Help & information    View the list of Transcripts


09:12:55 TAMPA CITY COUNCIL MEETING
09:12:55 THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2007
09:12:55 9:00 A.M. SESSION
09:12:55
09:12:55 DISCLAIMER:
09:12:55 The following represents an unedited version of
09:12:55 realtime captioning which should neither be relied
09:12:55 upon for complete accuracy nor used as a verbatim
09:12:55 transcript.
09:12:55 The original of this file was produced in all capital
09:12:55 letters and any variation thereto may be a result of
09:12:55 third party edits and software compatibility issues.
09:12:55 Any person who needs a verbatim transcript of the
09:12:55 proceedings may need to hire a court reporter.
09:12:55
09:12:55
09:20:23 [Sounding gavel]
09:20:32 Tampa City Council is called to order.
09:20:34 The chair will yield to Mr. Scott.
09:20:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:20:39 We will stand now for the invocation and followed by
09:20:41 the pledge of allegiance.
09:20:49 >>> We are thankful for the blessing of this day.
09:20:52 Thank you for the rising of the sun.
09:20:53 We thank you for the radiance of it and how it has
09:20:56 kissed us and allowed to us see another brand new day,

09:20:59 a day we pause and say thank you for the many
09:21:02 blessings that you have bestowed upon us.
09:21:03 Today we are so blessed to live in a nation that has
09:21:07 freedom and opportunity and privileges, even
09:21:12 challenges.
09:21:12 We thank you that you have given us grace and given us
09:21:16 mercy.
09:21:16 Today we thank you for this nation.
09:21:18 And we thank you for those who are in office
09:21:20 throughout this nation.
09:21:21 We ask your blessing upon them as they lead their
09:21:26 respected community and those in Washington who guide
09:21:28 our nation.
09:21:29 Also, we pray today for this council that you give us
09:21:31 wisdom.
09:21:32 Give us knowledge and give us insight.
09:21:34 We pray that we will make the best decisions that we
09:21:37 have been charged to do by those in our community.
09:21:41 We pray now that we will be patient, that we will
09:21:44 listen, that we will be open, and that we will be in
09:21:48 touch.
09:21:49 Bless our time together.

09:21:50 In your name we pray.
09:21:51 Amen.
09:21:54 (Pledge of Allegiance)
09:22:15 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
09:22:19 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Here.
09:22:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
09:22:22 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Here.
09:22:23 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
09:22:24 >>GWEN MILLER: I would like to put on the record that
09:22:26 Mrs. Saul-Sena will not be here for the morning
09:22:28 session or the evening session.
09:22:29 And I would like to send out a birthday wish to
09:22:32 councilman Reverend Scott.
09:22:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, Madam Chair.
09:22:39 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I am not going to be here Sunday.
09:22:41 It's my birthday.
09:22:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Oh, happy birthday.
09:22:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, these are two fine
09:22:51 individuals that are older than I.
09:22:52 But I would like to say something on behalf of Mr.
09:22:54 Scott's birthday.
09:22:56 27 is a very special number.

09:22:59 September 27th.
09:23:01 That's the birthday of my Ft. daughter Yvette.
09:23:04 And I believe it's former county commissioner Jan
09:23:10 Platt's birthday.
09:23:12 And I also know there's a young lady in West Tampa who
09:23:14 today turns 104.
09:23:16 So, Mr. Scott, you're in good company.
09:23:18 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Thank you, sir.
09:23:21 I hope to live to 104.
09:23:24 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I thought you were already 104.
09:23:26 [ Laughter ]
09:23:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We now go to item number 1.
09:23:29 Mary Mulhern, you have a commendation?
09:23:47 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm happy today to present a
09:23:49 commendation to some citizens of Tampa who are, of
09:23:57 their own initiative, doing an international cultural
09:24:01 exchange with one of our sister cities, which is
09:24:06 Oviedo, Spain.
09:24:10 For the grand reopening of Hillsborough community
09:24:12 college Ybor school of visual and performing arts
09:24:15 gallery.
09:24:16 They will host an exhibit celebrating Hispanic

09:24:19 heritage entitled "en espanol."
09:24:24 This exhibit is being curated by gallery coordinator
09:24:27 Carolyn Kossar and showcase works with sister city
09:24:33 Oviedo Spain, mixed media work by Consuelo Vallina,
09:24:40 and Esther Sanchez.
09:24:43 It should be noted that the City of Tampa has $8,000
09:24:46 available for sister city initiatives, but this
09:24:50 exhibit was coordinated without any of those public
09:24:53 funds.
09:24:54 An opening reception with the artist is planned from 6
09:24:59 to it p.m. and free and open to the public.
09:25:02 The exhibit will continue through November 3rd.
09:25:04 So it's my honor to ask Carolyn Kossar and Yvonne Yoli
09:25:17 Caplin to come up so we can present them a
09:25:23 commendation for this effort.
09:25:25 I present this commendation from the Tampa City
09:25:30 Council to Carolyn Kossar, Hillsborough County
09:25:34 community college, Ybor City, for her efforts in
09:25:36 coordinating the upcoming exhibition entitled en
09:25:40 espanol.
09:25:42 And congratulations on your new gallery, which
09:25:45 hopefully will be open for the opening?

09:25:50 [ Applause ]
09:25:50 And I present this commendation to Yvonne Yoli Caplin
09:26:02 for their efforts in coordinating with the
09:26:05 Hillsborough community campus.
09:26:09 Juan is from this area, the city, and actually has a
09:26:16 family case, and they often go to visit family, and
09:26:19 they have asked the artist in Spain and worked with
09:26:23 Carolyn to do this wonderful exhibition.
09:26:27 I present this to you, Yvonne and Carolyn.
09:26:35 Would you like to say something?
09:26:37 And then Yoli.
09:26:40 >>> Yes, I wanted to thank the City Council for this
09:26:42 honor.
09:26:44 I want to thank Yvonne and Juan Caplin for their
09:26:48 support and their efforts in this international
09:26:57 exhibit and thank the arts council of Hillsborough
09:26:59 County for their support.
09:27:00 And I hope to see you all at the opening reception on
09:27:03 October 9th.
09:27:04 Thank you.
09:27:09 >>> Let me get my glasses on.
09:27:16 It is an honor to accept this commendation on behalf

09:27:19 of myself and the artists traveling from Spain.
09:27:22 This commendation also represents a relationship
09:27:25 between two cities and two continents.
09:27:29 It is this way through the arts that we can achieve
09:27:32 further understanding with and hope that this gesture
09:27:34 by City Council goes beyond the HCC Ybor gallery.
09:27:42 This is one more step in making Tampa a center of arts
09:27:45 and culture.
09:27:46 We all know, and many studies have confirmed, that art
09:27:50 is not just here to acknowledge and elevate the human
09:27:54 spirit, it is also good for business.
09:27:58 I want to thank City Council and Mary Mulhern for
09:28:01 acknowledging our efforts.
09:28:02 Thank you.
09:28:05 [ Applause ]
09:28:10 >>GWEN MILLER: At this time Mr. Charlie Miranda has a
09:28:11 commendation to present.
09:28:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Madam Chair, I don't know if I made
09:28:15 an era.
09:28:16 I thought this was going to be presented an event but
09:28:19 it may be here at the council.
09:28:24 Please come forward.

09:28:26 Madam Chair, honorable council members, my pleasure to
09:28:48 be here with Madim young who worked for the arts.
09:28:59 This event is going to be tomorrow at 6:00 at the old
09:29:01 cigar factory on Armenia between chestnut and union --
09:29:06 spruce.
09:29:07 I knew she was a sharp lady.
09:29:10 In recognition of your tireless efforts towards the
09:29:13 formation of the West Tampa center for the arts and
09:29:15 the presentation on Nueva, devoted to the creativity.
09:29:23 The center is dedicated to emerging and career artists
09:29:28 as well as the at risk population, this event the
09:29:30 first of which we hope will be many is to be held in
09:29:32 the historic former Santiago cigar factory, 1906
09:29:38 Armenia Avenue on Friday, the 28th of September at
09:29:40 6:00 in the evening.
09:29:42 My honor on behalf of Tampa City Council to represent
09:29:44 you with this commendation.
09:29:46 [ Applause ]
09:29:53 >>> I would like to thank the City Council members for
09:29:55 this great honor.
09:29:57 And I must mention the family for allowing their
09:30:05 beautiful building to be used for the arts, and to be

09:30:08 used for at-risk programs for children and disabled
09:30:12 adults.
09:30:16 I think that September 28th will be a wonderful
09:30:18 event.
09:30:19 We have great entertainment.
09:30:21 And I want to invite all of you.
09:30:24 I have lots of invitations which I'll leave here, if
09:30:27 you will please honor us with your presence.
09:30:31 We will be very grateful to have you.
09:30:33 Again, thank you to J.D. van pelt for having the
09:30:38 wonderful idea of turning the cigar factory into an
09:30:43 arts center, and for the rest of the Ellis van pelt
09:30:48 family to acknowledge that West Tampa is in need of a
09:30:56 cultural face lift, and here we are.
09:30:59 So we welcome all of you.
09:31:01 Thank you.
09:31:01 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
09:31:03 [ Applause ]
09:31:07 We now go to the approval of the agenda.
09:31:09 There are any items council would like to pull?
09:31:12 Mr. Dingfelder?
09:31:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.

09:31:16 Just pull for a separate vote 38 and 41.
09:31:20 It doesn't require staff.
09:31:23 >>GWEN MILLER: Other items from council member?
09:31:31 38 and 41.
09:31:38 Mr. Caetano?
09:31:39 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: (off microphone)
09:31:55 >>> Council member Caetano, this is a resolution which
09:31:58 is in effect a memorialization of a prior council vote
09:32:01 at which time by a blot the City Council appointed
09:32:06 these people to the Planning Commission, and as I
09:32:08 stated during the time of the vote, the effective date
09:32:10 of their appointment was on the date of that vote.
09:32:14 This is a memorialization putting that in writing.
09:32:16 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: So it's just before us to
09:32:20 reaffirm what we have already done?
09:32:23 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If you wish to characterize it as
09:32:25 reaffirming.
09:32:26 I prefer to say it's a memorialization of something
09:32:28 that has an effect.
09:32:29 So it reduces it to writing.
09:32:32 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other items?
09:32:34 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: What was the other item, Mr.

09:32:36 Dingfelder?
09:32:37 41 and what?
09:32:38 >>GWEN MILLER: 38.
09:32:39 And Reverend Scott said 53.
09:32:45 Any other items?
09:32:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: On item 53, Madam Chairman, if we
09:32:50 don't transfer this money, there's going to be more
09:32:53 damage down there.
09:32:54 We are only looking at $10,000 now.
09:32:56 And if we don't transfer this money to get this
09:32:59 building fixed --
09:33:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
09:33:05 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Scott wanted to pull it so we
09:33:10 have it for discussion later.
09:33:11 >>GWEN MILLER: And we get to item 53.
09:33:14 Mr. Caetano, you can discuss the issue.
09:33:18 Mr. Shelby.
09:33:19 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I wonder if you can do the sign-up
09:33:22 sheet prayer to the approval.
09:33:24 >>GWEN MILLER: The sign-up sheet, Mr. John McKirchy.
09:33:30 >>> I'm presenting a substitute resolution for items
09:33:34 83 and 84.

09:33:36 It changes the date to comply with City Council's new
09:33:41 meeting schedule.
09:33:41 Thank you.
09:33:42 >>GWEN MILLER: We will do that when we get to
09:33:44 committee reports.
09:33:44 Okay.
09:33:46 Ms. Julie Cole.
09:33:51 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department here on item number 92.
09:33:54 Item number 92, even though it shows on the agenda as
09:33:59 a report relating to the pending ordinance doctrine,
09:34:03 it was supposed to be part of the scheduling of the
09:34:05 chapter 27 workshop, which was a little confused in
09:34:10 the minutes, it was really supposed to be scheduled
09:34:12 for today's meeting.
09:34:13 However, given the fact that it didn't appear on your
09:34:16 agenda as the workshop of the chapter 27 amendment and
09:34:21 given your new schedule, I'm requesting that when go
09:34:23 ahead and schedule the chapter 27 workshop on the
09:34:27 changes to chapter 27 for your October 25th, 2007
09:34:31 workshop meeting.
09:34:33 And we can take this particular issue up at that time,
09:34:35 or I can address it today.

09:34:37 But I think the intent is to have that made part of
09:34:39 your chapter 27 workshop.
09:34:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
09:34:43 When do you want to have it?
09:34:45 >>> October 25th, 2007, for the chapter 27 changes
09:34:50 workshop.
09:34:53 I don't know what your schedule is.
09:34:54 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We have a lot of workshops already on
09:35:00 that date.
09:35:01 You are aware of that?
09:35:02 >>> I am aware of that.
09:35:03 This was supposed to go today, and in order to keep
09:35:05 with our schedule, we need to have it happen.
09:35:08 So if you don't mind having that October --
09:35:12 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I wanted you to be aware we have a
09:35:16 number of workshops on October 25th.
09:35:21 >> Would you like to have this scheduled at a time
09:35:25 certain?
09:35:25 Well, this being new we don't know.
09:35:29 But would you want to have it scheduled to follow the
09:35:32 items that are already scheduled to have it at the end
09:35:34 of the discussion?

09:35:36 >>GWEN MILLER: That has already been --
09:35:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If we look at the page in the back,
09:35:41 it shows October 25th.
09:35:43 9 a.m. we are showing WMBE for two hours, eleven.
09:35:50 We are talking about dredging of Lake Kipling.
09:35:54 Do we need two hours for the WMBE meeting?
09:35:59 Just a question.
09:36:02 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I would just be concerned, council,
09:36:04 for you to schedule something at 1:30 because for some
09:36:07 reason if something does move up I didn't want council
09:36:10 to have to come back after lunch.
09:36:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Eleven is Lake Kipling and canals
09:36:18 and there's going to be citizens here for that, too.
09:36:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I think we need at least an hour and a
09:36:25 half for WMBE.
09:36:29 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Why don't we do 9 to 10:30 on WMBE,
09:36:32 ten-thirty to 11:30 on canals.
09:36:36 >> The major issue relates to the changing in the wet
09:36:41 zoning process that you already heard a lot about, and
09:36:45 Cathy Coyle and I discussed that with members of the
09:36:47 committee so I don't think it will take long.
09:36:48 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So I make a motion to modify all

09:36:51 these WMBE, 9 to 10:30, hour and a half, canals, Lake
09:36:57 Kipling, et cetera, 10:30 to 11:30, and then we'll
09:37:04 take chapter 27 at 11:30.
09:37:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Second.
09:37:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
09:37:09 (Motion carried)
09:37:10 Mr. Shelby?
09:37:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Just a reminder, council, that come
09:37:14 October you can choose by majority vote to work
09:37:16 through lunch, finish up the item so you don't have to
09:37:19 come back till the evening meeting.
09:37:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, thank you.
09:37:22 All right, Mr. Sal Territo.
09:37:27 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
09:37:28 I have been asked to ask you to make a substitution
09:37:31 for item number 37.
09:37:32 There was a typo, some accounts got switched around.
09:37:36 I wanted to correct item number 37.
09:37:40 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay, we will.
09:37:43 We need a motion to approve the agenda.
09:37:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Question.
09:37:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.

09:37:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: When I asked to pull 38 and 41, I
09:37:51 said I didn't need staff.
09:37:53 If anybody needs staff on either of those, especially,
09:37:58 I think, somebody said something about 41.
09:38:03 >>CHAIRMAN: Need a second to approve.
09:38:06 >> Second.
09:38:07 (Motion carried).
09:38:08 >>CHAIRMAN: I'm going to move unfinished business to
09:38:13 item number 8.
09:38:18 Steve Anderson needs to catch a plane so we go to him
09:38:21 first.
09:38:21 Steve Anderson, item number 8.
09:38:23 >>> Steve Anderson, Ruden McClosky, 401 east Jackson
09:38:29 here in Tampa.
09:38:30 Madam Chair, members of the council, as most of you
09:38:33 know, I'm legal counsel for BrightHouse Networks, and
09:38:41 we had received a request from council to appear and
09:38:44 to answer questions that you might have regarding the
09:38:49 channel realignment that we have announced, Bright
09:38:52 House has announced for December 11th.
09:38:56 I have with me today Carlos Del Castillo, the regional
09:39:01 manager and vice-president of Bright House networks,

09:39:03 who I don't think has appeared before you before, so
09:39:06 this is a good opportunity for you to meet Mr. Del
09:39:10 Castillo.
09:39:10 He's here to answer your questions, and I'm here to
09:39:13 assist in any way possible.
09:39:14 Thank you.
09:39:18 >>> Thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about
09:39:21 the channel relocation that Bright House networks will
09:39:25 be implementing on December 11th.
09:39:27 Rationale for the relocation, in case you are curious,
09:39:29 is quite simple.
09:39:32 It's in response to our customers indicating to us
09:39:34 that they would like to see a more uniform lineup
09:39:37 across all of the counties that Bright House networks
09:39:40 serves.
09:39:42 The Tampa Bay division of BrightHouse Network shows
09:39:44 the counties of Hernando, Pasco, Manatee, citrus,
09:39:48 Pinellas, and of course Hillsborough.
09:39:49 And we have a lot of migration between those counties
09:39:52 of our customers.
09:39:54 What we hear from them is they move from one county to
09:39:56 the next and they would like to see the same channel

09:39:59 lineup or as uniform as possible so it's easier for
09:40:02 them to use our service.
09:40:04 That's pretty much the rationale for it.
09:40:06 What I think is happening is there might be some
09:40:09 points, generate some questions so I would like to
09:40:12 give you some information that might help you further
09:40:15 understand this.
09:40:15 First I would like to tell you that all six pay
09:40:18 channels will remain on the basic tier after December
09:40:21 11th.
09:40:22 I think there may be some confusion but they continue
09:40:24 to remain on the basic tier as they are today.
09:40:26 Customers do not need to purchase another service tier
09:40:29 in order to receive the PEG channels.
09:40:33 The monthly service fee for the basic service will not
09:40:36 change as a result of this channel relocation.
09:40:39 Bright House networks will make a converter box
09:40:42 available to those customers that need to have the
09:40:45 access to view the Peg channels for a dollar a month,
09:40:49 and that is easily reduced from our normal 6.95 charge
09:40:54 for our equipment.
09:40:55 So you know, I think there might be some confusion

09:40:57 about the words tier being used and folks thinking
09:41:00 that customers are having to add another tier, digital
09:41:03 tier.
09:41:04 We are transmitting the same Peg channels in a digital
09:41:08 format.
09:41:09 That's the only change.
09:41:10 They will continue to be on the basic service.
09:41:13 As a matter of fact, we are going to double carry them
09:41:16 for a brief period before we actually make the change
09:41:18 so people can see them in analog and digital and then
09:41:21 move them off so they can get messages on the analog
09:41:25 channel approximate they go to another channel
09:41:26 location.
09:41:27 Close to 70% of our customers already have digital
09:41:30 service so it won't affect those folks in any way,
09:41:32 shape or form.
09:41:33 They'll still have access to them like they do today.
09:41:36 Finally, in the remaining months before December
09:41:40 11th, Bright House networks will work with the
09:41:43 city to make sure we fully communicate these channel
09:41:46 changes so the customers are aware of the changes.
09:41:49 This is not just related -- it's related to dozens of

09:41:55 other channels being moved all across the counties.
09:41:57 So that in a nutshell is the I shall knew front of you
09:42:00 and I will be happy to answer any questions.
09:42:03 >>GWEN MILLER: Does anyone want to say anything from
09:42:05 legal?
09:42:05 Anybody from legal here to speak?
09:42:07 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
09:42:11 We were just here to listen to what they said.
09:42:13 We disagree with their rationale for what it is they
09:42:15 want to do.
09:42:17 They have got their legal reasons why they think they
09:42:19 can make the move.
09:42:20 We have reasons why we think they can't make the move.
09:42:22 But that's not something we need to discuss with you
09:42:24 right now.
09:42:25 We think what you are really asking for is their
09:42:27 rationale for whether they want to make the move and I
09:42:30 don't want to get into a long discussion of the
09:42:32 tiering of these things, the fact there's channels
09:42:34 being changed, the fact that some people will not
09:42:35 receive these channels because they won't have the
09:42:37 box.

09:42:37 Those are really more legal issues and not really
09:42:41 appropriate for us to discuss here.
09:42:42 But we do have a difference of opinion and that's kind
09:42:44 of where we are right now.
09:42:45 >>MARY MULHERN: Sal, you can probably answer this, or
09:42:49 Bright House people.
09:42:50 Who are the customers who are able to ask that these
09:42:56 channels now that won't be able to, without this --
09:42:59 >>SAL TERRITO: I don't want to get into the technical
09:43:01 things.
09:43:02 Right now they are saying 60 to 70% of their customers
09:43:04 are digital.
09:43:05 That means 30% aren't, which is a roughly 15, 20,000
09:43:11 people who are now receiving our channels without the
09:43:15 necessity of having a box to receive those channels.
09:43:18 At some point, when the move is made, those channels
09:43:21 are going to be moved from the current 15 up into 600,
09:43:25 if what I am reading in the paper is correct, moving
09:43:27 those channels up into the 600 tier, the digital tier.
09:43:31 So people normally get them on channel 15, 18, so
09:43:35 forth.
09:43:35 Those people who choose not to have a box or can't

09:43:39 afford a box, I know one dollar is not much, but those
09:43:42 people will no longer be able to receive the Peg
09:43:44 channels because they will only have the analog
09:43:46 without the box rather than analog with a box.
09:43:49 So it will be the customers who choose not to move
09:43:52 that service which in effect is creating a separate
09:43:55 tier.
09:43:55 You will have some people on a tier without the
09:43:57 availability of receiving these channels.
09:44:00 That's our assessment.
09:44:01 And that's where we have a difference of opinion on
09:44:04 what they can do and what we think they can do.
09:44:06 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a little techy question for
09:44:09 you.
09:44:09 Is it the customers who have also the Internet
09:44:14 connection through Bright House that have the digital?
09:44:18 Can you explain to me who has digital and who has
09:44:21 analog?
09:44:23 >>> The issue of having Internet service has nothing
09:44:25 to do with whether you have a digital service on your
09:44:28 cable TV.
09:44:30 On your TV in your household is two separate services.

09:44:34 To the issue of what 30% of the customers not having
09:44:38 digital service, the issue in hand, I think
09:44:42 specifically relate to the Peg channel access, is
09:44:46 assuming that all the 30% are actually watching the
09:44:48 peg channels, and I don't think that's a logical
09:44:51 assumption.
09:44:51 And I'm not here to debate that either.
09:44:54 But the issue is we are accommodating that 30%.
09:44:57 Any portion of that 30% that has any interest in
09:45:01 watching specifically the peg channels, we can
09:45:03 accommodate them quite readily by providing a piece of
09:45:06 equipment for one dollar that covers that access to
09:45:09 those channels.
09:45:10 So it's remedied by that way.
09:45:12 One of the scenarios that I would like to put in front
09:45:15 of you, and if you think back to the days when we were
09:45:19 starting off as an industry, and most folks in the
09:45:22 household had non-cable ready television sets, kind of
09:45:25 the old turn dial, 2 through 13 TV sets, and when we
09:45:29 came out with TV went from channel 14 to channel 36
09:45:32 you still had to have a box to get those channels.
09:45:34 It was still the same price but you had to pay for the

09:45:36 equipment to be able to get those.
09:45:38 A lot of folks went out and bought cable-ready sets.
09:45:41 There are other technological capabilities for
09:45:43 consumers to be able to access these channels without
09:45:45 having to get a box.
09:45:46 But we think ours is a much more economical solution
09:45:49 for the customers rather than us everything to go out
09:45:51 and buy other equipment.
09:45:52 Also we are trying to be very consumer friendly.
09:45:54 >> How are you going to deliver that?
09:45:58 >>> We will be accommodating as responsible.
09:46:01 We have folks that cannot make it into our office
09:46:02 because they are not capable of getting them to us.
09:46:06 We are more than happy to roll a truck, no charge, to
09:46:10 take the box up to the household and install it no
09:46:12 charge to them.
09:46:13 Just a one dollar monthly thing.
09:46:15 >> I have one more thing I want to say, and then I'll
09:46:17 turn it over.
09:46:19 The fact that your customers that were complaining
09:46:23 because they travel between counties, I think you are
09:46:27 going to have a lot more complaints from people who

09:46:29 live in -- is this just happening in Hillsborough
09:46:33 County?
09:46:33 Or are you doing this in all?
09:46:35 >>> Across the entire division in all of our counties.
09:46:38 >> So you are going to get the complaints after you do
09:46:40 it from a lot more people than were complaining,
09:46:42 because when they move from Hernando to Hillsborough,
09:46:47 they had to figure out the channel.
09:46:48 I think people pretty much figured that if you move,
09:46:50 you know, you are going to have to -- and now what we
09:46:54 are going to have is people thinking they are no
09:46:56 longer able to access those, and especially going up
09:47:00 to 600.
09:47:02 >>> Actually, if you look at the lineup, two things.
09:47:07 One is the number of customers that are moving between
09:47:10 the counties is north of 80,000 in a given month, in
09:47:15 our service areas.
09:47:16 That's a significant number of viewers.
09:47:18 I think that's higher than the viewership in any one
09:47:21 particular county or city of those channels.
09:47:25 That aside, the ability for to us solution this for
09:47:29 the customers is a very straightforward in the sense

09:47:33 they will have that equipment available to them and be
09:47:35 able to take access to the channels that are in the
09:47:40 digital tier. If we were to look at the lineup and
09:47:44 continue this format we would see it go from channels
09:47:46 2 to 24 and then the next channel in line if you had
09:47:49 the digital box would be 603 on the basic service.
09:47:52 You would still be surfing in that -- actually you are
09:47:55 surfing where the waves are bigger because a lot more
09:47:57 folks are watching the digital channels and the HD
09:48:00 channels which are awesome in that area, and that's
09:48:02 where most folks are going today.
09:48:04 Most folks are going towards digital, and towards high
09:48:07 definition.
09:48:07 Keep in mind, February 2009, it's all going to go
09:48:11 digital, even though we have an extension for the
09:48:13 broadcasters, all the folks had to go to a digital
09:48:17 format in February 2009 so these folks take advantage
09:48:20 of the situation now will actually be a leg up and
09:48:23 won't have to go through that hassle in the future.
09:48:25 It works to their advantage.
09:48:27 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So then no matter what, come 2009,
09:48:31 everything will be HD or digital.

09:48:34 >>> No, not everything.
09:48:37 We are still required by recently passed mandate from
09:48:41 the FCC to continue for three more years with the
09:48:44 broadcasters, to carry their format, analog, digital
09:48:49 and high definition.
09:48:50 So essentially we are carrying their channels on three
09:48:52 different channel numbers for three years.
09:48:54 >> So now if I have a television where I do not need a
09:48:57 box, cable box, directly into my television, that
09:49:01 would be obsolete in the future, and I will have to
09:49:05 have pretty much one of these boxes, high definition
09:49:09 box or digital boxes or whatever, and it's going to
09:49:11 cost one dollar additional onto the cable bill?
09:49:15 >>> That is correct.
09:49:16 >> So how many seniors would that impact?
09:49:22 >>> That's a question I couldn't tell you.
09:49:24 I don't have the research on that.
09:49:26 I can tell you the federal government has appropriated
09:49:28 $200 million for this program to assign -- they hadn't
09:49:33 worked out the specifics on how they are going to
09:49:35 determine who gets these $40 vouchers to be able to
09:49:38 get digital equipment.

09:49:39 But those will be made available by the federal
09:49:41 government.
09:49:43 They haven't put together their plan or haven't rolled
09:49:45 that out, how they are going to contact folks, how
09:49:47 they are going to issue them, how they are going to
09:49:49 verify.
09:49:50 None of that has been worked out by the federal
09:49:52 government.
09:49:52 We have a plan already in place for a dollar they will
09:49:54 be able to skip all that process and be way ahead of
09:49:57 the issue.
09:50:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a few questions if council
09:50:04 will indulge me.
09:50:05 I think this is an extremely important issue.
09:50:07 Anybody who is watching us right now, over channel 22
09:50:12 county, education channel is what, 21, 20, something
09:50:16 like that, public access or what have you.
09:50:22 The bottom line is, this is going to change the whole
09:50:25 nature of these channels.
09:50:27 Channels 15 through 22, all right?
09:50:31 Let's get down to brass tacks on this.
09:50:34 I think the issues that have been discussed are very

09:50:36 important issues in terms of accessibility.
09:50:38 And these are probably the more pertinent legal issues
09:50:40 in terms of accessibility, you know, to the general
09:50:43 public who had basic service, that might have to be
09:50:46 litigated.
09:50:47 But let's talk about the other issue, okay?
09:50:51 Bright House is a good corporate citizen.
09:50:53 You know, we have all worked with you guys on numerous
09:50:57 charity projects and that sort of thing.
09:50:59 And you guys have been around for quite awhile,
09:51:03 different company names, but you evolved over the
09:51:06 years, now you're Bright House.
09:51:07 And we have worked with you closely with our contract
09:51:13 and with good understanding.
09:51:15 This thing just seemed to pop out of nowhere, and this
09:51:19 is the first time Bright House has been in front of us
09:51:22 to talk about it.
09:51:22 And other than the community reading it in the
09:51:24 newspaper, I don't know if the community had a whole
09:51:26 lot of input on this.
09:51:27 I know that you all have taken surveys and that sort
09:51:31 of thing and that's all fine and good but a survey is

09:51:34 also how you write the question.
09:51:39 Here's the concern I have, is you provide a public
09:51:42 service.
09:51:43 You are regulated by the FCC, as a public service
09:51:47 provider, okay?
09:51:48 And you are not regulated by the PSC, correct?
09:51:53 Just the FCC and your contract through us and state
09:51:56 law and what have you.
09:51:57 But you do that because you provide a public service.
09:52:02 Channels 15 through 22 are Peg.
09:52:04 Everybody says Peg.
09:52:06 What is Peg?
09:52:07 It's public access.
09:52:09 Which is always controversial.
09:52:10 We don't need to get into it.
09:52:12 But it's also Educational Channel and government
09:52:15 channel.
09:52:16 Okay?
09:52:16 To me, those are extremely important channels that the
09:52:23 public should have ready access to.
09:52:25 And right now they do.
09:52:27 Okay?

09:52:28 And the reason, people come up to us in the grocery
09:52:31 store, okay, at church, or synagogue or what have you,
09:52:34 and they come up to us and say, you know what?
09:52:37 I saw that issue over there on Kennedy Boulevard about
09:52:40 that building, and I disagree with you strongly about
09:52:43 that.
09:52:46 Just as an example.
09:52:47 Well, how did they come to watch us that particular
09:52:51 day?
09:52:51 Most of the people did not come to watch us because
09:52:54 they intentionally knew we were going to be talking
09:52:57 about that building on Kennedy.
09:52:59 What happened was is they are surfing through the
09:53:01 channels, and they get up to channel 14, which is
09:53:04 WTVT, and then they bump over to channel 15 which is
09:53:08 where we are today.
09:53:08 Or they go up to channel 22, and watch the county
09:53:12 commission, because there's extremely important
09:53:15 government matters going on right there on this
09:53:18 surfing level, okay?
09:53:20 Now, at my home, because I already have all the
09:53:23 digital stuff and I already can go all the way up

09:53:26 through 100, 200, 500, 600, okay?
09:53:30 If I'm surfing after December 11th, okay, I get to
09:53:37 channel 14, I'll go to channel 15 and you're going to
09:53:40 have, you know, whatever, ESPN, and then I get to
09:53:45 channel whatever it is.
09:53:46 >>> Essentially C-span.
09:53:48 >> And then you will get to -- are all of them going
09:53:52 to be those type of channels?
09:53:53 >>> Actually moving the BET down to --
09:53:58 >> Okay, BET is a commercial channel.
09:54:04 >>GWEN MILLER: That's black entertainment.
09:54:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That's what I'm saying.
09:54:09 It's privately own.
09:54:10 It's a great channel.
09:54:11 I don't know where it is now.
09:54:12 Wonderful.
09:54:12 What else?
09:54:13 >>> WGN, ET, C-SPAN.
09:54:20 >> What's WGN?
09:54:23 >> Chicago.
09:54:24 >> Commercial channel.
09:54:25 You are replacing those surfable channels, public

09:54:28 access, education and government with, these other
09:54:30 mostly commercial channels, et cetera, C-SPAN, good
09:54:33 for you, C-SPAN.
09:54:34 Why are you putting C-SPAN there?
09:54:36 Why is C-SPAN important?
09:54:38 Because you are showing the federal government at
09:54:40 action.
09:54:40 That's extremely important.
09:54:41 But you know what?
09:54:43 Who was it that said all politics -- people care about
09:54:48 what's going on in their local government.
09:54:51 It's extremely important that they know what we are
09:54:54 doing.
09:54:55 Okay?
09:54:55 Not because I want them to see this face or any of
09:54:59 these other faces.
09:55:00 It's because they need to know what we are voting on
09:55:03 and how we are voting.
09:55:06 To me, I'm very passionate about this.
09:55:09 Obviously.
09:55:09 And I think it's extremely important.
09:55:13 I think the public needs to have an outcry to you

09:55:15 folks, because if you care about customer relations,
09:55:18 which is what you started off by saying, this is
09:55:20 customer driven, then the customers need to tell you
09:55:23 folks to leave it where it is, so as they are surfing
09:55:28 through, they can watch five or ten minutes.
09:55:30 They don't stay long.
09:55:31 They watch five or ten minutes of all these channels
09:55:34 and then they move on to where they want to go.
09:55:36 But those five or ten minutes are extremely important
09:55:39 because otherwise the community is disenfranchised
09:55:43 from seeing what their government is doing.
09:55:46 Okay.
09:55:48 If you all can't do that on your own, then I urge this
09:55:51 community to write to you.
09:55:53 And this is Carlos Del Castillo is standing in front
09:55:58 of us.
09:56:01 >> Del Castillo.
09:56:02 >> I apologize.
09:56:04 I write them to write to you and all the communities
09:56:08 in the bay area should be saying the same thing.
09:56:10 There's nothing more important, okay, in service that
09:56:13 you're providing than to connect the community to its

09:56:17 government in action.
09:56:18 >> I agree with you wholeheartedly.
09:56:21 And that is why we have one maybe combination for the
09:56:25 box to be available at a lower rate, and, two, to the
09:56:30 channel surf issue, it's 19 clicks away from where it
09:56:33 is right now.
09:56:34 When we change to the channel 622.
09:56:36 It's 19 clicks away if you are going to basic service.
09:56:40 >> If you are on basic.
09:56:41 But you told me, you said 70% of the customers are now
09:56:44 not on basic.
09:56:46 So that's not 19 clicks -- excuse me, that's not 19
09:56:49 clicks away for me because at my house, it's now 500
09:56:52 clicks away.
09:56:53 And guess what.
09:56:54 I won't click there.
09:56:57 I won't even click there.
09:57:01 >>> The other side of that equation is where these
09:57:03 channels are being moved, the digital spectrum, is
09:57:07 where the other digital broadcasters, the digital
09:57:10 version of ABC, NBC, Fox, et cetera, and that is where
09:57:13 most of the viewers are going.

09:57:15 They are going to the digital version of the networks.
09:57:17 So they are actually surfing in that area watching the
09:57:21 sports and digital format, watching their programs, in
09:57:25 digital format, and watching their shows in the HD
09:57:29 tier as well.
09:57:29 If you have an HD set you still get this box for a
09:57:32 dollar, if that's what you want, for the basic
09:57:36 service.
09:57:37 So you are still going to have a lot of viewers that
09:57:40 are already surfing in that neighborhood.
09:57:42 And I think where people are getting hung up is they
09:57:44 think everyone is down in the analog channels.
09:57:46 Well, I hate to tell you this but the reality is most
09:57:48 folks moved to the digital world, and are in that
09:57:51 digital band width watching digital versions of the
09:57:54 networks.
09:57:55 Not the analog version.
09:57:56 Not all of them, I understand that.
09:57:57 >> One last thing.
09:57:58 When my TV comes on in the morning, by some miracle,
09:58:02 it happens to come on to bay news 9, which is a
09:58:07 personally owned channel, because that's the way your

09:58:09 technology is set up.
09:58:10 And when it comes on at bay news 9 to me that's where
09:58:14 most people would start surfing.
09:58:15 That's what I do.
09:58:16 I got all this high tech stuff because my wife liked
09:58:19 it but I just started banging around with those
09:58:21 numbers because I'm an old creature of habit in that
09:58:23 regard.
09:58:24 Getting old, Charlie.
09:58:25 So the bottom line is, I think that you should
09:58:32 reconsider this.
09:58:33 I hope it's not a done deal.
09:58:35 I hope it doesn't result in litigation with the city
09:58:38 and the other local governments in this area.
09:58:40 Because I think that's a real waste of time.
09:58:42 I think if it's truly customer driven, then the
09:58:47 customers and the community should be more involved in
09:58:49 this, and we should have public workshops just like we
09:58:53 do on these issues, and really take all of that into
09:58:56 consideration, because we don't want to fight with
09:58:58 Bright House.
09:58:59 We have always been good partners, you know, in

09:59:02 providing all these great services to our community.
09:59:05 And I think that you all should reconsider and slow
09:59:09 down a little bit on this extremely important public
09:59:13 service that you are offering.
09:59:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda.
09:59:17 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I hope Mr. Dingfelder will really
09:59:21 tell us how he feels about this.
09:59:24 Let me say this.
09:59:25 When my rabbit ears are working real good and I crank
09:59:30 the TV with a little crank on the side I can get about
09:59:33 anything I want.
09:59:35 But they have got to be working, got to be a clear
09:59:37 day, you can't have no clouds and all that kind of
09:59:39 stuff.
09:59:40 I have a system in my house that when it rains in
09:59:42 Arizona, my TV goes off.
09:59:45 It's one of them direct deals.
09:59:47 I can't say the name of the whole company.
09:59:49 I don't want nobody coming after me.
09:59:51 But that's what I have.
09:59:54 And I don't surf too much because that little thing
09:59:56 there has numbers.

09:59:57 When you press the number you get what you want.
09:59:59 307 is WGN, Chicago, where I watch the Lou Piniella
10:00:06 and his thriving cubs.
10:00:08 And 289 in my channel is the war, all about wars.
10:00:12 I watch 289 because I'm always at war here.
10:00:14 So I can see you at my house.
10:00:18 I don't have the opportunity for whatever reason, I
10:00:20 don't get the channel 9.
10:00:24 Also fortunate I don't get the Tampa City Council
10:00:26 either.
10:00:26 I don't know why, but that's the way the system is set
10:00:29 up.
10:00:31 I have a hard time eating and sleeping if I saw myself
10:00:34 again at night.
10:00:37 But I understand what Mr. Dingfelder is saying.
10:00:40 And what I am going to say echoes on some of those
10:00:43 sentiments is these things right now from what I have
10:00:45 seen corresponding from or office answering the
10:00:47 correspondence from the city, attorney's office that
10:00:51 this thing is somewhere, where it hasn't been fully
10:00:55 recognized as a suitable, acceptable, obligation
10:00:58 between your company and the City of Tampa.

10:01:01 So I'm asking us to continue this debate, and this
10:01:04 dialogue, and to always remember that there is a
10:01:07 possibility of a litigation of suit, maybe, hopefully
10:01:14 not, and anything we say today will be certainly held
10:01:17 against us in some form or fashion.
10:01:20 I'm not speaking as the elder statesman.
10:01:22 That one is all the way to the left.
10:01:24 But I am saying that there is a need here to
10:01:26 understand that we can debate the issue, but not
10:01:31 concentrate on facts to that point where they can be
10:01:33 used against us in litigation form.
10:01:36 Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:01:37 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions?
10:01:39 >>MARY MULHERN: I want to thank Mr. Dingfelder for so
10:01:43 eloquently explaining why this is concerning us so
10:01:47 much.
10:01:50 And Mr. Miranda is way ahead of me on this technology.
10:01:53 But I think it's an economic issue for the people who
10:01:56 are going to have to change the kind of technology
10:01:58 they have.
10:02:01 Probably most people who live in -- who don't have a
10:02:04 lot of money don't have a dish, and don't have, you

10:02:08 know, some don't even have the cable that you are
10:02:10 talking about.
10:02:11 Did you say 30% would have to get a box?
10:02:14 >>> No, ma'am, only those who want to be able to watch
10:02:17 the Peg channels.
10:02:18 >> Right.
10:02:19 In order to watch the Peg channels.
10:02:22 So that's a lot of people, 30%.
10:02:25 And I would guess that demographic is going to show
10:02:29 people probably lower income people.
10:02:32 And that really concerns me.
10:02:34 >>GWEN MILLER: Other questions by council members?
10:02:41 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Did you all do some type of survey to
10:02:43 allow that where you are now?
10:02:45 Did D you do a survey, a study, to arrive at this new
10:02:48 model that you are leading to?
10:02:51 >>> The information -- this is going forward before I
10:02:56 even started with the company.
10:02:57 I am relatively knew.
10:02:58 But I know they have been working on this for a
10:03:01 significant period of time to respond to the customer
10:03:03 demand, based on information that we received from our

10:03:05 customers.
10:03:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: All right.
10:03:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mindy is in the back of the
10:03:14 courtroom sort of slinking sew slow hoping that she's
10:03:17 not recognized.
10:03:18 And Carlos, you guys came here voluntarily.
10:03:20 We didn't subpoena you here and we appreciate it and I
10:03:23 apologize for getting a little loud.
10:03:25 I think it's an important issue that we can all work
10:03:28 on together.
10:03:28 But I appreciate you coming here.
10:03:30 But Mindy, if you could.
10:03:33 Thank you.
10:03:40 Mindy, all the paperwork that crosses my desk, I
10:03:43 remember seeing that surveys have been done hopefully
10:03:46 independent, reputable surveys have been done that
10:03:49 speak to the fact of how many people do watch channel
10:03:54 15.
10:03:54 How many people watch channel 22 and the education
10:03:58 channel, which is a wonderful channel?
10:04:00 They tutor children in the afternoon how to do math
10:04:05 and all sorts of great things.

10:04:06 Could you enlighten us a little?
10:04:08 And especially in Mr. Del Castillo's presence.
10:04:13 >> Mindy Snyder, for the office of cable
10:04:17 communication.
10:04:17 I actually did bring our survey along.
10:04:19 And just for anybody else that's interested, it is at
10:04:21 our web site at CTTV15 dot net.
10:04:26 And the -- we just had one done in April of this year
10:04:30 and it was independently done by a company called
10:04:32 Group W communications.
10:04:35 62% of cable subscribers are aware of CTTV.
10:04:40 Almost 40% of cable subscribers do watch CTTV.
10:04:47 70% of cable subscribers watch our channel by channel
10:04:51 surfing.
10:04:51 It's exactly what you were saying.
10:04:54 There's a whole lot of other facts and figures there.
10:04:58 People watch our channel.
10:05:00 They think it's a very, very valuable service.
10:05:05 They trust the information that comes across.
10:05:06 We ask a whole variety of questions.
10:05:10 Bottom line is people do value this service.
10:05:12 This was just done for government access, city

10:05:14 government access.
10:05:15 I can't speak for HTV, the county channel.
10:05:18 I know public and educational have done their own
10:05:20 independent surveys as well, and there is a
10:05:23 substantial viewership on both of those channels as
10:05:28 well.
10:05:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Why don't you give them a copy of that
10:05:31 so they'll know?
10:05:33 Give Bright House a copy.
10:05:35 >>> I will.
10:05:35 >>GWEN MILLER: Any other questions?
10:05:39 Mr. Anderson?
10:05:40 >>> And thank you very much.
10:05:44 We very much appreciate the accommodation this morning
10:05:47 putting us up early on the agenda.
10:05:49 I do want just a couple of comments.
10:05:53 Sal, and I agree with him, this is not the time or
10:05:56 place to get into legal discussions about our rights.
10:05:59 But I would point out to you that New York counsel for
10:06:05 Bright House has sent a letter to David Smith dated
10:06:08 September 24th that fully outlines the legal --
10:06:14 our position on the law relating to it.

10:06:16 So I know that it will be available to you, John, I'm
10:06:19 sure, Mr. Dingfelder, that you will read that with
10:06:21 interest.
10:06:23 So you're right, that can be discussed later.
10:06:25 And I would say to you, I'm one of those Neanderthals
10:06:32 myself.
10:06:32 Only recently did I move into the digital world, in
10:06:36 recognition that the entire industry is going to go
10:06:39 digital soon, and we will have to be prepared for it.
10:06:42 Mr. Dingfelder, I would point out to you that on my
10:06:45 television when I turn it on first thing in the
10:06:46 morning, it defaults to 609, the digital spectrum for
10:06:52 channel 9.
10:06:53 Bright House has accommodated us.
10:06:55 We still watch channel 9, but it's 609.
10:06:59 And I would confirm that what Mr. Del Castillo said, I
10:07:04 do my surfing now in the digital spectrum and would
10:07:08 continue to do that.
10:07:09 And I do agree with you and appreciate your passion,
10:07:12 and all of your concerns.
10:07:14 The Peg channels are extremely important to us all,
10:07:20 and he would don't want to do anything to detract from

10:07:23 that.
10:07:23 I think change is always difficult.
10:07:25 Please understand, this is part of a system-wide
10:07:28 change, not just here in Hillsborough.
10:07:30 So Mr. Del Castillo really didn't create it and
10:07:33 doesn't have much to do -- I know hopefully, Mr.
10:07:38 Dingfelder, people will listen to you, and will get
10:07:41 input from the consumers on how they feel about it.
10:07:44 Again, I want to thank you for allowing us to be here
10:07:48 today.
10:07:48 >>> I would just like to thank you as well and welcome
10:07:54 the opportunity to continue the dialogue.
10:07:56 Thank you very much.
10:08:02 >>GWEN MILLER: I now go to item number 2.
10:08:05 Ms. Julie Cole.
10:08:07 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
10:08:09 I have provided council a memorandum that there has
10:08:14 now been a zoning administrator interpretation
10:08:16 regarding this matter which could potentially come
10:08:18 before you so I would suggest that we not have any
10:08:20 conversation.
10:08:23 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to strike from the agenda.

10:08:26 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to receive and file.
10:08:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion to receive and file.
10:08:31 (Motion carried).
10:08:32 >> Item number 3.
10:08:33 We have a resolution we need to pass.
10:08:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: On both item 3 and 4, solicitation
10:08:39 on the right-of-way, I have nothing against this.
10:08:42 However, I see more and more of these out in the
10:08:45 street, write didn't see them been approved by this
10:08:48 council to do this.
10:08:49 And I don't want to hold these two responsible.
10:08:52 I think you have to have a certain amount of insurance
10:08:54 and so forth to do this.
10:08:55 And there's a lot of -- there's a law not being
10:09:00 enforced.
10:09:01 Fits good for these people to come in and do it the
10:09:04 right way, everybody else should do it the same way.
10:09:06 But I move 3 and 4.
10:09:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
10:09:09 (Motion carried).
10:09:10 >>GWEN MILLER: Item number 5.
10:09:16 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Those were provided from the legal

10:09:18 department at last week's meeting.
10:09:33 First reading.
10:09:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I move an ordinance approving a
10:09:35 historic preservation property, tax exemption
10:09:38 application relative to the restoration, renovation
10:09:40 and rehabilitation of certain property owned by
10:09:42 Michael Eisenfeld and Beth L. Eisenfeld located at 813
10:09:51 south Packwood Avenue, Tampa, Florida in the Hyde Park
10:09:53 historic district based upon certain findings
10:09:56 providing for notice of the property appraiser of
10:09:58 Hillsborough County, providing for severability,
10:10:00 providing for repeal of all ordinances in conflict,
10:10:03 providing an effective date.
10:10:04 89 we have a motion and second.
10:10:05 (Motion carried).
10:10:06 >>THE CLERK: Madam Chair, just for the public's
10:10:10 information, separate reading and adoption of that
10:10:12 ordinance will be scheduled for October 18th at
10:10:15 9:30 in the morning.
10:10:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Same thing for number 6.
10:10:23 Ms. Mulhern, would you read that, please?
10:10:25 >>MARY MULHERN: I move an ordinance approving an

10:10:32 historic preservation property tax exemption
10:10:35 application relative to the restoration, renovation or
10:10:38 rehabilitation of certain property owned by Coruna
10:10:42 corporation located at 509-513 North Tampa Street,
10:10:47 Tampa, Florida in the North Franklin downtown multiple
10:10:49 properties historic district based upon certain
10:10:52 findings providing for notice to the property
10:10:53 appraiser of Hillsborough County, providing for
10:10:56 severability, providing for repeal of all ordinances
10:10:59 in conflict, providing an effective date.
10:11:01 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
10:11:03 (Motion carried).
10:11:04 >>THE CLERK: For the record second reading will be
10:11:07 held on October 18th at 9:30 in the morning.
10:11:10 >>CHAIRMAN: Item number 7.
10:11:12 Mr. Caetano, would you read that, please?
10:11:14 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Move an ordinance approving an
10:11:18 historical preservation property tax exemption
10:11:21 application relative to the restoration, renovation,
10:11:25 rehabilitation, of certain property owned by bay
10:11:28 brewing company located at 2205 north 20th street,
10:11:31 Tampa, Florida, in the Ybor City historic district,

10:11:35 based upon certain findings, providing for notice to
10:11:38 the property appraiser of Hillsborough County,
10:11:40 providing for severability, providing for repeal of
10:11:44 all ordinances in conflict, providing an effective
10:11:45 date.
10:11:47 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion and second.
10:11:48 (Motion carried).
10:11:49 >>THE CLERK: For the record second reading will be
10:11:52 October 18th at 9:30 a.m.
10:11:54 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to item number 9, Cindy Miller.
10:11:59 >>CINDY MILLER: Director of growth management and
10:12:02 development services, here on item 9 which was a
10:12:04 motion for me to appear to address the possibility of
10:12:07 creating a mechanism for the city to accept
10:12:10 contributions of funds designate for affordable
10:12:13 housing from developers.
10:12:15 I would like to give a little bit of background as to
10:12:17 where we stand currently with our code for affordable
10:12:21 housing.
10:12:22 Chapter 27 does already have a provision in section
10:12:24 27-323 that does authorize as one of the provisions
10:12:32 for bonus density that should a developer wish to

10:12:36 provide 10% of a project's dwelling to be affordable,
10:12:39 and that has a 30-year requirement, that is already an
10:12:43 incentive in order to get bonus density.
10:12:47 However, from the standpoint of a contribution that
10:12:50 could be utilized by the city for affordable housing,
10:12:53 that is certainly not something that we would not find
10:12:57 to be a positive situation.
10:13:00 However, it does take some process in order to do
10:13:03 that.
10:13:03 When it comes to setting up an account, setting up a
10:13:09 trust agency or something from an accounting
10:13:11 standpoint that's not a problem.
10:13:12 We would need some form of development agreement as we
10:13:14 would under chapter 27, and then it also would require
10:13:17 some kind of provision for -- in the comprehensive
10:13:21 plan, as well as them following up within chapter 27
10:13:24 for the specifics.
10:13:25 And since that involves more of a legal issue, I would
10:13:29 like to defer that to Julia Cole for that.
10:13:33 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
10:13:34 When we were researching this issue and looking at the
10:13:36 types of things that we can do to incentivize

10:13:40 affordable housing, and I know you had this issue come
10:13:43 up in a little of other affordable housing, green
10:13:45 spaces kind of issues, we really started to look at
10:13:48 those comprehensive plans in the decode code and what
10:13:51 we can and can't do today and we do have provisions
10:13:54 now in chapter 27 that talk about bonus density as
10:13:56 relates to a PD but the threshold are very high, and
10:13:59 one of our thought processes is to go ahead and lower
10:14:02 the threshold for bonus consideration as part of the
10:14:06 PD process, but that would require us to amend our
10:14:08 comprehensive plan to provide for that lower threshold
10:14:11 and then go ahead and have an amendment to chapter 27,
10:14:14 to go ahead and introduce that concept as part of our
10:14:17 code.
10:14:17 And I think that really will get council -- where they
10:14:20 would like to be, which is the process to incentivize
10:14:24 additional requests for bonus, and additional requests
10:14:27 for development rights, as opposed to a mitigation,
10:14:32 and then the most legally sensible way would be to put
10:14:37 some language in our comprehensive plan.
10:14:38 We have some planning to look at that issue anyway so
10:14:40 this is just part of what we have been trying to

10:14:43 accomplish, and then it would take an amendment to
10:14:45 chapter 27 to allow those threshold to be lowered,
10:14:49 provide for the process under which we would be
10:14:52 accepting these kinds of bonus density types of
10:14:57 requirements for affordable housing, incentives for
10:15:00 the other things, and that process would then be
10:15:03 codified.
10:15:05 I'm available for any questions.
10:15:06 Thank you.
10:15:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Miranda?
10:15:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
10:15:11 I have talked to you personally about this, and
10:15:13 although we have made a gallant effort to get
10:15:16 affordable housing off and other governments before us
10:15:19 in the same seat have made the same commitments, this
10:15:22 administration, other administrations have done the
10:15:24 same thing, it works to a point.
10:15:26 But when a house, for affordable housing costs a
10:15:31 little over 200,000 or right at it, 213, it went down
10:15:35 13% or whatever, it's very difficult when you look at
10:15:39 the interest rate, to make the payment on that house,
10:15:42 the insurance on that house, the taxes on that house,

10:15:45 to do what we want to accomplish.
10:15:48 So I have talked to some members of administration on
10:15:51 just a whim and you may have to be change in the
10:15:56 comprehensive plan but if the developer comes in and
10:15:59 they have to have a component of affordable housing in
10:16:01 their structure, and they don't want to have it, we
10:16:03 have sidewalk argumentation, we have street
10:16:07 augmentation, we have a lot of others that we do,
10:16:10 wetlands, why not do affordable housing?
10:16:13 What I mean by that is this -- if a developer has to
10:16:16 build 10% or 5% or 10 houses or 5 house are or 20
10:16:20 houses in that unit, of affordable housing, and he or
10:16:23 she does not want to do that, then there's an
10:16:27 agreement reached between the city and the
10:16:28 administration, and that is held in abeyance.
10:16:31 He pays the city the money to construct whatever he
10:16:34 would have constructed in his development anyway, he
10:16:36 or she, then that money, when that developer, he or
10:16:40 she comes in and does a development, that money is set
10:16:43 aside for affordable housing.
10:16:45 Well, how does that work and how does it make it very
10:16:48 attractive to all?

10:16:50 First of all, the developer had to do this regardless.
10:16:54 So the amount of money spent will be spent on the
10:16:57 project somewhere else.
10:16:59 Then that developer might be given a credit or
10:17:03 something, to some degree, to facilitate and work with
10:17:06 the city.
10:17:06 Once that's done, then that money, you might say,
10:17:11 listen, here is $1 million that you gave us.
10:17:14 We are going to give it back to you to build eight or
10:17:17 nine or ten houses.
10:17:19 You can do it or XYZ corporation could do it for you.
10:17:25 You build the houses and you start that trend of money
10:17:27 coming in on a monthly payment that is really
10:17:30 affordable.
10:17:30 Because if you own the lot and you get somebody to
10:17:32 build the house, how much investment do you have?
10:17:38 Zero.
10:17:39 So once that's done, those individuals who really need
10:17:45 a housing are given the opportunity to own a house.
10:17:48 That money, again if you have ten houses built in one
10:17:51 year and five the next, 20, all of a sudden you have
10:17:54 100 homes making payments to a fund that creates more

10:17:57 money for affordable housing.
10:18:00 And it's like a dog chasing its tail.
10:18:02 We are never going to catch it at the rate we are
10:18:04 going.
10:18:04 And I'm just trying to expedite it by suggesting this.
10:18:07 And I have suggested this to others in the
10:18:08 administration, that I think this would be a very God
10:18:11 thought idea to start looking at.
10:18:20 >>CINDY MILLER: Certainly, having more tools in the
10:18:24 tool box is a wonderful approach.
10:18:27 What I would suggest if this council wishes then,
10:18:30 since we do have a number of steps in the process in
10:18:32 order to put something into place, is that as you are
10:18:36 considering the comprehensive plan, you are having
10:18:38 various presentations by the Planning Commission
10:18:41 staff, that we make sure that that is something that
10:18:43 is on the list that they need to make sure,
10:18:46 incorporate into the update, as well as I also want to
10:18:50 just get some clarification, is that we have always
10:18:53 talked about affordable housing and having to be an
10:18:57 incentive as opposed to mandatory.
10:18:59 So I just also want to make sure from that standpoint

10:19:01 we are looking still at incentives from a standpoint
10:19:04 of developments throughout the City of Tampa, and also
10:19:07 the third component is, we continue to work with the
10:19:11 county to see if there are opportunities to work with
10:19:14 them, and that would again be another opportunity for
10:19:17 leveraging our money.
10:19:23 >>MARY MULHERN: You were talking about incentives,
10:19:25 right?
10:19:25 From tax breaks or permitting breaks?
10:19:29 >>>
10:19:29 >>: I did mention that.
10:19:30 And it could be a lot of things.
10:19:32 Could be you could get 5-5, you might have a tax break
10:19:38 on the first two years or three years of the project
10:19:40 to help out.
10:19:41 And at the end you are helping the people who really
10:19:43 need the help.
10:19:44 The developer contributes.
10:19:46 You contribute.
10:19:46 And somebody wins.
10:19:47 I have never seen a person in this chamber in 13 years
10:19:50 that I have been here on and off, because I had to go

10:19:52 in compile a couple times, that ever said, I want you
10:19:55 to build me an affordable housing.
10:19:57 Not one.
10:19:59 I have seen a lot of people rightly so wanting to
10:20:01 build the houses but I have never seen one in these
10:20:04 chambers saying, I need a home, help me.
10:20:06 And that's the problem we have.
10:20:07 >> I was just going to follow up on what Charlie said.
10:20:11 The bonus density in front of us, I think we need to
10:20:16 find other incentives and you're right, we can do that
10:20:19 with comp plan changes, I think.
10:20:20 >> If I may make a suggestion, I'm back before you in
10:20:24 a workshop the last week in November for various
10:20:27 reports, as to affordable housing, as to how we have
10:20:30 done during the fiscal year, things of that nature.
10:20:32 Perhaps if it's this council's desire we can come
10:20:37 back, let you know where it stance in the
10:20:38 comprehensive plan update you and let have you at
10:20:41 least an outline for suggestion as who to how we can
10:20:44 incorporate this better into our land use zoning.
10:20:46 >>> And I think we all probably agree with Charlie
10:20:49 that we would like to look into the idea of this trust

10:20:52 fund.
10:20:56 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Right.
10:20:57 Let me follow that.
10:20:59 One of the recommendations came from the county to
10:21:01 establish a trust fund.
10:21:03 Whether they allocate the money for it, I don't know.
10:21:06 But I know St. Pete allocated the county commission,
10:21:08 did allocate a $10 million a year for that.
10:21:14 I think the recent cutback based on the tax cuts and
10:21:18 all of that.
10:21:19 But they were.
10:21:20 So I know St. Pete, Pinellas was doing that.
10:21:24 And it was an excellent opportunity to address
10:21:26 affordable housing, and again I think we still want to
10:21:29 go down the path of incent advising for affordable
10:21:35 housing and I think there are a lot of opportunities
10:21:36 for that.
10:21:37 I think the city is on a good track with affordable
10:21:42 housing, I think based on the report from the county,
10:21:45 say, well, you are doing about 90%, I think.
10:21:49 And the county and the city had to get a relationship
10:21:54 together as well.

10:21:54 But this trust fund would be a huge step.
10:22:00 I mean, it would be a great step if we just started
10:22:04 putting money in that trust fund to help affordable
10:22:06 housing to address the many needs in our community.
10:22:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Ms. Miller brings up a good
10:22:15 question, and I'm not advocating either way today.
10:22:17 But I think the way that -- you know, we don't have,
10:22:23 like some of the counties, Pinellas County,
10:22:26 Hillsborough County, the city doesn't have
10:22:27 discretionary funds to throw a dollar in to start a
10:22:33 trust fund so the trust fund has to come from the
10:22:36 private sector, majority of it, within the city.
10:22:39 So the next question is, do you grow the trust fund by
10:22:45 incentivizing?
10:22:48 Or do you grow it by some sort of mandatory program?
10:22:51 I will assure you, a mandatory program will grow a
10:22:54 trust fund much faster than an incentive program.
10:22:59 And we would not be necessarily inventing the wheel if
10:23:02 we did that, because there are many progressive
10:23:05 communities around this country that have mandatory
10:23:09 programs.
10:23:12 Charlie, you gave an example.

10:23:13 Developers out there in New Tampa building, you know,
10:23:16 100 homes or 500 homes or what have you, and you say,
10:23:19 well, 5% of those should be affordable housing.
10:23:22 Well, the developer, that doesn't fit his or her model
10:23:26 out there and he doesn't want to put those 5% ins.
10:23:30 So instead he takes that 5% differential money,
10:23:32 whatever the equation is, and plug it into that trust
10:23:35 fund.
10:23:36 You would grow that trust fund, in my opinion -- and I
10:23:40 would like to hear from staff on this in November.
10:23:43 I think you would grow it much faster in a mandatory
10:23:45 fashion.
10:23:46 But that's a very large philosophical step that this
10:23:51 city and City Council and the mayor and the community
10:23:54 would have to take if we are going to do that.
10:23:56 I think it's worth looking at.
10:24:00 The last thing I am going to say about incentives is,
10:24:03 when we talk about bonus densities, I think we have to
10:24:06 have a discussion with T.H.A.N., and with the
10:24:12 neighborhood associations, and make sure that those
10:24:16 bonus densities don't have a negative impact on the
10:24:21 communities where we are putting the more intense

10:24:24 development or the more dense projects.
10:24:29 So there's always a YING and Yang on these things.
10:24:35 We want to create density for affordable housing but
10:24:39 we have to be careful if we allow bonus density
10:24:42 anywhere you want, then we are G quickly going to be
10:24:45 hearing from those neighborhoods.
10:24:46 So let's be careful.
10:24:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: This is my second, if I may just
10:24:51 one second.
10:24:52 I understand exactly what's been said from all council
10:24:54 members.
10:24:55 I'm not asking for anything direct right now.
10:25:00 I have been speaking to this on and on with others in
10:25:02 the administration for some time and I think the time
10:25:04 to discuss it in some form.
10:25:06 I certainly don't want to hit an industry that's
10:25:09 already reeling, and that's the construction industry.
10:25:12 Other cities like Clearwater, I understand, that have
10:25:15 a certain amount like a $200 for every home, $100 for
10:25:19 every apartment goes into a fund.
10:25:21 I don't think we should do that today because the
10:25:23 industry is hurting.

10:25:24 But what I'm saying is, there's a lot of things that
10:25:28 government can do, local, county, state, and federal,
10:25:32 that if they really wanted to work, to work on
10:25:35 affordable housing, they have every tool in the world
10:25:38 to do it, to do it right, not to hurt the industry,
10:25:42 and to help the individual that's really looking for a
10:25:44 home that's affordable.
10:25:46 What is affordable?
10:25:47 Affordable to me may be something different.
10:25:49 Affordable to somebody else.
10:25:51 A $500 a month payment may be too high.
10:25:54 1,000 may be acceptable in other areas.
10:25:56 So what I'm saying is, you have to calculate their
10:25:58 income, the cost of insurance, their cost of taxes,
10:26:02 and somewhere this government should start to work to
10:26:05 have affordability in this community.
10:26:08 Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
10:26:10 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to ask a question.
10:26:12 Do we have an affordable housing tacks task force on
10:26:15 council yet?
10:26:17 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What we did, we discussed in a
10:26:19 workshop and then were also taking a look at county's

10:26:24 proposal and come back with some recommendations to
10:26:26 council.
10:26:29 >> And we'll be back in that in November with a
10:26:32 complete workshop presentation.
10:26:33 >>MARY MULHERN: I was thinking we should set one up on
10:26:37 council like John has green building task force.
10:26:44 Again, I volunteered to do it, coming up with the idea
10:26:49 if you don't want to do it.
10:26:50 But I think because I just came back from a conference
10:26:53 of cities from around the country, and there are a lot
10:26:56 of really interesting, innovative things going on, and
10:27:00 if we take the time to look at what's going on in
10:27:03 other cities for affordable housing, we can come up
10:27:05 with some really good ideas, and I think task force
10:27:08 would be a good way to do it.
10:27:09 Plus as John said, we need to get the neighborhoods
10:27:12 involved so that they are in favor of what we are
10:27:17 planning to do.
10:27:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott?
10:27:21 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would say, I don't know whether a
10:27:23 task force is necessary.
10:27:25 We spent a year and a half with the county, and the

10:27:27 city was highly involved in that process.
10:27:29 We created a really good working relationship between
10:27:31 the city and the county.
10:27:34 Talked about affordable housing, and so I want to
10:27:41 trust her to come back to council with some good
10:27:43 recommendations.
10:27:43 >>MARY MULHERN: So you have already been there, done
10:27:46 that.
10:27:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes, had discussion and pretty much --
10:27:52 cities are doing a lot of things but I think I want to
10:27:54 wait and see what she comes back with.
10:27:59 >>GWEN MILLER: I agree, Reverend Scott.
10:28:00 Thank you.
10:28:01 Is there anyone in the public that would like to
10:28:02 request reconsideration on legislative matters?
10:28:07 We go to our audience portion.
10:28:08 Is there anyone in the public that would like to speak
10:28:10 to any item on the agenda not set for a public
10:28:12 hearing?
10:28:12 >>JOHN GRANDOFF: My address is suite 3700 Bank of
10:28:18 America Plaza.
10:28:20 This is on item 53.

10:28:29 I represent Mr. Eric Ellerbee.
10:28:33 This is a twist on affordable housing which was
10:28:36 recently in the air.
10:28:38 My client learned late yesterday afternoon that this
10:28:40 $10,000 appropriation is to put an air conditioner in
10:28:44 the Santiago house which was discussed back on July
10:28:48 26th and where the council made a motion 5-2 to
10:28:53 award the bid for the property to Eric Ellerbee.
10:28:56 If you recall there was a bid process that got tangled
10:28:59 up a little bit but throughout the process Mr.
10:29:01 Ellerbee had the highest responsible bid.
10:29:04 He stands ready, willing and able to pay the city for
10:29:07 this property.
10:29:08 But now he could have closed on the property had your
10:29:11 motion been honored.
10:29:13 This is affordable housing.
10:29:14 He's ready to take it over and invest hard earned
10:29:18 money.
10:29:18 I venture to say he would have been spending the $10
10:29:20 that you on the air conditioner today, not the City of
10:29:22 Tampa, in these times.
10:29:25 So I'm not here to criticize your motion.

10:29:28 In fact, my client welcomes the motion.
10:29:30 But we again renew our request to move to closing with
10:29:33 the property.
10:29:34 There have been no challenges to the bid process.
10:29:36 We have renewed our interest in the property to the
10:29:38 administration.
10:29:40 And we ask that perhaps you adopt another similar
10:29:43 resolution urging the administration to move towards
10:29:45 closing on this property with Mr. Ellerbee.
10:29:48 Thank you very much.
10:29:49 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
10:29:50 Next.
10:29:52 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Madam Chairman.
10:29:54 Mr. Grandoff?
10:29:57 Was there some property damage to this building since
10:29:59 our last meeting?
10:30:00 >>> I haven't had any knowledge, Mr. Caetano.
10:30:03 I think it's fallen into disrepair.
10:30:05 There's been further damage through vandalism, to
10:30:07 windows.
10:30:08 I don't know the status of the air conditioner.
10:30:10 I think the air conditioner was in bad shape in July.

10:30:13 >> I understand there has been some damage since our
10:30:15 last meeting.
10:30:18 And if we allow this to continue, there's going to be
10:30:21 more damage.
10:30:21 Water is going to get in, and you are going to have
10:30:24 all sorts of problems.
10:30:25 Can we move on this issue?
10:30:28 >>> It would be better in private hands.
10:30:33 >>GWEN MILLER: Next.
10:30:37 >>> Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
10:30:39 My name is Moses Knott, Jr., I reside at 2902 East
10:30:42 Ellicott Street three nights a week and again I just
10:30:45 thank God for his gracious and his mercy.
10:30:52 A lot of people didn't living off their mama and daddy
10:30:56 and job and everything.
10:30:57 But I have grace and mercy.
10:31:00 I want to speak on this article 8 and article 9 here.
10:31:06 The TV thing here.
10:31:08 I want to thank Mr. Charlie Miranda, you know, for all
10:31:12 of you all.
10:31:15 You know, I don't know what happened they moved
10:31:20 channel 9.

10:31:21 You all are talking 15.
10:31:22 But channel 9, 24 hours of regular service, now that
10:31:26 thing, it might be a dark cloud.
10:31:28 I roll home and get to channel it to see what's going
10:31:30 on.
10:31:31 And most of the poor peoples get the small package.
10:31:35 I think it ran about 20 or 30 channels.
10:31:38 But there is 15, 9 all in there.
10:31:42 Then feigned what's going on.
10:31:44 And many people didn't know about City Council. This
10:31:46 City Council here is very important in everybody's
10:31:48 house.
10:31:48 They used to have it where it wasn't televised.
10:31:52 But you all did K do anything you want to do, say
10:31:55 anything you want to do.
10:31:56 When people are looking at you, everything calmed
10:31:58 down, because nobody wanted to be no nasty guy on TV.
10:32:01 But what I'm saying, though, it is very important.
10:32:04 But back to this affordable housing thing here.
10:32:07 I want everybody in this world to quit using the word
10:32:10 affordable house.
10:32:12 Now there's some affordable housing over on Henderson.

10:32:15 Mr. Charlie Miranda knows about it.
10:32:18 Ms. Miller, now about it.
10:32:24 Go in there, 50, $60,000.
10:32:29 You have got to make $20,000 to live in one of these
10:32:33 $200,000 houses here.
10:32:35 And got all over the world biggest mistake that they
10:32:43 built these affordable housing and brainwash them to
10:32:46 move into these houses.
10:32:48 See, the houses are set up like long time ago, with
10:32:53 poor peoples, you know.
10:32:56 Go buy a car they cannot afford.
10:32:59 Now they are saying people buying these houses can't
10:33:02 afford.
10:33:04 A 200,000, close to 200,000, make sure that you make
10:33:11 sure they don't get these lots free.
10:33:13 Now, I am going to preach till the day I die, where
10:33:17 Mayor Freedman took thousands and thousands of poor
10:33:22 peoples, put $200 fine on the lots, took it from them
10:33:27 and turned at round and gave to the these people to
10:33:29 build another $200,000 house.
10:33:31 Now, what I'm saying, if they were on the free lots
10:33:36 and then sold the house somewhere around 100,000,

10:33:39 somewhere like that.
10:33:40 But these people are jumping because they want a brand
10:33:49 new house, don't know how they are going to pay for
10:33:51 it.
10:33:51 Now can't pay the tax, with the interest.
10:33:54 And they said going on here in Hillsborough County
10:34:02 where these people got brainwashed to buying these
10:34:04 here parcels called affordable houses.
10:34:08 And some of them don't even make 20,000.
10:34:11 Most of them don't make $20,000.
10:34:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Would anyone else like to speak?
10:34:15 Mr. Dingfelder.
10:34:17 We now go to our committee reports.
10:34:19 Public safety, Reverend Scott.
10:34:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I would like to move items 10 through
10:34:28 21.
10:34:29 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: On number 15, what I want to see
10:34:36 in Buckingham, I don't want to see selective
10:34:38 enforcement.
10:34:39 We have a situation at Hunters Green where we have two
10:34:42 roads ten feet apart, one has a full stop sign, the
10:34:45 other one doesn't.

10:34:46 Now the one that doesn't has a speed gate.
10:34:49 And people crossing that are confronted with cars.
10:34:53 Now, I talked to the chief of police, and I would like
10:34:56 to put this on hold for a week, and perhaps traffic
10:35:00 can get back to me, as they are in Hunters Green.
10:35:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Okay.
10:35:06 So number 15 you want to pull?
10:35:09 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Yes.
10:35:10 Till traffic gets ahold of me to make sure they have
10:35:12 complied with all enforcement.
10:35:22 >>THOMAS SCOTT: It's not budgetary to that.
10:35:27 What I'll do then, pull out 15 and I will move then
10:35:31 10, all the items 10 through 21 except for item 15.
10:35:36 >> Second.
10:35:37 (Motion carried)
10:35:45 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let's continue that until --
10:35:48 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: To get ahold of me.
10:35:51 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Councilman Caetano is contacted by
10:35:55 traffic.
10:35:55 >> You want to the no, ma'am not come back on the
10:35:57 agenda for council?
10:35:58 Or do you want to have it scheduled for a date

10:36:00 certain?
10:36:01 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: As soon as traffic is able to get
10:36:04 back.
10:36:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Two weeks.
10:36:07 Or three weeks now.
10:36:08 The 18th.
10:36:12 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
10:36:13 (Motion carried).
10:36:14 >>GWEN MILLER: Parks, recreation, vice chair, Mr. John
10:36:18 Dingfelder.
10:36:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move items 22 through 25.
10:36:25 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
10:36:27 (Motion carried).
10:36:28 >>GWEN MILLER: Public works, Mr. Charlie Miranda.
10:36:30 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move item 26 through 35.
10:36:36 >> Second.
10:36:37 (Motion carried).
10:36:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Finance Committee, Mr. John ding.
10:36:43 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'm going to move items 36
10:36:48 through -- I move items 36 through 51 with a
10:36:58 substitute on 37 and excluding 38 and 41 for separate
10:37:05 votes.

10:37:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Second?
10:37:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
10:37:08 (Motion carried).
10:37:09 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 38, it's our annual carryover.
10:37:18 We have $52 million that didn't get spent.
10:37:21 So we'll spend it in this next budget year, in similar
10:37:26 fashion as we had planned on last time. Anyway, I'm
10:37:32 not going to move that for just have an issue that I
10:37:37 don't need to get into.
10:37:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I'll move it.
10:37:39 And this is not an abnormal thing.
10:37:42 This happens at every budget session in every year
10:37:46 about this time, life cycle of one calendar year.
10:37:51 What it is is accumulation of many things.
10:37:53 Primarily, contracts are issued in June, July, August,
10:37:56 September.
10:37:57 They are not started in time for whatever reasons, or
10:38:01 the setting date for the start of those periods for
10:38:03 the betterment of the city to have infrastructure,
10:38:08 jobs done in creating of those items, or happens after
10:38:11 October 1st.
10:38:12 So I would move it based on the information that I

10:38:17 know is the fact.
10:38:19 I have been here before.
10:38:21 It just happens every year continuously for as long as
10:38:26 I can remember.
10:38:28 And these are the reasons that I move the resolution,
10:38:31 item number 38.
10:38:32 >> Second.
10:38:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Since Charlie spoke so eloquently I
10:38:43 need to follow.
10:38:46 The city asked the residents to spend $350,000 on
10:38:50 certain improvements, along in the Bayshore area.
10:38:53 Those never got spent.
10:38:54 And now they are being carried over, and there's no
10:38:58 budget item for those expenditures.
10:39:00 So in support of the folks who are disappointed about
10:39:05 that, I won't support that.
10:39:08 Although I will agree with 52 million and -- I don't
10:39:12 agree with 300,000 of it so I'll just refrain from
10:39:15 supporting it.
10:39:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
10:39:18 (Motion carried).
10:39:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 41.

10:39:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The reason I pulled item 41, I
10:39:31 voted for Ms. Kitchen.
10:39:35 I think she does a great job supporting the Planning
10:39:38 Commission.
10:39:39 I did not vote for the other gentleman.
10:39:44 I had watched him on the Planning Commission, and I
10:39:47 don't think he is a big supporter of the Hillsborough
10:39:50 County city county Planning Commission.
10:39:51 I sat there a week ago and watched him butt heads with
10:39:56 Mr. Hunter for about a good half hour, you know, on
10:40:01 some very important, long-term planning issues.
10:40:06 And I don't think he's a great supporter of the
10:40:09 Planning Commission.
10:40:10 And yet he's being reappointed.
10:40:12 He's being reappointed because he was a county
10:40:14 appointment, and now he's being reappointed by this
10:40:16 city as a city appointment.
10:40:18 So I can't support the resolution because I can't
10:40:21 support that reappointment.
10:40:23 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Well, my question was, I received a
10:40:27 couple calls about it.
10:40:28 I had a couple calls about it.

10:40:30 And the issue became that I think he serves now on the
10:40:33 Hartline, is that right? The Hartline board?
10:40:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: County Hartline.
10:40:38 >>THOMAS SCOTT: And now being appointed by the city.
10:40:41 I guess the question arises, is it holding the council
10:40:50 to a separate position?
10:40:51 I don't think that it is, but you may want to address
10:40:54 that.
10:40:54 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
10:40:55 Key is whether those positions are office holder
10:41:00 positions, and if they are, you may not hold two of
10:41:02 them under the Florida Constitution.
10:41:04 And I don't know if the Hartline one is an office
10:41:07 holding position.
10:41:08 If it is, then he may not serve on both.
10:41:11 And the way the state law works if you are appointed
10:41:13 to a second one you are required to resign from the
10:41:17 first one.
10:41:18 I don't know what the status of these are.
10:41:20 If they are both office holders he may not hold both.
10:41:24 If they are not I don't know the answer to that.
10:41:27 N.

10:41:27 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Actually, I'm familiar with that sort
10:41:33 of issue, and I believe there are -- and I wish I had
10:41:36 the file of research in front of me, if I had known
10:41:38 the question would come up I would be able to cite
10:41:41 chapter and verse but I think there's an exemption for
10:41:44 people who are appointed to Planning Commissions to be
10:41:48 able to serve on other boards.
10:41:49 >> I don't think there can be an exemption in the
10:41:55 Constitution.
10:41:57 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Let me suggest that you do that,
10:42:00 approve Ms. Kitchen and hold in abeyance Mr --
10:42:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I have to share with you and I made
10:42:06 this statement when council did pass the vote the
10:42:08 legal effect of your vote, when you made that
10:42:13 appointment, was to make them effective that day.
10:42:16 This is a mere written memorialization of that vote.
10:42:20 If you wish to ask me to bring back that information
10:42:23 to you at a future meeting, just so you can assure
10:42:26 yourselves, and if there is a problem then it will
10:42:29 certainly come to light because the legal effect when
10:42:30 you get appointed to another board, and I am speaking
10:42:36 contemporaneously, but when you the effect is you are

10:42:41 automatically removed from the prior board.
10:42:43 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I'll move the resolution with the
10:42:46 understanding staff will look into this, and bring
10:42:49 back to us their findings, so if we need to come back,
10:42:53 because you can revisit the issue.
10:42:57 >>MARTIN SHELBY: That's an issue that I am also not
10:42:59 familiar with, if council wishes to have this council
10:43:02 go about recalling members of boards or removing
10:43:04 members of board, that has not come before this
10:43:06 council so I have been here so I am not now familiar
10:43:09 with that to be able to advise you.
10:43:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What do we need to do today legally?
10:43:15 >>SAL TERRITO: Once you made the appointment, which
10:43:17 you have already done, if he was on another board, and
10:43:19 that board is a conflict because it's a dual office
10:43:23 holder, he is no longer on the first board.
10:43:26 So he is off it and I don't think you can go back and
10:43:30 change your mind now.
10:43:31 I think it's basically gone before you can change your
10:43:33 mind.
10:43:34 And the Planning Commission, I believe, is an office
10:43:36 holder position.

10:43:38 The only exceptions are people lake notaries, officers
10:43:41 in the military, and Planning Commission is not a
10:43:43 Constitutionally exempt one.
10:43:45 I was a Planning Commissioner and I was one of those
10:43:47 people that was bound by this so I do know that much.
10:43:50 >> So what you are saying from a legal standpoint, we
10:43:53 have already given the appointment, we need to go
10:43:54 ahead and pass the resolution and effective based on
10:43:56 the law, he then cannot serve on the Hartline board?
10:43:59 >>> And that's something for him to have address under
10:44:03 state law.
10:44:03 And I would assume that the Hartline board attorney
10:44:07 will have to opine on that for his client in that
10:44:11 capacity.
10:44:11 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
10:44:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sal, we often come to a second --
10:44:19 not often.
10:44:19 We rarely but on occasion come to a second meeting and
10:44:22 we rescind earlier motions.
10:44:24 Okay.
10:44:25 So motion we passed a few weeks ago, if it was
10:44:29 rescinded -- and here's my concern.

10:44:31 Perhaps this gentleman might prefer to stay on
10:44:36 Hartline, because Hartline is right in the thick of a
10:44:38 lot of issues, mass transit, et cetera.
10:44:41 Maybe he should be given a choice as to which board he
10:44:44 would rather stay on.
10:44:47 Now, I hear what you are saying about the fact that we
10:44:49 already voted.
10:44:50 But.
10:44:53 >>> You can't change it.
10:44:54 >> I know, but legally if we rescinded that motion,
10:44:57 then that motion could possibly -- possibly, and I
10:44:59 don't know that we know the answer to this -- but
10:45:01 possibly we could undo what he did if we requested it.
10:45:05 At this point I'm sure he will be watching or hearing
10:45:07 about it real quick and he might say, now what?
10:45:10 If I had my choice, maybe he wants to stay on Hartline
10:45:12 and not go to Planning Commission at which point we
10:45:15 would rescind our motion and move forward.
10:45:17 So I would say the more prudent thing, there's no
10:45:19 hurry on this resolution.
10:45:21 These resolutions kind of come to us, they dribble
10:45:24 into us whenever they do.

10:45:25 So what I would suggest is to wait until the October
10:45:28 18th to do the resolution, spit the resolution out
10:45:32 so we can vote on Ms. Kitchen separately from this
10:45:36 other gentle anyway, and then on the 18th we can
10:45:38 have the legal questions and we'll hear from him as to
10:45:41 his preference.
10:45:41 >>> The issue isn't the resolution.
10:45:43 You already voted to put him on the board.
10:45:45 He's already a member of that board.
10:45:46 >> But I'm saying we could rescind the motion we made
10:45:49 two weeks ago which would undue that appointment to
10:45:51 the board.
10:45:51 >>> Let me ask Mr. Shelby what the rule is farce
10:45:55 reconsiderations in previous vote by the board.
10:45:57 Is it one week, two weeks?
10:45:58 I don't know the answer.
10:46:00 I know you have to be on the winning side and you
10:46:02 apparently were not on the winning side on that
10:46:04 particular issue so someone on the winning side would
10:46:06 have to vote for reconsideration, if you haven't gone
10:46:08 beyond the time limit.
10:46:10 I don't know what that time limit is.

10:46:19 (off microphone).
10:46:20 >>SAL TERRITO: Assuming you want to make this kind of
10:46:24 a change, the way to do it is that person would resign
10:46:27 from the old board, because he's already -- if he
10:46:31 wants to be appointed to that old board there may be
10:46:34 an understanding he no longer lives in the city and no
10:46:38 longer for appointment.
10:46:40 You run into this kind of problem, you give the person
10:46:42 a choice. If you agree with his choice or your choice
10:46:45 then would you basically have a vacancy which could
10:46:47 you then fill.
10:46:48 I'm not sure that will work in this case because the
10:46:50 board from which he is presumed to have resigned by
10:46:53 statute is, one, I don't think he's eligible for.
10:46:56 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Which is why I think it's prudent
10:46:58 to wait till October 18th till we have all these
10:47:01 questions answered.
10:47:02 That's all I am saying.
10:47:03 I am not advocating one way or the other.
10:47:06 I'm just saying maybe we could do that.
10:47:11 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Rule 4-F of your rules state that a
10:47:16 motion to reconsider any action of the council shall

10:47:18 be made only by a member who previously voted on the
10:47:20 prevailing side and shall be made only at the same
10:47:23 meeting or at the first subsequent regular meeting.
10:47:28 A second to the motion may be made by any other
10:47:30 member.
10:47:33 >>THOMAS SCOTT: We may not have to do that.
10:47:37 >>GWEN MILLER: I just got a message from Mr. Giunta.
10:47:43 He says he will resign from the Hartline board.
10:47:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So I move resolution 40 and 41.
10:47:51 >>MARY MULHERN: I just wanted to make an observation,
10:47:59 that we went to all this trouble to really look at the
10:48:01 applicants for these board positions, and apparently
10:48:05 we didn't find out all the information we could have.
10:48:08 So we might want to think about doing more research
10:48:12 next time before we vote on this.
10:48:19 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I agree with Ms. Mulhern and I also
10:48:22 agree with things said today on this particular
10:48:24 matter.
10:48:24 I think it's incumbent upon us next time to address
10:48:27 this issue on a more substantial view and Avenue that
10:48:32 we explain these to the individuals, even though they
10:48:34 may know that sometimes it's not explained thoroughly.

10:48:39 I was going to suggest like what Mr. Nick Felder said
10:48:43 but I believe that's a moot point that we at least
10:48:45 notify the individual by letter and ask what board he
10:48:48 would like to serve on, but that's a moot question now
10:48:51 because it's already been answered.
10:48:53 So I understand where we are at.
10:48:57 >>GWEN MILLER: Reverend Scott.
10:48:59 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I was going to say, I know, at the
10:49:03 county when we did an appointment, we had a list of
10:49:05 boards they were already serving on if they were
10:49:07 already on boards.
10:49:08 You may want to add that, that they identify all
10:49:13 boards that they already serve on.
10:49:15 That way we will know.
10:49:19 The other thing, though, a moot issue now is, because
10:49:23 he was already on the Planning Commission and on
10:49:25 Hartline.
10:49:26 I don't know how that happened.
10:49:31 >>SAL TERRITO: I don't want to get into too much
10:49:33 discussion because there may be some implication in
10:49:35 votes that were taken but generally whenever he was
10:49:37 appointed to the second board, I don't know which came

10:49:39 first, then under state law he will have been presumed
10:49:43 to have been removed from the first board.
10:49:46 It does have an impact on votes that were taken since
10:49:49 that time and that's a whole can of worms I don't want
10:49:51 to get into here.
10:49:55 >>THOMAS SCOTT: He's already resigned from Hartline.
10:49:58 I move item 41.
10:50:00 >> Second.
10:50:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
10:50:03 Mr. Dingfelder?
10:50:04 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Again I just want to reemphasize to
10:50:07 Ms. Kitchen, I am going to vote against this.
10:50:10 Ms. Kitchen is lumped into the same resolution as this
10:50:12 other gentle and therefore because they are lumped
10:50:16 together I have to vote against the resolution.
10:50:18 If they were separate I would be voting for Ms.
10:50:20 Kitchen as a separate resolution.
10:50:22 But it's just the way it's set up.
10:50:24 And in the future I'm sure the clerk will explain it
10:50:26 to us.
10:50:27 >>GWEN MILLER: We can't have a separate resolution?
10:50:31 Can we get a separate resolution?

10:50:34 >>> The legal department can split it up and adopt two
10:50:37 resolution ifs that's what you would like.
10:50:39 >>SAL TERRITO: We can come back with two resolutions.
10:50:42 >>GWEN MILLER: I would prefer that because I don't
10:50:45 want to vote against Ms. Kitchen.
10:50:47 So a resolution to bring it back.
10:50:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The maker of the motion, if we can
10:50:51 split it out.
10:50:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Yes.
10:50:54 Do we need to bring both of them back next Thursday?
10:50:57 >>SAL TERRITO: You can bring them back at any time you
10:50:59 wish.
10:51:00 >>THOMAS SCOTT: What I'm saying is there a way we can
10:51:02 approve the one today?
10:51:06 >>> She is already a member.
10:51:08 All you are doing is memorializing her membership.
10:51:10 >> Can you bring it back the tonight?
10:51:12 Okay, bring it back tonight.
10:51:13 >> I will move then that we bring back two separate
10:51:15 resolutions on these appointments.
10:51:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Second.
10:51:17 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

10:51:20 (Motion carried).
10:51:20 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Just going to carry it over to
10:51:23 tonight.
10:51:24 >>DAVID SMITH: City attorney.
10:51:27 If you have the right to reconsider the motion it has
10:51:29 to be the motion that you approved.
10:51:30 The motion that you approved was to ratify the vote
10:51:33 that you took pursuant to a process that you
10:51:35 established.
10:51:36 Accordingly, in order to unravel one of them you have
10:51:40 to unravel both of them.
10:51:42 You probably have to go back and redo your process.
10:51:44 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, if I can.
10:51:48 If it just a mere memorialization --
10:51:52 >>> correct.
10:51:52 >>MARTIN SHELBY: My concern though, is -- and council
10:51:58 don't have to be combined on one.
10:51:59 >>> The motion that just passed is to split them out,
10:52:06 into two separate resolutions and deal with them
10:52:09 tonight.
10:52:09 It doesn't necessarily say where those resolutions are
10:52:12 going to go tonight.

10:52:13 But it's just to split them out.
10:52:15 There is no requirement under any law or ordinance
10:52:18 that says that these two people, even though they
10:52:21 passed together before, have to go on the same
10:52:24 resolution.
10:52:25 >>DAVID SMITH: I understand that.
10:52:26 But, see, the motion, what you are dealing with
10:52:29 procedurally is a motion for reconsideration.
10:52:32 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: No, we are dealing with item 41.
10:52:36 >> Yes.
10:52:36 And item 41 is simply to confirm an action you already
10:52:39 took.
10:52:40 If you have any ability to undo that and are dubious
10:52:45 about that we can look at that and come back to you
10:52:47 later.
10:52:47 If you are undoing it, what you are undoing is the
10:52:50 motion that was Pa.
10:52:52 The motion that was passed was not a separate approval
10:52:54 of each person.
10:52:55 It was a confirmation of the outcome -- outcome of the
10:52:58 vote that Shirley conducted for you pursuant to a
10:53:01 tabulated vote process.

10:53:02 And let me finish.
10:53:04 So the only ways you can get back beyond that
10:53:07 confirmation of the entire vote is to reconsider your
10:53:12 process, because that's what you confirm was the
10:53:15 outcome of that process.
10:53:17 Once you do that, maybe what this council wants to do,
10:53:20 then you can look at that process a second time.
10:53:24 Because what you have done is otherwise you change
10:53:26 your voting process after you have already done your
10:53:28 vote.
10:53:29 I believe you all voted for two.
10:53:31 And you ended up with the outcome you end up with.
10:53:34 Now what you are doing is tantamount to changing your
10:53:36 process without undoing the motion that you approved
10:53:39 that accepted that process.
10:53:40 So now we are going back to having a council vote only
10:53:44 on one person, which is contrary to the process you
10:53:46 approved.
10:53:48 I realize it's technical and it's not helpful, but
10:53:52 unfortunately I think procedurally that's what you are
10:53:54 stuck with.
10:53:55 But if you are going to wait till tonight, give us a

10:53:57 chance to look at the issue more thoroughly, and come
10:53:59 back with a more deliberate and considered view.
10:54:03 Because you are really kind of catching us off the
10:54:06 cuff here.
10:54:07 >>CHAIRMAN: Mr. Shelby?
10:54:10 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, is there a sentiment on this
10:54:12 council -- because this is what I would be concerned
10:54:14 about -- if it is just merely procedurally to prepare
10:54:18 two resolutions with separate names, so that those
10:54:21 people who were in the minority on the tally that
10:54:24 created that vote, which was ratified, can do so, the
10:54:30 net effect is, if nobody changes their vote, that
10:54:33 person is still confirmed.
10:54:34 I think Mr. Smith's fear is that those people will
10:54:36 change their vote, which would create the problem.
10:54:38 But as a purely procedural memorialization, if that's
10:54:42 all council wishes to do is to record their actual
10:54:45 votes, which did appoint them, separately, I don't see
10:54:51 a problem with that, unless there's a member of
10:54:53 council on the prevailing side who now says they are
10:54:56 considering changing their vote which would open, as
10:54:58 Mr. Smith says, a problem.

10:55:00 Procedurally I don't see it.
10:55:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: He said we could deal with it
10:55:05 tonight.
10:55:05 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Okay.
10:55:06 I just want to bring to your attention from a
10:55:08 procedural standpoint I don't foresee a problem.
10:55:11 >>GWEN MILLER: We'll bring it back the tonight.
10:55:13 >>DAVID SMITH: David Smith.
10:55:17 Let us come back to the end of your meeting today.
10:55:19 I'm concerned, the other usual you on your rule for
10:55:21 reconsideration deals with either the same meeting or
10:55:25 the next regularly scheduled meeting.
10:55:27 Now, is tonight the next regularly scheduled meeting?
10:55:31 Or is today the only meeting that the next regularly
10:55:35 scheduled meeting?
10:55:39 I just don't want to deprive you the opportunity to do
10:55:42 whatever it is you were going to try to do.
10:55:44 So I think we should come back to you at then of the
10:55:46 session today.
10:55:47 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Will you bring us two resolutions
10:55:50 so at least they can be split?
10:55:51 >>> We will certainly prepare those and if we can get

10:55:55 there, we will.
10:55:57 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We need to change that motion.
10:55:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Bring it back at the end of the
10:56:00 meeting.
10:56:01 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I move to rescind the prior motion.
10:56:05 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Question.
10:56:06 >>GWEN MILLER: All in favor of that motion say Aye.
10:56:07 (Motion carried)
10:56:09 Question?
10:56:10 >>THOMAS SCOTT: The question becomes now, though, end
10:56:13 of the day, that's this evening?
10:56:18 Because I have to leave at 11:30 to go to this
10:56:20 auction.
10:56:21 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to break anyway at 12.
10:56:23 We have a closed session.
10:56:24 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I have to leave at 11:30.
10:56:28 >>GWEN MILLER: We have to be back at 1:30.
10:56:31 We are going to come back because we have a closed
10:56:34 session.
10:56:34 We have to break at 12:00.
10:56:36 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I won't be here for the closed session
10:56:38 either.

10:56:43 >>> Let us prepare to research.
10:56:45 I'll see if we can do it in the next half hour.
10:56:48 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Can I make one other statement?
10:56:50 As I recall, there was a majority confirmation.
10:56:54 What we did, what we first voted, and then we
10:56:56 confirmed as a council, unanimously, those two
10:57:01 appointments.
10:57:03 >>DAVID SMITH: And that's the motion I believe --
10:57:06 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So you understand that we have
10:57:07 already -- and that's what Mr. Shelby said pretty much
10:57:10 is this is pretty much perfunctory, I guess, because
10:57:14 we have already voted by majority, really, as I
10:57:21 recall, the appointment of those two individuals.
10:57:25 And my position at this point in that he has decided
10:57:30 he's resigning from Hartline we just need to move
10:57:33 forward.
10:57:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Now I need to make a new motion
10:57:37 just to say -- it doesn't even have to be a motion.
10:57:40 Just skip these items for a half hour.
10:57:43 >>GWEN MILLER: Hold item 41.
10:57:44 >>MARY MULHERN: With no discussion.
10:57:46 >>GWEN MILLER: We are going to committee reports.

10:57:48 Building and zoning, Mr. Joseph Caetano.
10:57:51 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: I would like to move items 52 to
10:57:54 72.
10:57:54 >> Second.
10:57:55 (Motion carried).
10:57:55 >> Excluding 53.
10:58:00 53 has been excluded.
10:58:04 (Motion carried).
10:58:05 >>GWEN MILLER: Item 53.
10:58:08 >>THOMAS SCOTT: On 53, as you recall, and Ms. Miller
10:58:11 may want to come address this, it is my understanding
10:58:13 that this is the house that was bidded out.
10:58:19 Ms. Miller, the administration brought a
10:58:21 recommendation.
10:58:21 I put a motion on changing the ranking, is what it
10:58:25 was, a motion that the ranking was changed, and the
10:58:29 attorney said when couldn't do that or something to
10:58:30 that effect.
10:58:32 However, we did that and we sent it back.
10:58:34 So the administration had the responsibility, an
10:58:37 obligation to either accept that or to send back to
10:58:40 us, I guess, the original rank and recommendation.

10:58:46 I don't know where you all are in that process but my
10:58:48 concern at this point is we are spending $10,000, I
10:58:51 understand, on air conditioning.
10:58:53 Now I understand that air conditioner has already been
10:58:57 stolen from this house twice, has it not?
10:59:00 >> This is also repairs to the windows, there were
10:59:03 bricks and other rocks thrown the window so it's both
10:59:06 a security and safety issue.
10:59:07 Also, in my consultations with the consultants for
10:59:10 FDOT, we as the city under our agreement, not only
10:59:13 with FDOT, it was also funded, this house's
10:59:17 rehabilitation through federal highways.
10:59:18 Our obligation is that it is -- the way it was
10:59:21 transferred to us, fully renovated, is the way that
10:59:24 wave to transfer to anyone else.
10:59:26 So these repairs are necessary regardless of the
10:59:28 status of any sales transaction.
10:59:30 And it was recommended that we do the air conditioning
10:59:33 replacement, again to preserve the historic
10:59:36 rehabilitation that has occurred, and from the
10:59:38 standpoint of the windows and other damage, that the
10:59:42 building be appropriately secured.

10:59:44 So this is a necessary expenditure regardless of the
10:59:46 status.
10:59:46 >>THOMAS SCOTT: So on this, because of your agreement
10:59:49 with FDOT, it has to be in the original, I guess,
10:59:55 repair state, correcting the -- that the
10:59:58 vandalizaation has taken place.
11:00:00 >>> That is what I have been informed from the
11:00:02 consultant for FDOT.
11:00:04 >>THOMAS SCOTT: Where are we in the process?
11:00:07 Has the administration addressed the council's motion?
11:00:11 >>> In meeting with the FDOT representative the second
11:00:14 week of October.
11:00:15 So as I mentioned, I believe back in those council
11:00:18 meetings before, I need to work with FDOT to see what
11:00:22 their position is because of the grant situation.
11:00:24 So at this point I don't have an answer for you.
11:00:26 It is our anticipation we have to do another bid
11:00:28 process.
11:00:29 >> Let me restate the question.
11:00:34 My question was that council passed a motion actually
11:00:38 changing the ranking, send it back to the
11:00:40 administration.

11:00:42 And my question is, has administration addressed
11:00:45 council's ranking of the bid process?
11:00:50 >>> We have not yet addressed that.
11:00:52 But our anticipation from our legal counsel is we
11:00:54 would have to do another bid process.
11:00:56 But I first need to consultant with FDOT which we will
11:00:59 be doing in two weeks.
11:01:00 >> One last question and I'll be through.
11:01:03 Then we are going to spend $10,000 on a house because
11:01:09 we want it right.
11:01:10 What's going to preclude it being vandalized again and
11:01:13 we have to spend another 10 or 15 or $20,000?
11:01:16 >>> We have turned the security over to Tampa Police
11:01:17 Department.
11:01:19 Tampa Police Department has a presence in the house at
11:01:21 various times of a 24-hour day.
11:01:24 So therefore we are confident that this type of
11:01:26 vandalism that has occurred will not occur.
11:01:31 >>MARY MULHERN: That was going to be my question,
11:01:33 where we are in the process.
11:01:34 But I would like to ask, since this seems to be a
11:01:39 question at least that I'm having, RFPs, and

11:01:44 bidding, that if you are going to create a new RFP for
11:01:48 another bidding process, that that -- the RFP actually
11:01:53 come before council so that we are satisfied with the
11:01:56 kind of terms and the requests for proposal, because I
11:02:05 think our questions on the sale, previous bid, had to
11:02:09 do with how the which had -- bidder was selected.
11:02:13 So if we could look at the RFP before.
11:02:17 >>SAL TERRITO: Legal department.
11:02:18 RFP process is uniquely in the administration's venue,
11:02:23 not the City Council's venue.
11:02:25 You can -- what happened, we discussed this last time,
11:02:28 they bring to you their recommendation for the award.
11:02:32 You have the authority to say, I don't like that
11:02:34 award, I am going to deny it.
11:02:36 And I suggest you look at this, this and this.
11:02:39 They are only suggestions.
11:02:40 The actual process itself is an administrative
11:02:42 process, not a City Council process.
11:02:44 >>MARY MULHERN: Right.
11:02:46 But, okay, perhaps we don't have any authority to
11:02:48 approve it.
11:02:50 But perhaps it could be presented to us, a report, on

11:02:54 what this RFP is going to look like.
11:02:57 We could give an indication that we think that it
11:03:03 sounds like a fair and appropriate process so that the
11:03:11 bidder is selected, and that's my next question, can
11:03:15 we weigh in on the bids?
11:03:17 >>> What happens, whenever the bid is done, it will be
11:03:20 submitted back to City Council for approval or denial.
11:03:24 You don't get a chance to come back and say, I don't
11:03:26 like number one, let's go to number two, number three.
11:03:29 It's an all or nothing situation.
11:03:31 As far as the process, that's an administrative
11:03:33 process.
11:03:34 If you want to know what the process is, I'm sure they
11:03:36 can tell what you the process is.
11:03:37 But you don't have any role in fashioning that
11:03:40 process.
11:03:40 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, the problem with bringing out a
11:03:44 done deal is when we have questions about the
11:03:49 process -- if the process is a more objective process,
11:03:55 for instance, we suggested the highest bidder, which
11:04:00 is, I think, what the public would like to see when we
11:04:03 are selling public property.

11:04:07 That the highest bidder get the bid.
11:04:10 Things like that, that are completely objective and
11:04:12 not subjective, if we could concentrate the writing of
11:04:17 the proposal in that way, so that it will always be
11:04:23 deemed to be a more fair process, the proposal
11:04:26 process.
11:04:29 It would be my suggestion.
11:04:30 Because I don't want this to drag on forever.
11:04:32 And I don't want us to keep -- pretty soon, we are
11:04:35 going to pay for the house with new air conditioners.
11:04:39 If we replace like four more air conditioners, we
11:04:42 could have bought the house.
11:04:46 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Thank you, Madam Chair.
11:04:48 In F my mind is still with me, I remember there were
11:04:51 three bidders.
11:04:52 >>> Right.
11:04:53 >> The highest bidder what was about 315,000 or so.
11:04:56 That bidder was not qualified, I guess the finances
11:04:59 weren't in shape or something.
11:05:01 There was two other bidders that bid about the same
11:05:03 amount of money on the house, right in the 250 range,
11:05:06 if I recall.

11:05:07 >>> Right.
11:05:07 >> What happened is that one of the bidders had
11:05:10 already bought a house from the city.
11:05:12 >> Right.
11:05:13 >> And was in essence selling that house so he can buy
11:05:15 this house.
11:05:16 >> Right.
11:05:16 >> And that's what happened with this council got in
11:05:20 and said the process here should be looked at and
11:05:23 changed.
11:05:26 We had a screening committee.
11:05:28 To me I don't know if that's right or wrong and that's
11:05:31 for somebody else to make judgment on.
11:05:33 I just feel if you are going to have a high bidder and
11:05:35 you qualify and you got the moola, the cash, you buy
11:05:41 the house.
11:05:45 AUDIENCE: Amen.
11:05:45 >> Thank you, brother.
11:05:47 [ Laughter ]
11:05:47 So then the next thing, the next-and you didn't do an
11:05:53 amen.
11:05:55 And in the air conditioning, I'm sure this

11:05:56 administration is not going to go out and get the
11:05:58 money today and put the air conditioners in tomorrow
11:06:01 because they are going to be the same, they are going
11:06:03 to get that money, put it aside in that account.
11:06:05 So when the deal is made, it is a checklist that you
11:06:08 go through, somebody purchasing the house through the
11:06:11 bidding process, yes, if they have a stove, yes.
11:06:14 Does Vermont a refrigerator?
11:06:15 Yes.
11:06:16 Is the roof all right?
11:06:17 Yes.
11:06:18 Air conditioning will be installed in such a date.
11:06:20 I would imagine that's how it's being done.
11:06:22 Maybe I'm wrong.
11:06:27 >>CINDY MILLER: In order for Tampa Police Department
11:06:29 to provide the security they need, they need to have
11:06:32 an air conditioner.
11:06:33 So therefore the air conditioning has been installed
11:06:35 in the house.
11:06:38 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:06:39 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Thank you, Madam Chair.
11:06:41 I don't want us to spend any more time on this,

11:06:44 because we are trying to take another bite of that
11:06:46 apple which I think is about the third or fourth bite
11:06:48 we trade to take on this issue in terms of the RFPs
11:06:52 and the bidding and bidders.
11:06:53 Sal instructed us.
11:06:54 We have already done pretty much all we can do on that
11:06:57 issue.
11:06:57 We voted.
11:06:58 We did resolution.
11:06:59 Whatever we did.
11:07:00 We made our statement.
11:07:01 So I think that's sort of a done deal.
11:07:04 This issue is very discreet.
11:07:07 I asked Ms. Miller and Mr. Darrell Smith yesterday for
11:07:11 some explanation about this by e-mails and they were
11:07:13 very quick to respond and I appreciate that.
11:07:15 Basically, I think much of this money, the $10,000 has
11:07:19 already been spent or been committed.
11:07:22 To be spent.
11:07:23 And it needs to be spent to preserve the house.
11:07:26 You don't want a nice house like that sitting without
11:07:28 air conditioning.

11:07:29 Regardless of TPD.
11:07:31 Because you will get mold and mildew and that sort of
11:07:33 thing.
11:07:34 So with all that, nobody made that motion.
11:07:38 I am going to move we pass number 53 and move on with
11:07:41 that.
11:07:41 >> Second.
11:07:42 >>GWEN MILLER: Question on the motion, Ms. Mulhern.
11:07:44 >>MARY MULHERN: I was going to suggest that maybe we
11:07:47 buy the air conditioners in bulk and get a better deal
11:07:51 on them.
11:07:53 >>THOMAS SCOTT: I don't mind approving this because
11:07:55 Ms. Miller explained to us why we have to spend the
11:07:57 money.
11:07:58 However, keep in mind, the air conditioner has been
11:08:01 stolen twice already.
11:08:02 That's all I'm saying.
11:08:04 >>GWEN MILLER: Police department is not going to let
11:08:07 them steal it a third time.
11:08:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I didn't know we had a mini
11:08:14 district house, we have applies district.
11:08:16 I am going to support the motion and hope it's not

11:08:18 stolen while they are in it.
11:08:21 [ Laughter ]
11:08:22 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second to pass item 53.
11:08:24 (Motion carried)
11:08:26 We go now to transportation.
11:08:28 Ms. Mary Mulhern.
11:08:31 >>MARY MULHERN: I move items number 73 through 81.
11:08:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
11:08:36 (Motion carried).
11:08:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Item 83 and 84 has a substitute
11:08:45 resolution. With that I'll move items 84 through 86.
11:08:48 >> Second.
11:08:49 (Motion carried).
11:08:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: And I move item 82.
11:09:02 I missed that one.
11:09:02 (Motion carried).
11:09:03 >>CHAIRMAN: We go to our public hearings.
11:09:05 Anyone that's going to speak on items 87 through 90,
11:09:09 will you please stand and raise your right hand?
11:09:10 (Oath administered by Clerk).
11:09:17 >>CHAIRMAN: Item number 87 needs to be withdrawn.
11:09:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Move to strike number 87.

11:09:26 (Motion carried).
11:09:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Number 88 is a continued public
11:09:30 hearing.
11:09:46 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Land development.
11:09:47 I have been sworn.
11:09:55 I have a couple additional copies of the staff report
11:09:58 if you need those.
11:10:08 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Is it the same staff report or
11:10:10 revised?
11:10:11 >>ABBYE FEELEY: (off microphone)
11:10:16 Okay.
11:10:21 The case before you this morning is Z 06-106, it is a
11:10:24 rezoning located in the general vicinity of Zack,
11:10:28 Nebraska, Zack Street and Nebraska Avenue and Twiggs
11:10:31 Street.
11:10:32 It is requesting rezoning from CBD2 to CBD2 for
11:10:38 office, retail, residential, hotel.
11:10:41 Petitioner is proposing to construct a mixed use
11:10:43 project including business professional office,
11:10:45 retail, residential, and hotel, with a development
11:10:51 scenario of 840,000 square feet of office and 17500
11:10:55 square feet of retail.

11:10:58 They have included and equivalency matrix to allow
11:11:01 them to trade off of uses on the site.
11:11:04 Maximum height proposed is 540 feet, 50 floors, with
11:11:10 an F.A.R. of 52.
11:11:12 The building is going to be oriented towards Twiggs
11:11:13 Street with a series of retail spaces and a pedestrian
11:11:16 plaza with a covered arcade at the southeast corner of
11:11:20 Twiggs and Nebraska and I will show you some of those
11:11:23 areas.
11:11:28 As noted, green space areas are also being provided on
11:11:30 the north side of the subject site on both the east
11:11:33 and west sides of the historic Jackson house.
11:11:36 Based on the proposed development scenario the project
11:11:39 is required to have 875 parking spaces and 1 that you
11:11:44 parking spaces are being provided.
11:11:54 I will go ahead an orient you to the site.
11:12:06 Most of you I know are familiar with union station
11:12:09 located here to the east of the property.
11:12:12 This is Nebraska Avenue running along Twiggs to the
11:12:16 south and Zack to the north.
11:12:19 There are a number of parcels included in this
11:12:22 rezoning.

11:12:23 However, the predominant development will be happening
11:12:25 on the south side of the property along with this.
11:12:30 These two areas allow for future development -- and
11:12:33 the green spaces I was referring to are located on
11:12:36 both the west and east side.
11:12:45 I am going to show you a couple pictures of the site.
11:12:47 Right now it's predominantly surface parking.
11:12:51 Here is a view looking south.
11:13:02 Here is a view looking south west.
11:13:04 Here is a view of the Jackson house looking west along
11:13:15 Zack.
11:13:19 Here is a view looking east along Zack towards union
11:13:24 station.
11:13:24 And there's a front view of the Jackson house.
11:13:31 Staff has reviewed the petition and we have found it
11:13:40 inconsistent.
11:13:41 There are a couple of items that need to be changed in
11:13:44 between first and second reading.
11:13:45 They are technical in nature.
11:13:48 I'll go over them quickly.
11:13:50 One was a calculation of the open space, a strip of
11:13:54 land along the western boundary was included in that

11:13:56 calculation.
11:13:57 That should not have been included.
11:13:59 That needs to be revised and can be done between first
11:14:01 and second reading with a change to the site plan.
11:14:04 And the others were related to transportation.
11:14:08 One had to do with a request for a camera to be added
11:14:12 to the building for transportation.
11:14:16 Also improvements to the alley.
11:14:18 A note needed to be add for the paving of the alley
11:14:20 from Zack Street to Nebraska Avenue.
11:14:23 And then waiver number one which I haven't gone over
11:14:28 the waivers, I'll go back over those, was to reduce
11:14:31 the number of loading berths from five to two.
11:14:38 Again, there are two waivers requested.
11:14:40 One is to reduce the number of loading berths.
11:14:43 Right now the plan currently says eleven to two and
11:14:46 the maximum berths should be five to two so that's one
11:14:51 of the technicals.
11:14:52 The other is to reduce the required parking garage
11:14:54 upper one way, drive aisle from eleven feet to nine
11:14:58 feet for the 45-degree parking.
11:15:02 If you have any questions, staff is available.

11:15:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Planning Commission staff.
11:15:11 >>TONY GARCIA: Planning Commission staff.
11:15:14 I'm sorry Mr. Shelby is not here but I have not been
11:15:16 sworn in.
11:15:20 (Oath administered by Clerk) there may be some other
11:15:34 people, too.
11:15:34 Just a couple of additional comments as they relate to
11:15:36 the comprehensive plan.
11:15:39 I think Ms. Feeley has already given you the brunt of
11:15:44 what the intent is, of the project in question.
11:15:47 As she has already stated, there are several parcels
11:15:51 including the pilot project, of what is before you
11:15:54 today and the entitlement that will be requested of
11:15:56 you today will be particularly for this piece of
11:15:59 property over here which faces east Twiggs Street.
11:16:02 There will be a residential -- not a residential
11:16:04 component, pardon me, there will be a retail component
11:16:07 that will consist of a Promenade from what we have
11:16:10 been told by the developers and I'm sure they will be
11:16:12 showing you that which will provide services to the
11:16:16 people that will be working close proximity so we have
11:16:21 the courthouse.

11:16:21 Let me show you on the aerial.
11:16:24 The courthouse, which is situated just to the west of
11:16:26 this site, and do have the garage to the southeast
11:16:31 side.
11:16:31 So there will be quite a few members of the general
11:16:34 public who will be able to take advantage of these new
11:16:36 retail services that will be offered which is
11:16:38 consistent with the intent of some of the policies in
11:16:40 the comprehensive plan as they deal with the central
11:16:42 business district.
11:16:43 Also, the project is consistent with policies in the
11:16:48 future land use element specifically as they talk
11:16:50 about neighborhood and commercial redevelopment given
11:16:54 to those currently in situations of fiscal -- physical
11:17:01 and economic blight.
11:17:03 Most of this relates to surface parking.
11:17:05 The intent of what the applicant is bringing to you
11:17:08 with this project is consistent with the intent of the
11:17:10 comprehensive plan.
11:17:11 Planning Commissioner finds the plan consistent with
11:17:16 the comprehensive plan.
11:17:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Questions.

11:17:20 Mr. Dingfelder.
11:17:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Wilson?
11:17:26 >>> Wilson Stair, manager, architectural review and
11:17:30 urban design division.
11:17:34 >> I assume you are here for this petition?
11:17:35 >>> Yes, sir.
11:17:36 >> And under the conditions as they are being proposed
11:17:41 right now, what will your role be, number one, in some
11:17:46 previous projects, we have requested, and the
11:17:52 developers have agreed to the 30, 60, 90% approval as
11:17:59 the zin goes along, they submit the project to you for
11:18:04 review at those levels.
11:18:05 Is that included as a condition on this one?
11:18:07 >>> Yes, sir.
11:18:08 >> And you are comfortable with that?
11:18:10 >>> Yes, sir, I am.
11:18:10 >> The last question I had then is, when I look at
11:18:14 this picture, and I'm sure the developer is going to
11:18:16 show it to us in greater detail, it's a big garage,
11:18:21 like, what, seven or eight stories of garage, on the
11:18:24 whole entire platform, which if you are walking
11:18:29 immediately adjacent to it, doesn't matter because you

11:18:31 are just going to see storefronts.
11:18:34 But if you are across the street and you look across,
11:18:39 to me it looks like you are going to be looking at
11:18:42 eight stories of garage.
11:18:43 So is that just a depiction right now?
11:18:48 Are they going to close that up so it's going to be
11:18:50 tighter?
11:18:51 Or is it just going to be screened and you are going
11:18:53 to say, oh, that's a big eight-story garage?
11:18:55 >>> We have had a lot of discussions about that garage
11:19:01 and the facade, and we are going to be working through
11:19:04 that at 30% right off the bat.
11:19:10 I'm asking to see materials, how the mesh is going to
11:19:15 work, and also how they have given visual interest.
11:19:18 They have shown it in the rendering.
11:19:20 But we will be questioning the texture and how it
11:19:25 comes across.
11:19:25 >> I noticed on the hotel over there, what's the
11:19:30 newest hotel by the convention center?
11:19:32 >>> Embassy suites.
11:19:34 >> Embassy suites.
11:19:36 It appears they have a garage on their first couple of

11:19:39 floors but they sealed it up pretty well, when you are
11:19:42 driving by you can't really tell that's a garage.
11:19:45 And I think they did a nice job of sealing that up and
11:19:48 making it more visually appealing.
11:19:50 >>> Yes, I agree.
11:19:52 Yes, we look at all kinds of different alternatives.
11:19:56 If they enclose the garage and make it architecturally
11:20:00 integrated, that's how we phrase it, then they have to
11:20:07 add air conditioning and so many air changes an hour.
11:20:12 But if it's open like we have here, then we look at
11:20:17 screening techniques, and ways to make it visually
11:20:21 interesting.
11:20:22 But we don't require under the code that it's
11:20:25 mandatory for them to enclose the parking garages and
11:20:29 make it architecturally integrated.
11:20:33 We encourage it and we work very hard at convincing
11:20:36 them to go that route.
11:20:39 But it's not mandated in the ordinance.
11:20:40 >> We need to revisit that on our chapter 27 in
11:20:45 January.
11:20:45 Thank you.
11:20:45 >>GWEN MILLER: Petitioner?

11:20:52 >>DAVID MECHANIK: 305 south Boulevard.
11:20:55 I'm here on behalf of the applicant.
11:20:57 And I have been sworn.
11:21:00 I have with me Mr. Rick Newman and Adam Stein with the
11:21:06 Monacle incorporated which is the applicant.
11:21:08 I also have Albert Alfonzo who will walk you through
11:21:12 very briefly the site plan and speak to the screening
11:21:17 issues regarding the garage.
11:21:19 And I would like to just say that's part of the normal
11:21:22 process where we meet with Wilson at the 30% stage of
11:21:27 the design, and we get into the details on the
11:21:32 materials and so forth.
11:21:33 So that is built into the process that you have on the
11:21:35 books.
11:21:37 One thing I would just like to clarify in terms of all
11:21:41 the notes that Abbye mentioned as far as addressing
11:21:46 the objections.
11:21:47 In fact, these are all can be dealt with through
11:21:50 corrections in the notes, which we have agreed to do.
11:21:53 I did want to clarify, just so there was no
11:21:57 misunderstanding, the calculation, disagreement over
11:22:00 the calculation, resulted in our urban space going

11:22:04 from 29 to 28%.
11:22:07 So it was a minor adjustment.
11:22:10 And the code requires us to have 15% open space so we
11:22:14 still have a surplus of 13% open space on the site.
11:22:18 So we are not trying to shortchange the open space by
11:22:22 any stretch of the imagination.
11:22:24 I wanted to just clarify that for you.
11:22:27 At this time, I would like to introduce Albert
11:22:29 Alfonzo, Alfonzo Architects, who has designed the site
11:22:33 and the proposed building and he will walk you
11:22:35 through the site plan and the building.
11:22:39 Thank you.
11:22:51 >>> Albert Alfonzo, president of Alfonzo Architects.
11:22:54 I have been sworn in.
11:22:57 >>GWEN MILLER: You can use the hand mike.
11:23:00 >>> Yes, that would be great.
11:23:01 Thank you.
11:23:04 We have really worked very hard with staff, going back
11:23:08 and forth, trying to make sure that this very
11:23:13 important site -- we see this as a really pivotal
11:23:18 urban site in its relation ship to union station, and
11:23:22 also historical building across the street, and this

11:23:26 is really a pivotal site in regards to a nexus between
11:23:31 Ybor City, the CBD, that's one reason why the train
11:23:35 station was there originally.
11:23:36 So what we are trying to do architecturally is really
11:23:38 respond from a base standpoint of the project and do a
11:23:43 lot of people spaces in the base of the building doing
11:23:47 a lot of retail, pushing the building back along
11:23:50 Nebraska Avenue, creating a large sort of open court
11:23:54 here, and then coming back to the Robinson house with
11:23:58 paving and then doing a public park here around the
11:24:00 Robinson house.
11:24:01 Then along east Twiggs Street, we are trying to
11:24:04 actually improve the situation along Twiggs.
11:24:09 There is a very difficult city garage across the
11:24:12 street that has no fenestration at the base so we are
11:24:19 trying to do something that takes that first 30 feet
11:24:23 which I can show you here on some of the renderings.
11:24:28 I'm not sure if council has some of these renderings.
11:24:39 We would be very interested in public art, and again
11:24:49 know that this is very early in the process.
11:24:53 There's schematic design.
11:24:54 It's really a zoning application.

11:24:55 So we are trying to really just give you sort of a
11:24:59 direction, a nuance.
11:25:01 Obviously the project has to be designed to 30, 60,
11:25:04 90%, and we want more than anything to be able to give
11:25:10 the city a project that is -- that respect it is
11:25:14 streetscape, the that respect it is pedestrian scale,
11:25:18 and brings sort of public art.
11:25:24 Do you want to get that?
11:25:25 (cell phone rings).
11:25:26 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I apologize.
11:25:31 >>GWEN MILLER: He's going to turn it off.
11:25:34 Okay, you may go ahead now.
11:25:35 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Sorry.
11:25:37 >>> That's okay.
11:25:38 So as you can see, you know, when you are working with
11:25:42 art at the base of a parking podium, you really have V
11:25:46 to show sort of a design direction, and a design sort
11:25:51 of guide, intentions.
11:25:53 We have been working with Wilson, and he's really been
11:25:56 pushing us hard.
11:25:57 This is the third or fourth iteration that we went --
11:26:01 iteration to establish a strong base to this parking

11:26:05 podium and then come in and screen it with mesh.
11:26:09 We are talking to Robin Nigh about possibly, you know,
11:26:12 a lighting artist at night, and whatnot.
11:26:15 We also, I think, as the project further develops on
11:26:19 the Avenue of the arts, we would really want to
11:26:21 emphasize that on the north part of the site, as that
11:26:27 further develops.
11:26:28 So I'm open to questions.
11:26:31 We are very excited about the project, feel like it's
11:26:34 a really breath of fresh air to the office market
11:26:39 downtown.
11:26:40 And so I look forward to questions from council.
11:26:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I just want to make a comment,
11:26:46 Madam Chair.
11:26:46 I believe this is the property that looks real
11:26:49 derelict for years there, since the '40s and 50s
11:26:54 and 60s and 70's and so forth to the present time.
11:26:56 It has been something that when you come up, Nick
11:26:59 Nuccio Boulevard and you meet the intersections of
11:27:02 Nebraska and the cross street, you see this something
11:27:06 that's not pleasant to the eye.
11:27:08 We spent a lot of money on union station.

11:27:12 And this was an old bar across the street.
11:27:14 Not that I ever went there but I know there was and
11:27:16 created some problems for the city for many years.
11:27:18 I know Mr. Smith is smiling.
11:27:20 I don't know if he went there but I didn't.
11:27:22 [ Laughter ]
11:27:22 He's saying no but I caught him out of the corner of
11:27:25 my eye.
11:27:25 And what we are looking at is a fresh, something
11:27:29 different, something new, something invigorating,
11:27:32 something that means a lot to that part of the city
11:27:34 that has been for a long time forgotten.
11:27:38 The city did some investment there on 12th. A lot
11:27:41 of the investment in the city when we moved stormwater
11:27:43 out and got a beautiful area that's really build up.
11:27:47 When you look back, and you realize the changes little
11:27:52 by little, time has passed but it's really accumulated
11:27:56 to be something very nice.
11:27:57 When you look at the parking garage the port authority
11:28:00 put up across from the aquarium, you think you're in
11:28:02 South Beach.
11:28:03 It really, really looks nice.

11:28:04 And I applaud you for not having air conditioning.
11:28:08 We all want green buildings.
11:28:11 And sweatboxes.
11:28:12 So the people become thin when you don't have too much
11:28:15 air conditioning.
11:28:15 So I think that you have got to do that.
11:28:18 And I applaud you.
11:28:20 Not saying I approve of all the concept of your
11:28:22 drawings.
11:28:23 But I think it's something that's needed, something
11:28:26 that will be a good upstart to that whole part of the
11:28:30 city.
11:28:31 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:28:33 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Alfonzo, I admire your work and
11:28:36 your drawing.
11:28:37 I think the upper part of this is really buoy
11:28:40 beautiful.
11:28:40 I have concern about the lower part.
11:28:44 You know, we talk about leap of faith.
11:28:47 I think we'll take a leap faith on this one, and I'm
11:28:49 sure that you are going to do a good job on the lower
11:28:52 part in designing the lower part to be as

11:28:54 aesthetically appealing as the upper part.
11:28:58 What I mentioned earlier about the change in the code,
11:29:00 I think we should revisit the code to demand that the
11:29:04 parking garages -- and I hope as an architect would
11:29:07 you agree with me -- demand that parking garages are
11:29:10 as aesthetically appealing as the upper part of these
11:29:13 buildings are.
11:29:14 Because in the past they haven't been.
11:29:15 >>> Yes.
11:29:16 >> And so -- but I would never, Charlie, and I agree
11:29:21 with you 100%, never advocate that we air condition
11:29:23 parking garages.
11:29:24 So we have to find some middle ground there.
11:29:26 But anyway, I talked about that enough.
11:29:30 I'll trust between you and Mr. Stair and your team
11:29:32 that you will come up with a nice design on that and
11:29:35 we'll move forward.
11:29:36 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there -- mechanic neck nothing
11:29:41 further, just an opportunity to respond to any
11:29:42 comment.
11:29:43 >>MARY MULHERN: I have a lot of questions.
11:29:48 I have trouble visualizing.

11:29:50 Maybe if we looked -- at the overhead.
11:29:56 I don't know if that's the right thing to look at.
11:29:59 I guess I'm trying to figure out, okay, what is this
11:30:06 space, Zack Street?
11:30:10 On either side -- is that the Jackson house?
11:30:16 >>> Yes, unfortunately, sometimes parcels don't line
11:30:18 up exactly right.
11:30:20 So that's one piece that is locate on the north side
11:30:25 of Zack is the Jackson house.
11:30:30 >> Can you point to that?
11:30:32 >> It's the lead-out.
11:30:37 >>> It appears it's in the yellow line but that should
11:30:40 be shifted over because the aerials and the parcels
11:30:42 don't line up sometimes with the technology.
11:30:45 I apologize for that.
11:30:46 >> So the yellow outline parcel, it should be in the
11:30:51 yellow or not?
11:30:54 It shouldn't.
11:30:54 It's not part of the property.
11:30:55 >> Correct.
11:30:56 >>> Commissioner Mulhern, as you see here, there's a
11:31:01 property line on either side.

11:31:03 So that's a lead-out.
11:31:05 Then we are coming in with green space buffers and
11:31:08 making a public park on either side of the Jackson
11:31:11 house.
11:31:13 >>MARY MULHERN: And then on either side is a gray area
11:31:15 on your site plan here.
11:31:17 Is that owned by --
11:31:20 >>> yes, the developer.
11:31:21 >> The developer?
11:31:22 >>> Yes.
11:31:22 >> So what are the plans for that?
11:31:26 >>DAVID MECHANIK: There are no plans currently for
11:31:29 that site.
11:31:30 We have accepted the fact that there are no
11:31:34 entitlements being sought for those parcels, and they
11:31:38 are sort of remnant parcels and we couldn't identify
11:31:41 at present any particular use that would be
11:31:44 appropriated, so they are just really blank and
11:31:47 anything that we would propose in the future would
11:31:49 require a full blown rezoning approval at that time.
11:31:53 >>MARY MULHERN: The area, I guess, west of the --
11:32:07 along Zack Street.

11:32:13 Yes, toward there.
11:32:13 >>> That is owned by a separate --
11:32:17 >> So that's why you created this shape.
11:32:22 >>> Correct.
11:32:22 >> I just wondered.
11:32:24 Because I like the building a lot.
11:32:29 Within one of these renderings, the little Jackson
11:32:32 house looks kind of sad against that big modern
11:32:34 building.
11:32:39 >>> Do you have the full-blown --
11:32:41 >> Yes, I have it.
11:32:41 >>> There's a perspective with the Jackson house.
11:32:53 >> Okay, I didn't see that.
11:32:55 Are there going to be green elements to this building?
11:33:01 >>> I don't believe that decision has been made at
11:33:03 this time.
11:33:22 >> I just came back from Chicago, and what they are
11:33:25 doing in, Chicago, all I guess public buildings, but
11:33:29 they are encouraging all the buildings to have -- to
11:33:32 either have a green roof or to have reflective -- it's
11:33:41 such a great savings and I just want to encourage you
11:33:44 to look into that, because you could be a great leader

11:33:48 and example for the city.
11:33:52 I would like us to be an example for the private
11:33:56 sector.
11:33:57 We are working on that.
11:33:58 But it just makes so much sense economically.
11:34:00 And it would just be great things.
11:34:02 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: If I can speak to that real quick.
11:34:06 In the green economist committee we had, one of the
11:34:09 big bowls is to create incentives for the private
11:34:11 sector to, you know, have the buildings LEED certified
11:34:15 and other ways green.
11:34:16 So hopefully, over the next year or so, we'll get to
11:34:19 that point where we'll create incentives which will
11:34:25 help this developer make this building greener than
11:34:27 they might otherwise.
11:34:31 >>> And I would say if you could invite the private
11:34:33 sector to some of these workshops because all of our
11:34:36 office buildings that are much further along than this
11:34:38 project, you almost have to do green to be competitive
11:34:41 in the marketplace today.
11:34:45 It's adding anywhere from 3 to $10 a square foot to
11:34:48 the cost.

11:34:49 They all want to do it.
11:34:50 It would be great if it could be a partnering with the
11:34:53 city to maybe help bridge.
11:34:57 >> Not our committee, a public committee.
11:34:59 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:35:00 wants to speak on item 88?
11:35:02 >>> We do have a requirement that the parking
11:35:13 structure needs to be 80% opaque and the developer or
11:35:16 the petitioner has agreed on the site plan they will
11:35:18 meet that opacity which will include that screening.
11:35:29 >>> Good morning.
11:35:30 I had to look at the clock.
11:35:31 My name is willie Robinson and I have been sworn.
11:35:40 Owner of the Jackson house.
11:35:41 But I have met with the corporation and they have come
11:35:47 up to an agreement for giving us green space an and
11:35:51 for giving us access to the boundaries of the house
11:35:56 where I can have access into my garage, to also give
11:36:00 us public space, when the house is fixed up and
11:36:06 restored.
11:36:06 And the public will be able to sit down, look at the
11:36:12 Jackson house, and even paving of the alleyway where

11:36:17 it will be easy to walk around.
11:36:19 So I am in full agreement we've the design that they
11:36:21 have so far.
11:36:23 I would like to also say that we had a family meeting
11:36:27 that consists of my brother and my two grandsons, and
11:36:30 one of my grandsons was very concerned.
11:36:34 The green space.
11:36:35 And he wanted me to ask the Newman corporation to make
11:36:39 sure that the green area, which will be a parking,
11:36:44 never, never, never, and I quote, never, never, be
11:36:47 taken away.
11:36:50 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
11:36:51 Ms. Mulhern.
11:36:52 >>MARY MULHERN: I want ton say I think the house is
11:36:55 beautiful.
11:36:55 I didn't mean the house was sad.
11:36:56 I just meant it looked so small there surrounded by --
11:36:59 but I think it's going to be a really beautiful back
11:37:02 drop for your house, which I love.
11:37:09 >>MOSES KNOTT, JR.: I reside at 2902 East Ellicott
11:37:17 street.
11:37:18 We are asking this morning -- I told you all over and

11:37:22 over again, I come to Ybor City when I was a young boy
11:37:25 17 years old, and I lived with some people.
11:37:28 And it is hell living in somebody else's house.
11:37:32 You have to go by their rules and everything.
11:37:34 But when I come in this house, stayed with somebody in
11:37:37 Ybor City, when I got my first room, it was in this
11:37:40 Jackson house on the second floor.
11:37:43 And mayor when I was 17 years old, and I stayed there
11:37:49 and I enjoyed staying there but I went back home to
11:37:52 Mississippi and married my ex-wife, Boretta Floyd, and
11:38:03 I was up on the second floor there, and I was the only
11:38:05 one, and I got a pretty wife and all these men looking
11:38:12 at my wife and saying, he Lord, let me get out of this
11:38:16 place.
11:38:17 But put a quarter in to cook.
11:38:19 And these men in the morning, we had to put two
11:38:21 quarters me and my wife, and these men come in and
11:38:25 cook on our quarter.
11:38:26 But we moved from there to Tampa central village,
11:38:30 Central Park Village.
11:38:33 Up on the second floor where they tore the building
11:38:36 down.

11:38:37 But what I want to say, though, I'm going to be the
11:38:43 first one in this part of town to look at that house.
11:38:49 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I have to clear my mind up a little
11:38:50 bit.
11:38:51 You said you married your ex-wife.
11:38:54 Does that mean you married her twice?
11:38:56 >>> I ain't had but one wife.
11:38:59 >>I want to make sure.
11:39:01 >>> I have one but one wife.
11:39:05 Could I say a little something on that?
11:39:10 When me and her separated, I said you'll never find a
11:39:17 man like me so 31 years.
11:39:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone else like to speak?
11:39:22 We need to close the public hearing.
11:39:23 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close the public hearing.
11:39:27 >> Second.
11:39:28 (Motion carried).
11:39:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Do we have an ordinance?
11:39:32 >>ABBYE FEELEY: Please be sure when you make your
11:39:34 motion you refer to those items that need to be added
11:39:36 to the site plan in between first and second reading.
11:39:45 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I move the following ordinance for

11:39:47 first reading, an ordinance rezoning property in the
11:39:49 general vicinity of south side of Zack Street, west
11:39:51 side of Nebraska Avenue, the north side of Twiggs
11:39:53 Street in the city of Tampa, Florida more particularly
11:39:55 described in section 1 from CBD2 central business
11:39:59 district to CBD2 central business district, mixed use
11:40:03 office, retail residential, hotel, providing an
11:40:05 effective date.
11:40:05 And with the following changes that will be
11:40:08 incorporated by staff, including the reduction of the
11:40:17 loading berths to two, let's see, what else?
11:40:23 The reduced required parking garage issue, that's
11:40:27 identified on the staff report.
11:40:30 >>> Addition of cameras.
11:40:33 Are you referring to the additional cameras?
11:40:37 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay, we got the transportation,
11:40:40 the addition of the camera at the roof, the note
11:40:43 adding the entire alley from Zack Street to Nebraska
11:40:45 will be paved to city standards, waiver number 1,
11:40:49 modified, that's the berths, and calculation of open
11:40:54 space needs to be modified pursuant to land
11:40:59 development, as well as -- I think that's it.

11:41:01 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:41:02 (Motion carried)
11:41:06 Item number 89 we need to open.
11:41:09 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: So moved to open.
11:41:11 69 motion and second.
11:41:12 (Motion carried)
11:41:14 Is there anyone in the public that wants to speak on
11:41:16 89?
11:41:18 Need to close.
11:41:18 >> Move to close.
11:41:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Hold on.
11:41:24 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Here on item 89 which is the first
11:41:26 reading for a local landmark, the Tolle Parsonage
11:41:31 Coombs log cabin.
11:41:32 We have a short PowerPoint today.
11:41:36 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Can we incorporate your PowerPoint
11:41:38 in your presentation by reference?
11:41:41 >>GWEN MILLER: 89 and 90 go together?
11:41:44 >>> They are two different motions.
11:41:46 >>GWEN MILLER: Okay.
11:41:48 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: A brief summary of the building is
11:41:51 located at 1822 east Park Avenue.

11:41:54 It was constructed in 1925.
11:41:56 The Historic Preservation Commission is recommending
11:41:59 designation of the structure as a local landmark.
11:42:02 And understood criterion C which is architecture.
11:42:07 It is a two-story style log cabin built for Mr. and
11:42:14 Mrs. Fitz Tolle, was used as a long time as a camp
11:42:22 site for the boy could you tell us and they are still
11:42:24 visiting this site in a very unique setting and I
11:42:27 encourage you to visit that if you are not familiar it
11:42:29 with.
11:42:30 Thank you.
11:42:30 >>GWEN MILLER: Anyone in the public wants to speak on
11:42:32 item 9?
11:42:33 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move to close.
11:42:34 >> Second.
11:42:34 (Motion carried).
11:42:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move the ordinance for first
11:42:40 reading, an ordinance of the city of Tampa, Florida
11:42:42 designating Tolle Parsonage Coombs log cabin locate at
11:42:47 1822 east park circle, Tampa, Florida as more
11:42:49 particularly described in section 3 hereof as a local
11:42:51 landmark providing for repeal of all ordinances in

11:42:54 conflict, providing for severability, providing an
11:42:56 effective date.
11:42:56 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:42:57 (Motion carried).
11:42:58 >>THE CLERK: Just to state for the record on item 88
11:43:03 and 89 separate reading will be October 18th --
11:43:06 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: for the record second reading on 88
11:43:11 and 89 will be October 18th.
11:43:13 >> I want to thank and compliment the various families
11:43:16 that owned this house over the years and what a
11:43:18 wonderful job of preserving that log cabin.
11:43:20 And that goes for all the historic preservation that's
11:43:23 gone on around the city.
11:43:24 But that thing is amazing.
11:43:29 >> You don't fix that at Home Depot.
11:43:31 >> Move to open 90.
11:43:33 >> Second.
11:43:34 (Motion carried).
11:43:34 >>DENNIS FERNANDEZ: Historic Preservation Commission
11:43:36 staff.
11:43:37 The item before you is the Balbin Brothers cigar
11:43:42 factory, also known as Tampa Cuba cigar factory, 1202

11:43:47 north Howard Avenue.
11:43:48 We are recommending through the Historic Preservation
11:43:48 Commission that this property be designated a local
11:43:52 landmark.
11:43:52 It was built in 1904 for Samuel Davis cigar
11:43:58 manufacturing and Balbin Brothers cigar factory moved
11:44:01 in in 1910.
11:44:02 It is located in the west national register historic
11:44:05 district.
11:44:06 It is currently being redeveloped through for use was
11:44:12 their business, and you can see some of the historic
11:44:16 pictures of West Tampa and the building itself has
11:44:19 contributed to the same criteria which designates West
11:44:23 Tampa as a local historic district.
11:44:25 Under both its architecture and contribution to
11:44:27 community planning.
11:44:29 >>GWEN MILLER: Is there anyone in the public that
11:44:31 wants to speak on item 9 oh?
11:44:33 >> Move to close.
11:44:34 >> Second.
11:44:34 (Motion carried).
11:44:35 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Move an ordinance for first

11:44:39 reading, an ordinance in the city of Tampa, Florida
11:44:42 designating the Balbin Brothers cigar factory
11:44:46 building, a/k/a Tampa-Cuba cigar factory located at
11:44:51 1202 north Howard Avenue, Tampa, Florida, as more
11:44:55 particularly described in section 3 hereof, as a local
11:44:57 landmark, providing for repeal of all ordinances in
11:45:00 conflict, providing for severability, providing an
11:45:02 effective date.
11:45:03 >>GWEN MILLER: I have a motion.
11:45:05 >> Second.
11:45:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:45:07 (Motion carried).
11:45:08 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Also that this will come back
11:45:11 October 18th for second reading at 9:00 for second
11:45:15 reading.
11:45:15 >>GWEN MILLER: 9:30.
11:45:16 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: 9:30.
11:45:19 Thank you.
11:45:20 >>GWEN MILLER: Ms. Cole?
11:45:24 >>JULIA COLE: Legal department.
11:45:25 I am presenting to council two separate resolutions
11:45:27 relating to the appointments to the Planning

11:45:29 Commission.
11:45:33 As to what we would need to do is probably start with
11:45:38 repointing Vivian Kitchen, and then the appointment of
11:45:43 Ed Giunta.
11:45:50 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I'll move Vivian Kitchen.
11:45:53 >> Second.
11:45:53 (Motion carried).
11:45:54 (Motion carried)
11:46:11 >>> We would need a motion to approve the resolution
11:46:14 related to the appointment of Mr. Giunta.
11:46:27 >>JOSEPH P. CAETANO: Madam Chairman, I would like to
11:46:30 move the name of Ed Giunta to the Planning Commission.
11:46:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second.
11:46:39 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.
11:46:39 >>THE CLERK: Dingfelder voting no.
11:46:51 >>GWEN MILLER: We go to information by council
11:46:53 members.
11:46:53 Mr. Miranda, do you have anything?
11:46:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Yes, Madam Chair.
11:46:57 I would like to have two commendations I will be
11:47:00 presenting outside of the council chambers for sure.
11:47:02 One is to Ms. Jenny Diaz who today turns 104 years

11:47:08 old.
11:47:08 I will be making this presentation to her where she
11:47:11 resides at.
11:47:12 And the second one is, the heritage committee to be
11:47:16 presented -- separately.
11:47:18 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second for Ms.
11:47:21 Diaz.
11:47:22 (Motion carried).
11:47:22 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: And the second one is to the
11:47:25 Mayor's Hispanic Heritage committee, October 17, 2007,
11:47:31 and that will be here at the Tampa Theatre.
11:47:33 >> Second.
11:47:35 >> Motion and second.
11:47:36 (Motion carried)
11:47:43 >>CHAIRMAN: That's it?
11:47:44 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: You want some more?
11:47:46 I'll give you some more.
11:47:47 Things are getting real bad in this country when
11:47:50 everything is made in China.
11:47:52 I remember -- I'm from Arkansas and we are here and
11:47:59 making a living off this great company called
11:48:03 Wal-Mart.

11:48:04 Now everything is made in China.
11:48:06 Yesterday in West Tampa I went to buy a Cuban
11:48:08 sandwich.
11:48:09 I gave it back when it said made in China.
11:48:12 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Dingfelder?
11:48:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: A couple of things.
11:48:18 On a very positive note, about six weeks ago, council
11:48:24 supported my motion in regard to those hybrid
11:48:28 vehicles, and as you recall, we strongly suggested
11:48:31 that the administration rebid those hybrid cars.
11:48:35 The bids that came back, we approved it actually a
11:48:38 week ago as part of our consent agenda.
11:48:41 And I appreciate all purchasing hard work because I
11:48:45 know they had a lot of effort to rebid it.
11:48:48 Not only did we save $20,000 on the purchase of those
11:48:51 hybrid vehicles because we got the federal income tax
11:48:53 rebate, but on top of that, we got an additional
11:48:57 $67,000 of savings on the rest of that bid for the
11:49:00 other SUVs, because there was a little -- I don't
11:49:03 know if you all remember, but the local bidder got
11:49:05 thrown out on a technicality, or the local bidder
11:49:11 compared to the Pensacola bidder, but when the local

11:49:14 bidder cam back the second go around we saved another
11:49:17 $67,000 because council was willing to stick its neck
11:49:20 out and take a stand on that issue, a total savings to
11:49:25 this city of $87 that you just from that one bid so
11:49:28 I'm very proud of council and thank you for your
11:49:29 support on that.
11:49:31 That's a report.
11:49:32 The second item is going back to the Bright House
11:49:34 issue.
11:49:35 I would like our legal staff to come back to us on
11:49:38 October 18th and tell us what legal options that
11:49:43 this city has, and that the City Council has, and the
11:49:47 possibility of filing a motion for injunctive relief
11:49:52 as a possibility.
11:49:54 And I would like Mr. Smith to explore as well as any
11:49:56 other options that might be available to this
11:49:58 community to keep the Peg channels where they are.
11:50:03 And I think it's extremely important that the public
11:50:07 have the ability to see their government in action.
11:50:10 There are two ways that they hear about the
11:50:12 government.
11:50:13 One is through the newspapers, and the times and

11:50:21 Tribune do a wonderful job, not necessarily in that
11:50:24 order, either order, and secondly they watch us, the
11:50:26 government channels, either channel 15 or channel 22,
11:50:30 what have you.
11:50:30 That is extremely important.
11:50:32 Because the people are the ones who put us here, and
11:50:34 the people deserve the opportunity to watch us in the
11:50:37 most convenient place possible.
11:50:39 So that's a motion.
11:50:41 Come back October 18th with legal options.
11:50:45 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Second for discussion but I think
11:50:47 we have to get an opinion.
11:50:48 >>MARTIN SHELBY: I just want to bring to your
11:50:50 attention, and council member Miranda referenced this
11:50:53 in his comments earlier on the subject, council rule
11:50:56 4-J says council should avoid any discussion of
11:50:59 matters at a public meeting where the city is or is
11:51:01 likely to be a party in litigation without concurrence
11:51:04 of counsel.
11:51:05 I think your request obviously depending on what Mr.
11:51:09 Smith says that may or may not be appropriate to bring
11:51:11 to council but understands obviously by your motion

11:51:14 what your intent is.
11:51:14 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Mr. Smith will be prudent as he
11:51:18 always is if we try to go further than we should in a
11:51:21 public setting.
11:51:22 So he will just come back and generically talk about
11:51:24 those issues with us, where the city is going to go.
11:51:28 Maybe the mayor is way ahead of us.
11:51:29 Maybe she already directed legal to file something.
11:51:32 But we'll hear about it in a couple of weeks.
11:51:35 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a motion and second.
11:51:36 (Motion carried).
11:51:38 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: and before I say Aye, I am going to
11:51:42 support the motion.
11:51:43 But if it gets out of hand, if we have the meeting
11:51:45 that we go far and beyond our scope, I am going to
11:51:48 walk out.
11:51:49 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I agree with you.
11:51:51 >>MARTIN SHELBY: It will be my job to stop --
11:51:54 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: That's what I want to you do.
11:51:55 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The last thing is a little
11:51:58 housekeeping.
11:51:58 Legal department has suggested that we reorganize the

11:52:04 green ordinance task force slightly.
11:52:06 And what they suggested is, and I won't get into why,
11:52:11 sunshine law, what they suggested is that we
11:52:15 reorganize it into a green ordinance fact finding
11:52:18 body.
11:52:19 And all the meetings will still be noticed and they
11:52:22 will still be open to the public, and they will be
11:52:24 held in a public place.
11:52:26 So the public doesn't need to worry about it.
11:52:28 But the motion is to modify your earlier motion from
11:52:33 several months ago to reconvene this group as a green
11:52:37 ordinance fact finding body.
11:52:38 We will expire the green ordinance task force that was
11:52:45 previously created, create a new body, and that you
11:52:48 would direct me to co-chair with Cindy Miller, to
11:52:54 co-chair this with me, and I am very pleased the
11:52:56 administration is participating.
11:52:58 So that's a motion.
11:53:02 >> Is it also your intent to excise that portion that
11:53:04 requires that fact finding to return with an
11:53:07 ordinance?
11:53:09 It wouldn't be coming back with an ordinance as in the

11:53:11 original motion.
11:53:13 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: I think that Mr. Dingfelder is
11:53:15 right, when you have a fact finding committee, you can
11:53:18 do the same thing without getting legally in a way
11:53:24 where you have to explain a lot of things and if you
11:53:25 are going to create the ordinance and the committee I
11:53:27 think that would put the same burden back on that
11:53:29 committee.
11:53:29 I think Mr. Dingfelder should be there, along with the
11:53:33 administration, and come before this council and
11:53:36 present an idea for the ordinance.
11:53:38 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: That thank you for the
11:53:40 clarification, Mr. Miranda.
11:53:41 I think that is the intent of this fact finding body,
11:53:43 will it be to not eliminate options, not to draft an
11:53:47 ordinance per se, but to come back to this body with
11:53:52 lots of ideas, and choices, for this body to then
11:54:01 whittle it down itself.
11:54:02 I appreciate the opportunity to co-chair with Mrs.
11:54:04 Miller.
11:54:04 >> Second.
11:54:06 >>GWEN MILLER: Motion and second.

11:54:07 (Motion carried).
11:54:08 >>MARY MULHERN: I just was stuck on a plane till
11:54:16 midnight last night.
11:54:17 So after being at a two-day conference of CEOs for
11:54:21 cities, be and I'm not a CEO, and there weren't really
11:54:25 that many CEOs there but there were a lot of city
11:54:28 employees from around the country, and it was held in
11:54:31 Chicago, and there were people from all over, but the
11:54:37 most exciting thing was what Chicago has done.
11:54:40 And I lived there until, I think, ten years ago.
11:54:43 I keep losing track whether it's nine or ten years.
11:54:45 And I worked downtown.
11:54:49 And what's happened -- it's not in the last ten years
11:54:52 but it in the last five years as far as sustainable
11:54:55 building there, and as far as investment in arts and
11:54:59 culture, and their new thing which actually was a
11:55:03 story in the paper today, on the state level, they
11:55:06 have actually sold the city of Chicago, a long-term
11:55:14 lease, that they sold their biggest parking garage
11:55:17 downtown in Grant Park, and they also sold the Skyway,
11:55:21 which is the 7-mile toll road for billions and
11:55:27 billions of dollars.

11:55:28 So there are all kinds of things happening that were
11:55:32 really interesting.
11:55:33 But the thing that really struck me is, especially in
11:55:37 the green building arena, there were people from
11:55:40 Portland and Seattle and from the east coast, and they
11:55:45 were doing a lot with green building and
11:55:47 sustainability, that they have populations that
11:55:54 naturally would be inclined to support that.
11:55:55 But in Chicago, Chicago is kind of like here, it's
11:55:58 pretty working class, and not many people who are, you
11:56:02 know -- it's not like an environmental, it's a big
11:56:05 city in the midwest.
11:56:07 And they have completely embraced these ideas, because
11:56:12 of the leadership in Chicago.
11:56:13 So I think it was really inspiring, because I think we
11:56:17 really can do something, especially with writing that
11:56:21 green building ordinance, which is my hope, and I
11:56:25 think that your goal, when you are done with your fact
11:56:28 finding mission, which I would like to participate in,
11:56:31 and I have a lot of material to share with you just
11:56:34 from the past week.
11:56:35 But that we do come up with an ordinance that has some

11:56:40 teeth to it.
11:56:41 And there are a lot of examples out there that we can
11:56:45 look at.
11:56:46 I just want to share that with you.
11:56:51 >>GWEN MILLER: Mr. Caetano?
11:56:55 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: More -- one more thing.
11:56:57 I was looking for something to say in one of my
11:56:59 archive drawers and I found my -- the house that I was
11:57:04 born in, in the first eight or nine years lived there,
11:57:07 from 1949, a five room, one bath house, real nice,
11:57:12 real big, and built in 1949 the tax bill was $7.70
11:57:18 with a 15-cent --
11:57:23 >> You don't still owe it, do you Charlie?
11:57:26 >>> No, I owe the 7.15.
11:57:28 That's how tax investigates gone from that time to
11:57:30 now.
11:57:30 Let me also say that even if you add all the taxes on
11:57:34 this house, for all those years from '49 and you sell
11:57:37 it today, you still made a big profit and got a lot of
11:57:40 good services from the city.
11:57:44 Thank you, Madam Chair.
11:57:44 >>GWEN MILLER: Clerk, do you have anything?

11:57:49 >> Move to file all the documents presented today.
11:57:52 (Motion carried).
11:57:53 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Council, I asked the legal
11:57:59 department, Mrs. Kert, to make sure that council
11:58:03 cannot actually do this before 12:00.
11:58:06 You are about two minutes away.
11:58:07 And I can verify that just in case council should.
11:58:10 So I am going to provide this statement for to you
11:58:11 read regarding the closed session.
11:58:13 But --
11:58:15 >>GWEN MILLER: Two minutes.
11:58:16 >> Is that de~minimis?
11:58:20 I think we are close enough to 12.
11:58:23 >>GWEN MILLER: We can do it?
11:58:24 2 minutes?
11:58:26 Read it now?
11:58:28 >>> Always you want to wait another minute.
11:58:38 >>GWEN MILLER: I'll read it now.
11:58:40 Notice is hereby given that the Tampa City Council is
11:58:42 going to a closed session pursuant to section
11:58:46 286.0118, Florida statutes, for approximately one
11:58:51 hour.

11:58:52 The meeting will convene in the City Council chambers
11:58:55 and will move to the conference room on the 8th
11:58:57 floor City Hall for the closed session.
11:58:59 The council will discuss settlement negotiations,
11:59:03 strategy sessions related to litigation expeditious
11:59:08 for the case of City of Tampa versus city national
11:59:10 bank of Florida, and Civitas construction company,
11:59:15 case number 2Z061383 2nd district Court of Appeals.
11:59:22 Meeting will be attended by council member chair Gwen
11:59:24 Miller, council member Mary Mulhern, councilman John
11:59:27 Dingfelder, councilman Charlie Miranda, councilman Joe
11:59:31 Caetano and whoever will come later.
11:59:34 David Smith, city attorney, Marty Shelby, City Council
11:59:39 attorney, Jerry Gewirtz, chief assistant city
11:59:43 attorney, and Rick Zibach, Esq. Following closed
11:59:47 session, City Council will reconvene in open session
11:59:49 in City Council chambers, announce termination of the
11:59:52 closed session of the council and will take final
11:59:55 action if necessary.
11:59:57 We now go to the 8th floor.
11:59:58 >>MARTIN SHELBY: If I can, Madam Chair so the record
12:00:00 is clear, this follows the case of City of Tampa

12:00:02 versus city national bank of Florida and Citivest
12:00:05 construction corporation.
12:00:06 Thank you.
12:00:06 (Meeting recessed.)
12:00:13


TAMPA CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
SEPTEMBER 27, 2007
1:30 P.M.

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


13:35:33:07 >>GWEN MILLER: Tampa City Council is called back to
13:35:35:00 order.
13:35:36:00 Roll call.
13:35:40:00 >>CHARLIE MIRANDA: Here.
13:35:42:28 >>MARY MULHERN: Here.
13:35:43:27 >>JOSEPH CAETANO: Here.
13:35:44:27 >>GWEN MILLER: Here.
13:35:45:09 We need to open our workshop.
13:35:47:18 We have a motion and second.
13:35:48:21 All in favor of the motion, aye.
13:35:50:09 Opposed, nay.
13:35:51:24 >> Good afternoon, Council.
13:35:52:19 Michele Ogilvie, Planning Commission staff.
13:35:55:03 I want to thank you all very much for giving us this

13:35:57:00 opportunity.
13:35:58:01 We will take 30 minutes of your time.
13:36:00:07 I know Mr. Miranda needs to move on to bigger and
13:36:03:07 better.
13:36:03:19 Our conversation this afternoon is, again, about the
13:36:06:03 livable city and connections within that livable city.
13:36:10:27 We started off with the urban form.
13:36:14:22 And I have a map over here, and I'm going to give you
13:36:17:18 an outline that shows the map a little bit more
13:36:20:09 clearly.
13:36:20:24 Connections also deal with our environment and climate
13:36:25:09 change.
13:36:25:21 And there's an article that I've copied from the
13:36:28:00 American planning association's planning magazine that
13:36:30:15 I thought Council would enjoy reading at their leisure.
13:36:35:15 With such short time, Randy will be talking to you
13:36:38:21 about our connection with the transportation
13:36:40:06 concurrency exception area within the City of Tampa.
13:36:44:25 And close our workshop with a conversation about
13:36:48:18 transit, long-range transit planning.
13:36:55:06 >> Thank you.
13:36:56:06 Randy gores, the community planning division.
13:36:59:10 I have a presentation here.
13:37:01:06 I don't know how much of it I'll actually use.
13:37:04:00 If it comes up, we'll go through -- mostly because of

13:37:07:00 the pictures.
13:37:07:19 It will be easier to show with the pictures.
13:37:09:22 The purpose of today is to give you a quick rundown of
13:37:12:12 the TCEA and the mobility strategy for the City of
13:37:16:03 Tampa.
13:37:16:28 As we move through the comp plan update, there are
13:37:19:12 really three key issues we'll be dealing with as it
13:37:22:13 relates to the TCEA.
13:37:24:01 It's to what extent do we review, approve, deny
13:37:27:06 development, plan amendments, rezonings and so forth on
13:37:30:00 the basis of transportation concurrency.
13:37:31:25 What are the appropriate balance between roadway and
13:37:36:24 multimodal improvements we need to make, and how do we
13:37:39:18 balance the cost between the private and public
13:37:42:07 sectors?
13:37:44:12 I can go quickly through our challenges.
13:37:46:25 We have neighborhood concerns over traffic congestion.
13:37:54:22 We have constrained roadways, some limited funding,
13:37:58:09 limited choice of transit service, meaning that we're
13:38:00:27 not really attracting as many of the choice riders.
13:38:06:03 And our roadways are more road oriented instead of
13:38:09:25 transit development oriented.
13:38:14:09 >>MARY MULHERN: I just want to note that Mr. Dingfelder
13:38:16:22 is here now.
13:38:17:19 So we will have a quorum.

13:38:19:12 I'm interested in hearing the whole presentation.
13:38:26:00 >>GWEN MILLER: We have a night meeting, too.
13:38:33:25 >> I can get done in about 15 minutes.
13:38:36:16 I was trying to move quickly because of the threat of
13:38:40:01 the possibility of a quorum being lost.
13:38:42:19 >>GWEN MILLER: Anything with Mary, you can meet with
13:38:44:25 her.
13:38:45:18 >>MARY MULHERN: Well, I think it's important for
13:38:48:12 Council, besides me, I'm really into this transit
13:38:51:06 stuff.
13:38:51:18 It's more important for the rest of you to hear what's
13:38:55:24 going on.
13:39:01:24 >> We're trying to get done in an hour.
13:39:05:06 Let me go through a little bit about the growth
13:39:13:03 pressures we're experiencing.
13:39:14:13 In this map, you see the green is our existing
13:39:17:07 population.
13:39:17:15 The red shows what we project into the future.
13:39:19:21 So you see the area that we expect population to go
13:39:24:12 around downtown.
13:39:25:07 Primarily, downtown and it's spread out through the
13:39:28:06 rest of the city in different proportions.
13:39:30:15 This is a map of the projected residential densities
13:39:35:00 showing that you see increased densities in the
13:39:37:24 Interbay area up through downtown.

13:39:40:04 Sort of this corridor that goes from the south through
13:39:42:22 downtown upwards to the north of USF.
13:39:45:03 When we look at our employment patterns, the yellow
13:39:48:22 showing the existing employment distribution.
13:39:52:00 The sort of purple color or the pink color showing
13:39:55:22 where we expect new employment to occur.
13:39:58:06 You can see, again, this map, the employment
13:40:01:00 projections show Westshore, downtown, the USF area
13:40:04:00 having the greatest employment.
13:40:06:01 We have an estimate of over 130,000 people -- 132,000
13:40:14:01 additional employees.
13:40:15:07 Last slide, 95,000 additional residents.
13:40:17:28 That's a lot of growth in the next 20 years for the
13:40:20:00 City of Tampa.
13:40:20:15 This is the picture of the employment density that we
13:40:23:18 expect.
13:40:24:15 Again, Westshore and downtown and USF area showing
13:40:27:06 concentrations of employment.
13:40:28:18 This is the planning framework that the Planning
13:40:33:21 Commission.
13:40:34:15 It's the same map that they presented to you the last
13:40:37:07 time showing that there are three areas of change, the
13:40:40:19 Westshore, the downtown heritage and the USF
13:40:43:18 institutional.
13:40:44:03 The rest of the city is what's called the area of

13:40:47:12 stability.
13:40:47:22 That's the areas of change.
13:40:49:18 And these are the areas of stability.
13:40:51:15 When you look at our future land use map, this is
13:40:54:25 existing future land use map.
13:40:56:16 If you can see, and you overlay those three areas, you
13:40:59:16 can see that the greatest proportion of the mixed use
13:41:02:04 areas fall in downtown, the Westshore area and up near
13:41:05:06 the USF area.
13:41:06:06 So what we're showing is that the future land use map
13:41:08:16 is fairly consistent with the map showing the areas of
13:41:13:21 change and stability.
13:41:14:24 Our redevelopment areas, the areas that are in the
13:41:18:06 outline, that's the existing enterprise zone, the
13:41:21:19 pinkish areas are the community redevelopment areas.
13:41:24:18 Again, when we overlay -- let me go back.
13:41:27:27 These are the approved DRIs in the city.
13:41:30:28 On this map, you have DRIs, community redevelopment
13:41:33:24 areas and the enterprise zones.
13:41:35:19 Those are areas that the city has already made a
13:41:38:09 commitment to encourage development or that we've given
13:41:40:27 entitlements for development.
13:41:42:10 When you overlay the three areas, again, what you see
13:41:47:03 is the downtown heritage, Westshore areas and USF again
13:41:50:19 fall in line with a lot of the approved development and

13:41:53:15 where the CRAs are.
13:41:54:24 Now, we have several barriers to livability that we
13:42:01:01 want to address in the plan update.
13:42:02:24 Before I get into those, I have to kind of bring you
13:42:05:18 through a few definitions that I'm going to be
13:42:07:21 mentioning today.
13:42:08:16 Level of service is a term that we used a lot.
13:42:12:27 It's a degree of service provided by a facility
13:42:15:21 relative to capacity.
13:42:16:15 Basically, if you're at 57% capacity, 87% capacity,
13:42:20:06 it's a measure of what you're using versus what you
13:42:22:27 have.
13:42:23:07 Adopted level of service, that's the level of service
13:42:27:07 that the cities adopted for capital improvements
13:42:30:12 planning.
13:42:30:24 When it comes to roadways, we have adopted a level of
13:42:33:12 service D.
13:42:34:12 Roadways are graded by A through F.
13:42:37:12 D is not the worst case, but it's pretty congested.
13:42:41:10 You can still move around, but it's very difficult
13:42:46:06 negotiation.
13:42:46:18 Concurrency means that public facilities needed to
13:42:50:10 maintain the adopted level of services are available
13:42:53:07 when the impacts of development occur.
13:42:55:10 So basically, it means that in order for us to ensure

13:42:59:04 that our level of service D can be maintained, we have
13:43:02:27 to make sure we have capital improvements in place at
13:43:05:15 the time the development were to come on board that's
13:43:07:15 going to impact that roadway.
13:43:09:03 Financial feasibility means that the capital
13:43:12:18 improvement schedule must include funded projects to
13:43:15:21 ensure that the adopted level of service standards can
13:43:18:09 be met and maintained.
13:43:20:01 This is a new requirement that came up in 2005.
13:43:23:12 Prior to 2005, we would put -- projects on the schedule
13:43:28:27 that look like they had funded or maybe desired funding
13:43:32:21 in the future.
13:43:33:10 Now it's up to local government to ensure that the
13:43:35:13 funding is in place and that you can attain your level
13:43:39:24 of service standards.
13:43:40:22 That's important when you look at a map like this.
13:43:45:10 This is our existing deficient and constrained
13:43:48:15 roadways.
13:43:48:27 The roadways that are in blue are constrained, whether
13:43:52:28 by ordinance or by some right-of-way problem or there's
13:43:55:12 a legal issue.
13:43:57:13 Those roadways can't be widened because of some
13:44:00:12 constraining element.
13:44:02:27 The roadway links that are in red are the roadways
13:44:06:25 operating at a deficiency right now.

13:44:09:21 Ones that are below level of service D.
13:44:11:18 I highlighted one of the larger contributors to our
13:44:16:27 level of service problem and that's the interstate
13:44:18:18 system.
13:44:18:25 This portion of it is called the strategic intermodal
13:44:22:09 system.
13:44:22:19 It is a part of the Florida Department of
13:44:25:01 Transportation's highway system which links all of the
13:44:28:21 economic resources that it felt it was important for
13:44:32:27 the statewide economy.
13:44:34:06 So it's the ports, the airports, the cities and so
13:44:37:03 forth.
13:44:37:13 The system is operating currently below level of
13:44:41:06 service.
13:44:41:21 Even for F.D.O.T.
13:44:43:18 What that does for the City of Tampa is, and I think
13:44:46:24 many of you may have experienced this, especially a
13:44:49:18 good example is at the Kennedy/Westshore or Kennedy --
13:44:53:09 yeah, Kennedy/Westshore intersection at rush hour.
13:44:56:18 People coming from Pinellas will notice that the
13:44:59:15 interstate is already backed up.
13:45:01:07 They'll get off at Kennedy.
13:45:02:27 That causes a backup at Kennedy and Westshore, which
13:45:06:03 causes more backups along the way.
13:45:07:25 So when people who are familiar with the interstate

13:45:10:19 system see it backing up, they get off to get on the
13:45:14:00 local roads which causes problems on our local roads.
13:45:17:19 From a concurrency standpoint, what it means is that --
13:45:23:16 if concurrency was handled straight, just concurrency
13:45:27:19 the way the definition was, we would have to be able to
13:45:30:21 on our five-year schedule, have to take care of the
13:45:34:24 deficiencies through our five-year capital improvements
13:45:38:12 program.
13:45:38:22 A lot of people say why can't you use impact fees?
13:45:41:03 Let the new development take care of those impacts.
13:45:43:21 The definition of impact or impact fees are funds that
13:45:47:00 are paid by new development to cover the cost of the
13:45:49:15 public facilities for the impacts that the new
13:45:51:18 development generates.
13:45:52:18 What that means is that new development can only -- the
13:45:55:27 funds taken in from an impact fee can only be used for
13:45:59:18 the impact that it creates above what's there now.
13:46:02:15 The existing deficiency has to be taken care of by the
13:46:06:25 local government.
13:46:07:10 So one of our considerations as we move forward in
13:46:11:03 looking at concurrency, transportation concurrency,
13:46:13:00 especially, is we don't want to shift the burden back
13:46:15:04 to the existing residents and existing local government
13:46:19:06 to pay for the deficiency.
13:46:25:01 At the same time, we want to make sure we can cover

13:46:27:27 fees in the future to take care of the new impact.
13:46:30:06 And this is what the state -- the state -- what we're
13:46:34:15 going through in the City of Tampa in terms of
13:46:36:27 deficient roadways and concurrency is happening in
13:46:39:10 every urban area.
13:46:40:15 And a lot of it is happening as a result of -- or I
13:46:43:22 should say, a large portion of it is happening as a
13:46:46:06 result of the interstate system being constrained in
13:46:48:27 almost every other urban area.
13:46:51:16 So the state recognized this several years ago and put
13:46:55:00 in place for the ability for local government to grant
13:46:57:03 an exception to concurrency.
13:46:58:13 What it meant was, you didn't have to actually have the
13:47:01:19 facility in place at the time that the development came
13:47:05:12 on board.
13:47:06:00 You could let it degrade a little bit.
13:47:08:00 Could you plan the improvement out into the future.
13:47:10:24 There are several different types of exceptions that
13:47:13:06 the state allows.
13:47:14:28 The City of Tampa uses a transportation concurrency
13:47:17:24 exception area and allows for the exceptions in
13:47:21:13 designated areas that are for urban infill, urban
13:47:24:07 redevelopment, downtown revitalization or projects that
13:47:27:03 promote public transit.
13:47:29:06 Now, these are the statutory requirements really quick,

13:47:33:09 give you an idea what rules we must comply with.
13:47:37:09 First of all, the TCEA area must be compatible and
13:47:41:27 promote the comprehensive plan.
13:47:44:06 It has to support the comprehensive plan in our
13:47:46:27 long-term vision of the comprehensive plan.
13:47:48:15 You have to provide data analysis to show that you have
13:47:50:18 the right size that meets the rules and the right
13:47:53:12 configuration.
13:47:54:07 We have to coordinate with the MPO and the Florida
13:47:57:00 Department of Transportation on the TCEA to make sure
13:48:00:19 that we're following the right transit requirements.
13:48:04:09 And also the right size.
13:48:06:07 These are requirements that came into play in 2005 in
13:48:11:01 the new growth management act.
13:48:15:03 We now must show that we have a strategy in place to
13:48:17:28 fund mobility, including alternative modes of transit,
13:48:21:18 transportation, and that our strategies must address
13:48:23:19 urban design, the appropriate land use mix, including
13:48:26:24 the intensity and density, and that we have the right
13:48:29:22 network connectivity.
13:48:31:03 We also have to -- or before we used to just have to
13:48:35:00 coordinate with F.D.O.T., now we have to actually work
13:48:37:04 with F.D.O.T. in developing a mitigation plan for the
13:48:40:21 interstate.
13:48:42:15 The state's interest is moving people through the state

13:48:45:24 and moving goods and services through the state.
13:48:48:13 From the purest perspective of the state, they really
13:48:52:09 don't want local governments or people in the cities
13:48:54:22 using the interstate.
13:48:56:00 They would not want us to get on the interstate to take
13:48:58:18 it up to another part of the city, because they want to
13:49:00:24 move people through the city.
13:49:02:09 So part of this, if we're going to allow an exemption
13:49:05:21 and allow more development within the city, the state's
13:49:08:21 interest is how is that going to impact our interstate
13:49:11:03 system.
13:49:11:15 It's kind of a difficult -- I don't want to say
13:49:15:09 difficult, but it puts us on opposite sides and we're
13:49:18:15 trying to solve the same solution.
13:49:20:00 We want them to increase capacity on the interstate.
13:49:22:21 They would like us not to use the interstate so they
13:49:25:06 can move people through.
13:49:26:10 We have to work out the right mitigation plan so that
13:49:28:18 what we're doing on an exception basis is working in
13:49:30:24 line with what they would like to do with the
13:49:33:21 interstate.
13:49:34:06 If I could finish and take the question at the end, I
13:49:38:21 think that would be better.
13:49:39:24 This is what our existing TCEA looks like today.
13:49:42:18 There are three areas.

13:49:43:21 We have all three areas that are approved by the
13:49:46:00 statute.
13:49:46:19 We have an urban infill, a downtown revitalization and
13:49:50:18 then two redevelopment areas.
13:49:53:00 So we have all three areas.
13:49:55:12 The review standards are the same throughout each of
13:49:58:03 the areas.
13:50:00:07 And the -- and that's created probably the biggest area
13:50:03:24 of opportunity for us.
13:50:05:04 Doesn't matter if you're downtown.
13:50:06:25 Doesn't matter if you're -- either the redevelopment
13:50:09:06 areas or the infill areas, the exceptions have always
13:50:12:04 been granted on the same basis.
13:50:13:27 And what we see in the future is trying to create a
13:50:17:03 criteria that encourages development to go in those
13:50:19:15 areas of change, and also helps protect and preserve
13:50:23:15 the areas of stability by still allowing -- and still
13:50:26:18 allow the possibility of an exception.
13:50:28:21 One thing I should note is that it hasn't really been
13:50:33:12 summarized or really kind of promoted, but even though
13:50:37:15 the city has allowed exceptions, it is still collecting
13:50:41:13 mitigation fees above impact fees.
13:50:44:21 Development would get an impact fee credit against it.
13:50:48:00 But if he's coming in and making a proposal and there's
13:50:50:27 an impact on the roadway, the city is not only

13:50:53:07 collecting an impact fee, in some cases also collecting
13:50:56:09 a mitigation fee for the transportation impacts that
13:50:58:19 would be associated in that area.
13:51:00:18 It isn't that the city, since they've had the exception
13:51:03:12 area just allowed exceptions to occur and not made any
13:51:06:15 improvements.
13:51:07:04 It's allowed the exception to occur and still collected
13:51:10:12 funds to conduct some improvements.
13:51:13:28 Shifting from the land use part, because -- we have a
13:51:20:04 two-prong attack with the TCEA, part of it is a land
13:51:23:03 use requirement.
13:51:24:06 The other part is to make sure that we have the right
13:51:26:21 mobility plan funded.
13:51:28:06 Right now, the long-term transportation plan serves as
13:51:32:09 the mobility plan for the county and for the four
13:51:35:21 jurisdictions.
13:51:36:13 It has these components, highway and road projects,
13:51:39:22 transit projects, the bicycle pedestrian projects and
13:51:42:27 other projects designed to improve efficiency within
13:51:46:24 the system.
13:51:47:09 These are just some of the -- these are the road
13:51:49:18 projects that are in the committed long-range
13:51:54:06 transportation plan.
13:51:55:12 I'm not going to go through all the projects, but it's
13:51:57:18 to give you an idea that there are projects -- the

13:51:59:18 interstate projects within the TCEA, some roadway
13:52:02:04 projects that are in the New Tampa area outside the
13:52:05:01 TCEA.
13:52:05:27 Some additional road projects both throughout the city.
13:52:09:15 Two billion dollars of programmed highway and road
13:52:12:24 projects within the city over the next ten years out of
13:52:17:15 the long-range transportation plan.
13:52:20:10 The unfortunate side is, that's two billion dollars of
13:52:23:04 improvements that is an increase of about 2 million
13:52:28:22 service miles of volume to move traffic, and yet we
13:52:34:04 still estimate that it's going to be an increase in
13:52:37:00 congestion within the city.
13:52:39:21 So we know the plan -- or summary, 2 billion dollars'
13:52:44:13 worth of road improvements to increase lane mileage and
13:52:48:00 yet congestion is still going to worsen within the
13:52:50:27 city.
13:52:51:06 So the answer is not more roads or wider roads, because
13:52:54:07 we know that's still going to create more congestion.
13:52:57:06 I apologize for this map.
13:53:02:27 Allen from the MPO will give you better maps with the
13:53:06:03 long-range transit plan.
13:53:07:16 I want to put it to you and show you there is a
13:53:09:09 long-range transit plan that is part of the long-range
13:53:11:18 transportation plan.
13:53:12:06 And that is part of the mobility plan that we're trying

13:53:14:24 to build in with the comprehensive plan and the TCEA.
13:53:18:27 Alan will come up and give you a rundown or more
13:53:22:15 specific rundown on all the components.
13:53:24:15 But this plan includes the BRT lanes, the rail project,
13:53:29:16 increase the bus service, efficiency and so forth.
13:53:32:12 When you look at the long-range transportation plan
13:53:37:07 today, and underneath the highlighted area, shows
13:53:42:12 $7.3 billion cost of projects.
13:53:45:09 That's the breakdown that's shown in the area.
13:53:47:15 4.6 billion or 63% are in roads.
13:53:50:06 The rest are disseminated in the other four categories.
13:53:53:06 What's funded is 2.7 billion.
13:53:57:24 Our need is 7.3 billion.
13:53:59:13 So you see there's a big hole in the area that we still
13:54:03:24 need more funding.
13:54:05:06 It's not a small amount of funding.
13:54:07:04 It's a sizable amount of funding of nearly $5 billion.
13:54:10:13 Unfunded needs are 72%.
13:54:12:06 What we have is 28%.
13:54:13:27 This is just a rundown of the projects that are funded.
13:54:17:12 The types of projects.
13:54:18:12 You can see most of them are in that highways and road
13:54:21:01 transit about the 377 million.
13:54:23:12 And all the rest of the improvements are less than
13:54:25:27 that.

13:54:26:07 Here who is funding the projects or how the money is
13:54:32:09 coming through.
13:54:32:28 You see the highest funded projects are coming from the
13:54:35:15 Florida interstate system or the other turnpikes and
13:54:39:07 authorities.
13:54:39:15 The City of Tampa is roughly at about 5.72% of that
13:54:45:18 amount.
13:54:46:00 I do need to make a qualification, because someone
13:54:49:00 might look at the Hillsborough County and wonder why
13:54:50:19 they are less.
13:54:51:07 They have 28 agreements that are from private
13:54:56:04 developers in the outlying areas to provide roads.
13:54:58:18 So those numbers aren't included in this figure.
13:55:01:09 So that money -- that sum would be a little bit higher.
13:55:05:21 I wanted to make sure that I clarified that.
13:55:09:18 There is a mobility plan in place.
13:55:11:10 And the city is contribute being 5.72% of it right now.
13:55:15:15 It's mostly road oriented.
13:55:17:21 I think we're going to show that there's going to be a
13:55:19:25 need primarily for more transit-related projects.
13:55:22:24 So based on everything I've kind of gone through and
13:55:26:24 some of the other information that's come to bear, we
13:55:31:21 know we have an initial growth framework established.
13:55:34:09 We've identified areas of change and areas of
13:55:36:04 stability.

13:55:36:19 We have our basic development tools, our DRIs, our
13:55:42:13 CRAs.
13:55:43:09 We know they mostly align with data framework so we
13:55:45:27 don't see a real big need to make any changes in those
13:55:49:00 areas.
13:55:49:13 We've had our consultant, who has looked at the
13:55:52:03 existing TCEA against the statutory requirements,
13:55:56:27 through their analysis has shown that it still meets
13:55:59:21 the statutory requirements.
13:56:01:06 There have been some complaints that the TCEA is too
13:56:04:10 big but it meets the rules of the state.
13:56:06:24 One could argue if it is too big, it's still meeting
13:56:09:16 with the state.
13:56:11:16 The requirements of the TCEA.
13:56:14:06 Our long-range transportation mobility plan supports
13:56:16:09 our growth strategy, and I think Alan will show you a
13:56:19:07 little bit more about how the transit part fits that.
13:56:22:13 Everything in the transit plan is supportive of the
13:56:25:24 areas of change and the areas of stability.
13:56:28:01 I apologize for this one, basically it says the
13:56:34:00 mobility plan is not fully funded.
13:56:35:25 That's one of the things I think will be our greatest
13:56:38:15 challenge over the next several years is how do we fund
13:56:40:27 more mobility as we move forward to serve growth.
13:56:44:01 Here's what we think are some of our key opportunities

13:56:48:10 as we go into the plan update.
13:56:50:03 We think the TCEA subareas, the three subareas I
13:56:53:06 mentioned can be better aligned to support the overall
13:56:56:07 growth strategy.
13:56:57:00 And it might be that we create -- make the
13:56:59:09 redevelopments line up with the area -- the
13:57:01:09 redevelopment areas line up with the areas of change.
13:57:04:15 That's the TCEA redevelopment areas.
13:57:06:21 Pardon me.
13:57:07:09 We think this is probably where the biggest opportunity
13:57:10:27 for the TCEA to help us support the overall growth and
13:57:14:09 address some of the issues that I mentioned at the
13:57:16:22 beginning of the presentation.
13:57:18:09 And as you remember, right now, we have the same
13:57:20:25 criteria for granting exception.
13:57:23:18 You just have to be located in one of the three areas.
13:57:26:12 We think we can come up with different types of
13:57:28:21 criteria to guide the development where we want or make
13:57:30:28 sure that the development where it's going is the type
13:57:33:15 that we want.
13:57:34:04 And it might be whether or not it's in the area change
13:57:39:06 versus one of the stability areas.
13:57:41:22 Type of area, whether infill or redevelopment or
13:57:44:21 downtown.
13:57:45:06 Might be the extent of impact.

13:57:47:19 What we're looking for, if you're going to be in a
13:57:50:00 stability area, have to be a project that exhibit minor
13:57:54:03 impact as opposed to large impact, significant impact.
13:57:57:10 Whether or not the area, the site or area of proposed
13:58:01:27 development is already located near multimodal
13:58:04:03 improvements or planned multimodal improvements.
13:58:06:28 And then if there's ability for the property owner to
13:58:09:27 mitigate either for public, health, safety or just the
13:58:14:28 major impacts that it has.
13:58:17:18 What we feel is that in the past where exemptions were
13:58:20:27 just sort of given almost at the last stage, just
13:58:24:21 saying here is your exemption, you can go ahead and we
13:58:27:19 would collect the mitigation fee, now we see we're
13:58:30:15 trying to guide the right development to the right
13:58:32:07 place by using some of these tools.
13:58:34:03 We think we can identify some capacity projects.
13:58:40:10 The idea of looking forward and trying to coordinate
13:58:44:03 the land use and transportation planning is to identify
13:58:47:10 in advance where are the mobility projects that will
13:58:50:12 create capacity so that we can encourage development in
13:58:53:09 those areas.
13:58:54:12 Making sure that our land use and mobility policies are
13:58:59:09 better aligned and supportive.
13:59:01:27 This gets back to the concept of making sure we have
13:59:04:10 the right land use mix in the right place and served by

13:59:06:21 the right multimodal project.
13:59:09:06 An example of where that comes into maybe conflict is
13:59:12:06 when the development is approved and the developer may
13:59:15:06 say I can put in a bus stop, but you find out that
13:59:18:04 there is no bus service to that area.
13:59:20:15 Doesn't help move anybody.
13:59:21:21 There are no plans for bus service.
13:59:24:01 It is a capacity project in their minds, but it doesn't
13:59:26:16 help in moving people.
13:59:27:21 What we want to do is make sure that we try to guide
13:59:30:28 all the development in the areas ideally where you have
13:59:33:22 the projects in place or online or part of an overall
13:59:38:04 mobility plan.
13:59:39:06 And then one of the other -- the challenges, I think,
13:59:43:09 more of a regional challenge, at least a countywide
13:59:46:07 challenge is a strategy for recurring revenue for
13:59:48:18 operating.
13:59:49:06 For every capital expense that is generated through the
13:59:56:00 land use or mobility of the transit projects, there's
13:59:58:24 going to need to be a corresponding operating expense
14:00:01:28 that the transit provider is going to need.
14:00:04:19 It will have to be a strategy for Hartline, if they are
14:00:07:24 going to be the primary operators of the transit
14:00:10:25 system, to be able to maintain that, their operating
14:00:13:24 expenses as it moves forward.

14:00:15:09 That's the end of my presentation.
14:00:19:24 So I can answer a few questions.
14:00:21:18 If you want to hear Alan first and then hear all
14:00:26:25 questions at once, we can do that as well.
14:00:31:01 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I have a couple of questions but if
14:00:33:06 Mary wants to start, that's up to you.
14:00:35:19 >>MARY MULHERN: I need to ask him now or I'll forget
14:00:37:19 what my questions were.
14:00:39:03 So if you don't mind.
14:00:40:03 Was one of those maps you showed us, did any of them
14:00:45:09 show the city limit boundary and then the
14:00:49:12 transportation concurrency area boundary?
14:00:52:00 >> There was.
14:00:52:15 And actually, the transportation concurrency exception
14:00:56:28 area is everything south of Fletcher.
14:01:00:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Oh, okay.
14:01:00:19 That's what I thought.
14:01:02:28 It's really kind of an almost meaningless designation
14:01:10:27 for us, because the entire city is exempt, pretty much.
14:01:13:25 >> The areas north of Fletcher were negotiated as part
14:01:18:09 of developer agreements and DRIs, so their
14:01:21:00 commitments were already in place at the time the TCEA
14:01:24:21 was developed.
14:01:26:00 >>MARY MULHERN: Everything north of Fletcher DRI?
14:01:28:09 >> Not everything is DRI, but developer agreements in

14:01:30:19 place for the development that's there.
14:01:32:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Okay.
14:01:33:07 Here's my question, you talked about in addition to the
14:01:41:03 impact fees, we get mitigation fees from developers.
14:01:47:01 How is that money -- does it go directly -- if my
14:01:53:09 development is affecting this area, a certain area,
14:01:58:13 then does that money, that fund go directly back into
14:02:02:12 that area for --
14:02:04:15 >> It goes back -- if I understand -- the
14:02:08:19 transportation division would have a better response.
14:02:10:15 My understanding is that if there's a project in the
14:02:12:28 immediate area that is directly affected by the
14:02:17:15 development, that the funds can contribute to, it goes
14:02:20:01 there first.
14:02:20:24 Then it would maybe go into a general area around it
14:02:24:24 for projects.
14:02:25:15 Because there may be a project down the road that it
14:02:28:13 may affect that you can alleviate an intersection
14:02:30:21 improvement there that can cause efficiency problems.
14:02:35:12 I'll follow up with the transportation division to get
14:02:37:04 some clarity.
14:02:38:12 >>MARY MULHERN: That would be good for them to be here
14:02:40:06 since we're talking about transit.
14:02:41:15 That's a problem I feel we run into on Council is when
14:02:46:00 we look at a rezoning, and we look at what the impact

14:02:49:18 might be, and people will say especially in DRIs,
14:02:52:28 they'll say, well, we gave so much money.
14:02:55:16 But we, I think -- I'm not convinced that the city is
14:02:59:28 allocating that to the projects in that area or that
14:03:07:09 area -- so I'd like to, you know, look into that and
14:03:11:12 maybe in the comp plan.
14:03:13:12 Is there something we could tweak that so that --
14:03:20:25 >> As we work through the comp plan, part of it that
14:03:23:27 we'll be needing for you to come back with your input
14:03:27:27 and ultimately your agreement with are things like the
14:03:30:07 criteria that we would approve or disapprove or review
14:03:33:06 development.
14:03:33:18 As we start looking through potential capital projects
14:03:36:21 there will be projects that will be funded on the list
14:03:39:09 and there will also be projects that these are still
14:03:42:00 things we would like to fund.
14:03:43:10 That's really where some of that funding would go or
14:03:45:15 how that funding would get spent.
14:03:47:21 As we go through the comp plan update, a lot of those
14:03:52:15 questions will either be addressed directly in the comp
14:03:55:00 plan or addressed as part of a follow-up development
14:03:57:25 regulation that comes out of the comp plan.
14:04:00:10 >>MARY MULHERN: UM, this is just kind of following on
14:04:02:18 this whole -- I don't really understand how we have
14:04:06:09 this huge -- it's called a transportation concurrency

14:04:12:12 exemption area.
14:04:13:25 How does the new growth management law affect that?
14:04:17:21 Is that changing what we can require or what we can
14:04:23:03 approve?
14:04:25:18 >> It added a little bit.
14:04:28:06 And retrospect, when the TCEAs were approved in '89,
14:04:34:19 I believe it was, it was a new tool.
14:04:36:18 New tool from the state.
14:04:37:22 New tool from the city.
14:04:38:27 The transportation part of it was put in place, but
14:04:40:27 there were a lot of other elements from the land use
14:04:43:12 part and from the mobility part that were not put in
14:04:46:03 place for whatever reason.
14:04:47:15 Probably had to do with coordinating with the Hartline,
14:04:50:12 city staff and Planning Commission staff.
14:04:52:15 So some of the tools advocating moving forward could
14:04:57:21 have been place before.
14:04:59:06 I think it was a new tool and there was a question to
14:05:03:09 say what it was supposed to do and how it would work.
14:05:05:24 The law didn't necessarily change that.
14:05:07:12 We didn't take full advantage of it in the past that we
14:05:10:00 hope to be able to take advantage in the future.
14:05:12:06 The second part is that the law did change requiring
14:05:14:25 certain ties to the capital improvements element and
14:05:17:19 the fact that we now really have to show that there is

14:05:20:03 a plan to fund mobility.
14:05:21:21 Before it was, you just coordinated with the transit
14:05:26:03 providers.
14:05:26:13 Now it's you have to come up -- if you're going to give
14:05:29:01 the exemption and there is going to be an impact on the
14:05:31:24 roadway -- now need to show how those people are going
14:05:35:13 to be moving around.
14:05:36:09 If it's not going to be cars, it will need to be by
14:05:39:25 some way else.
14:05:41:27 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm just trying to make sure I
14:05:43:25 understand this.
14:05:46:21 So a tropical depression concurrency exemption area,
14:05:49:24 that's what we're talking about, right?
14:05:51:21 >> Um-hum.
14:05:52:21 >>MARY MULHERN: So, does every -- say, zoning request
14:05:56:27 or every permit, does everybody because it's exempt,
14:06:04:04 what's the guideline for you to tell them what they
14:06:07:25 need to do?
14:06:09:03 >> That's what we're going to be working on in the next
14:06:11:01 six months.
14:06:12:19 >>MARY MULHERN: I mean, it's like -- do you know what I
14:06:14:10 mean?
14:06:14:21 It's exempt.
14:06:15:15 Everything is exempt, so how do you require anything?
14:06:19:06 >> Part of it -- that's a good question.

14:06:22:09 The level of service standard is still in place.
14:06:24:24 It is still level of service "D."
14:06:27:15 What the exemption puts in place is that the
14:06:29:21 improvement no longer has to be in place at the time
14:06:32:15 your development comes on board.
14:06:35:07 But local governments still have to do something to
14:06:37:24 show that they are trying to solve their deficiencies.
14:06:43:27 The state has acknowledged that they know local
14:06:46:07 governments, there's not enough money for local
14:06:48:21 governments or the state to bring everything up to
14:06:50:21 level of service D.
14:06:51:21 The direction from the state is you have to show some
14:06:54:04 improvement.
14:06:54:19 You have to show that you have a plan for mobility,
14:06:57:13 that you have a plan that gets you as close as you can
14:07:00:19 to level of service D, or that you have a plan in place
14:07:03:15 to encourage development to be the transit-oriented
14:07:06:16 development that we're trying to get to.
14:07:08:27 >>MARY MULHERN: Are you saying each development has to
14:07:10:16 show a plan?
14:07:11:16 >> The city and the comprehensive plan.
14:07:13:21 We have to show the areas where we want to encourage
14:07:18:03 growth, how much growth we anticipate, whether or not
14:07:21:03 we have policies in place to encourage growth there or
14:07:24:01 to require growth to mitigate their impacts and then

14:07:27:13 how that fits into a transit and mobility plan.
14:07:33:27 >>MARY MULHERN: It's still sort of strange to me
14:07:35:22 that -- and when you said that the TCEA area, some
14:07:42:10 people think it's really big, which to me it looks
14:07:45:12 pretty big, but that it meets state requirements.
14:07:48:10 So are those state requirements, that level of service
14:07:52:12 D for transportation --
14:07:56:24 >> It has to do with a combination of what your vacant
14:07:59:21 land is, what your density is, residential mix versus
14:08:04:06 commercial mix within the area, the geographical areas
14:08:06:18 that you're defining.
14:08:07:22 Some people think the TCEA is big because it fits a lot
14:08:15:18 of the city boundary, but there's an urban service
14:08:17:16 boundary, which is much bigger than the city and which
14:08:19:12 the county is encouraging more development to go into.
14:08:22:25 Some areas, that development is occurring in -- or land
14:08:25:24 use classifications which are as high or higher than
14:08:29:12 some areas of the city.
14:08:30:07 So even though it represents a good part of the city's
14:08:33:12 boundary, it's still within a large growth boundary
14:08:35:25 that we're trying to encourage development.
14:08:37:25 When you step back even further, it's within a large
14:08:40:21 county, which is experiencing a lot of growth, within a
14:08:44:00 region that's going to experience a lot of growth.
14:08:46:06 Depending on how you look at it and what perspective,

14:08:50:16 it kind of I think fits into the overall growth scheme
14:08:53:15 of the county and the region.
14:08:55:00 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm just going to ask you one more
14:08:56:22 question.
14:08:57:07 The set level of service for these areas is D?
14:09:04:06 >> Um-hum.
14:09:05:06 >>MARY MULHERN: And that's F.D.O.T. level of service,
14:09:08:00 right?
14:09:09:21 >> It's the city's level of service.
14:09:13:01 F.D.O.T. sets their level of service for the
14:09:15:00 interstates.
14:09:15:12 And then the city sets and adopts its level of service
14:09:20:04 for roadways.
14:09:21:21 Adopted level of service for city roadways is level of
14:09:24:09 service D.
14:09:25:15 >>MARY MULHERN: I'm curious because when we got this
14:09:28:03 recent report from F.D.O.T. about two-waying streets,
14:09:31:09 it seemed like they were expecting a lot higher level
14:09:35:12 of service on these streets which were not the
14:09:38:03 interstate, Florida and Tampa and Howard and Armenia
14:09:41:06 than D.
14:09:42:04 >> Well, I think -- like to have higher level of
14:09:46:15 services on the roads that serve their system.
14:09:49:24 >>MARY MULHERN: But when we look at our roads as a
14:09:53:15 city --

14:09:54:06 >> That's the area that we like -- there are some
14:09:57:15 roadways that operate worse than that.
14:09:59:00 I think you've probably been on a few at rush hour
14:10:01:04 where it just stops.
14:10:02:12 Level of service D is the area that we think is the
14:10:05:27 threshold that we don't want roads to go beyond.
14:10:08:15 As you can tell from the map, they do.
14:10:11:09 >>MARY MULHERN: Thanks.
14:10:12:03 >> Um-hum.
14:10:17:28 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Couple of questions.
14:10:19:01 First, a comment or two.
14:10:21:00 When you say the state and the Feds don't want us to
14:10:24:16 use the interstate.
14:10:25:06 They just want it to be pass-through, that's not really
14:10:27:24 realistic.
14:10:28:22 I mean, as a south Tampa person, if I want to go to
14:10:32:18 MLK, I might use the local road.
14:10:35:09 But once I go -- want to go past MLK to Hillsborough or
14:10:39:12 bush or Fletcher or Fowler, I'm going to take the
14:10:43:09 interstate, unless it's rush hour.
14:10:45:18 And then maybe I'll -- I don't know, maybe I'll decide
14:10:50:00 otherwise.
14:10:50:18 But anyway, that's just seems like a commonsense thing.
14:10:55:13 They can't really expect city people to stay off the
14:10:58:10 interstate, right?

14:10:59:18 >> I'm overcharacterizing, but when we talk about --
14:11:02:06 because part of this gets into a mathematical formula
14:11:05:00 of trips.
14:11:05:22 We say that -- or when F.D.O.T. tells us that many of
14:11:10:24 our -- internal trips are using their interstate and if
14:11:13:28 they didn't, that would allow more people to come
14:11:16:12 through, you can see the quandary they are in.
14:11:18:15 They are trying to justify the money that they have on
14:11:20:19 the capacity improvements they need.
14:11:23:06 And some of the questions that they have in terms of
14:11:25:22 mitigation in other communities are related to what the
14:11:28:18 local impact on their interstate system is going to be.
14:11:31:24 I wouldn't be surprised as we move forward if they may
14:11:34:28 look to the city to help figure out how they can widen
14:11:39:00 the interstate.
14:11:40:03 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Or do mass transit, that way if I'm
14:11:42:06 in south Tampa and want to go to university, I might
14:11:44:27 take mass transit, especially if I'm commuting there as
14:11:48:00 an employee.
14:11:48:25 Anyway, the other thing -- in regard to the county, the
14:11:52:25 county urban service area is a good thing, is a good
14:11:55:24 policy that they put into place, as long as they hold
14:11:57:27 to it.
14:11:58:15 But if they continue to expand the urban service area,
14:12:01:25 like allowing this future beltway to be built, when you

14:12:06:10 add that beltway, you're going to -- inevitably, 10, 15
14:12:11:19 years, they are going to increase the urban service
14:12:12:09 area.
14:12:13:10 So it sort of defeats the purpose, but that's just
14:12:13:25 commentary.
14:12:14:15 My question, Randy is, this 6 billion-dollar gap, give
14:12:21:10 or take a few hundred million, how -- you know, how are
14:12:27:21 we going to fill some of that gap, A?
14:12:30:15 And B, if we're going to add 90,000 new people in the
14:12:35:12 next 20 years, to me that equates to about 30 or 40
14:12:39:12 thousand new residences, c-e-s, residences, 130,000
14:12:44:01 more employees to the area is a lot of new office
14:12:48:21 buildings and hospitals and whatever other employees,
14:12:52:15 employer places we have.
14:12:53:19 So let's focus on that question.
14:12:57:12 How much is the private sector going to help fill that
14:13:03:10 6 billion-dollar gap, and is that part of that equation
14:13:08:06 that you had there?
14:13:09:18 I didn't see private sector on there except as an
14:13:11:25 asterisk, and I couldn't really tell what it meant
14:13:14:09 before you flipped on.
14:13:16:18 >> It is one of the major things that we're going to
14:13:18:18 have to discuss and reach agreement as part of the comp
14:13:21:15 plan update and development regulations.
14:13:23:22 It was one of the three major issues when I started the

14:13:26:25 presentation.
14:13:27:10 I think you were just coming in.
14:13:28:24 But one of the biggest issues is what is the balance
14:13:31:09 between the public share and the private sector share
14:13:33:19 in funding mobility?
14:13:35:13 And there's a lot of different questions that we have
14:13:40:21 to go through, and that is really how much -- where is
14:13:44:21 the development going to go?
14:13:45:28 Are we trying to create an incentive-based plan?
14:13:49:24 And what is the fair share for the private development
14:13:52:00 to contribute towards that.
14:13:54:15 But that is part of the -- part of the questions or
14:13:58:15 many of the questions that we'll be looking at over the
14:14:00:19 next, I'd say, four to six months as we work through
14:14:04:12 the update of the comp plan.
14:14:06:18 Coming back with some general direction that will then
14:14:13:15 need to be taken care of in the ordinance or we'll have
14:14:16:06 it figured out by then.
14:14:17:27 It will be something that Council will have to make a
14:14:19:27 decision on.
14:14:21:18 Because every one of your rezonings, you hear it from
14:14:24:06 people now, the cost impact fees, where it's going to
14:14:26:12 go, so forth.
14:14:27:12 But we want to get that settled before the comp plan is
14:14:30:12 adopted.

14:14:31:25 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Okay.
14:14:32:10 The community as a whole, I feel pretty confident has
14:14:38:22 been led to believe that we were going to be actually
14:14:43:03 shrinking the TCEA.
14:14:45:12 You know, that just seemed to be the discussion that I
14:14:49:12 heard out in the Neighborhood Associations and in the
14:14:52:16 community over the last couple of years.
14:14:54:22 I hear your argument that if we shrink the TCEA, then
14:15:01:03 the city is going to have to figure out -- find the
14:15:04:12 money to fix those deficient and or constrained roads
14:15:11:25 and generally we're broke so we don't have that money.
14:15:14:06 So that's why I think the administration is advocating
14:15:16:13 that we don't actually shrink the geography of the
14:15:20:12 TCEA.
14:15:20:19 Did I characterize that okay?
14:15:23:16 >> I would look at it as a professional planner and
14:15:25:15 what I've seen in terms of analysis.
14:15:27:04 I think the city should want to retain some ability to
14:15:31:12 allow exceptions.
14:15:32:18 And it's really for two reasons.
14:15:34:06 Because there are so many deficient roadways now, if we
14:15:38:04 remove the ability to have the exception situation, not
14:15:42:21 only does it fall on the city to fund those, but we
14:15:45:09 have to figure out a way of doing it within our
14:15:47:25 existing five-year plan.

14:15:49:15 So it is more or less just have to figure out how to do
14:15:53:03 it.
14:15:53:15 Now we have to figure out where do we get the money in
14:15:55:28 the short term to fix those.
14:15:57:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Because that's state requirement.
14:15:58:24 >> State requirement.
14:15:59:09 The solution to that would be to lower your level of
14:16:01:13 service standard so it doesn't look like you have any
14:16:03:19 deficiencies.
14:16:08:18 So instead of D, you have an F.
14:16:08:25 That doesn't solve the problem, and then what it also
14:16:08:25 does, is you have no basis for mitigation or impact
14:16:12:04 fees because nothing gets worse.
14:16:15:04 Everything stays at F.
14:16:16:12 So I would think from my review of the information,
14:16:20:09 that you need to, I think, still have an exception in
14:16:23:07 place, but you create criteria so that you're granting
14:16:26:27 the exceptions in the areas that you want them.
14:16:29:00 So it doesn't mean that there -- there may be, we don't
14:16:32:27 know yet.
14:16:33:24 There may be areas after you go through all the
14:16:36:07 criteria, you just say, look, it's a great development,
14:16:39:03 looks nice but just doesn't meet any of the goals of
14:16:41:21 our comprehensive plan.
14:16:42:24 It creates public safety issues, blah, blah, sorry we

14:16:46:03 can't allow the exception in this area.
14:16:49:10 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: Well, two other quick comments.
14:16:51:06 For one thing, Mary, I think your questions are real
14:16:54:04 good.
14:16:54:15 The good news, Mary, TCEA is not transportation
14:16:58:22 concurrency exemption area, it's transportation
14:17:01:24 concurrency exception area.
14:17:05:21 There's not an absolute exemption through there.
14:17:09:00 I mean, it might be splitting hairs.
14:17:11:09 But the good news is, since it's an exception area, it
14:17:15:24 gives us the ability to write this criteria to draft
14:17:20:00 this new criteria that hopefully will be some of the
14:17:24:18 tools that we currently don't have.
14:17:26:18 And this Council gets very frustrated because folks
14:17:30:09 stand at that same exact podium you're at and say new
14:17:33:18 development should pay for itself or it shouldn't
14:17:35:21 happen.
14:17:36:13 New development needs to improve the roads or it
14:17:39:15 shouldn't happen.
14:17:40:10 Well, maybe it's not black and White like that, but
14:17:43:16 maybe there's a gray area, but you have to give us the
14:17:46:15 tools to be able to solve some of those issues and help
14:17:49:15 us in that gray area.
14:17:51:09 >> I agree.
14:17:55:13 >>MARY MULHERN: I knew I couldn't just say I was done.

14:17:57:21 To follow up on what John was saying about shrinking
14:18:03:18 the TCEA, what happens if you do that?
14:18:07:06 I mean, if you make it smaller, can't we still ask the
14:18:13:06 developer -- I mean, can we ask for mitigation and
14:18:20:24 impact fees to pay for that?
14:18:23:12 >> Unfortunately, the law does not require us to ask
14:18:26:09 for mitigation or impact fees for existing
14:18:30:18 deficiencies.
14:18:32:01 So the developer can come in and still say, okay,
14:18:35:21 anything above is impact, he could provide his
14:18:38:19 proportionate fair share.
14:18:40:28 But if the road is already below level of service D, we
14:18:44:12 couldn't use his funds to help take care of that
14:18:49:01 deficiency.
14:18:49:16 Again, that's part of the state law for impact fees and
14:18:53:16 the mitigation requirements.
14:18:55:00 So that then falls back onto the local governments to
14:18:58:12 come with the solution.
14:19:00:10 The legislature has been trying to look at that from a
14:19:02:18 variety of different ways, but they still haven't -- in
14:19:05:06 all the different proposals they move forward, it
14:19:08:00 always come back to the backlog deficiencies fall back
14:19:12:01 on for the local government to figure that out.
14:19:14:21 And then they've offered them a variety of different
14:19:18:00 exception programs, whether it's the TCEA, multimodal

14:19:21:16 district, ten-year concurrency management system, but
14:19:25:24 the concept is still the same.
14:19:28:28 >>MARY MULHERN: So the impact fee can only be asked for
14:19:33:04 to pay for the additional impact after?
14:19:39:12 I mean, it's kind -- I guess so, for whatever increase
14:19:43:13 in traffic you have, then you pay for it with that.
14:19:48:24 What do our impact fees look like compared to other
14:19:55:09 cities?
14:19:55:19 Are we charging enough?
14:20:01:03 >> We're less than other cities.
14:20:03:16 To my knowledge, I don't think ours have been raised
14:20:05:27 for a while.
14:20:07:15 >>MARY MULHERN: How long?
14:20:08:06 >> That's part of this process.
14:20:10:15 I hate to throw out a number because I know I'm going
14:20:13:00 to be wrong, but it's been a while.
14:20:15:06 Longer than -- if I can't remember when, it's been a
14:20:18:16 while.
14:20:19:01 Part of this process we get back in, talk about the
14:20:23:12 appropriate balance for public and private sectors, is
14:20:27:18 to look at that.
14:20:29:16 And the administration is going to be moving forward in
14:20:33:19 the next few months with the consultant to begin
14:20:36:03 looking at the impact fee districts and some options
14:20:38:19 for that.

14:20:39:12 But we have to look at the entire mobility -- ideally,
14:20:43:28 you want to look at the entire mobility equation, and
14:20:47:04 then see what impact fees can do for you in that
14:20:49:18 equation as well as all the other funding.
14:20:51:21 Again, the one purpose of putting the slide up with all
14:20:54:09 the different funding sources was to show that a
14:20:57:21 considerable amount of funding comes from a variety of
14:21:00:12 different sources.
14:21:02:13 Maybe F.D.O.T. isn't -- try to get them not to build so
14:21:06:15 many roads in the area but help them fund some of the
14:21:07:10 other improvements that we need as part of the regional
14:21:10:00 system.
14:21:11:09 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you for the presentation.
14:21:12:18 >> Thank you.
14:21:18:21 >> Good afternoon, Council.
14:21:20:01 I'm Alan Steinbach on the staff of the Planning
14:21:22:21 Commission and staff to the MPO.
14:21:24:03 I'm also the project manager of the MPO transit study
14:21:27:12 which is currently underway.
14:21:29:09 I want to tell you a little bit about that but also
14:21:32:24 share additional thoughts on how these types of issues
14:21:35:03 do affect the comprehensive planning process and how
14:21:37:24 we're going to make sure that we have a transportation
14:21:39:21 system that works into the future.
14:21:42:27 I'll tell you about the background of the study first.

14:21:46:00 I won't take a whole lot of time on this because there
14:21:48:24 are some other venues where you can learn very
14:21:52:24 thoroughly about what we're going to do but I'll leave
14:21:55:21 you the latitude to ask questions.
14:21:58:09 We got into this a year ago at the behest of the MPO
14:22:03:04 board.
14:22:04:03 They asked the MPO board to look into transit issues
14:22:06:21 and revisit needs plan that was in the long-range
14:22:09:07 transportation plan.
14:22:10:00 That's what we've been doing is doing a very thorough
14:22:12:10 needs assessment.
14:22:13:18 We now have a concept plan for transit, which are lines
14:22:16:27 on the map that have been very thoroughly investigated,
14:22:19:00 and we're standing behind that as what we think is the
14:22:22:06 best proposal for a major transit system to serve a
14:22:25:01 whole county, including this jurisdiction.
14:22:28:16 We had several guiding principles.
14:22:30:04 One was serving existing and emerging activity centers.
14:22:33:06 Clearly, the City of Tampa has three of the biggest
14:22:35:13 activity centers in the region.
14:22:37:15 So it's countywide and regional significance there.
14:22:40:27 Serving, growing and redeveloping areas.
14:22:43:09 As you know, many areas in the city are redeveloping
14:22:46:04 and people are asking how these people are going to get
14:22:49:09 around.

14:22:49:16 So we thought about this issue as we put this plan
14:22:52:12 together.
14:22:52:27 We also looked into issues of station area development
14:22:58:03 and transit-oriented development.
14:23:00:01 And this is one thing that I think is very critical for
14:23:03:00 a Council to understand the outcome of this study.
14:23:05:24 We started measuring the potential for station area
14:23:08:21 development looking at the land use plan, looking at
14:23:10:10 the community character of the different parts of the
14:23:12:24 county.
14:23:13:09 Getting down to our understanding of the neighborhood
14:23:15:18 level.
14:23:17:07 The MPO staff worked with the Planning Commission staff
14:23:20:24 and the City of Tampa staff on making sure that we were
14:23:23:21 recommending investments that were appropriate to the
14:23:25:00 areas that they are serving both in terms of community
14:23:27:15 character but also in terms of the ridership potential
14:23:30:03 of the system.
14:23:30:21 So what we found when we started looking at that the
14:23:35:16 land use plan that you have is accommodative enough in
14:23:38:25 terms of density to have transit oriented development
14:23:42:12 and make this system work.
14:23:43:19 When you get down to the day-to-day decisions of Land
14:23:46:15 Development and some of the pressures that you've
14:23:48:27 alluded to in terms of how much development is

14:23:50:22 appropriate in any given part of the city and people's
14:23:53:15 desire to have less, if there's not some strategy for
14:23:56:16 moving them around the city, there may not be enough
14:24:01:10 density in these kind of day-to-day decisions to
14:24:04:01 support this system.
14:24:04:28 The good thing about the system is that with rail in
14:24:08:21 particular, you have very localized station areas where
14:24:11:18 you will need to really get serious about supporting
14:24:14:24 them with TOD, walkability, et cetera.
14:24:18:27 But I think that is something that will come naturally
14:24:21:03 to you once that system plan is in place.
14:24:23:16 It will start making sense to you.
14:24:25:12 It will start making sense to people who live around
14:24:28:06 it, the business community, and there will be some
14:24:30:24 basis for making decisions putting density in different
14:24:33:28 parts of the city where the system goes.
14:24:36:21 We've definitely tried to ground ourselves in reality
14:24:40:28 here.
14:24:41:09 This is not a high-minded or -- kind of plan.
14:24:46:18 This is a plan grounded in they will analysis done by a
14:24:49:19 whole group of engineers and planners.
14:24:52:12 We looked at rights-of-way.
14:24:54:04 We looked at cost.
14:24:55:07 We've looked at the transportation model.
14:24:57:18 And so we've truth tested this to a significant degree.

14:25:02:12 I've included in your handout today a concept map,
14:25:09:00 draft concept map that will be presented to the MPO on
14:25:12:03 Monday.
14:25:12:10 There are two handouts, if you serve on the MPO, you've
14:25:15:06 gotten these before.
14:25:16:15 One is a summary of the transit technologies that we're
14:25:20:24 considering.
14:25:21:06 In the plan is commuter rail, light rail and bus.
14:25:24:06 Commuter rail is really serving the peak hour travel
14:25:29:00 coming in from the suburbs into the city.
14:25:31:00 It's a heavier rail type vehicle.
14:25:33:22 Light rail would be all-day service, electrified,
14:25:36:07 smaller cars that have the flexibility to serve
14:25:38:15 regional travel but also urban area travel and get down
14:25:41:09 onto city streets and serve neighborhoods and
14:25:43:21 districts.
14:25:44:13 And then bus, which is a vital component to this.
14:25:47:15 There are many parts of the city and county that are
14:25:49:27 not served -- let me take that back.
14:25:52:24 Many parts of the county not served by the bus system,
14:25:55:12 and we need to figure out a way to accommodate future.
14:26:00:24 The City of Tampa, we did some looking at this as a
14:26:03:04 team of people that Randy was involved with.
14:26:05:12 95% of the City of Tampa can be called -- to be served
14:26:09:12 by bus.

14:26:10:01 So you have a comprehensive bus service here in the
14:26:12:28 city, and it's providing much-needed capacity for your
14:26:16:25 residents.
14:26:17:06 I'll go ahead and move on into the concept.
14:26:27:25 I'll put this on the ELMO here.
14:26:30:12 There are really two levels of transit planning going
14:26:38:24 on now.
14:26:39:13 One is county by county.
14:26:40:24 And then there's the regional discussion that's
14:26:43:10 happening through TBRTA and other groups.
14:26:47:21 Our mission was to look at the whole of Hillsborough
14:26:49:25 County.
14:26:50:03 Look at the year 2050 and develop a concept that we
14:26:53:09 think serves -- adequately serves different parts of
14:26:56:06 the county and the cities.
14:26:57:21 And again, they do include light rail, commuter rail
14:27:01:13 and bus technologies.
14:27:03:15 Just to run you quickly through this map, we have light
14:27:07:13 rail service shown in the solid colors, red, blue and
14:27:11:09 green.
14:27:11:24 And those would serve south Tampa.
14:27:14:22 They would serve the airport, Westshore and West Tampa
14:27:18:09 into downtown.
14:27:19:21 They would go through downtown into Ybor City, up
14:27:22:06 through East Tampa, into North Tampa and along Fletcher

14:27:28:00 Avenue serving the USF area and extend out through New
14:27:31:07 Tampa as well.
14:27:33:06 So we have light rail service here serving a
14:27:37:01 significant part of the city.
14:27:38:09 When we looked at the station areas that are along
14:27:42:22 this, there are approximately 65 stations in this whole
14:27:46:01 system.
14:27:47:03 30 of those would be inside the City of Tampa.
14:27:49:06 And the potential for transit oriented development is
14:27:53:06 significant.
14:27:53:13 The potential to accommodate new people and jobs within
14:27:56:07 walking distance of those stations is significant.
14:27:58:28 One of the calculations we ran showed that of all of
14:28:02:28 the people who show up on the next 40 years or so,
14:28:07:06 about half of them will be able to live within these
14:28:10:00 station areas on this transit system.
14:28:13:01 Half of the employees who are going to show up in the
14:28:16:03 next 40 years or so will be able to work in places that
14:28:19:06 are located within walking distance of these transit
14:28:23:10 stations.
14:28:24:03 So you see that the potential here is great for this
14:28:27:07 type of investment to accommodate travel and people and
14:28:32:00 a different way of life, frankly, than we enjoy here
14:28:36:01 today.
14:28:36:12 We do have just for your interest, there are commuter

14:28:42:04 rail lines that go out into the region going north
14:28:45:09 along 41 up into Pasco, out I-4. and commuter rail
14:28:50:27 service planned for south county as well as through
14:28:53:16 Brandon and into Plant City bringing people into jobs
14:28:57:09 into the city.
14:28:58:09 There's a bus network that we developed to parallel and
14:29:04:04 to feed this system.
14:29:05:15 It would be on top of local bus.
14:29:08:09 There's also a need to approximately double the local
14:29:11:16 bus service that we have.
14:29:12:27 Both in terms of adding buses to routes that exist, but
14:29:16:18 also new routes.
14:29:18:21 We have bus lines here in the is it city that run every
14:29:21:06 30 minutes or an hour, and that is not adequate for
14:29:24:09 someone who wants to just walk out to the street and
14:29:26:22 catch the bus.
14:29:27:21 You have to plan every bus trip that you take here in
14:29:31:18 Hillsborough County, practically.
14:29:34:00 So there's a need for that.
14:29:36:03 And that's part of the background analysis that we're
14:29:37:28 working on.
14:29:38:16 We are working on a whole system cost.
14:29:41:15 We're working with Hartline on a bus system, existing
14:29:44:12 buses that are needed but also talking to them about
14:29:47:24 long-range planning for a bus system, which includes

14:29:50:12 BRT, commuter express and other services.
14:29:55:06 Like I mentioned, we're going to take this to the MPO
14:29:59:15 on Monday for a consideration for information.
14:30:02:10 It will be brought back in November to adopt and
14:30:05:01 finalize the study, but that is by no means the last
14:30:08:12 opportunity we'll have to visit these things.
14:30:11:09 There will be a complete technical vetting of this, of
14:30:14:06 any concepts that show up here or from anywhere else in
14:30:17:15 the regional planning process next year, the first part
14:30:20:21 of the year, there will be an alternatives analysis and
14:30:24:07 a lot of technical vetting, but also political vetting
14:30:28:18 about the proposals that come forth.
14:30:30:13 So we're saying these proposals -- we think these
14:30:34:01 proposals should be on the table and that we in
14:30:36:15 Hillsborough County should support them into that
14:30:38:09 regional discussion.
14:30:40:09 That discussion at the regional level will parallel the
14:30:43:12 update of our long-range transportation plan.
14:30:47:09 It will be one discussion about what's good for
14:30:49:15 Hillsborough County and what's good for the region.
14:30:51:12 There will not be an agreement about what to do, I
14:30:53:21 think.
14:30:54:03 We'll have to work that out.
14:30:58:15 Both you all will have to do that and us as staff
14:31:02:24 serving different agencies will have to do that.

14:31:04:04 By end of next year, you'll see both a regional plan
14:31:06:12 and a plan for Hillsborough County that are aligned.
14:31:09:03 And we'll move into adoption dates in the year 2009.
14:31:12:27 I'm going to end my comments there.
14:31:16:04 I had some things to add to what Randy was sharing with
14:31:21:18 you on funding, et cetera.
14:31:23:03 I think he did a great job of outlining that stuff, but
14:31:26:01 I think for transit, there are some nuances.
14:31:28:16 It's much different when you talk about transit and
14:31:34:03 paying for transit than it is paying for roads,
14:31:36:18 especially when you get into development mitigation,
14:31:38:22 but also on the funding side.
14:31:41:09 Very complex system of funding sources, agreements,
14:31:45:03 different agencies, et cetera.
14:31:46:13 So it's not an easy task that you have tasked Randy
14:31:51:15 with to help you figure this out.
14:31:54:00 But I think he's definitely on the right track.
14:31:56:06 And we at the MPO and the Planning Commission will
14:31:58:12 certainly support you all in trying to get that right.
14:32:00:22 I'm going to leave it at that.
14:32:06:18 >>GWEN MILLER: Thank you.
14:32:11:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: The map that you have up looks
14:32:15:27 remarkably similar to the map I think I saw about ten
14:32:19:03 years ago.
14:32:19:22 How does it differ, if at all?

14:32:24:21 >> Well, we have a map in our needs plan now -- the MPO
14:32:28:12 needs plan.
14:32:29:03 There is a rail system map and bus system map.
14:32:31:18 They even have a couple of commuter rail lines.
14:32:35:01 It's not very different.
14:32:36:09 We did not start from scratch.
14:32:38:07 We built on plans that have been done in the past, both
14:32:40:18 the commuter rail feasibility study done in 1993.
14:32:43:28 We did look at the Tampa rail project and dug into
14:32:46:12 that.
14:32:46:24 We looked at how that could both serve for local
14:32:50:09 mobility, citywide travel, but also how it would fit
14:32:53:09 into a regional system and fit into some of the current
14:32:56:03 discussions about crossing the bay, for example, that's
14:32:59:01 a new one with rail.
14:33:01:06 So all of these things have been worked into this and
14:33:04:07 really tweaked to fit into the current thinking and
14:33:08:15 current dialogue that's going on about this.
14:33:11:13 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: UM, and I was in Denver last year,
14:33:16:22 and I noticed that the -- in Denver, that there's a
14:33:21:12 long section running north-south that actually is with
14:33:25:06 the interstate.
14:33:27:12 I don't know.
14:33:27:27 I can't remember which interstate that is.
14:33:29:21 It runs north-south through Denver.

14:33:31:21 But anyway, it runs there, and they built -- when they
14:33:35:09 rebuilt the interstate, they rebuilt it with the new
14:33:37:27 rail line, which seems to make a huge amount of sense
14:33:42:25 so the corridor is right there.
14:33:44:21 The D.O.T. is in the process right now of rebuilding
14:33:49:06 I-275 as it comes through south Tampa, did they leave a
14:33:55:24 section of that -- did they leave rail corridor there
14:33:59:13 in that swath?
14:34:01:00 >> Yes, there is a transit envelope in the interstate
14:34:05:28 right-of-way in that section of I-275, but also along
14:34:09:00 I-4.
14:34:10:00 That transit envelope, when they did the original plans
14:34:13:06 for all of that, the master planning for the
14:34:15:07 interstate, they did make room for that.
14:34:18:06 So there is a possibility of running different types of
14:34:21:21 rail in there.
14:34:22:21 Regional rail, local light rail, and there's room
14:34:25:12 enough for them to share.
14:34:27:09 It's a very significant coordination effort that has to
14:34:29:22 go on between transit providers and D.O.T., who is
14:34:33:22 doing the interstate construction now.
14:34:35:15 But we're showing that in this concept using that
14:34:39:03 section of right-of-way between Westshore and downtown.
14:34:43:16 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So that's the good news.
14:34:45:18 The bad news that I wonder about is, the north-south

14:34:48:27 leg goes up Nebraska as compared to going up 275,
14:34:55:09 which, you know, doesn't make a huge amount of
14:34:57:25 difference, I guess, but then it keeps going up
14:35:01:15 Nebraska when Nebraska turns into 41 and goes into
14:35:04:24 Pasco instead of just staying on 275.
14:35:07:15 One of the reasons I mentioned that, I was coming down
14:35:10:19 through Pasco on Monday afternoon at 5:00, and I
14:35:13:25 couldn't believe how the interstate had backed up at
14:35:19:03 the county line and what's that first -- 56.
14:35:23:22 56 and 54, up there in Pasco.
14:35:26:18 Everybody going north out of Tampa, out of Hillsborough
14:35:29:04 County, and getting off at those Pasco exits.
14:35:31:21 I had never seen that before.
14:35:35:03 It was eye opening for me.
14:35:36:27 And it was like, well, those people, obviously, if
14:35:40:16 they're commuting, they need a rail system that goes up
14:35:43:22 to those major interstate exits.
14:35:46:09 And so why wouldn't the interstate folks let us go up
14:35:50:22 275 all the way up 275 and be able to dump the Pasco
14:35:55:06 folks where they need to go and let them park and ride
14:35:57:21 up there at the Pasco exits.
14:36:00:18 Is that in discussion at all or what?
14:36:03:04 >> They would if the right-of-way was available.
14:36:05:10 The northern leg of 275 from downtown north I'm not
14:36:09:04 sure that it works in that corridor.

14:36:12:06 The reason there was an envelope put in the east-west
14:36:15:24 corridor was for the high-speed rail so it's there.
14:36:19:03 The planning for 275 did not include that necessarily.
14:36:23:07 There may be reconstruction efforts.
14:36:25:00 There are two lines up to Pasco County.
14:36:30:21 I'll attempt to explain why I think they work for that
14:36:33:19 issue you're talking about.
14:36:34:19 One is the commuter rail line that goes along the
14:36:37:18 existing tracks.
14:36:38:06 So that really would be bringing people in in the
14:36:40:06 morning and taking them back home at night and really
14:36:42:15 capturing that market that you're talking about.
14:36:44:06 The reason why that's a good idea is because the tracks
14:36:48:24 are already there.
14:36:50:03 There are five or six trains a day for freight that go
14:36:52:28 through there.
14:36:53:21 So there's a lot of capacity on that line to do that.
14:36:56:12 We feel like that's a situation where the CSX would
14:36:59:15 work with commuter rail -- someone operating commuter
14:37:03:04 rail to serve that need.
14:37:04:07 Adding a commuter rail train adds approximately one
14:37:07:09 lane of interstate in terms of equivalent capacity to
14:37:11:19 carry people.
14:37:12:04 If you have the tracks there, you buy the trains, you
14:37:14:07 run the service, you're getting a lot of bang for your

14:37:16:15 buck.
14:37:16:22 The other issue for Pasco to Hillsborough travel is the
14:37:20:18 red line, the light rail line which would go up Bruce
14:37:23:18 B. Downs through New Tampa and we're talking about it
14:37:27:09 stopping at 275 with the possibility of being extended.
14:37:31:10 Whether it's extended or not, people coming down from
14:37:34:09 Pasco County will be able to get off the interstate
14:37:36:12 right there, and get on the line and head into jobs
14:37:39:15 either on North Tampa, USF or come all the way downtown
14:37:42:21 and beyond.
14:37:43:13 So I feel like between those two major investments
14:37:47:22 we'll be able to capture a significant part of that
14:37:50:28 market.
14:37:52:12 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: So 275 sort of splits the baby.
14:37:55:15 I see what you're saying.
14:37:57:00 >> It does.
14:37:57:24 275 will remain a great way to get in and out of Tampa
14:38:00:24 from Pasco County.
14:38:01:24 That's not going to change.
14:38:02:24 What we're talking about is adding capacity by making
14:38:05:12 these investments.
14:38:10:19 >>MARY MULHERN: And that's okay with F.D.O.T. because
14:38:12:12 you're not traveling in your neighborhood on 275.
14:38:15:00 If you're going across county lines, it's okay.
14:38:18:27 That's a joke.

14:38:22:03 >> Regional project at that point officially.
14:38:23:24 And F.D.O.T. is looking for capacity parallelling the
14:38:29:01 major corridors.
14:38:30:09 So F.D.O.T. is looking beyond the interstate system in
14:38:33:16 terms of corridor capacity.
14:38:35:01 They are interested in other ways to accommodate those
14:38:37:15 people.
14:38:37:27 So these types of things will resonate with them if
14:38:43:04 they can work out with the state system and the
14:38:44:00 interstate system.
14:38:45:19 >>MARY MULHERN: And how -- I guess it's too new to tell
14:38:48:13 how you're going to be working as the MPO with the
14:38:54:03 TBRTA people.
14:38:55:27 >> It is hard to tell what exactly is going to happen.
14:38:59:21 There are staff-to-staff conversations going on now,
14:39:02:15 both with us, D.O.T., Hartline, local governments.
14:39:07:18 We're trying to make sure that all the elected
14:39:09:18 officials here are educated about what the implications
14:39:13:03 are of this new process and how that relates to what we
14:39:15:25 do now.
14:39:17:01 It's very complicated technically.
14:39:19:18 It's going to be very complicated politically.
14:39:23:21 It remains to be seen whether some consensus will come
14:39:27:00 forward on that board sooner or later.
14:39:29:00 So right now, the important thing for us to do is to

14:39:33:16 understand what these things mean to us here at home in
14:39:37:06 Hillsborough County.
14:39:38:25 That's a valid exercise.
14:39:40:27 Anyone who tells you we should not be doing that I
14:39:43:15 believe is wrong.
14:39:44:06 And here is why.
14:39:45:25 The regional plan is going to look at regional travel.
14:39:50:16 They are now considering regional facilities and making
14:39:54:00 some definitions about that.
14:39:55:19 One of the rules of thumb is, does it cross the county
14:39:58:15 line?
14:39:59:00 Well, not every major transit investment that serves
14:40:03:03 Hillsborough County citizens crosses the county line.
14:40:06:27 If you want to get from USF to downtown, it doesn't
14:40:09:06 meet that criterion.
14:40:11:06 There are other criterions about connecting people with
14:40:13:27 activity centers.
14:40:14:25 There are numerous examples of that here within the
14:40:17:09 county limits or city jurisdictions that would not meet
14:40:21:18 that regional criteria.
14:40:23:01 So we need to keep doing this, because what comes up,
14:40:27:09 the regional system may be a very high level system and
14:40:30:21 we may have to come in and coordinate a local system
14:40:33:09 that fits with that.
14:40:34:22 It's not too early to start having that conversation

14:40:37:03 and making sure that we're all heading in the same
14:40:39:15 direction.
14:40:40:15 >>MARY MULHERN: I totally agree with you on that.
14:40:42:25 I think that we need to go forward and because that is
14:40:45:27 so large, that authority, it's going to take them
14:40:50:03 longer.
14:40:50:21 It's going to take them a lot longer than it would us
14:40:53:16 who have been working at this for years, too.
14:40:56:27 And it's not a new idea.
14:41:01:03 >> They are undertaking a very methodical process.
14:41:03:24 The process that D.O.T. has outlined to assist them in
14:41:06:06 creating their plan is a very methodical process.
14:41:08:22 It's a very thorough process.
14:41:10:04 It's a process that will require all of us to be very
14:41:12:24 patient.
14:41:13:06 But it will give us time to really thoroughly
14:41:16:21 investigate what to do.
14:41:17:18 I believe when it's over, that it will make a lot of
14:41:20:27 sense to a lot of people.
14:41:22:06 And it will not seem rushed.
14:41:24:13 >>MARY MULHERN: But do you see us going forward with
14:41:29:00 looking for funding and implementation for this?
14:41:33:12 >> "We" being whoever it is wants to do that is not
14:41:38:00 precluded from doing that.
14:41:39:07 The Tampa rail project, for example, could be

14:41:42:01 reinvigorated tomorrow with enough planning funds to
14:41:46:25 continue the work that was done before and to get it
14:41:51:01 back in the hopper of federal funds.
14:41:54:01 The problem with that is, the federal government may
14:41:57:21 not look too kindly on that.
14:42:00:21 And the state certainly may have some reservations
14:42:03:21 about us doing that.
14:42:04:28 They don't want us to get ahead of them and do
14:42:07:09 something that's not consistent with what's going to
14:42:09:00 come out of the regional transportation plan.
14:42:11:10 So if we have some early decisions and we say, yes,
14:42:16:15 that would make sense, you all go ahead and do whatever
14:42:19:03 you want to do, then I would say, yes, it would be
14:42:22:01 prudent to do so.
14:42:23:27 To do so without understanding where the regional
14:42:26:27 discussion was going I think would be very risky.
14:42:29:18 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: How long is the TBRTA time line?
14:42:32:16 >> They have to finish that by July 1st of 2009.
14:42:35:27 The alternatives analysis where they are done adding
14:42:39:04 concepts to the table will be done in the first half of
14:42:42:21 next year.
14:42:44:27 Then a discussion of how to vet those out and get those
14:42:47:21 into a draft concept will be done in the second half of
14:42:51:19 next year.
14:42:52:04 So, really, anything -- any new idea that comes up, it

14:42:59:18 will have to come up by the first of next year.
14:43:02:06 Once they get into the alternatives analysis and the
14:43:04:15 technical analysis, they are not going to want to add
14:43:07:21 new ideas to the mix.
14:43:08:21 It's going to be very difficult.
14:43:08:28 Believe me, having put this plan together, it's very
14:43:11:15 difficult to add an idea to this right at the end of
14:43:13:27 the game because you haven't been able to thoroughly
14:43:16:18 investigate it.
14:43:16:28 At some point, the party is going to be over in terms
14:43:19:06 of telling them what we want in terms of concepts to be
14:43:22:07 further analyzed.
14:43:23:10 That's why it's so important that we get something done
14:43:28:12 now.
14:43:29:21 That we can transmit into that discussion.
14:43:34:00 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: I think we're losing our quorum.
14:43:36:21 >>GWEN MILLER: Time for me to close the public hearing.
14:43:39:25 We need to close the public hearing.
14:43:41:10 All in favor of the motion, say aye.
14:43:44:06 You can continue to talk with them.
14:43:45:22 >>JOHN DINGFELDER: We can't, because of sunshine.
14:43:48:13 >>GWEN MILLER: Unh-unh, it's not a sunshine.
14:43:51:10 >> It's a workshop.
14:43:54:24 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Workshop requires a quorum, unless you
14:43:57:00 can --

14:43:58:07 >> I think we're done.
14:44:00:06 >>MARTIN SHELBY: Is there anything that's left from the
14:44:02:06 Planning Commission that had to be said today?
14:44:04:00 No?
14:44:05:03 Then I think you're adjourned.
14:44:08:00 >> Thank you.
14:44:09:18 >> Thank you.
14:44:09:21 [ The meeting was adjourned at 2:44 p.m. ]