.
11:11:12 And it took five weeks to get through that channel
11:11:14 back in here and another four weeks to get back.

11:11:16 We changed that so that the administrator of the
11:11:20 convention center, we said it's up to you to make this
11:11:24 thing go or not go.
11:11:32 They are very minor. If we talk about that space not
11:11:34 available we'll move here.
11:11:35 The hotels have space enough for the people coming in.
11:11:39 Those things are worked out.
11:11:40 And these things, I read them.
11:11:43 They are very minor.
11:11:44 In nature.
11:11:45 And I felt that, like Ms. Saul-Sena said, it's a waste
11:11:48 of our time.
11:11:49 That's what the administration does.
11:11:51 And if it's a big issue, certainly bring it before
11:11:53 this body.
11:11:54 But these are minor changes.
11:11:56 These are not that there's a dispute between one party
11:11:59 and another party.
11:12:00 These are mutually consented items that the young lady
11:12:03 put in, the young attorney.
11:12:05 And I agree -- agree with that.
11:12:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Based on that I would like to move

11:12:11 resolution 13 through 15.
11:12:13 >> Second.
11:12:13 (Motion carried).
11:12:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Secondly, I would like to ask the
11:12:17 administration, the legal department, to come back in
11:12:19 30 days with an explanation of whether council can
11:12:25 turn this contract approval for the convention center
11:12:27 over to the administration as an administrative item.
11:12:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
11:12:31 (Motion carried).
11:12:32 >>CHAIRMAN: We go to public works, Mr --
11:12:35 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To appear.
11:12:39 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If some council member wants to
11:12:41 vote 16 I have no problem with it.
11:12:44 That entails $100,000 from friends of the riverwalk,
11:12:47 along with $40,000 from the Hillsborough County public
11:12:52 health department for people to walk and enjoy
11:12:55 themselves and get exercise.
11:12:59 Okay, then I move 16 through 20.
11:13:02 >> Second.
11:13:02 (Motion carried).
11:13:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Finance, Mr. John Dingfelder.

11:13:07 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move items 21 through 29.
11:13:10 >> Second.
11:13:10 (Motion carried).
11:13:18 >> Did we pull 26?
11:13:19 >>GWEN MILLER: No, 29 for one week.
11:13:24 (Motion carried).
11:13:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 29 is continued for one week.
11:13:28 We already voted on that.
11:13:30 We go to transportation, Mary Mulhern.
11:13:32 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items 30 through 37.
11:13:35 >> Second.
11:13:35 (Motion carried).
11:13:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 33 we didn't move.
11:13:44 Mr. Dingfelder.
11:13:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 38 through 40.
11:13:49 >> Second.
11:13:49 (Motion carried).
11:13:50 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: On number 40 where we are talking
11:13:57 about the non-ad valorem assessments in Westshore an
11:14:01 not limited to transportation, et cetera, et cetera,
11:14:03 we have asked for a report back on -- I'm sorry, we
11:14:08 can deal with that separately.

11:14:10 We want to expand the definition of.
11:14:13 I think we are getting that separately and getting a
11:14:16 report back in 30 days.
11:14:17 >> We now go to our public readings for second
11:14:20 reading.
11:14:20 We now open 41 through.
11:14:28 (Motion carried).
11:14:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone to speak on 41 through
11:14:33 48?
11:14:33 If would you please stand and raise your right hand.
11:14:37 (Oath administered by Clerk).
11:14:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Very briefly, council, a request to
11:14:46 have all written communication relative to today's
11:14:48 hearings which have been available for public
11:14:50 inspection in council's office be received and filed.
11:14:53 >> So moved.
11:14:54 >> Second.
11:14:54 (Motion carried).
11:14:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:14:59 wants to speak on item 41?
11:15:01 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
11:15:02 >> Second.

11:15:02 (Motion carried)
11:15:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern, would you read that,
11:15:07 please?
11:15:07 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance being presented
11:15:10 for second reading.
11:15:13 Or I move to adopt this ordinance being presented for
11:15:15 second reading, an ordinance vacating, closing,
11:15:18 discontinuing, and abandoning a certain right-of-way
11:15:20 all that portion of east second Avenue lying south of
11:15:23 east third Avenue, north of east First Avenue, east of
11:15:26 32nd street and west of north 34th street, in
11:15:29 orange, wood park subdivision, a subdivision located
11:15:32 in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida,
11:15:34 the same being more fully described in section 2
11:15:37 hereof, providing an effective date.
11:15:39 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
11:15:40 Vote and record.
11:15:44 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano being absent.
11:15:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:15:57 wants to speak on item 42?
11:15:59 >> Move to close.
11:16:00 >> Second.

11:16:00 (Motion carried).
11:16:01 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I move to adopt the following
11:16:06 ordinance upon second reading, an ordinance
11:16:08 authorizing the installation and maintenance of
11:16:10 encroachment, awning, columns and architectural
11:16:14 decorative features over portions of the public
11:16:17 right-of-way known as east 5th they have, and
11:16:19 north 23rd street as more particularly described
11:16:22 herein subject to certain terms, covenants conditions
11:16:25 and agreements as more particularly described here,
11:16:27 providing an effective date.
11:16:28 >> Second.
11:16:28 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
11:16:29 Vote and record.
11:16:35 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano being absent.
11:16:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:16:39 wants to speak on item 43?
11:16:41 >> Move to close.
11:16:42 >> Second.
11:16:42 (Motion carried)
11:16:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:16:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move the following ordinance upon

11:16:49 second reading, an ordinance authorizing the
11:16:52 construction and erection of proposed encroachments
11:16:54 covered walkway by the Hillsborough County school
11:16:57 board for the Roosevelt elementary classroom addition
11:17:00 project, over a portion of the public right-of-way, a
11:17:03 portion of west Tacon street as more particularly
11:17:07 described herein subject to certain terms, covenants,
11:17:09 conditions and agreements as more particularly
11:17:11 described herein providing an effective date.
11:17:14 >> Second.
11:17:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:17:17 Vote and record.
11:17:20 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Caetano being absent.
11:17:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:17:28 wants to speak on item 44?
11:17:29 Come up and speak.
11:17:41 >>> Good morning.
11:17:42 My name is Karen Hernandez.
11:17:47 And I am the head of public policy for the Tampa
11:17:52 alcohol coalition and I am here to address the item we
11:17:56 are speaking on now, the possibility of serving liquor
11:18:00 for the duration or the entire stadium of Raymond

11:18:04 James.
11:18:04 We at Tampa alcohol coalition have concerns about
11:18:07 this.
11:18:08 We feel that this addresses health and welfare issues
11:18:13 to our community.
11:18:15 Hillsborough County already has a very high DUI rate.
11:18:17 We already have issues dealing with injuries,
11:18:21 fatalities, having to do with alcohol consumption.
11:18:23 And having a liquor being served to a large variety of
11:18:28 people, thousands, brings up some concerns for us as
11:18:33 far as how this is going to affect our community.
11:18:37 Now, I am also a professional former bartender.
11:18:42 So the idea of what we have got here serving mixed
11:18:45 drinks and liquor versus beer is something I'm very
11:18:48 familiar with.
11:18:49 And I understand that Raymond James does have a
11:18:53 responsible vendor program where they do do education.
11:18:56 The difference between serving the beer and mixed
11:18:59 drinks, there is a difference.
11:19:01 Alcohol is not equal.
11:19:03 For example, if we have a situation where someone
11:19:06 wants to order a mixed drink and they go up and they

11:19:10 order, I don't know, let's call it a longed island ice
11:19:15 tea, we have rum, gin, that is not a good thing.
11:19:25 If they are allowed to buy as Raymond James two drinks
11:19:30 each when they go up, and they buy two Long Island
11:19:34 iced teas, we are easily looking at six drinks, maybe
11:19:40 even more depending on how they are poured and what is
11:19:44 the size of the glasses going over that counter.
11:19:47 That is not the same as what they are going to get
11:19:49 when they order alcohol content, beer.
11:19:56 Now understand the beer at Raymond James is not always
11:20:00 sold in two ounces.
11:20:01 I believe it's 16 or 20.
11:20:02 I am unsure of the size but I also know when someone
11:20:05 goes to order a beer at Raymond James generally it is
11:20:08 not considered one drink if you are going to calculate
11:20:10 the alcohol content.
11:20:12 Bringing liquor in that form and giving all of these
11:20:14 people who are sitting in the sun, who are getting
11:20:18 hot, who in many cases may already be intoxicated
11:20:21 because they have been out having a good time and
11:20:26 tailgating, they now have the opportunity to come up
11:20:29 and purchase an alcohol beverage that has a higher

11:20:31 alcohol content than anything they could have
11:20:33 purchased before, by volume.
11:20:35 They will drink it quicker.
11:20:37 It's the same size as you would get if you are going
11:20:39 to get your beer.
11:20:40 But they can consume it in the same amount of time.
11:20:43 So more alcohol is going to be consumed in the same
11:20:47 amount of time than would be one drink or one beer.
11:20:52 What's one of the first things to go?
11:20:54 When we start to drink, our ability to judge,
11:20:59 including judging our own ability of whether we are
11:21:01 impaired or not.
11:21:03 So if we have someone who has had a couple drinks that
11:21:06 are mixed drinks with a whole variation of dig liquors
11:21:10 combined in there and their impairment is quicker than
11:21:12 it would be with beer, then they are going to go out
11:21:16 and have a difficult time.
11:21:18 (Bell sounds).
11:21:19 We then have issues of health and safety and
11:21:21 well-being for anybody that's going to be leaving the
11:21:23 stadium, DUI, domestic, and how it will affect
11:21:29 Hillsborough County in general.

11:21:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Your time is up.
11:21:31 >>> Thank you.
11:21:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Can I ask her a question?
11:21:34 Ma'am?
11:21:36 I wanted to ask you a question.
11:21:40 So, in summary, what would your recommendation be?
11:21:45 That we don't a --
11:21:47 >>> The recommendation would be at Tampa alcohol
11:21:50 coalition, we are opposed to this.
11:21:52 We would not recommend this is the situation.
11:21:55 There is already beer served there.
11:21:56 This adds so much more into what could be a
11:22:00 detrimental to our society.
11:22:02 >> And what is the Tampa alcohol coalition?
11:22:04 >>> Tampa alcohol coalition is a coalition that we
11:22:08 have here under the Hillsborough County drug alliance.
11:22:10 We drug specifically with issues everything to do with
11:22:12 alcohol, underage drinking, whether it be
11:22:15 overconsumption, licensing issues.
11:22:17 We are a community based organization that has members
11:22:20 from MADD, mothers against drunk driving, to court, to
11:22:28 law enforcement.

11:22:34 Gentleman in the back as well.
11:22:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Another question for you.
11:22:37 Ms. Mulhern?
11:22:38 >>MARY MULHERN: I didn't have a question.
11:22:41 >>> Thank you.
11:22:42 At minimum we would like, at minimum, we would like to
11:22:44 see that this be postponed so we could look a little
11:22:48 further on what the ramifications would be.
11:22:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:22:51 Do you want to speak?
11:22:56 >> Do we need to close?
11:22:58 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't want to close because I
11:22:59 have a question.
11:23:00 I have various questions.
11:23:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, this is a public hearing.
11:23:07 Obviously Peter has a right of rebuttal.
11:23:10 To find out whether or not there's anybody else that
11:23:12 wishes to speak before council, and give the
11:23:15 petitioner an opportunity to rebut.
11:23:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak in the
11:23:19 public?
11:23:28 >>> Good morning, Mr. Shelby.

11:23:30 I may be jumping the gun.
11:23:33 For the petitioner.
11:23:33 I didn't want to stand in the place of a public
11:23:36 member.
11:23:36 But if this is the appropriate time I would like to
11:23:39 just take a few moments to speak about the points that
11:23:41 were raised.
11:23:44 John Marshall, Holland and Knight LLP, 100 North Tampa
11:23:47 Street here in downtown Tampa.
11:23:48 I represent petitioner LEVY restaurant.
11:23:52 The concerns that were just raised, first of all there
11:23:55 are self and I want to address all of them.
11:23:58 But they are very important and they are extremely
11:24:00 important to levy restaurants.
11:24:03 Levy is a family owned business operating in seven
11:24:06 other professional sports stadiums, as well as Raymond
11:24:09 James here in Tampa.
11:24:12 Safety has got to be the primary and main motivating
11:24:17 factor for them.
11:24:22 If the people are not enjoying Raymond James stadium
11:24:25 they are not going to be purchasing foods, hotdogs,
11:24:27 pizza: They aren't going to want to come back to the

11:24:30 Bucs game.
11:24:31 Part of their job is to make sure this is an enjoyable
11:24:34 and safe place to be and that is their top commitment
11:24:36 and I'm here to tell you that's their top priority.
11:24:39 The level of stadium security because of the public
11:24:41 health and safety concerns that were raised.
11:24:44 Another very serious concern, and it's very serious.
11:24:47 I want to tell you what I had at Raymond James
11:24:50 stadium.
11:24:51 There were about 65 thousand fans at a game.
11:25:00 We have one for every 295 people who are at the games
11:25:03 which is an out standing, I think, ratio for security.
11:25:08 Captain Driscoll spoke to you last time when we
11:25:11 presented the petition initially and he told you that
11:25:13 the Tampa Police Department did not have objection to
11:25:14 their request.
11:25:16 And I think that's an important thing to emphasize.
11:25:20 We also wanted you to know that right now 15,000 fans
11:25:23 have the ability to enjoy a liquor drink as a choice.
11:25:28 And I guess one of the important things to know about
11:25:30 this is often the experience is cross venue, but this
11:25:36 is a choice that people use and so it's something they

11:25:40 might enjoy a drink, and just so you know it can't be
11:25:43 a six-out alcohol drink.
11:25:46 And I understand what the previous speaker said about
11:25:48 a Long Island iced tea and that would be a real
11:25:51 concern but 1.5-ounces per serving for liquor at
11:25:56 Raymond James stadium for what we will be doing.
11:25:58 If you have questions about that we can answer that
11:26:00 more in-depth.
11:26:01 We have someone here to speak about that.
11:26:04 And there's just no statistical anecdotal evidence
11:26:08 about in this area either at Tropicana Field, at the
11:26:13 St. Pete Times Forum, at Legends Field where fans
11:26:16 enjoy liquor drinks as a choice, that there has been
11:26:18 an adverse impact because of that choice.
11:26:21 So not only is there not an adverse impact at Raymond
11:26:23 James stadium now with 15,000 people having this
11:26:26 choice, but in the community, we don't know and have
11:26:30 not heard of an adverse impact because a liquor drink
11:26:33 might be a possibility.
11:26:34 Finally, state and local law is going to cut anyone
11:26:38 off who is going to try to cut corners or not do the
11:26:41 job right.

11:26:42 And we are going to comply with state and local,
11:26:45 already have.
11:26:45 If we didn't, we wouldn't be in business.
11:26:47 Finally, management service I think is a key here.
11:26:51 Management at service at point of service.
11:26:54 As the previous speaker said, we do have a problem
11:26:56 that's comprehensive.
11:26:57 It has a viewer tolerance.
11:26:59 If somebody tries to circumvent the rules or bend the
11:27:03 rules, our rule is, if in doubt we are not going to
11:27:07 serve and we won't do that and that's what we intend
11:27:09 to follow.
11:27:09 If we can answer any other questions we would be happy
11:27:12 to.
11:27:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Mr. Marshall, I have a set of
11:27:16 questions.
11:27:19 We have a body, I'm sure you are aware of it, called
11:27:21 the Tampa Sports Authority.
11:27:23 Has this been brought up before the Tampa Sports
11:27:24 Authority?
11:27:25 >>> The Tampa Sports Authority is aware of the
11:27:28 application, and they have been actively involved and

11:27:32 are aware of it, yes.
11:27:33 >> Maybe I should ask the question a little bit
11:27:36 differently, sir.
11:27:37 Has the testimony Sports Authority voted on this,
11:27:43 since Tampa Sports Authority is the governing body
11:27:45 that the two governments set up to review items, and
11:27:47 I'm not a member of that authority.
11:27:50 But I know somebody that is, that sits on this board.
11:27:55 Then you have mentioned 235 police officers, would be
11:28:00 200 plus and I agree with that.
11:28:02 If we have to have that many police officers, we
11:28:05 usually have one in a thousand so we are about four
11:28:09 times greater than the necessary evils of life
11:28:12 determine to be the fact.
11:28:18 Has the cost, any cost as to be incurred by the
11:28:22 general public and having more police officers and
11:28:25 more surveillance and more guidance?
11:28:27 I don't remember that whole contract.
11:28:30 But seemingly, a lot of cost is borne by the general
11:28:35 public, even though the general public and a large
11:28:37 number cannot attend.
11:28:39 And then I don't have, even though the police

11:28:41 department said they had no problem with it, I don't
11:28:44 have a police report on how many incidents they have
11:28:48 had on DUIs leaving the area.
11:28:51 And I'm not blaming the Tampa Bay Buccaneers or the
11:28:55 concessionaire levy or any one of those.
11:28:58 What I am getting at, the information that I have --
11:29:00 and I failed to ask these questions last time, and I
11:29:03 apologize to you, sir -- I don't have that.
11:29:06 I don't know.
11:29:09 In a lot of areas of the city you can't have alcohol.
11:29:13 At Al Lopez park.
11:29:14 I don't know if we patrol that.
11:29:17 And if they do have kind of activity there going on.
11:29:23 In parks you cannot carry alcohol or consume alcohol
11:29:25 in a city park, if I remember correctly.
11:29:28 Going back in history, Madam Chair, when this first
11:29:31 came up under the Bill Poe administration, I think we
11:29:36 voted against hocking, where the vendors would come in
11:29:41 and out.
11:29:41 And I'm not certain because I am going by memory.
11:29:44 I am going back some long time like 33 years.
11:29:47 And that was later reversed where you had the

11:29:50 vendors -- it's a bad term called hocking but that's
11:29:56 what it is.
11:29:57 I didn't make that one up.
11:29:58 So that changed.
11:29:59 Everything has changed little by little, whether it's
11:30:03 for the good or the bad I don't know.
11:30:05 But I like to at least have the statistics, of those
11:30:08 events, and not only -- and if I remember correctly,
11:30:13 this is only specifically for the Buccaneers.
11:30:17 Am I correct?
11:30:18 >>> This is for the Buccaneer events, and for concerts
11:30:21 that would be at the stadium.
11:30:22 >> So then it has more than one.
11:30:23 I would like to know for my information how many
11:30:27 arrests were made for disorderly and alcohol
11:30:31 individuals, before I have an opportunity to vote.
11:30:33 I want to give you that opportunity.
11:30:34 But I want to make sure that, A, the Sports Authority
11:30:37 has reviewed this, and has come up with a
11:30:39 recommendation for or against, and, B, if there is a
11:30:42 cost to the public, what that cost is that we have to
11:30:45 hire additional personnel to patrol the area.

11:30:49 Even though I voted for this last time, that's why I
11:30:51 like the first and second reading so I can get more
11:30:53 information.
11:30:54 Like I said earlier, it's my fault for not asking
11:30:56 these the first time, not yours, sir, and I apologize
11:31:00 to you and your law firm.
11:31:02 But that's what I need to do.
11:31:04 I need to get a report from the police department on
11:31:06 that sector to find out how many DUIs were given
11:31:11 during that course of the year.
11:31:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Miranda, I'm wholly in support
11:31:17 of your suggestions for the petitioner.
11:31:19 I think you raise important issues.
11:31:23 I understand the way the Bucs have been playing that
11:31:26 people want to drink.
11:31:29 And I love the Bucs but let's hope they have a better
11:31:33 year this coming year.
11:31:35 But on a serious note, I'm really torn on this issue.
11:31:38 Because on the one hand, for the last couple of years
11:31:41 since we approved it, we have allowed hard liquor in
11:31:46 the expensive areas of the stadium, in the corporate
11:31:51 boxes, in the high-end areas of the stadium.

11:31:56 The city allows hard liquor.
11:31:58 So if we don't allow it in the rest of the stadium,
11:32:03 are we being elitist?
11:32:07 I think that's pretty obvious, you know.
11:32:09 And why shouldn't some folks in the stadium get the
11:32:14 same opportunities as everybody else in the stadium?
11:32:18 That's the problem we have with this.
11:32:19 I wish we could turn back the clock perhaps a couple
11:32:22 of years and just have beer and wine in the whole
11:32:24 stadium but we can't take away what was already
11:32:26 granted.
11:32:27 But, Charlie, I think you bring up a good point.
11:32:29 It's my understanding as the Sports Authority board
11:32:32 has not necessarily heard this, although Madam Chair
11:32:36 differs, so I don't know.
11:32:38 I haven't been there.
11:32:39 Maybe the Sports Authority staff has reviewed this but
11:32:41 not the board itself.
11:32:43 Is that a possibility, Mr. Marshall?
11:32:47 >>> Madam Chair, may I respond to that?
11:32:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes, you may.
11:32:51 >>> Councilman Miranda and Dingfelder, they are very

11:32:53 good questions and I want to try to answer them in
11:32:56 order and if I leave one out, if you will let me know.
11:32:59 We also --
11:33:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Oh, I wasn't finished, before I
11:33:05 give the floor to you. The bottom line, and I think
11:33:07 this relates to public safety, what you were concerned
11:33:09 with is the more drinking you have the more drunks you
11:33:12 have.
11:33:12 The more drunks you have the more fights you have and
11:33:14 the more injuries you are going to have.
11:33:15 So, you know, there's a tension here.
11:33:19 And I think that when TPD opined on this, because I
11:33:23 kind of jokingly, you know, asked TPD where they stood
11:33:28 on this issue.
11:33:30 I don't know that they have really studied this or
11:33:33 analyze it the way they have in the past.
11:33:35 I jokingly said, have you ever had any fights in Tampa
11:33:38 stadium?
11:33:39 It's sort of a rhetorical question.
11:33:42 Or calls for service, is what I said.
11:33:44 So I think the questions Mr. Miranda raised, I think
11:33:48 we should delay this and let you have a chance to

11:33:51 answer it over a period of time, not necessarily
11:33:53 today.
11:33:58 >>> I'll take my tame now to respond to questions and
11:34:00 if we do need to come back and if the council wants
11:34:03 more answers, of course we'll be willing to provide
11:34:06 whatever you want.
11:34:07 But I wanted to just give you a fair shot and really
11:34:12 good answers to questions you have.
11:34:14 The first is the Tampa Sports Authority, about ten
11:34:21 years --
11:34:22 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Before we
11:34:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It is my sense we are going to
11:34:28 continue this.
11:34:29 It only makes sense to come back two weeks later and
11:34:33 go through the whole process.
11:34:35 Plus we have a time certain at 11:30.
11:34:37 So you may want to consider this whole process.
11:34:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, council, just because this
11:34:42 is quasi-judicial, to address the concerns, if there
11:34:47 is going to be a continuance, it would be up to the
11:34:51 petitioner to get a sense of council and to make that
11:34:55 request.

11:34:59 He does have the right as the representative of the
11:35:01 petitioner to mach his case and ask for an up or down
11:35:04 vote.
11:35:04 I understand what councilman Scott is suggesting
11:35:09 because you have an 11:30 time certain whether
11:35:12 petitioner wishes to reserve his comments and then ask
11:35:14 for the continuance based on the sentiments of council
11:35:17 if that's his desire.
11:35:18 But obviously he does have the right to make his
11:35:20 statement and to ask for a vote.
11:35:23 And I don't believe that it's council's desire to in
11:35:26 any way take away any of his due process rights.
11:35:30 >>GWEN MILLER: One second, sir.
11:35:33 Ms. Mulhern, you have been waiting for a question.
11:35:37 >>MARY MULHERN: I was going out along the same lines
11:35:40 as Mr. Shelby and Mr. Scott.
11:35:43 I think we have all had time to think about this since
11:35:47 we had this first reading, and second reading, and in
11:35:51 good conscience, I feel this is a big usual you of
11:35:55 public health, safety, and welfare.
11:35:59 And I would like to ask you, if you would be willing
11:36:01 to continue this, and it would give you time to do the

11:36:06 research, to answer these questions we have presented,
11:36:10 and also for our police department to do some very
11:36:13 specific research, because we can look at numbers.
11:36:17 You mentioned that levy has the contracts in other
11:36:24 stadiums.
11:36:24 I think we could look at what the difference is.
11:36:27 As far as DUIs, accidents.
11:36:31 And I think one thing that really hasn't come up
11:36:33 except for the alcohol, bartender, and alcohol person,
11:36:41 is not just about the safety in the stadium and the 64
11:36:45 that you people but people walk out of there, and it's
11:36:47 not just the neighborhood.
11:36:48 And I know our police department talked to the people
11:36:50 in the neighborhood about it who didn't have
11:36:53 objections.
11:36:53 But we are talking about the entire region of people
11:36:58 who are going to deal with, not only as John said, are
11:37:01 there more drunks, but they are drunk fer they are
11:37:04 drinking more.
11:37:05 So I think throws a lot we need to know and I would
11:37:08 like to ask first of all if you would be willing to
11:37:11 continue this first reading to -- this is the second

11:37:16 reading.
11:37:17 Continue the second reading for the time it would take
11:37:22 and maybe we would ask our police officer who tell us
11:37:27 how long it would take to do the research, to find out
11:37:29 statistically if there are more accidents, more
11:37:32 violence, in the areas of stadiums where this happens
11:37:40 and I would also like to point out that this is pro
11:37:43 football and I don't think you can compare it to
11:37:45 Legends Field or a baseball game.
11:37:47 This is, you know, it's kind of drinking.
11:37:53 So I think we need to look at other NFL stadiums who
11:37:57 allow the hard liquor all over the state.
11:38:01 >>> Thank you, councilman Mulhern.
11:38:03 If I may, I understand that you have time constraints
11:38:07 here.
11:38:08 But I would like to quickly respond and then I
11:38:10 understand that a continuance something that several
11:38:13 members of the council think would be helpful.
11:38:15 On that issue, I would just like to ask that with the
11:38:21 beginning of the season coming, there's substantial
11:38:24 interest in trying to move forward, when we can.
11:38:27 And so we would appreciate coming back, I guess as

11:38:30 soon as we can.
11:38:31 I think we can gather data relatively quickly, and we
11:38:35 will certainly endeavor to do so.
11:38:37 So if there is a continuance, we just ask to come
11:38:40 back, I think as soon as we could, to speak with you.
11:38:44 With that said, originally, this contract for Raymond
11:38:48 James stadium, the stadium operating agreement, was
11:38:51 between the Buccaneers and the Tampa Sports Authority.
11:38:54 And then as you know, there was a metamorphosis in
11:38:59 development where now the county is the owner under
11:39:01 the new condo set-up of the Tampa -- the condo set-up
11:39:06 of Raymond James stadium.
11:39:07 So the authority for moving forward with this petition
11:39:10 was granted by the county.
11:39:13 We have that ability through the stadium agreement.
11:39:16 So we move forward with all of the policies and
11:39:19 procedures that of course are required by the city.
11:39:21 And as you know they are very strict policies that the
11:39:23 city has about when you can file wet zoning
11:39:27 application. The Tampa Sports Authority has been very
11:39:29 aware of this moving forward, and council Miranda, I
11:39:34 don't know if there's -- I. Heard that there has but

11:39:38 I'm not sure, to answer your question.
11:39:42 Security is a critical, critical concern.
11:39:49 In the same I think it's real important, you know,
11:39:51 outside of the stadium there are more police -- at
11:39:54 least 50 uniformed police officers outside the stadium
11:39:58 at every game.
11:39:59 We are not even counting the stadium security that are
11:40:01 there because of levy and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers who
11:40:04 are not uniformed police officers who are in the
11:40:07 stadium, as well as the undercover officers that levy
11:40:11 feels it wants to hire in order to make sure that the
11:40:14 alcohol policy is enforced, and rigorously enforced.
11:40:20 So we feel that security is going to be covered.
11:40:23 And also our experiences in other venues, and we'll
11:40:28 try to do what research we can, councilman Mulhern,
11:40:34 about other sporting venues, but this is not uncommon
11:40:37 in other professional sports venues, and it's enjoy as
11:40:40 a choice, as an alternative.
11:40:42 And because it is strictly limited in size, and the
11:40:45 way it's sold, it's not a privilege that we found it's
11:40:50 been abused hear or Raymond James stadium, or
11:40:52 elsewhere, where levy operates.

11:40:59 If I may just have a second, just ask my client if we
11:41:02 covered some of the items that are raised and then
11:41:04 we'll be right back.
11:41:27 >>> He wanted me to convey, we want to understand,
11:41:32 too, that this is not and could not for purposes of
11:41:35 just serving a normal bar.
11:41:38 There are limited number of drinks.
11:41:40 I think there are five or six drinks that it's
11:41:42 possible that you can order, and they will be in set
11:41:45 locations with bartenders as opposed to reaching
11:41:49 across the counter with your hotdog and your beer and
11:41:52 asking for a small daiquiri or lemon coke.
11:41:59 This will be a stand alone bar where it will be
11:42:01 staffed and monitored by a bartender and also --
11:42:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
11:42:07 Mr. Marshall, none of those assertions, everyone
11:42:10 though I like you and believe you, none of those
11:42:13 assertions are conditions that you are putting in the
11:42:15 zoning conditions.
11:42:16 >>> You are correct.
11:42:17 Those are not in the zoning conditions.
11:42:19 >> So they are really not that relevant because they

11:42:21 can change with a new contractor or what have you.
11:42:24 >>> Very well.
11:42:24 And if that's something -- we will think about that as
11:42:30 well, councilman.
11:42:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Officer Miller, I see you came up
11:42:34 close.
11:42:34 Do you want to make a statement?
11:42:38 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
11:42:42 What I want is generalize what council wants as a
11:42:45 search in DUI arrests.
11:42:48 We let 65,000 people who could be possibly
11:42:51 intoxicated.
11:42:52 They are going to St. Petersburg, Clearwater, Orlando.
11:42:55 How far out are we talking?
11:42:57 Specifically, this is a lot bigger usual you than just
11:43:00 my normal mom and pop wet zoning case.
11:43:03 Yeah, I did contact neighborhood associations.
11:43:07 They weren't opposed.
11:43:08 So I just want to make sure you understand, I did my
11:43:11 job very extensively because I knew this was going to
11:43:15 be a serious subject.
11:43:16 There are certain things in statistics that we can't

11:43:18 generator get back as far as DUI arrests, because they
11:43:23 were watching a sporting event at the press box or
11:43:26 some other club and then they got arrested for DUI.
11:43:31 I used to do DUI for ten years on the streets and we
11:43:35 don't have specifics on where were you at during that
11:43:38 arrest.
11:43:39 Were you at a sporting event?
11:43:41 Sometimes we can tell because they still have the
11:43:43 jersey on.
11:43:44 So it's going to be hard.
11:43:48 >>GWEN MILLER: What time frame do you need?
11:43:52 >>> Well, depending on the vast search you want me to
11:43:56 do.
11:43:56 We are talking about countywide, contact multiple
11:44:01 agencies, or if we are just talking City of Tampa
11:44:03 limits.
11:44:07 >>MARY MULHERN: Way was suggesting if we are going to
11:44:09 continue this -- and I thought that was the idea.
11:44:12 But what I was suggesting is that you look at
11:44:16 certainly within the City of Tampa, if you are going
11:44:20 to look here.
11:44:21 But really more importantly if you could look at

11:44:23 places that do have this unlimited alcohol sales, at a
11:44:27 stadium, and the statistics of DUIs before, in the
11:44:35 football season, say, and then the statistic the next
11:44:38 year, or, you know, after they have done that.
11:44:41 I don't know if it's going show anything.
11:44:43 But I think it's worth looking at.
11:44:45 And that's the only thing that I can say that would
11:44:48 give us an indication.
11:44:50 I realize that you can't find out --
11:44:54 >> And I will definitely bring that to our research
11:44:56 people and see what kind of numbers I can come up with
11:44:58 as far as DUI enforcement and arrests.
11:45:03 Also, how many people you extract out of stadiums.
11:45:07 Typically it could be 70 to 75 people per game and so
11:45:13 numbers, I'll see what I can --
11:45:15 >> You might be able to look at that too if more
11:45:18 people are getting tossed off.
11:45:19 >> I can tell you, you put 65,000 people anywhere, and
11:45:22 give them alcohol, you are going to have problem in
11:45:24 that particular place for a few hours.
11:45:26 Yes.
11:45:26 So things will go up within that time period.

11:45:29 I'm sure stats will show that.
11:45:31 I'll try to put together as best as I can any
11:45:36 contributing factors based on football games or
11:45:39 concerts at that venue.
11:45:42 >> That would be great.
11:45:43 Also if could you clarify for us who is paying.
11:45:46 I mean, within the stadium there's a cost to us if we
11:45:53 have to have more police officers.
11:45:56 Although they are hired by --
11:46:04 >>> Tampa sports usually pays for the officers on the
11:46:07 property.
11:46:07 Some are on duty and some areas of the stadium.
11:46:11 Of course, the ones that are going to be also affected
11:46:15 are those already on the streets working throughout
11:46:16 the entire city that make a DUI arrest.
11:46:19 >>
11:46:23 >> And paid for --
11:46:24 >>> Yes, by the taxpayers.
11:46:26 So this will be an additional cost by taxpayers if
11:46:28 there's additional enforcement needed.
11:46:30 It just all fits into the equation.
11:46:32 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: No one is questioning, officer,

11:46:34 your abilities or that you did exactly what was asked
11:46:37 for you and your department and all of that.
11:46:39 We are just asking questions in general.
11:46:41 It comes to my mind, however, one television or
11:46:47 newspaper report a few years ago, and again, I don't
11:46:51 know if I'm certain.
11:46:52 I believe one stadium -- and I'm going to say it was
11:46:55 the New England patriots -- stopped alcohol altogether
11:47:01 because of fan participation but I'm not sure.
11:47:03 I will find out by the time we have this vote.
11:47:08 I don't know of any others.
11:47:10 But I think one did.
11:47:11 And I will ask and find out what's happening or what
11:47:14 time they cut it off or something.
11:47:16 And the question is, again, I don't believe we as a
11:47:19 city during the event -- and I'm not talking about
11:47:26 football -- we don't monitor city parks and make sure
11:47:29 nobody is drinking on city land, and that's my main
11:47:32 concern.
11:47:32 That's number one.
11:47:33 There are a lot of other things that I want to bring
11:47:35 up because but I won't know because we have enough on

11:47:38 the table.
11:47:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern had a motion.
11:47:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I had asked if the petitioner was
11:47:45 willing to ask for a continuance.
11:47:48 >>> Council, we would love to move forward today.
11:47:52 But what I am hearing from council from at least three
11:47:54 members who would like a continuance, I think we
11:47:57 understand that we are going to gather the data that's
11:48:00 important and come back to you.
11:48:02 Just to make one quick comment, councilwoman Mulhern,
11:48:07 I think it's going to be hard to find.
11:48:09 Tampa and Hillsborough County are very special in
11:48:11 their alcohol regulations.
11:48:13 And so this sort of transition is going to be hard to
11:48:15 identify from beer to adding liquor.
11:48:17 Of course what we will look for we can find but I
11:48:20 think it's going to be really difficult to find
11:48:22 something right on point like this.
11:48:24 Just the second Pointe point would be that again we
11:48:28 don't feel, and I don't think there is any evidence
11:48:31 that we have seen that adding liquor to the mix is
11:48:34 going to increase any burden, and we have such an

11:48:37 excellent law enforcement and security presence there
11:48:40 right now that we don't expect and anticipate any sort
11:48:46 of additional burden on law enforcement.
11:48:49 This is another choice.
11:48:50 And if there are people who are going to drink more
11:48:53 than they should outside the stadium and come in,
11:48:58 their habits may not change when you add alcohol.
11:49:02 But they have been doing that with whatever they have
11:49:04 been drinking outside of the stadium.
11:49:06 Inside the stadium, I can tell you, we are going to be
11:49:08 enforcing the rules and the policies that the city,
11:49:12 that the state and that levy has, and we take that
11:49:15 very seriously so we look forward to coming back,
11:49:18 councilwoman, and visiting with you then.
11:49:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Don, how long do you think we should
11:49:24 continue?
11:49:30 >>> Officer Miller: I am going need at least 30 to 60
11:49:33 days to comprise the types of statistics city-wide and
11:49:37 something that will correlate just based on this
11:49:39 particular issue with the Sports Authority.
11:49:41 In that stadium.
11:49:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Make a motion 30 days.

11:49:45 >>MARY MULHERN: motion for continuance for 30 days.
11:49:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Did we get a second?
11:49:53 >> Second.
11:49:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion, Mr. Dingfelder.
11:49:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess I read in the paper that
11:49:57 the season is starting in a couple of weeks.
11:50:03 >>> The first game is a week from any Friday night,
11:50:05 councilman.
11:50:09 >> Pre-game, so I'm sure they are anxious to get this
11:50:11 cranked up, not to outbalance the public safety
11:50:15 issues.
11:50:16 But they are very serious issues.
11:50:20 A motion of 30 days?
11:50:25 >>MARY MULHERN: He said 30 to 60, so I think we should
11:50:28 give him 30.
11:50:29 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think the petitioner is so
11:50:31 interested in getting this going that they could
11:50:33 probably provide a lot of statistics, too.
11:50:36 I'm ambivalent about this issue, I really am.
11:50:39 But I think that if you are incentivized to come up
11:50:45 with research you find some young smart people to do
11:50:47 the research and I think the kind of research -- what

11:50:51 I am interested in is comparing -- the choice before
11:50:54 us now is drinking wine and beer versus drinking wine,
11:50:59 beer and liquor.
11:51:00 It's not a choice of nothing to drink and something to
11:51:03 drink.
11:51:04 It's something and then additional.
11:51:06 That's the kind of information that I'm really
11:51:08 interested in.
11:51:09 And I think that three weeks is possible.
11:51:11 And what I would suggest is that we put this on our
11:51:13 agenda for the 23rd and we ask our police
11:51:16 department to tell the petitioner what kind of
11:51:18 research they are interested in and the petitioner
11:51:22 could potentially do the research because they have
11:51:23 the resources to do that.
11:51:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Linda, this is what I asked Don to
11:51:29 look at stadiums that only sold beer, and then when
11:51:33 they went up to selling liquor if there was a
11:51:35 difference in the public safety.
11:51:36 So I think they are already doing that.
11:51:37 And I also feel that I would like our police
11:51:41 department to be able to do this research for us.

11:51:43 We want unbiased opinion on this.
11:51:46 So I'm sure that petitioner will do the research and
11:51:49 we can weigh that but I would like to hear from our
11:51:53 own people.
11:51:53 And he did ask for 30 to 60 days.
11:51:57 >>GWEN MILLER: As Mrs. Saul-Sena the two working
11:52:01 together I think it can be done quicker.
11:52:03 And let him go another week.
11:52:08 He's going to do the right thing.
11:52:10 He can do the right thing.
11:52:12 I think the two working together, this can really be
11:52:17 30 days, if we do take that up and work with the
11:52:19 petitioner.
11:52:23 >>> City of Tampa police department is always willing
11:52:25 to work with anybody concerned with public safety.
11:52:28 We probably have to confirm with my commander on how
11:52:31 would you like me to do it.
11:52:32 And what approach we are going to be using since this
11:52:36 is a whole different skill of what I am usually
11:52:40 upholding during these wet zonings.
11:52:43 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I look at it a little differently.
11:52:46 And let me try to explain even though -- we are not

11:52:51 talking about a convenience store that is applying or
11:52:54 small mom and pop that is necessary to sell a couple
11:52:58 of cases a week to try to make the rent. This is not
11:53:01 going to break anybody in the 30 days.
11:53:05 It's not going to break the petitioner.
11:53:06 It's not going to break the concessionaire.
11:53:08 It's not going to break anybody.
11:53:10 If that's the case they would be out of business
11:53:12 already because they didn't have it.
11:53:13 So what I'm saying is that just because of one game or
11:53:17 two games or three games or four games or fire five
11:53:20 games, to me is not relevant to the discussion of this
11:53:24 council.
11:53:25 It is whether it's the best and available use or not.
11:53:28 And I'm not disputing Mr. Marshall's sincerity, not at
11:53:36 all.
11:53:36 What I'm saying is this revenue is not going to make
11:53:39 or break this issue.
11:53:41 It's just part of digit revenue that's going to come
11:53:44 in and that's what it's all about.
11:53:45 It's not go B anything else, like anything else that
11:53:49 comes before you.

11:53:50 It's all about money and that's what it should be
11:53:52 about, because it's not going to work any other way.
11:53:55 So I agree with Ms. Mulhern, 30 days.
11:53:58 I want the police department to have the benefit of
11:54:00 the doubt over of an extra week.
11:54:02 It's not going to break anybody, in my judgment.
11:54:06 Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think we are going to go
11:54:09 broke and subsidize anybody.
11:54:11 That's what I feel.
11:54:12 >>GWEN MILLER: You have a motion on the floor.
11:54:14 Want to call for the vote.
11:54:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Marshall, do you understand, it
11:54:18 would be August, I believe, the clerk would -- August
11:54:22 30th at 9:30.
11:54:24 Is that correct?
11:54:27 Check clerk it could either be August 30 or September
11:54:29 6th.
11:54:33 August 30th?
11:54:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Yes.
11:54:35 Mr. Dingfelder, we are going to move on.
11:54:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just want to say one thing.
11:54:39 It's important. The possible option we might want to

11:54:41 look at 30 days from now might be a one-year
11:54:43 conditional.
11:54:43 I honestly don't believe that Donald, in all due
11:54:46 respect, if because he does a great job, and the
11:54:49 petitioners are going to be able too find relevant
11:54:54 information because it is unique and they are apples
11:54:58 and oranges and folks are going to spread out 60, 80
11:55:01 miles from here.
11:55:01 It's like we are asking an impossible task.
11:55:04 It might be an opportunity to just grant, come back 30
11:55:06 days, from now, possibly grant a one-year conditional.
11:55:09 That way, we know where we are today in terms of
11:55:12 fights and injuries, et cetera.
11:55:13 A year from now, we might be able to compare to the
11:55:16 where we are a year from now and see how fights and
11:55:19 injuries --
11:55:20 >> That's good.
11:55:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Can we vote on the motion?
11:55:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I will be happy to make a motion so
11:55:27 they can move forward and we can move forward.
11:55:29 I think it's a legitimate substitute motion.
11:55:31 I'll just move to approve, in lieu of that motion,

11:55:33 move to approve it on the basis of a one-year
11:55:36 conditional and come back with that relevant
11:55:39 information a year from now and we'll see where we are
11:55:42 at.
11:55:42 And that would require the petitioner to agree.
11:55:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I would like to ask Mr. Shelby since I
11:55:49 made the motion.
11:55:52 Those 2004 separate motions, aren't they?
11:55:54 And we can't, without hearing, having our second
11:55:57 hearing, propose that.
11:56:00 We can't vote on a conditional wet zoning without
11:56:04 having the hearing first.
11:56:06 We just continue it and we can talk about that, and
11:56:10 ask for that if it comes to that at the next hearing.
11:56:15 >>REBECCA KERT: Legal department.
11:56:16 First of all the applicant is the only entity that can
11:56:19 ask for it and you can certainly ask him to consider
11:56:21 that.
11:56:22 And I'll let the -- whether they even want to consider
11:56:26 that.
11:56:27 And if you move forward today then the motion would be
11:56:30 for me to come back in a week if they ask for a

11:56:32 conditional.
11:56:32 If they come back in 30 days, I can have it for you,
11:56:36 prepared, to expedite it, but in case you do want to
11:56:38 approve.
11:56:41 >> Let me clarify my motion.
11:56:42 My motion would be, one, ask the applicant if they are
11:56:45 interested in a one-year conditional, in lieu of the
11:56:47 30 days.
11:56:50 Number one.
11:56:50 And number two, clearly it would take an extra week
11:56:52 because we get to go back to first reading with the
11:56:55 one-year conditional, and staff would have to just
11:56:58 redraft it as one-year conditional.
11:57:03 >>> We appreciate you working with us.
11:57:05 We think what we prefer to do instead of going to one
11:57:08 year conditional is come back in positive days and
11:57:11 visit with you fully.
11:57:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I withdraw the motion.
11:57:13 >>GWEN MILLER: we have a motion and second to continue
11:57:17 for 30 days.
11:57:17 (Motion carried).
11:57:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: For purposes of the record if we can

11:57:20 have the date and time announced.
11:57:21 >>GWEN MILLER: August 30th at 10:00.
11:57:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
11:57:26 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to waive the rules.
11:57:30 This has been going on and on.
11:57:32 Other information?
11:57:34 We need to make a motion to waive the rules that we go
11:57:38 through.
11:57:40 We have an 11:30.
11:57:41 We didn't stop to do it so we need to stay here and
11:57:45 give them that 30 seconds.
11:57:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's now 4 minutes to 12.
11:57:49 >>GWEN MILLER: And we are not going to finish it.
11:57:50 So we need to waive the rules to go through with
11:57:53 number 12.
11:57:57 >> We still have a 9:30.
11:58:03 >> We did not stop at 11:30.
11:58:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move the waiver for number 12
11:58:10 and hope it doesn't take more than five or ten
11:58:12 minutes.
11:58:13 >> Second.
11:58:13 (Motion carried).

11:58:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Who is the speaker for item number 12?
11:58:26 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's my item.
11:58:28 Last week, I don't know if the family was here but
11:58:32 they are here today.
11:58:33 My intent was to ask City Council to send a letter
11:58:36 to -- the chairman send a letter asking for the
11:58:39 Justice Department to do an investigation on the
11:58:42 Martin chamber, 1967 now.
11:58:51 Since that time the chairman did send a letter.
11:58:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Sent it to the attorney general.
11:58:55 Would you like to have a copy the mayor sent to the
11:58:58 attorney general?
11:59:00 >>> Yes.
11:59:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I would like to do, though, we
11:59:02 will hear from one person, give them three minutes, an
11:59:07 offerings representative from the family.
11:59:10 And then I would like to make a motion that council
11:59:15 send a letter, that the chairman got the letter asking
11:59:18 for a full investigation.
11:59:19 >>GWEN MILLER: You may speak.
11:59:22 >>> Good morning Madam Chair and distinguished council
11:59:25 members.

11:59:25 My name is Martin king of the black saves, civil human
11:59:32 rights organization located here in Tampa, 1115 Eskimo
11:59:36 Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33604.
11:59:39 I was told that I was going to be given 30 minutes to
11:59:42 present this proposal to you all.
11:59:47 However, if the mechanics and some things happened and
11:59:51 transpired to this, but I want to make my intent
11:59:54 clear.
11:59:55 And state to you previously the City Council in 1990
12:00:03 passed a resolution for an investigation.
12:00:11 And the reason it's important to come from the
12:00:13 legislative arm is because it comes from the community
12:00:15 and represents the city as a whole, and also it speaks
12:00:20 to what has not transpired prior to you ask the same
12:00:29 state attorney's office investigate and I'm asking for
12:00:33 you to pass a resolution for the Justice Department to
12:00:36 investigate, which has not investigated, if you have a
12:00:40 copy of those packets, the proposal, I have exhibits
12:00:44 attached, showing you that the FDLE did inquire as to
12:00:49 the FBI and Justice Department on working during that
12:00:58 particular time.
12:00:58 So the difference is that the Justice Department,

12:01:02 which is the appropriate agency to enforce the civil
12:01:05 rights of citizens, have not had the opportunity, we
12:01:10 call on for this city body to investigate, and as we
12:01:15 know, this is still the next great city.
12:01:19 And, you know, the next great city is not just in the
12:01:23 economy but it's in its character.
12:01:26 So what I'm asking you to do is remove this old relic
12:01:32 of the past.
12:01:32 Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, have moved on and it's
12:01:37 by the urging of the local government that they did
12:01:39 that.
12:01:39 So I'm asking Tampa, particularly, put our past in the
12:01:46 back of us and let's resolve this.
12:01:48 So I think it's more poignant that the resolution come
12:01:52 from the City of Tampa in reference to that.
12:01:55 And I'll be happy to answer any inquiry of the
12:01:59 council, if you have any concerns about what I'm
12:02:01 speaking of this morning.
12:02:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Mr. King, right?
12:02:07 Thank you, sir, so very much, you and the entire
12:02:10 family for being here.
12:02:11 And this was set for a time certain at 11:30.

12:02:14 Unfortunately, we passed that.
12:02:18 But I just want to make sure, I don't know who told
12:02:21 you have 30 minutes.
12:02:22 I'm not sure about that.
12:02:23 But I placed the item on the agenda because I want to
12:02:25 make sure that we sent a letter.
12:02:27 My intent was to ask the council to pass a motion to
12:02:31 send a letter to the attorney general who is in charge
12:02:33 of the Justice Department.
12:02:34 This is going to the U.S. attorney general who
12:02:37 oversees the Justice Department. My motion is to ask
12:02:40 him to come in or send a team in to do an
12:02:44 investigation of the incidents of Mr. Martin Anderson
12:02:50 being killed back in 1967.
12:02:54 And so, therefore, if council vote and pass this, a
12:02:59 letter will go from the chair.
12:03:03 Chairwoman Gwen Miller will send a letter to the U.S.
12:03:07 attorney general on behalf of this body requesting
12:03:10 such an investigation.
12:03:12 And I agree and concur with you, it's an opportunity
12:03:17 to put this issue to you rest or at least bring some
12:03:23 competent peace to this family.

12:03:25 So that's the intent.
12:03:30 -- it's to ask the chairman to write, to send to the
12:03:37 U.S. Justice Department, asking for an investigation
12:03:40 of the 1967 shooting incident of Martin Anderson.
12:03:48 >> Second.
12:03:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm sorry, Martin chamber.
12:03:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
12:03:54 I saw you standing up.
12:04:01 >>> Legal department.
12:04:02 I want to make council aware of the legislation that
12:04:05 was referenced in the document that Mr. King submitted
12:04:07 to you about Matilda, and there is federal legislation
12:04:14 being passed in the house.
12:04:15 It has not yet passed in the Senate but in the Senate
12:04:20 judiciary committee, that that will allocate a special
12:04:25 position at the Justice Department and FBI to
12:04:27 investigate specifically the cold cases from the civil
12:04:29 rights era.
12:04:30 And I just wanted to make council aware that that
12:04:34 legislation is pending and I contacted the Senate
12:04:36 offices this week.
12:04:37 It hasn't been set for a vote yet so I can't give you

12:04:40 the exact time line of when it will be passed.
12:04:42 But that's the bill that is going to allocate
12:04:45 additional funds for these kinds of investigations.
12:04:47 So to the extent that you are going to take any action
12:04:49 under that pending legislation, I just wanted to let
12:04:53 you know that hasn't yet passed.
12:04:58 >>> Let me correct something here.
12:04:59 My proposal is not lying on that legislation that the
12:05:01 council just -- counsel just proffered to you.
12:05:04 My proposal is relying on title 18, U.S. code 242
12:05:10 which was in existence since 1948.
12:05:13 I put the cold case legislation to make sure that
12:05:18 Congress was making an intent to deal with that but my
12:05:20 reliance is on the existing law at the particular time
12:05:24 so don't want to you say the law hasn't passed and you
12:05:27 can't do this because --
12:05:29 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We are not.
12:05:31 She's just bringing us up to speed on the current.
12:05:36 >>> I just for the record wanted to clear that.
12:05:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My motion is predicated on the side
12:05:42 that the family made a request, and council has a
12:05:46 motion on the floor, that we ask the U.S. attorney

12:05:48 general who heads up the Justice Department to do an
12:05:50 investigation from the 1967 shooting.
12:05:54 >>GWEN MILLER: There is a motion and second on the
12:05:57 floor.
12:05:59 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
12:06:00 Opposed, Nay.
12:06:01 (Motion carried).
12:06:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And we hope this will aid the family
12:06:06 and recognize that the City Council is trying to agree
12:06:10 with you and trying to bring some resolution and
12:06:14 resolution.
12:06:15 It.
12:06:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We would like to thank you for bringing
12:06:17 to the our attention.
12:06:18 We appreciate what you are doing and we will continue
12:06:19 to work with you.
12:06:21 Thank you.
12:06:25 >>GINA GRIMES: I was wondering if maybe just before
12:06:30 you break that Jill could update you on the status of
12:06:33 that item we were waiting for on the sidewalk
12:06:36 contract.
12:06:37 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

12:06:38 I was able to discuss this mat we are Steve Daignault
12:06:41 and so everybody understands what was in the contract
12:06:45 you approved last week which has been requested for
12:06:47 reconsideration is predominantly moneys for East Tampa
12:06:50 and work within East Tampa.
12:06:52 There is a portion that does have the opportunity to
12:06:56 allocation some resources to Bayshore but that was
12:06:59 never intended and never intended to include the
12:07:04 segments so that's not intended to be part of the
12:07:09 discussion.
12:07:10 Thank you.
12:07:11 >>GINA GRIMES: Based on that, we would withdraw our
12:07:22 request for reconsideration.
12:07:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
12:07:23 We will go into recess until 1:30.
12:07:27 (Recess taken at 12:07 p.m.)


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 2, 2007
1:30 P.M.

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.


>>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Tampa City Council is called to
order.
13:42:38:18 Roll call.
13:42:44:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
13:42:48:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
13:42:49:03 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Here.
13:42:50:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
13:42:51:04 Which item were we on?
13:42:58:27 An ordinance being presented for second reading.
13:43:09:24 Is there anyone who would like to speak on this?
13:43:12:09 45?
13:43:25:18 >> Motion to open item 45.
13:43:29:16 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Passed unanimously.
13:43:30:16 Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak

13:43:33:00 on item 45?
13:43:34:24 Is there a motion to close?
13:43:39:03 There's been a motion and second to close.
13:43:40:18 All those in favor, aye.
13:43:42:03 Mr. Miranda, would you read it?
13:43:44:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much, madam co-chair.
13:43:47:01 I move an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverage
13:43:52:00 containing alcohol by more than 1% and not more by 14%
13:43:55:25 by weight and wines regardless of alcoholic content,
13:43:59:01 beer and wine, 2-(COP)-R for consumption on the
13:44:03:18 premises only in connection with a restaurant business
13:44:06:01 establishment on a certain lot, plot or tract of land
13:44:09:00 located at 506 North Tampa Street, Tampa, Florida, as
13:44:13:00 more particularly described in section 2 hereof,
13:44:15:09 waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon
13:44:18:15 certain findings.
13:44:20:09 Providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
13:44:23:28 providing an effective date.
13:44:25:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have a motion and second.
13:44:26:09 All in favor of the motion, aye.
13:44:28:03 Any opposed.
13:44:28:27 The motion passes.
13:44:30:00 We're on item 46.
13:44:31:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to open 46.
13:44:33:18 >>THE CLERK: You need to do a roll call vote on that.

13:44:36:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm sorry.
13:44:37:01 Yes, we do.
13:44:37:28 Roll call vote on number 45.
13:44:39:28 Please record your vote.
13:44:57:03 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Mr. Scott being
13:45:01:06 absent.
13:45:03:10 >> Open 46.
13:45:04:10 >>GWEN MILLER: All of them are open.
13:45:05:21 Anybody in the audience want to speak on item 46?
13:45:09:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
13:45:10:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
13:45:11:03 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
13:45:12:15 [Motion Carried]
13:45:15:27 >> What is this establishment?
13:45:19:04 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That is a restaurant.
13:45:22:00 I believe that's Nuevo Cafe.
13:45:25:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: South of Bay to Bay on the
13:45:27:15 right-hand side.
13:45:30:25 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Thank you.
13:45:32:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move an ordinance for second
13:45:34:00 reading, ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages
13:45:36:15 containing alcohol of more than 1% by weight not more
13:45:39:18 than 14% by weight and wines regardless of alcoholic
13:45:43:04 content beer and wine 2-COP-R for consumption on the
13:45:48:10 premises only in connection with a restaurant business

13:45:50:21 establishment on that certain lot, plot, or tract of
13:45:53:09 land located at 3301 South Dale Mabry Highway, Tampa,
13:45:57:18 Florida, as more particularly described in section 2
13:45:59:21 hereof.
13:46:00:06 Waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon
13:46:03:01 certain findings, providing for repeal of all
13:46:05:15 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
13:46:07:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:46:08:15 Vote and record.
13:46:11:06 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Scott being
13:46:13:22 absent.
13:46:14:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
13:46:15:27 item 47?
13:46:16:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to close.
13:46:17:15 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
13:46:19:12 All in favor, aye.
13:46:20:12 Ms. Mulhern.
13:46:23:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I move to adopt upon second reading an
13:46:26:10 ordinance being presented on second reading, an
13:46:29:12 ordinance repealing ordinance number 2006-223; making
13:46:33:09 lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol of more
13:46:35:27 than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight and
13:46:39:19 wines regardless of alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2
13:46:42:27 (COP) for consumption on premises and in sealed
13:46:46:18 containers for consumption off premises at or from that

13:46:49:24 certain lot, plot or tract of land located at 410 South
13:46:52:28 Howard Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly
13:46:55:19 described in section 3 hereof; waiving certain
13:46:58:24 restrictions as to distance based upon certain
13:47:01:12 findings; providing for repeal of all ordinances in
13:47:05:01 conflict; providing an effective date.
13:47:07:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:47:08:12 Vote and record.
13:47:13:22 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with Scott being
13:47:15:15 absent.
13:47:16:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
13:47:18:06 item 48?
13:47:22:22 >> Jill Finney, Land Development Coordination.
13:47:26:07 I have been sworn.
13:47:27:00 The revised site plan has been received between first
13:47:30:27 and second reading.
13:47:31:25 They were certified and filed with the clerk's office.
13:47:34:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
13:47:35:00 I have a question for you.
13:47:36:03 We had discussed at the first hearing being able to
13:47:38:16 commit to the neighbors located to the south of this
13:47:41:04 property that money that's supposed to be spent on
13:47:45:07 transportation improvements would be directed toward
13:47:48:18 traffic calming and protection in their neighborhood.
13:47:50:28 And I would just like some clarification as to whether

13:47:54:21 you were able to accomplish that.
13:47:56:01 I don't know if it's dependent upon changing the
13:47:58:06 Westshore DRI to be able to spend money on that.
13:48:02:00 >>JULIA COLE: Julia Cole, Legal Department.
13:48:04:03 You may recall as we were going through this hearing,
13:48:06:00 we went through what could and could not be done as far
13:48:08:24 as the Westshore DRI.
13:48:10:13 We discussed that would have to be done separate and
13:48:12:13 apart from this zoning.
13:48:13:27 I think it would be something that we would have to
13:48:15:16 look towards changing the Westshore DRI to be able to
13:48:18:22 go ahead and use those neighborhood improvement funds
13:48:21:15 in the manner suggested.
13:48:22:28 I think your recollection, if I'm hearing you, is
13:48:25:22 talking about the potential changes to the Westshore
13:48:27:22 DRI which is in process, and we'll go through that
13:48:33:18 discussion further but would not be appropriate to be
13:48:35:21 part --
13:48:36:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
13:48:39:03 We have a motion and second to close.
13:48:40:18 All in favor of the motion, aye.
13:48:42:00 [Motion Carried]
13:48:42:28 Mr. Caetano, would you read that please?
13:48:47:12 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: An ordinance rezoning property in the
13:48:49:21 general vicinity of 4010 and 4100 Boyscout Boulevard in

13:48:55:04 the City of Tampa, Florida, and more particularly
13:48:57:04 described in section 1 from zoning district
13:48:59:10 classifications, CI, commercial intensify, to PD,
13:49:02:18 planned development mixed use office, retail, hotel,
13:49:06:04 residential, providing an effective date.
13:49:07:09 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:49:09:00 Question, Ms. Saul-Sena?
13:49:10:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
13:49:11:22 I'm not going to be able to support this because I feel
13:49:14:07 we don't yet have the tools to properly protect the
13:49:17:03 adjacent neighborhood.
13:49:18:12 And also, I was very disappointed that, in fact, if we
13:49:21:18 were being very particular about our ordinance, we
13:49:26:06 require elevations of all the buildings in a PD, and we
13:49:31:18 have absolutely no elevations of the proposed
13:49:34:01 residential development.
13:49:35:00 And I don't think it's appropriate, really, for us to
13:49:37:15 approve things that don't meet our standards.
13:49:39:15 So I'm not going to be able to support this.
13:49:41:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Have a motion and a second.
13:49:43:09 Vote and record.
13:49:50:06 >>THE CLERK: The motion carried with --
13:49:52:27 >> Does not carry.
13:49:53:24 3-3.
13:50:01:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Can we wait --

13:50:05:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Per Council's rules, this returns on
13:50:07:27 next week's agenda.
13:50:12:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Unless you waive the rules and you
13:50:13:24 won't waive the rules for this.
13:50:16:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Can we wait for Mr. Scott and then vote?
13:50:22:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right now the rules are not waived
13:50:24:21 so we move on.
13:50:25:24 >> Council members, Keith Bricklemyer, the attorney for
13:50:28:06 the applicant.
13:50:29:22 Ms. Saul-Sena indicated that there were no
13:50:31:12 elevations --
13:50:36:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: The meeting is closed.
13:50:37:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: No, we don't.
13:50:39:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you wish to take anything -- if you
13:50:42:06 wish to address Council on the vote or the merits of
13:50:46:10 the vote, it would have --
13:50:49:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's closed.
13:50:49:24 We voted.
13:50:53:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Right now it carries over to next
13:50:54:25 week unless there's a motion otherwise to waive the
13:50:57:21 rules.
13:50:58:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.
13:50:59:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Let's hear from Ms. Cole.
13:51:01:00 >>JULIA COLE: The only thing I was going to say, well,
13:51:03:27 I think what we need to do is at this point, either you

13:51:07:00 need to just assume that it will carry over or you can
13:51:10:19 vote to waive the rules to allow it to wait until
13:51:14:06 Mr. Scott gets back and that would be the action you
13:51:16:09 would need to take at this point in time.
13:51:18:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Scott hates waiving the rules,
13:51:21:09 so let's move on.
13:51:22:09 [ LAUGHTER ]
13:51:25:09 >>JULIA COLE: What I'm going to request then -- I think
13:51:30:00 what Mr. Bricklemyer is going to request is that when
13:51:33:01 it does come back next week, that the public hearing be
13:51:36:13 open so that he can address the issue, which
13:51:39:12 Ms. Saul-Sena has raised.
13:51:40:18 And that will be up to Council.
13:51:42:10 You cannot take that action right now.
13:51:44:00 I just wanted to put you on notice that I believe that
13:51:47:06 issue will be raised next week.
13:51:51:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Under unfinished business?
13:51:54:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Under unfinished business.
13:51:56:03 We go to item 49.
13:51:59:06 >> Move to withdraw.
13:52:01:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
13:52:02:21 All in favor, aye.
13:52:03:25 [Motion Carried]
13:52:04:15 Item number 50 wants to continue to September the
13:52:08:24 6th.

13:52:09:27 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So move.
13:52:14:07 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor, aye.
13:52:15:18 Item 51 want to be continued to September the 6th.
13:52:19:09 All in favor of the motion, aye.
13:52:21:09 [Motion Carried]
13:52:22:00 Okay.
13:52:22:16 We now go to our appeal hearing.
13:52:24:24 Is there anyone in the public going to speak on item
13:52:27:18 52, you need to stand and raise your right hand.
13:52:35:15 (Oath administered by clerk).
13:52:40:04 >> Good afternoon, Council, Marty McDonald, Land
13:52:43:24 Development.
13:52:44:16 I am staff to the variance review board.
13:52:46:19 This is appeal --
13:52:48:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Marty, welcome back.
13:52:50:09 >> Thank you.
13:52:50:21 Haven't seen you for a while.
13:52:52:09 You'll get to see me again here soon.
13:52:54:12 This is an appeal that came before you -- well, let me
13:53:00:18 back up here.
13:53:01:10 It went before the variance review board.
13:53:03:24 It was denied.
13:53:04:21 They appealed to City Council.
13:53:06:16 City Council remanded it back to the variance review
13:53:10:19 board, it was denied again, and now it's back in front

13:53:14:24 of you.
13:53:15:01 The VRB case is 07-25.
13:53:18:03 Would Council like me to refresh your memory on the
13:53:20:15 case?
13:53:21:00 It's been a while.
13:53:22:06 It went to the June 12th VRB hearing.
13:53:25:00 The address 4008 Ohio Avenue.
13:53:27:16 The petitioner's name is Carlos Rivera Morales.
13:53:31:21 They are requesting to reduce the front yard setback
13:53:33:21 from 25 feet to 13.5 feet with allowed encroachments of
13:53:38:00 the eaves and gutters in order to retain a double
13:53:43:00 carport.
13:53:43:06 The petitioner is asking for relief from section 27-77.
13:53:47:09 The petitioner gave testimony that he hired a builder,
13:53:50:03 the contractor.
13:53:50:25 The builder committed to pull permits.
13:53:53:06 The builder did not pull permits.
13:53:55:19 They were cited, and that -- by code enforcement, and
13:54:00:00 that brought him before the variance review board.
13:54:03:22 The petitioner submitted -- this is called the --
13:54:09:18 [INAUDIBLE]
13:54:10:09 33 pictures of carports in his immediate neighborhood.
13:54:14:24 This is the aerial.
13:54:18:06 This is the aerial of the site.
13:54:20:01 Ohio Avenue.

13:54:22:06 West Bay Avenue, and this is Grady.
13:54:25:00 This is the subject site.
13:54:26:18 And also, the site plan, it shows his existing home,
13:54:35:07 and this is the carport.
13:54:38:15 And I believe Mr. Morales is here and would like to
13:54:43:13 speak to you.
13:54:44:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question to legal?
13:54:45:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.
13:54:47:09 Just a minute, Mr. Morales.
13:54:51:18 We have a question for legal.
13:54:54:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The VRB attorney?
13:54:58:03 >> I am not, but Ms. Wysong is on vacation.
13:55:01:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We had an appeals standard.
13:55:06:25 It looks like that's the standard we're operating under
13:55:09:27 that we send it to VRB, we reverse, send it to the VRB,
13:55:14:10 they didn't do anything with it.
13:55:16:00 So now it's bounced back to us.
13:55:17:28 >> That's correct.
13:55:18:16 That's correct, yes.
13:55:19:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What are our choices?
13:55:21:12 >> You can approve.
13:55:22:09 You can deny.
13:55:23:00 Or you can approve with conditions.
13:55:24:15 At this point, you can take any action that the board
13:55:29:09 could take.

13:55:31:15 Before, you had to remand it, but you don't have to do
13:55:34:12 that anymore.
13:55:35:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have the ability to override the
13:55:36:18 VRB in today's hearing?
13:55:38:28 >> That's correct.
13:55:39:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If Council would like, I can read you
13:55:41:16 the provision of the code that references that.
13:55:44:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You said Council would like.
13:55:48:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we're okay.
13:55:50:09 >> I would like to hear it.
13:55:52:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Section 27-373-8 states in part, if a
13:55:59:21 petition is remanded back to the board or commission,
13:56:02:06 then the board or commission shall only consider and
13:56:05:01 take action based upon the direction from the City
13:56:06:27 Council indicating how the board or commission failed
13:56:09:00 to comply with the standards that were referenced
13:56:11:12 above.
13:56:12:07 If the petition is, again, appealed to the City Council
13:56:15:13 and the City Council finds that the board or commission
13:56:17:19 has still failed to comply with the above standards as
13:56:20:15 directed by the City Council, then the City Council may
13:56:23:12 take any action with which the board or commission was
13:56:27:19 authorized to take.
13:56:29:28 In making this determination, the City Council shall
13:56:32:04 not take any new evidence or testimony, shall only

13:56:34:22 review the record established during the public
13:56:36:25 hearings by the board or commission and hear argument.
13:56:44:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
13:56:44:21 Mr. Morales.
13:56:47:06 >> Good afternoon, members of the board.
13:56:49:06 My name is Carlos Morales.
13:56:53:28 Resident at 4008 Ohio Avenue.
13:56:56:09 Thank you very much for giving the opportunity to
13:56:57:21 present my petition one more time.
13:56:59:16 Today I'm asking for reconsideration since my petition
13:57:06:03 was denied June 12th by the VRB.
13:57:09:09 My petition consists of reducing the front setback from
13:57:14:01 25 feet to 13.5 feet so I can retain a two-car carport
13:57:19:06 that was built on the property.
13:57:21:15 As Marty explained before, I had a company who built me
13:57:26:27 a garage and a carport.
13:57:28:25 They are supposed to do the paperwork and apply for
13:57:32:19 permits, which was not.
13:57:37:01 Code enforcement came into the house asking for the
13:57:39:03 permits.
13:57:40:16 At that time, I did not have the permits.
13:57:42:09 He explained to me what I was supposed to do, to apply
13:57:47:00 for the variance and do the right paperwork so I can
13:57:49:22 obtain the proper permits for that.
13:57:52:03 Which I did for the garage but did not do that one for

13:57:54:24 the carport because I had to apply for the variance.
13:57:59:15 Before I decide to make the carport, because I wanted
13:58:05:13 to do some home improvements.
13:58:07:19 I surveyed the area.
13:58:08:27 I tried to find out which was the best way to do some
13:58:12:06 home improvements.
13:58:13:10 And I decide to build a carport to my house.
13:58:16:06 I have a medical condition, and that way it will
13:58:20:22 improve the home improvements, also help the community,
13:58:23:21 because what I was going to do, what I did was a good
13:58:27:15 presentable carport.
13:58:29:04 I know at that time, I had nothing to go by because I
13:58:32:27 have to depend on the VRB board.
13:58:35:15 I did present my case twice.
13:58:39:06 Depending on what's going to happen --
13:58:44:15 I notice if you go to south Tampa there are a lot of
13:58:49:21 carports.
13:58:50:09 I don't intend to go and point anybody who has a
13:58:54:21 carport legally or illegally.
13:58:56:09 I'm just trying to defend my situation.
13:58:58:01 I didn't know I had to apply for the variance.
13:58:59:27 I accept full responsibility for that.
13:59:02:10 And I'm just asking for reconsideration so I can retain
13:59:05:19 my carport.
13:59:06:15 Thank you.

13:59:07:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
13:59:07:15 Any questions of Council members?
13:59:09:03 Mr. Caetano.
13:59:10:21 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: You showed a picture there that there
13:59:12:03 are 33 carports.
13:59:14:12 What are the setbacks on those carports?
13:59:18:06 Do you have any idea?
13:59:20:12 >> My street, it's supposed to be 25 feet.
13:59:22:27 That's what I was told by the zoning department.
13:59:25:00 However, there are some areas where there are only 20.
13:59:28:09 My street, my size 25 feet from the fence line to the
13:59:33:12 house.
13:59:35:19 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Are any of the carports in that
13:59:38:22 picture less than 20 feet?
13:59:46:12 >> We have pictures of others closer up if you would
13:59:48:19 like to see them.
13:59:50:18 >> There are some carports in the area.
13:59:58:24 I just concentrated from Dale Mabry to Clark.
14:00:02:00 I didn't go too far away.
14:00:03:13 I did ask those people for feedback.
14:00:08:18 Not every one of those carports really are set up close
14:00:12:10 to the sidewalk, but the majority are.
14:00:15:25 For example, this one is almost in front of the house
14:00:20:24 and this is a few houses south of my house.
14:00:25:25 This is on the corner, Clark and Ohio.

14:00:29:15 This is Clark and Ohio.
14:00:33:21 As you can see, all the pictures over here show at
14:00:47:15 least 90% of the carports are basically built close to
14:00:51:10 the fence line or to the sidewalk.
14:00:53:24 I can show you all the pictures you want.
14:01:08:10 >> Do you have a picture of yours?
14:01:09:25 >> Yes, ma'am, I do.
14:01:11:06 >>MARY MULHERN: Could you put it up there with some of
14:01:12:24 these so we can compare them?
14:01:16:00 >> This is looking at the front, the two-car carport.
14:01:33:10 This is the front.
14:01:37:15 This is my gate over here which is closed at nighttime.
14:01:41:03 You can look over here looking from the west to the
14:01:43:16 east, the distance on the fence line to the edge of the
14:01:47:19 corporate.
14:01:48:07 Looking from the east to the west, distance set up from
14:01:54:03 the end of the carport to the fence line.
14:01:56:03 As you can see, I do not block any view of my next-door
14:01:59:15 neighbor.
14:02:00:18 It's built way back.
14:02:06:06 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: So you have 13 feet from your
14:02:08:06 property line to the edge --
14:02:09:21 >> Yes, sir.
14:02:10:03 Distance measured from the fence line to the carport.
14:02:16:27 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: In your opinion, have you checked

14:02:18:24 some of the others, what their distance are?
14:02:21:09 >> Yes.
14:02:22:18 Some are almost close to the fence line, some to the
14:02:25:18 sidewalk.
14:02:26:21 I don't know if you are familiar with south Tampa over
14:02:29:07 there.
14:02:31:18 I didn't know they have to go -- you know, the 25 feet
14:02:35:21 setback.
14:02:36:06 They want to charge me an extra fee to break it down
14:02:42:06 and I lose the money I spent building the carport or
14:02:45:12 trying to obtain the legal permits so I can retain the
14:02:48:09 carport.
14:02:49:16 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to clarify or to find
14:02:52:27 out, did you measure any of the carports so we know
14:02:56:27 what the distance is?
14:02:58:18 The setbacks that they have?
14:03:01:15 >> No, I wasn't authorized to do that.
14:03:03:27 I just talked to some of the owners, and what their
14:03:07:06 advice was to make sure they have -- before I build
14:03:11:00 that.
14:03:12:27 Two feet, three feet, some almost to the edge of the
14:03:16:15 sidewalk.
14:03:16:25 That's almost all of them.
14:03:23:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Is there one you could put up that
14:03:25:09 would look like it had less of a setback?

14:03:30:06 >> 25 --
14:03:34:28 >>MARY MULHERN: If you could put one of those pictures
14:03:38:27 next to yours that is very close to the --
14:03:45:07 >> How far back is that one?
14:03:49:06 >> You can see there where the sidewalk is.
14:04:09:09 >>MARY MULHERN: My question was for Ms. McDonald.
14:04:15:07 These other carports that he's showing us that are
14:04:18:18 similar, do we know if those are up to code?
14:04:23:22 >> We do not know which ones are legal conforming or
14:04:28:12 legal nonconforming.
14:04:30:10 Some were built 20, 25 years ago.
14:04:34:27 Some of been built recently.
14:04:36:15 And there's no way for us to know.
14:04:38:16 I think Mr. Morales without actually having a survey
14:04:42:27 done on each property to know exactly the difference
14:04:45:18 between the property line.
14:04:46:18 Typically, a property line is right behind the
14:04:49:09 sidewalk.
14:04:50:09 It's not always.
14:04:51:19 Sometimes the sidewalk is included in a property line.
14:04:57:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions?
14:04:59:03 Mr. Dingfelder.
14:05:01:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Let me yield to Ms. Saul-Sena.
14:05:04:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I need to ask a question of staff,
14:05:07:10 if I may.

14:05:08:06 What is supposed to be the basis on which we make a
14:05:17:21 decision?
14:05:19:24 >> Well, there are the five hardship criteria.
14:05:24:12 And I can pull those out.
14:05:26:06 But being the property is unique and singular, that --
14:05:31:24 and the VRB has to consider at least one of those five
14:05:35:28 hardship criteria to be able to pass it.
14:05:38:15 It doesn't cause any harm to the neighbors.
14:05:42:18 Let me get the criteria out.
14:05:46:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Do you have copies for us,
14:05:47:27 Mr. Shelby?
14:05:49:09 Thank you.
14:05:58:03 >> Will not substantially interfere or injure the
14:06:01:12 health, safety or welfare of others.
14:06:04:25 The variance is harmony with and serves the general
14:06:08:06 intent and purpose of the chapter 27 and the comp plan.
14:06:12:13 If the variance is approved, it will result in
14:06:15:18 substantial justice being done considering both the
14:06:17:19 public benefit intended to be secured by chapter 27.
14:06:21:18 And the individual hardships that will be suffered due
14:06:23:24 to failure of the board to grant a variance.
14:06:26:19 What they have to do is at least -- I believe -- they
14:06:30:18 used to have to consider all five.
14:06:32:12 Now if they feel like they meet one of them, they could
14:06:35:15 approve the variance request.

14:06:39:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions, Council members?
14:06:41:09 Mr. Dingfelder.
14:06:42:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move to close and then I'll
14:06:44:07 make a motion.
14:06:46:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
14:06:46:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second to close.
14:06:48:13 All in favor, aye.
14:06:51:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Council, we heard this back in May
14:06:55:22 on the first appeal.
14:06:58:18 We don't have the transcript, but we all know how we
14:07:01:10 voted.
14:07:01:25 We agreed with the gentleman, we sent it back to VRB.
14:07:04:28 They didn't agree.
14:07:05:28 They sent it back to us.
14:07:07:06 Now it's a Ping-Pong ball.
14:07:08:24 And I think we need to stop the game.
14:07:11:07 So I do believe and I think my motion the last time was
14:07:14:18 based upon the fact that item number 3, that if
14:07:17:27 granted, this will not substantially interfere with the
14:07:21:04 health, safety or welfare of others whose property
14:07:23:18 would be affected by allowance of the variance.
14:07:26:19 If you look through the file, the neighbors on either
14:07:28:24 side of him have sent him letters in support.
14:07:32:12 Thereof never been neighbors in opposition, to the best
14:07:35:03 of my knowledge.

14:07:36:03 This particular -- these particular streets in this
14:07:39:15 particular area, this is south of Gandy, right?
14:07:41:28 >> Yes, sir.
14:07:43:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It is in my district and I'm aware
14:07:44:27 of the area.
14:07:46:03 It has a lot of carports as you've sen in the evidence.
14:07:49:12 With that I believe he has met the hardship criteria
14:07:51:15 and I would move to, once again, reverse the VRB's
14:07:57:13 decision with due respect to the VRB.
14:08:00:10 They put in good time.
14:08:01:21 They put in good work.
14:08:03:03 But in this case I move to reverse them.
14:08:05:15 >> Second.
14:08:07:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
14:08:07:27 Question, Ms. Mulhern.
14:08:10:03 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
14:08:11:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena.
14:08:12:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
14:08:12:21 The real issue here was the irresponsible contractor
14:08:19:13 who built without pulling permits.
14:08:21:18 And after we vote on this, I'm going to see if we can't
14:08:25:01 do something about that contractor and his license.
14:08:27:22 Because that's why this gentleman is in the state he's
14:08:30:24 in.
14:08:31:13 Had permits been pulled, the setbacks would have been

14:08:33:27 evident, and we wouldn't be here now.
14:08:37:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
14:08:39:03 >>MARY MULHERN: Yeah, I thought better and thought I
14:08:41:06 needed to say something.
14:08:42:16 I watched the transcript when he came back to the
14:08:47:07 variance review board.
14:08:49:12 And I think that they said there were four of these
14:08:55:13 five criteria which were not met.
14:08:57:27 I guess you only have to meet one criteria now which
14:09:01:12 doesn't make much sense.
14:09:02:24 I think they voted unanimously not to approve it.
14:09:06:00 And I kind of feel like we're entrusting this to them.
14:09:09:06 They've listened to the whole record.
14:09:11:25 They've talked about it.
14:09:12:25 They've looked at it.
14:09:14:06 And I value their advice on this.
14:09:18:06 And I think the way that this would affect the
14:09:21:24 neighborhood is that we don't know if those other ones
14:09:26:15 are in compliance.
14:09:27:21 We're just allowing another carport that's taking up
14:09:31:10 practically a whole lot.
14:09:32:24 When you look at the site plan, it's almost as big as
14:09:36:21 his house, his carport and garage together.
14:09:39:09 And I just think every time we do this, we're setting
14:09:42:18 another precedent.

14:09:44:09 Who knows, we may end up having everyone -- more and
14:09:47:12 more people coming to us to appeal the decisions of our
14:09:50:13 variance review board, which we've entrusted to make
14:09:53:12 these decisions.
14:09:54:06 So I'm not going to vote to overturn their objection.
14:09:59:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:10:00:12 Question, Mr. Shelby.
14:10:02:07 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just to clarify by the maker of the
14:10:03:27 motion, by reversing the decision, you will grant the
14:10:07:09 variance.
14:10:09:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Correct.
14:10:09:10 Reverse the VRB's decision, which has the effect under
14:10:12:10 our code of granting the variance as requested.
14:10:14:25 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of that motion, aye.
14:10:17:03 Opposed nay.
14:10:18:27 >>THE CLERK: Saul-Sena, Miranda and Mulhern voting no.
14:10:22:12 The motion would have to -- [INAUDIBLE]
14:10:27:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's 3-3.
14:10:29:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Caetano voted no?
14:10:32:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Pursuant to rule 4-C of Council's
14:10:34:27 rules of procedure.
14:10:47:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Tiebreaker just came in.
14:10:56:16 >> Scott, are you prepared to vote?
14:11:06:21 There was a 3-3 vote.
14:11:08:06 Normally under Council's rules, rule 4-C, this is

14:11:12:03 returned under unfinished business at the next week's
14:11:15:01 agenda to give the absent member time to review the
14:11:17:12 record and be able to be prepared to vote on the
14:11:20:06 subject.
14:11:20:15 If you are prepared to vote, if you had the
14:11:23:00 opportunity --
14:11:24:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Is this the item I voted on?
14:11:28:00 >> In May you voted on it.
14:11:30:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Sent it back to the VRB.
14:11:32:12 >> An appeal hearing that was just concluded.
14:11:36:09 >>MARY MULHERN: We sent it back to the variance review
14:11:38:06 board.
14:11:38:18 He appealed to us.
14:11:39:25 And the variance review board denied it again.
14:11:43:12 And now he's appealing again.
14:11:45:15 So we're to decide.
14:11:49:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Do we have any backup?
14:11:52:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If you want to wait till next week.
14:11:55:25 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll wait to next week.
14:11:57:18 We'll make our decision next week under unfinished
14:12:00:19 business.
14:12:02:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The Council will vote under unfinished
14:12:05:04 business at next week's morning agenda.
14:12:08:06 >> Do I have to come back over here?
14:12:09:25 >> If you wish to know what the vote -- I would

14:12:12:27 recommend you be here, if you can.
14:12:22:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I want to know what my vote was last
14:12:24:03 time.
14:12:27:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it was unanimous last time.
14:12:29:06 >>GWEN MILLER: It was unanimous last time for them to
14:12:31:06 send it back to grant it.
14:12:32:21 But they didn't grant it.
14:12:36:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: What the Council's initial vote was to
14:12:39:00 remand?
14:12:41:01 >> It was unanimous to send it back to the variance
14:12:43:04 review board.
14:12:46:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to waive the rules.
14:12:49:21 Move to waive the rules to have Mr. Scott vote and be
14:12:57:03 done with this.
14:12:59:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you make your motion again.
14:13:01:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's a motion to waive the rules.
14:13:03:18 >> Second.
14:13:04:03 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:13:05:09 All in favor of the motion, aye.
14:13:08:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: My motion is as it stood before, the
14:13:11:15 motion is to once again for the second time reverse the
14:13:14:15 VRB, but this time put some finality to it because when
14:13:18:06 we reverse the VRB this time, he doesn't have to go
14:13:21:06 back.
14:13:21:16 Our decision will be final, and he will get his

14:13:23:12 variance for the carport that's on the top of the
14:13:25:22 screen.
14:13:27:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a question on the motion.
14:13:29:22 The last time we sent it back to them, we didn't
14:13:33:15 reverse it.
14:13:34:15 Is that correct?
14:13:35:18 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's correct.
14:13:36:00 You cannot undue your present standards for an appeal.
14:13:40:15 You are required when it's first appealed to remand it
14:13:44:27 back with instruction as to how they failed to comply
14:13:48:00 with what you thought were the standards or the
14:13:51:25 criteria necessary.
14:13:53:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I stand corrected.
14:13:54:12 It was remanded the first time back to them.
14:13:56:22 This time it would be reversed and we would grant the
14:13:59:15 variance.
14:14:00:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have a second?
14:14:01:03 Saul-Sena second it.
14:14:05:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Well, I changed my mind.
14:14:07:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Caetano, will you second it?
14:14:10:10 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Second.
14:14:10:21 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor, aye.
14:14:12:00 Opposed, nay.
14:14:13:24 >>THE CLERK: Saul-Sena, Miranda and Mulhern voting no.
14:14:17:00 The motion carried.

14:14:22:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You succeeded.
14:14:24:21 >> Thank you very much.
14:14:26:09 >>GWEN MILLER: You're welcome.
14:14:27:15 Okay.
14:14:27:25 We now go to information from Council members.
14:14:30:06 Mr. Caetano, do you have any new business?
14:14:35:12 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: No.
14:14:36:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
14:14:38:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I would like to ask staff to --
14:14:44:01 for a staff report on the status of the transportation
14:14:49:13 concurrency exemption revisions.
14:14:55:28 They are working on it, I guess.
14:14:57:27 And I would like to know where they are on that.
14:14:59:27 And I would like to know as soon as we could.
14:15:01:25 If we could do it next week first thing, we might hear
14:15:05:27 something about that.
14:15:10:00 >>THE CLERK: I believe there's a motion -- let me
14:15:12:04 check.
14:15:12:06 One made last Thursday night.
14:15:13:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That was on the DRI, the Westshore
14:15:16:09 DRI.
14:15:17:06 But that's different.
14:15:31:24 >> I believe there was a motion made on the TCEA.
14:15:36:03 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we go ahead and do it and
14:15:37:21 if it turns out that there's something already in the

14:15:40:03 works, then we'll do whatever comes first.
14:15:42:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you want a written report?
14:15:44:09 >>MARY MULHERN: No, I want a verbal.
14:15:45:28 I would like them to come and tell us where they are at
14:15:48:24 it so we can discuss.
14:15:50:12 If we can, next week.
14:15:52:00 >> Second.
14:15:57:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Two reminders to Council.
14:16:00:00 Number one is a reminder that you're having another
14:16:02:18 workshop on the comprehensive plan next week, and that
14:16:05:12 Mr. Goers, who normally represents the city on these
14:16:08:24 planning issues, I don't know, maybe somebody from
14:16:10:21 transportation will be able to answer this question.
14:16:14:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Roll it into Randy's report, because
14:16:16:09 it's comp plan related.
14:16:17:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Except for the fact that Mr. Goers
14:16:20:12 will not be here next week and Mr. Snelling will be
14:16:23:09 standing in.
14:16:24:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: This will be a transportation person
14:16:26:00 anyway, so ...
14:16:29:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do you want to do it in the
14:16:31:12 afternoon?
14:16:34:15 >>THE CLERK: Last Thursday night, there was a motion
14:16:36:09 made by Mr. Dingfelder, seconded by Linda Saul-Sena
14:16:39:06 that Daignault requested to appear before Council on

14:16:44:06 August 9 to provide a report on the status of the
14:16:46:27 ongoing TCEA status.
14:16:49:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Sorry.
14:16:51:24 >>GWEN MILLER: So withdraw your motion.
14:16:53:24 >>MARY MULHERN: I withdraw my motion.
14:16:55:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else?
14:16:55:24 Reverend Scott.
14:16:59:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Madam Chair, members of the board, just
14:17:01:12 a couple of things I want to bring you up to date on.
14:17:03:27 Central Park Village on Monday had their formal
14:17:07:13 demolition program and began the demolition of Central
14:17:11:06 Park Village, which was a very good turnout.
14:17:14:04 And we were there.
14:17:15:04 I was there representing the City Council.
14:17:20:01 And had an opportunity to make remarks.
14:17:32:07 >>GWEN MILLER: I was taking my mother to the hospital.
14:17:35:01 I was there from 12 to 8:30 in the morning.
14:17:38:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You're in our prayers, your mother as
14:17:40:27 well.
14:17:41:07 So I was there.
14:17:42:04 And I wanted to bring you all up on that.
14:17:45:16 And hopefully as that project move forward, here again,
14:17:49:10 it's an opportunity to benefit the residents and the
14:17:52:12 entire community.
14:17:54:01 So I'm really excited about that.

14:17:56:09 Then, also, as you know, the task force, the
14:17:59:16 transportation task force did pass the report by Ken
14:18:04:18 hay, which encompasses I think a half million dollars
14:18:07:09 in terms of -- transportation needs.
14:18:11:27 Phase two, we'll start that I think this month.
14:18:17:03 Begin to discuss phase two.
14:18:18:18 And then lastly, the letter, Madam Chair, has already
14:18:21:06 your signature, this is for the issue we voted on this
14:18:32:09 morning.
14:18:32:27 Just for the sake of the public, want them to be aware
14:18:36:07 that the Chairman has already drafted a letter and
14:18:38:25 signed it going to the attorney general on behalf of
14:18:41:27 the City Council on the City of Tampa, Florida, request
14:18:46:06 the United States Department of Justice fully
14:18:48:03 investigate the shooting death of Martin van chambers,
14:18:51:12 a Tampa resident who was killed on July the 11th,
14:18:55:15 1967, conduct such an investigation will provide
14:18:59:07 comfort and peace to our community knowing the cause of
14:19:02:09 justice -- your attention to this important matter of
14:19:05:15 great public interest is very much appreciated.
14:19:08:07 Please keep us apprised of your office action.
14:19:11:06 Signed by the Chairman.
14:19:13:15 I just wanted you to know that has gone out, for the
14:19:16:18 public and for the particular family as well.
14:19:18:24 Madam Chairman, that's what I have in terms of the

14:19:21:18 update.
14:19:26:21 >> [INAUDIBLE]
14:19:28:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
14:19:29:06 Mr. Dingfelder.
14:19:32:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
14:19:33:03 Good job on the chamber's issue.
14:19:37:03 I think, obviously, it's long overdue.
14:19:39:21 Tom, the only thing I wanted to mention on that phase
14:19:43:03 two, it's great they passed phase one, $500 million.
14:19:46:21 I asked Ken Hagan, we were at the chamber meeting last
14:19:50:06 week and I asked him to tell us a little bit about
14:19:52:16 phase two.
14:19:53:06 He said, well, they are going to start discussing phase
14:19:55:19 two.
14:19:56:04 And that was really about the next five years.
14:19:58:15 And I saw sort of everybody around the room kind of
14:20:02:07 went, because phase two is supposed to be about mass
14:20:05:06 transit and the possibility of rail and that sort of
14:20:08:06 thing.
14:20:08:21 I think everybody really wants to wrap their hands and
14:20:11:16 move forward while we have the momentum in the
14:20:13:19 community to do so.
14:20:14:19 So I'm hoping on behalf of Council and the city you'll
14:20:18:24 push them forward and not necessarily wait for another
14:20:21:06 five years to do that.

14:20:22:19 That's just an aside.
14:20:25:00 Let's see, a couple of substantive things, Bonnie Wise
14:20:30:12 in the Mayor's office, the Mayor is coming to us next
14:20:33:09 Thursday, previously it was scheduled for 9:30 in the
14:20:36:00 morning with the recommended budgets.
14:20:37:07 They are asking to move that till 10 a.m.
14:20:39:18 I guess a motion might be in order.
14:20:41:10 I'll move that.
14:20:43:06 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:20:44:09 All in favor, aye.
14:20:45:06 [Motion Carried]
14:20:46:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: At our retreat or strategic planning
14:20:50:00 workshop, at the end of the meeting, we all kind of
14:20:52:15 picked tasks that we might be interested in working on,
14:20:55:15 and it was sort of at least informally agreed we would
14:20:59:03 move forward on that.
14:21:00:03 The one that was selected or I selected and everybody
14:21:02:28 seemed to be okay with it was about to draft a green
14:21:08:00 building ordinance.
14:21:09:21 And what I realized was in meeting with some members of
14:21:12:21 the community, was that there's a lot of excitement out
14:21:16:03 there about the city kind of taking the lead and moving
14:21:19:15 forward on this issue.
14:21:20:27 So instead of me and Thom Snelling and staff just
14:21:24:12 working on this, what I decided, I would like to go

14:21:27:24 ahead with your blessing and form a task force, not a
14:21:30:21 two-year task force, but a task force that's going to
14:21:33:24 grab it, meet every other week and come back to you
14:21:36:27 hopefully by December with an ordinance in hand that
14:21:39:09 has meat on it.
14:21:40:27 Little explanation but long way to get to the fact that
14:21:43:15 if there's a motion to direct me to do that, I'll move
14:21:47:19 forward with the task force.
14:21:49:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
14:21:50:06 All in favor of the motion, aye.
14:21:52:06 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I will include the
14:21:53:18 administration, obviously.
14:21:54:13 Thank you.
14:21:58:16 And, let's see.
14:22:00:00 I'll bring that up next week.
14:22:05:00 You've received e-mail, I think, from Bart DePury.
14:22:10:03 Mr. DePury has an air conditioning business in Ybor
14:22:15:15 City and he continually gets flooded.
14:22:17:24 And this has happened at least -- well, many years.
14:22:20:24 But I think it's gotten worse because of the I-4
14:22:23:09 construction.
14:22:23:27 Did you see his e-mail?
14:22:25:00 He's really irate.
14:22:26:07 Anyway, I think he deserves an opportunity for that to
14:22:30:00 be aired out, that issue to be aired out and

14:22:33:16 administration to come back and talk with us.
14:22:35:19 With that, on the 23rd of this month, I would like
14:22:39:03 the stormwater department to come and discuss that --
14:22:41:09 not just Mr. DePury's property, but that section of
14:22:45:16 town, the flooding over there, what if anything we can
14:22:48:04 do about it and also our relationship with D.O.T. on
14:22:51:00 that issue.
14:22:53:15 >>MARY MULHERN: John, I had discussion with our
14:22:57:19 stormwater person about this.
14:23:00:22 Did you?
14:23:01:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.
14:23:01:27 And I think it's just important.
14:23:03:21 He can have discussion with us one on one.
14:23:06:15 >>MARY MULHERN: No.
14:23:06:25 I think it's good.
14:23:07:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It's good to have the whole
14:23:09:06 community involved.
14:23:10:00 I'll tell Mr. DePury we're discussing in case he
14:23:13:24 wants to join us.
14:23:14:24 That's the 23rd.
14:23:16:07 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:23:17:12 All in favor of the motion, aye.
14:23:19:03 Opposed, nay.
14:23:19:27 [Motion Carried]
14:23:20:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's all.

14:23:21:07 Thank you.
14:23:21:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda.
14:23:23:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you very much.
14:23:23:21 I want to, again, just talk about water a little bit.
14:23:26:06 It rains just about every day now, even though we're
14:23:29:09 way behind the needed goals to provide the quality of
14:23:33:03 water that we do.
14:23:34:03 We're still using four to five million gallons of water
14:23:38:22 or more on watering days, Tuesdays and Sundays.
14:23:41:21 I see the amount of citations going down.
14:23:45:09 I'm not happy with that, because I see more and more
14:23:48:18 people on a drenching water day still have their
14:23:53:04 sprinklers on, and that's just not right.
14:23:55:18 I can also tell you that the Water Department now, you
14:23:58:10 can apply for toilet rebates online, and we've had
14:24:03:15 34,000 different types of individuals change from
14:24:09:16 guzzling toilets to those that use 1.6 gallons a flush.
14:24:13:18 And that saves a considerable amount of water.
14:24:16:27 I ask you, if you need that for $100 rebate, to dial
14:24:23:13 the Tampagov.net and Franco, I guess that's who is in
14:24:29:04 charge of it because that's what I have here, and see
14:24:31:18 what happens there.
14:24:32:25 Also, I've had a couple of requests from people who
14:24:35:24 sent anonymous letters.
14:24:37:22 I usually don't follow up on anonymous things, but I

14:24:42:00 understand the -- kind of you're put in a situation
14:24:47:01 where your kid wants to play soccer or something, and
14:24:50:21 city park, where it's at being from the original intent
14:24:54:28 of the city to have a contract with those individuals
14:24:57:18 that or little league or something to that effect that
14:25:02:09 manages those parks for a dollar a year are being used
14:25:05:27 for the benefit and maybe rightly so.
14:25:09:27 I don't know, for revenue producing.
14:25:11:25 You want to play in AAU soccer league or whatever, you
14:25:14:21 have to pay so much and pay your expense and pay the
14:25:17:13 coach and pay the travel.
14:25:18:24 And in my opinion -- and my opinion is this, if you can
14:25:21:21 afford it, go do it.
14:25:23:12 I never did that, and that doesn't mean that it's right
14:25:26:10 or wrong, but I've had some requests from people who
14:25:29:01 don't have the means to pay and the kids want to
14:25:33:04 participate, and they are hampered by the cost.
14:25:36:16 But I would like to have a response from the department
14:25:38:22 of the city to tell us what they can and cannot do.
14:25:42:19 And I'm not on either side of this issue.
14:25:45:06 I'm just bringing it forward because I've had some
14:25:47:24 complaints on it.
14:25:48:21 If I can do that.
14:25:50:22 And then lately, also, lastly, I should say, I want to
14:25:55:25 send a commendation to Ortencia.

14:26:01:19 I don't know her last name.
14:26:03:03 She has been going up and down this elevator when I had
14:26:06:13 long hair.
14:26:07:03 And Ortencia has more train traveled on the elevator
14:26:11:22 than any astronaut in this country.
14:26:13:10 She's been to the moon and back various times if you
14:26:15:27 measure the distance of the eight floors throughout her
14:26:18:21 time and service with the city.
14:26:20:03 So I think it would be appropriate to do it next
14:26:24:21 Wednesday at her going away gathering, if I may ask
14:26:28:22 that.
14:26:29:10 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:26:30:18 All in favor, aye.
14:26:31:25 Opposed, nay.
14:26:33:21 [Motion Carried]
14:26:34:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's it.
14:26:38:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: -- with regard from information -- in
14:26:40:22 the form of a motion.
14:26:42:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think we were all involved in that
14:26:44:10 motion.
14:26:44:21 The Ortencia motion is for -- the --
14:26:52:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Then it's not going to be --
14:26:55:18 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me do it the other way.
14:26:57:09 I make a motion, like a good boy should, to ask the
14:27:04:03 administration to report to this Council what's going

14:27:07:21 on in the park and recreation department, whether those
14:27:10:27 lands are leased to and by the individuals who we have
14:27:14:09 a contract with are entitled to release that property
14:27:17:07 to somebody else who is making some money on it.
14:27:19:25 That's very basic simple.
14:27:21:15 I thank you very much.
14:27:23:19 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion, aye.
14:27:25:07 Ms. Saul-Sena.
14:27:27:00 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
14:27:28:09 I've been around for many budget years, but we've never
14:27:31:19 faced the kind of cutbacks that we're facing this year.
14:27:34:19 And I'm very concerned that Council will have an
14:27:37:13 opportunity once we receive the budget next week to
14:27:40:24 really consider it as carefully -- I personally find
14:27:49:03 the city budget a really daunting packet of
14:27:54:01 information.
14:27:54:12 And -- excuse me, Marty.
14:27:59:12 I need to get John, our budget chair -- I need to
14:28:02:25 know -- I feel like we're going to need additional help
14:28:05:16 this year.
14:28:07:27 For example, we've lost some positions.
14:28:11:01 One of the positions that's been cut I think forms --
14:28:13:15 is very important.
14:28:14:19 I want to discuss how we reinstate a position, perhaps,
14:28:19:18 that's been cut.

14:28:20:18 Do we have to identify money coming from a specific
14:28:23:18 source?
14:28:24:06 I really wish that we had our own budget analyst, but
14:28:27:13 we don't.
14:28:28:06 But I need to see -- I want us to think carefully about
14:28:32:03 how we can be most effective in going over the budget
14:28:35:18 with each other, with the administration, and what the
14:28:38:16 process is, if we want to add or delete something from
14:28:41:19 the budget.
14:28:45:04 I don't have a specific direction to say this is what
14:28:49:03 we need to do.
14:28:50:07 I just feel that we are all going to need more
14:28:53:06 technical support than we have needed in years past
14:28:56:18 because of the cuts that are a part of it.
14:28:59:12 What happens is, we're given this budget, and it's
14:29:02:15 bound.
14:29:03:00 And even though this administration has said that they
14:29:08:06 discussed with each of us what our priorities are, this
14:29:10:06 is a particularly strange year.
14:29:12:16 And I don't understand what the process is going to be
14:29:16:04 in terms of cutting and adding and how it's all going
14:29:19:18 to work together.
14:29:20:18 And I just feel like we need to be aware that we might
14:29:23:21 need to set extra time aside to work through this and
14:29:26:19 we don't have that much time.

14:29:28:00 We have a total of six weeks.
14:29:31:18 >> [INAUDIBLE]
14:29:36:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I haven't seen this year's.
14:29:39:07 None of us has.
14:29:43:01 >> [INAUDIBLE]
14:29:43:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The other thing very confusing just
14:29:45:16 to share with you, for example, in the parks and
14:29:47:06 recreation, they'll have a list of so many positions.
14:29:51:00 They won't -- for example, if I were interested, which
14:29:54:19 I am very specifically in the greenways and trails
14:29:58:12 position being cut, I think it's an important position.
14:30:01:09 The greenways and trail staff person has brought in
14:30:04:25 hundreds of millions -- not hundreds -- hundreds of
14:30:07:22 thousands of dollars' worth of grants and hundreds of
14:30:10:00 thousands of dollars' worth of land donations.
14:30:12:21 That position is slated to be cut.
14:30:14:06 I think that's unwise.
14:30:15:24 I want to see it reinstated.
14:30:18:24 I don't know how to go about something like that.
14:30:20:21 I'm just concerned that we have the time and expertise
14:30:23:12 to help us through you that process.
14:30:24:22 I want to share that with you and I really think we'll
14:30:29:24 need additional staff, administrative support on this.
14:30:33:03 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: I don't think we can add to the
14:30:34:21 budget.

14:30:35:03 We can delete.
14:30:36:06 I think the administration has to add to the budget.
14:30:38:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: We can change things.
14:30:40:12 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: I don't know about that.
14:30:41:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, we can.
14:30:42:22 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Mr. Miranda would have the answer.
14:30:48:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Let me say this.
14:30:50:06 This is just like congress and the president.
14:30:52:06 This is just like Tallahassee and Charlie Crist.
14:30:55:21 This is not us versus them and them versus us.
14:30:58:27 However, you can suggest, and you can have five votes.
14:31:05:01 You better have five votes going that way because in
14:31:07:19 case it gets vetoed, you have your five votes.
14:31:10:25 If you go in with four votes, it will not get done.
14:31:14:12 If it gets vetoed.
14:31:16:10 That's what I'm saying.
14:31:17:18 I don't think this Mayor has vetoed anything much
14:31:20:03 lately.
14:31:20:18 In fact, maybe she hasn't vetoed anything, which could
14:31:23:16 be a good thing.
14:31:24:24 What I'm saying is, in order for this body to make some
14:31:30:21 changes not only in this budget but in other things, it
14:31:34:03 must have the required five votes or the exercise would
14:31:41:16 be through.
14:31:43:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.

14:31:44:21 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, unlike some to my right all I
14:31:48:18 have to go on is the last four years.
14:31:50:16 For the first three years, we approved the Mayor's
14:31:53:12 budget without any changes.
14:31:55:03 Last year, when Mr. Harrison proposed a little bit of a
14:32:03:25 rollback, in fact, it was not the Mayor's proposal.
14:32:06:24 She objected to it but we went forward with it anyway.
14:32:09:24 Frankly, we ended up with only four votes.
14:32:13:18 We rolled it back to 3%.
14:32:16:25 And not only did we roll it back, but we also made
14:32:20:15 budget changes.
14:32:21:21 We said, Marty recommended and we did, he said, well,
14:32:25:16 if you're going to roll it back and have less money,
14:32:28:25 then you've got to identify which budget items you want
14:32:31:12 to cut back.
14:32:32:12 And so we did that.
14:32:33:19 We found seven or eight line items that matched up with
14:32:36:15 the several million dollars of roll-back cuts.
14:32:40:09 We did it.
14:32:41:00 We did it here.
14:32:42:04 We had four votes.
14:32:43:00 We were done with it.
14:32:44:00 We sent it to the Mayor and it never came back and it
14:32:47:10 became law.
14:32:48:03 So we do have precedent in this.

14:32:50:09 I'm not suggesting additional anarchy or anything like
14:32:53:12 that, but that's what we did last year, and it did
14:32:56:06 work.
14:32:56:18 Now, going back to Ms. Saul-Sena's question, if I
14:32:59:06 could, in terms of process.
14:33:01:18 I think it's a good discussion because -- and I brought
14:33:06:03 it up a few times now -- the Mayor is coming next week
14:33:09:12 to present the budget.
14:33:11:00 Right now, the only thing we have scheduled is -- the
14:33:15:21 only thing we have scheduled is on the 30th.
14:33:19:03 We have the afternoon meeting.
14:33:20:24 We have a two-hour session scheduled over in the other
14:33:26:09 building, in the little workroom.
14:33:27:28 The Mayor and the staff indicate that they are going to
14:33:30:22 bring as many staff as they can fit in that room to
14:33:33:13 answer any questions that we have about the budget.
14:33:35:27 Now, after that, our first public hearing is five days
14:33:40:15 later on the 4th of September.
14:33:42:27 It doesn't give us a whole lot of time between the
14:33:46:19 30th when we're having that discussion and the 4th,
14:33:49:24 our first public hearing, to make any changes.
14:33:52:22 So if we want to come back into August and schedule
14:33:56:25 additional workshop time so we can perhaps have one
14:34:00:00 workshop just to get an overview, and then the next
14:34:02:28 workshop on the 30th, if we really want to, you know,

14:34:06:13 wrestle with these things.
14:34:07:21 Maybe it shouldn't be a workshop.
14:34:09:01 If it is a workshop, we can't take any formal action.
14:34:12:21 >>MARTIN SHELBY: You can if you open it to public
14:34:14:24 comment.
14:34:15:06 It's a noticed public meeting.
14:34:17:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So we could take some action.
14:34:19:21 Obviously, it's not till September 4th at our
14:34:22:24 final -- our first public hearing, final action would
14:34:25:10 be taken.
14:34:26:13 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe under workshop, you can give
14:34:28:09 direction to staff even without taking public comment.
14:34:31:00 So you have those provisions in your rules.
14:34:33:24 As long as it's direction to staff let's say, for
14:34:36:03 instance, to make changes or to bring back alternatives
14:34:38:24 subject to your direction, that would be considered
14:34:41:00 appropriate.
14:34:41:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think it would be prudent if we
14:34:43:09 had a meeting between the 9th when the Mayor is here
14:34:47:09 and the 30th.
14:34:48:06 Somebody look at the calendar and find a date that we
14:34:50:12 can all live with and have a couple of hours then.
14:34:53:12 Then another one on the 30th and then a public
14:34:55:15 hearing September 4th.
14:34:57:00 Hopefully that will give us enough time if we want to

14:34:59:13 do anything, to do anything.
14:35:00:28 If we don't, fine.
14:35:02:24 >> David Smith, City Attorney.
14:35:04:12 I think John and Marty just accurately summarized what
14:35:08:00 you need to do.
14:35:08:25 You can't take official action anyway until the budget
14:35:11:21 is before you.
14:35:12:16 You can talk about it, you can make any kinds of
14:35:15:15 comments and any kinds of things you would like to see
14:35:17:25 addressed so you can get that information.
14:35:20:01 Ultimately, you do have the responsibility to pass the
14:35:22:09 budget and do you have the ability to alter it.
14:35:24:21 One of the things I wanted to say, however, and I may
14:35:27:27 have missed some of the comment while I was waiting for
14:35:31:00 the elevator.
14:35:32:10 Issue with regard to the budget analyst is in the
14:35:35:12 charter.
14:35:35:22 Let me tell you specifically what it says.
14:35:38:24 I don't know if you're going that route or not but it
14:35:40:21 will be very difficult to get it done in the time
14:35:42:28 sequence that we've got.
14:35:44:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I recognize that.
14:35:45:01 I have no expectation of us accomplishing that, none.
14:35:50:09 I'm not seriously raising it for this year.
14:35:53:06 It is wishful thinking.

14:35:54:28 >> Fine.
14:35:56:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, Ms. Saul-Sena?
14:35:59:09 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Yes, I was looking at the calendar
14:36:00:24 and we have a CRA meeting on the 21st at 1:30,
14:36:04:19 perhaps we could do this at 3:30 after that, have a
14:36:07:15 discussion of the budget.
14:36:10:10 That's a Tuesday.
14:36:11:06 You know how we've been having CRA meetings on
14:36:15:09 Tuesdays, so I'm proposing that perhaps --
14:36:19:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we do it in the morning.
14:36:21:00 If you go in the afternoon, everybody will start
14:36:24:12 winding down energy-wise.
14:36:31:03 >>THOMAS SCOTT: [INAUDIBLE]
14:36:32:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Could you check on that?
14:36:37:27 >> Doesn't have to be here.
14:36:41:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to suggest that the
14:36:42:15 morning is a good idea.
14:36:43:21 I think there will be a lot to chew over.
14:36:47:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Frankly, I think we should go back
14:36:49:03 over to police headquarters, because that is the
14:36:51:00 biggest room --
14:36:52:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: They won't let us because of
14:36:54:12 security.
14:36:56:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think they don't like it.
14:36:57:21 But it's still a public building.

14:37:05:07 Anybody who comes in has to sign in, go through a metal
14:37:09:06 detector.
14:37:10:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My motion would be then, is 9:00 in
14:37:12:27 the morning on the 21st which is a Tuesday to discuss
14:37:16:09 the budget at the police headquarters on the 6th
14:37:19:18 floor.
14:37:27:09 >>THE CLERK: You're setting this as a Finance Committee
14:37:29:19 workshop.
14:37:31:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: My calendar, I have things already.
14:37:41:16 [INAUDIBLE]
14:37:44:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to get it on there
14:37:46:19 before people's calendars fill up.
14:37:48:22 Can you make another suggestion of a date, Mr. Scott,
14:37:51:04 that might be good?
14:37:58:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mr. Dingfelder, if it's a Finance
14:38:00:00 Committee workshop as opposed to a Council workshop, it
14:38:04:01 determines whether your aide would be responsible for
14:38:10:01 the minutes or the clerk's office.
14:38:12:09 If it's a Finance Committee workshop, then it would be
14:38:14:19 covered -- normally it's covered by the aide who just
14:38:18:06 records it and take minutes.
14:38:19:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If it's a Council workshop?
14:38:21:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe that would be the clerk's
14:38:23:03 office.
14:38:24:27 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I would like the second the motion

14:38:26:18 to be a Council workshop.
14:38:27:21 I just think it's more official if the clerk does it.
14:38:32:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: So that would be Tuesday
14:38:36:06 August 21st at 9 a.m. in the police station.
14:38:46:00 >>GWEN MILLER: No, no police station.
14:38:47:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'm going to tentatively plan it
14:38:49:24 there.
14:38:50:09 I'm going to make the motion and then if it can't be,
14:38:55:09 we'll change it.
14:38:57:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can always switch it next week
14:38:59:06 the location.
14:39:01:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: That's my motion.
14:39:03:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:39:04:21 All in favor, aye.
14:39:07:24 [Motion Carried]
14:39:09:15 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I placed in your mailboxes
14:39:14:00 yesterday a copy of a letter sent to Chairman Miller
14:39:17:03 from senator Arthenia Joyner from the Hillsborough
14:39:20:10 County legislative delegation relative -- relating to
14:39:23:24 the request of the chair sent by letter relating to
14:39:28:13 changing the ordinance governing the Environmental
14:39:30:22 Protection Commission.
14:39:32:10 I would like to receive and file that as part of the
14:39:37:12 Council file.
14:39:38:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.

14:39:39:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:39:40:06 All in favor, aye.
14:39:41:18 Opposed, nay.
14:39:42:10 [Motion Carried]
14:39:43:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to receive and file all
14:39:44:25 documents.
14:39:45:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
14:39:46:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything else, clerk?
14:39:47:16 We have a motion and second.
14:39:50:21 All in favor, aye.
14:39:51:24 Opposed, nay.
14:39:53:01 If nothing else, we go to our audience portion.
14:39:57:15 (The meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m.)