Help & information    View the list of Transcripts

Tampa City Council
Thursday, September 20, 2007
9:00 a.m. session

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

09:01:13 [Sounding gavel]
09:01:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:01:17 The chair will yield to Reverend Scott.
09:01:23 >> Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the count.
09:01:25 It is indeed my extreme pleasure to introduce today
09:01:28 our pastor for the morning, is going to give our
09:01:30 invocation, the reverend Dr. Bartholomew, Sr. banks,
09:01:36 Sr.
09:01:37 The 8th child born to Bishop Elijah of Pensacola,
09:01:43 Florida, married to Vanessa banks.
09:01:46 They were married on February 1977 and to that union

09:01:50 four children were born.
09:01:51 He also has three grandchildren.
09:01:54 Pastor banks received his masters of science degree at
09:01:58 theological at Dallas theological seminary, and
09:02:05 business administration at the University of South
09:02:05 Florida in Tampa, Florida.
09:02:08 He is the pastor of the St. John progressive
09:02:12 missionary Baptist church where he's pastor now for
09:02:15 some time since 1985.
09:02:19 He is a preacher and pastor par excellence.
09:02:23 He also did the eulogy at the Ron Harrison funeral, as
09:02:28 you know, a few weeks ago, did an outstanding job at
09:02:31 that eulogy, and it is my extreme pleasure to
09:02:33 introduce him and have him come.
09:02:35 He is my friend, pastor banks.
09:02:39 Shall we stand?
09:02:40 >>> Thank you, councilman Scott.
09:02:42 Let us pray.
09:02:44 Our gracious and heavenly father, how excellent is
09:02:47 your name in all the earth.
09:02:49 We come now into your presence with Thanksgiving in
09:02:51 our hearts to thank you for the many blessings that

09:02:54 you allow us to enjoy.
09:02:55 We thank you for life and the reasonable appointment
09:03:00 of health and strength.
09:03:01 We thank you for the opportunity to live in this great
09:03:03 City of Tampa, and to enjoy the great quality of life
09:03:08 that so many public servants in the City of Tampa work
09:03:11 that we might enjoy.
09:03:13 We thank you for the families of those who serve in
09:03:20 foreign lands fighting for the freedom of our country.
09:03:23 Continue to protect them from harm and danger.
09:03:26 We thank you for the families of those law enforcement
09:03:29 officials who put their lives on the line day after
09:03:32 day in this country, protecting us from the crime
09:03:38 elements.
09:03:38 We ask blessing on their families as well.
09:03:42 We ask your blessing upon these public officials who
09:03:45 will contemplate decisions that affect the lives of
09:03:47 the people of this community.
09:03:49 We ask that you would give them wisdom, that the
09:03:53 decision that is are made here today will be
09:03:54 beneficial, that will enhance and improve the quality
09:03:58 of life.

09:03:59 We ask it all in your name.
09:04:00 Amen.
09:04:05 (Pledge of Allegiance).
09:04:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Roll call.
09:04:20 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
09:04:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:04:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:04:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:04:26 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:04:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:04:28 >>GWEN MILLER: At this time we are going to have a
09:04:30 presentation for the Officer of the Month by Reverend
09:04:32 Scott.
09:04:49 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It is indeed my extreme pleasure to
09:04:51 present today the Officer of the Month in the person
09:04:56 of sergeant Robert Nassief.
09:05:07 We are going to have the chief come and kind of talk a
09:05:09 little bit about him and then I'll come back, we'll
09:05:12 make some presentations and all that.
09:05:14 We have a lot of things for you.
09:05:16 Chief.
09:05:26 >> Chief Hogue: He's been called a lot worse than

09:05:29 that.
09:05:30 We appreciate you recognizing our Officer of the Month
09:05:33 of September 2007.
09:05:34 We are presenting sergeant Nassief -- why don't you
09:05:45 bring your wife up, too?
09:05:47 He's a sergeant with the sheriff's office.
09:05:49 Sergeant Nassief is kind of renowned in the Tampa
09:06:00 Police Department.
09:06:01 We had an award that we used to give out for the most
09:06:06 productive squad at the police department.
09:06:10 And he won it so many times we quit giving it out.
09:06:20 We didn't bother with the contest, he has such a
09:06:22 productive squad and does such good work.
09:06:24 But in most of these officers of the month things it's
09:06:28 a single incident we are recognizing today. Today
09:06:30 this is a particularly good piece of police work that
09:06:34 got done that really saved some citizens, a typical
09:06:41 thing where somebody stops somebody from doing things
09:06:44 that we don't have future victims out there, and this
09:06:46 is exactly what happened.
09:06:47 We had a band literally of vicious criminals that
09:06:53 randomly picked two women in Hyde Park where they

09:07:02 physically assaulted them and beat one of the women
09:07:04 over the head with a gun, and injured her seriously,
09:07:09 ransacked her house and then fled the scene.
09:07:14 And leaving behind these two injured women.
09:07:18 Sergeant got to the scene, one of his officers was
09:07:22 assigned, he got to the scene, he determined that
09:07:24 there was a cell phone.
09:07:27 He's an experienced, very competent investigator in
09:07:32 his own right and he then started tracking off of the
09:07:34 cell towers the cell phone, all over the city.
09:07:38 And every time that he would call the phone call, it
09:07:42 was kind of a frustrating event because every time he
09:07:44 would call they would give him the location and then
09:07:46 they would hang up on him.
09:07:48 He did this like five times and finally threatened the
09:07:51 last one, if they didn't keep telling him where they
09:07:54 were going to.
09:07:55 That he would be doing there to see them next.
09:07:58 Then this same band of criminals went to the north end
09:08:01 of town, up off of north Orleans around the 7,000
09:08:08 block, and once again accosted two women and a lady in
09:08:14 a house, just randomly picked the house, did a home

09:08:17 invasion, just a vicious attack on these people.
09:08:21 One of the men has had to undergo surgery from his
09:08:25 injuries.
09:08:25 They killed the family pet at the house.
09:08:27 These were just vicious, vicious people.
09:08:29 And he's chasing them all over town trying to stop
09:08:32 them.
09:08:33 They leave there, and they go to East Tampa, and he
09:08:37 tracks the phone to East Tampa to an apartment
09:08:40 complex.
09:08:40 He goes to that apartment complex.
09:08:44 He can't find anybody there.
09:08:46 And it's an empty parking lot so he rings the phone
09:08:51 one more time himself.
09:08:52 All of a sudden he hears a phone ringing.
09:08:55 One of the cars in the parking lot.
09:08:56 He goes over to that car, and he looks in, and kind of
09:09:03 just starting the investigation around the car and the
09:09:05 owner of the car comes out and says, what's going on?
09:09:07 And she want wanted to know.
09:09:09 And that led into her apartment, which resulted in the
09:09:12 arrest of two of the suspects.

09:09:17 And the fourth suspects, a third one was also arrested
09:09:21 and we have had a warranty for the fourth one now and
09:09:24 we are looking for him diligently.
09:09:26 But as you can see, these were some pretty terrible
09:09:28 criminals.
09:09:29 And because of his tenacious investigating attitude,
09:09:34 he chased them all over town that night, ended up
09:09:37 getting them in jail, and you can see how he probably
09:09:41 stopped some very, you know, serious injuries to other
09:09:44 people in the future to get these folks.
09:09:48 So I'm very pleased, very proud of sergeant Nassief,
09:09:52 the whole police department is, the September 2007
09:09:55 Officer of the Month.
09:09:57 [ Applause ]
09:10:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, chief.
09:10:08 Let me say to Madam Chair and to council, I really
09:10:13 applaud this council for setting aside this time every
09:10:17 month to honor these officers who protect us and out
09:10:21 there fighting crime.
09:10:24 I want to commend you.
09:10:25 And I think it's a worthwhile endeavor when we see
09:10:29 what is happening in our community and around our

09:10:31 state.
09:10:31 As you know, last week, we had four officers who had
09:10:34 gone down or shot down in the Miami area, and so it
09:10:38 just says that every day when they officers get up,
09:10:41 they are putting their lives on the line for this
09:10:43 community for us.
09:10:44 And we are grateful for that, thankful.
09:10:48 On behalf of the Tampa City Council, we want to give a
09:10:53 commendation to sergeant Robert Nassief for coming
09:10:57 forward.
09:10:57 And I want to give you this.
09:10:59 Along with this, a gift certificate to Charlie's, $100
09:11:04 gift certificate to go to Charlie's.
09:11:09 You should eat well at Charlie's for $100.
09:11:13 [ Laughter ]
09:11:14 And I think your wife will enjoy that as well.
09:11:19 We have other certificates, gifts for you.
09:11:22 I ask them to come forward at this time and make that
09:11:24 presentation.
09:11:27 >>> On behalf of Bill Currie Ford and all its
09:11:31 employees we would like to present with you this
09:11:32 watch.

09:11:33 We hope you enjoy it.
09:11:34 Thank you for everything that you do in the community.
09:11:38 [ Applause ]
09:11:43 >>> Steve Stickley representing Stepps towing.
09:11:47 Sergeant, on behalf of Jim and Judy Stepp and Stepp's
09:11:52 towing we would like to present this statute to you
09:11:54 and congratulate you for all the hard work and being
09:11:56 aggressive out there on the streets.
09:11:58 We also have a gift certificate to Lee Roy Selmon's
09:12:02 for you.
09:12:04 [ Applause ]
09:12:10 >>> Good morning, council members.
09:12:12 On behalf of Tampa's Lowry Park Zoo we would like to
09:12:15 thank you for your service, and offer you ticket to
09:12:19 the zoo.
09:12:22 [ Applause ]
09:12:26 >>STEVE MICHELINI: We have the biggest decision, where
09:12:29 do you go first?
09:12:31 Bryn Allen studios is providing with you a gift
09:12:33 certificate for you and your family to have your
09:12:35 pictures taken, and you can schedule that at any time.
09:12:39 I'll be providing you with the phone numbers and all

09:12:41 that shortly.
09:12:42 Also, Bern's steak house is providing you with a $100
09:12:46 gift certificate so you can go enjoy yourself at
09:12:48 Bern's, and as the councilman said you can enjoy
09:12:54 yourself for a hundred bucks.
09:12:56 On behalf of the Hillsborough towing association, $100
09:13:00 gift certificate, your choice, Lee Roy Selmon's,
09:13:03 Outback or Carrabas.
09:13:08 [ Applause ]
09:13:17 >>> I want to thank the gifts from the citizens of the
09:13:21 community than they put out, thank the City Council,
09:13:23 thank the chief.
09:13:24 I felt I was just doing my job like every day.
09:13:28 I was just glad I was able to serve the community the
09:13:30 way I was that night and I was glad to see this group
09:13:34 of band of vicious guys taken off the street so
09:13:37 quickly.
09:13:37 And it was such a group effort at the end that it was
09:13:40 just fantastic to see the final outcome of it.
09:13:44 Again, I just want to say thank you very, very much.
09:13:49 To say thank you, but thanks to my wife who has put up
09:13:52 with me for 13 years of adverse shifts and has never

09:13:56 complained, until just recently.
09:13:58 [ Laughter ]
09:13:58 That she would love for me to go to a day shift job
09:14:05 sometime in my near future.
09:14:06 But as it stands right now, I'm still on nights, and I
09:14:09 enjoy it.
09:14:10 But my daughter who couldn't attend, I thank her,
09:14:14 also.
09:14:15 Thanks again everybody.
09:14:17 [ Applause ]
09:14:19 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Sergeant, I would like to ask you
09:14:24 a question.
09:14:25 Sergeant.
09:14:26 Who is the ranking sergeant in your house?
09:14:30 >>> Well, I could say this.
09:14:33 [ Laughter ]
09:14:36 >> This should be a great political answer.
09:14:40 >>> I was made sergeant before she was, but she still
09:14:44 runs the household.
09:14:47 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:14:48 Congratulations again.
09:14:50 At this time, we have another commendation to be

09:14:52 presented by Ms. Linda Saul-Sena to the Jackson
09:15:00 family.
09:15:12 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It is my great pleasure this
09:15:14 morning to provide a commendation to willie Robinson,
09:15:17 Jr., for his extraordinary preservation of the Jackson
09:15:21 house in downtown Tampa.
09:15:24 This boarding house saw some of the musical greats
09:15:28 come through our town, and it's due to Mr. Robinson's
09:15:31 efforts, advocacy, hard work, over 50 years, that this
09:15:36 house is being preserved and recognized.
09:15:39 It's not only on a local register of historic places,
09:15:43 it's on the national register of historic places.
09:15:47 And this is so exciting for our community.
09:15:51 Come here.
09:15:52 I would like to read this commendation.
09:15:54 Tampa City Council hereby recognizes willie Robinson,
09:15:57 Jr., for his unparalleled dedication to the
09:16:00 preservation of the Jackson house, and his commitment
09:16:02 to safeguarding its history and legacy.
09:16:05 Jackson house, a segregation era boarding house, is a
09:16:09 local landmark and listed on the national register of
09:16:12 historic places.

09:16:13 And I would like Mr. Robinson to speak about the
09:16:15 extraordinary people who have been guests in the
09:16:18 Jackson house.
09:16:22 >>> Thank you very much.
09:16:26 I can only say I give praise to God.
09:16:31 I give praise to my ancestors.
09:16:34 And I give praise to the people who have touched me
09:16:37 most of all, which was my mother and my father.
09:16:41 They raised me to care for what I am, and God knows I
09:16:50 didn't even think that I would be standing in this
09:16:55 illustrious company talking to you all at this
09:16:58 particular time and date.
09:17:00 But it has so indeed that I am here today representing
09:17:07 the Jackson family in the year 2007.
09:17:12 And Ms. Saul-Sena, and she has just spoken, some of
09:17:18 the people who lived in our house has been Ella
09:17:20 Fitzgerald, Billy holiday, Duke Ellenton and count
09:17:25 Basie, and also when I walk down the hallways to eat
09:17:31 in our kitchen, who brought Dr. Martin Luther King to
09:17:38 introduce to our family.
09:17:39 And these are just some of the people who have been at
09:17:42 the Jackson house.

09:17:44 But I would also like to say, and I would like to
09:17:47 thank my immediate family, which is my daughter.
09:17:55 My daughter has tried to take over the reins in
09:17:59 raising me.
09:18:01 And sometimes we get in conflicts because I have to
09:18:04 let her know who is the parent and who is the child.
09:18:08 But I understand it's all in the heat of battle for
09:18:11 love.
09:18:12 And I thank you for that.
09:18:14 And also to my grandkids who also would never let me
09:18:20 be old.
09:18:22 They always when they come over want me to play with
09:18:25 them.
09:18:25 And I keep trying to tell them, I can't keep up with
09:18:28 you all no more.
09:18:30 But thank you again to them.
09:18:33 And I would like to say one more thing.
09:18:36 My mother always taught me to examine the big picture,
09:18:44 just not to see what you see but what you don't see.
09:18:48 She always used to ask me, okay, how was that meeting,
09:18:52 what did you see?
09:18:53 I tell her what I see.

09:18:56 And she said, well, what did you didn't see?
09:18:59 So, therefore, I wanted to say this.
09:19:04 We are here now, because of the legacy of my
09:19:08 grandparents.
09:19:09 But there is a bigger picture that I think I should be
09:19:12 able to thank.
09:19:15 First of all before I get to thanking them I want to
09:19:17 thank Mr. Fred Hearns and Mr. Johnnie sanders who
09:19:21 walked hand in hand and got the ball rolling for our
09:19:25 national historic registry.
09:19:27 Next, I want to look at the bigger picture because I
09:19:32 am very proud to be a Jackson.
09:19:34 And I want to open it up and say that the reason that
09:19:36 we are here, and what you don't hear, and what
09:19:40 sometimes we forget, is why we are here to tell our
09:19:43 story.
09:19:43 History is a foundation for the future.
09:19:48 And the reason that we are here to tell our story is
09:19:51 because we seem to forget, and we don't see all, and I
09:19:58 would like to give a big thank you to the Armed Forces
09:20:01 of the United States of America and to this great
09:20:03 country, because without this great country and armed

09:20:08 force it is men and women who paid the ultimate price,
09:20:11 as well as serving, giving their lives, this story
09:20:18 could not be told.
09:20:19 But I would like to say thank you, thank you, thank
09:20:22 you.
09:20:23 And God bless you.
09:20:25 [ Applause ]
09:20:33 >>GWEN MILLER: We now go to the approval of the
09:20:35 agenda.
09:20:35 Are there any items would you like to pull?
09:20:45 >> (off microphone) our rules of procedure, rule 4.
09:20:56 And I would like you as our chair to adhere to this
09:21:00 sow so our meetings are shorter, and we don't need to
09:21:03 spend our whole day here a lot of times.
09:21:06 And I would like to see you enforce that.
09:21:09 >>GWEN MILLER: I will, sir.
09:21:12 Any other items, Mrs. Saul-Sena?
09:21:14 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I was just curious what are R, G, H
09:21:18 and I, not everything memorized?
09:21:21 What are G, H and I?
09:21:24 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Okay, rule number 4 it says no
09:21:26 council member shall introduce a motion, speak to a

09:21:29 subject under discussion without recognition by the
09:21:31 chair.
09:21:34 If more than one member requests recognition at the
09:21:36 same time the order of the speakers will be decided
09:21:38 fairly as possible by the chair.
09:21:41 Council members shall refrain from speaking more than
09:21:43 twice on the same subject at the same meeting and
09:21:47 should not be recognized by the chair to speak a
09:21:51 second time until another member who has not spoken to
09:21:53 the question desires the floor.
09:21:57 Council members shall limit time with remarks on the
09:22:01 agenda item no longer than five minutes.
09:22:03 And I see excessive time, and this delays our
09:22:07 meetings.
09:22:09 And I think it could be expedited.
09:22:12 Thank you, ma'am.
09:22:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you for pointing that out.
09:22:14 Any other items need to be pulled?
09:22:16 Ms. Mulhern?
09:22:17 >>MARY MULHERN: Yes, I think this can probably be
09:22:20 answered quickly, maybe somebody can tell me about
09:22:22 this, but 64 and 65, where we are vacating lots, I

09:22:30 just wanted a little explanation of that.
09:22:34 I thought that when we vacated, it was done as a
09:22:41 public reading.
09:22:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I asked this question four years
09:22:49 ago when I was new, too. These are replats.
09:22:51 You see the third line down on both of those, they are
09:22:54 replats.
09:22:55 And, David, do you want to tell us real quick the
09:22:58 difference between the replat and a typical vacating?
09:23:03 These replats are sort of perfunctory tasks,
09:23:08 ministerial.
09:23:08 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:23:10 Although I am not familiar with this specific set of
09:23:13 lots, under 177 when you replat what you are
09:23:16 frequently doing is either reconfiguring the location
09:23:18 of the roadway slightly, or reconfiguring the lots
09:23:22 themselves.
09:23:22 But if in fact it's a replat you are not changing very
09:23:26 much.
09:23:26 Sometimes it's even done to cure a problem in the
09:23:29 original plat.
09:23:30 Somebody didn't join in the plat.

09:23:32 I just don't know the specifics of this instance.
09:23:34 >>MARY MULHERN: Let me read the resolution, and that's
09:23:38 what's confusing me.
09:23:39 Resolution vacating lots 54, 56 and 58.
09:23:49 You have to vacate it before you replat it?
09:23:52 What does vacate mean?
09:23:54 >>> Normally vacation means you do away with the
09:23:56 existing plat and do you that prior to replatting
09:24:00 under an ordinary process.
09:24:01 But let me look at that particular provision and get
09:24:04 you the facts to make sure there isn't something there
09:24:06 that you might be concerned about that I'm missing,
09:24:09 because I don't have the specifics.
09:24:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: They are vacating the lots, private
09:24:13 property.
09:24:14 None of this is public property per se, or probably
09:24:16 not.
09:24:17 They are vacating the layout of those lots that are
09:24:20 preexisting in the plat book, and then they are
09:24:23 reconfiguring them because, you know --
09:24:26 >> They are already owned by --
09:24:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Yes.

09:24:28 >>DAVID SMITH: I see the point you are asking, Mr.
09:24:32 Dingfelder.
09:24:32 It's really not a public issue.
09:24:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just needed a very brief
09:24:38 explanation of number 14 under public safety about the
09:24:40 new threshold calculation for fees.
09:24:45 I didn't know when they were going up or down.
09:24:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll let staff answer it.
09:24:52 >>DAVID SMITH: Did you want that answer now or did you
09:24:54 want to wait?
09:24:55 >>CHAIRMAN: Now.
09:24:55 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:24:57 It's my understanding the only change to change it
09:24:59 from a 12-month period to a calendar year basis.
09:25:04 For example, if your first was in October, the 12
09:25:08 months are supposed to run then before you have the
09:25:09 requisite number that causes you to pay a fine.
09:25:12 It got to be too difficult to keep track of that.
09:25:14 That can create different systems for every piece of
09:25:17 property so we went to calendar year.
09:25:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:25:21 Can we get a motion to approve the agenda?

09:25:23 >> so moved.
09:25:24 >> Second.
09:25:24 (Motion carried).
09:25:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We now go to our staff report.
09:25:31 >>> Jeff Vaske, legal department, requesting a
09:25:35 substitution of the ordinance originally submitted.
09:25:37 I made changes to the ordinance subsequent to
09:25:40 submittal deadline.
09:25:41 And --
09:25:43 >> Item 12.
09:25:43 >> And I provided council with copies of the
09:25:46 substituted ordinance.
09:25:52 >> Read the ordinance.
09:25:55 Do you have it?
09:25:56 When we get to that we'll do it.
09:25:58 Mr. David Smith.
09:26:01 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:26:05 First, I will tell you that what we will do in the
09:26:07 future is make sure every attorney who has an item on
09:26:10 your agenda will be here at the beginning of the
09:26:12 meeting to answer any of these questions when an item
09:26:16 is pulled.

09:26:16 If it's not pulled they will come back during the
09:26:18 appropriate time sequence so you can get your
09:26:21 questions answered promptly.
09:26:22 Way wanted to speak with you did B this morning was
09:26:25 request that you set a closed session.
09:26:27 This will be your third close session on Citivest.
09:26:30 I would request that you set it for next Thursday at
09:26:34 noon.
09:26:35 I don't think we need a very long session.
09:26:38 For those of you who may not recall, Citivest is in
09:26:40 litigation that the city has been involved in with
09:26:43 city national bank as trustee, deals with the property
09:26:46 on DeSoto and Bayshore.
09:26:47 There was a high-rise condominium request that did not
09:26:50 receive a certificate of appropriateness from the ARC
09:26:54 and was appealed to this council.
09:26:56 So I would request that you set the closed session.
09:27:01 If you would like we could do it here.
09:27:03 We would have to, because it's a close session, turn
09:27:05 off the television, et cetera, we'll have a court
09:27:07 reporter keep the minutes, or, if you would prefer, we
09:27:10 can do it where we have done it historically which is

09:27:12 in my conference room up on the 8th floor.
09:27:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I won't be able to do that.
09:27:20 I have a commitment already for the convention and
09:27:24 visitors bureau have their annual luncheon and asked
09:27:29 me to come participate and do the invocation.
09:27:32 >>DAVID SMITH: We could set it for a specific time
09:27:36 during your regular agenda meeting if you like but I
09:27:38 would recommend if you do that, we do it at the end of
09:27:40 the day.
09:27:45 We have to unfortunately exclude the public.
09:27:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, excuse me, there's
09:27:52 nothing wrong that we can't set it prior to the
09:27:54 council meeting at 8:00 in the morning.
09:27:55 >>DAVID SMITH: That's correct.
09:27:57 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's a heavy day next week.
09:28:00 Day and night council.
09:28:05 Don't get to take the kids to school anymore.
09:28:09 >>THOMAS SCOTT: You can move to have it next Thursday
09:28:11 at noontime.
09:28:12 I can certainly get a briefing later.
09:28:17 Unless there are other people going over to the
09:28:19 luncheon.

09:28:19 >>GWEN MILLER: How many are going to the luncheon?
09:28:21 >> I will be at leadership Florida next Thursday.
09:28:29 I will not be here next Thursday.
09:28:30 >>GWEN MILLER: That's two members that won't be here.
09:28:33 Can you brief them afterwards?
09:28:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have been briefed.
09:28:38 >>DAVID SMITH: I could speak with each of you
09:28:40 individually but I was kind of hoping we could have a
09:28:42 closed session.
09:28:45 I could speak with Mrs. Saul-Sena and Mr. Scott and
09:28:47 maybe what we'll do is we'll have this session at
09:28:50 noon.
09:28:52 Reverend Scott won't be here anyway.
09:28:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: At noon.
09:28:58 >> Second.
09:28:58 (Motion carried).
09:29:00 >>DAVID SMITH: Was that uppers?
09:29:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Upstairs.
09:29:03 Thank you.
09:29:04 Now we go to item number 3.
09:29:10 >>> Cindy Miller, director of growth management
09:29:14 services.

09:29:14 I have in your agenda package a memo regarding this
09:29:17 motion.
09:29:18 This was a request to provide a report as to what
09:29:21 types of inspections occur, if an apartment complex is
09:29:24 converted to a condominium.
09:29:26 Mr. John Barrios, manager of construction services
09:29:29 division, did research this, as to construction code
09:29:33 requirements, and basically the Florida building code
09:29:35 classified both types of occupancies as R-2
09:29:39 multifamily with the same basic construction
09:29:41 requirements, same kind of fire separation
09:29:44 requirements, type of construction, height, et cetera.
09:29:47 So, therefore, as to inspections for building codes,
09:29:51 there is no difference between the two types of uses
09:29:53 at those buildings.
09:29:56 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Ms. Miller, when the ownership
09:29:59 style shifts from being an apartment to a condo, is it
09:30:03 required that the city come in and reinspect, to make
09:30:07 sure that the previous apartment now condo meets our
09:30:12 code?
09:30:16 >>> That was only if it was new construction or major
09:30:19 alterations occurring.

09:30:20 We have no authority from my department to go in and
09:30:22 do another inspection.
09:30:23 >> I think the complaint that we received was because
09:30:26 when the shift occurred from apartment to condo -- I
09:30:29 mean, I would say buyer beware, but the owners were
09:30:34 concerned that the apartments indeed met code.
09:30:37 So I think that -- I guess this would be a question
09:30:40 for legal.
09:30:41 Perhaps it isn't a code requirement to have -- it's
09:30:46 triggered in some other way.
09:30:47 We just want to protect the public.
09:30:52 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
09:30:53 Way it would work today is if there's a change of use
09:30:55 of some kind approach sees under which would you need
09:30:58 to come back and have additional inspection.
09:31:02 I just don't know, and probably need -- would need to
09:31:05 review whether or not the change from an apartment
09:31:09 complex to a condominium would be considered a change
09:31:10 of use.
09:31:11 Because the nature of what we call multifamily, and
09:31:18 apartment is multifamily, it's really not a change of
09:31:21 use.

09:31:21 But that's just something when would have to look
09:31:23 into.
09:31:24 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano?
09:31:26 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Miller, I'm hearing stories
09:31:28 every day about these condo conversions.
09:31:32 For instance, the Highland oaks in Hunter's green,
09:31:36 every person that bought a unit there are hit with
09:31:39 large assessments, because of shoddy work from the
09:31:43 beginning.
09:31:45 When these places were put up.
09:31:47 No proper flashing around the windows.
09:31:51 There's a lot of rot, a lot of mold.
09:31:54 And these people are stuck.
09:31:55 And evidently, they did pass the building code.
09:32:00 But part of the inspections weren't stringent enough.
09:32:04 And our building department has to make sure that
09:32:07 these flashings and places of water has a way to get
09:32:12 in, to make sure it's done properly.
09:32:15 >>> Councilman, when it comes to new construction or
09:32:17 alterations, that certainly would be what we would be
09:32:20 doing.
09:32:21 With existing construction, my staff has no authority

09:32:23 to go in. That would be more of the level of the code
09:32:27 enforcement action.
09:32:28 That would be where that would be.
09:32:29 And that would be whether something is converted or
09:32:32 not.
09:32:32 That would be a different section we would be
09:32:35 addressing, certainly something that we will continue
09:32:37 to monitor.
09:32:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Doesn't the individual have an
09:32:41 inspection on purchasing it?
09:32:45 >>> That would be more of the situation where it would
09:32:47 just be standard business practice, not something that
09:32:48 the city would be involved with.
09:32:50 Due diligence on the part of the purchaser.
09:32:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:32:56 Item number 4, we have received a written report, need
09:32:59 to receive and file it.
09:33:00 >> So moved.
09:33:01 >> Second.
09:33:02 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: The report said that we couldn't do
09:33:05 anything.
09:33:05 But I would like to be given -- what I would like to

09:33:08 request is that after October, I believe it's the
09:33:10 20th, when some action will be taken, that council
09:33:13 be sent a memo making us aware of what the process and
09:33:17 time line would be.
09:33:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: First week in November?
09:33:21 >> First week in November that we receive a report
09:33:23 from staff apprising us how this issue is progressing.
09:33:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We have two motions and a second.
09:33:30 All in favor.
09:33:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's the same motion.
09:33:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Receive and file.
09:33:40 She wants another written report.
09:33:41 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Let me clarify that.
09:33:44 I'm sorry.
09:33:45 First week in November a written report on the status
09:33:48 of this issue.
09:33:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You're right, we have to vote on
09:33:52 the first one which is to receive and file.
09:33:53 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of that motion say Aye.
09:33:55 (Motion carried).
09:33:56 All in favor of the motion of the written report for
09:33:59 November.

09:34:00 Second.
09:34:01 (Motion carried)
09:34:02 Okay.
09:34:03 Item number 5.
09:34:08 Land development.
09:34:19 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management development
09:34:20 services.
09:34:21 >> Louder.
09:34:24 >>THOM SNELLING: Growth management development
09:34:26 services.
09:34:26 Good morning.
09:34:31 This is item number 5.
09:34:32 Motion was to come up with a report on the pros and
09:34:37 cons of amending chapter 27 to require primary
09:34:39 entrances to subdivisions, the only undedicated
09:34:42 streets and not on alleyways and to consider the
09:34:44 impact of such an amendment on affordable housing.
09:34:51 I have some handouts.
09:34:53 The Land Development Coordination staff did a similar
09:35:14 review of this issue, and basically it was kind of the
09:35:18 result of some of the developments that had taken
09:35:21 place in Courier City which replatting of a single lot

09:35:24 into four individual lots, and at any time you go from
09:35:27 a single lot to three or more you have to replat, and
09:35:30 typically it would have two of the lots oriented
09:35:34 towards the alley and two of the lots oriented towards
09:35:37 the street.
09:35:38 This is a fairly --
09:35:48 Okay, there you go.
09:35:55 As you can see, the single lot here and the single lot
09:35:59 here outlined in yellow.
09:36:01 The orange shows how the lot, from this single lot
09:36:06 here to this single lot here, the four lots, two
09:36:09 towards Horatio street and two towards the alley.
09:36:12 I'm sorry.
09:36:14 This particular development was two lots.
09:36:18 Typically that's a single lot.
09:36:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The infamous quads that we deal
09:36:27 with very often.
09:36:28 >> Yes.
09:36:32 So some of the positives, getting to the meat of it,
09:36:35 you can follow on the item.
09:36:36 I won't read each one specifically.
09:36:45 But it does have some of the aesthetic appeal.

09:36:48 And I don't want to down play that that much.
09:36:51 But it does have somatesthetic appeal.
09:36:54 A lot of times, the development, it does offer, the
09:37:03 entrance is here, here, and pretty much matches what
09:37:06 is what you put on the street.
09:37:11 So looking in front detail that you have in the back
09:37:23 so there is anesthetic appeal to the use of those
09:37:26 types of developments.
09:37:32 When the lot is narrow, a lot of times, it allows --
09:37:35 it maximizes the density already allowed in that area.
09:37:40 Sometimes it already has been built in a single family
09:37:43 lot.
09:37:44 It just allows it to maximize the density.
09:37:47 Which is more consistent with the future land use
09:37:50 plan.
09:37:50 Because the future land use plan typically, as you
09:37:54 read that along there, you see that it takes advantage
09:37:56 and really maximizes what had originally been
09:38:00 identified for in the land use plan itself.
09:38:04 The code back in 2002 was actually amended to allow
09:38:08 for this kind of development.
09:38:11 It spoke to providing a 3-foot access way between the

09:38:14 buildings themselves so people could access it, also
09:38:17 to make sure there was certain security with lighting
09:38:19 on the alley, on the accessway between the building in
09:38:23 the front and the back.
09:38:24 Also all units had to be addressed from the street
09:38:27 because cot potentially cause some problems.
09:38:29 Another advantage, council has worked very diligently
09:38:33 to try to incorporate whenever it could some of the
09:38:35 CPTED, the policing design principles. If you go
09:38:42 through some of your overlay districts a lot of that
09:38:45 CPTED design was mandated actually in the code, and
09:38:49 this really does put eyes on the streets which is one
09:38:52 of the fundamental principles of the CPTED development
09:38:55 or CPTED idea.
09:38:57 Finally it does provide with some additional price
09:38:58 ranging and some options this particular design.
09:39:02 Anytime you allow for greater designability, you do
09:39:05 provide for some additional options and what those
09:39:09 units will cost.
09:39:11 Now to the negatives.
09:39:13 As you know, alleys are typically very narrow and that
09:39:20 could cause some problems.

09:39:21 And I am going to go back to the first picture that I
09:39:24 showed you where I said this is typical and shows some
09:39:28 of the nice things about it.
09:39:29 You go back here, the original picture, it's almost
09:39:34 like where is the problem with what happens here?
09:39:36 And the answer is, where this car is, and this trash
09:39:40 can, and as you go down, you know, if this person is
09:39:45 having friends over, they run out of places to park.
09:39:48 They start parking on the alleys themselves and it
09:39:52 gets very congested.
09:39:54 One of the good things is it looks good.
09:39:56 One of the bad things, it's being used in a way that
09:40:00 it had not previously been designed to be done so it
09:40:03 does cause some congestion problems, as well as the
09:40:05 idea that in some cases, you end up having a dumpster
09:40:14 as your front door friend.
09:40:15 So that also is one of the problems, too.
09:40:20 There is a potentiality.
09:40:21 We did speak with the Tampa Fire Rescue, and there's
09:40:27 some potentiality about responding to 911 calls.
09:40:30 There could be some confusion, you know, when they
09:40:33 have to come to the back.

09:40:34 Alleys are typically pretty narrow oh, pretty small,
09:40:38 and it's virtually impossible to get an emergency
09:40:40 vehicle down to 10 or 12-foot alley when the vehicle
09:40:45 itself is quite large and can't maneuver, so they have
09:40:48 to come to the front, they come down the middle, and
09:40:50 if it gets blocked it could be a problem.
09:40:52 So they did voice some concerns.
09:40:55 There's insufficient room for sidewalks.
09:41:01 And increase of pedestrian use there's no place for
09:41:04 that to happen.
09:41:07 The other thing, also, there is a maintenance issue
09:41:09 that comes up.
09:41:11 I want to show you one quick thing here.
09:41:21 As this continues to be used more and more you can see
09:41:23 it's already starting to wet out the alley back here,
09:41:29 and that puts a burden, public right-of-way, it costs
09:41:34 additional money.
09:41:35 You can also see there had been some stormwater
09:41:37 run-off in some of the stuff in, some of the debris
09:41:40 when it comes here, starts to flow into the alley so
09:41:42 creates other stormwater types of issues.
09:41:45 In here, there's a break.

09:41:46 And this is probably one of the better ones that are a
09:41:48 little bit easier to deal with.
09:41:50 Some are far worse shape than that.
09:42:00 Basically, you see what our recommendation is there.
09:42:02 And what we are recommending is to not jump in and
09:42:05 make an immediate policy decision.
09:42:07 We do want top look at this, want to fully explore
09:42:10 some of the infrastructure requirements and problems
09:42:13 that come up, especially as it has to do with how the
09:42:16 alley is used and what kind of standards are used to
09:42:19 do that.
09:42:20 So, I mean, we really would like to bring it back as
09:42:23 part of the January cycle discussion, and further vet
09:42:27 out some of the infrastructure, utility issues that
09:42:30 are prevalent that we touched on this morning, as well
09:42:33 as talk about the increase, potential for the
09:42:35 increased cost to the city's budget itself.
09:42:41 I went very quickly and I'll answer any questions you
09:42:43 have.
09:42:43 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that's a pretty good
09:42:45 summary.
09:42:46 It also has major stormwater drainage implications.

09:42:51 >>> Yes, ma'am.
09:42:51 >> That you didn't touch on, but I have seen the
09:42:54 3-foot deep little pits by the driveways because
09:42:59 there's no place to put the stormwater and it's not
09:43:01 really safe for children in the neighborhood.
09:43:04 If we bring this back in January of '08, and after
09:43:09 your research we determine that we want to do
09:43:12 something about it, what would the time frame be for
09:43:17 council to take action?
09:43:21 >>> We will be continuing to look at it up until that
09:43:24 point.
09:43:24 It will probably work within the time frame of the
09:43:28 rest of the amendments.
09:43:29 If it was determined that council did want to make
09:43:31 amendments to address some of these things, either to
09:43:34 allow or disallow them, they probably could be rolled
09:43:36 into the actual January time frame.
09:43:38 So whatever time frame those follow is what these code
09:43:42 amendments follow as well.
09:43:45 >> Would you be able to come back to us with specific
09:43:48 recommendations so that we could follow that time
09:43:50 frame?

09:43:52 >>> We could come back with recommendations, yes,
09:43:53 ma'am.
09:43:54 On what we think professionally.
09:43:57 I think one of the things that we really discovered is
09:43:59 that it's a terribly complex -- on the surface, you
09:44:04 say, yeah, allies are great, and allies clog up and
09:44:09 you can't use them.
09:44:10 It's very complex.
09:44:11 Public utility is very concerned about that.
09:44:13 And right now there's nothing in there that
09:44:15 specifically addresses how you deal with stormwater,
09:44:18 when now you are taking an alley and using it as the
09:44:21 street was being used.
09:44:26 I'm talking about stuff that --
09:44:28 >> What direction would we need to provide to you
09:44:30 continue to study this and come back to us with some
09:44:32 recommendations?
09:44:33 >>> The recommendation, we would make a motion to come
09:44:40 back annually, yes, ma'am.
09:44:42 >> Come back in January.
09:44:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Second?
09:44:46 Motion and second.

09:44:47 Question on the motion, Mr. Dingfelder.
09:44:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just a couple of general questions,
09:44:52 Thom.
09:44:52 We typically have seen these quads in Courier City,
09:44:58 Oscawana.
09:45:00 Have we identified other areas of the city that are
09:45:04 subject to this type of thing?
09:45:09 >>> Courier City is certainly the most predominant,
09:45:14 and really the focus -- in terms of the value used as
09:45:17 the Land Development Coordination looked at other
09:45:19 parts of the city but this particular style of
09:45:21 development is almost unique to this area.
09:45:23 >> What I am wondering is, logistically, perhaps
09:45:27 that's because the market was right over the last five
09:45:30 years to do it there.
09:45:31 But I'm wondering where is the next Courier City
09:45:34 Oscawana?
09:45:36 Do we know that?
09:45:37 Have we looked at that?
09:45:38 >>> I appreciate that direction, because that's not
09:45:41 part of what we actually looked at, is where the
09:45:44 potentialities of this kind thing happening good or

09:45:47 bad.
09:45:47 >> Because I think that's pretty critical.
09:45:49 I think the neighborhood association, and many.
09:45:53 Neighbors in Courier City, Oskawana, have spoken
09:45:56 pretty loudly, which is actually why this motion came
09:45:59 up at all, that they are kind of tired of the quads
09:46:05 and they would like to go back to a little less dense
09:46:08 development in terms of triplexes or duplexes on those
09:46:14 same lots.
09:46:16 But we can't look at it in isolation.
09:46:20 If this has a potential to travel to the next
09:46:22 neighborhood, wherever it is, we need to look at it,
09:46:25 you know, down the road and look at it in a more
09:46:28 holistic manner.
09:46:29 However, to the contrary, if it's only available in
09:46:32 Courier City, Oscawana, I think it changes the debate
09:46:35 as well.
09:46:38 >>> I would think there are other areas.
09:46:40 We have allies.
09:46:43 All the way to the city, I would think.
09:46:45 >> Right.
09:46:45 And councilman Scott, you know, brought up the point,

09:46:49 which is also part of the motion which I think is well
09:46:52 taken, that affordable housing can be used, this
09:46:59 mechanism to increase the density on the lot to assist
09:47:01 knew building affordable housing.
09:47:04 I think that's a valid question that we do need to
09:47:07 analyze, especially if it's available in other parts
09:47:09 of town that might be more prone to affordable
09:47:11 housing.
09:47:14 So, anyway, what is the motion?
09:47:16 Is the motion just for staff to continue to look at
09:47:19 these issues?
09:47:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: May I clarify it?
09:47:22 My motion would be to return with specific
09:47:25 recommendation on this alley usage to include in the
09:47:30 January amendment cycle.
09:47:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Would that include a public
09:47:35 workshop?
09:47:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Absolutely.
09:47:37 Absolutely.
09:47:39 Perhaps we could do a workshop on it --
09:47:42 >>THOM SNELLING: The chapter 27, part of that, that
09:47:44 goes to a workshop process, I'm pretty sure.

09:47:47 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
09:47:48 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
09:47:50 Opposed, Nay.
09:47:52 >>THE CLERK: Verification on the second?
09:47:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
09:47:57 We go to item number 6.
09:48:00 Mr. Shelby?
09:48:07 Who else is going to speak?
09:48:08 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
09:48:09 What we were here today to do is provide you just a
09:48:12 preliminary presentation of what we found today.
09:48:15 I only had the opportunity to speak with councilman
09:48:18 Dingfelder so far, so I have to do it with the rest of
09:48:20 you right now.
09:48:21 Law unfortunately as you would expect, when you have
09:48:23 first amendment issues, very complicated.
09:48:26 What we have established is that there appears to not
09:48:28 be state preemption, which means since the state is
09:48:32 not preempted, it may mean the possibility for local
09:48:35 government to adjust the cap downward, the state cap
09:48:39 is $500.
09:48:40 We know Sarasota County has used the $200 cap.

09:48:45 That ordinance to my knowledge has not yet been
09:48:47 challenged, that we don't have anything definitive for
09:48:50 you but we are pretty comfortable that it is not
09:48:52 subject to state preemption.
09:48:54 That having been said, when we start talking about the
09:48:56 other committees that are created and how the funding
09:48:59 works with those, it gets a lot murkier.
09:49:01 Part of the reason there is I think it's the
09:49:05 bifurcation, and Marcie Hamilton, by the way, has done
09:49:08 the research on this, on really -- I'm really
09:49:13 parroting what she said.
09:49:15 Essentially what that seems to suggest is that you
09:49:17 cannot regulate what people spend if they are not
09:49:21 spending it directly in support of the candidate.
09:49:23 So you get these committees that are formed for issue
09:49:26 pursuance, and it gets to be very difficult to
09:49:30 establish that they are in fact working on behalf of
09:49:33 or against any given candidate, because they are
09:49:36 whatever the issue is, pro abortion, anti-abortion,
09:49:40 whatever it may be, just two candidates different on
09:49:44 that.
09:49:44 So the problem is, there's a lot more research that

09:49:46 needs to be done.
09:49:47 And what I would suggest, Mr. Shelby and we have all
09:49:52 been very busy.
09:49:53 We haven't had much opportunity to coordinate with Mr.
09:49:56 Shelby.
09:49:56 What we recommend we do is we update him on the status
09:50:00 on the research we have right now, and that we have
09:50:05 him kind of take the lead on it and be responsible for
09:50:07 making sure we move timely but we will assist him, and
09:50:11 we would also suggest, I think the timing here is the
09:50:13 primary point.
09:50:14 We have so many other things going on.
09:50:16 I don't think our next election is for quite awhile
09:50:18 yet.
09:50:19 So I think we have a little bit of time to make sure
09:50:22 we get you the information you need to make a
09:50:24 considered decision.
09:50:26 And Mr. Shelby will have a much better feel for your
09:50:30 calendar than will I.
09:50:31 So having him involved will also help us be responsive
09:50:36 to that.
09:50:36 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I could just follow up.

09:50:38 I just want to let you know, I am familiar with the
09:50:41 work that city attorney Marcie Hamilton has put in.
09:50:44 I just want to acknowledge her for the work on that.
09:50:46 And I would be happy to take that research and bring
09:50:54 it back to council when it so desires.
09:50:57 But I just want to acknowledge her and thank her for
09:51:00 the work she's done.
09:51:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:51:04 Sometime in the 70s, there was a limit that a
09:51:12 candidate could spend.
09:51:13 I think on City Council 25,000 and for mayor 50,000.
09:51:16 That was ruled unconstitutional.
09:51:18 But my question is, if you are going to limit
09:51:24 independent collections from 500 to 200 or 100 or
09:51:28 whatever, what does that do to a candidate, or to an
09:51:31 elected officer who is on an elected board, whatever
09:51:35 it may be?
09:51:36 And they have the visibilities, rightly or wrongly,
09:51:45 goodly or badly, of receiving free press and people
09:51:48 don't really listen a lot of times, when you do
09:51:52 something wrong, they remember the name, not what you
09:51:54 did wrong, in a lot of instances.

09:51:59 And it isn't prohibitive of a candidate if you want to
09:52:04 spend 100 of your own money to put that in yet you
09:52:08 can't collect 500.
09:52:09 There is a mixed signal that's going on.
09:52:11 It would be disadvantageous to an individual who
09:52:16 doesn't have the 100 or 200 or 300 or whatever they
09:52:19 want to spend on the campaign, I'll call it the
09:52:23 Bloomberg effect, when you have those billions, you
09:52:26 can spend millions in your campaign and never ask for
09:52:30 a dime.
09:52:31 So I have a mixed thing of this here.
09:52:33 Like you're saying I'm glad it's being put on the
09:52:36 shelf somewhere to bring back to discuss because the
09:52:38 elections are some time away.
09:52:40 I'm not against reform if it's done across the board.
09:52:44 But if we are going to let some individual put in 100
09:52:47 or 200 of his or her own money and some other
09:52:51 individual who is trying to do the best, and in
09:52:55 today's idealism of the public -- and I'm not going to
09:53:00 question media -- is this, if you can't raise money
09:53:02 you are not a viable candidate.
09:53:04 And being qualified and being sincere and being

09:53:09 furnished and having the best ideas takes second
09:53:11 place.
09:53:12 They rate you by how much money you raise in the
09:53:14 political arena.
09:53:15 And that's how it is; unfortunately.
09:53:20 That's how it is.
09:53:21 >>MARY MULHERN: Charlie, I agree that the incumbents
09:53:25 have an unfair advantage with getting free media.
09:53:28 But if you reduce the contributions that everyone
09:53:31 gets, you reduce some of that unfair advantage of the
09:53:36 money you get because you also get a lot more money
09:53:39 because your name is known and because of your
09:53:44 likelihood of being reelected.
09:53:45 So everybody knows that, that those incumbents can
09:53:49 raise like 400,000 and new candidates only about 40,
09:53:53 50.
09:53:53 So I think it helps -- it would help to level the
09:53:56 playing field a little bit.
09:54:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The reason this came up, Charlie,
09:54:05 after the last election, this last election really
09:54:07 showed almost an obscene amount of money being raised
09:54:13 for council elections.

09:54:15 And analysis -- and I am going to provide that
09:54:19 analysis to council, within the next year when we come
09:54:21 back on this issue, analysis will show that much of
09:54:25 that money came out of the development community and,
09:54:29 you know, from other people who are in front of us
09:54:32 regularly looking for this or looking for that or
09:54:35 wanting to influence council and this and that.
09:54:38 The reason this came up is citizens approached me
09:54:42 after this last election and said, you know, what can
09:54:45 we do about this?
09:54:46 This is really diluting, as you said yourself, this is
09:54:52 diluting the average person, the average voter,
09:54:54 because what happens is exactly right, somebody raises
09:54:58 a whole mess of $500 contributions, and they are taken
09:55:01 seriously, and other people that can't raise that kind
09:55:04 of money are taken less seriously.
09:55:06 And that's extremely unfortunate.
09:55:09 And on balance you make some good points, Charlie,
09:55:12 that there are some problems with that.
09:55:13 The Bloomberg type of candidate.
09:55:17 Fortunately we haven't seen those types of candidates
09:55:19 on this council.

09:55:20 We have seen it in other context perhaps.
09:55:23 So I think we have to do it on balance, and see what's
09:55:28 the best way to go.
09:55:29 But the question I had -- that was more of a
09:55:32 statement.
09:55:33 Question I had is, David, when you and Marcie looked
09:55:37 at this, it appeared to me in Sarasota that they did
09:55:40 this by statute and not by charter amendment.
09:55:43 Would you anticipate that that's the case with us as
09:55:45 well, that this would just be an ordinance change and
09:55:50 not -- because I don't think it's in the charter to
09:55:53 start with.
09:55:54 >>> Correct.
09:55:55 I do not recall any provision in the charter that
09:55:57 would affect this so it would be by ordinance.
09:56:01 >> Okay.
09:56:01 So procedurally, it's not a big deal policywise, now,
09:56:06 discussionwise.
09:56:07 I think that we need to have a tremendous amount of
09:56:09 input from the community on this, and see how the
09:56:12 community feels, because it is a big change.
09:56:14 But we did have two and a half years or so before we

09:56:17 get into it.
09:56:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
09:56:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, good thing you are sending this
09:56:26 back.
09:56:26 I will tell you now I probably won't support too much
09:56:28 changing.
09:56:29 I have been on both sides.
09:56:32 I have been on the side when as a candidate couldn't
09:56:36 get no money, okay?
09:56:37 And when I first ran for county commission or even
09:56:40 school board.
09:56:41 So, you know, you are not going to be able to find a
09:56:46 simple solution that's going to be -- going to fit or
09:56:49 match every situation.
09:56:50 Not going to be able to do it.
09:56:52 The other side also is, and made a statement about a
09:56:55 lot of money coming from developers to influence the
09:56:57 vote.
09:56:58 Now, I will tell you, I hope that's not the case.
09:57:01 I hope that people are giving money because they
09:57:03 believe in the candidate to be able to make good
09:57:07 decisions, set public policies.

09:57:10 I want to believe that.
09:57:11 I want to tell you that I have had developers give me
09:57:15 money, I have had developers not give me any money.
09:57:18 I vote against them.
09:57:19 It's the issue that comes before this council.
09:57:21 That should be voted not on the amount of money that
09:57:23 you are getting from anybody for that matter.
09:57:25 So, you know, my belief is that every decision that
09:57:31 comes before counsel or county commission will be
09:57:33 voting on the issue, and that's before us, not on the
09:57:38 fact that somebody gave us X number of dollars, okay?
09:57:40 And if somebody gave me money for that, and they can
09:57:43 count me out.
09:57:44 My issue is always going to be look at the issues, I
09:57:47 look at the facts, what's best that's before me.
09:57:52 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
09:57:55 My question is, what would the League of Women Voters
09:57:57 do?
09:57:59 They are the most, you know, across the board, let's
09:58:04 make the elections fair and open and I think the
09:58:06 League of Women Voters should have a forum on this in
09:58:09 a few months.

09:58:10 Although the elections are three and a half years
09:58:11 away, I dare say that particularly for the mayoral
09:58:15 election, people are going to start warming up in
09:58:17 about a year.
09:58:18 So I think it's not too early to begin to think about
09:58:20 this.
09:58:21 And I have to tell you, I thought that the people, the
09:58:23 reason people gave me money is because of my idea when
09:58:27 you sit here and get to vote on a rezoning it's
09:58:29 amazing how much more attractive you become once you
09:58:33 are already in a position of incumbency.
09:58:36 You're right, Mr. Miranda, incumbents have a lot --
09:58:40 and I think we want to create a more fair and level
09:58:42 playing field because I think there's a lot to be said
09:58:44 for fresh ideas from all over the community.
09:58:46 So I really look forward to this continuing
09:58:49 conversation, and I will support having a lot of
09:58:52 public forum, so that the average Tampa man, woman,
09:58:56 gets to engage in this conversation, that it's not
09:59:00 just -- I'm looking here at some of the folks who come
09:59:04 down every week and give major gifts to all the
09:59:07 candidates, not just the people who are engaged in

09:59:09 trying to woo council support.
09:59:11 Thank you.
09:59:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: It's my second time so I'll keep
09:59:14 quiet after this.
09:59:17 [ Laughter ]
09:59:19 What I'm saying is this.
09:59:22 I don't want to change something for the mere fact to
09:59:25 say to the public, look, I have got something, 500,
09:59:31 200, because I always think when I look at a problem
09:59:34 or item or solution, this side and the other side,
09:59:37 what if?
09:59:39 And the what if comes to me this way.
09:59:41 Now, we are going to say, Sarasota may be working
09:59:44 fine, but if somebody did a study in Sarasota and
09:59:46 somebody is going to get 500, and now there's three
09:59:49 checks for 200 from the same family, we haven't solved
09:59:53 the problem.
09:59:54 This is something very hard to control unless you have
09:59:59 watch dogs that check everything out, and some people
10:00:02 get married, don't have the same last name as Charlie
10:00:05 Miranda, my daughter don't have the same name as me,
10:00:08 it may be the same money.

10:00:09 I'm not saying it is.
10:00:10 And I hope the girls aren't watching.
10:00:12 But what I am saying is, there's always a way if you
10:00:15 want to do something to sway.
10:00:18 Sounds like a song.
10:00:19 But what I'm saying is these things have to be done
10:00:22 with a lot of -- I don't know if you are looking at
10:00:27 changing from March to November.
10:00:31 That would be something I think that would be
10:00:33 catastrophic, you are really going to be dealing with
10:00:35 big money, and nobody is going to know who you are.
10:00:39 And sometimes it's good for some candidates.
10:00:42 But what I am saying, these things have got to be
10:00:46 looked at not only what you have and how you want to
10:00:49 change it, but are you really going to fix anything?
10:00:52 That's the thing.
10:00:52 And I agree with a lot of things that have been said,
10:00:56 I agree with councilman Scott, and we have got to do
10:01:01 something.
10:01:01 But I want to make sure when we change something that
10:01:04 it's, A, it will meet the legal test, and that these
10:01:11 things are done in a mannerism where you just don't go

10:01:14 around, change it for the best, but that's all I can
10:01:17 do.
10:01:18 Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:01:19 >>GWEN MILLER: You can be the incumbent and still not
10:01:22 raise as much money so you can't say the incumbent is
10:01:25 going to raise the money.
10:01:26 So it's not just the incumbent raising money.
10:01:31 It's who the people think is the best candidate.
10:01:33 So we have to make sure we are doing the right thing
10:01:35 and make all these changes.
10:01:37 And I don't think getting that money to a person is
10:01:40 going to sway -- everybody votes their conscious and
10:01:43 they know to vote the right way.
10:01:44 That's going to help the community.
10:01:46 So money is not going to change anything, so I don't
10:01:50 think -- you need to study this really hard before we
10:01:54 do this.
10:01:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just one last thing, my second
10:01:57 comment under rule -- a lot of what we do is about
10:02:03 perception, okay?
10:02:06 We all know ourselves, okay?
10:02:10 We all know that we are going to vote for the right

10:02:12 thing regardless of who is standing there and how much
10:02:16 they gave, yada yada.
10:02:18 We all know that.
10:02:19 But the perception in the community is, oh, look, that
10:02:22 developer, we can look it up and he contributed, you
10:02:24 know, $500, and his mother and sister contributed
10:02:30 $500, and listen, you can look in my records, and
10:02:33 there are people like that who did that for me too.
10:02:36 So I'm not saying I'm pure as the driven snow because
10:02:39 we all get that type of money.
10:02:41 So be it.
10:02:41 But the reality is, is when it's $500 and then another
10:02:45 $500 from that same family and then another $500 from
10:02:49 that same family, that adds up very, very quickly,
10:02:52 okay.
10:02:52 And the perception of $2500 from that particular
10:02:56 family or whatever, or that particular corporation, or
10:02:59 five corporations, you know, is a little bit daunting.
10:03:02 If you take that same family and you multiply the five
10:03:06 times $100 contributions, then it's only $500 and it's
10:03:09 not so overwhelming.
10:03:11 But you're right, let's hear from the people.

10:03:14 We are here to represent the people.
10:03:16 Let's let the people help us decide this very, very
10:03:19 important issue.
10:03:20 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I had never raised money in the
10:03:23 past.
10:03:23 Every time I ran for elections, I ran my own come
10:03:27 pains.
10:03:27 And this year, I had my first fund-raiser in February.
10:03:31 I just didn't -- let me tell you, once you start, the
10:03:35 money is pretty easy to come in.
10:03:37 And I had money from all over the country.
10:03:39 From different companies.
10:03:41 And I'm not here as a popularity candidate.
10:03:48 I want to do what's right for everybody.
10:03:53 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
10:03:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Lawton Chiles did a good example,
10:03:57 never took over $100 per contribution.
10:04:00 He never lost an election.
10:04:04 >>DAVID SMITH: I'm just trying to make sure here.
10:04:07 Is it the direction of council that we are going to
10:04:10 continue what we had previously started, which was
10:04:13 looking at the possibility of limiting campaign

10:04:16 contributions from individuals and others to a
10:04:20 candidate?
10:04:22 And secondarily, looking at what the law is with
10:04:24 respect to activities and contributions to and from
10:04:29 committees?
10:04:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I make a motion, just to get
10:04:34 this off the dime?
10:04:35 I think Marcie -- you guys have concluded that this
10:04:40 independent expenditure organization, the tax, that
10:04:42 sort of thing, that we really can't control those,
10:04:46 realistically control those.
10:04:48 Marcie, is that kind of your early conclusion?
10:04:52 If that's the case, then I say we can just kind of
10:04:55 discard that and move forward on what we think we
10:04:58 could control, could, okay, which would just be kind
10:05:01 of what Sarasota has done which is reduce the 500 down
10:05:05 to X, whatever X might be.
10:05:07 And then you guys can refine that.
10:05:09 Mr. Shelby said he would sort of take over this
10:05:11 research.
10:05:12 We can refine it.
10:05:13 And then we can have public input.

10:05:15 And, you know, and then come forward with an ultimate
10:05:19 vote at some point down the road.
10:05:22 >>> Marcie Hamilton, legal department.
10:05:25 I do believe that you can limit the contributions to
10:05:28 individuals.
10:05:28 But there is a certain extent to which you can limit,
10:05:33 based on the readings by Mr. Miranda, councilman
10:05:37 Miranda.
10:05:40 An incumbent would have an advantage over the
10:05:43 newcomer.
10:05:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I guess my question is on the
10:05:51 independent expenditure organizations, the PACs, have
10:05:54 you concluded we really can't mess with those?
10:05:56 >>> I have not absolutely concluded because I cannot
10:05:59 find anyone that has -- there is no limitation placed
10:06:02 in the statute.
10:06:03 I have come across no limitations on that, because
10:06:06 there are differences between first amendment rights
10:06:09 with contributions and expenditures.
10:06:11 So it probably would are more difficult to limit that.
10:06:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: My motion, let's simplify it.
10:06:17 Won't mess with the independent expenditure

10:06:20 organizations, the PAC, but we'll ask Mr. Shelby to
10:06:23 continue just looking at the campaigns issue, the $500
10:06:31 pish you and come back with an update much in six
10:06:36 months.
10:06:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Second.
10:06:39 >> Do you want to do in the a year?
10:06:42 >>> I was thinking the beginning of January, to at
10:06:44 least give you a matrix.
10:06:46 If you want to make it six months, that's fine.
10:06:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't think it needs to come back
10:06:51 in January.
10:06:53 That's kind of soon.
10:06:54 >>> Whatever council wishes.
10:06:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'm just trying to understand what are
10:06:58 we doing?
10:06:58 Are we trying to limit the $500?
10:07:01 >> Yes.
10:07:02 If it's council's will with the input of the community
10:07:05 it would be to continue to explore the limiting,
10:07:08 reducing the contribution amount per person,
10:07:12 corporation, whatever, from $500 down to X.
10:07:16 It might be $100.

10:07:17 Might be $200.
10:07:18 You know, whatever that is.
10:07:21 To continue to explore the issue you from legal's
10:07:23 perspective, to get community input as we go along,
10:07:26 and ultimately there will be a vote and we'll see
10:07:32 where the vote goes.
10:07:33 But I think it's worth exploring and it's worth
10:07:35 getting the community's input on the issue.
10:07:37 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to suggest, because it
10:07:40 sounds like a lot of my colleagues aren't necessarily
10:07:44 in favor of limiting those contributions.
10:07:47 But I think it really is incumbent upon us to let the
10:07:51 public have a voice, and this is a huge issue
10:07:55 everywhere.
10:07:55 And, you know, I think it would be a great opportunity
10:08:01 for us to have -- to hear from the public on this.
10:08:04 And you may think it's a bad idea.
10:08:06 But why don't we let our constituents tell us what
10:08:09 they think before we decide not to do anything?
10:08:14 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
10:08:15 floor.
10:08:16 All in favor of the motion say Aye.

10:08:17 Opposed, Nay.
10:08:17 (Motion carried).
10:08:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Appreciate it.
10:08:20 Six months.
10:08:20 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 7.
10:08:24 Mr. James Buckner.
10:08:29 >>> James Buckner, technology and innovation.
10:08:32 I'm not sure my copy is going to be as exciting as the
10:08:35 last one but I want to update you on connectivity
10:08:38 within the City of Tampa.
10:08:39 Last time we were here discussing this, we talked
10:08:41 about the prospects of a municipal city-wide WiFi
10:08:47 network.
10:08:47 That's a very expensive proposition so what we have
10:08:50 chose tone do is attack it more from the smaller view
10:08:53 and try to address turning on WiFi hot spots in
10:08:57 various parts of the city.
10:08:58 And I'm here where W some good news because I believe
10:09:01 with the help of a lot of the community organizations
10:09:04 and some local vendors, we are making good progress in
10:09:07 that area.
10:09:09 Specifically this morning I would like to ask

10:09:11 Christine Burdick, the president of the downtown
10:09:13 partnership, to come up and tell you a little bit
10:09:15 about what's going on in downtown and Channelside.
10:09:18 Then I'll come back and cover a couple of the other
10:09:20 areas that we are working.
10:09:22 Christine.
10:09:24 >>> Christine Burdick with the Tampa downtown
10:09:27 partnership.
10:09:28 About three years ago, we were introduced to and
10:09:31 started working with a Tampa based firm on Gandy.
10:09:35 They are an Internet provider and beta storage and
10:09:41 handling firm.
10:09:41 They have plans all over the world and come from South
10:09:45 Tampa.
10:09:45 And they were interested in a very good, cooperative
10:09:50 arrangement.
10:09:51 They could provide better service in downtown, and
10:09:55 also to help us establish a free wireless network for
10:09:58 the outside, open public areas and downtown, a cross
10:10:03 the access feed.
10:10:05 In order to do that, they would need to be able to
10:10:07 gain access to the top of some of the buildings and

10:10:11 put very small portals or pieces Q equipment and it
10:10:24 was a favorable opportunity for the buildings as well,
10:10:26 and they unusually were able to set up a pretty good,
10:10:28 not complete, but a fairly good wireless network,
10:10:33 especially in the downtown business core, and in the
10:10:36 area of the Channel District.
10:10:38 And keep in mind this is on the outside.
10:10:42 At the time, they then got a very large contract with
10:10:44 the Hillsborough County school board, and so they for
10:10:47 two years were busy working on Hillsborough County.
10:10:50 And in that time, some of the hot spots went cold.
10:10:56 And so we have now been back in touch with them, with
10:11:00 the city, the city's department, and they are now
10:11:02 working on phase one.
10:11:06 There's a POP on top of the Lykes building.
10:11:09 And so in Lykes park, the signal is very strong and
10:11:13 should be on the streets.
10:11:16 Phase two, they are working with two other buildings
10:11:18 on Harbor Island and the Marriott and another building
10:11:23 in the south end of downtown.
10:11:25 And then phase three, they are working with the city's
10:11:27 traffic department, hoping to be able to have some of

10:11:33 these small pops on traffic signals, and that involves
10:11:37 getting into the electric with the signals.
10:11:38 So that's going to take a little longer time.
10:11:40 But when that is complete, that should be an entire
10:11:44 seamless wireless network for the external areas in
10:11:46 the downtown district.
10:11:47 And they have been a good partner.
10:11:48 And we are really happy to have kind of been the
10:11:51 conduit for that to happen.
10:11:55 >>> Thank you, Christine.
10:11:57 I also wanted to mention three other areas we have
10:11:58 been working with.
10:12:01 Tom Keating with with the Ybor City Chamber of
10:12:02 Commerce and of course with the Ybor Development
10:12:04 Corporation there.
10:12:05 We have worked with Ron Rotella, with Westshore
10:12:08 alliance, and also with Neal Constantino, with the
10:12:12 Davis Islands Chamber of Commerce.
10:12:14 And we have introduced all three of those
10:12:17 organizations to two of the local vendors, and gotten
10:12:19 that relationship going as Christine just described.
10:12:23 She talked about SEGO networks, a local company doing

10:12:27 a lot of good work in that area.
10:12:29 Bright House is now interested, also, in helping.
10:12:31 And might add that both of these local vendors are
10:12:34 talking their investment up front, no investment costs
10:12:38 to the communities.
10:12:40 Their investment for installation as well as operating
10:12:43 costs up front.
10:12:45 They are also both talking froe Internet access, or
10:12:49 free with some certain time limits as the accounts may
10:12:57 dictate.
10:12:57 One other area I want to mention was the airport,
10:13:00 aviation authority.
10:13:01 We have talked with Keo Bonikoff, the chief
10:13:08 information director there.
10:13:09 You may be aware the airport just acted a WiFi network
10:13:13 this summer. That was a year long project that they
10:13:16 undertook.
10:13:17 They decided to build their own infrastructure, about
10:13:20 a $2.3 million effort on their part, active as of this
10:13:25 summer and they are very happy with the results so
10:13:26 far.
10:13:27 They are getting about 50,000 customers per month

10:13:31 using it and it's free access as well.
10:13:34 So I believe we have got the ball rolling, headed in
10:13:36 the right direction here, and I think you will be
10:13:39 seeing a lot more WiFi hot spots in the few months
10:13:44 around the city.
10:13:44 So pending any questions, that concludes my update.
10:13:47 >> How do we let people know this is available?
10:13:51 >>> Well, basically an advertising campaign.
10:13:53 And we would like to try something through the city,
10:13:55 but I believe the community associations, we need to
10:13:58 impose upon them a bit to try to do that advertising
10:14:01 as well.
10:14:01 >> Because if we have it, we should be very proud and
10:14:04 pleased and let people know.
10:14:06 >>> Exactly.
10:14:07 I know SEGO is going around now as the hot spots
10:14:10 become active and they are putting up little signs
10:14:12 around WiFi spots and put their advertising logo.
10:14:18 Since they pay for it I'm sure that's a good thing for
10:14:21 them to do. I'm sure Bright House will do the same
10:14:24 thing.
10:14:25 Thank you.

10:14:26 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 8.
10:14:32 >>> Cindy Miller, growth management development
10:14:36 services.
10:14:38 This motion was to ask that there be an update as to
10:14:42 the negotiations regarding the for the Homer Hesterly
10:14:45 armory.
10:14:46 I'm going to sort of introduce the topic and then
10:14:48 Julia Cole is going to conclude with where we go from
10:14:52 here.
10:14:52 I thought it would be helpful if we could first sort
10:14:56 of look at a layout of a block so that both council
10:14:59 and the audience have an idea where we started and
10:15:05 what the process has been.
10:15:08 What is traditionally considered -- what is
10:15:17 traditionally called the armory is this parcel.
10:15:24 The next area that is north of this slide which is
10:15:30 here is an area that is currently utilized by the
10:15:33 National Guard.
10:15:35 Let me point out that the entire block is owned by the
10:15:38 National Guard.
10:15:41 The city does have what's referred to as a reverter
10:15:44 interest, and our legal staff can explain a little

10:15:46 more on that.
10:15:47 But this particular area where the armory is located,
10:15:51 the National Guard has vacated the building itself.
10:15:53 They still utilize the surrounding land.
10:15:55 But they are actively still utilizing this parcel and
10:15:58 the northern parcel.
10:16:00 This very northern parcel is owned exclusively by the
10:16:02 National Guard with no reverter interest.
10:16:04 City has a reverter interest in this parcel and that
10:16:07 parcel.
10:16:07 So I think that is of help to get an orientation.
10:16:15 When the National Guard and the city staff first
10:16:18 started working together several years ago, I believe
10:16:20 this might go back four or five more years.
10:16:23 The National Guard had an interest in disposing of the
10:16:26 armory itself.
10:16:29 What basically was identified is that when it comes
10:16:32 for utilization of the armory, that surrounding area
10:16:35 of land around it is not really sufficient to be able
10:16:38 to give good utilization.
10:16:46 When we discuss with the National Guard or armory
10:16:48 whether there would be the possibility of them making

10:16:50 available the entire block.
10:16:51 What they have required is that in order to vacate
10:16:55 that northern half of the block that they be fully
10:17:00 relocated, way call a turn-key operation, lock the
10:17:04 door one day, open up in another location.
10:17:07 And the cost of that, they identified in some of our
10:17:10 early meetings with the public, and pre-proposal
10:17:14 meetings, was in excess, I believe in excess of 5 to
10:17:17 $6 million.
10:17:18 I understand it may very well be a higher dollar
10:17:20 amount than that.
10:17:21 So that was what was required.
10:17:23 When we -- then I provided to City Council a time line
10:17:28 which I will give a copy to the clerk for the record;
10:17:32 is that a memorandum of understanding was executed
10:17:34 between the City of Tampa and the armory board back in
10:17:36 December of 2005.
10:17:40 This much was an agreement approved by the City
10:17:43 Council and executed by the mayor, it basically drew
10:17:46 an outline of those items that the National Guard and
10:17:50 city needed to resolve as far as the process for
10:17:52 conducting an RFP.

10:17:53 The memorandum of understanding required a review
10:17:57 committee.
10:17:58 Review committee consisted of two city employees, two
10:18:01 National Guard representatives, and two citizens from
10:18:04 the community.
10:18:07 The proposals for the facility were solicited in April
10:18:13 2006, proposals were submitted in June.
10:18:15 We then had a series of what I would call public
10:18:19 outreach.
10:18:21 We had meetings at the convention center, taking input
10:18:24 from the proposers as well as from the public, and
10:18:27 also having Q and A as part of that.
10:18:29 The proposers themselves were on display at the West
10:18:33 Tampa library.
10:18:34 And all meetings of the review committee were held in
10:18:36 the sunshine, in the public domain.
10:18:41 The results of the review committee of August 1st,
10:18:46 2006, was that at the time we had six proposals
10:18:49 submitted.
10:18:50 They basically narrowed that down to three proposals.
10:18:54 They found all to be acceptable.
10:18:55 But they ranked one, two and three.

10:18:58 To take back to the armory board.
10:19:02 The armory board was the next step.
10:19:04 And again let me reiterate the block is owned by the
10:19:07 National Guard.
10:19:09 The armory board, we had a meeting in August of 2006
10:19:12 with them, that I attended as well as members of the
10:19:15 public did.
10:19:17 And I believe at least one or two of the proposers.
10:19:20 And they asked that their staff work with us, work
10:19:23 with the city staff, to negotiate with all three
10:19:28 proposers at the same time.
10:19:31 In subsequent months, in phone conversations I had
10:19:35 with the National Guard staff, they could not
10:19:40 determine a way they could do that and had not
10:19:42 assigned legal staff at that point.
10:19:43 They kept changing who their staffing was.
10:19:45 When it comes then to the March 10th, 2007 armory
10:19:49 board meeting, which I did attend, and again it was a
10:19:53 sunshine meeting that is held, the armory board then
10:19:56 went back to what the review committee's
10:19:58 recommendation was, which was to initiate negotiations
10:20:02 with the top ranked proposer, and then if not

10:20:06 successful go on to others.
10:20:08 (Bell sounds)
10:20:10 Can I take a bit more time, Madam Chair?
10:20:13 So from that standpoint let me also point out that the
10:20:15 National Guard, sometime in the first quarter of 2007,
10:20:20 retained legal counsel here in Tampa, and that process
10:20:23 since March 2007 really, I should say, since August
10:20:29 1st, 2006, has been fully in the court of the
10:20:33 National Guard and armory board representative.
10:20:36 The legal representative of the armory board has been
10:20:40 working with the top ranked proposer, and going
10:20:45 through what I believe would be called their due
10:20:48 diligence checklist for both parties.
10:20:51 But the city has been totally out of that.
10:20:53 City staff has been not involved in that process.
10:20:58 There are matters coming before council in the coming
10:21:00 months.
10:21:01 One is a Planning Commission for a land use change, a
10:21:06 small scale plan amendment that will go to Planning
10:21:08 Commission November 5th.
10:21:10 And will be scheduled, we believe, before you on
10:21:13 November 29th.

10:21:14 For a change in land use for this block or portions of
10:21:18 this block.
10:21:21 All three proposers need the same land use change,
10:21:25 regardless of their ranking.
10:21:27 Right now, it's quasi-public and public area, RM-16,
10:21:32 all of them need a land use change.
10:21:36 Subsequent to any land use change, there would also
10:21:39 need to be a rezoning.
10:21:42 Now, there have been questions as to why hasn't any
10:21:45 form of real estate transaction come before City
10:21:47 Council?
10:21:50 The reverter clause or any other kind of real estate
10:21:53 transaction, or selection.
10:21:55 And I am going to let Ms. Cole get into the details as
10:21:58 to what the legal requirements are.
10:22:01 But I want to sort of leave you with one example of
10:22:03 way recall from a few years ago.
10:22:05 There was a developer that was going to purchase real
10:22:08 estate from the city over in West Tampa.
10:22:14 But the property that the developer owned and the city
10:22:16 owned were part of a PD rezoning.
10:22:19 We were not authorized the staff to bring the real

10:22:22 estate transaction for that sale of that transaction
10:22:25 before City Council until after the PD rezoning had
10:22:28 occurred.
10:22:29 So there is a certain sequence that must occur as this
10:22:35 transaction or any similar transaction which requires
10:22:38 rezoning can go forward.
10:22:40 At this point I would like to turn it over to Ms. Cole
10:22:42 so she can talk about where it would go from here.
10:22:45 Thank you.
10:22:48 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
10:22:51 There has been a lot of confusion as to whether or not
10:22:53 the selection should have come back to City Council at
10:22:57 relates to the memorandum of understanding, and/or the
10:23:00 timing of the reverter interest coming back to City
10:23:02 Council.
10:23:02 And admittedly the contract has some vagueness in it,
10:23:06 whether or not the city staff has that right to have
10:23:09 the selection, or that should have been council.
10:23:12 But I think as Ms. Miller said, in a typical
10:23:15 transaction with the city having an actual ownership
10:23:18 and trust, the real estate transaction does not come
10:23:23 back to staff and City Council until after the

10:23:25 entitlement process.
10:23:26 In addition when you have an RFP process, and I
10:23:28 confirmed this with the folks in our office, City
10:23:33 Council isn't in the position of actually making the
10:23:35 selection.
10:23:35 What they are in the position of is approving the
10:23:38 contract.
10:23:38 And you have a little bit of you unique situation here
10:23:41 as well because you have an RFP that was put out, and
10:23:45 the RFP was not based on what is the most amount of
10:23:51 money you can get for the property but how you deal
10:23:54 with the armory board, their issues, and also the
10:23:56 specifics on plans that they will be requesting to
10:23:59 come before City Council.
10:24:00 And you will be sitting both as a legislative body on
10:24:04 whether or not the land use change, which was
10:24:06 necessitated to have any project on this property,
10:24:10 making that determination, as well as in a
10:24:13 quasi-judicial capacity, making the decision on the
10:24:15 rezoning.
10:24:16 So we have to be very careful when we are dealing with
10:24:19 City Council making a decision in a quasi-judicial

10:24:22 manner, and City Council making its decision as it
10:24:24 relates to a business decision.
10:24:28 The situations always have to be separated.
10:24:30 So in this instance, the appropriate process to avoid
10:24:34 any contract zoning problems, to avoid any other
10:24:36 issues, would be for City Council to go ahead, hear
10:24:40 the land use process, the change of the land use, hear
10:24:45 the rezoning, and make a decision on the land use, and
10:24:48 on the rezoning.
10:24:49 And as Ms. Miller said, all three of the bidders to
10:24:54 rank or proposers to rank would be the change of CMU
10:24:57 35.
10:24:57 However, it's going to be a PD rezoning that is
10:25:00 necessary.
10:25:01 That is a very specific zoning.
10:25:03 It includes all of the uses, what the project is going
10:25:06 to look like, and it's through that process you will
10:25:09 decide whether or not the project is appropriate.
10:25:11 In addition, as Ms. Miller said, as in any business
10:25:15 transaction, the reverter interest will need to come
10:25:18 back to you, in addition there are other documents
10:25:20 that through the title process, we have determined

10:25:25 will need to come back to you as well.
10:25:27 Timing of when those come back to you we are still
10:25:29 reviewing and determining if we bring that prior to
10:25:33 any of the land use or on the zoning going forward.
10:25:37 More likely it will be afterwards.
10:25:39 So we'll come back to you with that and tell you the
10:25:41 process for that.
10:25:42 But at this point in time I did want to clarify the
10:25:45 concern, and I think they were valid concerns which
10:25:48 were raised, relating to whether or not the election
10:25:50 should have come back to City Council, and the reason
10:25:53 that it relating to these concerns.
10:25:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
10:25:59 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Two questions.
10:26:01 Julia, one, the reverter interest, typically these
10:26:05 reverter clauses that I've seen speak to public
10:26:08 purpose.
10:26:11 And obviously the armory had a very large public
10:26:14 purpose, wrestling, that sort of thing.
10:26:19 That's a joke.
10:26:19 But anyway, but that's the type of reverter clause we
10:26:24 are dealing with here?

10:26:27 >>JULIA COLE: Similar for a governmental use as
10:26:29 opposed to being a public purpose.
10:26:30 Not a huge nuance but a little bit of a nuance.
10:26:33 >> But it's an important interest that we have, in the
10:26:40 major part of the three parcels.
10:26:42 >>> To have of that reverter interest and it does have
10:26:44 some input.
10:26:45 I would agree with that.
10:26:46 >> So without the city's cooperation, they couldn't
10:26:49 just -- the armory, even though they own the fee, they
10:26:53 couldn't just sell the land and build condos unless we
10:26:55 approved it.
10:26:57 Because obviously that's not a governmental interest.
10:27:00 If there was condos.
10:27:02 >>> The only answer I can say to that is certainly
10:27:04 they could not have a transaction move forward without
10:27:08 the city releasing that reverter interest, or we would
10:27:11 have the right to come back in.
10:27:13 >> So we have a major role in this.
10:27:15 And then the other confusion, I guess it's sort of
10:27:17 three questions.
10:27:18 The other confusion I had is, back in December 2005,

10:27:22 this council, many of whom are still here, approved
10:27:27 the memoranda of understanding with the armory.
10:27:29 And I recall the discussion at that point in time, I
10:27:34 don't have the transcript in front of me but I sort of
10:27:37 recall it less 2001 years ago, that the selection was
10:27:42 going to come back to council.
10:27:44 And I'm just wondering, in the memoranda of
10:27:47 understanding, doesn't it say somewhere in there that
10:27:50 the city will have to agree with the selection or
10:27:54 something?
10:27:55 Doesn't it use the term "city"?
10:27:57 >>> Yes.
10:27:58 And that's where the confusion comes in.
10:28:01 City, the administration, or the selection committee
10:28:04 making that decision, or is that something that needed
10:28:05 to come back to City Council?
10:28:07 And we had actually -- Mr. Shelby went ahead and
10:28:10 pulled the transcript and provided that.
10:28:13 Both Mr. Smith and I reviewed that.
10:28:15 I would say even at that time there was some confusion
10:28:17 as to what was coming back there. Was discussion
10:28:19 about, yes, we would have the opportunity to approve

10:28:21 the contract, and there was some discussion at the
10:28:23 time about who would be on the selection committee,
10:28:26 and I'm not sure everyone at that point it
10:28:28 specifically said the selection would come back to
10:28:30 City Council, whether or not it was intended to be the
10:28:34 selection came back to City Council or just a contract
10:28:37 would be coming back to City Council.
10:28:39 I would absolutely agree that it is somewhat confused.
10:28:42 But it is my legal opinion that given the
10:28:46 circumstances where you have an RFP but it's very
10:28:49 specific as to what the projects will be, and they
10:28:52 have site plans attached to it, it has specific uses
10:28:56 attached to it, and separating out council's role, and
10:29:02 a proprietary manner, with its reverter interest,
10:29:06 versus its role as a quasi-judicial matter, you have
10:29:12 to be very careful to separate those and contract
10:29:14 zoning.
10:29:14 >> I'm fine with that, but on the bigger sense I have
10:29:18 a little charter concern in terms of balance of
10:29:21 powers, because under the charter, the administration,
10:29:25 you know, look at the 100 items on our agenda today,
10:29:29 the administration, you know, does a lot of things.

10:29:33 But at the end of the day, to enter into an agreement,
10:29:36 a contract of selection, an RFP selection, you know,
10:29:39 no matter what, it comes back to us before they select
10:29:43 somebody to build something for to us do something for
10:29:47 us, et cetera, et cetera.
10:29:48 And that's my concern, is I want to make sure we are
10:29:54 abundantly clear that that declaration, that there was
10:29:57 any real delegation there, because what happens if
10:30:01 this process moves forward and somebody challenges it
10:30:03 on that basis, that council never came back?
10:30:06 I'm not saying necessarily we even want to do that but
10:30:10 from a legal perspective I'm a little concerned this
10:30:12 process could move forward and somebody challenge it
10:30:14 on that basis.
10:30:15 You know, that council didn't rubber stamp what the
10:30:25 mayor and administration recommended to us what we do
10:30:27 day in and day out, week in an week out.
10:30:30 And that concerns me.
10:30:31 And if it's going into a legal area that David is
10:30:33 going to warn us about right now, I understand that,
10:30:37 too.
10:30:37 But I need to express my concern about that, because

10:30:41 once I start getting a better feel for this, that
10:30:46 concern went off of my head.
10:30:47 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney, still working on that
10:30:51 voice issue.
10:30:55 We did look back through the transcript.
10:30:56 And I believe you in particular, councilman
10:30:59 Dingfelder, mentioned some concern about the selection
10:31:00 process.
10:31:01 So your recollection of your comments, I think, is
10:31:04 accurate.
10:31:06 It would have been nicer had there been a little more
10:31:10 clarity at that time.
10:31:11 But looking at the transcript as a whole, and
10:31:13 particularly looking at Ms. Ferlita's comments, there
10:31:16 was some discussion about the proposal.
10:31:19 But the proposals were ranked by the committee.
10:31:24 What you approved determined that the mayor would pick
10:31:26 that committee based on two at-large people, two, I
10:31:34 believe, representatives from within the city and two
10:31:36 citizens at large.
10:31:37 It was that committee's role to rank those prospects.
10:31:40 And I think what Ms. Cole has indicated to you as the

10:31:44 legal concern we have, when council gets involved
10:31:47 approving the selection of the specific proposal,
10:31:52 which you then have to vote on in your zoning
10:31:55 capacity, and I think the decision was made at the
10:31:57 time that the proper way to construe the agreement,
10:32:01 particularly in light of the ambiguity, is to construe
10:32:03 in the a manner that would not put council in a
10:32:06 position of potentially being involved in contract
10:32:08 zoning.
10:32:09 All of that having been said, and Ms. Ferlita's
10:32:12 comment was telling, and I'll read it to you.
10:32:16 I believe Morris Massey, Cindy Miller, and the council
10:32:24 were involved in the colloquy, and Morris was asked,
10:32:29 how do we handle this?
10:32:30 And he says, there's nothing in the contract that
10:32:32 would bind us.
10:32:35 And Ms. Ferlita said, we don't vote on the contract
10:32:40 when it comes if we don't like the terms.
10:32:43 Meaning, I think, the ultimate upshot was she at least
10:32:47 was understanding that in the more normal process of
10:32:52 things around here, and that is, you're correct, the
10:32:55 administration prepares a contract, it comes to

10:32:57 council to either approve it or not.
10:33:01 Because a contract has to be approved by City Council.
10:33:04 But the problem here was, the contract wasn't with the
10:33:06 city.
10:33:07 The contract was with the guard and whoever was
10:33:10 selected as the high -- excuse me, the best bidder.
10:33:15 That having been said, let's look at what we still
10:33:17 have before us.
10:33:18 This council still has the authority.
10:33:21 And if it's going to move forward to approve the
10:33:25 release of the reverter.
10:33:26 I believe there's actually three that will be involved
10:33:29 from a title standpoint.
10:33:31 One is to release the reverter.
10:33:33 Two is -- second one is to acknowledge an existing
10:33:36 contract that was outstanding that relates to the
10:33:38 reverters, in fact also released in operative, and the
10:33:43 third, I haven't gotten exactly the documents, deals
10:33:48 with relinquishment of any rights or claims of the
10:33:52 property.
10:33:52 So this council will be involved from a proprietary
10:33:54 standpoint.

10:33:55 If you don't approve those instruments, this
10:33:58 transaction cannot occur.
10:34:00 So admittedly, a convoluted process.
10:34:05 Unfortunately, not clarified as well as it should have
10:34:07 been at the time, but this council still has its right
10:34:09 to act in its proprietary fashion with respect to
10:34:13 those issues.
10:34:13 And as Ms. Cole has indicated we are trying to
10:34:17 disentangle those from the quasi-judicial action
10:34:22 according to the zoning.
10:34:22 I hope that cleared it up.
10:34:23 If not, extremely clear, but I think that's the
10:34:27 context that's important that you understand it in.
10:34:29 So the way you proceed doesn't create any risk for the
10:34:34 city.
10:34:35 I think you know what your options are.
10:34:37 And if you have questions, I will be happy to answer
10:34:39 them.
10:34:40 Or otherwise I would be happy to talk with you
10:34:41 directly one on one if there's something that will be
10:34:45 best not discussed in a public forum.
10:34:48 >>MARY MULHERN: I know this is a complicated real

10:34:50 estate deal, but I read all the documentation.
10:34:55 And I think we should all have the RFP.
10:34:58 And if -- and the memorandum of understanding.
10:35:03 It's page 3 of the request for proposal.
10:35:12 It's tab 2.
10:35:17 If you go to the last paragraph, I'm not going to read
10:35:20 the whole paragraph.
10:35:21 I'm going to start with the last sentence in the
10:35:23 paragraph.
10:35:23 The City of Tampa and the ABBMA in their sole and
10:35:30 absolute discretion with or without cause, and without
10:35:33 liability of any kind to any proposer, reserve the
10:35:37 right to: Accept or reject any and all proposals,
10:35:43 either in whole or in part, with or without cause,
10:35:48 wave any informality of any proposals, cancel this
10:35:51 request for proposal, and to make the award in the
10:35:55 best interest of the City of Tampa and the ABBMA,
10:36:01 subject to Tampa City Council and ABBMA approved
10:36:08 proposal.
10:36:08 So if there is any confusion, it does have to do with
10:36:12 the timing, and it has to do with the fact that -- and
10:36:18 all this talk about, you know, making contract zoning

10:36:24 decisions have nothing to do with the fact that City
10:36:30 Council had not been given the opportunity to look at
10:36:33 the bids.
10:36:37 And I have many, many, many other comments and
10:36:40 questions.
10:36:40 But if you just continue, I'll just make it easy right
10:36:43 now, if you turn the page.
10:36:47 We should have the first bullet point on page 4.
10:36:51 We should have all the supporting documentation.
10:36:53 And I would like to start at the very beginning.
10:36:55 And I would like to see -- and I think that the
10:36:58 citizens of Tampa who are being asked -- we are being
10:37:02 asked to give us our rights to this ten-acre parcel,
10:37:07 because the city deeded this property to the National
10:37:10 Guard at some point, from what I'm told, is that
10:37:14 right, Julia?
10:37:15 And they -- if they are to leave this property, the
10:37:21 National Guard, it comes back to the city.
10:37:25 So we are the rightful owner of it, if the National
10:37:28 Guard leaves.
10:37:29 So if we were to go ahead and follow through with what
10:37:36 the administration is asking us to do, we are

10:37:42 releasing that right of reverter.
10:37:45 And even though you're saying it comes at the end, I
10:37:48 don't think our decision should come at the end.
10:37:52 We are talking about a big piece of property that
10:37:58 would at some point, maybe not today, maybe not this
10:38:00 year, but the National Guard hasn't been doing much
10:38:03 there.
10:38:05 I would like to have seen us get a better deal in the
10:38:08 first place.
10:38:09 If you were bringing us a deal that we didn't have any
10:38:11 questions about where the city was benefiting, I
10:38:16 wouldn't have any questions.
10:38:17 But we're looking at something with a lot of
10:38:20 questions.
10:38:20 I'm getting questions from constituents.
10:38:23 And this needs to be made clear to people.
10:38:27 And I know we are not voting on anything today.
10:38:29 But we should have been voting on this earlier when
10:38:35 these came up.
10:38:36 Unfortunately I wasn't on council when the MOU came
10:38:39 up, because I think there should have been a lot of
10:38:41 questions there.

10:38:43 And I don't know -- I don't think those have been
10:38:46 answered.
10:38:47 >> Let me sharpen your point, councilman Mulhern,
10:38:51 because the portion of the RFP that you recite, it's
10:38:53 simply a reservation.
10:38:55 But I think if you turn to page 5, you will find
10:38:58 language that is even more supportive of what I think
10:39:00 your contention is.
10:39:01 Looking on page 5, it addresses even the result of the
10:39:05 committee.
10:39:05 It says, an RFP review committee will evaluate all
10:39:09 proposals subject to the approval of, blah-blah-blah.
10:39:11 Look at the last sentence.
10:39:13 It is understood, last two sentences, it is understood
10:39:16 and agreed that the City of Tampa and the ADBMA must
10:39:23 mutually agree as to the selected proposal.
10:39:25 Now this is after the selection.
10:39:27 The selection process is not complete until approved
10:39:30 by City Council.
10:39:36 Authorized by the mayor and approved by the ABBMA.
10:39:38 And that would simply bolster your point.
10:39:39 I think your first point really deals with the

10:39:41 reservation.
10:39:42 This deals with the actual process.
10:39:44 So having made that very clear -- and those were the
10:39:47 predicate facts that I assumed you understood when
10:39:50 Julia started her presentation.
10:39:52 That's exactly what the RFP says.
10:39:58 >>MARY MULHERN: I read that sentence and that
10:40:00 paragraph.
10:40:00 It is understood and agreed that the City of Tampa.
10:40:02 I would contend that as City Council, we are the City
10:40:06 of Tampa.
10:40:06 >>DAVID SMITH: You're missing my point.
10:40:09 I'm agreeing with you.
10:40:11 >>> No, I think if this is a legal question, and I
10:40:14 disagree with you on that, that we -- and it's
10:40:17 implied, it's stated in here that City Council has a
10:40:21 part in this process.
10:40:23 >>> If I understand --
10:40:24 >> And you are preempting that.
10:40:26 >> No.
10:40:26 You are disagreeing with the fact that I am agreeing
10:40:28 with your analysis.

10:40:29 I agree with your analysis.
10:40:31 That's what I was telling you.
10:40:33 I was pointing out to you that the more operative
10:40:36 provision is the provision on page 5, which makes your
10:40:40 point.
10:40:42 The provision on page 3 doesn't, because it deals with
10:40:45 the reservation.
10:40:45 So I'm agreeing with you.
10:40:47 I'm not disagreeing with you.
10:40:49 I'm only trying to help you understand what the
10:40:51 predicate facts are for the second statement.
10:40:53 And that's the statement in which Julia Cole is
10:40:56 making, with respect to whether or not that causes the
10:40:59 contract zoning issue.
10:41:02 >>> I don't think you can discount that paragraph that
10:41:04 I read to you which is on page 3.
10:41:06 Because what that is talking about is the process.
10:41:10 The City of Tampa and armory board will consider all
10:41:13 viable proposals for the sale and subsequent
10:41:16 development: And then it goes on to include City
10:41:19 Council in that decision about those proposals.
10:41:24 >>CINDY MILLER: May I just clarify something?

10:41:27 Because I just want to add one clarification, and
10:41:31 maybe this is not quite the way I would like to phrase
10:41:34 it, from the administration's standpoint.
10:41:39 Administration from the standpoint of recommending.
10:41:42 We are not recommending any of the three.
10:41:43 What we are presenting, what I am presenting to staff
10:41:47 at some point, and through my staff, the land review
10:41:53 committee evaluated all six proposals, narrowed it
10:41:57 down to three, they found all three to be acceptable,
10:42:02 and they rank them one, two and three, presented them
10:42:06 to the armory board.
10:42:08 As the administration, I'm not coming to you with any
10:42:13 of it.
10:42:13 We are just presenting that the review committee did
10:42:16 this, the armory board then has been negotiating one,
10:42:20 two and three.
10:42:22 We are now turning it over to the legal department as
10:42:25 your legal counsel, and to advise you how to process
10:42:30 continues.
10:42:30 So I don't want you to think of this as an
10:42:32 administration/city Council issue.
10:42:35 It's not.

10:42:35 We as the administrative staff have complied with our
10:42:40 interpretation of the memorandum of understanding, and
10:42:42 we now leave it where it is.
10:42:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern, one more.
10:42:51 >>MARY MULHERN: Now I am going to talk really plain.
10:42:53 The city came up with this RFP, created it, and then
10:42:57 created the committee that was going to vest this RFP.
10:43:03 For to you say to us that you are not proposing this,
10:43:06 this was select without council having input, the
10:43:09 final bidder, the choice was made, the RFP, the
10:43:13 requirements, autumn of it was set up by the City of
10:43:14 Tampa, without City Council having any say in the
10:43:22 selection.
10:43:26 >>CINDY MILLER: We as city staff and the
10:43:28 administration proceeded under the memorandum of
10:43:32 understanding, which was a joint agreement with the
10:43:36 armory board, and with City Council's approval of the
10:43:41 memorandum of understanding.
10:43:43 So, therefore, we do believe we have City Council's
10:43:46 approval as to the process as outlined in the
10:43:48 memorandum of understanding.
10:43:51 From that standpoint, we of the administration not

10:43:55 advocating for any of the proposers.
10:44:00 Met with the review committee with their
10:44:01 recommendation --
10:44:02 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to say one thing and then
10:44:04 I'll leave it to the rest of you.
10:44:06 The memorandum of understanding includes the RFPs.
10:44:13 So you can't -- you can't separate them.
10:44:16 They are both part of this process.
10:44:19 So the City Council agreeing to the memorandum of
10:44:23 understanding also includes whatever language is in
10:44:27 the RFP.
10:44:28 And would expect it to be complied with.
10:44:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Madam Chair, I raised an issue a
10:44:36 couple weeks ago, I brought to council's attention,
10:44:39 first I want to be clear I want to be able to go
10:44:41 forward with whoever is selected.
10:44:43 My whole issue is the process.
10:44:45 Here again, the process, and the role of council in
10:44:48 the process.
10:44:49 I understand the administration, I understand that, I
10:44:57 respect that.
10:44:58 How are you going to deal with the fact you are coming

10:45:00 from the county commission and now you have got -- I
10:45:03 can live with that.
10:45:04 But at the same time there has to be mutual respect
10:45:06 and understanding.
10:45:07 We all have to understand what the process is, okay?
10:45:10 So when I look at this memorandum, you did a good job.
10:45:13 When we met, yesterday, I think it wags, I don't have
10:45:17 any information, you came in, you gave a lot of
10:45:19 information, and I went back and I went through this
10:45:22 and I read this and I tell you, there is a lot of
10:45:25 confusion N.your memorandum of understanding, in our
10:45:29 memorandum of understanding on page 4, on page 4,
10:45:33 under tab 1, it says RFP review committee.
10:45:36 And administration -- I don't have a concern about
10:45:40 that, you know.
10:45:42 It said -- it goes down to the mayor and the City of
10:45:45 Tampa.
10:45:47 All right.
10:45:48 Then it drops down, I think last paragraph.
10:45:51 However, it is understood and agreed that the city and
10:45:54 the armory must mutually agree as to the proposal that
10:45:59 is accepted pursuant to the RFP.

10:46:03 Mutually.
10:46:04 Okay?
10:46:05 If the city and the armory aren't able to agree as to
10:46:09 a proposal to be accepted, then this memorandum shall
10:46:12 be, what?
10:46:13 Terminated.
10:46:14 So there is a process where the city, and both
10:46:19 involved in this whole process.
10:46:21 Then you go down to G.
10:46:23 Duration of the agreement.
10:46:24 It talked there about the city and the armory conclude
10:46:30 the closing of the sale of the property to a person or
10:46:34 entity selected by both the city and the armory, okay?
10:46:40 In the memorandum of understanding.
10:46:41 You go down under H an it says that the memorandum --
10:46:47 nothing can be changed unless it's in writing.
10:46:49 I mean, council, a lot more confusion, to tell you the
10:46:55 truth.
10:46:55 When you have this in writing and apparently there's
10:46:59 been some omission or there's been lack of
10:47:01 understanding in terms of this process.
10:47:04 Now, my whole thing is, I want the process to move

10:47:08 forward.
10:47:08 I just want to make sure that we are following the
10:47:11 process, and that council has a role in this process,
10:47:15 and that we want to be allowed to follow the role that
10:47:19 we have.
10:47:19 Whatever was supposed to be brought to us then we deal
10:47:21 with that.
10:47:21 Whatever the administration will be doing, certainly I
10:47:23 have no problem with that at all.
10:47:25 And I will say this to our legal staff, Mr. Smith.
10:47:31 I think this is my second time that we have had an
10:47:33 issue on RFP.
10:47:35 The housing was another issue, remember the old
10:47:37 housing?
10:47:38 It went back and came and said, well, we don't have
10:47:40 the right to change the ranking, we just vote on it.
10:47:44 Remember that issue?
10:47:46 And I said, we really need to look at that and get a
10:47:49 better understanding of this whole RFP process and how
10:47:52 it should be handled.
10:47:52 I'm telling you, at some point, somebody better take a
10:47:55 look at this and give a better understanding, come up

10:47:58 with something legally so that we can move forward.
10:48:02 Now, I want to are very clear, very clear.
10:48:05 I am not here to interrupt anything the administration
10:48:09 is doing or anybody else is doing.
10:48:11 I am going to be supportive and carry out the business
10:48:13 that I have been elected to do for the citizens of
10:48:15 Hillsborough County.
10:48:15 However, I want to be respected, I don't want to be
10:48:21 included from the responsibility the chart area louse
10:48:22 me as an elected offerings to carry out under the
10:48:25 charter.
10:48:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
10:48:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I don't know if I can follow that.
10:48:31 But I will give at try.
10:48:35 Let me say this.
10:48:38 When you use a word city, everybody thinks that's me.
10:48:41 I got elected.
10:48:45 And that is me.
10:48:46 But that's me in a different point.
10:48:47 And let me bring it up in comparison to something
10:48:50 else.
10:48:50 I always try to rationalize and compare something.

10:48:53 What we are asking me to do, can't be a Planning
10:49:00 Commissioner on a Monday, on the first week, and a
10:49:03 City Council member on a Thursday, at the end of the
10:49:07 month, voting on something that I review.
10:49:09 So what I'm saying is, whether the administration is
10:49:12 right or wrong, I'm glad I wasn't involved in the
10:49:16 selection committee, because I would have a real bad
10:49:19 conflict of interest if I had to vote on something
10:49:22 that I tried to negotiate two or three weeks earlier.
10:49:26 Contracting is like the administration voting on
10:49:30 something they like three weeks ago and then come here
10:49:34 and having a vote on who is going to do, and how the
10:49:38 zoning is going to be on that piece of property.
10:49:40 I also like to see whoever gets it to get it and do it
10:49:44 right.
10:49:44 Why do I say these things?
10:49:45 A, I don't want the property in city hands.
10:49:48 It's contaminated.
10:49:49 It would cost a lot of money to fix.
10:49:50 And if I have it in city land I get el zappo on
10:49:56 income.
10:49:56 Somebody else, good people in the community,

10:49:58 throughout the state, the country, want to come in and
10:50:00 bid, God bless you.
10:50:01 I hope you make money.
10:50:03 And if you lose money, don't come see me.
10:50:06 But what I'm saying, it's a gamble.
10:50:09 You have to turn-key the operation somewhere else, at
10:50:13 millions of dollars, before you take initial interest
10:50:18 and property rights of that property with a reverter
10:50:21 clause being released.
10:50:23 Those things will be done.
10:50:25 And let me give you an example.
10:50:26 I'm not bringing this up for sower milk, for crying in
10:50:31 the past or whatever.
10:50:31 September 4th, 1996.
10:50:33 You think this is big?
10:50:34 This is nothing.
10:50:37 When that stadium contract was done, it was not done
10:50:40 by any government agency other than the mayor, the
10:50:46 individual who at that time was the head of the county
10:50:49 commission, I forget his name.
10:50:52 No, not the head of county commission, the guy who
10:50:55 had -- Klemen.

10:50:58 And a couple other interested parties.
10:51:02 There was no commissioners there.
10:51:03 There were no council members there.
10:51:05 At the end, when everything was said and done, rightly
10:51:09 or wrongly, then it went for approval for the two
10:51:13 bodies.
10:51:14 And basically, this is running in the same type of
10:51:17 railroad.
10:51:18 It's done that way.
10:51:20 I would have a conflict of interest, if I got involved
10:51:23 in the beginning of the selection or the presentation
10:51:25 of this item, and then at the end of some time, I
10:51:30 would vote on how it's done.
10:51:31 That's my feeling.
10:51:32 I may be wrong.
10:51:33 But I don't think I am.
10:51:35 So I don't like it.
10:51:37 But that's the way it is.
10:51:40 In life I don't like a lot of things but you have to
10:51:43 accept what comes and you have to make the best of
10:51:45 what's available to you, and make the best decision
10:51:48 for all the citizens of this great city.

10:51:50 And that's what it's all about.
10:51:51 At the end, let's face it, it's all about money.
10:51:55 People ain't here because they like any one of us.
10:51:58 They are here because they want to make armory on the
10:52:00 armory.
10:52:00 God bless you.
10:52:01 But that's how I see it.
10:52:03 Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:52:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena.
10:52:06 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I just wants to thank Reverend
10:52:08 Scott for his comments.
10:52:09 I thought they were really on point about process.
10:52:13 And all the other council members.
10:52:18 [ Laughter ]
10:52:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
10:52:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you.
10:52:21 Julia, on page 4, of the paragraph E, page 4 --
10:52:34 >> Under tab 1 or tab 2?
10:52:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I don't know.
10:52:38 I think it's the MOU and it's item E.
10:52:41 It's a provision that's been read a few times.
10:52:45 Stated and agreed that the city and ABBMA must

10:52:50 mutually agree as to the proposed orders, et cetera,
10:52:52 of the RFP.
10:52:54 In your opinion, and this is where the confusion sets
10:52:58 in.
10:52:58 It's my understanding, Ms. Miller indicated earlier
10:53:01 that she went to Jacksonville to participate in the
10:53:04 discussion after the rankings and that sort of thing
10:53:10 and then the process moved forward, and now we are
10:53:12 negotiating with number one and then number two,
10:53:14 number three.
10:53:15 But what I am confused about is has the city under
10:53:23 that sentence, have we agreed to the proposal that is
10:53:26 accepted pursuant to the RFP yet?
10:53:31 Have we agreed under that sentence yet?
10:53:34 >>> It would have been my position that the selection
10:53:38 isn't agreed until the point in time that the reverter
10:53:41 interest comes back to you.
10:53:45 The contract in a typical RFP, typically you don't
10:53:51 make the actual selection.
10:53:52 Since we don't have a contract.
10:53:53 But what we do have, at least the reverter and some
10:53:58 other additional documents that will need to come back

10:54:00 to you.
10:54:00 And that's the point I was trying to make, is it
10:54:03 written as clearly as it should be?
10:54:05 No.
10:54:05 It's not.
10:54:06 But the only way that I can interpret this agreement,
10:54:10 including the interpretation with what's in the RFP,
10:54:13 to avoid a contract zoning problem, is in that way, is
10:54:18 to say that is the contract, in essence,
10:54:20 quote-unquote, that comes back to you.
10:54:24 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:54:27 We had some issues and some complications if this is
10:54:30 generating, would recommend since there's no action
10:54:32 before you today that you give us an opportunity to
10:54:35 stop and evaluate the potential causes of action of
10:54:41 the city with regard to the contract and what that may
10:54:43 engender.
10:54:44 I think we have been very clear with regard to how we
10:54:52 see the process.
10:54:53 You correctly characterized the process.
10:54:56 I don't know exactly how it's misunderstood but that's
10:55:01 what we said.

10:55:02 I am understand that.
10:55:02 I don't want to get into an he lack rah -- elaboration
10:55:06 of what this MOU says since we have already been
10:55:09 advised we may be liable for breach of contract.
10:55:11 That being said I would like to discontinue this
10:55:13 discussion because it's not in the best interest of
10:55:15 the city to discuss the potential legal position in
10:55:17 public when we haven't had a chance to think through
10:55:20 all its ramifications.
10:55:22 There is one issue.
10:55:23 Let me gather a lot more material.
10:55:26 I have been advised by council for the armory board
10:55:28 that there was a meeting held, and there are minutes
10:55:30 of that meeting that indicate that there were certain
10:55:33 directions provided by the city with respect to how
10:55:37 the process would unfold.
10:55:38 I want to look at that and determine exactly what our
10:55:41 risks are, so that we know how to proceed.
10:55:44 So I appreciate your concern.
10:55:46 I understand very carefully what your concerns are.
10:55:51 And I understand why you have them.
10:55:53 So let us have an opportunity to review this a little

10:55:56 more deliberative fashion and do it in a way that
10:55:59 minimizes the potential problems.
10:56:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
10:56:03 I have the floor.
10:56:05 Point of order, tiff floor.
10:56:06 And I am not going to discuss this.
10:56:07 I will respect his request.
10:56:08 The only thing I would say going forward, David, is
10:56:11 that it appears that some council people have been
10:56:14 briefed a little more than other council people, which
10:56:19 leads me and others that haven't been necessarily
10:56:21 briefed on this, at a little bit of disadvantage.
10:56:23 I don't know that anybody has come and spoken to me on
10:56:26 this issue.
10:56:27 So we don't need to get it into.
10:56:30 I'm just saying maybe it was in direct response to
10:56:36 certain questions that people had.
10:56:38 But anticipate, next time anticipate this can be a hot
10:56:41 issue and everybody needs to be briefed equally.
10:56:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott?
10:56:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, first of all, that's a valid
10:56:49 point.

10:56:49 I just want to say I asked for a briefing, and they
10:56:51 obliged and came down, both Ms. Miller and legal
10:56:54 staff.
10:56:55 And I just want to say also to Ms. Miller, I how much
10:56:58 that you are not taking this personal.
10:57:02 You are not an attorney.
10:57:03 That's the only thing we need to understand.
10:57:06 However, here again, we just want to make sure that we
10:57:11 are within the confines of the charter and responsible
10:57:17 in doing something.
10:57:18 >>MARY MULHERN: And I just wanted to say also that I
10:57:20 did have a briefing with Ms. Miller yesterday, and did
10:57:25 state that I had a lot of concerns, and I would rather
10:57:28 that this not come -- that we had continued this
10:57:30 agenda item for another day until I could have some of
10:57:33 these questions answered.
10:57:35 So that didn't happen.
10:57:38 And that's why I am asking at this meeting.
10:57:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Smith, when will you be back?
10:57:48 Do you need a date or you will let us know?
10:57:50 You will let us know when?
10:57:51 >>DAVID SMITH: Why don't we tentatively set something

10:57:55 in three or four weeks.
10:57:56 When is your October regular meeting?
10:58:00 The 4th?
10:58:04 That may be a little early.
10:58:05 It may not tap that long.
10:58:06 It depends on what I find out when I start looking.
10:58:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move for the 18th.
10:58:15 >> Second.
10:58:15 (Motion carried).
10:58:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 9.
10:58:21 Mr. Shelby.
10:58:26 >> Item number 9 pursuant to your own rules requires
10:58:30 that the resolution replacing the council's rules of
10:58:32 procedures which govern your meeting be read by title
10:58:36 a second time prior to being adopted.
10:58:38 Council, it's been brought to my attention that each
10:58:40 of you have received this morning a memo from the
10:58:46 chief of staff Darrell Smith.
10:58:47 He's relayed some administrative concerns.
10:58:52 I believe that Ms. Foxx-Knowles is privy to that
10:58:57 information.
10:58:57 And if you need to take it up, if you wish to take it

10:59:00 up, it would be appropriate to do that, when it comes
10:59:04 to adopting your calendar.
10:59:06 I should point out that council wishes, just to
10:59:19 reiterate, as long as it's council's understanding,
10:59:21 and that's what the agreement was, then should choose
10:59:25 to keep it this way.
10:59:27 The understanding that I believe was that council
10:59:30 would, as much as calendar would permit, meet on the
10:59:33 1st and 3rd of each month rather than
10:59:35 alternating weeks.
10:59:36 I believe there's a concern by the administration that
10:59:38 there might be some times in the course of doing
10:59:41 business with the city when the calendar is set up
10:59:44 when Tau into account holidays, there may be a 3-week
10:59:48 break, and Mr. Smith has relayed to me a concern that
10:59:51 he's concerned about the administration, the efficient
10:59:55 administration of government if council had three
10:59:57 weeks between regular meetings.
11:00:06 There are two points that say all scheduled meetings
11:00:08 under rule 3, all scheduled meeting days are subject
11:00:11 to calendar adjustments approved by City Council and
11:00:13 maintained by the city clerk, and rule 3-B-7 size that

11:00:18 regular meetings may be designated by majority vote of
11:00:23 City Council.
11:00:24 So you have flexibility within the city calendar.
11:00:27 The point will be the administration and Ms.
11:00:29 Foxx-Knowles related it's important to set forth what
11:00:33 the parameters are, so both the staff, and the public
11:00:37 can be on notice accordingly.
11:00:39 Other than that, council, the only other concern that
11:00:41 I have relates to how council wishes to handle
11:00:50 invocations.
11:00:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me first say you are going to meet
11:00:53 every week.
11:00:54 I mean, you have your regular meeting first and third
11:00:57 week, whatever the date, whatever it is.
11:00:59 Then you meet the second and fourth.
11:01:01 You are still going to be meeting.
11:01:03 We did as a county commission with the other issue
11:01:05 that the city administrator needs to bring.
11:01:07 They still could bring those issues at those other
11:01:09 meetings.
11:01:10 It's just a matter of following the legal parameters,
11:01:12 and, you know, whatever it is, and add it to the

11:01:15 agenda.
11:01:15 County be done.
11:01:17 We did it all the time.
11:01:18 It was the zoning issue and the administration needs
11:01:20 to bring something to us.
11:01:21 And they brought it.
11:01:24 So it shouldn't be a problem for us, in our rules, in
11:01:26 the rules.
11:01:27 It still allows to you schedule a meeting that we need
11:01:30 to.
11:01:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Saul-Sena, then Mr. Dingfelder.
11:01:34 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I feel like we discussed this at
11:01:37 great length and I would be prepared to move this
11:01:39 resolution.
11:01:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:01:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just for clarification, Mr. Shelby,
11:01:45 the resolution, and our rule changes, doesn't include
11:01:49 the actual calendar dates for this coming year, fiscal
11:01:55 year.
11:01:55 So we can move the resolution without addressing Mr.
11:01:59 Smith's request at this time.
11:02:01 And frankly that would be my leaning.

11:02:04 I agree with councilman Scott that, you know, on those
11:02:09 indications when they have an emergency item they can
11:02:12 bring in, they can schedule it and bring it in.
11:02:14 But the reality is, we can pass a resolution without
11:02:18 really addressing Mr. Smith, concerns one way or the
11:02:22 other.
11:02:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern.
11:02:24 >>> Different issue --
11:02:26 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to say, didn't we agree
11:02:28 that we are going to revisit how this is working in
11:02:31 six months?
11:02:32 So I think whatever we decide to do, it's not going to
11:02:35 be set in stone and we can see if there's a problem
11:02:38 with it, we can change the schedule after we get going
11:02:41 and find that out.
11:02:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just so that you are clear, I don't
11:02:45 know whether you had the opportunity.
11:02:47 But Mr. Smith also recommended a specific date that
11:02:50 council would have considered amending the calendar,
11:02:53 that he might suggest for regular meetings.
11:02:56 Just wanted to bring that to your attention.
11:02:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Shirley Foxx-Knowles, did you want to

11:03:02 speak?
11:03:04 >>DAVID SMITH: I wanted to bring something else to
11:03:05 your attention.
11:03:06 I apologize for being late to this process.
11:03:08 I have been immersed in a variety of other things.
11:03:11 It's a relatively small point.
11:03:12 And it deals with, as lawyers do, with potentialities
11:03:15 more so than real concerns, in the sense that nothing
11:03:17 is -- the suggestion to you is that you consider
11:03:23 deleting your special discussion meeting, and for the
11:03:27 following reasons.
11:03:28 You now have a regularly scheduled workshop meeting.
11:03:31 The advantage of dealing with those issues at a
11:03:34 regularly scheduled workshop is you have the entire
11:03:36 council.
11:03:37 You have the clerk who will keep the records, and is
11:03:41 obligate by law to make sure those records are
11:03:44 properly kept.
11:03:45 You won't have the problem of having a misdefinition
11:03:49 of the scope of the special discussion meeting.
11:03:51 There will be a workshop.
11:03:53 It will be on TV.

11:03:55 The entire public will have the benefit of observing
11:03:57 that process in its entirety.
11:03:59 So it won't be limited in nature.
11:04:02 And as I say, the clerk will be able to keep the
11:04:04 proper records.
11:04:05 And she will comply with the state requirements in
11:04:07 that regard.
11:04:09 And it seems to me, also my department, be able to
11:04:16 focus activities here dealing with workshop sessions
11:04:20 so we can be more adequately prepared and address
11:04:22 those issues.
11:04:23 So for those reasons, I'm suggesting that I'm a little
11:04:27 concerned about the special discussion meetings.
11:04:28 I think it would be better to do it at your workshops
11:04:30 and have full and proper public input and proper
11:04:33 record keeping.
11:04:34 So that --
11:04:38 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I think that's not a necessary
11:04:39 change.
11:04:40 We had many discussions on these special procedures.
11:04:42 And it would be my motion that we pass the resolution
11:04:45 amending council's rules of procedure.

11:04:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Foxx-Knowles.
11:04:51 >> Well, she deals with the calendar.
11:04:54 I want to deal with my motion and then we'll deal with
11:04:56 the calendar.
11:04:57 >>GWEN MILLER: I want her to say something.
11:05:03 >>SHIRLEY FOXX-KNOWLES: Shirley Foxx-Knowles, city
11:05:05 clerk.
11:05:05 I did want to finalize those items on the calendar.
11:05:10 Really, just adding five additional dates.
11:05:14 >> Wait, wait, wait.
11:05:21 >> The motion was to approve the rules which have
11:05:24 nothing to do with the calendar.
11:05:26 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Point of order, can we deal with
11:05:28 this?
11:05:29 I would like to move the rules, City Council's rules
11:05:32 of procedure and deal with the calendar after we hear
11:05:35 from the audience.
11:05:36 That's something that, you know, we can deal with --
11:05:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Shelby.
11:05:42 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll read it.
11:05:44 Move a resolution replacing the rules of procedure
11:05:46 governing meeting -- we had so many discussions on

11:05:49 this -- as a City Council, City of Tampa, superseding
11:05:53 all previous resolutions setting procedure, providing
11:05:56 an effective date.
11:05:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
11:05:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:05:58 (Motion carried).
11:06:00 >>GWEN MILLER: Can we hear from Mrs. Shirley
11:06:06 Foxx-Knowles now?
11:06:08 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Why don't we do it at the end of
11:06:09 the meeting?
11:06:10 And she'll be here at the end of the meeting.
11:06:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And it's not on the agenda.
11:06:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Council members?
11:06:17 All right.
11:06:18 We go to item number 10.
11:06:19 We have a resolution we need to pass.
11:06:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move the resolution.
11:06:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:06:31 Do you want to speak on it?
11:06:33 >> Just that we are mere to answer any additional
11:06:35 questions you may have on item number 10.
11:06:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, no questions.

11:06:38 (Motion carried).
11:06:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Nay.
11:06:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:06:45 would like to request a legislative matter,
11:06:47 reconsideration for legislative matter?
11:06:49 We now go to the comments from audience.
11:06:51 Anyone in the public that would like to speak to any
11:06:53 item on the agenda not set for a public hearing?
11:06:55 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.
11:07:01 Just two items.
11:07:01 One came up today on the discussion of the replatting.
11:07:04 We have had a couple of replattings in Beach Park that
11:07:09 had sort of turned the lots around.
11:07:12 We often wondered why we were not given legal notice
11:07:17 of that being done, and we had questions as to whether
11:07:20 that is legally you can't do it as a council, could
11:07:23 maybe pass a rule that would allow the neighborhood,
11:07:27 the neighborhood, to know what's going on so we could
11:07:30 give input.
11:07:31 But I don't want to take more of my time on that.
11:07:33 There is a concern.
11:07:35 I would like to address your new rules of procedure.

11:07:41 I thank you.
11:07:42 I know that you all did take some of the input from
11:07:45 the public as you proposed with these.
11:07:49 However, this discussion, the special meeting, says
11:07:53 that it does not -- not necessary for three or more
11:07:59 council members to be at those special discussion
11:08:01 meetings.
11:08:01 So how could you then take any action?
11:08:07 I was concerned about that, and also about tacking on
11:08:11 an item onto your agenda at the last minute that maybe
11:08:17 the public is thinking is just going to be a workshop
11:08:19 meeting, and then you are going to be taking official
11:08:22 action.
11:08:23 It's going to take much more alertness, I'll use the
11:08:28 word, on the public to know what's going on.
11:08:32 At least now we know that on Thursday she would be
11:08:35 doing this.
11:08:40 I also had a comment on the sign-up sheet.
11:08:44 I understood you all were going to have a sign-up
11:08:46 sheet.
11:08:47 I would just like the public to note, this is going to
11:08:49 be coming up soon, where that sign-up sheet to speak

11:08:54 will be, and how we are going to more alert the public
11:09:00 to know that they must sign up for it, and what will
11:09:03 happen if, for example, there are many items on your
11:09:07 agenda, if indeed there is more than 30 minutes of
11:09:12 comments that really should be given to you before you
11:09:18 vote on one of these issues.
11:09:22 Can council -- because I don't think this says -- can
11:09:27 council again allow further input, more than 30
11:09:29 minutes by the public?
11:09:30 Can you do that by amending your rules?
11:09:35 Those are my comments.
11:09:36 And I hope you will consider them.
11:09:38 Because it doesn't happen often.
11:09:41 But sometimes there are issues that come before you
11:09:45 that need more than 30 minutes of public comment.
11:09:48 Thank you.
11:09:48 And please consider the plat issue, too.
11:09:56 >>> Joe Redner, 1310 Alicia, Tampa, Florida.
11:09:59 Good morning.
11:10:01 Is there going to be a public hearing on the 9:30 time
11:10:04 slot for the sign ordinance today that we are going to
11:10:08 get to speak at?

11:10:10 >> Yes.
11:10:10 >> Do you have any idea when it's going to happen?
11:10:12 >> It might be after lunch.
11:10:13 >> After lunch.
11:10:16 >> So inconsiderate.
11:10:23 >> 3703 east River Hills Drive, Tampa, Florida.
11:10:26 I have to agree with the meetings as long as they are.
11:10:28 We have to make those meetings longer than 2-hour
11:10:31 limits.
11:10:33 I did want to make some comments on number 7 regarding
11:10:35 the WiFi.
11:10:38 I didn't know what was going to be brought up so I am
11:10:40 just going to have to speak a little bit
11:10:42 extemporaneously.
11:10:43 I spoke about this before and I'm so glad that you're
11:10:45 considering the free WiFi hot zones.
11:10:48 That's really going to make a difference.
11:10:50 Just to let you know, my background, I am a Microsoft
11:10:56 certified engineer, a degree in computer science and I
11:10:59 do know some of the technical issues involved here and
11:11:01 I wasn't sure if this was discussed.
11:11:03 But with capacity as it increases, the cost to the

11:11:06 city does increase, so I do hope that you will
11:11:09 consider partnering with businesses like hotels and
11:11:12 restaurants, because those are going to be the places
11:11:15 where people are going use those computers.
11:11:18 I did want to say that I was in the Asheville area,
11:11:21 North Carolina, this last weekend and there were
11:11:25 several smaller towns around where they have free WIFI
11:11:32 hot zones, and in regards to councilman's Saul's
11:11:36 mentioning signs, they actually have small signs that
11:11:39 say free WIFI access, green, they have white
11:11:44 lettering, very visible, easy to see, and you might
11:11:47 want to just look into something like that, because
11:11:49 they are very easy to see, and I just think that's a
11:11:53 great idea, and the direction that you are proceeding.
11:11:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I just want to point out to you that
11:12:00 under the rules starting October, public comment has
11:12:02 been moved up so you will not have in the future have
11:12:05 to sit through a whole discussion like did you this
11:12:08 morning
11:12:20 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 29302 East Ellicott
11:12:25 street three nights a week.
11:12:27 And then I just thank God for his grace and his mercy.

11:12:32 I can't do without it.
11:12:33 A lot of people can.
11:12:38 Their jobs, their friends, who they work from and
11:12:40 everything.
11:12:40 But I have God's grace and mercy.
11:12:42 Brought me a long ways this morning.
11:12:44 Thank you.
11:12:45 Ooh, looky here.
11:12:47 I want to talk, though, about this article 8 this
11:12:49 morning, what you all talked about awhile ago.
11:12:55 Reverend Scott, you made a comment awhile ago, the
11:12:59 lady was here with the city, and you told her, said
11:13:02 I'm not a lawyer, but, you know, I love this City
11:13:08 Council now, I love the way you all sit up there.
11:13:12 Ooh, the best City Council the city ever had, got the
11:13:15 best lawyers, everything.
11:13:17 I thank the Lord for letting me live to see this day
11:13:20 come.
11:13:20 But awhile ago, you are the smartest guy up there.
11:13:25 I'm going to tell you why.
11:13:26 You are a God-sent man.
11:13:28 You come straight from the Bible.

11:13:30 You know, many people wonder about me.
11:13:33 Man, how do you make it? How do you get away -- how
11:13:38 you walking around blessed like you is?
11:13:43 You know, I only want to say this here.
11:13:45 When Jesus was here, he walked the earth, his biggest
11:13:52 argument was with the lawyers. I don't know if any of
11:13:53 you read the Bible, you know.
11:13:54 He's a smart man because you read the Bible.
11:13:58 A lot of people don't remember that.
11:14:02 But all I'm saying, for years and years and years,
11:14:06 when Mayor Freedman come through that door saying, I
11:14:10 want you all to sign here, and say, I got a walk-on
11:14:14 order.
11:14:14 And I say, you all sit there, you all are like guinea
11:14:19 pigs, you know.
11:14:22 The mayor can do anything she wanted to.
11:14:24 Then, ooh, you was the guinea pig for years and years
11:14:29 and years.
11:14:31 Now, these crack houses and all that kind of property,
11:14:40 you all didn't say nothing about it.
11:14:49 Don't worry about it, just sign it.
11:14:51 But, um, anyway, though, I want to say, though, about

11:14:55 this thing this morning, you all were talking about
11:14:58 this article 6 here about this City Council having so
11:15:01 much money.
11:15:04 You know, I been wrestling with that down through the
11:15:06 years.
11:15:07 Last ten or 12 or 15 years, it come to a thing, that
11:15:14 if you are a politician and you ain't got no money,
11:15:17 you don't even think about trying to run for a seat,
11:15:20 now.
11:15:21 And if you are black you can forget about it.
11:15:27 But now, we got a black running for president.
11:15:35 This man got ten million more dollars than Hillary
11:15:41 got.
11:15:42 And I said, this man should be president.
11:15:49 But I want to say, though, that I agree with you all
11:15:53 about that money deal.
11:15:59 >> Would anyone else like to speak?
11:16:00 >> Mr. Moses, do you live in the City of Tampa, the
11:16:06 other four nights?
11:16:10 I have had a lot of constituents who like watching you
11:16:13 when you come up to public comment.
11:16:15 And they asked me that question.

11:16:16 I don't know how to answer them.
11:16:18 Perhaps they are listening and they get an answer.
11:16:22 >>> Okay.
11:16:23 The city here lawyer asked me that this morning.
11:16:35 Where are you the other three nights?
11:16:36 >> Four nights.
11:16:37 Because you're here three nights.
11:16:39 >> Okay.
11:16:40 I live in the hood.
11:16:42 It dangerous over there.
11:16:44 And I used to be a rich man.
11:16:48 And then I'm a public speaker.
11:16:52 Back through the years, peoples have written me, they
11:16:57 burned my house, somebody throw something against the
11:17:03 window. But me, I don't want anybody to know where I
11:17:06 am.
11:17:06 I do live here and yonder.
11:17:12 It's only three nights that I'm there.
11:17:15 It's so dangerous in the hood where I'm at now, you
11:17:17 know, my sister came to my house and she looked
11:17:24 through there, and I had to move my gun and the TV
11:17:27 remote controls.

11:17:31 She said, you told me two years ago that you sleep
11:17:35 with the TV control and the gun side by side.
11:17:38 Thank you.
11:17:39 >> Hope you don't get them confused.
11:17:45 >>GWEN MILLER: No one else would like to speak so
11:17:48 we'll go to the ordinance for first reading.
11:17:50 Item number 11.
11:17:51 Mr. Caetano, can you read that?
11:17:55 Number 11.
11:17:59 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) an ordinance of
11:18:14 the city of Tampa, Florida, 17.5 article IV, land
11:18:20 development Variance Review Board, amending section
11:18:24 17.5-71, establishment, composition, and terms,
11:18:29 officers, providing for severability, providing for
11:18:31 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
11:18:34 effective date.
11:18:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion an second.
11:18:36 (Motion carried)
11:18:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you read number 12?
11:18:42 >>MARY MULHERN: Move an ordinance on first reading, an
11:18:46 ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida amending City
11:18:48 of Tampa code chapter 24, article V, occupational

11:18:52 license tax, amending chapter 22, section 122, payment
11:18:58 of occupational license tax amending chapter 250,
11:19:01 section 66, occupational license tax, providing an
11:19:04 effective date.
11:19:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:19:07 (Motion carried).
11:19:08 >> We now go to our committee reports.
11:19:11 Public safety.
11:19:15 >> I move 13 and 14.
11:19:18 >> Second.
11:19:19 (Motion carried).
11:19:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Parks, recreation, Linda Saul-Sena.
11:19:22 >> I would like to move resolutions 15 through -- (off
11:19:30 microphone).
11:19:31 >> I move items 23 through 40.
11:19:34 >> We have a motion and second.
11:19:40 Finance Committee, John Dingfelder.
11:19:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move items 41 through 57.
11:19:46 >> Motion and second.
11:19:47 (Motion carried).
11:19:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: While I have the floor, I just want
11:19:52 to say two things real quick, because one, my mother

11:19:58 Azeele had a little operation at the hospital
11:20:01 yesterday and she's doing wonderful.
11:20:02 And I wanted to give her a shout out because I know
11:20:05 she's watching and wish her all of our best and for a
11:20:08 quick recovery.
11:20:09 And then number 2, our staff back here is a bunch of
11:20:13 animal lovers and they wanted me to tell everybody
11:20:15 from 11:00 today until 2:00 today, right outside at
11:20:20 gas-like park at the corner of Madison and Kennedy,
11:20:24 the Humane Society is having a mobile adoption center
11:20:27 with a variety of dogs, cats, puppies and kittens
11:20:32 available for adoption so the pet lovers wanted me to
11:20:35 tell everybody to go out and adopt some animals.
11:20:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Building and zoning.
11:20:41 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to move items 58 to
11:20:43 93.
11:20:44 >> Second.
11:20:44 >> Motion and second.
11:20:49 Ms. Mulhern.
11:20:50 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items number 94 through 106.
11:20:59 >> Motion and second.
11:21:15 >> Is there anyone in the public oh going to speak on

11:21:17 items 107 through 133?
11:21:27 113.
11:21:29 Would you please stand and raise your right hand?
11:21:30 (Oath administered by Clerk).
11:21:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to open the public hearing.
11:21:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved.
11:21:47 >> Second.
11:21:47 (Motion carried).
11:21:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I believe there are some items that
11:21:51 need to be received and filed that have been available
11:21:53 for public inspection at City Council chambers prior
11:21:56 to action, please.
11:21:58 >> Motion and second.
11:21:59 (Motion carried).
11:22:00 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Secondly, a reminder if there's been
11:22:03 any ex parte communications please disclose that
11:22:06 prayer to taking action.
11:22:07 Thirdly, please when you state your name, please
11:22:12 reaffirm that you have been sworn.
11:22:13 Thank you.
11:22:14 >>CHAIRMAN: Ms. Cole.
11:22:16 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.

11:22:18 You have before you second reading on the changes to
11:22:20 the sign code.
11:22:22 As I have previously identified to you, this has been
11:22:25 a very long work in progress.
11:22:27 We have a sign committee that reviews the sign code.
11:22:29 We went through the process of having changes which we
11:22:33 thought were in line with how other jurisdictions are
11:22:36 dealing with their sign codes.
11:22:38 This would reduce the amount of signage allowed.
11:22:42 It would receive the height of free standing signs.
11:22:46 It would deal with several kind of issues within the
11:22:48 code, and one of the issues a little bit of length at
11:22:54 first reading it does deal somewhat with electronic
11:22:56 signs.
11:22:56 If I could just take a moment to talk about that
11:22:58 because I think there's some people here to speak
11:23:01 about that issue specifically.
11:23:02 What I am asking you to do in this version of the sign
11:23:05 code is to codify what has been the practice, which is
11:23:10 to allow signs, which have an electronic component to
11:23:13 them, be allowed to be permitted, that is something
11:23:23 that was a policy that has not been codified.

11:23:25 I am asking you to at a very minimum codify that issue
11:23:29 or if it is not council's wish to codify that issue
11:23:32 then we will remove that and we will direct that no
11:23:35 more electronic signs can be permitted within the City
11:23:38 of Tampa.
11:23:39 Now, to take that a step further, as I indicated to
11:23:43 you at the previous hearing, and at other times, the
11:23:47 sign committee has no consensus as related to the
11:23:51 electronic sign issue.
11:23:52 And it was an issue that we left for continuing
11:23:58 discussion at the previous first reading.
11:24:02 We discussed that a little bit and we thought maybe we
11:24:04 should go ahead and codify what we have, and continue
11:24:08 to review that question.
11:24:10 I have had an opportunity to speak with some of the
11:24:12 members of the sign committee who are here to speak
11:24:14 about that, about that issue, and they understand that
11:24:17 that is something that at least previously, if that is
11:24:23 something council wishes, what I would ask is, after
11:24:26 you move through that, if that's what you want to do,
11:24:29 that you request that the city attorney's office,
11:24:32 legal department, and staff, continue to work with

11:24:37 citizens in order to review the electronic sign issue
11:24:40 and come back to you with some recommendations.
11:24:47 As I was going through this process I made every
11:24:50 effort to make sure I notified everybody of every
11:24:52 single meeting and we had probably 15 different
11:24:54 meetings on this.
11:24:54 When I notified members of the sign committee on this,
11:24:57 I sent an e-mail, and it appears that some of those
11:25:00 e-mails came back and I didn't notice.
11:25:03 Specific members of the sign committee therefore can D
11:25:05 not know this is going forward on first reading three
11:25:07 weeks ago.
11:25:08 I was able to talk with them.
11:25:10 They understood what happened.
11:25:12 And they are here today.
11:25:13 And I think the electric sign issue is the one they
11:25:17 would like to talk about.
11:25:18 I know that they have brought a video, and since they
11:25:20 were not able to appear at the first reading, I think
11:25:25 in their six minutes, the-ask the council to show them
11:25:30 some indulgence.
11:25:32 They were not able to be here which is my fault but I

11:25:35 didn't see that the technology -- I didn't see the
11:25:38 e-mail had shot back to me.
11:25:40 I'm available for any questions on this.
11:25:41 And this is a public hearing.
11:25:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder.
11:25:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I talked to folks around Dale Mabry
11:25:50 across the street from Lowes.
11:25:52 There is a sign that was -- it was a digital sign and
11:25:56 it was scrolling, now, constantly.
11:26:00 And I'm wondering how does that fit into the current
11:26:03 ordinance, how does it fit into the proposed -- or the
11:26:06 ordinance where that's approved.
11:26:09 Is that what you call a totally activated sign?
11:26:11 >> Under the definition of the sign code, as it is
11:26:15 today, tanned sign code as it appears before you, is
11:26:18 an activated sign.
11:26:19 But the problem has been enforcement of signs that per
11:26:23 policy have been approved to be electronic, but then
11:26:27 code enforcement wants to go out and cite those people
11:26:30 but there's nothing to cite them because it's been
11:26:33 done by policy versus per code.
11:26:35 Since this one then clarify this, and we are only

11:26:37 talking about not the electronic nature but the time
11:26:40 frame of the movement, that would clarify that I shall
11:26:43 to you allow code enforcement to go ahead and properly
11:26:46 cite that kind of activated --
11:26:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: What if they leave that same
11:26:51 movement and they leave it up the same way for a
11:26:54 month?
11:26:56 Okay.
11:26:58 Is the movement itself going to be prohibited under
11:27:02 this code that we are approving?
11:27:06 >>> The constant movement is illegal today, would be
11:27:09 illegal under this code.
11:27:10 What would then be allowed is you can have that sign,
11:27:13 and if its status -- static for a 24-hour period and
11:27:17 then changes the next day, that would be allowed under
11:27:19 this code.
11:27:20 If it's moving every three hours, stay static and then
11:27:24 it changes in the a 3-hour time period, that would be
11:27:27 illegal under this code and would have been illegal
11:27:30 under the previous code per policy, which is part of
11:27:34 where the confusion would have lie.
11:27:40 Some don't move at all.

11:27:41 Some move a lot.
11:27:42 It's quite frankly a nightmare to enforce without some
11:27:45 kind of codification in the code.
11:27:46 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Cole, as I asked that the
11:27:51 last meeting where you presented this, how about these
11:27:54 gas stations, the price of gas moves like the stock
11:27:57 market.
11:27:58 Something could be $27.69.
11:28:02 Ten minutes later it could be 2.72.
11:28:05 It's going to present a nightmare to the consumer, and
11:28:08 tots owner of that establishment.
11:28:10 I don't think it's fair that we are going to impose.
11:28:14 I will not support something like that.
11:28:17 >>> It is my recommendation that exact issue be dealt
11:28:19 with after the sign code, or not adopted depending on
11:28:24 how we want to deal with it and deal with that as part
11:28:26 of the discussion about electronic signs, because we
11:28:28 cannot create an exemption only for gas stations.
11:28:33 That's a first amendment problem.
11:28:34 I understand the point you are making and I think it's
11:28:37 an incredibly valid point.
11:28:38 I think the problem is we have to deal with it in a

11:28:41 very content mutual way, and give in the fact that the
11:28:45 sign committee had no consensus as it related to
11:28:48 electronic signs, and given the fact that really we
11:28:52 don't have that in front of you today, and the fact we
11:28:54 have so much confusion as it is today, it's my
11:28:56 recommendation we go forward with it as it is and
11:28:59 allow the opportunity for me to continue to work with
11:29:02 different folks in the industry, and citizens to bring
11:29:05 forward some recommendations to deal with that exact
11:29:08 issue.
11:29:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Mrs. Cole, my understanding is this
11:29:14 addresses the electronic sign more leniently at least
11:29:21 than what the present code is does now, is that
11:29:23 correct?
11:29:24 >>> Well, I think it the problems have been that way.
11:29:32 Exactly what the interpretation says, which is to
11:29:34 allow signs that have the ability electronic in nature
11:29:39 and not having them move within a 24-hour period.
11:29:41 So really what this is doing is codifying an
11:29:44 interpretation and a policy of the way the code reads
11:29:47 for that.
11:29:47 >> I'm sorry, to interrupt.

11:29:50 >>> Would anyone in the public like to speak?
11:29:52 You may speak now.
11:29:54 >> Joe Redner, 1310 Alicia.
11:29:57 Number one, you have to have a reason, a government
11:29:59 interest to limit the use of signs.
11:30:00 I believe the justification for this proposed
11:30:03 ordinance is that the movement might distract drivers
11:30:06 and cause an accident.
11:30:08 There are several government buildings with signs, a
11:30:11 whole bunch of them, that change, and there's one
11:30:15 which is Legends Field.
11:30:16 You have to go out and see that one.
11:30:18 And those signs too have to conform, also.
11:30:21 Because if there's an accident at one of those
11:30:24 locations, the government would be very liable saying,
11:30:28 you think flashing signs cause accidents, and having
11:30:31 an accident that flashing signs that belong to the
11:30:34 government, I don't understand, the government has
11:30:37 flashing signs, and the at the same time saying they
11:30:41 cause accidents.
11:30:42 Part call it and admission against interest.
11:30:45 That's a legal term.

11:30:47 You are not going to make people drive better by
11:30:50 limiting movement on signs.
11:30:51 Flashing signs are everywhere.
11:30:53 Don't go out in the county.
11:30:54 Go everywhere.
11:30:55 Don't go out on Dale Mabry.
11:30:57 Don't go down on Channelside.
11:30:58 The government has flashing signs there down there
11:31:00 everywhere.
11:31:05 We have to get a driver's license that meaning we are
11:31:08 supposed to know how we are to deal with distractions.
11:31:11 There's no more accidents. The studies show there's
11:31:13 no more accidents where there are signs.
11:31:15 You have got us limited to almost no signs at all now.
11:31:19 You have us down to little bitty squares.
11:31:22 I think it's harder to look for signs, it's more of a
11:31:25 distraction, than if you know No where it is.
11:31:29 Have you ever been to a place where you have to look
11:31:31 for signs?
11:31:32 That's distracting.
11:31:34 And that's where you are going.
11:31:36 It's the wrong direction.

11:31:38 Let us draw a little attention.
11:31:40 After all, that's what signs are for.
11:31:42 Thank you.
11:31:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:31:43 Next.
11:31:48 >>> I'm Bob Smith, electric sign company.
11:31:51 We have a video to show you.
11:31:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Do you have a sign-up sheet?
11:32:00 If not you have three minutes.
11:32:01 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you have a speaker waiver form?
11:32:03 Right now you are limited to three minutes per council
11:32:05 rules.
11:32:05 >>> I understand that.
11:32:06 We have three minutes per council rules and one minute
11:32:08 for additional every person that's here.
11:32:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Did you get that on a speaker waiver
11:32:13 form?
11:32:14 >>> No, I talked to Julia.
11:32:16 >>GWEN MILLER: You have to have a speaker waiver form.
11:32:19 Do you have a speaker waiver form?
11:32:20 >>> No, ma'am.
11:32:21 >> All you have is three minutes.

11:32:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Do you want to take a few minutes and
11:32:28 have people sign the form and come back?
11:32:30 >>> Sure.
11:32:31 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Thank you.
11:32:32 >> Member of the sign committee.
11:32:36 Mr. Caetano, what happened with the committee is we
11:32:40 just dealt with on-site signage.
11:32:42 We didn't deal with off-site signage, which we think
11:32:46 should be dealt with as well.
11:32:48 And at least as I understand the sign ordinance, it's
11:32:53 other than public and safety kind of sign messages for
11:32:56 the first time, government will have to comply with
11:32:59 its own rules and regulations.
11:33:01 Because if you want to use the term sign pollution.
11:33:06 What happened to us on electronic signage is we just
11:33:10 ran out of time, and we said, let's go ahead and get
11:33:14 the sign ordinance on all the aspects we agreed,
11:33:18 approved, and then work on the electronic signage
11:33:21 issue.
11:33:22 We realize that the technology has changed, and it
11:33:26 needs to be dealt with.
11:33:27 And I think what Julia is telling you is if you don't

11:33:29 codify it, there won't be any electronic signs.
11:33:33 We think that's wrong.
11:33:34 But give the committee time to get back to you with
11:33:37 some recommendations that pertain to electronic
11:33:40 signage, and then come to grips with it.
11:33:42 But at least move forward with what we have total
11:33:45 consensus on, which is to prove the aesthetic quality
11:33:49 of the city.
11:33:50 That's kind of what happened.
11:33:59 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: (off microphone)
11:34:02 And the Westshore alliance supports this proposed
11:34:07 ordinance?
11:34:08 >>RON ROTELLA: In fact, our commercial overlay
11:34:10 district that we have in Westshore almost parallels
11:34:15 what's being passed.
11:34:16 There are some provisions of this new ordinance that's
11:34:18 more restrictive that we support.
11:34:26 >> Terry Neal, president, Temple Crest civic
11:34:29 association, Tampa, Florida.
11:34:30 I am in support of this sign ordinance simply because
11:34:33 anything that beautifies our city is good for our
11:34:37 city.

11:34:40 A couple hundred years ago we redevelop how in
11:34:46 Philadelphia and New York the streets were muddy and
11:34:48 signs were everywhere.
11:34:49 Civilization has changed.
11:34:50 We have learned to create more beautiful cities,
11:34:52 higher quality of life, and I tried to think of an
11:34:55 example that illustrated that, and I couldn't help but
11:35:01 think of when I went to Paris, and I climbed mount
11:35:07 mart and I went around the corner to the entrance and
11:35:09 steps which looks over the city of Paris and the one
11:35:15 thing that the people of the city of Paris did a
11:35:19 couple hundred years ago was to say, all of the
11:35:21 buildings have to conform to one size, all of the
11:35:24 signs can't be above a certain size, and I'll tell you
11:35:28 what, that's one of the most beautiful cities in the
11:35:30 world because they created conforming regulations for
11:35:35 all the businesses.
11:35:36 And there are other cities in this United States that
11:35:39 do that.
11:35:41 But I want to add one other thing that I don't think
11:35:45 anyone has considered.
11:35:47 Mr. Redner mentioned that signs cause accidents.

11:35:50 And I have another take on that.
11:35:52 When signs are lower and they are not way up in the
11:35:55 sky, people have to slow down to look for the signs.
11:36:01 What a wonderful thing.
11:36:02 We actually have an option to reduce speeding in this
11:36:06 city by putting the signs someplace where people have
11:36:10 to slow down and find what they are looking for rather
11:36:14 than seeing a huge sign up in the air, speeding to it,
11:36:18 and then not even putting their turn signal on and
11:36:21 just going into it.
11:36:22 I just think that's a wonderful side effect of this
11:36:25 sign ordinance and I hope you pass it.
11:36:27 Thank you very much.
11:36:33 >>> Paul Smith, electric sign company.
11:36:35 We would like to ask you, I was on the sign committee
11:36:38 for two years myself.
11:36:39 We spent all our free time with the city trying to get
11:36:43 this ordinance helping, and I'm asking you for a
11:36:45 little more time to show the city.
11:36:48 >> What do you need?
11:36:49 >> Six and a half minutes.
11:36:51 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move the to waive the rules.

11:36:54 >> Were you going to say something?
11:36:56 >> I was going to say the gentleman, unfortunately,
11:36:58 technology kept from coming to the first reading.
11:37:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We appreciate the time you put into
11:37:05 it.
11:37:06 Move to waive the rules, give him six minutes.
11:37:09 >>GWEN MILLER: six minutes.
11:37:10 (Motion carried)
11:37:11 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Show the video.
11:37:17 >> Tampa, Florida, home of 325,000 people and today we
11:37:25 are at a crossroads.
11:37:26 (Video shown:)
11:37:28 Sign, sign, everywhere a sign, do this, don't do
11:37:34 that, can't you read the sign?
11:37:37 Sign, sign, everywhere a sign.
11:37:45 Sign, sign
11:37:59 >> I'm Bob Smith.
11:38:00 >> We need more audio.
11:38:04 >> We are going from a transformer, a high voltage
11:38:07 transformer, 15,000 volts, and moving into the park
11:38:12 where this big 15,000-pound transformer is now being
11:38:15 replaced by this small power supply.

11:38:17 Now, we have 12 volts coming out of this power supply
11:38:25 as you can see here.
11:38:26 I'm holding in the my hand.
11:38:27 12 volts.
11:38:28 Five year warranty.
11:38:32 And we love it in the sign industry.
11:38:37 If you move over here, there's different types of LED
11:38:39 that we can deal with.
11:38:41 And you can see almost waterproof.
11:38:45 You can never do that with fluorescent tubing or neon
11:38:49 lighting.
11:38:49 Over here we have another channel letter made with
11:38:57 neon and half with L.
11:39:00 D.
11:39:00 Can you guess which it is?
11:39:01 It's very hard.
11:39:02 Let me show you how it's headed in the L.
11:39:06 D. business.
11:39:06 You can see the single stroke and we have a single
11:39:09 stroke LED.
11:39:11 But the neon up here is very --
11:39:14 >> Using high voltage, neon, high voltage

11:39:21 transformers.
11:39:22 Down here, you can touch it, bang at round.
11:39:25 Only 12 volts used.
11:39:27 What a great safety factor in designing signs to put
11:39:30 on buildings.
11:39:31 And LED uses one-third, less than one-third of the
11:39:36 power supply that any other source that we have used
11:39:40 whether it be neon or fluorescent tubing.
11:39:44 And no one gives a five year warranty in the industry.
11:39:46 >> My name is Frank foster with Tampa sign
11:39:50 incorporated.
11:39:51 I have been in business in Tampa doing work for the
11:39:53 city for about 21 years.
11:39:55 I'm sitting here with Bob Smith from electric sign.
11:39:57 Combined, we get about 50 years of experience doing
11:40:02 this kind of work in the city and in the county and
11:40:05 other places.
11:40:07 We are here today to ask, the electronic signage
11:40:13 issue.
11:40:14 We go from old-fashioned signs here that we set up a
11:40:19 mini demonstration to show you where this industry has
11:40:22 come from.

11:40:22 But to begin, a couple of years ago, Rose Ferlita
11:40:26 asked me to join the committee to review all sign
11:40:30 regulations within the city limits.
11:40:32 And I was honored to be able to participate.
11:40:37 And I have asked Bob to join us.
11:40:39 We spent a couple of years at our own expense and our
11:40:43 own time trying to work each aspect of the industry.
11:40:47 When we met with the City of Tampa, over the last two
11:40:50 years, since he mentioned, we were there to try to
11:40:52 educate them on the type of signage and where we were
11:40:55 going in the sign industry.
11:40:57 We were going from the old neon type signs, then moved
11:41:02 onto the fluorescent type signs, and now you we are
11:41:05 into the LED.
11:41:06 Light emitting diodes.
11:41:09 When we get into the light emitting diodes, we see a
11:41:12 little bit ever history here. We found out back in
11:41:15 1985, when the city of had these portable signs, and
11:41:22 they were everywhere, all over the city.
11:41:25 This type of sign was everywhere, these portable
11:41:27 signs.
11:41:27 So you notice the affordable signs there were these

11:41:33 red lights.
11:41:34 So what I want to show you is why, Frank came up with
11:41:37 the idea, why did they come up with the code to stop
11:41:40 all flashing lights in 1985?
11:41:41 And this is the idea that we came up with.
11:41:44 In 1985, those portable signs had bulbs in the top of
11:41:51 them and they would be blinking on and off so they
11:41:54 weren't obtrusive at first but after the bulbs blew
11:41:57 out and the owners or whoever was leasing the signs
11:42:00 said, well, let's puts these in, this will give us
11:42:02 everyone more light.
11:42:04 And this is what they had going down the road all over
11:42:06 the City of Tampa.
11:42:08 That's where we believe that they put into the code,
11:42:12 no flashing lights.
11:42:13 We even had to go back at that time and take all the
11:42:15 movie theater lights that had the tracers that went
11:42:18 around and locked them down so they could just come up
11:42:22 and we thought that was a real loss of nostalgia
11:42:24 there.
11:42:26 >>> What you are looking at now over the highways, LED
11:42:30 lighting. This is down Channelside.

11:42:32 And these LEDs that the city owns are constantly
11:42:35 flashing.
11:42:38 By the state, no restriction, can do whatever they
11:42:40 like.
11:42:48 Here's a big one owned bits state no. Restrictions
11:42:51 whatsoever what size.
11:42:55 They are owned by the State of Florida.
11:42:56 No restrictions what whatever.
11:42:58 Now let's get to the city signs.
11:43:00 There's one.
11:43:01 The city owns a lot of electronic signs.
11:43:04 And they can -- that's a beautiful one, Tampa Bay
11:43:08 convention center.
11:43:10 And here's another great one.
11:43:11 Running 24 hours a day flashing as much as they want.
11:43:14 That's a city sign.
11:43:15 Now here's one privately owned.
11:43:17 We just want to shop that because it's a nice sign.
11:43:21 The sign code will only allow us to change our signs
11:43:24 once every 24 hours so if you had a time and
11:43:26 temperature sign right now you cannot use it in the
11:43:28 City of Tampa.

11:43:29 I just want to skip a little further.
11:43:32 If it's good enough for the State of Florida, if it's
11:43:33 good enough for the City of Tampa, it's good enough
11:43:36 for everybody that pays for those signs, they are used
11:43:38 in the city.
11:43:39 And I have one more thing to say, is that when we go
11:43:43 in to get a permit for electronic signs, what I would
11:43:46 like to see is that the emergency services be granted
11:43:52 an e-mail, so emergency service, if something was to
11:43:55 come up and you have a hurricane, they can type in the
11:43:57 thing, send it out to everybody that owns an
11:43:59 electronic sign, you could put an Amber alert up
11:44:02 there, could you put an evacuation route up there or
11:44:05 put any type of emergency that the city will need.
11:44:08 What a powerful thing that would be.
11:44:10 And you know what it would cost the city?
11:44:12 Nothing.
11:44:15 Neil.
11:44:16 Thank you very much.
11:44:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:44:17 Next.
11:44:20 >>> I'm JD Hickey, born here, my father was born here,

11:44:24 my grandfather was born here, my great grandfather was
11:44:27 throne off a ship and put ashore in Ft. Myers.
11:44:33 I have been in the retail business.
11:44:34 Retail business requires a sign.
11:44:36 My grandfather's store was on Franklin Street and 1200
11:44:39 block.
11:44:40 My father's store was on Florida Avenue at 1105.
11:44:43 And my business years ago was on Dale Mabry.
11:44:46 So I have been around Tampa a very, very long time.
11:44:51 The city is one of the biggest violators.
11:44:54 That convention center sign is absolutely gorgeous.
11:44:57 I don't know who you bought it from.
11:44:59 It's one of the prettiest signs around.
11:45:01 But to say that nobody can have a sign like this is
11:45:04 just super, super ridiculous.
11:45:12 Signs, $25,000, it's sort of self-regulating.
11:45:18 You are not going to have one on every corner.
11:45:21 To a minor degree it takes care of itself.
11:45:27 The gentleman before me took a lot of my thunder with
11:45:30 his beautiful presentation.
11:45:31 It showed all the city signs.
11:45:34 But the guy was talking earlier about Paris.

11:45:37 And Paris, you have got the street or two or three
11:45:44 blocks, the things change again to another name.
11:45:47 So they have a different sign on every corner.
11:45:49 And that's about all I have to say right now.
11:45:51 But we need to think this long and hard, because if we
11:45:55 outlaw this sort of thing, then what we are doing, say
11:45:58 no signs for any small business, what you are doing,
11:46:00 you are forcing all the small business people out of
11:46:03 business into the malls.
11:46:05 And that's not good.
11:46:07 We need small businesses that can exist on these
11:46:09 thoroughfares.
11:46:10 So we all don't have to go in and rent from these big
11:46:13 huge malls.
11:46:14 Thank you.
11:46:22 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.
11:46:25 I have been sworn.
11:46:27 I was also on the sign committee.
11:46:29 And as far as the electronic signs, we pretty much
11:46:35 asked you to either totally remove it from this
11:46:38 ordinance, because there was not discussion on what to
11:46:42 do with it.

11:46:43 So most of the discussion being on the electronic
11:46:50 signs, I hope you won't scrub the whole ordinance
11:46:53 which has very good parts to it, which does not deny
11:46:58 people signs.
11:46:59 But signs that will make our city more attractive in
11:47:02 the future and more easy for us to see who want to see
11:47:08 them.
11:47:08 When you have such an array of signs, it's hard to
11:47:11 find what you are actually looking for, whereas if
11:47:15 everyone has a sign, that it is a certain size and of
11:47:22 a certain level, it makes it much more easy to see.
11:47:25 And one of the B big things is to put an address on
11:47:28 the sign, which now evidently is not a rule that
11:47:31 exists.
11:47:34 You were asked recently at the last hearing why you
11:47:37 ever did this.
11:47:47 It was because the council who did that heard from so
11:47:49 many of the constituents about the unsightliness of
11:47:52 some of the streets in our city.
11:47:54 And that's why the sign committee was put together and
11:47:58 the sign committee worked together with people from
11:48:00 the industry, from the neighborhoods which I represent

11:48:03 the neighborhoods from the city, from different other
11:48:08 businesses.
11:48:09 So there was representation on the committee, and
11:48:13 together we came up with this concise decision as to
11:48:18 what was brought to you, and you passed on first
11:48:24 reading.
11:48:24 And please remember, people do not have to go out and
11:48:27 change their signs.
11:48:30 Those signs that are existing, which are now legal,
11:48:33 will be grandfathered in.
11:48:34 So unless it there's a change of use, then they will
11:48:39 not have to go out and change their sign.
11:48:46 I want to encourage council to at least pass the part
11:48:49 of the ordinance, eliminating, if you wish, the part
11:48:54 with the electronic sign which would ask you to codify
11:48:58 until another committee could indeed review that with
11:49:03 all of the input that we got to make our decision on
11:49:08 the rest of the code, and then come back to you on the
11:49:11 electronic sign, because we don't want the city to
11:49:14 become a city of flashing lights.
11:49:17 I think that was brought out last time by Mr. Rotella.
11:49:24 At the last hearing.

11:49:25 I don't think those what we want.
11:49:28 We don't want a New York atmosphere here in the City
11:49:32 of Tampa.
11:49:33 Thank you.
11:49:43 >>> Paul Taylor, I have been sworn in, I would like to
11:49:46 distribute some items to council, please.
11:49:48 I just want top submit a corrected illustration,
11:50:13 submitted an illustration last meeting that showed
11:50:23 legally permitted sign, if they change ownership or
11:50:26 reduce to the image at the bottom of the drawing
11:50:29 there.
11:50:30 The sign would be in fact five feet off the ground.
11:50:34 I just wanted to correct my submittal.
11:50:45 At the last hearing several comments were made last
11:50:47 hearing about having an appearance of signage like
11:50:50 that in New Tampa.
11:50:55 Use the word fresh idea that Mrs. Saul-Sena brought
11:50:59 up.
11:50:59 Instead of passing the present restrictive sign code,
11:51:02 would you go ahead and adopt the New Tampa overlay
11:51:07 sign code for the City of Tampa?
11:51:16 I have a photographic illustration at the last time

11:51:23 hearing, a gentleman presented the very same
11:51:26 photograph.
11:51:27 However, the images shown there gave an appearance of
11:51:30 all the signs touching each other.
11:51:35 I don't know, was the photograph taken with a lens
11:51:40 that was something like a fish-eye lens to possibly
11:51:44 show the signs touching each other?
11:51:47 In a negative fashion.
11:51:49 Was this misrepresentative?
11:51:51 This is exactly what a motorist would see as they are
11:51:55 driving down that particular block of Kennedy
11:51:57 Boulevard.
11:52:01 I went to the same site.
11:52:02 These are my photographs.
11:52:04 And tried to present what was really the image at that
11:52:11 particular location.
11:52:19 Although there are a number of signs there at the
11:52:22 particular property, they are separated by 31 feet to
11:52:25 approximately 96 feet apart.
11:52:32 The city block is also 315 feet long. I hand measured
11:52:34 with a measuring wheel.
11:52:37 I want to ask a question, if council voted to adopt a

11:52:44 new sign code based on the images previously
11:52:47 presented, which may have been misrepresented, is the
11:52:55 vote tainted because the previous exhibit was not
11:52:57 really representative of the situation?
11:53:01 I do not know.
11:53:02 And I'm just asking if you would consider the
11:53:04 possibility of maybe retracting the votes from the
11:53:10 previous hearing because of the possible exhibit being
11:53:15 not representative.
11:53:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:53:18 Next.
11:53:23 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I want to talk for a minute about
11:53:24 the window signs that you are being asked to restrict
11:53:28 to five square feet.
11:53:30 As Mr. Hickey pointed out, small businesses are the
11:53:33 backbone of the community, and those are the
11:53:35 neighborhood-serving commercial entities.
11:53:38 Recently, you went from a sign that was this size from
11:53:43 notice because the allegation was that you couldn't
11:53:45 notice that sign.
11:53:46 Well, that's approximately the size of the sign that
11:53:48 you are now going to be allowed to have for small

11:53:51 business.
11:53:53 This is a sign now that you require for notices.
11:53:57 This is twice the size of that one that you just saw.
11:54:01 And if the city is going to this size of sign to
11:54:04 ensure that the notice is provided, and that people
11:54:08 can see it, why would you expect the small business to
11:54:11 be able to survive with that size of sign?
11:54:14 They can't.
11:54:15 If you are talking about small in-fill commercial
11:54:18 developments and small boutique shops, they rely on
11:54:23 those window signs, and frequently those signs become
11:54:26 artistic motifs in and of themselves.
11:54:28 A floral shop paints flowers on the windows.
11:54:32 A travel agency paints boats and airplanes on the
11:54:36 signs.
11:54:37 When you start restricting the size of the signs you
11:54:39 eliminate the possibility for those kinds of artistic
11:54:42 qualities that make this city unique.
11:54:46 I'm respectfully requesting that you eliminate this
11:54:48 restriction on the window sign to ensure that the
11:54:50 small businesses that can't afford the off-site signs,
11:54:53 that don't have the monument signs, that the strip

11:55:00 malls have, they are going to be restricted to a very
11:55:02 small window sign that, as they have already said
11:55:07 before, are very difficult to see and you are putting
11:55:09 an extremely hard and difficult hardship on these
11:55:12 small businesses.
11:55:14 I'm respectfully requesting that you change the item
11:55:16 11 back to the way that it currently reads, which is
11:55:19 25% of the total window area.
11:55:21 This is an unfair burden on a small business.
11:55:25 As far as the electronic signs and all that, there are
11:55:28 other people -- I'll let other people talk about that.
11:55:30 But if the city says you are going to this kind of
11:55:33 sign to achieve notice, why should a small business be
11:55:37 expected to survive with a small sign like that?
11:55:41 Thank you.
11:55:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I would just like to --
11:55:46 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would just like to ask when we
11:55:49 are done a question.
11:55:51 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 2902 East Ellicott
11:55:55 street three nights a week.
11:55:57 I didn't get sworn in because I didn't know you were
11:56:01 going to vote on this this evening.

11:56:02 And I always leave it --
11:56:05 >>> actually, you don't.
11:56:06 I want to make that clear for the record just so that
11:56:08 people have no misunderstanding.
11:56:10 Item 107 is not a quasi-judicial.
11:56:13 It's a legislative matter, a change to the code.
11:56:15 It is not a quasi-judicial matter.
11:56:21 It's purely legislative.
11:56:22 You don't have to be sworn in, Mr. Knotts.
11:56:28 >>> Okay, thank you.
11:56:29 The reason I'm speaking on this thing, now, I have
11:56:31 been a small businessman all of my life, and us small
11:56:38 business people, we don't have but a little money.
11:56:43 We are all the way in the world we can advertise our
11:56:46 business is a sign.
11:56:49 But the reason I want to say, though, this thing got
11:56:52 into discrimination and races and everything, and the
11:56:56 reason race come in at, when you first brought this
11:56:59 thing up two or three years ago, went in my part of
11:57:01 town, in the black part of town, and took down
11:57:04 everybody's sign, didn't even notify nobody, just went
11:57:08 down the streets and knocked down the signs and took

11:57:10 them down, and people didn't even know -- people have
11:57:13 been in business 25 and 30, 40 years, took their signs
11:57:17 down.
11:57:18 Now, I know they got something called -- I know people
11:57:23 that put up signs are illegal.
11:57:26 I can see you all passing an ordinance that you put up
11:57:29 signs, and don't get a permit to do this.
11:57:32 But before you take somebody's sign down been in
11:57:35 business for years and years, and I can see you going
11:57:37 back to this person saying, hey, you have to do
11:57:40 something to this sign.
11:57:41 But this is the most discriminating thing here and
11:57:44 about the worst thing you ever came up with.
11:57:47 But another thing I want to talk about.
11:57:49 You only got a few people that hate signs.
11:57:58 Say the signs make the city look bad.
11:58:00 Now every big city you go there's going to be a lot of
11:58:03 big signs.
11:58:04 You know, way want to say, though, coming up there a
11:58:08 couple times, the sign is too big.
11:58:16 I said, somebody's mommy and daddy died, and they got
11:58:22 a little sign on the corner.

11:58:25 But it's going along.
11:58:28 Hey, now, this hate thing got out of control.
11:58:32 A handful of people can come up with something, and
11:58:36 force it on everybody.
11:58:39 It is totally wrong.
11:58:40 But, you know, they hate signs.
11:58:48 I mean, like people hate bulldogs, got rid of 'em.
11:58:55 And then it got out of control with that.
11:58:57 But I say, though, that I know they put rules and
11:59:02 regulations.
11:59:03 But this thing right here, it's totally out of
11:59:07 control.
11:59:07 Thank you very much.
11:59:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
11:59:13 >>> Mike Stram.
11:59:16 I own a place called home gallery.
11:59:21 It's the American dream.
11:59:21 I started in my van.
11:59:23 Everything I owned was in that van.
11:59:25 And that was back in 1990.
11:59:27 My business grew and it grew and finally I was able to
11:59:30 afford to buy property on Dale Mabry.

11:59:37 We built a brand new gallery, the home theater
11:59:40 gallery, talking about the electronic sign activation
11:59:42 issue.
11:59:43 And as I was going through the permitting section, and
11:59:46 my sign meets all the city and county requirements, it
11:59:51 went through all of the appropriate permitting issues
11:59:55 that were required before we could build it, through
11:59:59 the inspection process, as it was being built.
12:00:01 And it's a gorgeous architecturally nice looking sign
12:00:07 and it has these electronic reader boards on each
12:00:12 side.
12:00:12 One side is full color and one side is just red.
12:00:15 And as I was putting that sign together, and deciding
12:00:21 on what it is I wanted, I'm a high tech business.
12:00:24 We automate homes.
12:00:25 We do the home theater things and all that kind of
12:00:28 thing. This is a perfect way to describe what my
12:00:30 business really is.
12:00:34 Like someone said prior, I'm a small businesslike him.
12:00:37 We are not in the malls.
12:00:39 We don't have that multi-$100 million annual
12:00:42 advertising budget, to hit the newspapers and the

12:00:45 radios.
12:00:46 My sign is my advertising, and the referral of my
12:00:50 customers.
12:00:51 As I was going through the permitting process, I was
12:00:54 told that as long as I did the time and temp I could
12:00:58 change my message whenever I wanted to show the time
12:01:01 and temp.
12:01:02 But that was some kind of public service announcement.
12:01:05 And it seems as the gentleman from the electronic sign
12:01:12 company had said earlier, that these electronic signs
12:01:15 may be able to present all of our community some kind
12:01:18 of a messaging system.
12:01:20 These are electronic.
12:01:22 I can change it from a PC in a flash, if there was
12:01:25 some kind of amber alert or public safety message
12:01:28 these things could be use add whole lot better in that
12:01:30 sense, if public notices and public safety were any
12:01:33 issue at all about changing these messages.
12:01:36 And I came down, and I don't make a habit of coming to
12:01:39 City Council meetings.
12:01:40 I'm too busy.
12:01:41 I'm running my business.

12:01:43 And I'm nervous sitting here talking to this group.
12:01:47 I talk a good story in my showroom, but it's different
12:01:50 here.
12:01:53 It's my dream business.
12:01:55 It just seems unfair to me, and that's why I came down
12:01:59 here.
12:02:00 It shouldn't be a matter of who owns the sign, that
12:02:03 the city owned aquarium sign can show messages every
12:02:08 two to three seconds changing and the same with the
12:02:11 Hillsborough County, the sign at Legends Field is not
12:02:13 only changing every three seconds for the message of
12:02:16 the Yankees stadium, which is great, but it's also a
12:02:20 profit center for that business.
12:02:21 They are selling ads on that thing for the National
12:02:26 Bank or whatever.
12:02:27 I stand there and look at that sign for longer than
12:02:29 ten minutes you will see three or four ads.
12:02:31 That's a profit center for them.
12:02:33 I'm not selling time on my machine.
12:02:36 I'm advertising my business, and of course the time
12:02:41 and temp.
12:02:42 And to drive safely.

12:02:44 County be used for things that can be good.
12:02:48 Please consider that 24-hour thing.
12:02:51 Thank you very much.
12:02:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I had a quick question for you.
12:02:59 I share your concern.
12:03:01 And I expressed that a little bit the last time.
12:03:04 Unless you're standing there looking at a sign, I
12:03:08 won't know the difference if changes every couple of
12:03:11 minutes.
12:03:12 Unless I'm just standing there looking at it.
12:03:14 So to me, I think we should reduce it down to a couple
12:03:19 minutes.
12:03:20 Now, the moving sign I find a little -- on Dale Mabry
12:03:28 I was driving along and all of a sudden it stood out
12:03:31 and caught my attention.
12:03:32 >>> I know the one you are talking about, right.
12:03:34 >> And it was moving and everything else.
12:03:36 And I'm thinking that's just one.
12:03:37 And what happens if everybody up and down Dale Mabry
12:03:39 goes to that?
12:03:40 Then all of a sudden it's just going to be -- all of a
12:03:46 sudden it's going to be like Times Square and I don't

12:03:49 think we need that in our community.
12:03:51 But --
12:03:53 >>> was that the scrolling message going through?
12:03:55 >> Right.
12:03:56 Currently prohibited and continue to be prohibited.
12:03:59 But if we reduce this from 24 hours down to like five
12:04:03 minutes, would you have any problem with that?
12:04:06 I mean, would that satisfy and meet your concerns and
12:04:10 your dreams of your business and your private
12:04:12 enterprise, or everyone two minutes or something like
12:04:15 that?
12:04:16 I don't want us to get any closer than because then
12:04:18 you are going to get closer and closer to a scrolling
12:04:22 activated sign.
12:04:22 But if we come down from 24 hours, I'm comfortable
12:04:25 with five minutes or something like that.
12:04:27 And then Joe Caetano, clearly that would address your
12:04:32 concern, too.
12:04:33 And the other concern I have, the government
12:04:37 hypocrisy.
12:04:38 I think we need to revisit that paragraph about the
12:04:41 government exemption, because I agree, I mean, the

12:04:44 video clearly shows, there's some signs that are
12:04:49 clearly way finding and directional signs that we
12:04:53 should have a government exemption, okay?
12:04:56 Turn this way for whatever, you know.
12:04:59 That sort of thing.
12:05:00 That's okay.
12:05:01 But you're right.
12:05:02 When it gets abused and we call the Yankee stadium
12:05:05 sign or the Bucs sign a government sign, because maybe
12:05:08 it's on government property or something like that,
12:05:11 but then they sell X, Y and Z products, that's no
12:05:16 different from your sign and we shouldn't be
12:05:18 hypocritical like that.
12:05:19 >>> Thank you.
12:05:20 I certainly support that viewpoint.
12:05:22 And, you know, there was a gentleman that spoke
12:05:25 earlier about the rights of the person with that
12:05:28 driver's license, and is it really a traffic safety
12:05:30 issue?
12:05:31 Are people driving by and wrecking their cars?
12:05:34 Pinellas County, Manatee County, everywhere that I
12:05:36 drive, these signs are -- and we are talking about

12:05:39 permanently installed signs, not the one that trailer
12:05:43 sign, now, with the old lights that turn into the big
12:05:47 flood light issue.
12:05:49 But these permanently, you know, attractive permitted
12:05:53 and approved by the city and government agencies to
12:05:56 install these signs, personally, I don't feel that
12:06:06 traffic -- from these guys selling newspapers every
12:06:09 Sunday on the corner, out in the middle of traffic.
12:06:12 >> My question was more specific.
12:06:14 Would you be happier if we went from 24 hours down to
12:06:17 like five minutes?
12:06:18 >>> Absolutely.
12:06:19 I mean, the ability -- and you're right.
12:06:22 People driving by Dale Mabry at the speeds that people
12:06:25 are driving on Dale Mabry these days, you know, they
12:06:29 are not going to see my sign change, now, four times
12:06:32 in that.
12:06:34 I timed it, you know.
12:06:37 At that 40 mile-an-hour, 45 mile-an-hour speed limit
12:06:41 down there, they can really only see my sign for like
12:06:43 four to five seconds.
12:06:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you, sir.

12:06:47 >>> Thank you very much.
12:06:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Madam Chair, I just wish to bring to
12:06:52 council's attention it's a few minutes past the noon
12:06:54 hour.
12:06:54 Per council's rules, how do you wish to proceed?
12:06:57 >> It's a rule.
12:07:04 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move we finish with this and then
12:07:06 break for lunch.
12:07:07 >> Second.
12:07:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to continue item 107.
12:07:11 (Motion carried).
12:07:11 >> My motion was to continue 107 and when we are
12:07:18 completed to break for lunch.
12:07:21 This item.
12:07:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
12:07:24 >> I have a question.
12:07:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Thank you.
12:07:29 Could we move ahead, Ms. Cole, with the change that
12:07:33 electronic signs are limited to changing once every
12:07:36 five minutes?
12:07:36 >>JULIA COLE: If you were to make that change, I would
12:07:39 request that it go back to first reading.

12:07:43 Open up first reading and then go back to second
12:07:45 reading.
12:07:46 And probably if we are going to go to that kind of
12:07:48 change I probably would separate it out a little bit
12:07:51 from a copy sign and create a new category so it may
12:07:53 take me a little bit to make the changes in a way that
12:07:56 I think would make more sense.
12:07:57 >> Could we move this with the deletion of the part
12:07:59 that addresses the electronic signs?
12:08:02 >>JULIA COLE: I wouldn't really.
12:08:03 I feel very strongly that we need to at least have
12:08:06 something in there, because I'm still concerned about
12:08:08 the way it's been handled.
12:08:09 I would rather you send this back for first reading
12:08:13 maybe within 30 days, allow me to make the change to
12:08:15 the five minutes.
12:08:17 Like I said, it may take some redoing in terms of the
12:08:21 language and then bring that back in 30 days for first
12:08:24 reading and then take that to second reading.
12:08:25 >>MARY MULHERN: Julia, don't go away.
12:08:28 If we are going to do that, then I think some other
12:08:30 concerns were raised here that we can maybe talk

12:08:32 about.
12:08:33 I have a question about the size of the storefront
12:08:38 signs that you are being reducing.
12:08:41 I know you told me this but I don't remember.
12:08:43 What's the rationale for making the window --
12:08:47 >> Currently the regulation is 25% of the window area.
12:08:51 When we were going through this process, a tremendous
12:08:53 amount of concern really was over the amount of
12:08:55 signage businesses have in the visual clutter, and
12:08:59 then there's also concern of window signs about being
12:09:02 able to see inside.
12:09:03 So that is why the size.
12:09:06 What we have done is reduced to the five square feet
12:09:10 per business, and that was what the recommendation
12:09:13 was.
12:09:15 So that's where we are on that issue.
12:09:16 >> What is the concern about being able to is see
12:09:21 inside?
12:09:22 >>> Safety concerns about being able to see inside
12:09:24 into a business, you know, CPTED, the police being
12:09:28 able to see in, and see what's going on, and really
12:09:31 what where this issue comes up a lot is the

12:09:33 convenience stores that basically plaster their
12:09:37 windows with, you know, beer and wine, and soda
12:09:42 advertising.
12:09:44 Now 25%, that is something that can be enforced
12:09:46 through that provision.
12:09:48 But that was very difficult to go out there and
12:09:50 measure.
12:09:50 So being able to measure a square footage would be
12:09:53 easier to enforce and ensure the visibility.
12:10:01 >> That's the prerogative to display whatever they
12:10:08 want on their own establishment, their own building.
12:10:10 I would feel comfortable with leaving that the way it
12:10:12 is, when you come back.
12:10:13 I don't know.
12:10:14 We can talk about that.
12:10:19 >> If I can add.
12:10:20 I think if what we are going to do is this stuff on
12:10:23 first reading I would request we have specific
12:10:25 direction to me as to exactly what we want to change
12:10:27 so that you don't get into this position of having
12:10:30 changes that aren't exactly -- maybe if you can go one
12:10:34 by one on the specific changes that you want, I can

12:10:36 bring it back to first reading and --
12:10:39 >>> okay.
12:10:39 I oh would move for that specific change to leave it
12:10:41 as it is, because I think that the supporting small
12:10:47 businesses and keeping them, making it possible for
12:10:51 them to continue to function, not to make it any more
12:10:53 difficult.
12:10:56 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Cole, how are you going to
12:10:58 handle a real estate office that has 25 independent
12:11:02 business people working in an office?
12:11:05 Okay.
12:11:05 It may be Coldwell Banker out on the front.
12:11:09 Okay?
12:11:10 But you have 25 independent business people in there
12:11:14 who each pay rent to be in there.
12:11:18 A table fee, whatever they are paying.
12:11:20 How do you handle that?
12:11:24 >>> it would be considered both under the currents
12:11:25 sign code and this code.
12:11:28 It would be considered because they are all under kind
12:11:30 of a same business -- well, sewage not a single
12:11:36 occupancy parcel which in terms of the wall sign there

12:11:39 isn't a significant difference between what we do
12:11:41 today and what the changes, from one and a half to one
12:11:45 and a quarter, how it may impact maybe with the free
12:11:50 standing signs, the pole sign.
12:11:51 >> I'm referring to window signs.
12:11:53 >> Oh, I apologize.
12:11:54 Window signs?
12:11:55 It would have the impact of going from 25% of the
12:11:58 window, being able to be utilized, down to the five
12:12:02 feet.
12:12:03 So it would not have any -- it wouldn't matter whether
12:12:06 or not you had ten independent agents in there, you
12:12:11 are either talking about a 25% regulation, 25% of the
12:12:14 window area, versus a 5 square foot per business.
12:12:18 But that's what the recommendation of the sign
12:12:20 committee was.
12:12:21 >> I think you are going to have complications.
12:12:22 You have got 25 different people in there and each one
12:12:26 has a different name for their company.
12:12:27 Even though it may say Coldwell Banker out on the
12:12:31 marquee.
12:12:31 But there are 25 individuals in there.

12:12:34 And they each have pictures on their windows.
12:12:38 >> I think that's something that council feels is
12:12:42 appropriate, we'll go ahead and change that back to
12:12:44 the way it is.
12:12:46 That's within council's purview.
12:12:47 >> My suggestion is that needs specific direction by
12:12:52 motion.
12:12:53 >> What now?
12:12:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Not yet.
12:12:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The first thing I think would be
12:12:58 appropriate if council does not wish to go forward on
12:13:00 the second reading today, then to pick 30 days when
12:13:03 you expect it to come back with first reading but keep
12:13:06 this continue as a public -- as a public hearing.
12:13:09 You don't have to necessarily vote this down.
12:13:11 But you will have a date when you have the other thing
12:13:14 in front of you, then you can take advantage.
12:13:18 It in front of you to take advantage of the other one.
12:13:20 That's my recommendation.
12:13:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda.
12:13:23 You cannot speak again, sir.
12:13:24 Mr. Miranda?

12:13:25 Miranda
12:13:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Oh, I thought -- I was going to
12:13:29 keep quiet.
12:13:31 As some of you know, I voted against this ordinance
12:13:33 for some of the reasons stated.
12:13:34 But more importantly, because I felt very strongly
12:13:38 that a banner is a sign.
12:13:43 We also omitted flags.
12:13:45 Well, I understand it was a state flag, a federal
12:13:48 flag, a city flag, or something.
12:13:50 But a good friend of all of the citizens of the great
12:13:53 area, Steve Otto wrote, you can have a flag any size
12:13:58 you -- size you want, I guess that's not a violation.
12:14:01 But more importantly when you look at the corner of
12:14:03 Columbus drive and MacDill or the corner of
12:14:04 Armenia and Hillsborough, I'm not going to mention the
12:14:10 name of the company, a long pole, about 12-foot tall,
12:14:14 starts out about 18 to 24 inches and goes all the way
12:14:18 up, that's not in violation but it's on a city
12:14:26 right-of-way that they stick a sign in for some phone
12:14:29 company.
12:14:30 You know, those are the things that are troubling to

12:14:31 me.
12:14:32 How can you have those things -- they move with the
12:14:36 wind, and so I'm telling myself, what have I really
12:14:39 done if I approve this?
12:14:41 Not too much.
12:14:42 A flag.
12:14:45 A banner is not a sign.
12:14:47 I understand the difference between a virus and a
12:14:50 bacteria.
12:14:51 But to me, if it's got writing on it, if it's got
12:14:55 something on it that means something, it's a sign.
12:14:59 So what we are saying is, you can have a banner.
12:15:05 You can have a flag.
12:15:06 But don't you dare put a sign.
12:15:09 Well, my question is, what's the difference?
12:15:11 They both have a message.
12:15:14 Can you answer that, legal department?
12:15:17 I don't want to put you in the hot seat.
12:15:23 >>> There's a couple components.
12:15:27 I know sign code, a banner is considered a sign.
12:15:31 A category for temporary banners on-site of properties
12:15:35 that there are regulations for.

12:15:37 There is a separate regulation for banners within the
12:15:40 right-of-way in chapter 22 which does allow banners in
12:15:44 the right-of-way, it does allow them to be a certain
12:15:50 size, like attached to utility poles, and does allow
12:15:54 some logos on them. That is within a separate
12:15:57 section. Code.
12:15:57 So to answer that question, yes, the germ and bacteria
12:16:02 may be very similar but there are nuance that is make
12:16:04 them different.
12:16:05 As relates to the flag issue, our code today, does
12:16:07 have a specific regulation as it relates to flags.
12:16:10 This code does not have a specific regulation as to
12:16:13 flags.
12:16:13 When you regulate flags you get into a whole purview
12:16:16 of regulations.
12:16:17 Now, there are -- where you see pieces of fabric
12:16:23 tethered to a pole which contain their copy on them,
12:16:27 those are actually not regulated by the sign code
12:16:29 because our sign code regulates material with copy on
12:16:33 them.
12:16:33 So that is the way it stands today as relates to the
12:16:37 flag.

12:16:37 >> If I may continue.
12:16:39 For the benefit of some, because we go to another part
12:16:45 of the ordinance, you can have a banner that is not
12:16:48 considered a sign, because it omits in the another
12:16:51 part of the ordinance.
12:16:53 And I think that's wrong.
12:16:54 If you are going to have an ordinance, if you are
12:16:57 going to have something substantial, make it for
12:16:59 everybody.
12:17:00 Don't exclude some because it says furnished by ABC.
12:17:08 A little thing like that.
12:17:09 And the thing that's really big and it's got some city
12:17:13 festival coming or something of that nature.
12:17:15 But it's everywhere.
12:17:16 It's about 2,000 of them.
12:17:18 Why don't we low at those?
12:17:20 We don't, because they are some friends of ours.
12:17:24 I didn't run for office to have friends.
12:17:27 But I'm saying is, if you want to cover it, cover it
12:17:31 all.
12:17:34 This is what it is, a sign and a banner, in my look --
12:17:38 maybe I'm wrong -- are the same.

12:17:41 And that's why I didn't support this the first time.
12:17:43 And if that's still a difference in the ordinance
12:17:46 coming back, I won't support it again.
12:17:49 I agree with Mr. Dingfelder's analogy of changing the
12:17:53 signs to a certain lesser amount, because it's the
12:17:56 right thing to do.
12:17:59 But just can't everything to anybody.
12:18:02 And at the same time, only signal out some.
12:18:07 Why not single out everybody?
12:18:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I want to get this off the dime and
12:18:11 make a couple of motions, three of them specifically.
12:18:14 Charlie in, regard to banners, I'm not going to agree
12:18:17 or disagree with you.
12:18:18 I will just point out that we are changing the
12:18:19 regulation on banners to say that we are limiting
12:18:21 banners to a period not to exceed 30 consecutive
12:18:25 calendar days, and not more than 60 days in a single
12:18:28 year so they are not treated exactly like signs, but
12:18:30 we are limiting banners somewhat.
12:18:32 Under this.
12:18:33 So neither here nor there but I just wanted to point
12:18:36 that out.

12:18:37 My first motion as related to the window signs, that
12:18:39 would be section 20-5-7.
12:18:44 And this is a direction for staff to come back to us
12:18:47 in 30 days, to modify this.
12:18:51 And I'll just go item by item.
12:18:53 In regard to window signs, I agree with Ms. Mulhern.
12:18:56 Let's go back to the 25% where we were, and we'll
12:18:59 strike the 5-foot square foot limitation.
12:19:04 Just go back to where we were.
12:19:05 That would be my first motion.
12:19:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
12:19:10 (Motion carried).
12:19:15 >> Nay.
12:19:15 >> And the next one would be on PAREN 19, 25.7.
12:19:24 And this is the 24-hour as related to electron you can
12:19:27 signs.
12:19:28 My motion would be to change that to now read every
12:19:33 five minutes.
12:19:34 Copy on an electronic message sign cannot change more
12:19:36 than once in a 5-minute period.
12:19:40 Blah-blah-blah.
12:19:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: It says unless otherwise allowed by

12:19:54 law or for a government -- but my next motion is going
12:19:57 to speak to modifying the description of what a
12:19:59 government sign is.
12:20:01 An allowability government sign is.
12:20:02 So this motion does not change government sign per se.
12:20:06 It only changes 24 hours to five minutes.
12:20:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The motion was very specific.
12:20:12 Mr. Dingfelder, I believe, Ms. Cole had asked for some
12:20:15 latitude to be able to reconfigure that to have a
12:20:17 separate section, perhaps --
12:20:22 >> Yes, if she wants to reconfigure that to
12:20:25 accommodate it.
12:20:26 That's fine.
12:20:26 That would be the tenor.
12:20:28 (Motion carried).
12:20:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Finally, Mr. Caetano, 20.5-7 speaks
12:20:36 to what a government sign is.
12:20:37 And it says no permit is required if a government sign
12:20:39 is necessary for blah-blah-blah.
12:20:43 I think that in one of the blah-blah-blahs it includes
12:20:49 "public facilities."
12:20:50 And I think that's how the Yankee stadium, the Bucs

12:20:55 stadium, and some of the others, the fairgrounds,
12:20:57 et cetera, maybe not fairgrounds, because that's
12:20:59 state.
12:21:00 I don't know if they are regulated anyway.
12:21:01 But, anyway, I think they get under this clause of
12:21:04 public facilities.
12:21:05 Therefore, they are exempt.
12:21:06 So we have exempted ourselves.
12:21:08 But then they put up these private messages on public
12:21:11 facility.
12:21:12 So my motion would be to ask staff to look at that
12:21:15 issue and see if, under public facilities, we can then
12:21:20 carve out and say, you know, not for use, for private
12:21:26 advertising.
12:21:27 Ms. Cole.
12:21:31 So we don't want a private advertising exception, even
12:21:35 if it's on a public facility.
12:21:37 You are going to have to work with that a little bit.
12:21:40 And I can't tell you the language that you are going
12:21:42 to need obviously from up here.
12:21:45 But that's the intent of my motion.
12:21:47 If we can do that, I think it's wholly legitimate for

12:21:51 the Buccaneers stadium sign to say, you know, the next
12:21:55 Bucs game or something like that, or, for instance,
12:21:58 say turn here to get in here, or that sort of thing.
12:22:02 But I don't think it's appropriate to say buy
12:22:06 Budweiser, buy Miller, whatever.
12:22:09 So if we can limit it, that's the intent of my motion.
12:22:11 >> Second.
12:22:12 >> That's the motion and second.
12:22:14 (Motion carried)
12:22:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: One more thing.
12:22:19 And I knew what Mr. Dingfelder said about the 30 days
12:22:22 and I appreciate those comments.
12:22:23 However, what it is you put the banner up for 30 days,
12:22:25 on the 31st day you take it off and you put up
12:22:28 another type of banner and it's legit under our code.
12:22:31 Those are the problems.
12:22:33 There's a way of skirting everything if you really
12:22:34 want to skirt it.
12:22:35 That's what I'm saying.
12:22:36 And I appreciate everything you said.
12:22:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm just wondering, we are making all
12:22:42 these changes.

12:22:44 Do you want to add banners?
12:22:47 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I appreciate that.
12:22:48 I didn't know if I had to --
12:22:52 >>JULIA COLE: I need to clarify the issue with you the
12:22:54 banner.
12:22:54 We have two types of banner in the city as it stand
12:22:56 today's.
12:22:57 You have the banner on the property for like downtown
12:23:04 buildings, or a variety of other reasons that you
12:23:06 would put a banner on your private property.
12:23:08 As it stands today, there's a temporary nature to them
12:23:11 but it's not set out, there's no permit required.
12:23:14 It would be very difficult to monitor.
12:23:16 It's very difficult to enforce.
12:23:17 So that was a provision we are changing in here which
12:23:19 is to deal with banners on private property.
12:23:21 The other provision -- and I think this is a provision
12:23:24 that Mr. Miranda is speaking about -- are banners that
12:23:29 are allowed under the transportation code, chapter 22,
12:23:33 and specified rode ways, not for every roadway, it's
12:23:38 for specified roadways where you can have these
12:23:40 banners that meet a certain size in the right-of-way,

12:23:45 and those banners, and I think this is one of the
12:23:48 issues that I think Mr. Miranda is raising, is those
12:23:50 banners specifically allow a provision for certain
12:23:52 size sponsorship on them.
12:23:54 And that is within a separate section of the code.
12:23:59 I think it is fair analysis to say they are treated
12:24:02 differently than signs which are coming forward
12:24:03 through the regulation under your sign code.
12:24:06 So that is, I think, the issue and reviewing chapter
12:24:10 26.
12:24:10 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with that and I thank Mrs.
12:24:13 Mulhern for being so helpful, that that be included
12:24:16 also, because to me it only makes sense.
12:24:18 And it only makes sense further, because you and I and
12:24:21 the general public, guess, what we can't put a sign on
12:24:23 that post.
12:24:24 Even though it is public right-of-way.
12:24:26 It's been very muted in the past and I would just like
12:24:30 to bring it up to it open, that's all.
12:24:33 I agree and I would like to have that put in on first
12:24:36 go-around on first reading.
12:24:37 >> If that is council's intent to go forward and try

12:24:42 to amend chapter 22, you are going to have to let me
12:24:45 know -- and I was not here when the banner ordinance
12:24:51 was in place but I understand that is something that
12:24:53 was very hard fought, something that they want to be
12:24:57 very involved in, and I have a feeling that that is
12:24:59 going to take longer to review and look at than simply
12:25:04 coming back to you for these few little changes on
12:25:06 first reading.
12:25:07 It's council's decision if they want to hold this up
12:25:09 or not.
12:25:10 But that's my concern.
12:25:11 I think that's something we are not going to get back
12:25:13 to you in positive days on, it's something when I
12:25:15 bring it back it's probably going to garner a
12:25:16 tremendous amount of discussion and a tremendous
12:25:19 amount of interest.
12:25:20 >> I will bring it up separately then.
12:25:26 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other items?
12:25:28 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Request that council consider a
12:25:32 formal motion to continue this to October 19th at
12:25:35 9:30.
12:25:35 >> So --

12:25:38 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I'm sorry, October 18th.
12:25:41 October 18th at 9:30 a.m.
12:25:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion.
12:25:45 Mr. Caetano.
12:25:46 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Ms. Cole, as technology is
12:25:49 advancing every day, I don't know if you have noticed,
12:25:51 I know on Bruce B. Downs Boulevard, there is a truck
12:25:55 that runs up and down the road selling advertising,
12:25:59 and they change every three minutes.
12:26:01 I was behind one the other day.
12:26:03 Or maybe five minutes.
12:26:05 And that thing just rolls.
12:26:07 It's a big -- have you seen them?
12:26:10 >>> I know what you are talking about.
12:26:11 Those are very interesting phenomenas.
12:26:20 We do have a certain level of prohibition about ad
12:26:25 mobiles, that there is a provision.
12:26:27 If you will notice that those are not just like a
12:26:31 billboard on wheels but they seem to have a certain
12:26:35 amount of cargo space to them.
12:26:37 Once you add cargo space it creates an entire
12:26:39 different category of signage, in a vehicle, and this

12:26:44 is why sign codes take three years to get to you,
12:26:47 because that has interstate commerce issues, you are
12:26:52 talking about trucking, that relates to how we
12:26:54 regulate other types of signage on, the signage for
12:26:58 contractors, so that's an issue that again, if that's
12:27:02 something you want us to look at, I would really
12:27:04 recommend that we look at that separately, move
12:27:06 forward with the code as it is, and we can review
12:27:08 that.
12:27:09 But that is something that is going to take some time
12:27:12 and research and is a very complicated I shall to you
12:27:14 get into.
12:27:16 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion on the floor.
12:27:18 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
12:27:19 Opposed, Nay.
12:27:21 Mr. Miranda.
12:27:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: If I may ask the legal department
12:27:24 to review chapter 22 and bring some recommendation to
12:27:26 the council, in the next 15 years.
12:27:31 [ Laughter ]
12:27:35 Six months.
12:27:38 >>> Then I can say this entire process will be

12:27:40 completed by the time my daughter goes to college.
12:27:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would just like to speak to Mr.
12:27:46 Miranda's motion.
12:27:47 I was around when we did this before.
12:27:49 The Westshore alliance, the downtown people, love
12:27:52 these art banners which are in the quarters of our
12:27:56 offices right now.
12:27:57 It isn't about advertising, it's about bringing beauty
12:27:59 to the streets.
12:28:00 And that is a long complicated conversation.
12:28:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Council members, it's 12:30.
12:28:14 What's your motion?
12:28:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Six months.
12:28:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Changed to the six months.
12:28:18 All in favor?
12:28:21 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
12:28:22 Opposed, Nay.
12:28:23 (Motion carried)
12:28:24 It's 12:28.
12:28:27 What time to be back?
12:28:29 >> 2:00.
12:28:30 >> 1:30.

12:28:31 >>GWEN MILLER: All right.
12:28:32 We have a motion to be back at 1:30.
12:28:34 We are in recess till 1:30.

Tampa City Council
Thursday, September 20, 2007
1:30 p.m.

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

13:38:17 [Sounding gavel]
13:38:23 Tampa City Council is called to back to order.
13:38:25 Roll call.
13:38:25 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Here.
13:38:29 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
13:38:30 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
13:38:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
13:38:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, maybe ask those people who
13:38:38 haven't been previously sworn if they would like to at
13:38:40 this time, if there's anybody who intends to testify
13:38:42 to any of the hearings.

13:38:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Is anybody going to speak?
13:38:45 Please stand and raise your right hand.
13:38:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you haven't already been sworn.
13:38:52 (Oath administered by Clerk).
13:38:56 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Again when you state your name,
13:38:58 please reaffirm that you have been sworn.
13:39:00 I will put a little placard to remind you.
13:39:03 Thank you very much for your cooperation.
13:39:04 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to oh open them again since we
13:39:06 have gone so long.
13:39:07 >> So moved to open the public hearing.
13:39:09 >> Second.
13:39:10 (Motion carried).
13:39:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
13:39:13 wants to speak on item 108?
13:39:15 Anyone want to speak on item 108?
13:39:17 >> Move to close.
13:39:23 >> So moved.
13:39:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you read, please?
13:39:27 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move an ordinance for adoption upon
13:39:30 second reading, an ordinance vacating closing
13:39:32 continuing abandoning all that portion of right-of-way

13:39:34 lying south of east Chelsea street north of east R,
13:39:39 west of north 14th street and east of north
13:39:42 13th street in south Nebraska Heights, subdivision
13:39:46 in the City of Tampa, Hillsborough County Florida the
13:39:48 same being more fully described in section 2 hereof
13:39:50 reserving certain easements and conditions, providing
13:39:52 an effective date.
13:39:54 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:39:56 Vote and record.
13:40:08 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder, Miranda
13:40:10 and Scott being absent.
13:40:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We need to hold item number 109.
13:40:13 We don't have a quorum for that one.
13:40:16 We go to item 110.
13:40:19 We have one coming in.
13:40:20 Item 109.
13:40:21 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
13:40:23 item 109?
13:40:31 Reverend Scott?
13:40:32 We need to close.
13:40:44 >> Moved.
13:40:45 >> Second.

13:40:45 (Motion carried).
13:40:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Would you read that, please?
13:40:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would like to move an ordinance
13:40:59 presented for second reading, an ordinance making
13:41:01 lawful the sale of beverages by more than 1% by weight
13:41:04 not more than 147% by weight and wine alcoholic
13:41:07 content beer and wine 2(COP-X) for consumption on the
13:41:10 premises only at or from that certain lot, plot or
13:41:14 tract of land located at 4020 West Kennedy Boulevard,
13:41:19 unit 104, Tampa, Florida, as more particularly
13:41:22 described in section 2 hereof waiving certain
13:41:25 restrictions as to distance based upon certain
13:41:27 findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances, in
13:41:30 conflict, providing an effective date.
13:41:32 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and --
13:41:34 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Motion to adopt?
13:41:35 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
13:41:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Vote and record.
13:41:39 (Motion carried).
13:41:58 >> Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak
13:42:00 on item 110?
13:42:03 >> Move to close.

13:42:03 >> Second.
13:42:04 (Motion carried).
13:42:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I pose.
13:42:10 I am going vote no.
13:42:11 Reason being, this is waiving the distance to a
13:42:16 school, the school is opposed to that, and so I can't
13:42:20 support it.
13:42:24 I think there was another school in the area.
13:42:27 But I will not support it.
13:42:35 >>MARY MULHERN: Since I wasn't here for the first
13:42:38 reading, that's all I heard so I don't think I can
13:42:40 support it either.
13:42:47 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if you wish to have the
13:42:49 petitioner address any concerns, if that's' council's
13:42:55 desire, it would require questions of fact and you
13:43:02 would have to reopen the hearing.
13:43:05 >> Move to reopen the public hearing.
13:43:10 (Motion carried).
13:43:10 >>STEVE MICHELINI: I have been sworn.
13:43:14 This is a family-run grocery store.
13:43:17 It's very small in nature.
13:43:18 And there are time limits on its operation.

13:43:22 They close at 8 p.m.
13:43:23 It's a husband and wife operation with one other
13:43:26 person who assists them to give them the break.
13:43:29 We work very closely with TPD on the regulations and
13:43:32 on the safety concerns regarding this.
13:43:36 In order for this to be accessible by anyone else,
13:43:41 it's by street, and you would have to walk at least a
13:43:44 half a block around -- both the husband and wife have
13:43:48 been educated and trained in the protection of the
13:43:51 consumer issues regarding consumption of alcohol.
13:43:54 The grocery store has been there for several years.
13:43:58 And they are simply asking for the ability to sell
13:44:00 beer and wine.
13:44:03 And as I said, it has to close, not only the grocery
13:44:07 store, but they can't do any operations after 8 p.m
13:44:11 And I'm respectfully requesting your approval there.
13:44:13 Were no objection it is first time it came to you.
13:44:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions?
13:44:18 Any questions by council members?
13:44:19 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Move to close.
13:44:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
13:44:24 (Motion carried).

13:44:26 Mr. Miranda, would you read 110?
13:44:28 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, ma'am.
13:44:30 I move adoption of the following ordinance for second
13:44:32 reading, an ordinance making lawful the sale of
13:44:34 beverage containing alcohol by more than 1% by weight
13:44:37 not more than 14% by weight and wines regardless of
13:44:40 alcoholic content, beer and wine, 2(APS), in sealed
13:44:43 containers for consumption off premises only at or
13:44:47 from that certain lot, plot or tract of land located
13:44:51 at 951 East 7th Avenue, suite D, Tampa, Florida, as
13:44:55 more particularly described in section 2 hereof,
13:44:57 waiving certain restrictions as to distance based upon
13:45:00 certain findings, imposing certain conditions,
13:45:03 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
13:45:06 providing an effective date.
13:45:08 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
13:45:09 Question on the motion, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
13:45:10 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: To give you some more of the
13:45:13 testimony from the previous hearing, Ms. Mulhern, I
13:45:15 asked John Dingfelder about this because he used to
13:45:18 teach at one of the schools that was right around here
13:45:21 and he said that this business is oriented towards

13:45:25 7th Avenue and the school is oriented in a
13:45:27 different direction and he felt that the specific
13:45:33 difference in orientation protected the children and
13:45:35 based on his testimony as a teacher there supported
13:45:39 it.
13:45:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
13:45:41 I have to ask this question and I think Mr. Michelini
13:45:44 will know the answer.
13:45:45 It brings autopsy question I have in my neighborhood.
13:45:53 >>GWEN MILLER: You are can't ask him a question.
13:45:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, can I ask council?
13:45:56 Wilson middle school is on Swann, and my daughter went
13:46:00 there.
13:46:00 And there is a store a few feet, right next door to
13:46:07 the school.
13:46:11 How did that happen?
13:46:12 >> I was going to ask --
13:46:18 >> That may be true, council, but that is not relevant
13:46:22 to the facts you have before you.
13:46:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Just asking a question not relevant
13:46:27 to that.
13:46:30 Here is how it's relevant.

13:46:32 It has to do with the -- there obviously must have
13:46:38 been a waiver here.
13:46:43 -- talking about.
13:46:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chairman.
13:47:21 The issue though, is you have to have -- you have to
13:47:25 waive your rules to accommodate this application.
13:47:27 And the issue is, is it within a thousand feet, the
13:47:32 current requirement?
13:47:33 Okay.
13:47:34 I don't care if you say north, south, east or west.
13:47:37 Your rules said it cannot be a thousand.
13:47:40 Not only that you but also have other convenience
13:47:42 stores already located in the area.
13:47:44 And this is the area, right?
13:47:50 The part you are trying to clean up.
13:47:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If it's relevant as to how one is
13:47:59 possible under the code versus another, I suspect that
13:48:03 could be relevant. If you wish to ask staff that
13:48:05 question, or if Mr. Michelini has the answer to that
13:48:09 question, if you want to reopen the hearing to do
13:48:11 that.
13:48:11 >> REBECCA KERT: I actually don't have the answer to

13:48:13 that, that's a factual question. It could have
13:48:17 occurred under a previous code, or it's my
13:48:20 understanding that it's not an incidental use.
13:48:23 It's not an incidental use.
13:48:26 The one before you is in fact an incidental sale of
13:48:29 alcoholic beverages, is incidental to the primary use,
13:48:32 which is a grocery store, and that's why they are able
13:48:35 to ask for a waiver to be within a thousand feet.
13:48:37 >>MARY MULHERN: So if all you are doing is selling
13:48:40 liquor it's okay to be next to a school?
13:48:43 >>REBECCA KERT: Not under your current code.
13:48:44 Not under your current code.
13:48:45 So I'm under the assumption that --
13:48:50 >>MARY MULHERN: Do you remember it, Linda, Charlie?
13:48:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That was even before my time.
13:48:56 >> I'm ready.
13:48:56 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:48:59 Vote and record.
13:49:12 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Dingfelder being
13:49:14 absent and Saul-Sena and Scott voting no.
13:49:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone in the public like to
13:49:26 speak on item 111?

13:49:28 >> I would like the clerk to look at the record.
13:49:30 I remember voting no -- I mean yes on this.
13:49:33 I said I voted no, but I remember we had discussion on
13:49:37 this.
13:49:38 And this is a tie.
13:49:47 It was 3-3 and I voted yes.
13:49:49 I would like to not move ahead on this until the clerk
13:49:52 reads that record.
13:50:04 This is not correct.
13:50:05 (Sounding gavel)
13:50:05 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item 112. Anyone in the
13:50:06 public that would like to speak on 112.
13:50:08 We'll come back to it.
13:50:10 Can I get a motion to close, please?
13:50:12 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close 112.
13:50:14 >> Second.
13:50:15 (Motion carried).
13:50:16 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 112.
13:50:23 Have you got it? Ms. Mulhern, would you read this,
13:50:26 please?
13:50:27 >>MARY MULHERN: This is another one that I don't --
13:50:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?

13:50:32 Go ahead, Mr. Dingfelder.
13:50:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll read it.
13:50:35 You can ask a question after I make the motion.
13:50:37 I move an ordinance for second reading, an ordinance
13:50:39 making lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol
13:50:43 more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight
13:50:45 and wines regardless of alcoholic content beer and
13:50:47 wine 2(APS) in sealed containers for consumption off
13:50:51 premises only at or from that certain lot, plot or
13:50:54 tract of land located at 406-428 west Waters Avenue
13:50:57 unit 412 Tampa, Florida as more particularly described
13:51:00 in section 2 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as
13:51:03 to distance based upon certain findings providing for
13:51:05 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
13:51:08 effective date.
13:51:08 >> Question on the motion.
13:51:10 Mrs. Mulhern?
13:51:11 >>MARY MULHERN: What was the waiver?
13:51:13 >>GWEN MILLER: You want to know what the waiver was?
13:51:25 Clerk, do you know what the waiver was?
13:51:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: This was a little strip center, one
13:51:35 unit out of the little strip center but I don't

13:51:37 remember what the waiver was.
13:52:01 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
13:52:03 I have been sworn.
13:52:04 For the location on 406-428 west Waters Avenue unit
13:52:12 412, they are looking for the residential waivers
13:52:15 only.
13:52:16 Residential waivers only.
13:52:17 >> This is out on Waters Avenue so the residential is
13:52:21 behind it?
13:52:25 That would make sense.
13:52:26 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you are going to take additional
13:52:28 testimony I would make two requests, number one, open
13:52:31 the public hearing and give the petitioner an
13:52:33 opportunity to respond before closing.
13:52:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was looking at the map 69 do we
13:52:41 have any other questions?
13:52:43 Does council have another question?
13:52:44 If do you let me know so we can answer open the
13:52:49 hearing.
13:52:51 >>MARY MULHERN: She answered my question.
13:52:52 >> We have a motion and second.
13:52:54 Vote and record.

13:52:54 Vote and record.
13:52:57 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Saul-Sena being
13:53:04 absent.
13:53:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
13:53:06 wants to speak on item 113?
13:53:14 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
13:53:15 I have been sworn.
13:53:18 On the item 113, which is WZ 07-114, I received and
13:53:27 petitioner is requesting a -- sorry.
13:53:31 Requesting the wet zone, only the west side of the
13:53:36 property.
13:53:36 When we initially showed the request was -- now they
13:53:39 are requesting only one story.
13:53:44 And I would like to correct the petition for the
13:53:48 record.
13:53:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Do we need to go back to first
13:53:52 reading?
13:53:53 >>> I have reviewed this.
13:53:54 And it's the same area except for second reading if
13:54:00 you substitute exhibit A.
13:54:02 It's the same except for less.
13:54:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's going to be with the

13:54:06 substitution of the exhibit?
13:54:09 >>CHAIRMAN: Would anyone else like to speak?
13:54:12 Want to speak?
13:54:14 You may speak if you like.
13:54:18 >>> Hi. Grace Yang, 201 North Franklin Street, Suite
13:54:23 2200, Tampa, Florida.
13:54:24 I'm the attorney, authorized agent for the petitioner.
13:54:28 I just wanted to let council know, this did come
13:54:30 before you on first reading on August 30th.
13:54:33 It was for 4(COP-R) request for all three stories, and
13:54:37 subsequent to the August 30th first hearing, my
13:54:41 client has decided to change his business model.
13:54:44 They only want to take over the first story, not the
13:54:46 second and third.
13:54:47 And that is why we did ask to reduce the square
13:54:50 footage.
13:54:52 Only be wet zoned for the first floor.
13:54:54 We appreciate your consideration.
13:54:55 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
13:54:57 >> Move to close.
13:54:58 >> Second.
13:54:59 (Motion carried).

13:54:59 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have a question for the clerk.
13:55:05 It's the same ordinance as first reading.
13:55:07 Do you have that in your possession?
13:55:09 A substitute legal description?
13:55:15 Does it need to be --
13:55:27 >>THE CLERK: (off microphone).
13:55:29 >> The reading of the ordinance doesn't talk about
13:55:31 first floor, second floor or third floor.
13:55:33 It just describes the address so I think we are okay
13:55:36 if we just read it.
13:55:38 Do you think?
13:55:39 >>> Yes.
13:55:40 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I want to make sure because what ends
13:55:42 up in the official record becomes the exhibit.
13:55:46 >>> The address is the same.
13:55:48 The only thing that would change would be --
13:55:54 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move the following ordinance for
13:55:55 second reading with the substitute exhibit and survey,
13:55:58 an ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages
13:56:00 containing alcohol regardless of alcoholic content
13:56:03 beer, wine and liquor 4(COP-R) for consumption on the
13:56:05 premises only in connection with a restaurant business

13:56:07 establishment at or from that certain lot, plot or
13:56:09 tract of land locate at 300 east Madison street, 500
13:56:13 and 5015 North Franklin Street, Tampa, Florida as more
13:56:16 particularly described in section 2 hereof waiving
13:56:18 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
13:56:20 findings, providing for repeal of ordinances in
13:56:23 conflict, providing an effective date.
13:56:24 And that specifically is limited to the first floor
13:56:26 only.
13:56:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
13:56:29 Vote and record.
13:56:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Somebody didn't vote.
13:56:45 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried unanimously.
13:56:46 >>GWEN MILLER: We have 111 back?
13:56:52 >>> According to the file this petition has originally
13:57:02 been placed on first August 30th.
13:57:04 At that time, it was a 3-3 vote, came back on
13:57:07 September 6th.
13:57:11 On September 6th, it was placed on first reading
13:57:14 according to what we have marked on the cover sheet.
13:57:19 It was Miller and Scott voting no.
13:57:21 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I thought that was correct.

13:57:25 Always.
13:57:27 [ Laughter ]
13:57:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So 111 --
13:57:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public want to speak on
13:57:33 item 111?
13:57:34 >> Move to close.
13:57:36 >> Second.
13:57:36 (Motion carried)
13:57:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern, would you read that,
13:57:40 please?
13:57:41 >>MARY MULHERN: I move to adopt upon second reading an
13:57:43 ordinance being presented for second reading, an
13:57:46 ordinance making lawful the sale of beverages
13:57:48 containing alcohol regardless of alcoholic content,
13:57:51 beer, wine and liquor, 4(COP), for consumption on the
13:57:54 premises and in sealed containers for consumption off
13:57:59 the premises in connection with the lounge/nightclub
13:58:02 business establishment on that certain lot, plot or
13:58:04 tract of land located at 50718 east Adamo drive,
13:58:08 Tampa, Florida, as more particularly described in
13:58:10 section 2 hereof, providing an effective date.
13:58:13 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.

13:58:15 Vote and record.
13:58:20 >>THE CLERK: Motion carried with Miller and Scott
13:58:22 voting no.
13:58:24 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 114.
13:58:27 We need to open the public hearing.
13:58:28 >> So moved.
13:58:29 >> Second.
13:58:38 >>> Ron Beeler, staff preservation, here to speak on
13:58:43 114 and 115 and 116.
13:58:46 >> Move to open.
13:58:47 >> Second.
13:58:47 (Motion carried).
13:58:48 >> You see the front elevation of the first ad valorem
13:58:52 I am going to present today, the structure is located
13:58:54 at 813 Packwood and is currently owned by Michael and
13:58:58 Deb Eisenfeld.
13:59:02 Brief history on the structure, it was erected in
13:59:06 191717 as a two-story structure, a low-pitch gable
13:59:13 roof, wide overhang, and a wrap-around porch.
13:59:16 The primary structure is recollection language lar --
13:59:21 recollection language lar in shape.
13:59:24 Structure was made popular in southern California

13:59:25 between 1905 and 1930.
13:59:28 The first owners were Benjamin and Mary Williams.
13:59:31 Benjamin was the treasurer and manager of Williams and
13:59:33 company, wholesale grocery, locate at 119 Whiting
13:59:36 Street.
13:59:40 This is an aerial --
13:59:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order and a question.
13:59:47 And I don't mean to be rude with staff but we have a
13:59:49 long agenda and lots of people in the audience.
13:59:51 All of this is in the record.
13:59:53 We have been provided with?
13:59:55 >>> That's correct.
13:59:56 On all three of them.
13:59:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If we could ask questions.
14:00:00 But otherwise we'll just incorporate the record and
14:00:03 move on?
14:00:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree.
14:00:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Anybody want to speak on 114, 115 or
14:00:11 116?
14:00:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
14:00:15 >> Second.
14:00:16 (Motion carried).

14:00:17 >>THE CLERK: I do not very much any ordinance on 114,
14:00:24 115 or 116.
14:00:25 >>GWEN MILLER: Somebody want to make a motion?
14:00:29 Do you have them?
14:00:31 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, it's my understanding -- I'll
14:00:33 find out what happened if you want to move on.
14:00:37 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to hold 114, 115 and 116.
14:00:40 >> Second.
14:00:40 (Motion carried).
14:00:41 >>>
14:00:44 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I apologize to staff.
14:00:45 Full day.
14:00:46 Next time.
14:00:46 >> We need to open 117.
14:00:48 >> So moved.
14:00:49 >> Second.
14:00:49 (Motion carried)
14:01:26 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:01:27 I have been sworn.
14:01:28 Case WZ 07-110 for the location at 428 west Waters
14:01:35 Avenue.
14:01:37 >> What item number?

14:01:39 >>GWEN MILLER: 117.
14:01:40 >> The same address as the one we did?
14:01:44 >> This one is for 428.
14:01:52 The petitioner is requesting a 2(COP-R), the sale of
14:01:56 beer and wine, in conjunction with the restaurant,
14:02:00 which will be located in the strip center.
14:02:02 Wet zoning will be about 1700 square feet.
14:02:07 The establishment -- the sale of alcohol will be in
14:02:14 conjunction with the business.
14:02:16 In my report I stated there was no wet zoning, a
14:02:22 minute ago we had the other one which was the 2(APS)
14:02:24 and the distance separation between the two wet
14:02:28 zonings would be approximately 260 feet.
14:02:31 And also there are residential uses which are south of
14:02:36 the property, and based on that the applicant is
14:02:43 requesting a distance waiver.
14:02:47 The land development has no objection to this request.
14:02:57 The new establishment which is 428, this is the one
14:03:00 which is on the west side.
14:03:01 The other establishment was from the right side, on
14:03:04 the east side to the end of the location.
14:03:09 I don't know if it will be helpful.

14:03:15 This is 110.
14:03:17 On the left side, the west side, this is the one which
14:03:22 was approved, about 250 feet in between them.
14:03:26 The elevation of the establishment, I'm not sure, when
14:03:37 I went to the location it was closed.
14:03:39 A business across the street -- across the street is a
14:03:46 business, a commercial usage and residential use.
14:03:53 Land development has no objection.
14:03:55 Application has been sent to TPD for their review.
14:04:04 >>> Don Miller, officer of -- City of Tampa police
14:04:09 department.
14:04:09 We have no objection to the petition.
14:04:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
14:04:16 >>> Good afternoon.
14:04:18 I have been sworn in.
14:04:19 I am here with the owner.
14:04:25 The reason we selected this location is we tried to
14:04:27 move away from the Armenia location.
14:04:32 To serve the community in that area.
14:04:33 So to serve sandwiches in that location.
14:04:45 So the owner will be very glad to participation.
14:04:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that

14:04:50 wants to speak on item 117?
14:04:52 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
14:04:53 >> Second.
14:04:54 (Motion carried).
14:04:54 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to make sure I got this
14:05:00 straight.
14:05:00 We just approved a package store, right?
14:05:06 And then this is for a restaurant within 200 feet.
14:05:10 There was a waiver on the last one.
14:05:12 I'm just trying to refresh my memory.
14:05:14 That was for residential behind?
14:05:19 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Yes.
14:05:24 Right lind on the south side.
14:05:29 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance making lawful the
14:05:31 sale of alcohol of alcohol not more than 14 by weight
14:05:35 and wines regardless of alcoholic content beer and
14:05:38 wine 2(COP-R) for consumption off premises only in
14:05:41 connection -- on the premises only with a certain lot,
14:05:44 plot or tract of land located at 428 west Waters
14:05:47 Avenue, Tampa, Florida, more specifically described in
14:05:50 section 2 therefore waiving certain restrictions as to
14:05:53 the distance based upon certain findings, imposing

14:05:56 certain conditions, providing for repeal of all
14:05:58 ordinances in conflict, providing an effective date.
14:06:00 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
14:06:02 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
14:06:03 Opposed, Nay.
14:06:04 (Motion carried)
14:06:05 Need to open 118.
14:06:06 >> So moved.
14:06:07 >> Second.
14:06:08 (Motion carried).
14:06:08 >>REBECCA KERT: Could I make a request that City
14:06:12 Council continue items 114, 115 and 116 to next week
14:06:17 with direction --
14:06:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move items 114, 115 and 116 to
14:06:23 next Thursday.
14:06:23 >>REBECCA KERT: Thank you.
14:06:24 (Motion carried).
14:06:25 >>MARTIN SHELBY: 10 a.m.?
14:06:29 >> 10 a.m.
14:06:33 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Were they closed?
14:06:34 So they will remain closed under unfinished business
14:06:38 with the ordinance.

14:06:40 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:06:42 I have been sworn.
14:06:44 WZ 07-118, I received -- there are no changes in the
14:06:56 wet zoning request.
14:06:58 Just some additional information on it.
14:07:28 On the current WZ 07-118 for the location of 1103 east
14:07:34 Cumberland Avenue, petitioner is requesting for COP-X
14:07:40 which is to sell alcohol in conjunction with the
14:07:44 health club.
14:07:46 The request is 23,000 square feet.
14:07:51 It is divided into three levels.
14:07:53 On the first level -- on the first level, the request
14:08:06 is for 969 square feet.
14:08:13 The second level, which contains approximately 10,025
14:08:18 square feet in the wet zone area.
14:08:20 And the level number 3, over 12,000 square feet of the
14:08:26 wet zone area.
14:08:29 A few years ago this location was actually cop-X and
14:08:39 it is in conjunction with the retail.
14:08:43 When I went to the location at this time, this
14:08:46 property is under construction.
14:08:48 I have some pictures.

14:08:53 The front of the building which will be the wet zone,
14:09:04 which they are requesting the wet zone street level.
14:09:09 Site of the building behind that is towers of
14:09:12 Channelside.
14:09:16 At this location, they don't have the sign.
14:09:22 Across the street of the building as you can see, some
14:09:26 kind of storage.
14:09:27 In the back of the building is the Chamber of
14:09:31 Commerce.
14:09:32 In the back also is a commercial usage.
14:09:37 And also a parking.
14:09:40 Because the location of the Channel District, they are
14:09:46 allowed to have the sell of alcohol, primary function
14:09:51 of the business, and allows the council to waive the
14:09:56 distance separation to other wet zoned properties
14:09:59 which are in the 1,000 walking distance, as well as
14:10:02 residential usage, and the institutional usage.
14:10:07 Land development has no objection to the request.
14:10:10 The application has been sent in to the Tampa Police
14:10:12 Department for their review.
14:10:14 Thank you.
14:10:16 >>> Officer Dan Miller, City of Tampa police

14:10:23 department.
14:10:24 The police department has no objection.
14:10:28 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: My question would be, 12,000 square
14:10:30 feet, if it were not attached to a residential use, if
14:10:32 this were a free standing restaurant, or let's just
14:10:36 say restaurant, I would assume that, you know, you
14:10:39 have to provide parking and that sort of thing.
14:10:41 And what I guess I need reassurance from maybe not you
14:10:45 but the petitioner, this is a very significant area to
14:10:48 be wet zoned, and I'm wondering what part of the
14:10:52 client mix is going to be internal from the building
14:10:54 and what from walking in the distance, and do they
14:10:59 have enough parking so that the surrounding
14:11:01 neighborhood isn't going to be negatively impacted by
14:11:03 the clients, by the customers to the wet zoned areas.
14:11:08 Also, it's unusual, in my experience, that it's zoned
14:11:17 for hard liquor.
14:11:18 I think petitioner can answer that.
14:11:23 It's not that it wouldn't make working out easier.
14:11:27 >> Ruden McClosky.
14:11:33 The engineer for the towers of Channelside.
14:11:36 It is intended to serve primarily the people who live

14:11:38 in the towers and will be using the health club.
14:11:41 The idea is, it sounds like a lot of square footage
14:11:45 but spread over 3 levels and intended mainly to serve
14:11:48 again the people there.
14:11:50 It would conceivably be open to other people but the
14:11:53 parking is going to be captured internally and through
14:11:55 the parking with the towers, and Mr. Gillard can show
14:12:00 you the site plan, go through the parking but we
14:12:02 calculated that and should be able to meet the parking
14:12:05 requirements.
14:12:08 >> So there is 9,000, 12,000 -- the 10 and 12,000 are
14:12:15 restaurants, or night clubs, something that suggests
14:12:17 to the folks who live there?
14:12:19 >> It's intended to be again mostly for the people who
14:12:22 live there and will be actually using the health club
14:12:24 and recreational areas.
14:12:26 Currently the pool area has been wet zoned because
14:12:32 2005 and a few other areas on the ground floor and the
14:12:34 concept to be converted for the health club into an
14:12:37 area where people can also have alcoholic beverages.
14:12:43 9 put your name on the record.
14:12:45 >>> Scott giller, horn and associates, 1007 princess

14:12:52 palm Boulevard, Tampa, Florida.
14:12:53 Basically, when the project was rezoned originally,
14:12:56 the whole towers, this was a membership gem and they
14:13:02 had allocated spaces at this time so this is still
14:13:05 membership, they are just wet zoning it now so they
14:13:08 can serve alcohol.
14:13:10 >>MARY MULHERN: Is it going to be just Lite beer?
14:13:15 [ Laughter ]
14:13:15 >>> I think it's vodka and protein shakes.
14:13:22 [ Laughter ]
14:13:22 >> Are you going to put a stripe on the treadmills?
14:13:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
14:13:31 wants to speak on item 118?
14:13:34 Anyone want to speak on 118?
14:13:35 >> Move to close.
14:13:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Got a question.
14:13:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I couldn't tell from the site plan
14:13:39 if any of the area is outdoors or if it's all indoors.
14:13:42 >> There is approval for some outdoor seating as well.
14:13:46 >>> On the ground floor?
14:13:47 >> I believe it's on the second floor.
14:13:52 >> So there are going to be no sidewalk cafes?

14:13:55 >>> Not for this, no.
14:13:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close.
14:13:59 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
14:14:01 Opposed, Nay.
14:14:04 Mr. Caetano.
14:14:09 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) content beer,
14:14:19 wine and liquor 4(COP-X) for consumption on premises
14:14:22 only at or from that certain lot, plot, or tract of
14:14:25 land located at 1103 east Cumberland Avenue, Tampa,
14:14:30 Florida, as more particularly described in section 2
14:14:34 hereof, waiving certain restrictions as to the
14:14:36 distance based upon certain findings, providing for
14:14:40 repeal of all ordinances in conflict, providing an
14:14:43 effective date.
14:14:45 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
14:14:46 Question on the motion, Mrs. Saul-Sena.
14:14:48 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I am going to be voting against
14:14:50 this.
14:14:50 I know it's a symbolic gesture but I want to explain
14:14:53 why.
14:14:53 I feel like this development, the towers of
14:14:56 Channelside, are completely hostile to the entire

14:14:59 neighborhood.
14:14:59 There's nothing oriented for people walking up on the
14:15:02 street.
14:15:03 Everything is -- you're driving in your car and go up
14:15:06 in the towers, there's no street activity, there's no
14:15:09 cafe, everything is geared toward something that could
14:15:12 be in the middle of nowhere.
14:15:14 But it happens to be in a lively urban neighborhood,
14:15:17 and I feel that what they have done in terms of
14:15:20 designing the building to not have a relationship with
14:15:23 the surrounding uses of the people on the street, is
14:15:26 not the kind of good urban planning we want.
14:15:28 So that's why I am not going to be supporting this.
14:15:30 I feel very strongly that in the Channel District, in
14:15:33 downtown in particular, you should have outdoor spaces
14:15:38 that relate to your neighbors.
14:15:39 And I don't think this is a good neighbor.
14:15:41 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
14:15:42 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Linda, I agree with you 100%
14:15:47 conceptually but the problem is this a is a wet zoning
14:15:50 related to I think just the second floor.
14:15:52 So it's not realistic to address the street level

14:15:57 stuff going on.
14:15:59 Council messed this up in the original, and I think I
14:16:02 might have voted against it for that reason, too, but
14:16:04 we messed up on the front end in terms of the zoning.
14:16:07 But this is wet zoning related to the second floor so
14:16:09 I don't think we can hold it against them.
14:16:14 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Instead of street level, on the
14:16:17 ground floor, the second floor and the third floor.
14:16:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Oh, all three floors?
14:16:23 Hmmm.
14:16:24 Interesting.
14:16:24 I apologize.
14:16:25 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
14:16:27 All in favor of the motion say Aye.
14:16:28 Opposed, Nay.
14:16:33 >>THE CLERK: Saul-Sena and Dingfelder voting no.
14:16:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Need to open 119.
14:16:37 >> Second.
14:16:38 >> So moved.
14:16:41 (Motion carried).
14:16:41 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
14:16:45 I have been sworn.

14:16:48 And the item WZ 07-119, will not change the usage of
14:16:58 the request.
14:16:59 I would like to submit the record.
14:17:11 On WZ 07-119, petitioner is requesting a 4(COP-X) sale
14:17:34 of beer and wine and alcoholic beverages in
14:17:37 conjunction with and the wet zoned area will have
14:17:44 approximately 8,000 square feet.
14:17:45 The wet zoning will be located on the first ground
14:17:48 floor of the west portion, will be located outside the
14:17:56 mall on the street level.
14:17:57 The establishment will have approximately 220 seats
14:18:02 and 199 of them will be located inside.
14:18:05 The sale of alcohol will not be incidental to this
14:18:08 primary function of the business.
14:18:11 The petitioner is requesting the waivers to the
14:18:19 distance separation, due to the other wet zones
14:18:22 locations in the area.
14:18:24 There are no residential or institutional in the area.
14:18:28 Land development has no objection to the request.
14:18:31 Just to let you know, this is her boundary which is
14:18:38 marked in the yellow. I was on the first level.
14:18:43 I received a phone call a few days ago, yesterday,

14:18:43 from Ms. Sandra Burkhart, she is located at 3816 West
14:19:01 Sevilla. Based on her request, she does oppose this
14:19:06 request.
14:19:10 The application has been sent in to the Tampa Police
14:19:14 Department for their review.
14:19:16 Thank you.
14:19:18 >>> Officer Miller, City of Tampa police department.
14:19:21 Police department has no objections to this wet zone.
14:19:24 There are some concerns from the Beach Park homeowners
14:19:26 association, which I think are here present today to
14:19:30 voice their concerns on this project.
14:19:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
14:19:37 >>> Grace Yang, 211 North Franklin Street, suite the
14:19:49 attorney for the petitioner and I have been sworn.
14:19:51 I believe all the council members received my letter
14:19:53 dated September 13th along with supporting
14:19:55 documents.
14:19:56 The supporting documents included a sample menu,
14:20:00 included information about the company, and included
14:20:04 some summaries of the awards and positive press this
14:20:12 company has received.
14:20:13 I am going to just highlight portions of that letter.

14:20:15 This is for a proposed British-style pub and grill
14:20:21 going into the Westshore mall.
14:20:23 I have another site plan.
14:20:24 Which I will show for you all.
14:20:35 The proposed pub will be located in this area on the
14:20:37 street level in between a Saks Fifth Avenue and J.C.
14:20:42 Penney's, the pub is oriented toward memorial highway,
14:20:46 to the west, and Kennedy Boulevard to the south.
14:20:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can I ask a question real quick
14:20:58 while she has the map up?
14:21:00 Grace, what other wet zonings?
14:21:02 I'm familiar with a couple of restaurants.
14:21:03 What other wet zonings are within the mall?
14:21:07 >>> There are four existing wet zonings in the mall.
14:21:10 I believe they are all zoned 4(COP-R) and those are
14:21:12 the Palm Restaurant, the Maggiano's, the Fish Market,
14:21:17 and the -- Palms, Maggianos, Chang, and --
14:21:23 >> All four of them right there together?
14:21:26 >>> All four together, but they are in a different
14:21:28 area of the mall.
14:21:30 They are more around this area.
14:21:32 >> I just want to make sure there weren't any others.

14:21:36 >>> The proposed pub is going to be actually away from
14:21:38 that area.
14:21:40 It's isolate on the opposite side of the mall.
14:21:47 The petitioner is a subsidiary of a company called
14:21:52 hospitality USA, ink, based in Houston, Texas.
14:21:56 And the leaders have over 120 years combined
14:22:02 experience in the industry, operating these kinds of
14:22:04 pubs and grills.
14:22:05 And the co-founder is Carlson and Larry Martin.
14:22:13 Have traveled from Houston to be here today.
14:22:18 Tampa has been selected as their 20th, proposed
14:22:22 20th store.
14:22:23 Their first venture in Florida.
14:22:25 But they have had some recent openings, and they have
14:22:28 19 other similar kinds of bars and grills.
14:22:31 This will be a non-smoking facility.
14:22:36 There is not going to be any smoking inside.
14:22:38 And at this point in the presentation, I would like to
14:22:41 invite and introduce Edward Carlson from the company.
14:22:45 He's going to add some comments.
14:22:46 And then I'll follow with some additional information.
14:22:53 >> Good afternoon, council members.

14:23:00 My name is victor Carlson.
14:23:02 I'm one of the co-owners of the baker street pub that
14:23:05 we are proposing to put in the Westshore plaza.
14:23:07 We operate as grace said 19 pubs all throughout the
14:23:10 United States, in major metropolitan areas.
14:23:14 We have over 1600 employees in our system.
14:23:17 And as grace said, we are very experienced in the pub
14:23:21 business.
14:23:25 Hospitality USA is one of the leading British pub
14:23:30 groups in the United States.
14:23:31 As a former resident in the Hyde Park area, it's been
14:23:35 one of my dreams to come back to Tampa to open up a
14:23:38 pub.
14:23:38 So I spent the last four or five years looking
14:23:41 throughout Tampa for an opportunity to open our pub.
14:23:45 I met with the people on the Westshore plaza mall, and
14:23:49 have been able to come to agreement to start the
14:23:52 process.
14:23:54 The baker street pub is -- the concept itself is over
14:23:59 30 years old.
14:24:00 My partner and he's in the back, bought it over 12
14:24:03 years ago, and we have expanded throughout the

14:24:05 country.
14:24:07 The 7,000 square foot pub as grace said is nonsmoking,
14:24:11 located on the opposite side of the other restaurants
14:24:14 that are there, in the mall, by Saks Fifth Avenue and
14:24:18 J.C. Penney's, open seven days a week, food service
14:24:22 till 2:30 a.m. in the morning.
14:24:23 We have achieve-driven menu, and also if you look
14:24:27 inside that menu, there's a little clear place that
14:24:31 they have some Florida specialty items, and specialty
14:24:34 menu, lunch specials.
14:24:36 The pub itself is a very highly decorated, traditional
14:24:41 British style pub with walk lock in paneling, booths
14:24:48 and seats for the people to gather for conversation,
14:24:53 and the business itself will probably employ over 80
14:24:57 employees.
14:24:58 Six of them will be full-time managers.
14:25:01 The project itself, we are spending about $1.4 million
14:25:04 on the buildout for this project.
14:25:06 And there's free WIFI and the demographics are
14:25:12 traditional business people 30 to 55 years old and we
14:25:19 would like any support from the council.
14:25:21 Thank you.

14:25:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I could ask you a question, sir?
14:25:25 And grace, you may have mentioned this already.
14:25:29 If you look at the menu, which is very lovely, it
14:25:32 appears that your principal thing is food until you
14:25:36 get to the last page which is, you know, beer and
14:25:38 wine, I guess.
14:25:39 >>> Yes, sir.
14:25:40 >> And maybe some liquor.
14:25:41 So the obvious question is, why aren't we going with a
14:25:45 4(COP-R) in terms of the restaurant use?
14:25:51 >>> I would be glad to answer that for you.
14:25:54 As I believe council is aware, in order to qualify for
14:25:57 a 4(COP-R) in a city, it requires that the R zoning
14:26:01 have at least 51% of gross revenue from food and
14:26:06 nonalcohol sales.
14:26:07 Traditional historical sales figures from the other
14:26:10 operating pub and grills in the other states, they
14:26:12 track more around 40 to 45% food.
14:26:16 So their other businesses are getting about 40 to 45%
14:26:21 revenue from food.
14:26:22 But that's not going to qualify them for the 4(COP-R)
14:26:26 in the semiannual reporting requirements that this

14:26:28 city imposes.
14:26:29 And that's why I have advised them and that's why he
14:26:33 pursued getting the 4(COP-X) instead.
14:26:36 There is a full menu as you see.
14:26:39 They raved about for their fish and chips and their
14:26:43 chicken Nuggets.
14:26:45 But there is a risk that they would not be able to
14:26:48 meet that 51% requirement, which is why we are going
14:26:51 for an X instead of the R.
14:26:58 >>MARY MULHERN: Actually, what John brought up, it's
14:27:00 interesting to me for our zoning people, because I
14:27:05 think most restaurants that sell alcohol, that's how
14:27:10 they make their money.
14:27:10 I don't think too many actually make -- I'm
14:27:13 questioning our zoning categories.
14:27:16 Because most restaurants, they are making their money
14:27:18 off the alcohol.
14:27:19 They are not going to be -- I'll ask the expert here.
14:27:27 So I might be wrong with about that.
14:27:30 But really my question is another suggestion, and I
14:27:33 guess a question for you.
14:27:35 We have all these e-mails from business people who are

14:27:39 very excited about this pub coming into their
14:27:42 neighborhood, and as we are trying to develop the
14:27:46 Westshore area, it would be nice if people looked at
14:27:49 actual like a corner pub.
14:27:52 You don't have to go to the mall to go to a pub.
14:27:55 Just a thought for the developers out there.
14:28:00 >> You know, they are talking about business people.
14:28:02 It would be nice if we had -- for there to grow more
14:28:06 of the neighborhood.
14:28:07 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: From the senior statesman, as I
14:28:13 look in the menu, what it is, they would have a
14:28:17 problem, because of their mean yea is geared towards
14:28:21 the middle to low cost of scale.
14:28:24 In other words, I don't see no 22.95 or 24.95 filet
14:28:30 mignons.
14:28:30 But on the menu, I don't see 25, $30 a person
14:28:35 somewhere else.
14:28:35 In other words, this is a very quick menu to operate
14:28:38 because everything is either afraid or brought in and
14:28:42 cooked right away, and in and out it goes.
14:28:44 So I understand the concept.
14:28:46 But what Ms. Mulhern said, the ratio is about 18 to

14:28:51 20% food cost or alcohol cost compared to if you
14:28:55 really have a 1-A restaurant you are in the 42% food
14:29:00 cost.
14:29:00 The problem is -- in this type of set-up, the menu
14:29:04 doesn't justify the means as far as the 51-49%.
14:29:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I was wondering about R zoning.
14:29:13 Because it seems like -- it would be hard to require
14:29:18 most restaurants to make that much off food, because
14:29:20 the revenue usually comes --
14:29:25 >>> and I would like to address those code
14:29:26 requirements a little more if I may continue.
14:29:29 Your code, section 3-70, B-1, gives you approval
14:29:34 guidelines for a 4(COP-X).
14:29:36 The first guideline being that if they are trying to
14:29:39 get a 4(COP-X) zoning the establishment should have at
14:29:42 least 50 feet.
14:29:44 My client meets that requirement.
14:29:46 The second guideline says for a 4(COP-X), the
14:29:49 establishment should have at least 1,000 square feet
14:29:52 of floor space.
14:29:53 My client meets that in this case.
14:29:56 You have some other guidelines in section 3-70.

14:29:59 3-70-A-1 says that the subject property has to have a
14:30:03 land use zoning that will permit the sale of alcohol.
14:30:06 This is at the Westshore mall.
14:30:08 It is zoned.
14:30:09 It's permitted.
14:30:10 So my client meets that requirement.
14:30:12 370-A-2 says that the subject property should not be
14:30:15 within 1,000 feet of various community uses such as
14:30:19 churches, schools, daycares, alcohol rehab centers,
14:30:24 government buildings.
14:30:25 My client meets that separation requirement.
14:30:29 370-A-4 says that the subject -- I'm sorry, A-3 says
14:30:34 that the subject cannot be within 1,000 feet of other
14:30:37 establishments selling alcohol unless those other
14:30:41 establishments ever selling alcohol as an incidental
14:30:44 use.
14:30:44 And that's the case here, and with the other
14:30:46 restaurants at the mall, they are incidental.
14:30:51 A-4 in the code says the subject property cannot be
14:30:53 within 1,000 feet of property zoned residential.
14:30:56 My client meets that separation requirement as well.
14:30:59 And, finally, section 3-70-A-6 gives further basis,

14:31:05 because the city is trying to encourage or allow these
14:31:08 uses in shopping centers.
14:31:10 And 370-A-6 says that if the subject property is
14:31:15 located in a shopping center with more than 75,000
14:31:19 leasable space then that's another consideration for
14:31:23 waiver or approval on this.
14:31:26 So that's the case here where I think my clients, they
14:31:28 have been trying to be very careful and deliberate
14:31:31 about where they place the pub and grill.
14:31:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'm just asking our legal
14:31:37 department or the young lady who does the alcohol
14:31:39 zoning requests --
14:31:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Kert.
14:31:45 >> When the other four restaurants were mentioned that
14:31:47 sell alcohol, I would imagine they can make it under
14:31:49 the R, because I don't think none of them are X's, are
14:31:53 they?
14:31:58 >>REBECCA KERT: R designations.
14:31:59 >> I thought that would be an R because of the menu
14:32:02 complexity and the wide variety of high-end dishes
14:32:06 that you can buy there before you would fall into the
14:32:08 category.

14:32:10 What's holding this place doubtful in my mind at least
14:32:13 is that the menu doesn't complement the alcohol.
14:32:18 Alcohol complements the menu.
14:32:19 And if you had a higher priced menu, you would have no
14:32:22 problem.
14:32:22 You would certainly meet the R.
14:32:23 But I see no items here that sell for over 8.95, 9.95.
14:32:28 I think you got a batter fish something for 11.95.
14:32:32 Yeah, 11.99, the London platter. But everything is
14:32:36 7.99, 6.99, and then you go into to me one of the
14:32:42 highest class malls in the area, and the menu, I
14:32:46 think, would warrant something much higher than that,
14:32:48 and you are only hurting yourselves by not giving that
14:32:51 restaurant a chance to sell higher-priced menus.
14:32:54 It's true that you have to hire a couple of cooks.
14:32:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
14:32:59 wants to speak on item 119?
14:33:04 If you are going to speak, please come up.
14:33:06 Come on and speak.
14:33:11 >>> I have been sworn.
14:33:13 My name is Emmy Purcell Reynoldson, president of the
14:33:16 Beach Park homeowners association.

14:33:18 I want to put into the record some letters that I
14:33:21 wrote to Ms. Yang.
14:33:26 I cut out some for confidentiality.
14:33:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Give to the Mr. Shelby.
14:33:31 Mr. Shelby?
14:33:34 Take that letter, please.
14:33:38 >>> We have been talking for probably about a month
14:33:40 about this.
14:33:41 And when I got a copy of the application, I thought
14:33:45 there was a waiver, because it's within a thousand
14:33:47 feet of institutional use.
14:33:49 And the other waiver is it's within a thousand feet
14:33:52 from four restaurants.
14:33:53 But, anyway, I told the petitioner from the beginning,
14:33:58 the Beach Park homeowners association fully support
14:34:03 full beer, wine and liquor restaurant use at that
14:34:06 location.
14:34:08 We wanted to know why, like Mr. Dingfelder said, why
14:34:11 can it not be a 4(COP-R).
14:34:14 We also accepted hours of operation.
14:34:18 Other three restaurants, they are close at 11.
14:34:21 One much them closes at 12.

14:34:22 Our neighborhood is directly south of Westshore plaza.
14:34:25 And we have people leaving the mall late at night.
14:34:30 We think that 11:00, 12:00 closing is enough for this
14:34:37 area that is close to residential.
14:34:39 We fully support the concept, the menu.
14:34:42 Sounds like a great idea.
14:34:43 We would like to have another restaurant there.
14:34:45 But we don't want to have a zoning there that would
14:34:49 allow something like Club Fuel or underground or
14:34:52 something, and two martinis.
14:34:56 We don't want the nightclub atmosphere there.
14:35:00 We are also concerned about the hours, the security.
14:35:02 We also have a program where we pay place 80 to
14:35:07 $100,000 a year for officers that work in our area.
14:35:10 But if they are called for service calls, they will
14:35:13 leave Beach Park and go where they are going.
14:35:15 And I think after midnight, our program would be
14:35:21 diluted because they would continue constantly be
14:35:23 called to someone that's open till 3:00 in the
14:35:27 morning.
14:35:29 I asked the petitioner, ask your owners, business, why
14:35:34 don't they consider changing their business mod toll

14:35:36 this one particular site?
14:35:37 She said, well, they can't meet the 51%.
14:35:40 Well, of course not if you are open till 3.
14:35:42 Who is eating dinner at 3:00 in the morning?
14:35:45 It's all alcohol. If they close at midnight they
14:35:48 probably meet the 51%.
14:35:49 All the other restaurants that are successful are
14:35:54 successful.
14:35:55 We also have a question about outdoor seating.
14:35:57 The first one was zero.
14:35:59 The second one 24.
14:36:00 Application said 50.
14:36:02 I think she might have said 119.
14:36:04 I'm not sure what the actual outdoor seating is. We
14:36:07 support the outdoor cafe idea, but we don't want any
14:36:10 loud music going on till three in the morning.
14:36:15 We think that's not a very good environment.
14:36:17 And the person who wrote in with a letter of support,
14:36:20 I don't know if the address is 3816 Azeele or Sevilla.
14:36:24 I think she said Sevilla but it was typed as Azeele
14:36:30 and that is not anywhere close to this establishment.
14:36:32 It is miles away.

14:36:35 We love the four restaurants that are there.
14:36:36 We support the restaurant idea.
14:36:38 It looks like a great theme.
14:36:40 But we really think it should be an R and it needs to
14:36:42 close at midnight.
14:36:43 Thank you very much.
14:36:48 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) I want to ask a
14:36:51 question. Is it your neighborhood that is paying for
14:36:55 the police?
14:37:01 >>> Our residents volunteer to pay into a pool of
14:37:04 money and then we pay the City of Tampa police
14:37:06 department to have that officer patrol within our --
14:37:12 within our boundaries, seven nights a week, 365 nights
14:37:16 a year, but if they are called to a 911 call they will
14:37:21 leave the neighborhood and go answer a call if they
14:37:23 are close by, whoever is the closest one.
14:37:28 >> (off microphone).
14:37:31 >>> No.
14:37:31 We are the closest neighborhood to Westshore plaza,
14:37:35 and they are just right across the street.
14:37:38 Beach Park is south of Westshore, west to the bank,
14:37:40 east to Lois Avenue, south to Morrison and Beachway

14:37:49 Avenue.
14:37:54 >>MARY MULHERN: (off microphone) so you're paying
14:37:58 for --
14:37:59 >>> What we pay for is an officer to stay within our
14:38:02 boundaries and they patrol for six hours, but if they
14:38:04 get a call over their radio, 911 call, close by, they
14:38:11 have to respond.
14:38:12 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay, thanks.
14:38:14 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: How many times in the last year
14:38:17 has your patrol officer, that you pay for, gotten
14:38:20 calls to the mall?
14:38:24 >>> I don't have those specifics.
14:38:27 >> So actually he should not leave your patrolling
14:38:30 area.
14:38:31 That should be up to the Tampa Police Department to
14:38:33 send somebody to the mall, not your policeman that you
14:38:36 are paying out of your organization.
14:38:37 >> I don't actually know how they make that decision.
14:38:41 Because Tampa Police Department --
14:38:44 >> But they are off duty, they are on your payroll.
14:38:48 >>> Yes.
14:38:49 >> Officer, can you announce to that?

14:38:51 >>> Officer Miller: You are correct.
14:38:54 They are going to stay within their zone that they are
14:38:56 being paid for, that particular job.
14:38:58 But officer safety is of the utmost importance. If
14:39:00 there's a situation when an officer is calling for
14:39:02 help, that unit will respond.
14:39:06 That's probably one of the only big reasons, if it's a
14:39:08 high priority call they will respond to the mall.
14:39:10 >> To your knowledge has that happened in the last
14:39:12 couple years?
14:39:12 >>> To my knowledge it has not.
14:39:14 But, I mean, there's always that option, it could
14:39:17 happen.
14:39:17 >> I understand.
14:39:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Vizzi?
14:39:25 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.
14:39:27 Yes, I have been sworn.
14:39:28 Yes, an officer comes to our meeting.
14:39:30 We had two general meetings a year and he comes.
14:39:33 And he tells us, if he didn't go, he's telling us that
14:39:39 he will leave our area to go on an emergency call.
14:39:42 When I called and spoke to the general manager of the

14:39:44 mall with our concerns, he told me we shouldn't worry,
14:39:48 because they are going to have to have three security
14:39:51 patrols -- I mean, three security guards on this
14:39:55 property. Just telling you that, you can tell that
14:39:59 they anticipate some problems.
14:40:01 We know what happens in other alcoholic bar -- I'll
14:40:05 qualify -- areas, Ybor, Channelside.
14:40:10 And I understand even at International Plaza, where
14:40:13 you do have bars, they are not near any residential
14:40:17 areas, that they do have problems and the bar owners
14:40:22 always say it's not our problem once they leave.
14:40:25 So it makes me even more concerned to hear the general
14:40:29 manager at Westshore say that they would have to have
14:40:32 three security guards.
14:40:36 We have never opposed the "R" wet zoning at the
14:40:43 restaurant.
14:40:44 But all on the other side of the mall.
14:40:46 A and as I told the general manager, Westshore has
14:40:49 always been a good neighbor to us, has always been
14:40:51 considered when there were noise issues, that when
14:40:56 they cleaned the garages and even the parking lots, we
14:40:58 can hear that.

14:40:59 They have always taken care of those things.
14:41:02 So I was really concerned to hear that they would be
14:41:08 having an agreement with the group that would be
14:41:12 staying open.
14:41:13 They say 2:30 now, but they have repeatedly said 3:00.
14:41:17 And if they close at midnight, like the other
14:41:22 restaurants, three close at eleven, one at twelve.
14:41:27 If they didn't sell liquor from 12:00 to 3:00 they
14:41:29 wouldn't have so much liquor sales that it would
14:41:34 exceed their food sales.
14:41:36 So, council, please don't start another liquor zoned
14:41:40 area at International Plaza, it's a big one, I know,
14:41:45 one started, and now there are lots of them.
14:41:47 But there are no residential areas immediately
14:41:51 abutting.
14:41:52 Now, remember, we are on the south side of this, on
14:41:56 the east side, where the other restaurants, you have
14:42:00 those other neighborhoods north of Kennedy.
14:42:03 So you would have the -- you will call them
14:42:08 incapacitated drivers, driving around neighborhoods at
14:42:11 3:00 in the morning and I don't think that that's an
14:42:13 area where we should be trying to attract that kind of

14:42:17 crowd every night of the week.
14:42:20 So please, council, deny this wet zoning.
14:42:24 We are all in favor of you giving them an "R."
14:42:26 We can see that that's appropriate.
14:42:28 But not an "X."
14:42:30 Thank you.
14:42:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
14:42:40 >>> Karen Hernandez.
14:42:42 And I just wanted to state my opinion having to do
14:42:45 with this particular issue.
14:42:48 There are some questions about the licensing, whether
14:42:50 it's 4(COP-X) rather than R.
14:42:53 In my past experience working in the hospitality
14:42:56 industry and bartending one of the questions may be
14:42:58 what time is the kitchen closed? Because if they
14:43:01 close down the kitchen at midnight or 11:00, then the
14:43:05 sale of liquor till 2:30 in the morning you then
14:43:09 vice-president a nightclub bar type setting that is
14:43:11 not already in that establishment.
14:43:13 So perhaps that might be one of the questions that
14:43:15 could be asked.
14:43:16 When does the kitchen close?

14:43:17 Thank you.
14:43:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
14:43:25 >>> Jay lash, I'm general manager of Westshore plaza.
14:43:30 I'm here representing property as well as venture
14:43:33 company.
14:43:34 I believe you have in your package a letter that we
14:43:37 sent about a week or so ago in support of this.
14:43:42 A couple of things of clarification as I listen to
14:43:45 some of the comments from our shoppers.
14:43:46 We are very excited about this concept.
14:43:50 We expect it to do tremendously well, and act as a
14:43:54 complement to our other great restaurants that we
14:43:56 actually have with a very solid entertainment
14:43:59 experience core group.
14:44:01 We think it will be a great asset to that.
14:44:03 I want to touch on a couple of things that I have
14:44:05 heard today, because I'm very concerned about it.
14:44:08 And I would be remiss if I didn't talk about the
14:44:16 activity.
14:44:17 We also -- also have off-duty police officers here, at
14:44:22 the shopping center, I should say, oaf the course of
14:44:24 the weekend.

14:44:25 I have already been in communication with the folks,
14:44:28 they are in contact with us, we have intentions to
14:44:32 look at our employment for security and if we need any
14:44:36 kind of shoring up anywhere.
14:44:37 We will certainly address that as well.
14:44:38 I think it's important to know that associates from
14:44:41 Glenshire, one we are looking at trying to bring in
14:44:45 something of this nature, we are very attracted to
14:44:46 this organization because they run a professional,
14:44:49 secure business.
14:44:50 We are not trying to bring something into the
14:44:52 business -- to that I should also say I traveled
14:44:57 personally out to Houston recently to visit three of
14:45:00 their location as round that market.
14:45:01 Interestingly, it over the course of the years I
14:45:05 learned I had a chance to learn where they came from
14:45:09 and where they are going.
14:45:10 They are a great business.
14:45:10 I also learned a lot about their training, how their
14:45:13 associates deal with issues of alcohol and serving.
14:45:16 I know from the business as well the question that
14:45:18 came up, the kitchen is open till 2:30 a.m.

14:45:21 It does not shut down prematurely.
14:45:24 So it is a reliable, good run organization.
14:45:29 Lastly, if I can, there was a comment made about
14:45:31 bringing more or creating a nightclub atmosphere, and
14:45:34 I heard the issues about issues about some things at
14:45:38 International Plaza.
14:45:39 The location that they are at has kind of evolved away
14:45:43 from the shopping center.
14:45:44 As things were reconfigured, this space has lost
14:45:48 connectivity to the interior common area of the mall.
14:45:51 So at some point, we had to find a different use.
14:45:54 That's hard to do often in our situation.
14:45:56 But this use was good for a certain restaurant or type
14:46:00 use.
14:46:01 We went shopping and looking across the country for a
14:46:04 concept to bring in.
14:46:05 That's this.
14:46:06 We are very confident with that.
14:46:07 But as far as expanding out and creating more of a bar
14:46:11 scene or bar atmosphere, we don't have the space, nor
14:46:14 woo Do we have the intention of doing that.
14:46:15 This is a one-opportunity situation with those people.

14:46:21 Thank you.
14:46:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
14:46:22 Petitioner?
14:46:29 >>> Thank you.
14:46:30 I appreciate the time for rebuttal.
14:46:33 We are going to try to touch on various comments that
14:46:35 I heard during the public portion.
14:46:40 The issue about the item of the food, yes, Mr.
14:46:43 Miranda, if they could increase the cost of their
14:46:45 food, that would certainly help bring them to Pa that
14:46:48 51% gross revenue level.
14:46:50 But I think part of the a pole of a pub like this is
14:46:53 that you can go in and not spend a lot of money, and
14:46:57 still have a good time, still be able to enjoy some
14:47:01 good food, good, delicious food without having to pay
14:47:04 a very large bill.
14:47:06 I don't know if they will be reworking the menu.
14:47:11 I think they are very happy with the kind of menu that
14:47:13 they have.
14:47:13 So we do need to try to have the X zoning as opposed
14:47:19 to the R.
14:47:20 The issue but police, as I believe you heard, the mall

14:47:23 has -- the mall is supported by its own mall security
14:47:27 as well as off-duty Tampa police officers.
14:47:31 When my clients, if they are allowed to open up their
14:47:34 pub and grill, they will be supplementing all of that
14:47:36 security with additional off-duty Tampa police
14:47:40 officers to patrol the area, to make sure that it's
14:47:44 safe for everyone who is visiting that area.
14:47:48 They are doing this to be proactive, to be a deterrent
14:47:52 in crime, and they don't anticipate a lot of problems.
14:47:56 Again, they have had numerous other locations that are
14:48:00 open, and so they know the dynamics of this kind of
14:48:05 business, and they are really using this more to
14:48:07 secure crimes, to be proactive.
14:48:11 Their core demographics, the core customer for this
14:48:14 pub and grill concept is 30 to 55.
14:48:18 30 to 55-year-olds.
14:48:22 So I don't know, you know, how they are going to be
14:48:25 acting out there.
14:48:28 But 30 to 55.
14:48:34 [ Laughter ]
14:48:37 The numbers fluctuating, keep in mind when we start
14:48:45 this wet zoning process, this is many, many months

14:48:48 out.
14:48:49 We started this process four, five, six months ago
14:48:53 when site plans designs were still in flux, and so
14:48:58 trying to adjust that seating requirement, it does
14:49:02 sometimes change.
14:49:02 But as of this point, their plan is to only have about
14:49:06 24 seats outside.
14:49:07 Rest would be contained inside the building.
14:49:11 Concerns about the T music and about noise.
14:49:14 The music would be contained inside the building.
14:49:17 I think they would probably only have two munitions
14:49:24 playing acoustic guitar inside during certain nights
14:49:27 of the week, but it's inside the building in the mall,
14:49:30 surrounded by the mall, the parking lot, Kennedy,
14:49:34 memorial.
14:49:35 Again, I don't anticipate any issues at all with loud
14:49:39 music blaring.
14:49:43 The food, as you heard on the food service, does not
14:49:45 stop at 11:00 or midnight.
14:49:48 It will continue past midnight, closer to the close of
14:49:50 business.
14:49:53 It's in an isolated part of the mall.

14:49:55 There's no room to expand and build out like
14:50:00 International Plaza or to build out like Ybor City.
14:50:03 And finally, I ask you to please consider that this
14:50:06 client has met your code requirements for the distance
14:50:10 separation, has met the code requirements for a
14:50:12 4(COP-X) zoning, and has also been able to produce, I
14:50:16 believe now, in excess of 35 supported e-mails and
14:50:21 phone calls from people who are very excited to
14:50:24 welcome the concept to the Westshore mall.
14:50:28 I'll be happy to answer any other questions.
14:50:30 >>CHAIRMAN: Questions by council members?
14:50:33 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: First I have to share with you that
14:50:34 some of the e-mails came without signatures, and it's
14:50:38 interesting.
14:50:39 They weren't necessarily people who lived in
14:50:40 Westshore, but they were from people with whom we
14:50:43 could figure out a connection between a business
14:50:45 connection in this.
14:50:47 And you sent us by accident some of the prototypes
14:50:52 which is kind of humorous. Anyway, the other thing
14:50:55 is, would you consider a conditional use?
14:50:57 I just have to be straight with you.

14:50:59 I cannot support your request for X.
14:51:03 I can go with an R or I can go with a conditional use.
14:51:06 Given that your client wants to invest over a million
14:51:08 dollars, they probably don't want a conditional use.
14:51:10 So the "R" would seem like the way to go.
14:51:13 I just want to share.
14:51:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
14:51:18 >>MARY MULHERN: I just have a quick question.
14:51:20 And then you can probably -- I thought someone said
14:51:25 the entrance is from outside.
14:51:28 >>> Yes.
14:51:28 >> Is there an entrance from the mall into the
14:51:30 restaurant, also?
14:51:31 >>> No
14:51:41 I believe the only entrances will be from the outside.
14:51:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: There's a picture on the overhead.
14:51:50 >>> If I can show it to you quickly.
14:51:52 Thank you.
14:51:54 That location is right here.
14:51:57 As I mentioned, over time, this has evolved away from
14:52:01 the interior of the mall.
14:52:02 It had absolutely no interior mall access.

14:52:04 These would be the common area corridors of the mall.
14:52:08 It will have an entranceway on the corner.
14:52:14 >> Thank you.
14:52:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
14:52:15 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just from a procedural perspective.
14:52:21 Do you have the aerial map?
14:52:26 >>> I think Barbara has the aerial.
14:52:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a little concern about the
14:52:32 1,000-foot, the reference to the 1,000 feet.
14:52:38 Slide it a little bit to the side.
14:52:40 Keep going, keep going.
14:52:41 There, stop.
14:52:42 The tan colored buildings down on the bottom of the
14:52:47 thing, aren't those multifamily?
14:52:53 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I think that --
14:53:01 >> Has somebody measured it?
14:53:02 Did they measure it as the crow flies?
14:53:05 >>> Tiff survey which says they are more than 1,000
14:53:07 feet from the wet zoned area, I believe.
14:53:11 >> Sometimes surveys are wrong.
14:53:13 But I just --
14:53:16 >>> I imagine by walking distance.

14:53:19 >> You wouldn't walk there.
14:53:20 >>> I don't do that.
14:53:21 We depend on the surveyors to do it but the direction
14:53:25 is --
14:53:25 >> When you walk there, if you walk there and you want
14:53:27 to walk down to the corner of Westshore and Kennedy
14:53:29 then it probably becomes further than 1,000.
14:53:31 But --
14:53:33 >>> if you can give us a moment we can -- the survey
14:53:36 is supplied.
14:53:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I just think from a procedural
14:53:39 perspective we want to make sure that those --
14:53:46 >>> They don't show it on the survey because they
14:53:59 signed off, it's not within a thousand feet but it is
14:54:01 pedestrian traffic.
14:54:03 So the survey is certified, too.
14:54:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You cross at the corner.
14:54:16 >>> Here is the mall property.
14:54:18 >> Right.
14:54:19 But you're measuring from your space.
14:54:21 >>> Right.
14:54:21 >> And it goes straight across the parking lot, to the

14:54:25 corner.
14:54:27 No, to the corner.
14:54:28 There's a big light there.
14:54:29 Right there.
14:54:30 And the big light there.
14:54:31 You cross over at the light.
14:54:32 And you keep going.
14:54:35 There.
14:54:37 I'm just concerned, we want to make sure that
14:54:39 procedurally we are in good shape.
14:54:41 And that concerns me a little bit.
14:54:45 Just in terms of notice.
14:54:51 >>> We hired a surveyor to measure the distances, and
14:54:55 the survey shows that it is beyond the 1,000-foot
14:54:58 radius.
14:54:58 I have not received -- I am not aware of any letters
14:55:02 or e-mails in opposition from anyone regarding in the
14:55:04 gables.
14:55:07 I'm not aware any phone calls or anything.
14:55:11 >> I'm just questioning the survey, that's all.
14:55:13 I just want to make sure from a notice perspective
14:55:15 that the appropriate people have been notified.

14:55:17 >>GWEN MILLER: What street is that where you see that?
14:55:22 >>> I'm not really sure.
14:55:24 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, that's Kennedy and then it
14:55:27 flares out to the Franklin Street bridge.
14:55:34 >>GWEN MILLER: But is it on Kennedy?
14:55:36 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: It's on Kennedy.
14:55:39 >>> For notice purposes, residential parties received
14:55:43 notice for 250 feet away.
14:55:44 And then the neighborhood association.
14:55:46 >> Isn't there still a waiver issue?
14:55:49 >>> If it were within 1,000 feet.
14:55:51 What you need to understand from a staff perspective
14:55:56 is the surveyors are -- their license is on the line
14:56:04 and that's what we rely on.
14:56:05 If the survey is in error then they jeopardize their
14:56:08 license.
14:56:09 >> Somebody tell me what that is as the crow flies.
14:56:11 Because as the crow flies it looks to me like it's
14:56:14 less than 1,000 feet.
14:56:16 >>> We don't have it measured as the crow flies
14:56:19 because that's not how the ordinance requires we look
14:56:21 at it.

14:56:22 It may be.
14:56:30 >>BARBARA LEPORE: We don't measure the distance
14:56:32 separation.
14:56:32 We get that information from the surveyors.
14:56:37 And if the distance shown on the exhibit D shows they
14:56:41 are more than 1,000 feet, identified as --
14:56:46 >> I'm not real good at blind faith.
14:56:48 And that's what I am saying, if we are going to give
14:56:51 blind faith to the survey when I can look at this map
14:56:53 and say logic tells you as you are walking there, you
14:56:55 walk across the parking lot, you cross the light and
14:56:58 you keep on going down Kennedy and you're there.
14:57:00 So it's virtually as the crow flies.
14:57:05 Is as the crow flies.
14:57:06 That concerns me.
14:57:07 I don't know.
14:57:08 And maybe it's not a notice issue.
14:57:11 It's still a waiver issue.
14:57:12 And we would be waiving it just like might be waiving
14:57:16 everything else.
14:57:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by council members?
14:57:21 Mrs. Saul-Sena?

14:57:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: If there is a waiver issue, then
14:57:25 that affects the finding of fact.
14:57:28 And since we have a couple of other things on our
14:57:31 agenda, maybe we could hold this a little bit.
14:57:35 So the petitioner could contact the surveyor, find out
14:57:39 if they measured in the way that we asked.
14:57:42 >>> The surveyor, which I believe they are instructed
14:57:48 to follow your code, asked to measure by ordinary
14:57:51 pedestrian traffic.
14:57:52 I have worked with Polaris on numerous projects.
14:57:55 I have no reason to believe that that residential area
14:57:59 is not beyond 1,000 feet.
14:58:03 If you walk it, it will be beyond 1,000 feet.
14:58:08 >>GWEN MILLER: Anybody want to close the public
14:58:10 hearing?
14:58:18 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, we are going to be
14:58:21 here at least another 20 minutes.
14:58:22 I would request, we have been working on this so long,
14:58:25 that we defer our action right now, and you all make a
14:58:29 phone call and just double check with your surveyor,
14:58:32 find out how far it was when they measured.
14:58:35 >> And where they measured it.

14:58:37 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Did they measure from where the
14:58:39 door of this place is going to be to the multifamily
14:58:41 down on the southwest of there?
14:58:43 >>> All right.
14:58:45 I will make a phone call.
14:58:50 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone) as the crow
14:58:54 flies, if we keep on doing this we are going to be
14:59:00 here forever, okay?
14:59:01 We have to rely on these professionals that come out
14:59:03 to do these surveys.
14:59:05 And I can't see delaying this issue.
14:59:14 The surveyor is on the line, not us.
14:59:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think this petition is in
14:59:21 trouble.
14:59:21 I don't want to say the surveyor or whatever. But if
14:59:24 I listened from the other side what this side has
14:59:27 said, seems to me, the petition is in doubt right now
14:59:33 from different council members including maybe even
14:59:35 myself.
14:59:38 The menu, and I'm not going to compare you, but the
14:59:43 highest praise on the menu is 12.99.
14:59:47 Now Nuccio Boulevard costs you 14.99.

14:59:53 And that's the lowest of good quality food.
14:59:57 Hope my neighbors don't get upset with me.
14:59:59 But what I am saying is, the menu price reflects why
15:00:04 you need the X.
15:00:05 And also because you're open till three.
15:00:08 Could you solve your own problems by saying, I want to
15:00:11 close when the restaurant closes at 12:00.
15:00:14 If you do that, you don't need an X.
15:00:17 And I'm not an expert but I have been in the
15:00:19 restaurant business my whole life.
15:00:23 And I never want to do it again.
15:00:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
15:00:28 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I just think it's very interesting
15:00:30 that just a few minutes ago we passed and approved a
15:00:33 wet zoning for somebody that was a waiver, there was a
15:00:37 school area district, and met every requirement, every
15:00:42 test of the city code, and is in trouble.
15:00:45 I just find that quite interesting.
15:00:51 >>GWEN MILLER: What's the pleasure of council?
15:00:54 >>MARY MULHERN: Basically, we approved a restaurant
15:00:59 and a package store.
15:01:02 So that's what makes the difference to the neighbors.

15:01:06 >>> It has a full food menu which has been provided to
15:01:09 you.
15:01:10 Food will be served from 11 a.m. until near closing
15:01:13 time.
15:01:15 There are other restaurants has 40 to 45% food sales
15:01:20 in their other locations that are currently open in
15:01:22 other states.
15:01:23 They meet the code requirements.
15:01:25 I will try to -- Ms. Saul-Sena, we cannot agree to the
15:01:31 X.
15:01:31 I just want to go back and make sure I address that
15:01:34 question of yours.
15:01:35 This client is prepared to spend almost $1.5 million
15:01:38 to try to develop this new business in the mall, and
15:01:43 they are entering into a long-term lease with the
15:01:45 mall, and for that amount of money, time and energy
15:01:49 that they are planning and hoping to spend in this
15:01:52 city, cannot agree to a conditional one-year.
15:01:56 We ask the business wants the community support.
15:02:02 There has been other areas of the community that has
15:02:05 expressed their support for this petition.
15:02:08 I will try to get some clarification on the surveyor

15:02:11 issue, if you would like to try to continue that and I
15:02:14 will try to reach the surveyor.
15:02:19 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I was trying to look for a little
15:02:21 middle ground here.
15:02:22 The discussion came up about midnight.
15:02:24 And I know that it's your client company's model to
15:02:30 obviously try to stay open till 2:30, 3 in the
15:02:35 morning.
15:02:35 I would agree that that part of Kennedy Boulevard, I
15:02:38 can't picture other establishments of any type that
15:02:42 are open after midnight.
15:02:44 I think it does set an unusual and perhaps a negative
15:02:49 precedent.
15:02:50 And I'm just -- I would like to know if you are
15:02:54 amenable to a condition of midnight, which I think is
15:02:57 a reasonable condition, number one, and number two, an
15:03:01 easy condition for you, no life music outdoors.
15:03:04 >>> There is no life music.
15:03:05 >> No, as a condition.
15:03:07 And I would ask you to confer with your client on both
15:03:11 of those as possible conditions for a motion to
15:03:12 approve.

15:03:14 Midnight, closing, seven days a week, no live music
15:03:17 afterwards.
15:03:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, Madam Chair, maybe if we can
15:03:24 move it on first reading and then when it comes back
15:03:27 to second reading, I time to address with their
15:03:31 client.
15:03:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: You can't because whatever we
15:03:33 approve on first reading in terms of hours and
15:03:35 conditional --
15:03:36 >>> that would require a change in the title of the
15:03:38 ordinance so it wouldn't be appropriate to read it.
15:03:44 >> Tick-tock.
15:04:02 While there's silence, Rebecca, at some point I think
15:04:05 we need to look at our language generally to talk
15:04:08 about this crow flies versus walking.
15:04:13 It seems totally arbitrary that we would leave it up
15:04:15 to the surveyor.
15:04:17 >>> When it comes back, as part of your July cycle,
15:04:21 which comes to you next week, I believe, for
15:04:24 transmission.
15:04:24 >> Clarify Watt means?
15:04:27 >>> Yes.

15:04:28 It's changed from walking to the straight distance, to
15:04:31 be consistent with the rest of your special uses.
15:04:34 >> Good.
15:04:35 Okay.
15:04:35 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes.
15:04:43 >>> Mr. Dingfelder, I appreciate your efforts to try
15:04:45 to find some common grounds.
15:04:47 My clients are fine with agreeing to no live music
15:04:50 outside.
15:04:51 It was never planned.
15:04:53 So they are perfectly fine with that condition.
15:04:55 My clients cannot agree to the midnight close.
15:04:59 It's just not their business model to be able to close
15:05:03 at midnight.
15:05:04 Your code allows in 3-20 to have alcohol allowed for
15:05:10 sale in businesses until 3 a.m.
15:05:13 Not to say that they are going to be open until 3 a.m.
15:05:16 every day.
15:05:18 It kind of depends on when they start opening their
15:05:20 business and see how business is.
15:05:22 If it's completely dead in there by 2 a.m., they will
15:05:25 address their hours and close earlier because that

15:05:29 would not make any sense.
15:05:30 We are only asking for the same flexibilities that
15:05:32 other competitors and other businesses might be able
15:05:34 to enjoy by having them close and alcohol sales after
15:05:39 midnight.
15:05:39 So I can't agree to the live music, no -- I can agree
15:05:43 to the no live music outside.
15:05:45 I cannot agree to the --
15:05:49 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I have to say I'm a huge supporter
15:05:51 of Westshore mall.
15:05:53 I eat at all the shops.
15:05:54 I eat at all the restaurants.
15:05:55 And the context here is restaurants with Rs that
15:05:58 close by midnight.
15:05:59 Based on the fact that we need to make good decisions
15:06:02 in the context of a healthy and compatible community,
15:06:06 I move for disapproval.
15:06:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We have to close.
15:06:11 >> Move to close the public hearing.
15:06:12 >> Second.
15:06:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to close the public
15:06:15 hearing.

15:06:15 (Motion carried)
15:06:15 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I move to disapprove the request
15:06:26 for a 4(COP-X).
15:06:42 >> That requires to us put technical reasons on the
15:06:45 record:
15:06:47 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: For the public health, safety and
15:06:50 welfare, council has the light right to impose
15:06:53 conditions.
15:06:56 And I would like to site section 3-73-A.
15:07:04 >>REBECCA KERT: I believe from discussion that I heard
15:07:05 that the concern was the concentration of additional
15:07:08 alcoholic beverage establishments where the sale of
15:07:11 alcohol was not incidental, and that is the section
15:07:14 that they are requesting a waiver from, section
15:07:17 370-A-3.
15:07:26 370-A-3.
15:07:31 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second the motion and
15:07:32 incorporate the attorney's reference.
15:07:36 And I'll second it on the basis that I think there was
15:07:40 a fair compromise offered to the neighborhood.
15:07:44 If petitioner -- I think that we were trying to
15:07:48 mitigate the adverse impacts by perhaps offering to

15:07:52 close this at midnight like all the other
15:07:55 establishments around there, including the four other
15:07:57 restaurants/alcohol establishments in the mall.
15:08:02 And if they are adamant about staying open past
15:08:07 midnight till 2, 3 in the morning, then I can't
15:08:10 support it either.
15:08:12 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
15:08:14 Opposed, Nay.
15:08:16 Nay.
15:08:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So what's the ultimate?
15:08:24 >>> It's denied.
15:08:27 The motion was --
15:08:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: 4 to 3?
15:08:30 >> Motion passed 4 to 3.
15:08:32 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: For denial.
15:08:34 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: What was the vote?
15:08:38 >> 4 to 3.
15:08:41 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I vote against.
15:08:43 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item 120.
15:08:48 We need to open.
15:08:48 >> Open to move.
15:08:54 >> Second.

15:08:55 (Motion carried)
15:09:01 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
15:09:19 Here on case WZ 07-120.
15:09:22 The petitioner is requesting a 4(COP-R) for sale of
15:09:26 beer, wine and liquor, for consumption including Busch
15:09:33 Gardens and Adventure Island.
15:09:35 At this location we already have three wet zoning
15:09:38 approved by the council, which are on this side, one
15:09:42 is the Desert Grill and the Grand Colony House, both
15:09:42 have 4(COP-R) wet zoning.
15:09:48 And also the Adventure Island has 2(COP-X) approved
15:09:54 wet zoning.
15:09:58 At this time the petitioner is requesting to increase
15:10:00 the wet zone to 4(COP), include about 288 acres of wet
15:10:08 zone area, 243 acres will be included in the Busch
15:10:13 Gardens, and 45 acres will be for the adventure
15:10:17 island.
15:10:20 There are others besides those which I quoted, other
15:10:23 wet zone establishments which are in this 1,000
15:10:27 walking distance.
15:10:29 There are also residential uses.
15:10:31 And there are also institutional uses that petitioner

15:10:33 is requesting the waiver for the distance separation.
15:10:38 The sale of alcohol will be incidental.
15:10:44 The land development has no objection to the request.
15:10:51 The area which I marked in yellow, those are the areas
15:10:54 that they are requesting to wet zone.
15:10:56 I received some phone calls from the same lady
15:11:02 yesterday.
15:11:02 The lady's name was Sandra Burkhart.
15:11:06 She's at 3816 west and she did oppose the wet zone
15:11:13 request.
15:11:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
15:11:22 You have done that twice now when you announced a
15:11:24 particular phone call.
15:11:26 It just seems like --
15:11:30 >>BARBARA LEPORE: I was asked to pass it over to you.
15:11:34 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Perhaps a fairer way to do that,
15:11:36 otherwise people are going to be barraging you with
15:11:39 phone calls.
15:11:41 Another way to do it is just type it up and put it in
15:11:44 the record.
15:11:44 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Okay. I will send it with my report
15:11:46 to you.

15:11:49 The application has been sent to the Tampa Police
15:11:54 Department for their review.
15:12:01 As I said, we have no objection to the request.
15:12:03 Thank you.
15:12:05 >>> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police
15:12:07 department.
15:12:07 City of Tampa police Haas department has no objections
15:12:09 to this wet zoning.
15:12:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
15:12:18 >>> Hi. Grace Yang, 201 North Franklin Street, suite
15:12:26 2200 Tampa, Florida, I have been sworn, and I am the
15:12:30 attorney and authorized agent for the petitioner.
15:12:32 You should have all received from me a letter dated
15:12:34 September 13th and some supporting documents
15:12:37 explaining this wet zoning petition in greater detail.
15:12:41 To summarize the request, Busch Gardens and adventure
15:12:44 island would like the flexibility to be able to sell
15:12:47 and serve beer, wine, distilled spirits in both areas
15:12:53 both parks -- to areas in both parks.
15:12:56 Parks would like the flexibility to be able to offer a
15:12:58 range of alcohol beverages at special events at the
15:13:02 parks that they are hosting.

15:13:04 For example, corporate groups in the area.
15:13:07 Local charities.
15:13:09 Convention groups are sometimes interested in buying
15:13:13 out and booking certain parks of the park for events.
15:13:17 That they are inviting people to have attend.
15:13:20 When they book these kind of events, the event
15:13:23 organizers have sometimes asked Busch Gardens or
15:13:26 adventure islands if they could offer more than just
15:13:30 beer at their events, much as Anheuser-Busch beer is
15:13:36 great but they wanted more.
15:13:38 So Busch Gardens and adventure island have filed this
15:13:42 petition in order to have the flexibility of the
15:13:43 4(COP) use.
15:13:45 In order to accommodate the request as needed to sell
15:13:47 and serve full liquor at those events.
15:13:50 Both parks have been offering a very pleasant family
15:13:54 friendly environment during normal park hours for
15:13:57 regular park visitors.
15:13:59 The family friendly atmosphere will continue.
15:14:02 They will not be affected as a result of the petition
15:14:05 approval.
15:14:07 The an the anticipated full liquor service would only

15:14:10 affect a very limited segment of people visiting the
15:14:13 park in conjunction with special events, corporate
15:14:17 events, of this nature.
15:14:19 Something I want to make very clear to you and tried
15:14:23 to correct on the record.
15:14:25 There are absolutely no plans to introduce new kiosks
15:14:30 going in at both parks during regular business hours.
15:14:33 I want to make sure that the council understands that.
15:14:38 Keep in mind -- and I think this is very important --
15:14:40 keep in mind that there are different areas of both
15:14:43 parks that had more than beer for years.
15:14:47 The desert grill restaurant at Busch Gardens has been
15:14:50 selling 4(COP-R), full liquor, since 1979.
15:14:56 So under the city zoning, since 1979, desert grill has
15:15:01 the ability from the city zoning to be able to sell
15:15:05 full liquor.
15:15:06 Yet, if you walk into the desert grill restaurant
15:15:09 today, the only thing that you can buy are
15:15:13 Anheuser-Busch beer products.
15:15:16 Similarly, the Crown Colony House at Busch Gardens has
15:15:19 been zoned 4(COP-R) since 1989.
15:15:23 So they have had a zoning for full liquor at colony

15:15:28 house since the late '80s.
15:15:30 Yet if you walk into Crown Colony House as a normal
15:15:34 park visitor during normal park hours, the only
15:15:37 alcohol items you will be able to purchase there are
15:15:40 Anheuser-Busch beer products.
15:15:42 Adventure island has been zoned 2(COP), beer and wine,
15:15:47 since 1991.
15:15:49 And yet since 1991 until the present, the only kind of
15:15:54 alcohol you will be getting during normal park hours
15:15:57 there is Anheuser-Busch beer products.
15:16:00 So they have had more zoning than they have actually
15:16:06 been using.
15:16:06 And the reason for this 4(COP) is to allow consumption
15:16:10 of full liquor at the park, but not during normal
15:16:13 business hours.
15:16:14 They haven't done it with desert grill.
15:16:16 They haven't done it with Crown Colony House.
15:16:20 They have not done it with adventure island.
15:16:23 They will not be doing it if you approve this
15:16:25 petition.
15:16:28 The two parks are also --
15:16:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a question on that.

15:16:32 You are not making that as part of the condition of
15:16:34 your zoning?
15:16:35 >>> The conditioning --
15:16:37 >> That you just said, it's persuasive on the surface
15:16:41 but is not a condition of the zoning, let's say
15:16:43 Anheuser-Busch decided to get out of the theme park
15:16:46 business and sold the whole thing to Disney, and then
15:16:49 Disney could do whatever they want with it.
15:16:51 I'm just saying, we have to be very careful when we
15:16:53 make promises, and this doesn't just apply to you,
15:16:56 anybody that stands at that podium, and council has to
15:16:59 be very careful in listening to promises because the
15:17:02 if it's not a condition of the zoning then it's
15:17:06 unenforceable.
15:17:07 We had that a few weeks ago receipted to a car wash.
15:17:10 So we just have to be careful in making promises about
15:17:12 we love Anheuser-Busch, we love Busch Gardens, eights
15:17:16 wonderful corporate neighborhood and a good friend to
15:17:18 the City of Tampa but tomorrow it could be sold and we
15:17:20 all know that and we could have a totally different
15:17:23 program going on.
15:17:24 I just -- it's just a general thing.

15:17:34 >>> If I may continue.
15:17:35 Busch Gardens and adventure island are also asking for
15:17:39 4(COP) so they can offer Busch Gardens gift pack in
15:17:45 some of their gift shops, if they want to do that.
15:17:47 I have with me today an example of a winter holiday.
15:17:53 Budweiser gift pack, for example, that might be
15:17:55 something that they sell during Thanksgiving or
15:17:59 Christmas, winter season, at the park.
15:18:02 So in this example you have two coasters with the
15:18:05 Clydesdales, and then you have specially marked cans
15:18:11 with different holiday themes.
15:18:14 There are absolutely no plans for the park to sell
15:18:17 regular six-packs or 12-packs of beer to go.
15:18:20 It's purely for unique, special products like these.
15:18:30 Busch Gardens, adventure islands, Busch entertainment
15:18:33 corporation, Anheuser-Busch, have had a very long and
15:18:37 proud history as responsible alcohol vendor, and as a
15:18:40 good member of this community.
15:18:42 We hope you will allow this change in the wet zoning
15:18:45 so that they can have more flexibility with special
15:18:48 events, and groups at the two parks.
15:18:52 Dan brown, who is the general manager of Busch Gardens

15:18:55 and adventure islands, is here with me.
15:18:57 Mr. Brown or I will be glad to answer any additional
15:19:00 questions that you may have.
15:19:06 >> I will be happy to answer any additional questions
15:19:08 you may have.
15:19:13 >> I'm really glad that you clarified the issue of
15:19:16 kiosks.
15:19:16 I read that in the paper.
15:19:18 And I was very concerned about that.
15:19:21 You said this is not about kiosks.
15:19:22 But my question is, would you be willing to put what
15:19:26 you said in writing as a condition of this request?
15:19:32 That the 4(COP) would be used for special events after
15:19:35 regular park hours?
15:19:40 That's what I thought I heard you say.
15:19:42 Because that's a very different situation than just a
15:19:46 general 4(COP).
15:19:48 >> I guess one issue, that you may have a special
15:19:50 event during park hours.
15:19:52 So you may have a company that wants to host their
15:19:57 employees for a day at the park.
15:19:58 And they might buy out the section like the pavilion

15:20:04 in Busch Gardens during normal park hours.
15:20:07 You might have people invited from the company going
15:20:08 into the Gwazi pavilion area so you have normal park
15:20:14 activity for the majority of the guests but you might
15:20:16 have some guests invited to this corporate event.
15:20:20 That does occur during normal park hours.
15:20:26 >> Could you agree it would -- that you couldn't give
15:20:31 it parkwide?
15:20:33 Can you think creatively about some way that -- if we
15:20:36 were to give you a 4(COP), it would give whoever owns
15:20:40 this property the right to sell liquor throughout the
15:20:45 entire many acres of the park?
15:20:47 And I think that's a very reasonable concern on behalf
15:20:51 of council.
15:20:52 So can you creatively think of a way to restrict it in
15:20:55 a way that would give us some assurance that that will
15:20:59 not be the case?
15:21:01 >>> I guess I would be looking to your city legal
15:21:03 department to ask about possible conditions to that
15:21:07 effect.
15:21:12 There's a specifics that it will be a public place of
15:21:14 assembly, theme park, a music park.

15:21:19 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, requested that we look into
15:21:23 whether that would be possible to permit the 4(COP)
15:21:27 for continued use of this property as a place of
15:21:29 assembly, theme park, amusement park, make sure it
15:21:34 would be -- rather than opening up all of the property
15:21:37 for 4(COP) down the line.
15:21:39 I mean, I have thought of possible conditions to try
15:21:42 to restrict it.
15:21:44 And I was unable to think of something that would
15:21:53 work, as far as giving it away, if they charge
15:21:56 admission to get in, we consider that sale, and that
15:21:59 could prevent some club from charging, you know, $50
15:22:01 to get in, all you can drink and then say they are
15:22:04 giving at way.
15:22:05 So that didn't seem to this work.
15:22:08 As far as special events, I think that would be hard
15:22:10 to enforce because we really don't have a definition
15:22:12 of what a special event is.
15:22:14 I'm not really sure what their hours were, and it
15:22:17 doesn't seem, you know, what they are proposing fits
15:22:20 in with different after-hours sort of things.
15:22:23 So I wasn't able personally to come up with anything

15:22:25 that would limit it further.
15:22:26 You know, I don't know if the applicant is able to
15:22:29 answer anything.
15:22:30 But enforceable with what they are asking for, it's
15:22:35 tricky.
15:22:39 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Kert, I have some questions, too.
15:22:45 What the petitioner is asking for is what they will be
15:23:04 able to do is have full sale of beer, wine and liquor,
15:23:09 for the entire area of a survey.
15:23:13 They have suggested a condition which if it's
15:23:15 acceptable to City Council, it could be added, which
15:23:18 would limit that ability to have that 4(COP) on and
15:23:23 off premises, consumption, only as long as the
15:23:27 property is to be used as a public theme park but
15:23:35 beyond that there are no conditions.
15:23:38 >>MARY MULHERN: Basically they are asking for full
15:23:40 ability to sell anywhere in both these parks.
15:23:42 >>> Yes.
15:23:55 >>> I'll reserve any additional time for rebuttal.
15:23:58 Thank you.
15:23:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
15:24:00 wants to speak on item number 120?

15:24:02 >>> Good afternoon, council members.
15:24:12 My name is John Dausman.
15:24:16 I have not been sworn in but I'm sure Mr. Shelby will
15:24:19 take care of that.
15:24:21 (Oath administered by Clerk).
15:24:26 >>> I do.
15:24:30 I think the council has already gotten to the issue
15:24:34 with you the question in the last two minutes that is
15:24:37 of great concern to me as a resident of the
15:24:40 neighborhood immediately to the south, and to the
15:24:43 discussion of the -- the very brief discussion that
15:24:46 our neighborhood association was able to have at only
15:24:50 one meeting.
15:24:52 There has been no representative from Busch Gardens to
15:24:55 attend any of our meetings, of, in the 17 years that I
15:24:59 have lived there.
15:25:02 And Mr. Neal and I have met with Mr. Brown on a
15:25:06 previous effort and made it clear to me, or him, how
15:25:09 much we seek interaction.
15:25:12 Busch Gardens did have a meeting on this topic on
15:25:14 their property and invited the neighborhood
15:25:17 presidents.

15:25:18 My position will be this is not ready.
15:25:22 I understand that Busch Gardens is not going to damage
15:25:25 their reputation, but this 365 days a year, 24 hours a
15:25:32 day, availability raises a question of its way out of
15:25:38 line with the words, not what's in writing, but the
15:25:42 words that are being said.
15:25:45 If you want a corporate event to be able to be held
15:25:48 anywhere, such as next to the lions cage, are you
15:25:52 going to keep on every single one of the people who
15:25:58 might be there and make sure that not one person gets
15:26:02 to the bar a little too often and then tries to stick
15:26:04 a hand over the cage?
15:26:06 Or the same thing in adventure island, where the main
15:26:11 market is under age, under age, and it's wet, and it's
15:26:18 slippery.
15:26:18 In other words, it's dangerous.
15:26:22 I don't think that Busch Gardens really has that in
15:26:24 mind.
15:26:25 But I'd like them to put in writing the restraints on
15:26:30 what they actually plan to do.
15:26:33 And I'll end with my biggest concern.
15:26:37 What happens if this were granted?

15:26:40 I have another concern very briefly.
15:26:41 What was said at the introduction and on the
15:26:44 television screen that they are asking for, incidental
15:26:47 sales and COP-R. It appeared twice. As I understand
15:26:51 it, that is not the case at all. And I would like to
15:26:54 hear someone correct that on the record, that it is
15:26:57 not related to restaurant sales.
15:26:59 It will be possible to drink and not buy food.
15:27:03 And then to my final concern, one. Things that was
15:27:07 said in the meeting, the Busch Gardens held, they need
15:27:10 to remain competitive with the Orlando parks.
15:27:14 And what do they have that we don't have?
15:27:16 It's not an council Margarita.
15:27:19 It is nighttime entertainment concerts.
15:27:24 And club atmosphere.
15:27:27 Pleasure Island.
15:27:28 If this were granted with that restriction, what's to
15:27:32 keep Busch Gardens a year from now, two years from
15:27:35 now, opening again at night with tens of thousands of
15:27:41 college students right down the street.
15:27:43 Thank you.
15:27:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.

15:27:46 >>> My name is Richard Flamica, 1713 Pawnee Avenue in
15:27:59 the Temple Crest neighborhood which abuts Busch
15:28:03 Gardens, and I have been sworn.
15:28:05 On August 21st, several neighbors of Busch Gardens
15:28:10 and I met with some senior staff members of the Busch
15:28:13 entertainment corporation.
15:28:15 One of these was Dan brown, the general manager of
15:28:17 Busch Gardens, and another was Jay Galbraith of
15:28:22 general affairs, the subject of this meeting was this
15:28:24 4(COP) wet zoning request.
15:28:27 According to my notes, we were told several times,
15:28:30 Busch Gardens and the family -- is a family
15:28:33 destination.
15:28:34 Busch Gardens, we were told, is a family theme park.
15:28:37 The updating of an existing wet zoning permit is being
15:28:40 sought to accommodate a present business model.
15:28:45 What that present business model is was not defined.
15:28:50 We were told the explanation for the expanded wet
15:28:52 zoning request was to accommodate special events by
15:28:56 large groups, sponsored night party, and possibly even
15:28:59 for concert.
15:29:01 Busch Gardens claims they are losing business because

15:29:04 they cannot sell beer, wine and liquor throughout the
15:29:07 park and at adventure island.
15:29:10 No specific information about the numbers or names of
15:29:13 groups deciding not to use Busch Gardens for their
15:29:16 special events because they could not be sold beer,
15:29:20 wine or liquor was volunteered.
15:29:24 Why do family oriented theme parks which are
15:29:29 surrounded by residential neighborhoods need 4(COP)
15:29:32 wet zonings throughout their entire properties?
15:29:36 They do not.
15:29:39 Before acting on this request, I would like you to
15:29:42 consider the very real possibility of increasing
15:29:45 numbers of DUI mishaps occurring on the crowded
15:29:49 streets surrounding Busch Gardens and adventure island
15:29:52 if this zoning is approved.
15:29:55 I urge you to deny it.
15:29:57 And I thank you for your attention.
15:30:00 This late afternoon.
15:30:03 >>MARTIN SHELBY: We have a speaker waiver form.
15:30:41 Ms. Forbes?
15:30:42 Thank you very much.
15:30:44 An extra minute.

15:30:48 A total of four minutes.
15:30:56 >>> My name is Terry Neal, president of Temple Crest
15:31:00 civic association, Tampa, Florida.
15:31:02 We border the southern edge of Busch Gardens.
15:31:04 Tampa Police Department stated they have had to
15:31:06 respond to only a couple of alcohol related incidents
15:31:09 in the past few years.
15:31:11 I am not sure I understand that comment, because my
15:31:13 research of the police records by year, by month, by
15:31:19 grid, for the last six years found there were 35 DUI
15:31:23 arrests for grid 23, which is exclusively the Busch
15:31:26 Gardens property.
15:31:29 There were also 18 liquor law violation arrests.
15:31:32 The wet zoning prohibits within a thousand feet of
15:31:38 residential area as the crow flies, and I do want you
15:31:40 to know that their application does state they are
15:31:43 within a thousand feet of residential areas, they are
15:31:47 within a thousand feet of government buildings.
15:31:49 So I just want to make that clarification.
15:31:52 If their application is wrong this application has to
15:31:54 be denied immediately.
15:31:55 This permit will allow the sale of beer, wine and hard

15:31:59 liquor in both Busch Gardens and adventure island at
15:32:02 all legal hours, 365 days a year, plus the right to
15:32:06 operate a package store to allow guests to purchase
15:32:11 alcohol when they leave the parks.
15:32:14 One thing, back to the residential.
15:32:17 You notice on the Elmo.
15:32:21 That's residential.
15:32:22 And that's a luxury apartment complex on the north
15:32:27 side of Busch Gardens that you approved last year.
15:32:30 A lot of residential.
15:32:31 That's vast numbers.
15:32:34 They said they are only going to sell commemorative
15:32:37 bottles of beer at the package store.
15:32:39 That's then.
15:32:39 If you approve this permit they will be able to sell
15:32:42 beer, wine, and hard liquor.
15:32:45 At a meeting they told us that they are only going to
15:32:47 host the few special events serving alcohol 16, 17
15:32:52 nights a year tops.
15:32:56 If that's all they are going to do, why don't they
15:32:58 simply apply for special wet zoning permits for those
15:33:01 special events?

15:33:03 This permit gives them the legal right to create a
15:33:07 300-acre night-time venue for concerts and other
15:33:13 events, 365 days a year, until 3 a.m., if they want
15:33:17 to, or if they sell the property.
15:33:20 That would be their legal right under this zoning.
15:33:25 And Wan size conventions will they hold?
15:33:28 Well, they are going to hold whatever the capacity of
15:33:30 the parks are, of course.
15:33:31 It makes good business sense.
15:33:33 After all, would you turn on all the rides and hire
15:33:38 staff to do otherwise?
15:33:40 Busch is making promises the law will not require them
15:33:42 to keep.
15:33:44 Approving the largest wet zoning area in the City of
15:33:47 Tampa is a dangerous precedent for you.
15:33:51 Your actions on this petition will be used as an
15:33:54 example from other businesses of why every wet zoning
15:33:59 petition should be approved, because it violates city
15:34:04 code, has a thousand feet of residential, thousand
15:34:08 feet of government, et cetera, et cetera.
15:34:10 Oh, and in your package you will find it's within a
15:34:13 thousand feet of other areas selling alcohol,

15:34:16 including another package store.
15:34:19 At a meeting Busch told neighborhood representatives
15:34:21 including myself, they needed this wet zone to be more
15:34:25 competitive with Orlando.
15:34:28 Let me remind that you neither Disney, nor universal,
15:34:32 who are very successful, thank you very much, have
15:34:35 permitted to sell beer, wine and alcohol on their
15:34:38 entire park properties.
15:34:43 It's a sad day when alcohol is necessary as a
15:34:48 marketing strategy to bring people to Tampa.
15:34:52 That's not the kind of city I want or need.
15:34:55 I hope it's not the kind of city you want or feel we
15:34:59 need either.
15:35:01 These theme parks are for families, and there is no
15:35:05 place for this kind of wet zoning.
15:35:09 Beer, wine, hard liquor, should be reserved for bars.
15:35:14 The current zoning should not be changed or, if
15:35:18 anything, a petition which a more severe limiting wet
15:35:23 zoning should be reapplied for.
15:35:25 Please, council, vote to deny this petition.
15:35:39 >>> My name is Karen Hernandez, Forest Hills Drive.
15:35:43 I would just like to state my opinion, my personal

15:35:45 opinion that I have of this particular request.
15:35:50 I would hope you would vote this down and I am in
15:35:53 support of the neighborhoods and the people that have
15:35:55 come in the neighborhood asking to you vote this down.
15:35:57 This is highly a residential area, and what Busch
15:36:01 Gardens is asking once again is that the entire park
15:36:04 receive a 4(COP), including where the turtles are,
15:36:09 where the gators are, where the animals are residing,
15:36:12 the entire area.
15:36:14 Now, what would be the purpose to have the entire area
15:36:18 receive this license if there was not some future plan
15:36:22 to perhaps use that property or billed build other
15:36:24 sites on the property where maybe the animals are
15:36:27 living now, to be able to use this and sell the liquor
15:36:29 in that area.
15:36:30 I think this is far and above what should be granted.
15:36:34 I hope that you would take into consideration the
15:36:36 neighborhood.
15:36:37 I do not live far from where Busch Gardens is.
15:36:41 Perhaps it's just a few miles.
15:36:43 My child goes there, my 17-year-old son, and I'm
15:36:46 comfortable sending him to Busch Gardens and I hope it

15:36:49 will continue to be a family place.
15:36:51 And I have some concern that the contradiction that
15:36:53 they have with saying they are going to be a family
15:36:56 place, yet asking for basically free rein to sell when
15:37:03 and where they choose.
15:37:04 Thank you.
15:37:07 >>> My name is Paul CATOE and I am the president and
15:37:18 CEO of the Tampa Bay convention and visitors bureau,
15:37:21 and I'm here to speak in favor of the wet zoning of
15:37:23 Busch Gardens.
15:37:25 Busch Gardens is very important to this community.
15:37:29 It helps us bring over 17 million people to this
15:37:33 destination.
15:37:35 It is responsible for about $3 billion in economic
15:37:40 impact.
15:37:42 They are great corporate citizens.
15:37:44 I don't know if you have been to Busch Gardens lately
15:37:47 or not but go out there and drive around Busch
15:37:49 Gardens.
15:37:51 It was a bad neighborhood eight, ten years ago.
15:37:54 It's a beautiful neighborhood today.
15:37:56 A beautiful neighborhood.

15:37:58 They have worked hard to make it beautiful.
15:38:01 Yes, I represent the hospitality industry.
15:38:04 We bring groups to Tampa and Hillsborough County for
15:38:09 one purpose, to meet, to have conventions, and to
15:38:13 spend money.
15:38:16 We are an organization that help bring the Super Bowl
15:38:20 here, bring the NAACP basketball tournaments, we're
15:38:24 working to bring other events here.
15:38:26 We have a delegation today that is in Sydney,
15:38:29 Australia, to try to bring the world dragon boat races
15:38:34 to this destination.
15:38:36 It is imperative as a convention destination that we
15:38:39 be able to provide services to those that come to our
15:38:43 market.
15:38:45 And part of those services are providing opportunities
15:38:48 to go to the number one attraction that we have, and
15:38:52 to be able to enjoy themselves, to have their events
15:38:56 there, and do the things that they should do there,
15:38:58 and that they want to do there.
15:39:01 The park is already booked for Super Bowl activity.
15:39:05 It's important that we be able to provide the customer
15:39:09 with what they want there.

15:39:12 Busch Gardens is a 900-pound gorilla in our backyard.
15:39:19 We cannot ignore this.
15:39:20 This is important for our community.
15:39:23 It's important to our industry.
15:39:28 Please vote in favor of this wet zoning for Busch
15:39:30 Gardens so we can be competitive with other
15:39:32 destinations.
15:39:34 Again they are good corporate citizens.
15:39:36 They take good care of their park.
15:39:38 They take excellent care of their customers and they
15:39:41 take good care of our customers.
15:39:44 Thank you very much for your time.
15:39:51 >>MARGARET VIZZI: 213 South Sherrill.
15:39:53 No, I live nowhere near Busch Gardens.
15:39:56 And I have many teenage grandchildren, 14, three about
15:40:01 18, plus others, who we allow to go to Busch Gardens
15:40:06 alone, and before this, I had no concern about doing
15:40:10 that.
15:40:11 But if you allow that entire park to be wet zoned, I
15:40:15 would be allowing my grandchildren to walk into a bar,
15:40:21 and I have a real problem with that.
15:40:23 If they want certain areas zoned to have special

15:40:28 events, that's one thing.
15:40:30 But to zone this entire park for wet zoning anywhere
15:40:34 that they would want to, I have a real problem with
15:40:37 that, and I would ask council to please deny this.
15:40:41 Thank you.
15:40:44 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I'll wait till the public is done.
15:40:49 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Mr. Neal, can I ask you a
15:40:51 question, please?
15:40:53 You gave us some figures, liquor law violations, 18
15:40:59 since 2001.
15:41:02 It's on the little chart that you gave us.
15:41:16 >>> Excuse me, when you get old, you have to use
15:41:19 glasses.
15:41:19 >> I know, I have been there.
15:41:20 >>> 18.
15:41:22 That's in grid 23.
15:41:25 >> How many of those liquor law violations were
15:41:29 participants at Busch Gardens that you know of?
15:41:31 >>> Well, grid 23 is the entire Busch Gardens
15:41:37 property.
15:41:40 So I would not know all of them.
15:41:42 But since grid 23, since that's the entire Busch

15:41:46 Gardens property, I would assume it could have
15:41:50 something, or at least --
15:41:52 >> You don't know if they got their alcohol at Busch
15:41:54 Gardens, though.
15:41:55 >>> Well, no, I don't.
15:41:58 But if they are on Busch Gardens property, they
15:42:00 shouldn't be drinking there.
15:42:02 >> Well, Busch Boulevard is a very heavily traveled
15:42:05 road.
15:42:05 >>> Right.
15:42:06 >> And now that.
15:42:07 >>> Except to get into the Busch Gardens area you ever
15:42:11 to clear that gate.
15:42:13 >> I think next time you come up here you better have
15:42:16 some better figures than this because you're sweeping
15:42:18 the broom with everybody in one package, and it
15:42:22 doesn't ring with me.
15:42:24 Because you're not proving to me that these people
15:42:26 went to Busch Gardens and drank.
15:42:27 >>> Well, the police didn't say anything about
15:42:31 anybody.
15:42:31 >> Officer, do you have any statistics on all the

15:42:41 arrests at Busch Gardens?
15:42:44 You do?
15:42:44 >>> (off microphone)
15:42:49 Including the 23, I guess, DUI arrests, or DUI stops,
15:42:59 occurred close enough to the property to be counted as
15:43:03 grid arrests.
15:43:04 So, right, we don't know if that occurred because of
15:43:06 Busch Gardens or not.
15:43:08 We can't verify that.
15:43:09 >> It could have been somebody coming from the --
15:43:16 >>> it could have.
15:43:17 >>GWEN MILLER: The next speaker.
15:43:19 >>> Dan brown, general manager much Busch Gardens and
15:43:22 I have not been sworn in.
15:43:25 (Oath administered by Clerk) I just want to take a
15:43:32 moment and really kind of explain, we read a lot in
15:43:37 the media.
15:43:38 Of course we try to discovering we could to try to
15:43:40 keep this -- I know it's hard to believe but right now
15:43:46 we have no plans to do anything different at Busch
15:43:48 Gardens.
15:43:49 Certainly we are looking for the flexibility to be

15:43:51 able to sell the night functions, or day functions as
15:43:55 it might be.
15:43:56 But at this point, the family target is our target
15:44:00 market.
15:44:00 It has been for many, many years.
15:44:03 We expect to continue that.
15:44:04 I know we all visit Busch Gardens.
15:44:07 It's very, very important to us that we maintain that
15:44:09 family mix, and as the leading destination in this
15:44:14 area, we are going to do everything we can to keep a
15:44:16 wholesome entertainment.
15:44:21 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: When you're done I have a question.
15:44:23 Mr. Brown, I have huge respect for you and Busch
15:44:26 Gardens.
15:44:27 You truly are one of the things in our community of
15:44:31 which we are most proud.
15:44:33 I don't feel comfortable allowing open-ended liquor
15:44:38 zoning over 300 acres.
15:44:40 I just don't feel comfortable with that.
15:44:42 And the way that our rules work, it isn't the council
15:44:46 is granting this to you as the president of Busch
15:44:48 Gardens, or everyone to Busch Gardens.

15:44:51 What we would be doing is providing open-ended liquor
15:44:55 zoning without restriction over 300 acres.
15:44:58 So what I think would be most productive for us to do
15:45:01 today is not take any action, but for you and your
15:45:05 attorney to go back and think hard about what kind of
15:45:09 creative conditions you are willing to emboss on
15:45:12 yourself that would allow to you do what you want to
15:45:14 do, which is to have these special events, and allow
15:45:19 us the comfort of not writing a blank check for 300
15:45:23 acres of wet zoning, liquor zoning.
15:45:27 >>> I understand your request.
15:45:28 I would like to remind you that we have been giving
15:45:31 away beer for almost 48 years in a very respectable
15:45:34 manner.
15:45:35 We take it very, very serious.
15:45:37 Our corporate company spend as great deal of money in
15:45:41 promoting the proper use of beverages to our benefit
15:45:45 both as a park and a company to do it well and I think
15:45:49 our history for as many years as we have been in this
15:45:51 market really shows, we hired police department as
15:45:54 needed, and our history certainly should stand as a
15:45:59 precedent that we are corporate citizens.

15:46:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Let me ask a question.
15:46:08 You say you are doing the whole area but you are not
15:46:10 having the whole area of Busch Gardens.
15:46:13 You are doing it in different areas like different
15:46:17 events? I know you have one way in the back, that
15:46:19 place in the back there.
15:46:20 >>> The desert grill, yes.
15:46:22 >> And in different places.
15:46:25 You are having these events?
15:46:29 >>> We can do a full buyout but it's usually very,
15:46:32 very rare.
15:46:33 At this point, companies will look at buying a section
15:46:36 of the park or a village.
15:46:38 As you know we just announced one of the most
15:46:40 extensive and largest attractions that we are about to
15:46:43 open in April of next year.
15:46:45 This is in the area of python Congo area that I am
15:46:48 sure you are very familiar with, retransitioning that
15:46:51 entire area, and of course we are looking in the
15:46:54 future to possibly be able to open up a specific area
15:46:57 of the park, the night park used to be able to
15:47:01 showcase that particular attraction.

15:47:03 It's difficult for to us pick and choose where a
15:47:05 company might want to use or what part of the park,
15:47:08 and that's why we need the flexibility.
15:47:09 >> But nobody will be walking around the park?
15:47:14 >>> Well, there could be sections of the park where
15:47:18 guests would be able to -- we can set up different
15:47:20 stations where if they rent the west side or the bird
15:47:25 gardens or what have you, yes, we are looking -- we
15:47:27 don't know the size of the company and we are
15:47:29 certainly trying to rent out and sell as many of these
15:47:33 events as possible.
15:47:34 At this point, we have no plans to change the day part
15:47:38 of the business whatsoever.
15:47:38 >> It would be to the person who rented out but not
15:47:41 for everybody who comes to the park.
15:47:43 >>> That's correct.
15:47:44 It's a special event.
15:47:45 But some of those events could be during the day.
15:47:47 We could rent out, close a restaurant and let that be
15:47:51 done.
15:47:52 We need that flexibility.
15:47:53 And that's why it's difficult to specifically answer.

15:47:58 We get those very unique requests.
15:48:00 They love our product.
15:48:01 They come to Tampa Bay.
15:48:02 They don't want to necessarily be in a box northbound
15:48:04 a hotel.
15:48:05 They are looking for a creative way like the aquarium
15:48:08 and do things special and showcase this community.
15:48:12 And so we get those kind of requests and they are
15:48:15 very, very important to book these events as well.
15:48:17 And we believe we have a fantastic asset and we want
15:48:21 to promote it.
15:48:22 >> But you have to be invited.
15:48:24 You can't be just a regular spectator coming to
15:48:26 your -- to Anheuser-Busch.
15:48:31 They have to be invited.
15:48:32 >>> That's correct.
15:48:33 But we could do our own special events.
15:48:36 We could open it up to the public if we wanted to do a
15:48:39 private party, or just for past members so we could
15:48:44 specifically do things.
15:48:45 So I don't want to mislead you.
15:48:48 >> No, no.

15:48:50 What I'm trying to say, just a paid guest coming into
15:48:53 the Busch Gardens cannot attend that party if somebody
15:48:57 is having it.
15:48:58 If I just came from another city, and I can't GOP to
15:49:03 that person's party.
15:49:04 >>> in most cases no.
15:49:06 But we need the flexibility to be able to sell that as
15:49:08 well.
15:49:08 If we were to open this event up or have a party
15:49:11 ourselves, for like I said certain groups, just gold
15:49:16 pass members or just season pass groups that we would
15:49:19 open it up to the public to have those events.
15:49:21 And we need the ability to break out sections of the
15:49:24 park and be able to sell.
15:49:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
15:49:30 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Saul-Sena raises a good point,
15:49:33 and I don't know, she knows you, she trusts you, I
15:49:38 like Busch Gardens.
15:49:39 But all that is irrelevant.
15:49:41 Because 20, 30 years from now, 50 years from now,
15:49:44 whatever, we might all be gone.
15:49:47 But you're planning to hang out, Charlie?

15:49:53 This wet zoning would you and I also notch that
15:50:00 sometimes theme parks get sold.
15:50:03 Busch Gardens has undergone major transformations over
15:50:06 the years.
15:50:06 I have witnessed it firsthand as a child growing up
15:50:08 here and watched the change.
15:50:10 And it's a wonderful place.
15:50:11 The theme park can be sold.
15:50:14 So her point is very well taken with me, that, you
15:50:20 know, we might have a great relationship with you and
15:50:23 with your company, but it's irrelevant to the analysis
15:50:26 that we have to do here.
15:50:28 Because at the end of the day it's 300, 200, 300 acres
15:50:32 ever wide-open wet zoning.
15:50:35 That if the park got sold and 50 years from now
15:50:40 somebody decided they didn't want a theme park
15:50:42 anymore, they could start breaking this thing down
15:50:46 into little one-acre sections, and that wet zoning
15:50:49 issue would be decided here today.
15:50:54 That is the concern of council.
15:50:55 And that's why I agree with Mrs. Saul-Sena.
15:50:58 We want to accommodate Tampa request to Busch Gardens.

15:51:01 But I think you need to work with your attorney and
15:51:05 our attorneys to narrow it down to an area at least
15:51:09 where I feel comfortable, now, going forward with
15:51:11 this.
15:51:11 Either gentlemen oh graphically, to narrow the scope
15:51:14 of it.
15:51:14 Right now we are approving wet zoning on your request
15:51:17 that would include the Savannah area where your
15:51:20 animals are walking around, okay?
15:51:22 I mean, it's kind of silly.
15:51:24 Why would we approve that area?
15:51:26 >>> They may want a special outing to be able to be up
15:51:31 close and personal with the animals.
15:51:33 And that is one of our top sellers.
15:51:34 So --
15:51:36 >> With a drink in their hands.
15:51:38 >>> they could do a catering event, a tent and special
15:51:42 area, that we can oversee and overlook the animals in
15:51:46 a safe atmosphere, yes.
15:51:47 >> And I'm okay with that, but I would suggest -- I
15:51:49 would suggest that perhaps you all put in a little
15:51:52 more work into that and define the geographic area,

15:51:56 and survey it out.
15:51:57 You don't have to renotice.
15:51:58 Because it's less than the area that's already been
15:52:01 noticed, and Britt back down into little areas where
15:52:04 you think this is realistically going to happen.
15:52:07 I would be able to support that.
15:52:08 But as it is right now I can't support carte blanche
15:52:11 300 acres.
15:52:12 And I don't care if it's you or the president of the
15:52:14 United States.
15:52:14 I just -- I don't feel comfortable with it.
15:52:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Mulhern?
15:52:19 >>MARY MULHERN: I have had 18 years, and I got another
15:52:24 10, of taking kids to amusement parks.
15:52:27 And I love Busch Gardens, which for me, you know,
15:52:30 usually I'm getting dragged there.
15:52:32 Not so crazy about adventure island.
15:52:36 But what I'm curious about, I really care about
15:52:41 economic development here.
15:52:42 I want Tampa to bring people here.
15:52:45 And I want these parks to be competitive.
15:52:48 But, on the other hand, we heard from Ms. Vizzi, who

15:52:53 has had dozens of grandchildren, that she's taken
15:52:56 there, and all the parents I know, from our community
15:53:00 who go there, think of it as a place for children.
15:53:03 And we do allow our teenagers to go there by
15:53:06 themselves, which we wouldn't do to let them go to
15:53:09 Ybor City, where, you know, they could just be going
15:53:12 to get a hamburger.
15:53:14 But you don't know what else they might get into.
15:53:17 And so for me, this is not -- we love your brand, your
15:53:24 family brand.
15:53:25 And we want -- we see that as what makes you stand
15:53:28 out.
15:53:29 So I guess my question for you is, what proportion
15:53:33 is -- you see this need to branch out into the
15:53:38 alcohol.
15:53:40 What proportion of your business is coming from
15:53:44 tourism as opposed to local?
15:53:46 And if you have a demographic about adults coming
15:53:50 there as opposed to families with children?
15:53:53 >>> I don't have the statistics on me right this
15:53:56 minute but we certainly do have a mix of both tourists
15:53:59 and local, and certainly over the years, the tourist

15:54:03 mix from 20 years ago was much less than it was in
15:54:06 those days.
15:54:07 And certainly we had to promote products to provide a
15:54:16 lift for our local market.
15:54:18 But certainly we are looking trying to focus this on
15:54:20 the nighttime or special events piece, not so much the
15:54:24 day business.
15:54:25 >> But we regularly, and with a lot less questioning,
15:54:29 approve one-day wet zoning, and special events
15:54:32 permits.
15:54:33 And that would be, you know -- just for nonprofits?
15:54:44 >>> Just for not for profit groups.
15:54:47 >>MARY MULHERN: Ms. Kert, don't go away because I want
15:54:49 you to clarify something for us with relation to
15:54:55 chairwoman Miller's questions about who and where can
15:54:58 people drink if we pass this zoning change?
15:55:03 >>REBECCA KERT: I wasn't sure of the question -- I
15:55:05 thought the chairman's question was what was intended
15:55:09 as Busch Gardens.
15:55:10 I thought as far as what the 4(COP) would allow, would
15:55:13 allow full liquor for consumption on premises and off
15:55:16 premises for the entire surveyed area.

15:55:22 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: I would like to propose that we
15:55:25 give the petitioner 30 days to come back and see if
15:55:29 they can come up with something to give us additional
15:55:32 reassurance.
15:55:33 Perhaps they would like to request some additional
15:55:38 conditions.
15:55:38 So I would like to move to continue this discussion
15:55:40 for 30 days.
15:55:43 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, was there a second to that
15:55:45 motion?
15:55:46 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll second it but I would like to
15:55:47 hear from the petitioner is amenable to a 30 day
15:55:50 continuance.
15:55:51 I think they would have to be.
15:55:53 That's what Rebecca tells us.
15:55:58 >>REBECCA KERT: Yes, I have spoken with Mr. Brown.
15:56:04 I will have Rebecca to come back to try to help you
15:56:07 narrow this down a little bit so that council is more
15:56:09 comfortable.
15:56:16 >>> I think don't they need some direction about what
15:56:19 you're talking about?
15:56:24 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: Madam Chairman, my direction then

15:56:27 would be -- I think you got the gist of it.
15:56:30 We want to see the general public -- the over 300
15:56:35 acres and the general public would not have access to
15:56:38 liquor.
15:56:40 I would hope that you come back with something that's
15:56:42 more oriented towards special events, and discreet
15:56:47 areas.
15:56:49 And I think that you can think about that and work on
15:56:52 something that would come back.
15:56:53 For example, if somebody brought out all of adventure
15:56:56 island, well, then the general public isn't there,
15:56:59 it's just discreet to them, or it's geographically
15:57:05 physically a smaller portion.
15:57:07 And I think that you're very smart and creative.
15:57:10 And we have a lot of latitude in our ability for you
15:57:15 as a petitioner to impose conditions on yourself.
15:57:18 And I think if you think about that and you think
15:57:21 about what you heard today, could you probably come up
15:57:23 with some good things.
15:57:24 And you are allowed to talk to the neighborhood.
15:57:26 And I would encourage to you talk to the neighborhood
15:57:28 when you have some ideas, vet some ideas with them.

15:57:34 My fondest hope is 30 days from now you come back to
15:57:37 us with the support of the neighborhood having come up
15:57:39 with something that meets your needs, and meets the
15:57:44 community's needs.
15:57:46 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second on the
15:57:47 floor.
15:57:48 Question on the motion.
15:57:48 Mr. Shelby?
15:57:50 >>MARTIN SHELBY: A specific place and time, teem
15:57:52 please.
15:57:53 >>LINDA SAUL-SENA: October 18th at 10:30.
15:57:58 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of the motion say Aye.
15:58:00 Opposed, Nay.
15:58:02 Need to open number 121.
15:58:05 >> So moved.
15:58:06 >>: Second.
15:58:40 >>BARBARA LEPORE: Land development.
15:58:42 I have been sworn.
15:58:43 I'm here on case WZ 07-122.
15:58:47 For the location at 6401 north Nebraska Avenue.
15:58:52 Property was rezoned recently to the planned
15:58:54 development.

15:58:55 The case number was Z-06-27, PD.
15:59:05 Petitioner is requesting 2(COP-R), the sale of beer
15:59:08 and wine, at the 6401 north Nebraska Avenue.
15:59:15 In association with the restaurant.
15:59:16 Wet zone is 3,000 square feet, which 2400 of them will
15:59:23 be located inside of the building.
15:59:27 There will be about 400 seating seats and 18 of them
15:59:33 will be located outside of the building.
15:59:36 The sale of alcohol will be primarily -- would be
15:59:40 incidental to the primary function of the building.
15:59:43 At this time, there are no other wet zoned locations
15:59:45 in the area.
15:59:48 There are residential locations, residential uses, as
15:59:51 well as the institutional, at this time petitioner is
15:59:55 requesting the waiver to the distance separation.
16:00:01 At this time, when I went to the location, it's a
16:00:06 vacant lot.
16:00:08 (off microphone)
16:00:21 As you can see the wet zoning.
16:00:29 Land development has no objection.
16:00:42 Land development has no objection.
16:00:53 The petition has been forwarded to the Tampa Police

16:00:54 Department.
16:01:00 >>> Officer Don Miller, City of Tampa police
16:01:02 department.
16:01:02 We have no objections to the wet zoning.
16:01:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?
16:01:11 >> 1400 Gandy Boulevard.
16:01:19 I have not been sworn.
16:01:21 (Oath administered by Clerk).
16:01:27 >>> Yes.
16:01:30 >>GWEN MILLER: What do you plan to do?
16:01:32 >>> Plan to put up a 2800 square foot sports bar.
16:01:38 And sporting events, games.
16:01:54 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there already a building you are
16:01:56 renovating or what?
16:01:57 >>> No.
16:01:58 It's flat.
16:01:59 >> You are going to build a new building?
16:02:01 >>> Yes, ma'am.
16:02:02 From the ground up, construction.
16:02:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
16:02:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Are you aware, sir, under this
16:02:07 zone, that you are requesting, that the sales have to

16:02:11 be 51% as a total sale?
16:02:15 >>> Yes.
16:02:18 69 is there anyone in the public that wants to speak
16:02:20 on item 121?
16:02:23 When they are done speaking you may come back.
16:02:27 >>> Susan Lauren, treasurer of the Old Seminole
16:02:30 Heights association.
16:02:31 I have been sworn.
16:02:34 We have been working with this owner for on and off
16:02:38 for probably two or three years.
16:02:43 To meet our requests, we strongly urge to you approve
16:02:47 this request.
16:02:48 Thank you.
16:02:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Any questions by council members?
16:02:51 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close the hearing.
16:02:53 >> Second.
16:02:53 (Motion carried).
16:02:54 >>CHAIRMAN: Do you have an ordinance?
16:02:56 >> I move an ordinance upon second reading, making
16:03:11 lawful the sale of beverages containing alcohol of
16:03:13 more than 1% by weight and not more than 14% by weight
16:03:16 and wines regardless of alcoholic content beer and

16:03:19 wine 2(COP-R) for consumption on the premises only in
16:03:23 connection with a restaurant business establishment on
16:03:25 that certain lot, plot or tract of land located at
16:03:28 6401 north Nebraska Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more
16:03:32 particularly described in section 2 hereof, waiving
16:03:34 certain restrictions as to distance based upon certain
16:03:37 findings, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
16:03:39 conflict, providing an effective date.
16:03:41 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just for clarification that's first
16:03:43 reading?
16:03:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: First reading, thank you.
16:03:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
16:03:47 (Motion carried)
16:03:52 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 122, anything on that?
16:04:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Good luck.
16:04:01 >>GWEN MILLER: When you open list know.
16:04:04 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It's going to be coming back in two
16:04:06 weeks so it will be final when the council votes again
16:04:08 in two weeks.
16:04:09 Thank you.
16:04:12 >>GWEN MILLER: You don't have to come back.
16:04:21 >> You should.

16:04:22 >> You should come back.
16:04:34 >>THE CLERK: Item 122, it was sent by certified mail
16:04:40 and U.S. mail.
16:04:41 Certified mail was returned to us unclaimed.
16:04:44 We have not received -- she has not filed a
16:04:49 certificate.
16:04:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to strike from the agenda.
16:04:53 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Got the whole letter back?
16:04:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
16:04:58 (Motion carried)
16:05:00 Now we go back to item -- I have forgotten. What item
16:05:04 is that?
16:05:06 9?
16:05:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: The calendar, related to item number
16:05:14 9.
16:05:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Point of order.
16:05:29 My point of order is this isn't on the agenda.
16:05:31 So I don't think there's anything credit critical.
16:05:37 It's already 4:00.
16:05:38 I think we should put it on the agenda and deal it
16:05:41 with when we are all rested next week.
16:05:48 >> I know it's been a long day for council members.

16:05:50 I would say, though, it's closer than November.
16:05:53 In fact this time next Thursday, we will have been two
16:05:57 hours after the deadline for agenda items for the
16:06:00 clerk's office for the new cycle in the new approach
16:06:04 to council meetings.
16:06:05 But I would be glad to come back under unfinished
16:06:08 business next Thursday.
16:06:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The first one you are asking for is
16:06:14 November 29th according to your letter.
16:06:16 That's why I said November.
16:06:20 >>GWEN MILLER: How many council members --
16:06:28 >> I don't care to do it now.
16:06:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Anybody have a problem?
16:06:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: As long as we can meet the
16:06:36 requirement.
16:06:37 >>MARTIN SHELBY: This is procedural.
16:06:38 It's just calendar.
16:06:42 >>> Dale Smith, chief of staff.
16:06:44 I appreciate the opportunity to address the new
16:06:48 council meeting schedule as determined by your updated
16:06:53 rules.
16:06:54 And that were approved this morning under second

16:06:56 reading.
16:06:57 I would like to start off with just emphasizing that
16:07:01 this is a major change with regard to the way City
16:07:06 Council and the City of Tampa has been doing business
16:07:09 in the past.
16:07:10 And I really don't know how long the city council has
16:07:14 been on a weekly meeting cycle for regular meetings, a
16:07:20 significant period of time, and moving to a regular
16:07:24 meeting every two weeks is going to be a challenge for
16:07:28 the administration, and council members.
16:07:32 We are committed to providing the information that you
16:07:34 need in a timely basis, in accordance with your new
16:07:38 rules.
16:07:38 And we are committed to working with council in a
16:07:41 partnership to get the new program off on the right
16:07:45 foot, and to make sure that it's successful.
16:07:50 And making it successful is going to be dependent on
16:07:55 mutual awareness of needs.
16:07:57 You need information.
16:07:58 You need timely information.
16:07:59 We also have our requirements for the submission of
16:08:04 items in the administration side.

16:08:07 And I would like to take a couple of minutes just to
16:08:10 emphasize or point out the challenges that we have on
16:08:15 the administration side.
16:08:16 And I do have some copies of the calendar with the
16:08:20 dates and the appropriate meetings marked in.
16:08:24 I would like to pass that out.
16:08:28 Going to a council schedule that is based on every two
16:08:46 weeks, the first and third Thursdays for regular
16:08:49 meeting, and tailoring that schedule into months that
16:08:54 don't have the same number of Thursdays, and tailoring
16:08:58 into months that have holidays in them requires some
16:09:02 adjustment.
16:09:04 And even with the adjustments that we have available,
16:09:08 and using the designated days for the appropriate
16:09:11 meetings, we still end up in five different instances
16:09:15 where we have three weeks between regular council
16:09:19 meetings.
16:09:20 And I understand that it was discussed this morning
16:09:23 that in the event that we come up on that situation
16:09:27 that we can use a nonregular meeting as an alternative
16:09:32 to bring items before council, as long as they are
16:09:35 appropriately agendaed.

16:09:37 I would submit that we should strive to try to get a
16:09:42 schedule up front that we view is realistic, and
16:09:48 responsible, and then we react or we deviate as
16:09:52 necessary along the way as we see conflict come up, or
16:09:57 situations that have not been anticipated.
16:10:00 I would like to take a moment to explain my calendar
16:10:04 here.
16:10:05 It's fairly low-cost.
16:10:07 And the abbreviations there, we should be looking at
16:10:09 October 2007, and the regular dates on October
16:10:16 4th, on the 11th, the CRA, and then evening
16:10:20 council meeting on the 18th, a regular meeting,
16:10:24 25th ath a workshop, and an evening meeting.
16:10:28 I believe this depicts your standard, your goal as far
16:10:33 as the days of the months or the Thursdays of the
16:10:36 month where you have the respective meetings.
16:10:39 If you look to November of 2007, he's the first
16:10:44 instance where we come upon a holiday, Thanksgiving
16:10:47 being on the 22nd of November.
16:10:50 So we see where there is a regular meeting on the
16:10:54 1st of November, and the CRA meeting on the
16:10:57 8th, and on the 15th a regular meeting.

16:11:01 And we have no other meetings.
16:11:02 Thanksgiving, and no regular meeting on the 29th
16:11:05 currently on the council-approved calendar.
16:11:09 Let me point out using that meeting on the 15th of
16:11:12 November what the lead time is for the submission of
16:11:19 agenda items.
16:11:20 And under your new rules of procedure, the agenda
16:11:24 items are due to the city clerk at 2:00 on November
16:11:28 the 8th.
16:11:30 So city administration will be striving, front loading
16:11:33 the items, coordinating them so we can get them into
16:11:37 the clerk by the 8th.
16:11:39 If we for whatever reason come up with an item on
16:11:43 Friday the 9th of November, that did not make that
16:11:47 deadline, then one of the items that I would like some
16:11:52 guidance from council is how to respond to that.
16:11:56 How should we be anticipating to work it?
16:11:59 Obviously, there's a walk-on capability contention on
16:12:03 Madam Chair's approval.
16:12:07 There is also the idea of waiting until the next
16:12:10 regular meeting.
16:12:12 Or there's an idea of trying to integrate it into a

16:12:16 nonregular meeting, into an evening meeting or a
16:12:18 workshop that will be scheduled with the appropriate
16:12:21 agenda, lead time and all of that.
16:12:25 You see in, November, though, if we miss the agenda
16:12:28 deadline for the meeting on the 15th, we currently
16:12:31 have no option until other than a walk-on, until the
16:12:36 29th, where we have an option of integrating us
16:12:40 into an evening meeting.
16:12:42 If we did it that way, we would submit the item one
16:12:46 week prior in accordance with your council rule.
16:12:48 That is the first instance where we are suggesting the
16:12:52 opportunity of adding a regular meeting on the
16:12:55 29th.
16:12:58 That would be making three regular meetings.
16:13:01 But it gives us an opportunity to get a regular agenda
16:13:04 item on the council regular agenda prior to the normal
16:13:09 time now, would be December 6th, the next page
16:13:13 there, which is the regular meeting.
16:13:16 So, again, if we missed the agenda for the 15th,
16:13:19 it's almost a month before we can get back before
16:13:23 council in a regular meeting agenda opportunity.
16:13:28 So that's one example where it would be worthy of

16:13:35 consideration.
16:13:35 I point out in January of 2008, this is one month
16:13:41 where unusually we looked at adding another regular
16:13:44 meeting, but council may want to consider in this
16:13:49 situation, as I have depicted there, we have two
16:13:52 regular meetings back to back, on the 10th and the
16:13:55 17th.
16:13:56 And if this would be compatible with council
16:14:00 direction, to move the regular meeting from the
16:14:03 17th to the 24th, then move the workshop from
16:14:07 the 24th in the evening meeting from the 24th
16:14:10 down to the 31st.
16:14:12 Obviously a deviation from your typical protocol for
16:14:15 what meetings come on which Thursday.
16:14:18 But that's within your rules, also, as far as council
16:14:20 prerogative to make those changes.
16:14:24 The next opportunity to minimum advertise three-week
16:14:30 gap would be on May 2008.
16:14:37 In that case, we have regular meetings on the 1st
16:14:42 and the 15th.
16:14:43 If we miss the 15th agenda date, which is May the
16:14:48 8th, without adding it to an evening or a workshop

16:14:53 agenda, we can't get back before council until
16:14:56 currently June 5th.
16:14:58 Again, almost a month.
16:15:00 And you need to also consider continuation of items,
16:15:05 or just unfinished business that gets deferred.
16:15:08 We don't have the opportunity that we currently have
16:15:11 to defer it into the next week, or in the next two
16:15:14 weeks.
16:15:15 June 8th, or June 2008 is the next example where
16:15:22 if it was realistic to move around the meetings, you
16:15:27 could move the existing regular meeting on the 5th
16:15:30 to the 12th, the CRA, and the evening meeting to
16:15:34 the 5th and end up without an addition add
16:15:39 meeting.
16:15:41 The next situation would be on October 2008.
16:15:50 Again, we have the first and the third Thursdays with
16:15:53 regular meeting.
16:15:56 We have a holiday there on the 9th.
16:15:59 Then we have a workshop and evening meeting on the
16:16:03 23rd, and a CRA on the 30th.
16:16:07 If you could add a regular meeting on the 30th,
16:16:10 that would preserve a two-week rotation for regular

16:16:13 meetings.
16:16:17 And that completes the examples here.
16:16:21 I believe as compared to my memo this morning write
16:16:25 was referencing five.
16:16:26 By shifting around the meetings as I discussed, I
16:16:28 believe you could get into the four added meetings.
16:16:34 And at this point, I would be glad to entertain any
16:16:37 comments or questions that you have.
16:16:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott?
16:16:40 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, Mr. Smith, I'm a little confused
16:16:43 because I don't see where that could ab problem.
16:16:46 I mean, if the item is scheduled to be on the agenda,
16:16:49 let's say, for instance, November, you had to have it
16:16:52 in by the -- you had to have it for the 9th, could
16:16:58 you do an addendum.
16:16:59 An addendum meaning you add it tot onto the agenda.
16:17:06 At county commission an addendum was prepared and this
16:17:08 was an additional item that could make the cut in
16:17:10 time.
16:17:11 You wouldn't stack it, but those opportunities would
16:17:13 be there.
16:17:14 Plus the fact that council still meets each week.

16:17:17 Each of us are meeting.
16:17:18 And you could still add an item, if it's an emergency
16:17:24 item that you needed to get approval on or whatever, I
16:17:28 don't see where it could be given to the clerk and
16:17:34 made aware to the chairman, and it could be added to
16:17:36 that gent agenda so that council could take that up as
16:17:39 the first item, so that we wouldn't delay that.
16:17:42 So I don't really foresee that there's a major issue.
16:17:47 I'm just one council member from my perspective.
16:17:50 >>> I don't believe your current rules have an
16:17:52 addendum built into it.
16:17:54 Only rule we have to apply is approximate T preceding
16:18:00 Thursday by 2:00, and if it doesn't make that
16:18:03 deadline --
16:18:07 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's a walk on.
16:18:09 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Basically, council, on page six of
16:18:16 your new rules it says time sensitive matters, the way
16:18:20 you have it based on what you adopted today, time
16:18:22 sensitive matters that cannot otherwise wait till the
16:18:24 next regular meeting may be brought before City
16:18:27 Council as an official action at an evening meeting
16:18:30 with approval of the chair and prior notice.

16:18:32 And again notice is a concern to the public, as you
16:18:35 heard today.
16:18:39 Also, council, you do have that all scheduled meetings
16:18:45 are subject to adjustment.
16:18:47 Do you have that right.
16:18:49 And you do also have the right, the regular meetings
16:18:51 may be scheduled for another day and time as may be
16:18:53 designated by majority vote of council.
16:18:56 In conversations I shared with you earlier with Mr.
16:18:59 Smith, the important thing, though, is I think from
16:19:02 the public's and the administration's point of view is
16:19:05 consistency and advance knowledge about what should
16:19:08 be.
16:19:08 So rather than having to adjust your schedule, and I
16:19:13 haven't had an opportunity to look at it, but I have
16:19:15 maybe one suggest.
16:19:16 But if council wishes to take an opportunity to look
16:19:20 at it, in fact, I have concerns two, fold, looking at
16:19:26 the calendar the way the clerk has it presented.
16:19:28 When you have a regular meeting, the fact that you
16:19:30 will have two regular meetings will be that your
16:19:33 regular meetings will be longer.

16:19:35 And that is a fact, to business the way it is
16:19:39 presently.
16:19:39 Your consent items will be longer.
16:19:43 And council may go a bit longer than it has.
16:19:47 But you will not have an evening meeting, except
16:19:49 sometimes within the schedule where you look to see --
16:19:56 that's a area for tremendous fatigue because based on
16:20:01 going on a long agenda, to come back in the evening is
16:20:04 not a good idea.
16:20:05 So there are ways that Mr. Smith recommended, and even
16:20:07 for instance with regard, let's say, if you turn to
16:20:10 the month of July, just as a point of reference, for
16:20:15 the month of July, when Mr. Smith has suggested that
16:20:18 the 31st have a regular meeting.
16:20:20 He also has an "E" there which means you will have a
16:20:23 regular meeting of CRA and and "E," where if you move
16:20:27 the evening meeting to the 24th, you would have no
16:20:30 evening meeting.
16:20:31 On the 31st as Mr. Smith proposed.
16:20:34 That's one of the suggestions that I just saw now.
16:20:36 But I'm just concerned, council, that I think in order
16:20:39 for this to be successful, the calendar that is

16:20:44 adopted has to be cognizant of the fact that you are
16:20:46 human beings, and you can only make as good a decision
16:20:49 as you are capable of doing based on your workload.
16:20:52 And I'm concerned that you not stack regular meetings
16:20:57 with evening meetings unless it's absolutely
16:20:59 necessary.
16:21:00 And that's just a concern that I have watching how
16:21:05 council does it.
16:21:06 >>> Might I point out that's currently in your
16:21:09 calendar.
16:21:10 That's not a change that I made.
16:21:11 So I do agree that that is something that should be
16:21:14 addressed as far as possibly moving the E into the
16:21:19 24th but I did not make any change to that.
16:21:22 >>MAR